tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4010225.post6785961322146458003..comments2023-06-15T17:23:17.392+00:00Comments on JOHN MEANEY: John Meaneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13236108158993642237noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4010225.post-26993258958806956502007-12-12T20:08:00.000+00:002007-12-12T20:08:00.000+00:00I like what you have said here, a story I once mad...I like what you have said here, a story I once made up evolves the action of a single subjective event on the lives of people: People start using footage of it (through different transformations) to create walls of differentiated experience between themselves and others, as a kind of forcefield, but end up creating big rip, at least within the earth's light cone.<BR/>On a slightly different note, it seems that people do not like the finite: People would rather have the idea that anything is possible rather than just "some good things are". I know some people who have become depressed despite having many good things in their lives, simply because they have perceived bounds on the possibility space of there life, without being able to say, "this is enough for me". This accommodation and lowering of expectation comes to different people at different times, often depending on how wide they see those limits as being, but open up the shadow of unlimited possibilities in both space and time; omnipotence and immortality, then peoples minds light up. This is why people love mystery, because its ambiguity contains limitless avenues. I'm reminded of Solomon "God has given a great burden, he planted eternity in hearts of man, but he is unable to comprehend God's plan from beginning to end"<BR/>In the absence of a comprehensible infinity, do we choose definite finiteness, or the incomprehensible?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com