observations, issues, 'realities'
which 'reasonable people' can 'reasonably' differ on.
There are observations, issues, 'realities'
which, when people decline the conventional consensus
are considered to be insane.
Most of the time, it's a reasonable label.
Sometimes, as with OThuga, it is the Main Stream Media brainwashed society that is insane . . . a la Eric Fromm's SAN SOCIETY insane.
On the one hand, none of us can ever, this side of eternity, hope to be 100% understood by anyone, much less 100% of 'others.'
Even identical twins reared in a very stable consistent home have a very different life experience because the one is not really totally the other. They do not 100% of the time have 100% the same identical thoughts and feelings.
On the other hand, Holy Spirit fostered empathy can, by His Grace, offer us through another Spirit Filled mortal an incredible amount of understanding, empathy, congruence.
It is one thing to throw the baby out with the bath in terms of human experience and observation--because of some irrational or hyper prissy pseudo objectivist criteria.
It is something else to recognize that even micrometers have limitations and adjust one's expectations accordingly.
AND
Wisdom recognizes that Almighty God knows us thoroughly, exhaustively, 100% completely. That He knew from before the foundation of the world and still considered us, His feeble, finite creation, to be worth His own death and suffering via the person of His Only Begotten Son, is one of the infinite mysteries of the construct of Love.
To deny that love in any sense of the word to any degree has to be one of the, if not THE worst insults, travesties, most horrific stupidities in all Creation.
To try and squeeze that Love and any understanding of it into finite, prissy, pseudo-super-rationalist criteria and constructions on reality . . . would, logically, be very close to such a hideous travesty, insult, stupidity.
Marvelously well said, dear brother in Christ! You've got some beautiful posts up today.... This is one of them. Thank you!
What's this got to do with the (un)reliability of human experience, or my post #144 you are responding to?