The Tree of Liberty

[tongodeon]

Popular political quotes often turn out to be fabricated, misattributed, or at very least taken out of context. But the people quoting Thomas Jefferson's famous "tree of liberty" seem to have his words and intent entirely correct. Thomas Jefferson's famous quote, originally written to William Stevens Smith on 13 November 1787, seems to be even more

Comments

"necessary"

[tongodeon]

To you, it doesn't seem necessary. To me, it does. I want to see a unifying whole among them all, woven together with love.

First, I have no trouble readily accepting "a unifying whole woven together with love". Affection, good will, and common experience are in perfect harmony with a nondirected universe. It's not necessary that things be unified or that love weave it together, and it could be otherwise, but it's awful nice that it's this way.

But second, when I say "necessary" I don't mean "wishful thinking". There's a difference between philosophical "necessity" and personal druthers. When I say "I want to know who shot Rep Giffords" I'm not just expressing a personal preference. I mean that she's in a hospital with a hole in her head, under circumstances which necessitate an assassin. On the other hand "I want to know who shot Kurt Cobain" expresses a preference, not a necessity. A Nirvana fan might prefer to believe that Cobain didn't shoot himself, but it is not necessary to assume the existence of a second shooter

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

Heh. If in 200 years from now where tongodeon has become a worldwide name, they did a study doing exactly the same thing, but your name was used as part of the study, and people responded as though YOU were God in this way, it wouldn't invalidate your existence. All it does is say that these people have NO CLUE who you really were/are.

Just because people make God into egocentric personal opinion doesn't invalidate His existence.

Re: "necessary"

[tongodeon]

I think you're misunderstanding the point of the study. Repeating it 200 years from now wouldn't "invalidate my existence" any more than it would invalidate my passport, but it *would* invalidate any claimed connection between those people and myself. It would demonstrate that, whether or not I exist, my true knowledge and opinion is not what they're accessing. It would prove they're making up their own opinions and attributing it to me. It would prove that when they say "Tongodeon thinks that ..." all they're really saying is "I think that..." Assuming that I was a widely respected authority 200 years from now, it would completely deflate their claimed authority from pretending to know what I thought. It would prove not that I don't exist, but that my everything that they imagine that I think is their own egocentric personal opinion.

That was my point bringing it up here about the appeal to "God's" authority, or here in response to your observation that we see whatever God we feel like seeing. Whether or not God exists (different

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

I should note that as I was not one of the people in the study, you are over-generalizing. You cannot say that my personal connection with God is illusory. That may be your (unprovable) opinion, but for all you know, I've seen Him, talked with Him, walked with Him, and He's shown me stuff that would blow your mind, but I'm just not talking.

Perhaps if I was in that study, they would have come back with different results on this one guy who recognizes that his opinion and God's opinion just might be very very different from each other.

I'm just sayin' for purposes of accuracy. :)

Re: "necessary"

[tongodeon]

I should note that as I was not one of the people in the study, you are over-generalizing.

I just wrote a long explanation for why this is utter poppycock. The entire point of studies - the reason why they exist, and why they are useful - is that you *can* apply results of a study to members of a population not included in the survey.

for all you know, I've seen Him, talked with Him, walked with Him,

No, "for all I know" these stories are sincere and well-meaning delusion. Literally for all I know - for everything that I am aware of, for anything that anyone is able to point me to - "stuff that would blow your mind but I'm just not talking" sounds like exactly what I'd say if I was making up a story that would be unverifiableI could just as easily say "I've got a suicide note signed by God, declaring that he eliminated himself 10,000 years ago". For all you know is this true? Of course not. For all you know - for everything that you know about the crazy ways that humans try to persuade each other - it's far more likely that I'm

Re: "necessary"

[ianvass]

And I responded to your post with my response. :)