Since the dead have limited means with which to speak for THEMSELVES, they’re kinda screwed

But, if we have reached a consensus of disagreement, while unsatisfactory, it’s still a consensus. But, if you have more evidence to contradict what I’ve said, I’ll be checking my notifications. Either way, thank you for your time. You’ve helped me clarify my own stance on how critical historical context truly is to combat modern ignorance thanks to a faith in “evolution in all things” (rather than just biological, which is all it was meant for and is good for) and a general belief that we’re automatically smarter about the past because we’re here and the past isn’t.

Since the dead have limited means with which to speak for THEMSELVES, they’re kinda screwed and their words are subject to whatever we wish to to do them since there are few true Speakers for the Dead. [see Orson Scott Card for context)

Can’t be helped I suppose. But in any case, I learned a lot about original texts that I didn’t know before, and you’ve helped give me (through the challenge provided by debate), source material to combat historical ignorance wherever I may find it with just a few more bits of evidence in my pocket.

For what purpose? Accuracy. That’s all I care about. 100% is impossible, yes, but it’s worth the effort. One always has to be willing to change their beliefs in light of new evidence that seems to have validity, even if it is contrary to their long held established beliefs.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


9 − three =

Leave a Reply