Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cyntrox
Drake Dun: Me saying I'm God doesn't make me God. Sure, you may say that it's something new and all, but what's the point?
|
The analogy is totally inapposite. I am talking about whetheror not a particular term can be meaningfully applied to a particular referent. You are talking about whether or not a particular factual situation is the case.
Put it this way. Say you stay up all night reading Nietzche and get all pumped up on your will to power. Then you say something like "I need no God. I am God." I could respond with some dictionary definition, but I would just be quibbling about terminology. It would be clear enough what you meant. And if enough people used the word that way for long enough, it would be absurd for me to continue loyally defending its now outdated definition.
Actually, I can't quite tell whether your beef with new age people is about terminology or about spirituality. I originally assumed the latter, which was why alarm bells sounded in my head and I posted to this thread. Which of these are you saying?:
1) To call a personal spirit guide a "totem" is a misuse of the word, given its commonly agreed upon definition.
2) To call a personal spirit guide a "totem" is incorrect, because spirit guides and totems both exist but are two different things.
(or perhaps some third option I am overlooking...)
Drake