[ExI] Immortality, Absolute and Potential

[Lee Corbin]

Jef writes

> Lee wrote (to Stuart)
> 
>> On the face of it, that's an absurd claim!  After, what if
>> there are now people (who can't possibly know it, of course
>> but)  who in fact will never die?  It's not logically impossible!
> 
> Lee, when someone you recognize as thoughtful and intelligent makes
> what appears to an absurd claim, you might consider exploring what
> broader or different context they have in mind.

Yes, good idea.  I did eventually get around to that by 
suggesting that we were using some words differently,
like "waste" for example.  On the other hand, sometimes

But you'll notice that I did put in the qualifier "On the face
of it", so my instincts aren't too bad!  :-)

We all need to constantly rehearse M. N. Plano's immortal:

      "Never attribute to malice what can be explained
      by stupidity.  Don't assign to stupidity what might
      be due to ignorance.  And try not to assume your
      opponent is the ignorant one-until you can show it
      isn't you."

the memorization of which should be a requirement for
joining this list (just kidding).

> Yesterday, I heard someone say "I'm going to get my tires rebalanced,
> and it's free at the place where I bought them."  I thought to myself
> that it's certainly not "free" then, but that it wouldn't serve any
> purpose to point it out to this person, who knows what she meant and
> is absolutely right. I was also strongly reminded of you -- same
> principle, different scale.

Well, thanks, I'm glad I'm in your thoughts a lot, LOL.  But
seriously, I have taken to heart your suggestion that perhaps
I ignore context more than I should.  I do welcome any such
criticism, so long as it says FAR removed from name-calling
and personal attack.

> But the last time I went, one of the more senior people introduced the
> subject of "Operating Thetans" and said that they had unlimited
> ability to change things around them.  I responded, asking "If they
> each have infinite power, then how is that different from each having
> no power at all?"  Shortly thereafter, this professed "Clear" visibly
> lost his cool.   Same logical pattern Stuart initially expressed to
> you.

Weird coincidence.  Still, you probably *knew* what she meant
just as you assert that you knew what the person meant who said
that he or she was going to get a free tire rebalancing. That
$scientology type could more charitably have been understood
to mean "vast" or "immeasurably great" or something. As a 
general rule, as you know, we save time and enhance communication
by using the Principle of Charity as applied to speech, and attempt
to take the most positive or meaningful interpretation that we can
of what has been said.

Later on in my email to Stuart, I did probe for what he was probably
trying to say that I simply wasn't getting.

Lee

P.S. Your post FYI showed up twice on the list FWIW.