nic: My point is that to an impartial observer the beliefs of a religious person might appear very similar to those of someone who is truly suffering from a mental illness.
No worries, mate.
My point is and has ever been that the human does not exist who is impartial, therefore, I must assume you mean to speak for rocks or some other sort of observer besides human observers. This 'partiality' is very much a human trait, as I am sure you can readily agree, and I would submit that those who wish to eradicate partiality are wishing to eradicate an innate trait of humanity itself.
The desire to observe impartially is a desire contrary to the nature of humanity, in my opinion. One might as well seek to fly unaided by anything external to oneself as to seek to observe impartially. Actively seeking to do that which is contrary to our nature is aberrant behavior, abnormal behavior. Dare I say, mentally ill behavior?
No. I don't say mentally ill. Rather, I assert that it is more indicative of a social illness, seeking to distance oneself from phenomenon observed as though comprehension of the observed phenomenon will be somehow better through the attempt; as though clarity of explanation is deemed qualitatively and moralistically better than clarity of experience.
I tend to lay aside such ideas as . . . silly. Rejecting the evidence of personal experience is a rejection of much of what makes me a human. I think I will happily continue to embrace personal experience as a valid source of information until I can clearly be convinced that is an unwise thing to do.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
