09-21-2014, 12:00 AM
Littlepaw, thank you for the reminder to engage my own perception with some sense of focus especially when expansively challenged on this forum. I mentioned I always read Castaneda without an eye to the fiction/non-fiction considerations. I opened up my mind, and I'm certain you know what I mean.
This is not a plug for serloco. At times I feel a sensation against my spleen to back-off from indulging his imput. But clearly to my own perception, serloco surpasses the 'teachings' of Don Juan in that you can interact, and that he is 'full' (you can say 'full' of whatever--fill in the blank--ha ha).
Again, I like that there are different perspectives to view anyone here posting. My perspective in this particular post is to note to myself (and anyone who wants to share) what I really want here. AND, in that respect, (as I implied) I need to be discreet and focus to do so (and direct my dialogue to elicit from others in that vein). So thank you. ALSO, thank you serloco for sharing your expanse, and especially when you become specific enough to make knowledge cogent personally. If I may be so bold, there is a potency of further clarity for each one of us (Littlepaw, serloco, billy) to gain value.
I probably don't get past the tonal with what I am doing, but I am thankful for these opportunities of exchange on the forum. No one needs conformity here (None of us would be posting with that prospect), so don't read kum ba yah into this. Still, I liked promoting the atmosphere for increased empiricism all around.
This is not a plug for serloco. At times I feel a sensation against my spleen to back-off from indulging his imput. But clearly to my own perception, serloco surpasses the 'teachings' of Don Juan in that you can interact, and that he is 'full' (you can say 'full' of whatever--fill in the blank--ha ha).
Again, I like that there are different perspectives to view anyone here posting. My perspective in this particular post is to note to myself (and anyone who wants to share) what I really want here. AND, in that respect, (as I implied) I need to be discreet and focus to do so (and direct my dialogue to elicit from others in that vein). So thank you. ALSO, thank you serloco for sharing your expanse, and especially when you become specific enough to make knowledge cogent personally. If I may be so bold, there is a potency of further clarity for each one of us (Littlepaw, serloco, billy) to gain value.
I probably don't get past the tonal with what I am doing, but I am thankful for these opportunities of exchange on the forum. No one needs conformity here (None of us would be posting with that prospect), so don't read kum ba yah into this. Still, I liked promoting the atmosphere for increased empiricism all around.