09-15-2011, 12:01 AM
The people quoted, what is their perception, is it of value? Both Shakespeare and Churchill were very intelligent people, and so they saw ways to lead humanity...Shakespeare in writing and Churchill in politics. But what about their vision? They were not really visionaries IMO. They tuned into the collective needs and satisfied that, rather then stretching the boundaries of perception with their awareness. So when they are quoted, I think about the quote itself and what value it is to a warrior (in these nagual forums), because both Shakespeare and Churchill were social servants,...they served the social will and intuited the needs of people, in turn they got to dominate in their callen field... no doubt a satisfaction for them and probably what drove them... but again this does not make them visionaries in nagual understanding. So to quote them here, what is the point? I'm not saying I'm against quoting, but rather prefer to examine it nonetheless, from the perspective of its creator. To say a warrior should be brief...and witty? Concise and to the point? It seems to me that would be more the arena of Shakespeare, Churchill and the like. What we should do here, IMO, is push the boundaries even further then that.