I almost didn't comment on this for fear of being divisive but I feel strongly that I want to clarify my own position and hope I can do it without promoting anything but unity between us all. I have to say that I feel my words have been twisted, and though I'm sure that most understand that this is so I just wanted to leave no room for doubt.

"More specifically that the posting of "Spirit of Place" by Tombo was written the way it was to appeal to you specifically and other people with your perspective. "

When I write I try to imagine the reader as someone with a different, more skeptical view to my own not because I'm trying to convert the reader to my point of view, but because I'm trying to see it from more than just my own point of view. To put it simply, I try to be skeptical. Why? Because I recognise that I have a tendency to get carried away by my imagination! I'm just trying to cultivate the scholar in me, that's all. Its like Robert Graves said - "a poet who wilfully denies fact cannot achieve truth". I'm certainly not trying to shoot anyone's point of view down in flames, least of all FourWinds'. Quite the opposite, I'm trying to understand things through other peoples' eyes. When people don't agree with what I write that doesn't mean that my point of view needs defending or that the person disagreeing with me should change their point of view. It just means that people have different views - I would soon become very bored if everyone had the same view (would I become a Christian if everyone else was a heathen? like Iggy cutting his hair short 'cause everyone else was a longhair). The important thing to remember is that we all have a great deal in common - our love of ancient monuments.

I've been thinking it over and I reckon that its not so much that these issues are in themselves divisive. Its all in the way that it is put. It is one thing to discuss and share beliefs, perspectives and experiences. This can only be a good thing, leading to insight into other people's points of view and therefore understanding, without which there can be no unity. Its another thing altogether to get the soapbox oat and come over all evangelical. Its sometimes difficult to keep a hold of the reigns when talking about the things that you believe in, and enthusiasm can carry you away. I know that this has happened to me before (though I think I've managed to behave myself pretty well in this thread!). Its important to remember that refusing to tolerate another person's point of view is fundamentalism of the worst kind. I said somewhere in this thread that I'm not interested in preaching to the converted. Actually I'm not interested in preaching at all, because a preacher is someone who wants to make converts. When I write my weblog & post to these forums I'm not trying to make converts, simply to say "here's a way of looking at things that you may or may not have considered" then leave people to make up their own minds about how to look at things. Its the difference between saying "This is my point of view, what's yours?" (followed by actually listening!) and just screaming "This is my point of view and its the way, the truth and the light so you'd all better listen up and believe or be damned!". I completely understand why people wouldn't want to get involved in discussions of this sort. The "believe or be damned" mentality surely is divisive (to say nothing of the other reasons why people might not want to get involved, eg. the fact that these things are often quite a personal matter). But somehow that doesn't convince me that discussions of this sort aren't worthwhile. Surely the only cure for fundamentalism is learning to understand points of view different to your own. This simply cannot happen without discussions of this sort taking place. So ultimately I have to say that I think this has been a fascinating thread, and a very positive one.

(continued...)