lbb

Oh? Do you also "don't agree" that 2+2=4? My statement was every bit as factual as that.

Not unless you've got some more compelling arguments to bring forward than you ever have here. You assert, Graham. You make statements that bluntly contradict experience and observable fact. You offer nothing in support of these statements except the newage equivalent of a four-year-old insisting, "Is, is, is, is, IS!!!" You can probably find people somewhere who accept the Yoda act as a certificate of authority to pronounce on esoteric matters, but I'm not one of those people, and never will be.

Very well. Then explain, if you would, the Buddhist teachings on equanimity,a nd exactly how your dualistic view of the universe (this week) reconciles with them.

As an alternative, you could say something like, "You know what? I don't really know much about Buddhism, in fact I only know the vaguest things about it. It seems kinda cool, but when you come right down to it, I don't really know what it's about, or what the Buddhist view on dualism is." I certainly wouldn't look down on you for saying this. But if you're going to use references to a spiritual tradition, you should certainly be knowledgeable about its fundamental principles.