I know this sucks but I’m here to back up the OP’s reply to you. The main theme of the book is that it can’t be taught; you have to take out of it whatever you take out of it.
I refer to it on occasion even now, 15 years after I first read it. It’s a fantastic book like that, but it’s about the nature of everything.
False equivalency, just because you state your own interpretation doesn’t mean I can’t come up with my own. If you critically think abt the text which you should do anyways you will still get your own interpretation and infact by hearing others your own interpretation could be influenced in a way that is valuable in and of itself. The most anyone or thing can do is influence your interpretation but the biggest influence by far is going to be your own personal life experiences and you stating your own interpretation won’t change those.
OP can you describe some content of the book and why it changed your perspective? Otherwise why bother sharing.
I know this sucks but I’m here to back up the OP’s reply to you. The main theme of the book is that it can’t be taught; you have to take out of it whatever you take out of it.
I refer to it on occasion even now, 15 years after I first read it. It’s a fantastic book like that, but it’s about the nature of everything.
deleted by creator
False equivalency, just because you state your own interpretation doesn’t mean I can’t come up with my own. If you critically think abt the text which you should do anyways you will still get your own interpretation and infact by hearing others your own interpretation could be influenced in a way that is valuable in and of itself. The most anyone or thing can do is influence your interpretation but the biggest influence by far is going to be your own personal life experiences and you stating your own interpretation won’t change those.