These are good examples of why you should NEVER speak about your GNOSIS.
These "truths" are QUALIA (indistinguishable from opinion).
They are "interesting" and can open your mind to new perspectives, but they are not "true" and should not be mistaken for "truth" (they are also not "untrue" or "false").
Language is baby-talk that has been codified and calcified.
Here's an example of what I'm getting at, ***
Language has "deeper meaning" but that "deeper meaning" is different depending on who's looking (GNOSIS).
I found some interesting examples while studying ancient Chinese pictograms.
The pictogram for "good" is a combination of "fat" (which is also translated as "delicious") and "sheep".
In modern usage "good" is so abstract it is nearly meaningless.
In ancient times, "good" meant "like a fat delicious sheep", which of course you can use to feed and clothe your family. It's a much more literal and practical term and doesn't lend itself as well to the fallacy of "opposites".
Another example is the pictogram for "evil", which is the same pictogram as "heart" but drawn crooked or deformed. It's literally "a deformed or malformed heart". It lends itself more to the idea that "evil" is simply misguided "good" intentions.
When thinking about this, I found that "modern language" just seems hollow and fake.
We make so many assumptions just based on word parings and the fallacy of "opposites".
People read a dictionary and they "think" they "know" something (but it's just a tiny fraction).
You sort of have to "weave your own web" so to speak (and don't tell anyone).
Your answer reminds me of the book Siddartha by Herman Hesse. In the exchange, he tells the Buddha that his teaching others is flawed, as one can't describe accurately what they have found to someone who has not found it. The book was more elegant in the conveying of this, I'm reaching back some years here from memory. I found that one of the poignant grips of the book.
I do find it ironic that despite your view on this as outlined above, you seek to spark exactly such responses from those of us you interact with. I wonder what it is you hunt, and how often such exchanges have served as a catalyst for you in finding it, if even briefly.
I believe that if we draw the brightest possible line between FACT and OPINION (QUANTA and QUALIA), we will circumvent the majority of human miscommunication.
In 24 seconds,