Your Online Cup of Tea
Ito 1500 B.C: The question is, are you a journey or destination person?
Rivato 1465 B.C: It is wrong to assume that a person can only be one of them. Since if you are a journey man or destination person, it is a matter of when. Man is both. Alone I am a destination man. But with friends I am journey a person.
Scalio 700 B.C: Rivato is also wrong, why assume that people are either journey or destination oriented? There is a third way, when one has neither pleasure in the destination nor the journey to it.
Rovicus 500 B.C: Scalio has misunderstood Rivato, for Rivato says “if”, indicating that it is not necessary to either one. So he was not wrong. The third way has always been part of Rivato.
Bristu 200 B.C: Scalio, along with Rovicus and the rest of his Neo-Rivatonians, those of the Third Way, have fundamentally misread Rivato. There is no third way. The question of journey or destination, assumes pleasant conditions. What would be the point of asking someone if they preferred the journey or destination if the end was unpleasant?
Clavio 300 A.D: It is clear that the destination of necessity has primacy over the journey. Even for those who claim that the journey is their preference. This was demonstrated by Bristu who refuted the idea of a third way. Since if the destination is unpleasant, it will greatly reduce the possibility of enjoying the way. And if the destination is pleasant, it not only makes the journey enjoyable but without it one would have no reason to go on the journey either.
Marchinachzedine 800 A.D: The destination does not have primacy over the journey in all cases. For at times some wish to journey with no particular destination in mind but just for the sake the journey itself.
Ronas Equitna 1300 A.D: It is clear that the journey and the destination contain each other. And are different manifestations of the one and simple purpose which we shall call Act. The journey is contained in the destination inso far as the destination is but a marker in the larger journey of life. Just as in a journey there are many destinations which constitute it to be the journey. If it where not so, then the journey would be reduced to a destination. But a destination with no further journey would result in finality. Which is abhorrent to the nature of man which ever seeks to be in act. Therefore it is clear that the journey and destination are two aspects of the one Act itself. Act or being, being the ever journeying destination. Therein lies the mystery of truth.
Oxza 1600 A.D: For we know that “journey” and “destination” are but concepts of the mind having no grounding in reality. Therefore it is foolish to say that people are either one or the other.
Sam Hilin 1900 A.D: Since the “journey” and “destination” are but concepts we must also cast off this notion of the one Act which contains them both. There is no journey, no destination, no Act. There is only the inevitable fall into the abyss of finality. Finality beyond light, beyond darkness, beyond anything at all.
Kiros McElios 2000 A.D: If indeed “journey” and “destination” refer not to anything that exists, and if by being concepts they do not actually pertain to the essences of things that exist, then our concepts are unintelligible and tell us nothing of the real world. Indeed they are concepts but they pertain to reality, not in name only but in actuality. As such we are not falling into the Abyss of finality. But ever moving to the destination that ever moves. As our proper and fitting end.