A world without discussions seems like a perfect world, but I ask myself if indeed it is. Sure, knowing that two people will never argue because of antagonistic ideas is extremely positive, and that it should exist in the world, but not being able to argue doesn’t seem something good. A discussion, when it’s well made, it’s enriching. To listen to different points of view is extremely positive. How is it possible to grow, to learn, to improve. Closing oneself in a certainty? Just like a horse with blinders, lack of discussion can blind the person to all that surrounds him. I know that, ’cause I’ve live my life that way. I just lived in one way, ’cause I didn’t broaden my horizons. I just stayed at home, ’cause I saw in the world only what I wanted to, my selective vision only allowed me to see reasons to continue to be at home alone, reading and creating other worlds. If I’d given it a chance, if I ’d taken my blinders off and everything else I used to blind myself with, I’d probably have seen what normal people see, and that would have allowed me to be different. But I kept my convictions, which led me to suicide. The same thing happens in heaven, how can someone grow without having discussions? Only talking about subjects they agree upon? There’s no gain of culture, of experience, even intelligence, that way. In heaven there’s no “winning” conflicts, but there’s alga no “gain” of knowledge. Is it worth it?
Besides, there’s also the fact that you have to police yourself. You have to shut up in a moment you want to speak. You have to suppress your desire to discuss, of using knowledge and trying to convince someone. Instead of the thrill of the passionate argument, the evidence and what you know, you have an empty conversation about a completely random subject. All you can do is repress yourself, to lock down what you want to say. Leave all your thoughts and arguments inside yourself. How healthy is that? How good is to live in a balanced way? It’s no good, ’cause I’d lived like that. I had never been myself, I’d always been what everyone wanted me to be. In the end, I was never myself, I was a fictitious image of myself. I looked at myself and didn’t recognize the person I saw, I did what I didn’t want to do, and didn’t do what I wanted. I never allowed myself to be me, and that didn’t end up so well…
And how can people repress themselves? How can they hold that impulse for discussion, which I have the theory that is one of the most inherent things that exists in the human essence, to begin to talk about time? How strong is the will of the inhabitants of heaven? It seems to me that’s just impossible to leave aside the will to speak and express yourself. Even I, who spent my life in a regime of complete social semi-isolation, felt the need of expressing myself (I was a writer). Being able to expresses oneself is what makes us humans, at least in my opinion. Our need to express ourselves is so big that even deaf people and mutes can talk, and blind people can read. We create tools to include all in this desire of ours. The expression is so important to humans that we can’t accept the fact that other animals don’t do that, we always try to find out how animals also do that. We look for it until we find it, ’cause in our heads it’s just impossible to exist a species that doesn’t communicate. So, thinking about all of that, and about how we like to express ourselves, how we enjoy arguing, I ask myself again: how is it possible to repress an argument without segregating people, and more than that, how is it possible to replace it for a random, pointless conversation?
I’m probably not completely integrated in heaven, that’s why I can’t find and answer for that. Maybe living in heaven means to leave a piece of humanity behind, the piece contaminated by Lucifer. Maybe here we’re all just the image and likeness of God, which, if memory serves, wasn’t a character that liked being contradicted. And that makes the desire to discuss inexistent, ’cause those who are fully integrated have the certainty that a discussion doesn’t lead you anywhere, which I firmly disagree with, and the best thing to do is to talk about any subject that’s not important and that both share the same points of view.
Or maybe there’s another hypothesis, one I fear might be true. If it is, the implications are really serious. Maybe the angels live in the city not to serve as example, but to suppress the human parts of people (souls). Maybe they walk among us just to extend their divine aura, to influence us. The arguments are over before they begin ’cause the angels don’t let them become what they could become, they control the impulses. Some kind of brain wash. But if that’s true, where’s freedom? How can we be ourselves if we are just being controlled by the will of the servants of the Lord? How can paradise actually be a paradise if we are not free to be human? Sure, humanity has failed in many aspects, but is it fair to take that away from us? Is it really fair to brain wash, to control us with invisible strings, just to keep the image of perfection? And how can a place like this be perfect? How a mere puppet can be better than a real person?