• cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The issue is that you called it dumb because you interpret it as “only children” are enlightened enough to see the tree as a tree.

    But I don’t believe that is the intent of the comic, instead, they simply drew a child as a shorthand representation for the concept of enlightenment.

    I believe any person can be so enlightened to see something as it is, and not what it could be made into if they wanted to.

    Therefore, I don’t think the comic is dumb as you stated. I think the comic is attempting to motivate people to see things as they are and be enlightened.

    Also there was a little humor in the misspelling of a common word when calling something dumb, in the way of “kettle calling the pot black”

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      I can see how me using the word dumb in that context could cause a disagreement, especially as I misspelled beauty, I could have used shallow instead.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Something about looking and not seeing. Or those who have eyes to see…I wonder if this is our mythical third eye, the ability to imagine, extrapolate eg child/inner child, in this instance.