• cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month 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
            0
            ·
            1 month 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
            0
            ·
            1 month 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.