Just to recap, your process is this:
0) Leave any semblance of rationality behind
1) Earnestly search for some being that has no evidence for it's existence and there are conflicting claims as to the exact nature of this being
2) Don't find anything - then you must have had the wrong idea of this hypothetical being
3) Change idea (but no clue as to what) and search again
4) Repeat ad nauseum
5) Die of old age
If this were a scientific hypothesis that you were doing this method for, you'd quite sensibly never be taken seriously by anyone. However, since this is a claim made in a book written in the bronze age, it's perfectly reasonable?
0) Leave any semblance of rationality behind
1) Earnestly search for some being that has no evidence for it's existence and there are conflicting claims as to the exact nature of this being
2) Don't find anything - then you must have had the wrong idea of this hypothetical being
3) Change idea (but no clue as to what) and search again
4) Repeat ad nauseum
5) Die of old age
If this were a scientific hypothesis that you were doing this method for, you'd quite sensibly never be taken seriously by anyone. However, since this is a claim made in a book written in the bronze age, it's perfectly reasonable?
If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. - J.R.R Tolkien
