I present the facts and give all my reasons for arriving at my conjecture. Therefore, my writing is based upon logic and reason rather than creative imagination. Some find that dry and uninteresting, and that’s fine. After all, I’m here to study the text, not revise the text.
To some degree I can concur but, one must remember that the UB has been introduced with information which has been noted as “opinion” from the authors and some that are presented as fact from their point of view.
Therefore, the UB is, in my opinion, a nonfictional creation, where from the standpoint of some readers could be considered as fiction, which may be due to their beliefs or experiences, that are modified based on how the narrative has been created, or presented, assuming that the authors understand that there would be many different readers with varied intellect or intelligence.
One of the definitions found for “fiction” is as follows: “6. Law. an allegation that a fact exists that is known not to exist, made by authority of law to bring a case within the operation of a rule of law. ” Where in this sense, can be applied to the narration of the UB.
However, I personally believe that the UB, is a creation of “nonfiction” because of the following definitions, which seems to apply best in my opinion:
1 – “the branch of literature comprising works of narrative prose dealing with or offering opinions or conjectures upon facts and reality, including biography, history, and the essay (opposed to fiction and distinguished from poetry and drama ).”
[British Dictionary definition]
1. writing dealing with facts and events rather than imaginative narration
2. (modifier) relating to or denoting nonfiction
Where “modifier” has an interesting defining point, also used in the UB, as “qualifier”:
1. (grammar) Also called qualifier. a word or phrase that qualifies the sense of another word; for example, the noun alarm is a modifier of clock in alarm clock and the phrase every day is an adverbial modifier of walks in he walks every day
2. a person or thing that modifies
Also, in the UB, the word “opinion(s)” is used about 85 times, and is used in many cases as qualifiers to the information presented therein to be the “opinion” of the authors, thereby not indicating facts to be presented but conjecture, therefore making the information being presented, in some cases, as an idea or fiction, based on understanding as is seen by the authors, but not necessarily to be considered as facts, but possibilities or potentials?
As an example I present the following:
(30.5) 1:6.6 The more completely man understands himself and appreciates the personality values of his fellows, the more he will crave to know the Original Personality, and the more earnestly such a God-knowing human will strive to become like the Original Personality. You can argue over opinions about God, but experience with him and in him exists above and beyond all human controversy and mere intellectual logic. The God-knowing man describes his spiritual experiences, not to convince unbelievers, but for the edification and mutual satisfaction of believers.
(30.6) 1:6.7 To assume that the universe can be known, that it is intelligible, is to assume that the universe is mind made and personality managed. Man’s mind can only perceive the mind phenomena of other minds, be they human or superhuman. If man’s personality can experience the universe, there is a divine mind and an actual personality somewhere concealed in that universe.
“To assume that” someone is as another person may see them, is based on that other persons opinion or conjecture, but for some people to make such an assumption and then to present it as fact, can be viewed as an insight into that other persons character or misunderstanding based on a limitation of intellectual spiritual reality, or ability based on experience which is focused on only a specific topic and less diverse.
