Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00192)

> To be fair to Gomes, in the instance mentioned, the following are the
> possible scenarios, in view of the fact that the subscriber is a very
> credible person.
>
> 1. Gomes may not have had time to research Krishnamurti litigation due to
> higher priority research.
>
> 2. Gomes after researching may have found Krishnmurti litigation a very
> touchy/sensitive political one especially with the current leadership of
> TSA and BOD, as one of the  members of the Board of Directors of TSA was
> one of the four people who sued Krishnamurti for $9 million and this is a
> secret well kept from the members of TS for a long time. Gomes needs the
> full cooperation and help from the current (and future BOD) both for access
> to historical materials and publication help and hence keeping silent would
> be the most prudent course of action for him to take as risks are too much.
>
> mkr

3. Or in spite of the credibility of the person, the information was understood.

4. Or the information may have been a tentative off handed opinion never backed up
by research in the first place and intended to be repeated.


I think it has to kept in mind that researchers are human beings too.  We have
opinions like everyone else, and opinions are not the product of formal research.
Just because someone is a researcher and has an opinion about something, that does
not automatically mean that that opinion is based upon any research at all.  Like
everyone else, we are perfectly capable of forming opinions simply based upon
available information--or perhaps even very little more information then the next
person may have.  Please, allow us to have off handed opinions like every other
human being.  We are people too.

JJHE