Re: Theos-World Mic Forster reg. "FACTS OF NATURE" and reincarnation.
Mar 29, 2002 02:23 AM
Your tendency to take statements of anyone who disagrees with you out of
context, misquote them (or not quote them at all) -- and thereby, apparently,
intentionally distort everything you report on or respond to -- is already
Talk about "fairness in communicating"... Since when does a joking reference
to the word "nuts" and other questions regarding your purposes and
credibility have anything to do with calling someone "crazy" or "psychotic"?
That's just downright
misinterpretation (that could be called "fabrication" if done intentionally).
Everyone else seems to get the jokes, and not take offense. Why can't you?
Is it the language barrier that makes you misunderstand idiomatic English or
tongue-in-cheek satire, sarcasm or irony -- when you are being questioned as
to your credibility or purposes? Or, could it be because, perhaps, you have
a paranoiac belief that you are being persecuted by those who point out your
fallacious, non sequitur and associative argumentative techniques -- that we
are all expected to believe "proves" your prejudicial and opinionated points
In any case, such tricky adverse tactics makes most of your supposedly
confirmatory arguments and references regarding your opinions about the
falsity of theosophy, also beyond belief... And still makes us wonder; "what
ax you are you really grinding, or whose cause are you really promoting" --
since, fostering a disbelief in karma and reincarnation (which cannot be
refuted scientifically or objectively with any more validity than it can be
confirmed metaphysically or subjectively) -- and, thereby, negating their
ethical and moral imperatives, plays right into the hands of the destructive
powers of materialism, selfishness and greed that are now taking control of
the world's economy and fostering the deterioration of its ecology, as well
as the oppression of its ordinary people?
As for the rest of your complaints about "fair ways of communicating" and
"improper explaining" in response to your previous mailings -- I have no idea
what you are talking about -- since you refuse to quote or respond to my
statements directly in context. Therefore, all I can assume is that such
complaints could very well be "paranoia" or a "persecution complex" -- which
wouldn't necessarily take a psychiatrist or MD to diagnose (when an amateur
psychologist or perceptive theosophist would be sufficient. :-)
In a message dated 03/29/02 5:57:50 AM, email@example.com writes:
>I don't think you are in a position to claim about other people on
>this list that they are crazy, this is not a fair way of comunicating.
>Maurer said the same thing about another list member (Mauri) a few
>Psychotic is the term for a diseased state, that even a
>psychiater(MD), which you are not, would need to diagnose someone
>personally in their office for an extended period of time to make such
>claim as you misuse in this case.
>I do not think this is a fair way of comunicating, besides the point
>about Descartes was not properly explained by you in reference to
>what I wrote in my previous mails.
>And on top to then simple vindicate another person without further
>explanation, is a rather below the belt polemic style, so lets end it
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application