Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00002)

Hello Paul

WOW! That really is some mail. What happened? It is helpful actually.
By tacky I mean sticky, gluey, difficult to move about in, lacking air,
claustrophobic.

<<<Having seen "the treatment" from several folks here, I would guess that
the message is "I'm so disdainful of you that I refuse to address you or
refer to you by name, yet my disdain requires expression via indirect
sneering comments." But hereby welcome and invite explanations from anyone
about why people do that. Seems like passive aggressive stuff to me; throw
a rock, hide your hand.>>>

Yes, these words you write describe YOU very well. And then there is that
list of personalities you then went on to post, where you categorise others
on Theos-World with your comments (because you had nothing better to do
whilst waiting for your guests). Those comments are comments about you. Or
did you somehow think they were about them?

So, regardless of all those other people, the LISTS of people and
organizations you harbour in your mind - and regardless of how "bad"
they/we/or some of us may be === it is possible to turn around and look at
yourself/ourselves and examine your/our own faults WITHOUT going on about
the faults of others. No one is saying that is easy, but it is PRACTISING
THEOSOPHY. If no one else on this list practised Theosophy, it would still
be no excuse for either of us not to.

If YOU do it you won't have to make up lists and be chained to those
thoughts any more. You won't have to go on about other people on this and
other lists, which you have just so well demonstrated that you at present
do. You will be more concerned about your faults than theirs. And you will
also be more concerned for other people. The only good reason, if there be
a good reason, for making up a list of other peoples faults, is so that it
is possible to see our own faults. The faults you see in others Paul, are
your faults. *It stands to reason.*

So in answer to YOUR INVITATION, that is why I think YOU (rather than
people), do that.

Cheers for a better New Year, and I mean it!
Tony.


-----Original Message-----
From: kpauljohnson <kpauljohnson@yahoo.com>
[mailto:kpauljohnson@yahoo.com]
Sent: 31 December 2002 2:02 pm
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Tacky tactics


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Tony"
Good morning,

The post quoted below uses some tactics that I've seen repeatedly on various
fora, used by Baha'is, Cayceites, Theosophists, Fourth Way disciples.
Sometimes I've been the target, more often the observer of its use on
others. In every case the dynamic is this: one person is a true believer,
the other a dissident or skeptic. The former expresses disdain for the
latter, not by saying outright "you, X, are beneath me so I look down on you
and denounce you" but rather by making sneering, dismissive comments to
others *about* the skeptic or dissident without naming him or her. Such
comments offer a tiny fig leaf of plausible deniability-- if the target
objects, their authors can turn around and say "I wasn't referring to you
and the fact that you imagine I was just proves you're paranoid." I will
never forget one Baha'i who made a point by point attack on a post I made
and then furiously insisted that he had never read it or anything else I
ever wrote!
(And never would lower himself to do so.)

Having seen "the treatment" from several folks here, I would guess that the
message is "I'm so disdainful of you that I refuse to address you or refer
to you by name, yet my disdain requires expression via indirect sneering
comments." But hereby welcome and invite explanations from anyone about why
people do that. Seems like passive aggressive stuff to me; throw a rock,
hide your hand.

Tony (whom I know only from this post) wrote:

<alpha@d...> wrote:

> Hi Terrie
>
> Your e-mails! Rather like the sun peeping out from behind they dark black
> clouds.

What dark clouds?

> You initially wrote:
> <<<I think/feel that HPB's materials are
> a worldly, enlightening and unbias resourse AND that what she has
> written is in fact a tremendous accumulation of reason and wisdom AND
> quite a respectable gift to have accomplished/offered on up - it's an
> inspiration, even today.>>>
>
> Alas, what seemed a reasonable statement,

"Seemed" is not absolute but relative. So it seemed to *you*, Tony, but not
to me.

has turned into a rather tacky
> conversation about bias.

Tacky meaning in poor taste? Why is it tacky to discuss bias? Rather than
sneering at the conversation, perhaps you might enlighten us with non-tacky
comments about bias?

Like you, biased is not something I would use
> about or attribute to H.P.B.

Why not? She was a vigorous polemicist with a very definite agenda. Not
that there is anything wrong with that, but let's not pretend it's not the
case.

We do know she had tremendous powers of
> discrimination:), and where you might well use discrimination, another
might
> use bias. The books you read may be to do with your discriminatory
powers,
> rather than with bias. The sun view is different to the black clouds
view.

That sort of comment is summarized by a very simple phrase, "holier than
thou." Why not get down off your high horse and engage the topic as an
equal among equals? The Theosophical movement is very poorly served IMO by
the tactics its adherents use, congratulating one another with their
superiority to benighted skeptics. I'd advise saving that for private email
because it makes a bad appearance for your "side."


> Bias is below the belt, discrimination above the head. Roget is not law.

Descriptive, not prescriptive. Terrie doesn't have to use the word the way
it is generally used, but will be better understood if she does so.

> I have read some Olcott, and been to several talks given by Krishnamurti.
> It is nice to dip into lots of different things, but there is no
particular
> reason why anyone should feel the need to read Krishnamurti from the
> Theosophical point of view.

No particular reason? That's rather sweeping. How about the fact that the
maximum membership of the TS was during its promotion of him as the World
Teacher? And that his profile is now much higher than the Society that
nurtured him and which he then rejected?


Olcott did a wonderful job as an
> administrator, and also did mesmeric healing and other great things.
> But H.P.B. was the Occultist, was of the inner side, so to put it. Here
in
> London it is warm, and the happy waitress serving the coffees to us
outside
> in Soho was from Mauritius, and was demanding to see some snow. It is
always
> supposed to snow at Christmas here, but rarely does. There is something
> magical about snow. Is it something to do with the fact that every
> snowflake is a geometrical shape. It is very like H.P.B's writings.
They
> are full of symbols and geometrical shapes, sounds and colours, pictures,
> and so on. As snow flakes are so beautiful, think by how much more so are
> the thought flakes in "The Secret Doctrine" and "The Voice of the
Silence,"
> and All works of That occult or hidden Nature.
>
> Keep shining
> Tony
>
Shiny New Year to you!

Paul, no dark cloud
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thalprin <thalprin@y...> [mailto:thalprin@y...]
> Sent: 30 December 2002 11:13 pm
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Unbiased
>
>
> Hi again




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/