theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World RE: A Question for the New Year

Jan 12, 2005 06:28 PM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins


Hello Dallas,

Thanks for your input. It seems to me that your fifteen or so disconnected sentences and sentence fragments below are an excellent example of what I meant when I said that while one may be very clear about the meaning of what he/she writes, that apparent clarity in the mind of the writer is no guarantee that the reader will perceive the same meaning intended by the writer, or even understand the discourse at all. In this case, your repeated use of indefinite pronouns such as "it" and "that" without any obvious references to nouns, makes your discourse below almost unintelligible to me. Thus, I am unable to respond to all but one of your questions. Perhaps you will rewrite your thoughts and questions in a way where your sentences will be so constructed as to have a clearer connection between the present or implied nouns and pronouns within them. I believe that such a rewrite will help me to better understand your meaning. The one question you asked below which I may be able to decipher is: "How did you arrive at the title of your organization?" If your question is a reference to Alexandria West, then the answer to your question is a the "title" was proposed by the late Victor Endersby, who was very active in the initial stages of the organization's formation. As to your other questions, I am looking forward to your rephrasing them so that I can better understand your meaning and respond to them.
Thanks
--j



W.Dallas TenBroeck wrote:

Jan 12 2005

Dear J:

Ity seems it does not give much room for minds to grow?
Kind of like a universe of one [then a barrier] and the rest are debarred
from it.

Is that by any chance what one calls a "closed mind?"
What happens should such an individual be wrong?
I think our Universe has the utmost variety, and ought to invite
exploration. Of course, some are overwhelmed by that, and demand for
themselves seclusion and rest. Or some intermediate freedom.
Isn't this one of the proofs of the "freedom of the individual mind?"
Is that by any chance what one calls a "closed mind?"
Seems to me, from my experience, it is more interesting to contact variety.
On the other hand, such a one-focussed mind is a contradiction (or a paradox
in itself).
I mean, it knows of its existence, is convinced of its acuity, perception
and uniqueness, yet has a desire to contact others of similar capacities
(strength unknown) in an effort to dominate or denigrate.
So what is achieved?

How did you arrive at the title of your organization?
No question but "always" is a trigger word to exclusiveness. Yet we
frequently use it without thinking out its limitations. A kind of a "put
down."

Best wishes,

Dallas

======================================


-----Original Message-----
From: john,
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 8:45 AM
To: Subject: Re: A Question for the New Year



<< Even when the writer is satisfied that the sentence or paragraph carries its intended meaning, that is no guarantee that the sentence will not have a very different meaning to the reader. >>


This statement reminds me of why I dropped out of participation in a particular Mensa discussion list years ago. (Yes, I used to be a member, am no longer, no activities in rural Arkansas.)

In this particular group was a lady who insisted an telling us exactly what we meant by our words. It did us NO GOOD to tell her what we meant by those words. She knew, 100%, what we meant, even when we didn't mean it (and even if everyone else in that group understood our meaning).

It just got so frustrating to get into arguments based on her knowing she was 100% right. She was the type of person who even KNEW that it was wrong to shout, even one word. She had learned, years ago, that if you wanted to emphasize one word, that you were to do it with extra characters. She would *emphasize* a word like that, and insisted that was the *only* way to do it. But as you can see with my prior sentences, paragraphs, I prefer to EMPHASIZE a word by capitalizing it. She called that shouting. It did us no good to point out that "Netiquette" tutorials defined shouting as capitalizing entire sentences or entire messages. She knew she was right.

Anyway, mhy point is that there will ALWAYS be people who will interpret someone's words the wrong way, and KNOW that they are right, even if everyone else has a different point of view.





Yahoo! Groups Links
















[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application