Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt00409)

Daniel,

I followed your link to Greg Tillett's "exchange" with Pedro. Actually, 
the post does not appear to me as an "exchange" with Pedro at all. As I 
read it, Tillett was not posting a message to Pedro, but rather, he was 
making a general post to to everyone on the chat list. Pedro is only 
mentioned in second person (i.e. Pedro, he...). The tone is indeed 
sarcastic i.e. "Adyar's preferred methods rides again!" Other than 
that, I'm afraid I don't see your point. 
First of all, Tillett appears to be confronting Pedro's and Adyar's 
method of argumentation. The four questions are really rhetorical. You, 
on the other hand, was criticizing me directly, and for a statement I 
never even made! Specifically, you pulled from one of my posts the 
phrase "errors of ignorance" and apparently made an association to the 
ULT Voice of the Silence, which I neither mentioned nor alluded to in my 
original post. Further, while I was attempting to answer your initial 
post, in order to point out your misinterpretation of my post, you were 
already piling on more posts of your own quoting Dallas, Wes, O.E. 
Library Critic etc. The quotes you posted were in support of a position 
you had taken, based upon your misinterpretation of my post. In other 
words, your replies were not responsive to mine, but rather, to some 
thought-form that you planted in your own head. This is not the case 
with Tillett's post. So, yes Daniel, in my mind, your posts to me do 
appear to be combative. If you want to post documentation on what you 
discovered about ULT's Voice of the Silence, that is great. Just don't 
make what you imagine to see in my posts an excuse to do so, and don't 
make me your whipping boy while you are doing it. I am offended by 
interchanges of this nature, whether they be directed at me, or to 
anyone else. 
It is interesting that you submitted a post from Greg Tillett (of all 
people), as a justification for the tone of your post to me. Each of 
us, you, Greg and myself, have earned advanced degrees at legitimate 
institutes of learning, were trained in methodology, possess significant 
archives of historical documents related to Theosophy, are historians, 
and are published. Traditionally, people with such common backgrounds 
share a collegial relationship. Over the years, I have exchanged emails 
with Tillett, and have such a relationship with him. I also have this 
relationship with the people I deal with in connection with business 
concerning the Theosophical History journal, former colleagues at the 
University here, colleagues at AAR, and with my wife's colleagues. But 
I have never seen any evidence of this kind of professional respect from 
you. Why is that? 
Jerry





Daniel H. Caldwell wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> Thanks for your answers to my two questions. 
> I was asking you those questions in order to
> clarify my understanding of what you had 
> been writing. I cannot read your mind
> and it was NOT clear to me what your
> stand was on the issues involved.
>
> I was "picking" apart your statements
> in order to understand your meaning.
>
> If my two questions seemed "combative"
> I'm sorry, but if I had seen you in person
> I would have been asking the same questions.
>
> Looking at my initial post at:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/23988
> all I can say is:
>
> Goodness if my statements and questions
> seemed combative, I wonder how you would
> view some of Gregory Tillett's exchanges
> with Pedro O. and Anand G. on this forum.
>
> OBTW, I felt Tillett's postings were
> refreshingly frank and direct but some
> subscribers here probably thought
> otherwise.
>
> But again thanks for your answers as they
> did help to clarify your position.
>
> Daniel
> http://blavatskyarchives.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links