Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00164)

Greetings Bruce,

robert_b_macd wrote:
> Dear Bill,
>
> I have no problems with what you have to say and take it all with the
> good faith in which I know it was intended.  I have no doubt that
> Carlos can stand up for himself.  I probably could have taken in good
> faith what Bart had to say had he not thrown in at the last that
> completely unfounded comment on the Hollocaust.
>   
Yes,  I sensed that this was the proverbial straw, however I was 
referring to your previous post where you  presented a well thought out 
philosophical argument, but chose for some reason to present this 
argument using named individuals as points to be made.  Just today you 
offered the philosophically sound idea of discussing things in the 
abstract.  I suggest that Bart was coming nearer this ideal when he 
quoted the ML letter than you were when you addressed his reasoning 
behind quoting the letter.  Now we come to the issue of the Holocaust.   
Why is Bart under the impression that your magazine, by publishing some 
article, has said that it did not happen?  I think it  important to hear 
from Bart on this point so that we may better understand his thought 
processes. This could be a very similar situation to your disagreement 
with Daniel's publishing those lies about HPB.  You have concluded that 
they are lies and so you do not think any spreading of them through 
further publication can be useful.  Bart may have concluded that the 
holocaust did happen and that any further spreading of lies and 
concoctions to the contrary is wrong.
> I am sure that you are not objecting to people joining in debates.  I
> suspect that Carlos would have ignored Bart's opinion of him and kept
> his focus on the larger debate at hand.  I, on the other hand, found
> the topic of philosophical interest and tried to post a well thought
> out argument in good faith.  One way of creating a harmonious site is
> to assume that others are acting out of principle.  As we cannot guess
> at anothers motive this would seem to be the most charitable way to
> proceed, certainly more so than trying to judge others.  In this way
> we stick to the arguments and don't get caught up in defending motive.
>   

Yes and it always a good solution to try and "out" the truth rather than 
"prove" another is a liar.  The truth will stand for itself when it is 
given full exposure.   I do not know the truth of what FOHAT may have 
published about the holocaust since I have not read everything the 
magazine has published.  I trust that you have, but still I am awaiting 
Bart's evidence before drawing any conclusions.  If Bart has made a 
mistake in remembering some article or other and perhaps where that 
article was published, then I am sure he will acknowledge that mistake 
and we can all move on.  To be mistaken, no matter the degree, is not 
the same as being a liar.  This is the point that you and Carlos are 
making with respect to those who lied about HPB and whose work is being 
published anyway.
>  An argument even if poorly motivated can still be a good argument. 
> Motive then becomes a distraction to the issue.  We are not here to
> teach people to become better people, we are here as students, and
> will take away from each exchange what we need. 
I would say that we are here for a variety of reasons.  I would also 
that we have a tendency to put into each exchange what we need as well.  
As an editor, I'm sure you are aware that it is sometimes useful to 
write that philosophical argument that we think is so well thought out 
and then sit on it for awhile,  return to it and try to see it as it 
will likely be received by the readers, especially the readers whom we 
use to make a point with.  I often find that after a second or third 
time through a posting I can eliminate a good bit of the personal and 
replace it with the abstract.  The points can still be made.




> This is the point that
> I was originally trying to make to Bart and if in the process I
> overstepped the bounds of propriety, I apologize.
>
>   
I think it has been good to clear the air somewhat,  but at the same 
time I find the process less than enjoyable because it is not my 
intention to  publicly point out the potential mistakes of anyone other 
than my own self.  With that in mind,  wherever I may appear to be using 
you to make my points, remember that we are all brothers and as Adelasie 
says, if we look close enough we will surely find ourselves reflected in 
each other,  warts and all. 
Given that,  I apologize to you as well.


peace and goodwill,


bill




>