Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt01613)

Iain <ibse03888@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: Dear all,
          I'd drink to that!!
cheers Iain
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vincent" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Cass and Carlos- Intoxicated


> Cass-
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> "This is an excellent example of two minds enslaving each other in 
> ego.  Why not just substitute "drunk" with "intoxicated".  Two 
> unspoken truths are the cultivation of a sense of humour and common 
> sense, let's get back to both eh guys."
> 
> Very true, and utmost common sense that you offer here, Cass.  
> Especially about the ego part.
> 
> I tried the humor thing, but Carlos didn't like it apparently, 
> thinking I was too happy for his tastes.  As for enslavement, he and 
> I are both good at that, although Carlos might be hesitant to admit 
> it, I don't know.  I love to get preachy when I'm preached at, hehe.
> 
> Carlos-
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> "Vincent,
> 
> Others are mirrors for us."
> 
> Obviously.  You are welcome to start mirroring.  Think of a twoway 
> mirror, as opposed to simply oneway.  It's easy to preach, my 
> friend, and assert as you have that the other should remain silent, 
> but that works both ways.
> 
> "Theos-talk is not about personal discussions."
> 
> Where did you get that wild idea?  There are no such restrictions in 
> this forum.  At least not that you're exercising.  Although, I 
> certainly wouldn't call our exchanges a 'personal' discussion.  You 
> simply had a personality conflict with me, and my wordiness rubbed 
> you the wrong way.  I'm a writer.  It's in my nature, whether you 
> like that or not.  If you don't like what I have to say, then you're 
> not obligated to respond.  But you did several times, and I 
> responded back.  Don't try to pin that on me, my friend.  You played 
> your part.  Naughty, naughty.
> 
> "Compare the number of sentences and level of "personality energy"in 
> the two cases."
> 
> The problem is that you're comparing each person with the other here 
> in the first place.  An evidence of the aforementioned ego 
> conflict.  Something that I said had vexed you, and so you engaged 
> in personal discussion with me, while wildly asserting that this 
> forum is not for personal discussion.  And somehow you believe 
> that 'personality energy' is a bad thing, when factually it is not.  
> It's better to have personality energy than none at all.
> 
> The fact that you had internally flipped the concept of 'personality 
> energy' from a good thing into a bad thing in your mind is simply 
> evidence of the personality conflict residing within you.  And so 
> you attempt to correct what you mistakenly believe to be wrong.  
> You're attempting to correct a mispercieved imbalance, because you 
> believe that things should be balanced.  When life is not always 
> that way.
> 
> And no, my friend, lots of sentences are not a bad thing either when 
> one is a writer.  Lots of sentences simply means one has a fluency 
> with words (as do I), and does not imply either excess personality 
> energy or word intoxication.  It simply means that I put quality 
> effort into any endeavor that I undertake, in this case writing.  On 
> my end, I simply interpret your attention span as perhaps being a 
> bit short.  Although you did read every word.  It just sort of 
> reminds me when I was breaking corporate productivity records at 
> United Parcel Service as a supervisor.  My bosses loved it, but 
> occasionally a coworker would become offended in their sense of ego 
> competition.
> 
> Now what does all of this have to do with Theosophy?  I'll leave 
> that to you to connect the dots, seeing as how you got preachy with 
> me.  (Okay, your turn.  You're enslaved, lolol.  And I'm the 
> energizer bunny.)
> 
> "Peace to you."
> 
> At last, something constuctive.  Peace to you as well.
> 
> Blessings
> 
> Vince
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva  wrote:
>>
>> This is an excellent example of two minds enslaving each other in 
> ego.  Why not just substitute "drunk" with "intoxicated".  
>> Two unspoken truths are the cultivation of a sense of humour and 
> common sense, let's get back to both eh guys.
>> 
>> Cass
>> 
>> Vincent  wrote: Carlos-
>> 
>> You wrote:
>> 
>> "Who called anyone literally drunk here?"
>> 
>> You comparatively derived a metaphor of 'word' drunkenness from a 
>> source of literal drunkenness.  'Another way to get drunk' as per 
>> your thread title.  You were deriving a metaphor from the literal, 
>> even as all metaphors are derived from the literal as comparative 
>> communication devices.
>> 
>> "I thought you could perceive "getting drunk" is a metaphor."
>> 
>> Most certainly.  And in the context of your obvious offendedness, 
> a 
>> derogatory metaphor at best.  Metaphors are used as comparisons to 
>> the literal as a literary device.  You were comparing.  And your 
>> comparative metaphor was in relation to something that you detest.
>> 
>> "Pay attention, "Vince"."
>> 
>> Sounds pretty aggressive, lolol.  Forced perspectives don't make 
> too 
>> much headway with me.  I think you're still offended.  At what, I 
>> really don't know, because you said that you didn't feel that I 
> had 
>> tricked you.  But you're offended nonetheless.  Do you require 
>> continued assistance working through your offendedness?
>> 
>> Vince
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------
>> Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously 
> low rates.
>> 
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>


 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 





		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1&cent;/min.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]