Re: Bruce on "Daniel and Dallas"
Jul 27, 2006 03:42 PM
by danielhcaldwell
Bruce,
I guess you are writing to me! :)
You say:
"I love the way you 'claim' never to know what any historical
personage is thinking or doing!!"
Did I claim this? Maybe your are joking or making an overstatement
on purpose. :)
I would prefer that they actually TELL me...what they are thinking...
if they are dead...I will read what they wrote and try to ascertain
what they were thinking....
But if they don't tell me or if I can't read something they
wrote...I guess I can try to....speculate...or whatever about what
they are thinking but that doesn't mean that I really KNOW.
Well I think sometimes I explain my points. Yes sometimes I don't
or I don't do it fully.
You also write:
"In your code of ethics it seems to be a moral imperative to stand
nowhere and criticize all."
Well at least you wrote "it seems...." :)
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "to stand nowhere".
An example or two might help me to know what you are trying to
communicate.
Yes I do try to point out from time to time historical
inaccuracies. And I try to usually document them so you can decide
for yourself whether my point is well taken or not.
Daniel
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "robert_b_macd"
<robert.b.macdonald@...> wrote:
>
> Dallas,
>
> I love the way you "claim" never to know what any historical
personage
> is thinking or doing!! Yet you certainly construct your quotes
like
> you are trying to make a point! Perhaps if you explained your
points
> people would not be left having to guess what you are thinking or
> doing!!! Your only explanations seem to be in the criticism of
other
> people's opinions. In your code of ethics it seems to be a moral
> imperative to stand nowhere and criticize all.
>
> Jesus X 2!
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
> <danielhcaldwell@> wrote:
> >
> > Bruce,
> >
> > I love the way you know exactly what I was or wasn't thinking or
> > doing!!
> >
> > Take this gem of yours:
> >
> > =========================================================
> > Daniel has baited Dallas into commenting on an historical matter
by
> > again first trying to deceive readers through lack of context.
Rather
> > than demonstrate to readers why Dallas is wrong in his analysis,
> > Daniel might demonstrate some courage and present his own
> > convictions to the readers. It is rather cowardly sitting in the
> > weeds constantly floating decoys and then blasting anyone who
cares
> > to investigate. Clever but
> > cowardly.
> > =========================================================
> >
> > When I wrote my posting titled "Robert Crosbie Claimed" I wasn't
> > even thinking about Dallas!! I had been discussing the use of
> > the word "claim" with Carlos. So I simply decided to present
> > to Carlos a series of statements showing what Crosby claimed.
> >
> > So now you say I was baiting Dallas?
> >
> > But of course you know better than myself what I was or wasn't
> > thinking or doing.
> >
> > Bruce, is this in your code of Theosophical ethics to accuse
people
> > of what you don't have the foggiest idea about?
> >
> > Jesus!
> >
> > Daniel
> >
>
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application