Theos-Talk Archives (July 2006 Message tt00569)

Daniel,

A few comments:

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> 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. :)
>
You can check out the context, perhaps it might become clear.

> I would prefer that they actually TELL me...what they are thinking...

Wouldn't that be nice.  Regrettably when you ask some people to
clarify themselves they go off comparing apples with oranges and
thereaby signal an unwillingness to communicate and a willingness to
hinder clarification and waste time, or so it would seem.

> if they are dead...I will read what they wrote and try to ascertain 
> what they were thinking....
> 
Have you ever tried reading their words divorced from context so that
you need only focus on the dead letter?  This is a marvelous way of
tying others up in fruitless debate.

> 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.
> 
You may not KNOW but if you are distracted with apples posing for
oranges you can guess that communication for the purpose of
clarification is not the goal.

> Well I think sometimes I explain my points.  Yes sometimes I don't 
> or I don't do it fully. 

Can you present us with examples where clarification actually resulted
from something you wrote or said?

> 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".
> 
Maybe the man sitting on the fence is standing nowhere and the bonus
is that he can criticize those standing on either side of the fence.

> An example or two might help me to know what you are trying to 
> communicate.
> 
Apples and Oranges are examples that work for some people.

> 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.
> 
Perhaps you are deluded in your supposition. 
> Daniel
> 
Daniel, if you really wanted to communicate, it shouldn't be that hard.

Bruce 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  --- 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
> > >
> >
>