Theos-Talk Archives (May 2009 Message tt00403)

Dear Daniel and Anand,

Maybe the middle position is to ackowledge the freedom of thought in the TS, but also to acknowledge that not all thoughts are equal and that our only criterium and responsibility is truth, even if we don't agree on, or know, what 'truth' actually means. 

Only through free debate we can hammer out some of our differences, evenwhile agreeably agreeing to disagree as an honorable position of last resort. 

In the end we'll just have to match statement by statement, passion by passion, gut by gut, rethoric by rethoric, service by service, sacrifice by sacrifice. And in case of foul play we'll have to call a spade a spade as there is no arbiter to appeal to. 

"Intensified fact-based analysis within a Theosophical framework" would be the motto here. 

Govert


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 6:29 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Another question for Anand: But WHO decides?





  Anand, you write:

  ----------------------------------------
  That means TS can not say "We have given freedom of thought to all members, if humanity is hurt by members' ideas, we are not responsible". TS is responsible for ideas it spreads in humanity. It does not matter much whether these ideas are chosen democratically or autocratically. What matters most is whether ideas going out of TS are useful to humanity or not.
  ---------------------------------------

  But WHO in the TS is to decide which ideas are "harmful" or "beneficial"? What person is to decide for the TS what ideas are "useful" or NOT??

  Should all of the TS members allow YOU to determine which "ideas" the TS should promote?

  Or shall it be determined by majority vote???

  Maybe the majority of TS members would vote for promoting Krishnamurti's teachings. :)

  Or maybe the International President should be the ultimate decider?

  Daniel



  

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