Someone might wonder, hey, if he like dope so much why would e even really be motivated to give up. The reason is that I want to have kids. I always said I would clean up completely before that. I've been in this boat before as I was a punk rocker, druggie when I learned TM, yes I gave up dope for '2' not '3' weeks before.  I was clean since before learning TM until quite a long time after. But I still smoked for a few years until shortly going to MIU when I was 17.  The first year I was broken and it was the worst. But by the third year I was healed, and by the fourth I was perfect, or so I thought.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 2:33 AM
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: I would like to try an experiment in compassion


From: Bob Brigante [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 1:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: I would like to try an experiment in compassion

 


--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...>
wrote:

>
> "Regarding your claim that TMers need more than TM to quit
> smoking, that is not what research indicates"
>
>
>
> Thereby implying that 100% of TMers need no more than TM to quit
> smoking. Therefore, as it stands, you have committed TWO
> falsehoods: Not only what you claim you claimed is false, but
> also your original is false. Care to dig your hole a little
> deeper? Maybe the TMO should have asked all to abstain from
> dishonesty for 3 weeks prior to being initiated (or at least
> those who are addicted to it).
>

>
> -Mark

**********

100%, or nearly so, of the TMers monitored in the scientific studies
quoted who quit smoking did so because of the stress relief they
experienced from TM, not from other stop-smoking programs (they would
not have been allowed in the studies if they were participating in
some stop-smoking program other than their practice of TM).
Therefore, when I said above that "Regarding your claim that TMers
need more than TM to quit smoking, that is not what research
indicates," this is a true statement -- people in the studies who
quit smoking did so only because of TM.

Nobody made any claim about TM enabling everybody in the short run to
quit smoking, and, once again, I will remind you that I quoted a
scientific study to that effect:

http://www.tm-online.org.za/faqs.html#11



----------------

 

Bob,

 

You continue to attempt to escape responsibility for falsehood by spinning what you originally said. Now you claim it was this: �Almost all TMers, who quit smoking after starting TM, quit because of TM only and nothing else.� Whether that is the actual study or not is irrelevant. It is not your original representation of it.

 

Let�s take a detailed look at your original statement again:

 

"Regarding your claim that TMers need more than TM to quit smoking, that is not what research indicates"

By simple reversal of the sentence construction and the positive-for-negative, we can see that your statement directly implies (says) this:

 

"research indicates that TMers need no more than TM to quit smoking, which is counter to your claim"

Since you did not qualify the amount of TMers with a percent figure, you automatically imply that not only 100% of TMers who start TM quit smoking, but they need no more than the effect of the TM to do it. The first element of the statement is obviously false, and the second one is probably false. Even if the second one is true, it is irrelevant to this conversation. At best, ignoring your original and accepting your spin, your point is irrelevant.  

 

-Mark

 

 




To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Reply via email to