--- In [email protected], "Hagen J. Holtz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think you are a little bit overshadowed by my metaphoric title, > which for you seems to make the necessity of going into the details > of my argumentation obsolete. But is this not taking the same line > like that monosyllabic professor seems to do ? He reduces his > simplifications, as if only exclaiming a sound like "ping !" and > you immediately put me on the prejudicial track that I had been > responding with "pong !". But funnily enough your own comment > sounds like another version of "ping" and again I will try not to > react with "pong !", trying to elaborate my arguments in a > reasonable manner. But frankly without much hope, because against > stupidity it is said seems to be no remedy. > > And telling to me that I tried to cope with that, what "was only > told to me" is as stupid as it only can be. Imagine a physicist > would be insinuated to only being able to apply, "what he was told", > because he is making some calculations, using some canonical > formulas. Is this modus operandi already the proof, that he has > been loosing the capacity of his own decision makings or creativity > because of that. Not at all, or is he !? I tell you, if someone > like you jumps in the same boat of this narrow gauged critic, it > is hard for me to go with you for a tour parallely in another boat, > because you have already been drowned due to the weight of your > cloddishness.
You forgot to accuse me of lying. > > The whole story is in the title of this post. > > > > What is happening is two people expressing their > > OPINIONS. But the TM supporter feels compelled > > to express *his* opinion while/by calling the > > other person a liar. > > > > People have been looking for those things that > > define Maharishi's spiritual legacy? This is it. > > Really, doesn't it just encapsulate the whole thing? > > Hagen's response is thoroughly steeped in the belief > that he is RIGHT. Each of his arguments are presented > as if they were fact, even though what they really > are opinions based on stuff that was told to him, > often presented here word for word AS they were told > to him. > > But it's the "What about your lies" thing that is so > telling. The fact that Michael Coleman disagrees with > him indicates to Hagen not *only* that he is wrong, > but that there is some nefarious intent involved. > The fact that Coleman's beliefs are different than > Hagen's indicate that Coleman is LYING. He "really" > knows the truth but is lying about it. > > I'm sorry, but this really IS one of the defining > characteristics of the TM True Believer. We've been > seeing it here lately in the demonizations of Deepak > Chopra, and of individual posters who have posted > comments critical of TM and Maharishi. > > The baseline assumption of the TM TBs is that they > are wrong. That's a given...they're TBs. But how they > PRESENT things is that the critics are not *just* > wrong, they're LYING. > > Be it Deepak Chopra or Paul Mason or Vaj or this > Michael Coleman fellow, it's not *enough* for the > TM defenders to declare that they are wrong. They > also feel compelled to declare that these critics > are LYING, that they have evil intent. > > Isn't that fascinating coming from a bunch of people > who claim that they have the inside track to a tech- > nique that creates inner peace and world peace and > that theirs is the "highest teaching?" >
