--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: <snip> > The lack of interest in Vaj's perspective I see here, > the polemic gamesmanship used to try to discredit him > personally rather than address the points he has > brought up, reveals an anti-intellectual bias that > reminds me of a political machine. I know that he > returns fire and I'm sure I'll be deluged with his > many online sins for defending him here. > > But here you have a guy who is waaaay into meditation > and is obviously very sharp, and I don't sense a shred > of curiosity about his detailed perspective among the > people here who claim to be waaaaay into self > development? BIG WTF? > > Did everyone miss the "compare and contrast" angle in > your education? > > An intellectual resource is being squandered on both > sides here. On a forum with people who have done TM > for decades, and some who have done it for 15 years > or more and then went into other techniques to compare > TM to, the best we can produce intellectually is: > > Show me you dome badge buddy!?
It's disingenuous for you to lump me and raunchydog and ed11 in with Willytex, Curtis. The three of us are making valid points about Vaj's "compare and contrast" performance here. We're not demanding he show his dome badge. We *are* genuinely and legitimately curious as to how he could ever have been a TM teacher as he claims, and yet come up with the kind of flat-out nonsense that has appeared in his current spate of posts. You can't do a valid compare-and-contrast if you can't give an accurate account of one of the things you're comparing and contrasting. It doesn't matter how many other things you know about or how extensive your knowledge of them is. To go back to Barry's analogy with crayons, if somebody's insisting that crayons are an inferior medium because all they can produce is black and white, the very first question that comes to mind is, Have you ever *used* crayons? Do you even know what they are? And if he then claims he used to *teach* crayon drawing, well, the jaw just drops. *Of course* we'd ask him to come up with some kind of varification of his having been a crayon drawing teacher. How can I be interested in the perspective of someone who thinks crayons produce only black and white, other than as an example of some kind of cognitive pathology? Curtis, it's *you* who isn't addressing the points that have been raised. raunchydog and I have both explicitly addressed the things Vaj has said about TM that simply aren't accurate. He hasn't responded with any kind of clarification, just ad hominem. He's discredited *himself* personally. And you're discrediting yourself by defending him and attacking us.
