> > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: [snip] > Or that they were lies. Or, more kind, hopeful > fantasies on his part. I can agree with the > kinder interpretation for some of his claims, > but not all. Some were knowing lies. The person > who sat there on the stage looking out at the > rows of twitching, spasming, out-of-control > meditators in Fiuggi and still claimed that TM > could not possibly have any negative effects > was definitely lying. I rate *kind* Turq higher. After all I too have surveyed "rows of twitching, spasming, out- of-control meditators". No, I did not see those as negative effects (or any other negative effects quite frankly). Actually I didn't see anything I would ultimately judge as "out of control" either. Makes me a liar? That's not to say that there may NOT have EVER been any negative effects. For one thing, if you push to an extreme, there is NOTHING that cannot EVER have some negative effects. Even a saint will tread on an ant. Even the simple, natural, effortless sipping of peppermint tea is bound to affect someone, some place in a negative fashion. By these standards no one could ever say of anything that there are no negative effects. That would damage our language. > But the bottom line is that my experience learn- > ing, practicing, and teaching both TM and other > techniques of meditation is that Maharishi's > claims to: 1) the uniqueness of TM, 2) the effect- > iveness of its "followup," 3) the "differences" > between the supposed positive effects of TM and > the positive effects of other techniques, and > most importantly 4) what it is *worth* in the > marketplace are at best mistaken and are at > worst knowing lies. I have good reason to respect your opinion because of your experience (and I do). But of course the force of your claim "from experience" is opposed by every individual with similar, or greater experience that disagrees. Let's take Jerry Jarvis. I'm assuming he disagrees with you. And I'm assuming his CV is even more impressive than yours. Does that make him right and you wrong? Or, in preferred language, does that make his opinion more credible than yours? > When you have had the same experience learning, > practicing, and teaching both TM and some other > technique of meditation, then you are qualified > to criticize me. Noooooo! The greatest crime against thinking is the attempt to shut down debate (IMO of course). (Presumably by your lights you are not *qualified* to criticise MMY, as I would doubt even you have had "the same experience learning, practicing, and teaching both TM and some other technique of meditation" as he had). > Until then, you are still in > the position of being a person who has tried > only one technique of meditation in his life, > has practiced *it* sporadically, has never taught > it or been trained to teach it, and has never > learned, practiced or taught any of the other > techniques you still believe TM is "superior" to. > > In other words, Get real.
