--- In [email protected], "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > >> But somehow Barry is shocked, shocked that Ann's > >> perspective on her time with Robin would have > >> undergone this type of development. > >> > >> This is especially interesting given that Barry's > >> guru committed suicide, whereas Robin embarked on > >> a grueling 25-year course of self-rehabilitation, > >> emerging as a person many of us here find sane and > >> admirable. > > > > I would have to say that of all of the things that Judy as written this > > last paragraph is, for me, the most poignant and powerful. It is testimony > > to her and to Robin. If suicide can and often does indicate hopelessness, > > weakness, crushing despair then for Robin to have resisted, avoided, never > > contemplated let alone succumbed to the suicide route then he is a man of > > great faith, courage and strength. And Judy's perfect wording here conveyed > > the truth of this like no other. Frankly, it was almost a revelation. > > As we do not have any records of Robin being evaluated by > professionals as to his sanity or otherwise, I doubt we > could say that Robin's 'rehabilitation' was grueling, as > it is known only on his testimony, not independent > observation.
Oh, I see, interesting, now it's being suggested that Robin has been misrepresenting how difficult those 25 years were for him, that he doesn't even know what his experience was. I mean, after all, only independently observing professionals are capable of accurately characterizing a person's experience. Xeno, do you read what you write before you post it? > For those on FFL, some feel he is rehabilitated and some > feel he is not, and again we have no objective evidence, > only the evidence of what he writes, which of course we > must interpret according to our own devices. That's correct. However, that does not mean cases cannot be made for both sides and the soundness of the arguments evaluated on an objective basis, with reference to the evidence of Robin's posts, not to mention his own testimony as to the before-and-after of his experience of himself. IOW, it's really not the case that because we don't have confirmation from professionals, we can have no idea of the probabilities. And BTW, it's not the case either that only Robin knows what he went through during those 25 years, or that only he knows how much he's changed. His best friend who has known him for 35 years--through his Unity Consciousness period and throughout his subsequent rehabilitation-- could testify to both. Robin has mentioned this friend often in his posts, so it's not clear how you missed it. > I have no judgement on the relative value of suicide or > avoiding such. That's revealing. > Robin at some point was involved in two main paths of truth > from what has been posted here. Transcendental Meditation, > and Catholicism. He says he has disavowed both, that they > were not the truth. He says he is still seeking truth. That > means he has not found it. Yet he sets himself up as the > arbiter of truth in his arguments, at least with me. You are confusing the sort of all-encompassing truth claims made in Maharishi's teaching and Catholic teaching with the individual truth items you've discussed with Robin. Robin has been very clear that he has *not* found an all- encompassing truth that is valid for the present day, and he has never set himself up as the arbiter of such. Moreover, while he believes he has been able to determine the truth with regard to individual items such as he has discussed with you, he makes it clear these are beliefs based on his experience and analysis and acknowledges that he could be wrong about any of them. Indeed, he consistently invites challenge and argument concerning these beliefs. > I take a similar stance sometimes, having had certain experiences > which I would call 'truth', and I base my positions on my > interpretation of those experiences. Yet having rejected two > versions of what truth is, and not yet finding the goal that he > calls truth, Robin certainly cannot by these admissions take > the position that he can determine what is truth or not. > Therefore Robin, whom I might quixotically call in jest 'Mr > Reality', seems to be at the very least manipulative in his > arguments based on those footings which he has rejected and on > those at which he has not arrived. This is simply incoherent, Xeno. Part of the problem is the confusion I outlined above between all-encompassing truth *systems* and individual items of truth. But the "manipulative" charge makes no sense whatsoever. > But one thing is sure, you cannot base an explanation of > reality on what you consider to be false, yet Robin frequently > refers back to these as if they would bolster his argument, > that perhaps, somehow, those experiences would somehow be > relevant to what truth might be for him now. I do not think > he has established in any clear sense where he is working from > now. Would you cite a couple of instances in which you perceive that Robin has done what you describe? Perhaps we can determine what your misunderstanding was. > Further, a good teacher makes one's experiences clear or at > least clearer and moves a student along. Yet Robin eventually > comes to put down everything one thinks is real without > clarifying the real issue or moving the student along to a > more expanded experience of truth. When has Robin claimed to be a teacher on FFL (or anywhere these days)? > Basically you end up in his view, as plain wrong, period. > It appears to me to be a process of subtle and increasing > intellectual intimidation as he goes along >From what I've observed of your exchanges with Robin, Xeno, Robin has explained and clarified and attempted to move you along to a more expanded experience of truth until he's blue in the face, but you've completely failed to pick up on what he's been telling you (that's you as a fellow participant in a dialogue, not as a "student")--not even so much as to make it evident that you understand what he's saying well enough to disagree with it. I think the situation here is that you, Xeno, *feel intimidated*, rather than that Robin has been attempting to intimidate you. >, which at least in the past became physical as well. Cheap shot.
