Response below.
--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > (Terminology is interesting. "Pro-TMer" isn't > > > considered disparaging by either those who support > > > TM or its critics, yet "anti-TMer" evokes howls of > > > outrage from the latter. And while "anti-TMer" is > > > considered offensive by the critics, it doesn't > > > bother them at all to label the pro-TMers > > > "TBs/True Believers.") > > > > ******** > > > > This is an astute observation. For example, I > > occasionally use the True Believer or equivalent > > lable, while at the same time I usually reject > > the anti-TM label when applied to yours truly. > > The thing is, "True Believer" is actually more > accurate than "pro-TMer." "True Believer" implies > all of the characteristics that Eric Hoffer wrote > about in his books, while "pro-TMer" only implies > someone who feels that the TM *technique* itself > is beneficial. > > The term "anti-TMer" is incredibly inaccurate, > and IMO consciously so. I would say that *most* > of the people here who have problems with some of > the TM dogma and some of the TMO behavior have *no* > such problems with the basic TM technique itself. > > The attempt to call someone who has problems with > some of the TM dogma and many of the actions of > the TMO an "anti-TMer" is DISHONEST. MOST of the > folks here who have been called "anti-TMers" by > one of Hoffer's classic TBs have NO problems with > TM the technique. It's just that the TBs want > people to *think* that they do. > > Read the list of Hoffer's criteria for a "True > Believer." THAT is what I am referring to when I > term someone a TB or True Believer. I am *not* > suggesting merely that they are "pro-TM" and > that being a "pro-TMEer" is a bad thing. Hell, > *I* am actually "pro-TM" in that I think that > the basic TM technique has value. > > But at the same time I believe that many of the > personality traits and behaviors exhibited by the > True Believers are very damaging indeed, both to > themselves and to others. > ******** Shame on you for snipping! SHAME SHAME SHAME. Just kidding of course. But note that in the part you snipped, I said: "On the other hand, it doesn't necessarily follow that what we might call the "truth content" of the labels is equivalent.Â…Furthermore, we would probably have no difficulty accepting the prevailing view among educated people that the hard core membership of the organization is likely to be more narrow-minded and paranoid than the membership at the fringe, and tend to view them more negatively than anyone else would." This is the part that agrees with your points, which are all well-taken. L B S To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
