--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As Shemp has pointed out often, her supposed "outrage"
> > > > over lying and immorality doesn't seem to apply as
> > > > strictly to Democrats as it does to Republicans. Shemp
> > > > thinks this failing is because she's a Democrat; I 
> > > > think it's because she's a hypocrite, that's all.
> > > 
> > > In fact, it *does* apply as strictly to Democrats as
> > > to Republicans.  Sorry, wrong *again*.
> > 
> > If you honestly believe what you said above:
> > 
> > 1. You obviously have a dislike for liars.
> > Do you believe that you are consistent in
> > your vehement denunciations of people who 
> > lie, no matter who they might be? That is, 
> > do you hold all liars to the same high 
> > standards?
> > 
> > 2. Do you feel that when it's obvious that
> > someone has lied that it's somehow your duty
> > or responsibility to point out their lies and
> > seriously chastise them for lying, no matter 
> > who they might be?  If you do believe this, 
> > do you think you've been consistent at doing
> > this in real life?
> > 
> > 3. Do you believe that someone who justifies 
> > the lies of others, makes excuses for them, 
> > or in some way apologizes for the lies and 
> > "explains them away" is also guilty of lying?
> > 
> > Just curious...
>
> Just quote whatever you believe I've said
> that's inconsistent, Barry, and I'll be
> happy to address it.

Ok. Seems to me that you scream and yell about
the "liars" who just happen to be people you
already dislike, but cut those liars you do
like a great deal of slack, even going out of
your way to make excuses for them, and come up
with amazing leaps of logic to show how they
weren't "necessarily" lying, even when you know
that they were:

***********************************************

Message #112873

Re: Surely MMY would not deliberately deceive the English?

--- In [email protected], "Paul Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On 29th September 1967 'The Frost Programme' included an interview
> with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi at London Airport. During the chat the
> topic of mantras came up. His answer would give the listener the
> idea that the TM movement used a palette of 'thousands' of mantras,
> which, if it were not true, would amount to false advertising.
>
> Frost - Is that the same sound that you give to each person?
> MMY - No, each person gets different but we don't have as many sounds
> as we have men in the world. So they are grouped together.
> Frost - How many sounds are there?
> MMY - Oh there are lots of sounds.
> Frost - I mean hundreds or thousands or ...?
> MMY - You could say thousands.

Two points here. First, people aren't persuaded to
learn TM because they are led to believe "thousands"
of mantras are used, so to call this "false advertising"
is a bit of a stretch.

Second, certainly it's deceptive on its own terms.
MMY surely knew Frost was asking specifically about
mantras as used in TM, and that's what most
listeners would have assumed he was asking about,
so Paul is quite right, they would have interpreted
MMY's response in that sense.

But MMY responded as though Frost were asking about
mantras generally. It's an instance of "plausible
deniability"--i.e., if confronted, he could have
claimed to have understood Frost's questions to
be general rather than specific. In that context,
his replies were perfectly accurate, so he wasn't
"lying" per se.

Obviously MMY didn't want to get into the specifics
of the mantras in TM. If he'd said, "Oh, a dozen
or so," that would have led to more questions: Why
that particular dozen? and so on.

He should just have said he'd rather not get into
specifics and left it at that. Perhaps he would have
if Frost had asked, "How many sounds do you use in TM?"
rather than, "How many sounds are there?" But Frost's
question was imprecise, and MMY took advantage of it
so as not to appear to be withholding information.

(Actually he gave a bit of a hint that he wasn't being
entirely forthright: "*You could say* thousands,"
i.e., you could say that if you were referring to
the number of mantras that exist, rather than the
number used in TM.)







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/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> 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/
 



Reply via email to