--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Ok, we get it. Either your past life memory is > > fuzzy or you don't want to talk about your time > > as an Inquisitor. > > > > However, just out of curiosity, you keep calling > > me a 'phony.' A phony *what*? > > > > I've always found 'phony,' used as a noun, to be > > a lazy kinda weasel word. The word implies that > > the person it's aimed at is pretending to be some- > > thing he is not,
<preserved because it relates to the response below> > Exactly. It's usually used to describe someone > to an audience that is familiar with the persona > that person presents, so the audience already knows > the "what" that is being described as phony... > > > but what *exactly* is it that you > > think I'm pretending to be. > > ...so the missing piece in "He's a phony" isn't > what the person is pretending to be--since the > audience knows what that is--but what he really > *is*. > > And I'm pretty sure I've made it quite clear here > what you really are: shallow, dishonest, vicious, > ego-ridden, pretentious, pompous, and hypocritical, > just for starters. You're also often delusionary, > and you're wrenchingly profoundly attached to your > own point of view, unable to tolerate perspectives > that differ from yours. You have an elaborate set > of inflexible rules about how others should think > and behave, accompanied by an equally elaborate set > of fantasies about how they *do* think and behave. Thanks for your reply. I'm ignoring it pretty much completely because I don't really care what you believe I'm pretending to be. Like Popeye, I yam what I yam. You are welcome to to your ideas about how best to serve yams; I prefer them with a cherry and maple sugar sauce. :-) I was allowing you to vent. You seemed to need to. Besides, I just wanted to see if you were still silly enough to jump when I asked you to jump. :-) Also, I was a little curious as the arguments you'd use in your response because your recent use of the word 'phony,' and in a thread that had just mentioned Torquemada, reminded me that I had recently read a passage about the use of that very technique. It was in the Practica Inquisitionis, Bernardo Gui's 1323 manual for Inquisitors. In it, he instructs the aspiring Inquisitor in the ways of dealing with a heretic. The stupid ones you can safely bring to trial, but if you find one who is somewhat clever or well-spoken, and he starts being clever in front of the faithful (who might be swayed by his words and begin to doubt the all-powerful nature of the Inquisition), you should immediately shift your strategy and begin to undermine his credibility. In other words, you should call the heretic names, but (and this is the interesting part given the context of your use of the term 'phony') "hazy" names, not specific names. The word he recommends is 'faux,' false. Its use in his passages is similar to your use of the word 'phony.' He specifically tells the young Inquisitor to avoid saying *what* about the heretic is false. The point is simply to call them "false," over and over and over, to make sure that the audience of the faithful begins to associate that word, and no other, with the particular heretic. Sound familiar? (By the way, he even includes a section on how to repond if someone asks you, "The heretic in question is a false *what*?" He recommends that you say, "You all *know* the ways in which the heretic is false. You have seen him with your own eyes." As a result, I find your reply fairly hilarious. Thanks.) You use another technique that is straight out of Gui's manual for Inquisitors, calling people liars. Ooops, sorry...I got the spelling wrong: LIARS. :-) The point again is to *associate* that word with the heretic in the minds of the "audience." Gui suggests that they specifically use this word when challenged by a heretic on matters of FAITH or BELIEF. The idea is to make the point that anyone who deviates from the dogma as defined by the Inquisition is not just wrong. They *know* the "real" Truth, and are attempting to spread heresy by LYING about it, and claiming to believe some- thing else. I'm just bringing these points up for your edification and for possible use in your own self discovery. I mean, the more I read about the Inquisition, the more it becomes obvious (to me, anyway) that you may have done time there. You might want to consider doing a past-life regression and trying to recover some actual memories of those lifetimes. Having flashes from past lives is fun, a bit like watching a movie. And, as with movies, sometimes it's just a pleasant diversion and sometimes you actually learn something. In your case, watching a movie of your Inquisitorial past might enable you overcome some present-day samskaras by becoming aware of what caused them in the past. And even if it doesn't, you'll get to watch the torture scenes again. :-) 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/
