--- In [email protected], Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If Doc Pete did get his degrees by sending in $20 to a Divinity > Institute, would his words here be any less inspected by us?
It worked for Johnny Gray. (Pacific .. University. Went defunct a few years later after it kept getting sued and investigated as a diploma mill.) > The impact of his words on us will always be up to us. We interpret > his words based on our immediate understanding of them and whether or > not we resonate with the POV -- not a single one of us would say, > "Well, he's got the credentials, so I must believe his words." He > could be Professor Emeritus at Harvard, and we'd be taking pot shots > at his concepts, right? Why are you dissing Michael Weinless? A bit quirky, but .. > We don respect no stinkeenk bahges. Except the badge of big E. Self-proclaimed or not. "Labels are labels. The thing is the thing. Never the twain shall meet.' (Thats from my favorite 13 century BCE hipster, poet, zen tantra south beach master). > If someone is touting credentials as a reason for why we should just > accept his POV, then I think that that issue is something that can be > looked at, Well, this can also be indirect. We toot the credentials of our "authorities" and since we are his/her mouthpiece we speak with the credentialed authority of them. Whether it be MMY, "scientists", Science, "famed quantum physisict John Haglin, "my enlightened guru", etc. For example, how many here once spoke authoritatively before audiences about what "Science had discovered" or "Science has proven" -- without knowing sh*t about Science. but I don't get that Doc Pete is "handing down from on > high" so much as he's shooting from the hip with his life-wisdom gun. Does that have anything to do with happiness being a warm gun?
