RE: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

Thu, 03 Feb 2005 09:00:31 -0800

In other words, by way of addendum to my previous post, the real test would be: what are TTers saying to people OFF the listserv (to the "C" parties in my scenario)?
 
As for honest people disagreeing on any issue, that's the tree thing. We are all sincerely hugging our own trees. When an arm is reached out, someone can be pulled from one tree to another as I described, but they're still not seeing the whole forest.
 
Another note: the nature of any given person's interaction with others varies. On each and every occasion, a person can choose either to engage or not to engage. Making safety for people helps them decide to engage.
 
Debbie
-----Original Message-----
From: Lance Muir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

Of course. When you review the ongoing 'conversations' within the  cliques/camps on TT what headway do you see being made? The more literate among us (that'd exclude me) could occupy both sides of any conversation while 'speaking' (writing) under the name of virtually any person.
Is this not so? 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: February 03, 2005 09:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

In a message dated 2/3/2005 5:17:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Kevin says: 'They will not change by skilled reasoning.' Please describe the nature of the content of your own posts, Kevin. Are we witnessing the wisdom of God or, the wisdom of Kevin? If a Mormon I, I'd be quite unmoved. On the whole they (your arguments) are quite supercillious.


I do beleive that a worthy point of discussion would be one which includes an understanding of just why it is that honest people disagree on most any issue.

J

Reply via email to