"Gone Mental" (was Re: WHY TM CAN'T BE LEARNED FROM A BOOK)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > So the time may be approach-
> > ing in which I'm not gonna find anything posted here inter-
> > esting enough to reply to. It's all been done to death and
> > argued endlessly *in exactly the same words* for decades
> > now. SO been there, done that.
>
> We are not worthy!

Some are more worthy than others. :-)

> Actually, I think if Barry wanted to be honest about it,
> his posting here is more akin to what we probably all did
> at least once or twice when we were eight year olds - namely
> ringing someone's door bell and then running away.
>
> I mean, sheesh, if you are into pushing peoples buttons,
> why not stick around every once in a while instead of going
> and hiding behind a tree.

Barry Wright: Why bother? Everything I need to know about who got
their buttons pushed and how severely they got pushed
is visible in Yahoo's Message View.

Santa Claus: Barry, Baby, you are asserting something without any feel for the 
way it is playing in reality. This is called perfect subjective dislocation 
from the necessary feedback which the universe is giving you. Get it, Barry? 
When you blow your nose on your sleeve, there is some mucus there which, if you 
want to still look pretty, you have to remove. 

You can't just say: The Kleenex idea, it's just an opinion. My sleeve is just 
as good an absorber of my snot as your bloody Kleenex. I don't need no fucking 
Kleenex—You wimps.

I blow my snot on myself and you guys offer me a Kleenex: Hey, I guess I 
pressed your button once more! 

Barry Wright: And I thought I stated quite explicitly that I don't
feel I "owe" anyone here anything. Not a response to
something they post, and certainly not an argument
or an impassioned defense of something I said.

Santa Claus: If you tell us, Barry, that ice-cream tastes good because of the 
placebo effect, we are not exercised about this. It don't bother us ice-cream 
eaters that much. Even though you used to be one of those who licked down to 
the bottom and then ate the cone. The deliciousness of ice-cream: just so you 
know, everyone: That was trained moodmaking.

Maybe. Maybe not. But if in trying to tell us ice-cream just tasted good 
because we were told it was good, then it isn't really a matter of opinion, 
Barry: it is a matter of negative wish-fulfillment. 

 It is not a question of opinion. It is a question of the sensation in your 
mouth. For some reason you tasted a different brand of ice-cream [by the way, I 
stopped eating that damn ice-cream myself—not good for me; still I don't say it 
didn't go down good with me at the time]—and then found yourself having to kill 
off the old ice-cream memories.

But your ice-cream maker—your second one—didn't he choke to death on one of his 
own cones? My opinion, maybe; but if he's not sending you any e-mails, and 
can't be located anywhere, maybe it's not an opinion. Your last Guru, Barry: 
he's dead. That's my strongest opinion.

You aren't, are you—merely giving your opinions when you get your hate on about 
someone on FFL, are you, Barry boy? Opinions mean some absence of knowledge. 
But you, surely if you were only expressing opinions in your hatred, would have 
to question the truthfulness of these opinions. And since you give us your 
opinions about, say, the geocentric reality of the universe, us Galileos, have 
to set you right: the universe is not Barry-centric; it is, as far as we can 
tell—scientists will back this up with their opinions—heliocentric.

Is Sati merely a matter of opinion, Barry? Should a woman be obliged to throw 
herself upon her husband's funeral pyre? Is your hatred of Judy mere opinion? 
Do you hold your views to be opinions only? How can an opinion generate intense 
feelings of hostility? And why, Barry dearest, do you ever refuse to argue out 
your case?

Barry, if you expressed your attitude and beliefs *as if you knew when you 
stated them* they were just opinions, and they held only this status with you, 
then why are you bothered when we come back with our opinions about your 
opinions? You say x is y here at FFL. Does that mean that if someone realizes 
that x is not y, that making this known to you constitutes your having pressed 
their buttons?

If you truly felt everything everyone said here on FFL was just opining, then 
why not join in the fun and defend yourself against counter-opining? You seem 
to take very seriously everything anyone says here contra your own opinions, 
because you are silent and unresponsive. This decision *never ever to rebut 
those who disagree with you*, that is decision you make at the level of 
opinion? As in: it is my opinion that no matter what Robin or anyone's else 
says, I should not respond? But if *that* is but an opinion, Barry, then 
perhaps it is a mistaken opinion. Perhaps your refusal to enter into the fray 
is determined by something way beyond opinion. It is determined by some kind of 
experience you have which tells you: I must never, under any circumstances, 
answer my critics. This ain't giving an opinion to yourself, Barry; this is 
based upon the subjective knowledge you have of yourself, which says: No matter 
what: I ain't going into battle.

And the alternative to facing the music, Barry? To keep saying: You guys are 
just giving your opinions, and by writing anything in disagreement with me you 
are proving that I have stimulated you to do this, meanwhile, in my rigid and 
inexplicable muteness I am following a profound revelation. Well, your decision 
to not say anything after throwing one of your bricks, Barry: that is very much 
a willed act. For anyone to respond to you, that presses the button *in you*, 
Barry Baby, which says: Turn off everything and  retreat.

And then, after a while, start throwing bricks again.

Barry: What I say is OPINION. What *they* say is OPINION.
Neither of these OPINIONS has anything to do with
"truth" or anything even remotely like it.

Santa Claus: And this, Barry: "What *they* say is OPINION. Neither of these 
OPINIONS has anything to do with "truth" or anything even remotely like it"—IS 
THIS AN OPINION? Is that not an opinion? How does this dogmatic statement 
constitute anything but an opinion? Please explain, Barry. Out of everything 
anyone has ever said—you: us—on FFL, are we to assume that this very assertion 
is the one exception to merely expressing an opinion?

You seem to have forgotten your own creed, Barry. Because in this very 
declaration you really are providing the paradigmatic example of OPINION. If 
what you say here is NOT an OPINION, then how can my saying it is bullshit not 
have the same status as what you say, which I must believe you believe to be 
NOT AN OPINION?
 
You are confused, Barry Wright. You are inadvertently paradoxical. I am doing 
my best to teach you, Barry; but you are a somewhat obstinate pupil.

Barry: I am content with merely stating my opinions and then
watching the reactions to them. Some, it would seem,
are not. They feel that they are "owed" some kind of
argument or debate or discussion about their opinions,
as if by offering up one that is contrary to theirs
you "have" to become a captive audience to how they
got their buttons pushed, or their attempts to push
yours in response. Not my idea of discussion, sorry.

Santa Claus: You set the agenda with your opinions, Barry. We respond sincerely 
and honestly with our own opinions about the validity of your opinions. How is 
it we are to understand "my idea of discussion" if you only want to state your 
opinions without having anyone remark on how those opinions seem to fit into 
reality? No, it seems, dear boy, that you want to exercise the prerogative of 
getting your opinions out—some of which are negatively charged with affect [as 
I have pointed out elsewhere in a recent FFL post]—and not  elicit any kind of 
response to this freely chosen decision of yours to give your opinions. Isn't 
it true, that if each and every one of us posted back that we agreed with you, 
you would find that acceptable, and would not tarnish us with the accusation we 
are just acting because you've pushed our buttons? Would not that too be 
opinion-making as well?—to concur with Barry every time he posts?

"I am content with merely stating my opinions and then watching the reactions 
to them. It would seem they are not." Now I can only read this as meaning: I am 
happy to make severe and definitive judgments about certain issues, and have no 
attachment to defending these judgments. If FFL readers find my judgments 
faulty or obnoxious or ridiculous or indefensible, they surely know better than 
to "merely state their counter-opinions". They should remain silent in the face 
of my hurling insults or saying things which are designed to offend—not just 
offend people personally, Barry—that doesn't really bother me a bit—but rather 
offend the universal sense of truth and honesty: that's where I have a problem 
when you press my buttons. You say something stupid or irresponsible, Barry and 
we respond. It is true you then DON'T RESPOND; but don't you see, dear boy, 
that THAT ITSELF is just as much a response as if you did offer a rebuttal? We 
are condemned to be free, Barry, as one famous continental philosopher put it: 
and you are condemned to be judged for the opinion you express by not 
responding to the honest criticism of your opinion.

That you think your silence constitutes proof of your detachment and equipoise 
in this  circumstance is a rather pathetic and misinformed idea of reality, 
Barry, for your silence is, as it turns out, much more peculiar and strange 
(because of the psychological context within which it occurs) than any opinion 
that I have seen expressed here on FFL in opposition to what you have said in a 
given post.

And the proof of this is how you defend yourself in these two posts of today. 
If your refusal to engage in debate with your critics was evidence of some 
disciplined existential act of freedom, we would be able to realize the proof 
of this when you came, as you have this morning, to post in defence of your 
actions. As it is, in arguing in the unconvincing and contradictory way you 
have here, you make us understand why you do not respond: it must be—this is 
merely an opinion, Barry—because you have decided that no response represents 
the best response. But it is still a response, Barry—and *you really don't 
understand why you don't respond*. You are a victim of your own unfathomed 
compulsions, Barry. 

Again, Barry, if you throw a stone at someone, if you strike at their beliefs, 
if you say up is down (or pretty close to this), how is it that the person or 
persons on the end of this are acting in a manner which is anything else but 
normal, responsible, and sane. What is abnormal, irresponsible, and 
quasi-insane is your opinion—and unfortunately your opinion here conceals the 
truth about yourself to yourself—that *any* response to Barry Wright proves 
that he has pressed your button.

It is a curious world you inhabit, Barry. Just my opinion, mind you. But I have 
thought it out very carefully. Now if it were merely your opinion that: I will 
not respond to Santa Claus today—then the act of not responding would be 
validated when you did come to explain why you did not respond. As it is, we 
can safely predict your reasonings for not responding to this Santa Claus post 
will be as unconvincing and as ineffectual as the reasonings inherent in your 
first two posts of today.

What a bitter and angry fellow I am. Right, Barry? 
 
Barry: I just spout opinions, and allow others to do the
same. I hold no one on this forum's (and, for that
matter, no one on this planet's) opinions to be
better than my own. They are on exactly the same
equal footing as what they are -- OPINIONS.

Santa Claus: According to this idea, Barry, then each one of us should just 
state an opinion—but never post anything in response to what anyone has 
specifically said in a previous post. Does this meet the criterion of your idea 
of a discussion: not to discuss? It is your OPINION that everything said here 
amounts to just opinions, and every opinion is equal to every other opinion. 
Well, then, it is my opinion that you are wrong. Is that opinion invalidated as 
an opinion? Why is my counter-post to your two posts of today somehow outside 
the category of opinion, and therefore just as legitimate—since it is after all 
but an opinion—as your opinion that I have only responded to your posts because 
you have pressed my buttons? Is the assertion that this post represents your 
having pressed my buttons something more than an opinion, Barry? At what point 
and under what circumstances do you deem the discussion—about anything—to leave 
off the realm of opinion and enter into the realm of knowledge and fact and 
truth?

Because you see, Barry, I am right out of the realm of opinion as I write this, 
and you will have to give more than your opinion that I am wrong in coming to 
this determination, even if it, seen objectively, is in fact just an opinion. 
Barry, buddy, you ain't motivated by opinion in these matters which touch your 
own person and your core beliefs; you are motivated by feelings and desires and 
memories and attitudes. If we felt you were only giving your opinions (where 
your posts generate controversy and tension), then we would accord your posts 
this interpretation. But as it is, the grumpy and misanthropic Barry Wright 
injects so much sullenness, resentment, and contempt into many of his posts 
(when not writing reviews of TV shows or movies—when he gets more 'personal'—or 
is discussing TM, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the Puja, the TM Movement, and 
Enlightenment) that we are forced—even against our will—to construe his posts 
as something not bearing much relation to 'opinion'; but rather assuming the 
form of strong reaction and judgment—for if Barry Wright thought he was but 
expressing opinions, these so-called opinions would not be charged with so much 
negative emotion. The very absence of generosity and fairness and equity in 
Barry's posts (many of them: the ones certainly that ask for rebuttal) is proof 
of their origin in anything but abstract opinion.

Barry: Those who don't feel that their opinions ARE opinions
are welcome to make a big to-do about that and actNy 
like drama queens. I shall graciously allow them to
do so, while chuckling from behind my tree. :-)

Sant Claus: Again, sweet Barry Baby, you are only—by your own 
argument—expressing opinions here. And if every post amounts to just opinion, 
then you will surely appreciate that I have only done what you have done—and 
therefore you should encourage me in my opining. If there is anyone on FFL who 
wishes to make of Barry Wright's controversial posts and his defence of his 
withdrawal from the responsibility to stand behind those posts—something other 
than how I have interpreted this Barry Phenomenon here in this post, I would 
like to hear from you. But I don't want to have someone mount a defence of 
Barry by systematically ignoring the essentials of my argument here. I wish to 
be addressed directly in what I say. And until someone does this, I will assume 
that what I have said here goes way beyond opinion; I believe I am stating what 
are the facts in this matter. I am saying what happens to be the case.






Reply via email to