My response was that, yes, I would have known after > some period of practice, based only on my experience > of the sutra. At least in my case, Curtis's assumption > about the role of the "hype" is in error. > > Does Curtis acknowledge this? Of course not. He even > claims my experience has nothing to do with it--despite > the fact that this is what he was asking about in the > first place. > > He also says he would describe his experience the same > way. If so, even his *own* experience shows that the > assumption in his rhetorical question is in error.
None of us has experienced flying without the hype so your point is meaningless. You are making a claim without any basis in fact. You don't know what you would experience without the hype. I acknowledged that there are moments in flying that feel like you might stay up. But it NEVER happens does it? It is just a feeling. It was a rhetorical question. So why did you try to answer it? (Definition: A question to which no answer is expected, often used for rhetorical effect.) Judy I will never understand you personally. My post was very carefully written not to be rude to you personally. You seem like you enjoy discussing things with people who see the world completely differently, and then you get all pissed off. If you are right about flying it will be my loss. So give me a break with the personal attacks. I don't think anyone will fly. So what? Your attack on my personal integrity is just proof that you cannot tolerate people with other points of view. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I just want to point out one more instance of > Curtis's sleazy avoidance tactics: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > <snip> > > > > The authority based belief systems all have this flaw. > > > > If you had been given the flying sutra blind, without > > > > all the hype, would you conclude that you were about > > > > to stay in the air? > > > > > > I didn't conclude that even *with* the hype, Curtis. > > > > > > However, if I'd had no idea what was "supposed" to > > > happen, but had the same subjective experiences, > > > there would have come a point when I suddenly > > > recognized what was supposed to happen, because at > > > times, at the apex of a hop, I have the sense for > > > a split-second that I'm not going to come down again. > > > This is a *visceral* sense, not any kind of > > > intellectual notion. It's something my body knows. > <snip> > > > > I would never challenge your right to practice something > > that gives you pleasure or benefit. I'm glad you have found > > something that you value. My comments are directed to MMY's > > organization that promotes the idea that people can fly but > > have shown no proof that even remotely suggests that someday > > people will fly. Hopping is not the first stage of flying, > > it is the last stage of hopping around. It also hurts your > > back so I hope you are careful. What you may feel during > > the experience has nothing to do with the reality of it. > > When I practiced flying I would have described it the way > > you have. I think you have a pretty grounded view of its > > place in your life and a healthy "let's see" attitude > > about the more extravagant claims. I would love to be > > proved wrong about people flying but there are more obvious > > things to test right now, especially in medical areas. > > Curtis asked, rhetorically, whether without the "hype" > about flying, I would have known what was supposed to > happen as a result of practicing the flying sutra. The > implied answer to his question, of course, was No, and > this was supposed to demonstrate that the idea that > people could fly was solely a function of the "hype," > not of any experience of the sutra itself. > > My response was that, yes, I would have known after > some period of practice, based only on my experience > of the sutra. At least in my case, Curtis's assumption > about the role of the "hype" is in error. > > Does Curtis acknowledge this? Of course not. He even > claims my experience has nothing to do with it--despite > the fact that this is what he was asking about in the > first place. > > He also says he would describe his experience the same > way. If so, even his *own* experience shows that the > assumption in his rhetorical question is in error. > > If this isn't an example of irrationality and serious > deficiency in critical thinking, I don't know what is. > > More likely, it's an example of Curtis's lack of > integrity when debating TM issues, something I had > occasion to draw attention to many times in my > previous discussions with him on alt.m.t years ago. > > It is also, in my observation, typical of those I > label anti-TMers and is one of the main aspects of > how I define them. > > While they routinely claim it's TMers who are irrational, > illogical, deficient in critical thinking, or even > deliberately deceptive, these characteristics are far > more prominent in their own criticisms of all things TM. > > Why can't they make their case honestly? What is it > that drives them to distort and fudge and twist and > say things they know aren't true? > 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/ <*> 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/
