Theos-Talk Archives (September 1994 Message tl00091)

This is by Eldon Tucker

----

Paul Johnson:

    Don't be too discouraged. Whenever you do anything out of
the norm, you'll find critics. The more exceptional the thing
you do, the stronger the opposition aroused.
    It's a natural psychological thing, and people don't
really mean to inflict harm. What we have is projection.
Someone does not know you personally, nor know your
motivations. They put themselves in your place, and say "If I
were Paul, writing this book, why would I, Paul, be doing
thing." Their responses reveal more about themselves than
about you.
    Most of us do this unaware. We assume we know why other
people are acting a certain way, why they are doing what they
are. The assumption can prove false, but how many of us are
big enough to admit it, when pointed out to us?
    I experience the same thing at times. J.T. Coker
attributes certain motives to my comments regarding the recent
conference, and gives me a scolding. I may be told that I'm
writing because I consider myself somehow superior, far above
others, etc. The same thing happens with me: someone filling
in the blank, answering the question of "why?" with their own
assumptions.
    Jerry H-E may be questioned as to why he writes about
Leadbeater. From his viewpoint he could be acting out of
intellectual honesty (my assumption), but others could "fill
in the blank" with their own assumptions, perhaps less
complementary. How do we know why he writes as he does? We ask
him. And the same with you or I. Ask the person themselves and
they will tell you why they are doing something.
    We all tend to do this, sometimes unaware. Consider your
reaction to my article on the value and place of history. I
had picked some points from various postings and used them as
a basis on an essay. I had no thought of attaching you in some
way when writing. My approach has been to write on the
Philosophy, using bits and pieces of things that come up as
suggestions of things to write about. You felt I was singling
you out, but I wasn't. Others may consider me as subtly
attacking people, not daring to name names, etc. All that is
their *assumption,* to which I would say "not true."
    Someone might say: "That's not all there is to a person,
there's the unconscious too." But it's not really fair to play
psychoanalyst, to impose our interpretation of unconscious
motivations on another. That's really only appropriate with
someone we know personally, and done in confidence. It's not
something to guess at in a public forum. (At least on living
people, people subject to being hurt, and respond in anger.)
    Richard Ihle makes a good point with his humor. The past
is dead, long live the future! The karma of negativity between
us and others exists until we break the reactive cycle of
anger and counter-anger, and respond to anger with good will.