Re: some suggested discussion guidelines
Sep 18, 1995 11:13 PM
by K. Paul Johnson
According to Eldon B. Tucker:
> discussing Theosophy. (I'm trying to describe here something
> that I find myself tending to follow, and not asserting these
> are rules that we all have to follow.)
> * Don't attack someone with natural-born psychic faculties
> for exploring them.
or intellectual faculties, or artistic ones?
> * Do not pass judgement on people involved with the psychic.
or other spiritual movements, or disciplines?
> * Defend the core concepts of Theosohpy against people that
> deny any value to them or deny that they exist.
a fruitless exercise, other than for developing patience
> * Openly describe the spiritual-intellectual path of study
> and defend its value and approach as something different
> than the psychical, and equally real.
> * Keep clear the distinction between individual views and
> a balanced description of the core concepts.
If we could all live up to that, we wouldn't need theos-l.
Rubbing up against one another's diverse ideas helps us sort
out the essentials from the nonessentials, but the distinction
is less than clear
> * Ask questions and state my own views in response to things
> that I disagree with. Don't flatly say "that's wrong" or
> attach someone's motives for saying something.
> * Don't try to banish people with views that I don't like,
> either "off the list" like has been suggested with Daniel
> and his biblical writings, or "to theos-roots siberia,"
> with historic discussions. We can not read postings that
> we don't like without any prior form of censorship. If
> we're posting something on a sensitive topic, we can label
> it at such in the subject line.
Those of us who would like Daniel shown the door feel that way
not because of not liking his views, but rather his attitudes,
his behavior, and his reasons for being here. But you who
enjoy debating him have overruled. That's OK, enjoy!
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application