Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00245)

At 11:46 PM 12/12/96 +0000,  "Dr. A.M.Bain" <guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <199612091457.JAA19285@envirolink.org>, John Straughn
><JTarn@envirolink.org> writes

>>Dr. A.M.Bain writes:

>>>Richard Ihle wrote:

>>>>Don't we want Tom as a friend?

>>>As far as I personally am concerned, not while he demeans and insults
>>>the intelligence of women on and off the lists, the defence of which
>>>type of thinking produced one of the most underhand and vicious behind-
>>>the-scenes hate campaigns I have ever experienced at the hands of
>>>"theosophists".  My crime?  supporting gender-incusive language and
>>>genuine equality between the sexes by my support for Theosophy
>>>International, which was described as a "Rival organisation."
>>>
>>>Sorry.
>>>
>>>Alan

>>I think that it all depends on what the primary goal is.  Does understanding
>>come before judging or does judging come before understanding.  Or should
>>judging even come into play?
>>
>>Just a thought.:)
>>---
>>The Triaist
>>

>Tom, you, everyone on this and all of the lists are members of the
>universal human family mentioned in the TI statement of intent.  That is
>a common bond shared by all human beings.  However, not all human beings
>are my friends, and I am not a friend to all human beings.  Some I know
>for certain are my enemies, although still members of the same human
>family.  Judging comes into everything in this life somewhere or
>another, even if it's only which brand of a product to buy.
>
>I do not see any reason to relate understanding and judging together as
>if they were inevitably connected - seems an odd idea to me.

I agree.  In fact, not seeing that they do not rule each other out seems to
be a major philosophical problem.  I see judgment and understanding as an
example of Yin and Yang.  The attempt to judge without understanding is
intolerant.  The attempt to understand without judging would leave no basis
on which to choose.  As spirit and matter cannot exist without each other,
though, the attempt to either judge or understand without doing both, at
least to some extent, is probably doomed to failure.

But this raises some questions.  I had originally assumed that Alan's ruling
out of the possibility of friendship with me was due to the fact that I
compared men to women, and that he considered all such comparisons to be
sexist.  But now that he has said that making value judgments is inevitable,
I am confused, since it implies that it is only that he disagreed with my
value judgment, not that I made it, that would cause him to rule out the
possibility of friendship with me.  If I valued carrots at 40 cents per
pound, and he valued them at 50 cents per pound, would that also be a basis
for ruling out friendship?  To be consistent with what he said about the
ways in which I regard women as inferior, would he not have to say that I
had "demeaned and insulted" carrots everywhere by not valuing them according
to their true value?  If I valued apples at 60 cents per pound, would I be
considered to be fruitist?