Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00298)

In message <199612131008.FAA25957@envirolink.org>, John Straughn
<JTarn@envirolink.org> writes
>Using your example, when you buy a product, and you buy one because of a big
>bright sign that says "Buy me, I'm better than so-and-so", you are not
>necessarily buying a product that is better than so-and-so.  You haven't
>examined both products to understand them and therefore make a much better
>judgement based on the facts.  You've made a hasty judgement based on a pretty
>sign.  I'm not sure if this is very clear... ugh.  Let me know what you
>understood from my blubbering please. :)

I understand that you seem (note seem) to be using a double standard,
and introducing a term into the matter which was not present in the
original post which I picked up on.

The example above, for instance, is a judgment based upon a *lack* of
understanding.  It is not a "fair" judgment - which is the new
term you have introduced.  Your original post did not use "fair" as a
referent.  So now we have (IMO) introduced the concept of justice into
the equation.

In my experience, all judgments are based upon subjective and personal
criteria based upon experience; experience which is good or bad, short
or plentiful.  Judgement is, in the first and last analysis, based upon
how we FEEL, although a great deal of thinking may go into the process
before the judgment is made.  And which is the correct spelling of
Judg(e)ment!  Burble ...

(What's the logo for an old guy without a beard?)

Alan
---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age:
http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk