Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00353)

>Comment: The use of quote marks in reference to KPJ's putative reply, by
>all publishing conventions known to me, suggests that the issue is
>prejudged, and negatively so.  Please explain this apparent bias in the
>light of your lengthy remarks suggesting the value of objective
>evaluation of both data and opinions.

I have attempted to read the article a few times now, without success.
The writer constantly makes snide personal imprecations against Johnson
in lieu of argument, and as one would expect from the title, he really
does not care if the reader sees that this is mostly intended as a
personal attack. While more restrained than some Theosophical polemics
(e.g., Kingsland's "Was She a Charlatan?") the article does not seem to
have much idea what tone is necessary for scholarly discussion and
objective weighing of evidence. This rabidity makes the article virtually
impenetrable for anyone whose concern is to discover the truth of the
issues rather than to choose sides in a personal war. Were it boiled down
to some one-fourth the size, so as to focus on its actual issues and
express them concisely, then it might turn out to have something valuable
to say; but after reading a couple of thousand words which said nothing
more than "the Maharajah probably would not be riding a horse by himself,
and Johnson is a jerk for not mentioning this", I had little interest in
probing further.

Tim Maroney