a friendly argument

[Guest guest]

Tattvavit:

>

> That is not what I was trying to do. For I doubted that your mind is as

> consonant with Srila Prabhupada's as you arrogantly claim (your arrogance

> indicates that it is not). He was not like your mind. Rather, I hoped that

> you would control your emotion and step back and see your position from

> another perspective.

 

Firstly, I would like to ask why it is that men who are having difficulty in

a discussion with a woman always introduce the word "emotional" to undermine

the other party? There has been nothing "emotional" about my postings so

far, they've been quite straightforward. These kinds of tactics are rather

ugly and unpleasant, especially since we're having what you repeatedly refer

to as "a friendly argument."

 

Secondly, you claim that I was "putting words in his [Mahatma's] mouth," yet

you are guilty of doing the same here, claiing that I "arrogantly claim"

that my mind is "consonant with Srila Prabhupada's." Kindly don't take words

to extremes, and then turn them around to use on the person who wrote them.

Since my conviction is what it is, it obviously threatens you in some way,

and so you have felt the need to resort to insults, ie: accusing me of

arrogance. Perhaps you could look a little further into the meanings of both

"conviction" and "arrogance" and satisfy yourself that just because someone

doesn't have any interest in your point doesn't mean they're arrogant, it

just means they're satisfied with their own conclusions, which in this case

have been drawn from Srila Prabhupada's teachings -- something that you find

to be arrogant. What a bizarre viewpoint from a member of ISKCON!

 

Finally, I don't wish to see my position from another perspective. As hard

as that might be for you to swallow, I'm not interested in some scholastic,

politically correct approach that you seem to so fondly embrace. I am

satisfied with the position I have on most topics, and when someone

introduces something to me that enhances that position, I am delighted. So

far, in this discussion, I haven't met with that opportunity. I'm not

holding my breath...

 

Now I believe we truly are finished. Thank you for your time. I wish I could

say I really benefited from it, but ... (I just threw that in so you could

see what arrogance really was

 

Your servant,

Braja Sevaki dd

 

> So I wrote:

>

> > > Suppose someone argued that seeing a psychologist *had* helped in

> > > overcoming a difficulty and enabled this devotee to go on with

> > > chanting Hare Krishna. What will your reply be?

>

> You replied:

> > How long was this person observed? What constitutes "improvement" or

> > "help"? This is a moot point if one has accepted that nothing helps

> > except chanting Hare Krishna.

>

> Thanks for offering a sample of how you would reply. Although you asked

> two relevant questions, you quickly asserted that for one with an

> inflexible position, the questions are useless; nothing will change her

> mind. So there is no point in having a friendly argument.

>

> --ys, td