Guest guest Posted June 17, 2006 Report Share Posted June 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > SW: The interplay between the satirical and the sanctimonious seems > inevitable, here. Neither seems either relaxed or relaxing. One > insists on a certain guard against recklessness, the other finds this > too constraining and insists on license in the name of being a " loving > brother. " This seems clearly bombastic, to me. > > SW:I like Bill's intelligence and clarity, its precision. But, whereas > he invites others to follow, I don't know how willing he is himself to > follow. > He hasn't seemed willing to follow me, at least not as far as > I'd have preferred. > > P: Since, as you stated, Bill, is intelligent and clear, and he is not > following you, then one must conclude it's because you are neither. > > > SW: Pete, on the other hand, seems pretty much in touch with his > reptilian > brain, so to speak. I would invite both to take a vacation from > either side. Pretend, quite literally, to BE the other. It could be > fun. But then, who invited me in, huh, Ana? > > P: Your own sense of grandiosity invited you. How could you > miss and opportunity to look wise? But then again, not too > sure of yourself, huh? Calling on Ana for support. What a wimp! > > You're a lot younger than I thought. Sorry. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2006 Report Share Posted June 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > SW: The interplay between the satirical and the sanctimonious seems > inevitable, here. Neither seems either relaxed or relaxing. One > insists on a certain guard against recklessness, the other finds this > too constraining and insists on license in the name of being a " loving > brother. " This seems clearly bombastic, to me. > > SW:I like Bill's intelligence and clarity, its precision. But, whereas > he invites others to follow, I don't know how willing he is himself to > follow. > He hasn't seemed willing to follow me, at least not as far as > I'd have preferred. > > P: Since, as you stated, Bill, is intelligent and clear, and he is not > following you, then one must conclude it's because you are neither. > > > SW: Pete, on the other hand, seems pretty much in touch with his > reptilian > brain, so to speak. I would invite both to take a vacation from > either side. Pretend, quite literally, to BE the other. It could be > fun. But then, who invited me in, huh, Ana? > > P: Your own sense of grandiosity invited you. How could you > miss and opportunity to look wise? But then again, not too > sure of yourself, huh? Calling on Ana for support. What a wimp! Sky: just a note: Pete has acknowledged to me in the past that he will make caustic remarks -- just as the above -- as a shot in the dark (hunch if you will)... just to see how the person reacts. Based on the response he evaluates the accuracy of his hunch. It is an example of what I refer to as his sloppiness... which he seems to be *very* comfortable with. Sloppiness, Pete's style, you pick, it's just semantics. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.