PC (was Responsibility)

[Julian Winston]

At 4:07 AM -0400 10/10/03, tanya wrote:

Oh my! A sensitive person! Offensive to whom? Certainly not to me.

You cannot hold others (especially those from a century ago) to your
standards of what is Politically Correct to say.

I simply asked WHERE the viper quote came from. I know Kent never
said it, and I knew that it was a perversion of the quote offered.

The quote in question was made by Kent who was, by many of our
present standards, racist, anti-feminist, anti- abortion, anti- birth
control, somewhat Christian fundamentalist in his views-- and a
pretty good homeopath.

Jeremy Sherr, when lecturing about Hepar sulph., pointed out that
what Kent said about the danger of high potencies in untrained hands
could have been said ANYWHERE in this lectures-- but he said it in
"Hepar" which has images of razors and cutting coming through in the
provings.

No disclaimer is needed for the quote if you understand WHEN it was
said, BY whom it was said, and in the CONTEXT it was said.

Political Correctness leads to a complete sanitization of everything.
Books are banned and dialogue becomes creamy pap.

Let's call a spade a spade! (double entendre intended!)

JW

[Tanya Marquette]

i need to differ strongly with you on this. i did not say change the man's words. but
i do think it is important to not put out words that are racist or otherwise prejudicial
without acknowledging that this is not in the spirit of being an unprejudiced practitioner.
to not do so, at the very least says such attitudes are acceptable, and as worst, supports
agreement. you may know homeopathic history, but this is not about history. it is pure
and simple bigotry and has no place in our practices or teachings.

tanya

[Julian Winston]

At 7:19 PM -0400 10/10/03, tanya wrote:

Disagree all you want.
The words are from Kent in 1900. They are in the books. They are
part of the historical record.
And *I* differ with you. It is about history.
Bigotry has no place in our practice, and if I saw it today, I would speak up.
But trying to cleanse the historical record is folly. bKent was a
child of his times.

I guess you don't know about JH Clarke's anti-semitic and fascist
writing? Should we cleanse him from our records?

Everything must be viewed in the CONTEXT of the time.

JW

[Tanya Marquette]

and that is the point.: to confront bigotry--even when it comes up today
with historical beings. to repeat, i never said change their words. i said
they need to be critiqued. those attitudes of bigotry have telescoped
through history and still figure in today's behavoral responses. perhaps
you may really not know how to confront bigotry when confronted with it.
i learned many years ago that when someone confronts you with an
error of insensitivity, or prejudice, to consider it a gift to learn from.
i would hope that we all recognize that we all have learning to do.

tanya

[Shannon Nelson]

on 10/10/03 3:09 PM, Julian Winston at jwinston@actrix.gen.nz wrote:
And I would add, over-sanitization of thought has drawbacks in common with
over-sanitization of physical environment: the immune system (which in
context of "thought" would be the "powers of critical thinking") do not have
the opportunity to learn to handle the pathogens, and so we become afraid of
and/or vulnerable to influences that would be simply shrugged off, if they
were given their proper place and understanding.

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Tanya,

For curiosity, if it had been you who had recognized the quote, and been
familiar with its original version, what approach would you have taken --
perhaps simply to give the quote, with a disclaimer to the effect that "this
sort of metaphor would today we recognized as unacceptable, but in his day
this was sadly not the case", or something else?

Shannon
on 10/11/03 1:49 AM, tanya at tamarque@frontiernet.net wrote:

[Shannon Nelson]

on 10/10/03 3:09 PM, Julian Winston at jwinston@actrix.gen.nz wrote:
"Love the sinner, hate the sin."
A good exercise in tolerance, compassion, forgiveness, discrimination
(between "good and not-good", "rational and not-rational", etc.), and even
the lauded "objectivity"!

It's true, we learn from the past (on a good day, anyway) and move on!


Shannon

[Tanya Marquette]

Yes, Shannon. If one feels the need to use such kinds of quotes (although I would look for others that
made the point in a less offensive way), there should be some kind of recognition that the bigotry is
not acceptable. Otherwise, it appears as acceptable today and becomes another step in the
reinforcement of such attitudes. Benign neglect is still neglect and, thus, still is part of the problem,
not the solution.

tanya