theoretical discussion
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:30 pm
Dear,
Long back I read J.S. Mill on “Liberty”. He says that when you were encountered with a contradictory view, there would be three possibilities.
1. You might convince the other person with you view.
2. You might be convinced by the other view.
3. If not both, you would conform your view. Your conviction strengthened.
Sometime back in my absence, two of my colleagues were in heated discussion for more than an hour. One is theist and the other atheist. When I entered the room other friends requested me to mediate. I told them, as the arguments were on parallel lines and both persons were convinced in their views, there couldn’t be mediation or arbitration.
My suggestion as well as request. In the list when you are in theoretical discussion, you may be brief and specific. Regarding organon or chronic diseases, quote the relevant line or words, which you agree, differ or interpret differently. You may give the aphorism #. Then you may give your points.
I assume that we might have read organon at least once (!!), though not mastered it. We might be having a copy of anyone of the translation. If necessary we can refer it. More or less we are members in more lists. Similar inconclusive discussions were in the past and will be in future. The reason for inconclusive is given above.
BE HAPPY AND MAKE OTHERS HAPPY.
With best wishes,
H.B.
from India
PLEASE VISIT: http://www.freewebs.com/aumpranava/index.htm
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Long back I read J.S. Mill on “Liberty”. He says that when you were encountered with a contradictory view, there would be three possibilities.
1. You might convince the other person with you view.
2. You might be convinced by the other view.
3. If not both, you would conform your view. Your conviction strengthened.
Sometime back in my absence, two of my colleagues were in heated discussion for more than an hour. One is theist and the other atheist. When I entered the room other friends requested me to mediate. I told them, as the arguments were on parallel lines and both persons were convinced in their views, there couldn’t be mediation or arbitration.
My suggestion as well as request. In the list when you are in theoretical discussion, you may be brief and specific. Regarding organon or chronic diseases, quote the relevant line or words, which you agree, differ or interpret differently. You may give the aphorism #. Then you may give your points.
I assume that we might have read organon at least once (!!), though not mastered it. We might be having a copy of anyone of the translation. If necessary we can refer it. More or less we are members in more lists. Similar inconclusive discussions were in the past and will be in future. The reason for inconclusive is given above.
BE HAPPY AND MAKE OTHERS HAPPY.
With best wishes,
H.B.
from India
PLEASE VISIT: http://www.freewebs.com/aumpranava/index.htm
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]