(urth) Mirror Image Freedom

[Gerry Quinn]

From: "Lee Berman" <severiansola at hotmail.com>
>
>>Gerry Quinn- If A presents a theory and B stamps it 'REJECTED' without 
>>explanation, we must
>>certainly take into account or views of B if we are paying heed to the 
>>rejection.  But if B lays
>>out a strong and logical case for rejection, B's character and motives of 
>>less import.  Indeed, we may
>>suspect that A's protests in this regard may reflect more on A than on B.
>
> This is simplistic and biased. You clearly see yourself in the role of B. 
> Only A is seen as capable of
> ego-related bias, never B. You just won't recognize that what seems 
> "strong and logical" to you is not
> seen that way by every other person.

Far from it.  In the case of the Antechamber, for example, I am clearly in 
the position of A, whereas David Stockhoff, in particular, is in trhe 
position of B.  I don't whimper and question his motives and attempt to 
pyschoanalyse him.  I answer his points as best I can and try to come up 
with better ones of my own.

>>I will continue to express my views regarding theories you or others may 
>>present here, just as I hope
>>others will express their views regarding mine. In all cases I would 
>>expect such views and theories to
>>be supported or challenged by evidence (principally textual) rather than 
>>by special pleading and innuendo.
>
> Your "God and Christ are in the Sun Series" theory is a good example. To 
> you, that theory is based on strong
> textual evidence. Yet I can see your mental edits, resulting in the 
> deletion of texual mentions of so many
> other gods, many by name.  You don't want them so aren't there. But Christ 
> is wanted, so you include him in
> the story based on flimsy evidence which is as good an example of 
> "pleading and inuendo" as there can be.

I've accepted without demur that Dionysus is mentioned, which I had not 
noticed before.  I have tended to refer to Jesus rather than Christ, as the 
text is explicit there.

> Normally I would not use such patronising language to express doubt 
> regarding someone else's valued, long-
> considered personal interpretations. I only use it here to illustrate what 
> it is like to be criticized by
> Gerry Quinn.

I can only hope you will learn to criticise like Gerry Quinn.  You could 
make a start by including more references to the text and fewer personal 
attacks.

> I would never suggest you stop expressing your views. Nor do I expect you 
> to change the unctuous tone
> that creeps into your posts. You are who you are. The best I can hope is 
> that you become aware of it. I'll
> leave it at that.

It makes me laugh when you refer to 'patronising language' and 'unctuous 
tones'.

- Gerry Quinn