XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: epsteinrob@yahoo.com   
      
   Nobody in Particular wrote:   
      
   > Hollywood Lee wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >>On Sep 13, 10:22 pm, halfawake  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>Catawumpus wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>halfawake :   
   >>>   
   >>>>>He picks up new info in an odd way.  All of his info is contained in   
   >>>   
   >>>>I guess Rob has to tell himself something.  His "new" info   
   >>>>is old news, like the two arrows, and it doesn't remove the   
   >>>>items disputing him, for example the Buddha's implied suffering   
   >>>>in the Sakalika Sutta, the practice of religious suicide in   
   >>>>Buddhist scripture and history, and the critical perspective on   
   >>>>worldly existence in the Four Noble Truths and related   
   >>>>teachings.  He can try to ignore them, but that won't make them   
   >>>>go away.   
   >>>   
   >>>>-- Catawumpus   
   >>>   
   >>>I haven't ignored them.  I've acknowledged all of them, everything you   
   >>>said, and included them in my posts after that, but you just won't   
   >>>accept it.   
   >>   
   >>You should probably take your own assessment seriously, and just let   
   >>go of the fruitless discussion.  Cat has done an admirable job of   
   >>getting people to react to his studied ignorance of your explanations   
   >>- his posts on suffering are splendid examples of intentional   
   >>misunderstanding as a tactical tool in debate.  Why go further?   
   >   
   >   
   > "studied ignorance of explanation" - you hit the nail square on the head.   
   > You make a statement, he misinterprets it.  You explain what you meant, he   
   > calls you a liar, ignores your explanation and insists that you meant   
   > something different.   
   > I was already thinking that no-one could be that stupid and still be able to   
   > operate a computer.  Your explanation makes perfect sense.   
   >   
   > Niunian is similar, only he tries to get people to react by using   
   > vulgarities.  I watched his interchange with Kitty, where she refused to   
   > react, and he got more and more shrill, until it was obvious that it was   
   > staged.   
      
   If cat were a social psychology experiment, it would be to see if people   
   continue to become increasingly more engaged in response to continued   
   misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what they say.  The answer is   
   probably a big 'yes,' as the desire to clarify what you mean in the face   
   of misunderstanding is almost irresistible.   
      
   Robert   
      
   - - - - - - - - - - -   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)