It's a noble thing to be able to do, to understand and tolerate anything
posing as anything else and to be ready to explain and promote it
regardless of the consequences. I don't have your stomach for it, but I
appreciate that your intent in doing so has nothing in common with the
effect it has in confusing newcomers to homoeopathy about what planet
"homoeopaths" are on who will do this; that you have no idea of the
destructiveness of calling every stupid idea, unsupported conjecture, and
mindless idiocy a "type" of homoeopathy and may never be capable of taking
responsibility for clarifying the confusion yourself.
John
Ah no, I would not.
> This is why we are not communicating.
> You are apparently incapable of accepting the idea of plausibility of
> non-identical answers to a question. Which means I am wasting my time
> to keep repeating myself.
>
> I have been trying to explain "a viewpoint" which is not necessarily
> my own--but which I fully understand, and find to be one I can work
> with successfully; can coexist with without the need to either tear my
> own hair out or bite anyone's head off.
>
> In other words, I do not demand that the entire world agree with my
> own opinion, training, conclusions.
> That appears to be a point upon which we will simply never agree.
> So again (Hi Veronique! :o) ) c'est la vie... I can live with
> that too.
>
> The idea of attaching "modifiers" to the term "homeopathy" does not
> send me into apoplectic fits.
> The idea that words in common usage do *not* have the same meaning, as
> when those words are used in a technical sense, OR within certain
> groups of people.
>
--
"And if care became the ethical basis of citizenship? Our parliaments,
guided by such ideas, would be very different places."
—Paul Ginsborg, *Democracy: Crisis and Renewal*, London: Profile, 2008.
_______________________________________________
Homeopathy Mailing List
homeopathy@homeolist.com
http://lists.homeolist.com/mailman/listinfo/homeopathy
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen