Theos-Talk Archives (March 2002 Message tt00531)

Bill,

Now I see what you want to discuss. You don't really want to discuss 
Olcott's experiences or discuss your hypothesis about them and your 
reasons for "adopting" that hypothesis. 

You want me to look critically at my own biases and prejudices in 
the process. I see: this is the whole issue to you.

No doubt, I have prejudices and biases. And you don't? I assume 
that you might have them too. And since Steve Stubbs has a similar 
opinion to mine about Olcott's experiences, I guess he also has 
prejudices and biases. What about Muehlegger? We could spent weeks 
discussing not only my biases but everyone else's too. :)

But the real question is: can all of us put aside at least for the 
time being those "preferences" and "biases" and try to rationally 
discuss and understand Olcott's "alleged" experiences.

Maybe you will say this only reflects one of my "biases". Perhaps.

Bill, when I have the time to study and compare your hypothesis 6 
with the views of others, I will be most happy to discuss that 
hypothesis with you.

Daniel


Bill Meredith wrote:
> Daniel,
> I offered you the opportunity to look critically at your own 
experience
> instead of losing yourself trying to analyze the historical 
accounts of a
> dead man. The bias and prejudice of your thought processes of 
which ample
> evidence exists in your writings is not a side issue. It is the 
whole
> issue.
> 
> I urge you to examine your thinking and search for that delicate 
moment in
> the process where one's beliefs become one's truth, and one's truth 
becomes
> the one truth, and the one truth becomes the basis for one's 
beliefs.