Re: Theos-World Paul Johnson & Daniel Caldwell
Apr 18, 2006 01:18 PM
by Bill Meredith
And then you have Paul Johnson with his brilliant "theories" against the theosophical movement.
Carlos, what is your motivation in bringing this up again?
Strangely enough, last February Paul Johnson denounced Daniel Caldwell at Theos-talk as a "troller" who invented several aliases or "internet-personifications" in order to attack the ULT, to attack Paul himself, etc. Once Johnson made his points with regard to Daniel, our slanders-editor diesappeared from Theos-talk with no explanations. Or at least spent some time writing here under other names.
I believe that Paul gave a very clear explanation of why he was leaving
theos-talk. Perhaps you have forgotten?
I am still waiting for Daniel's answer to the texts by Paul Johnson on him.
A person who sees beyond the superficial realizes that Daniel has
answered this question very clearly. Another person, who only looks at
the surface of things, will not see the answer.
This is rather important. In case Daniel actually forged the existence of persons like "David Green", or "Terry Hobbes", etc. (which he did not deny so far), he might also be inclined to make propaganda of other forgers, like Sololoviof, etc.
After all, if that is true, the Coulombs and Soloviof could be considered his 19th century coleagues.
The overarching FACT of HPB's efforts is that a man should grow to think
independently for himself. As often as Daniel and I have disagreed, he
has never insinuated that I should take his word for anything. He has
never implied that his understanding of theosophy was THE
understanding. He has never said, "read this, but not that. Consider
these authors as legitimate but not these others." When Daniel makes
critical comments about THE MASTERS REVEALED, I know that he has
actually read the book. To his credit, he does not then say, "I have
read the book and it is flawed, so you don't need to read the book." I
believe that Daniel understands that every man must learn to think and
discern for himself the wisdom inherent in every representation of
truth. This learning process is sometimes difficult as old
well-accepted thought patterns are challenged again and again, but the
difficulty of such a life is far better than the stupor of never had
thought for oneself in any significant sense.
As we know, Ethics is of the essence if anyone wants to study Theosophy.
I hope Daniel will answer to Paul Johnson's accusations of internet-fraud, and I also hope he will abandon his propaganda about the falsehoods created by the enemies of the theosophical movement, who seems to have no respect for facts.
Carlos, I do see evidence that you also think for yourself
occasionally. Where you and I would disagree, is that you would have
others take your conclusions and observations as Fact, rather than have
them experience the theosophical process of discerning fact from fiction
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application