Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) - View Single Post

Richard T · 09-29-2008, 01:58 PM

Hello franzBardon.

Dr. Diggle's makes his statements based on a number of concepts.
I may agree to the form of the concepts but not on the spirit of the concept. Call it the spirit of the letter.

Mr. Deagle's premise lies primarily on his assessment of reality. And I challenge the basis that he uses to describe that reality as incomplete.

You cannot challenge statements without explaining why. And you cannot explain why by working from the point of view of the statements you are challenging.

So, obviously, the commentaries were not from Dr, Deagle's point of view.

The aspects of the lecture that I found of interest are related to the nature of reality, an aspect that he admits to be of the utmost importance. So I concentrated on those.

The lecture was quite lengthy in time, it would not have been practical to tackle every item independently. It is more efficient to offer a synthesis of the process as a solution rather than go through the entire process.

You say I have contradicting observations. Could you point them out?

The relevance to Dr. Deagle's statements lies in a re-definition of the basis upon which Dr. Deagle's builds them.

I am not easily offended franzBardon. No need to worry about that.

09-29-2008, 01:58 PM	#7
Richard T Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 179	Re: Comentaries on Dr. Deagle's conference Hello franzBardon. Dr. Diggle's makes his statements based on a number of concepts. I may agree to the form of the concepts but not on the spirit of the concept. Call it the spirit of the letter. Mr. Deagle's premise lies primarily on his assessment of reality. And I challenge the basis that he uses to describe that reality as incomplete. You cannot challenge statements without explaining why. And you cannot explain why by working from the point of view of the statements you are challenging. So, obviously, the commentaries were not from Dr, Deagle's point of view. The aspects of the lecture that I found of interest are related to the nature of reality, an aspect that he admits to be of the utmost importance. So I concentrated on those. The lecture was quite lengthy in time, it would not have been practical to tackle every item independently. It is more efficient to offer a synthesis of the process as a solution rather than go through the entire process. You say I have contradicting observations. Could you point them out? The relevance to Dr. Deagle's statements lies in a re-definition of the basis upon which Dr. Deagle's builds them. I am not easily offended franzBardon. No need to worry about that.