virus: Walk your talk

Tadeusz Niwinski (tad@teta.ai)
Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:52:15 -0700


Richard wrote:
>On Tuesday, October 14, 1997 4:40 PM, David McFadzean=20
>[SMTP:david@lucifer.com] wrote:
>> I was reading "Getting Past OK" again last night. Great book, I still
>> highly recommend it to everyone who hasn't picked it up yet.
>> Anyway, I was re-reading the part about the "Truth Trap" and it
>> is pretty obvious I am still in it (assuming it is a trap, of course).
>>
>> Level-3 seems to be predicated on the assumption that it is better
>> to be happy than right, right? I mean, if truth and happiness conflict,
>> then the L-3 master says so much the worse for truth, while someone
>> in the "Truth Trap" would say so much the worse for happiness.
>
>That's pretty close.
>
>"Happiness" may not work for everybody as a life purpose more important=20
>than being right, but the idea is you get to pick what you want your life=
=20
>to be about.
>
>I don't accept "being right" as a valid life purpose!

How about "pretending being always right" for a life purpose ?

I am trying to match what you write in your books (which I also highly
recommend) and what you do here on this list. When Nateman said he didn't
like his name in quotes in your posts to be changed to "Nametag", first
thing you did was to deny you did it and the second thing you did was to
accuse him of "accusing you without facts"[1]. Then, after I noticed that
"you or your computer" did it four times, you came with "we are both right".
Yes, nota bene, you wrote "We are both right", as if being right was the
only issue here. And of course, to feel better and show how "right" you
were you accused both of us[2] for absolutely no other reason.

What other than "pretending to be always right" motive would you have in
this case? I am glad this is a small enough "affair" we can use to better
understand all the memes which are involved here. I am sure we can discuss
it without getting too emotional.

I am trying to understand what you mean when you say

"I don't accept 'being right' as a valid life purpose!".

I am curious of what you want to say (and if you don't want to -- it's also
an answer) about the relationship between what you teach and what you do.
In other words, how you "walk your talk".

On the outside we both teach similar things, we both wrote two books and we
both teach self-help seminars, so I am obviously very much interested in
what you say "just-between-us-Virions". You claim "it is better to be happy
than right" (as David very well characterized your Level-3 concept) and you
demonstrate it with specific action on this list. This is great. I see it
clearly that "if truth and happiness conflict" and you choose happiness, the
only happiness you can get is the MS Happiness, which is far from the real
thing.

On the outside I also spread your memes in Poland by publishing the "Virus
of the Mind", which leads me to my today's mail from Poland: the first
comments I've received since the publication of the "Virus of the Mind".
And I really *happy* about it. (if my translation is not accurate I enclose
the original[3]):

"I am impressed after reading "Virus of the Mind" by Richard Brodie. I
would like to thank you because if not you and your interest and having it
translated (it of course regards Teresa as well) we wouldn't be able to read
such things in Poland for a long time. I also thank you for suggesting
other titles, especially the "Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins, and the
whole bunch of titles you've mentioned about in your seminars."

Congratulations, Richard!

-------
[1] "I never changed your name. Don't accuse people unless you are sure of
your facts!"

[2] "Now shame on Tad for accusing me and shame on Nate for using=20
lawyer-like dishonesty in his signature!"

[3] Jestem pod wra=BFeniem po przeczytaniu "Wirusa Umys=B3u" Richarda=
Brodie.
Chcia=B3bym Ci podzi=EAkowa=E6 bo pewnie gdyby nie Ty i Twoje=
zainteresowanie
i t=B3umaczenie (Teresy ma si=EA rozumie=E6 te=BF) pewnie w Polsce jeszcze=
d=B3ugo
by=9Cmy nie mieli okazji poczyta=E6 o czym=9C takim. Dzi=EAkuj=EA tak=BFe za
podsuni=EAcie innych tytu=B3=F3w a szczeg=F3lnie za "Samolubny Gen" Richarda
Dawkinsa no i ca=B3=B9 reszt=EA, o kt=F3rej m=F3wi=B3e=9C na kursach.

Regards, Tadeusz (Tad) Niwinski from planet TeTa
tad@teta.ai http://www.teta.ai (604) 985-4159