Categorical Observations

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by BK ( on August 23, 2002 at 02:54:52:

It has become abundantly clear to me, and I speak for myself, that there are two general types of people who frequent this discussion board.

One is what Baha'u'llah would call a group of true seekers. That is, these are people, Baha'is and Friends alike, acedemic individuals who are compelled by unbiased hearts to seek truth and cling to it where it is found. They understand the power of objective thought and cling to reason. While they might or might not be Baha'is, whether this is explicitly known or not, they are, nevertheless, examples of what it means to be decent and fair, which are things held in the highest esteem by Baha'is and people of reason.

Then, there are those who, driven on by attachments to vanities and the cynical and negative forces in the world, will oppose reasonable statements for opposition's sake, who think it is a sign of intelligence, or cleverness, even witt, to find fault, to dwell on their perceptions of wrongness and, in the end, become so irrational, as to harm the productive effect born out of discussions that are had in a spirit of unity and respect.

No names are necessary. You will know the difference by the tone and manner of each. Every unbaised individual, or those of the former category, will know who is a person of reason or not, who is a Baha'i and who attempts to tarnish the good name of the Faith. They will also readily recognize that reason will always dominate irrationality and that good faith will always be victorious over suspicion and mischief-making.

I'm writing this to beg the people of reason to avoid the latter catagory. When they raise the call of mischief meet it with silence and by silence will we say that irrationality, vanity and the like, for justice's sake, will not be tolerated. Attention feeds these sociopathic flames and disassotiation quenches them.

this topic is closed - post at