SA, yes, that is so. But I know that Paul is a kind person. My thoughts about this are not clear at present; hopefully I’ll have some better idea what to write later.
Meanwhile, would you discuss something with me? On May 17, 02:49, comment #53661 you wrote:
– “.. I will not accept that bad science and bad pharma are the be all of everything that is going on. I have my own experiences and know what it is all about.”
– “Anti Vaxcers are dangerous and cause death of children whilst pretending to be concerned about children. They are often connected to ‘natural movement’ and websites that practice quackery and profiteer from alternative medicine.”
There are two points I’d like to address here. Regarding the second quoted section, such arguments have been highly polarised for a long time and this seems to be the source of the impasse in communication, so regarding the first section, please tell me a bit about your own experience. And I’d be interested anyway.
What I suspect is that trust is essentially personal, but the modern way of relating has become very impersonal, especially in text communication such as this. So I think that we have to establish interpersonal trust before communication can be effective. Writing that reminded me of some thoughts from the Quaker Advices and Queries 13; “pray that your ministry may arise from deep experience, […] with sensitivity to the needs of others”, and one of the guiding principles at Wikipedia, “assume good faith”.
Returning to the first section, there is much distrust on both sides, there is genuine care on both sides, and there is profiteering which exploits both sides. Division itself seems to our first obstacle.