DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Timebinder, v. 2, issue 2, whole no. 6, Spring 1946

Transcribe
Translate

Timebinder, v. 2, issue 2, whole no. 6, Spring 1946

POSTCRIPTUS.
Thus endeth the sixth "Adventure Into Thinking". Your editor and publisher is more and more pleased with the calibre of the letters and articles he is receiving, because it shows so very conclusively that our readers ARE taking time out to do a lot of serious thinking about the various subjects.

Let us state our policy once more - we want to publich in this kournal EITHER side of ANY subject, just so it is written in a calm, logical and serious manner. Our desire is NOT that anyone be proselyted into a new way of thinking, but that every one may REALLY THINK about the serious things of life.

We feel that a word is ncessary, because of some recent conversations we have had concerning some of thecontents of T.T.B. This is, especially, in regard to the published Religious Credos of your editor and others.

We have been taken to task because the Credos were simply statements of belief, and did not give a lot of the reasons WHY the person writing them so believed, or the steps by which he -- or she-- arrived at those conclusions.

Our understanding of the word Credo is that it is exactly and only that - a statement of belief. Our dictionary tells us that it is "any formula or statement of beliefs as in religion, science, politics, etc."

And if any of you think your editor is goign to allow himself to get into an argument with any one at all, about religion, that person has greatly misjudged our intelligence (or else we have misjudged our own. Such argument is the silliest thing, extant. We will gladly DISCUSS, bet we will not ARGUE, and because any discussion soon degenerates into an argument (we are speaking about religious discussions, understand), we prefer to make a simple statement of beliefs, letting others make theirs if they so desire, or not as they please.

We have changed our policy somewhat, as you have probably noticed in this issue. That is, that your editor has not made his usual comments after each letter or article. The reason we have taken this new step is that we have become convinced that each person should have a chance to make his own statements, and let those stand or fall on their own merits, the same as we want our to do. And we want DISCUSSIONS, not ARGUMENTS, from now on...Whether you agree with us or not, we hope what we print does make you THINK. (Naturally, being human, we do liek to have you agree with us, but do not EXPECT you to do so in every case, since we know some of our beliefs are extreme.

Please write, and let us and others have the benefit of an idea or ideal that you hold important to advancement.

Saving...

POSTCRIPTUS. Thus endeth the sixth "Adventure Into Thinking". Your editor and publisher is more and more pleased with the calibre of the letters and articles he is receiving, because it shows so very conclusively that our readers ARE taking time out to do a lot of serious thinking about the various subjects. Let us state our policy once more - we want to publich in this kournal EITHER side of ANY subject, just so it is written in a calm, logical and serious manner. Our desire is NOT that anyone be proselyted into a new way of thinking, but that every one may REALLY THINK about the serious things of life. We feel that a word is ncessary, because of some recent conversations we have had concerning some of thecontents of T.T.B. This is, especially, in regard to the published Religious Credos of your editor and others. We have been taken to task because the Credos were simply statements of belief, and did not give a lot of the reasons WHY the person writing them so believed, or the steps by which he -- or she-- arrived at those conclusions. Our understanding of the word Credo is that it is exactly and only that - a statement of belief. Our dictionary tells us that it is "any formula or statement of beliefs as in religion, science, politics, etc." And if any of you think your editor is goign to allow himself to get into an argument with any one at all, about religion, that person has greatly misjudged our intelligence (or else we have misjudged our own. Such argument is the silliest thing, extant. We will gladly DISCUSS, bet we will not ARGUE, and because any discussion soon degenerates into an argument (we are speaking about religious discussions, understand), we prefer to make a simple statement of beliefs, letting others make theirs if they so desire, or not as they please. We have changed our policy somewhat, as you have probably noticed in this issue. That is, that your editor has not made his usual comments after each letter or article. The reason we have taken this new step is that we have become convinced that each person should have a chance to make his own statements, and let those stand or fall on their own merits, the same as we want our to do. And we want DISCUSSIONS, not ARGUMENTS, from now on...Whether you agree with us or not, we hope what we print does make you THINK. (Naturally, being human, we do liek to have you agree with us, but do not EXPECT you to do so in every case, since we know some of our beliefs are extreme. Please write, and let us and others have the benefit of an idea or ideal that you hold important to advancement.