|
Post by Henka on Apr 25, 2012 3:36:53 GMT 9.5
So, in other words, facts don't really matter, it's how you feel about it that really does? There is something fundamentally wrong with that premise. Think about it. Sorry henka but I have thought about it and facts do matter. You may be surprised to know that I hold a couple of degrees, including some science courses, and hold professional and technical qualifications. I just dont exclude what many people find difficult, for if we did we would still be torturing people for believing in gravity - it doesn't exist and is heresy didn't you know. I understand that currently research into things like quantum dots is overturning generations of physics facts, so it is an ongoing process. Human evolution can only take place when you can think the unthinkable. There is "thinking the unthinkable," or more correctly thinking that which has not been considered before, and buying into nonsense. Two entirely different things.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 25, 2012 6:35:08 GMT 9.5
....thinking that which has not been considered before, and buying into nonsense. .. That rather reminds me of an Irish story of a man asking how to get to Dublin and the other man saying: If I were going to Dublin then I would not start from here. To get from where we are to where we need to go, sometimes we need to start from somewhere else.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Apr 25, 2012 22:02:59 GMT 9.5
To get from where we are to where we need to go... Sounds rather like making the evidence fit the conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 26, 2012 5:45:42 GMT 9.5
Sometimes greater realities impact humans directly. This may be experienced as an existential crisis. Logic and evidence are rarely the way forward.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 26, 2012 8:52:29 GMT 9.5
Ever dreamt of something that did not make any sense - until some time later? That dream which was explaining something that would happen in the future.The mind is marvellous, but how can it predict? It is neither reasonable or logical to think that it can. BUT IT DOES! The secret of Freemasonry is something that can only be experienced. There are many things in life that will only be believed when experienced. And even then, one might question what one experiences.... that is reasonable and logical
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Apr 26, 2012 22:36:17 GMT 9.5
To get from where we are to where we need to go... Sounds rather like making the evidence fit the conclusion. some lateral thoughts:- 1. If someone fell in love they would know it. It could however be difficult to explain it successfully to someone who has never had such a profound connection. Yes they may "say I love you" to someone,may even have married them, but unless they truly fell in love with them, then they would struggle to understand what it means. That invisible force in life. 2. A bit like what many freemasons say about freemasonry. 3. Now (I am going to use ufos here as it is good illustration), it matters not one iota [inthis context] whether they are real of not - those who have seen them believe, those who havent may struggle to understand. But even so if eg the famous Betty and Barney Hill case helped people see that race didnt prevent people falling in love, it served a valuable purpose to society in its evolution. 4. I suppose again masonicly it is like how masons will argue until the cows come home as to whether a masonic author who writes about esoterics (eg Kirk MacNulty) in the Craft is barmy or insightful. Those who dont get it often sadly choose to character assassinate those who do as being insane. When you take a step back and look at it it is a bit daft. Better to think about "why dont I understand/get this" than belittle others.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Apr 27, 2012 10:46:53 GMT 9.5
I suppose again masonicly it is like how masons will argue until the cows come home as to whether a masonic author who writes about esoterics (eg Kirk MacNulty) in the Craft is barmy or insightful. Those who dont get it often sadly choose to character assassinate those who do as being insane. I was lucky enough to meet a member of this forum at a recent Grand Installation. I recognised his name and introduced myself. He took a half step back (literally), gasped, grinned and then told me that he had expected me to wearing a tall pointy hat. He was quite happy to stay and chat on. The behaviour you mention, Stewart, seems to be par for the course. People have 'comfort' zones and they do not like to be drawn out of them. To become familiar with our Soul, and eventually God, we will be challenged. We will be asked to leave our 'valuables' outside the door upon which we knock. If we are unable to do so then we cannot proceed.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 27, 2012 11:17:43 GMT 9.5
... We will be asked to leave our 'valuables' outside the door upon which we knock. If we are unable to do so then we cannot proceed. Quite so. And that includes the personality valuables such as astral psychism and lower mental skills.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Apr 27, 2012 21:15:34 GMT 9.5
I suppose again masonicly it is like how masons will argue until the cows come home as to whether a masonic author who writes about esoterics (eg Kirk MacNulty) in the Craft is barmy or insightful. Those who dont get it often sadly choose to character assassinate those who do as being insane. I was lucky enough to meet a member of this forum at a recent Grand Installation. I recognised his name and introduced myself. He took a half step back (literally), gasped, grinned and then told me that he had expected me to wearing a tall pointy hat. He was quite happy to stay and chat on. The behaviour you mention, Stewart, seems to be par for the course. People have 'comfort' zones and they do not like to be drawn out of them. To become familiar with our Soul, and eventually God, we will be challenged. We will be asked to leave our 'valuables' outside the door upon which we knock. If we are unable to do so then we cannot proceed. I really hope that Stewie wasn't implying that I am out of my comfort zone. For my part, I tend to temper my speculations with a skeptical eye. Can the argument be falsified? Is there another, less complex explanation? Most often, there is. I see people making connections between unrelated cultures, making a mish-mash out of things. Perhaps this is a result of Theosophical thinking, or even wishful thinking.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Apr 27, 2012 21:30:42 GMT 9.5
People have 'comfort' zones and they do not like to be drawn out of them. To become familiar with our Soul, and eventually God, we will be challenged. We will be asked to leave our 'valuables' outside the door upon which we knock. If we are unable to do so then we cannot proceed. Absolutely. For me some of my speediest phases of growth have happened as I was challenging myself - whether in extreme sports, facing fears over a period of years, learning (or attempting to) in areas I find difficult eg languages and so on. I know first hand just how scary a process this is, how much energy you have to put into doing it, how undulating the process, but also the direct almost unmeasurable benefits that can result from doing so. Funnily enough it all started when I metaphorically knocked on a door. Funnily enough, as an aside, I recently received an email from an old work colleague about half my age who has recently gone through his first in an ugle lodge, and he asked me if I wanted to go to his second (he assumed I was a mason). Clearly I put him right, and funnily enough we were discussing this sort of thing, though for now he is more into the social club side, not that there is anything wrong with that, but I do hope that one day he gets that aha moment and begins to feel the inner beauty of it all. Poor lad was trying to equate what he knows about me from working with me for a couple of years to me explaining this sort of stuff to him.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Apr 27, 2012 21:48:31 GMT 9.5
I really hope that Stewie wasn't implying that I am out of my comfort zone. Nope Stewie wasn't henka. If I wanted to direct a comment directly to you henka I would say "Henka........" Subtles are not my thing. Funnily enough Henka I do the same, as I try to look at all issues from as many angles I can. This enables me to find connections that many miss (as they tend to look only from one viewpoint). It is why in the masonic world, I simply did not talk to one "brand" (wrong word I know) of freemasonry, but looked at the whole masonic world, as well as the conspiracy and anti masonic worlds. This rounded picture enabled me to gain a perspective that I simply would not have if I just looked at say eg ugle. It may surprise you by I apply this to everything eg ufos - I have taken the time to talk to everyone from medical people who think it is sleep paralysis, to policemen who have witnessed etc. Re wishful thinking, to anyone who has married to avoid being left on the shelve may think that true love at first sight is wishful thinking, when those who have experienced it - know. And none of us can know everything. I am happy to go way outside my comfort zone on issues - whether it be abseiling - or arguably writing to HRH The Duke of Kent asking him to lead strongly at a pivotal moment in time for UGLE. Re stuff like ufos - once you have listened to coppers etc talk frankly about such issues then you have to think that on any other subject their words would get people imprisoned for life "I saw him mug the old lady M'lud that is why I arrested him". Why believe him then but not when he talks about his first hand ufo related experiences? A skeptic may say he is insane, where I say well we are talking a copper here. There may things that I dont get, or have discounted, or dont believe Henka. But I think it right and proper to consider all aspects of an issue fairly. And that can be challenging at times.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 28, 2012 6:35:41 GMT 9.5
....Can the argument be falsified? That is certainly a standard test of whether an argument is scientific. I wonder though whether metaphysics is also capable of falsification - for example using "tools" in a "moral" sense. Is there another, less complex explanation? Simple explanations are often attractive - sufficiently so that most people seem to stop their investigation as soon as they have found just one. Attempting falsification of the single simple explanation seems rather rare. And yet, how is less complex defined? Perhaps it means the least change in beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Apr 28, 2012 8:50:00 GMT 9.5
.. I see people making connections between unrelated cultures, making a mish-mash out of things. I can't resist this one. I wonder how to tell if cultures are unrelated. Is distance in space the test? For example both the ancient Egyptians and the Australian aborigines used boomerangs for hunting. Both the New Zealand Maori and the ancient Egyptians had a sun god called Ra. The spiral designs used for Maori tattoos have their closest match in Celtic art. What about distance in language? I recall my father telling me that in the second world war the Maori troops got on very well in Greece as they learned the language easily - the sounds being so similar to Maori. "Gerald Massey.... gives a long list of words taken from the Maori and the Egyptian, explaining that according to the laws of sound change in words passing from one dialect to another, there were differences to be noted, but that there was no mistaking the similarity in sound as well as in the meaning" www.maxfreedomlong.com/author/skshannon/There are of course some languages that are relatively isolated but they are quite rare. e.g. Basque What about distance in ritual? Bro Ward put some effort into tracking ritual. www.amazon.com/Freemasonry-Ancient-Gods-J-Ward/dp/1564591336And of course Bro Knight. What about distance in time to distinguish cultures? But then what if humans reincarnated in groups? Could that result in lost cultures reappearing? The repeated slaughter of gnostic communities certainly did not eliminate gnosticism. Here is an example of a group reincarnated working to re-manifest an ancient culture - substantially underground. Virtual tour here: www.thetemples.org/tour/The name they have chosen "damanhur" seems to translate as city of Horus. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damanhour Curiously the architecture is not nearly as Egyptian as some of the decorations and the feel to me is quite un-Egyptian. Perhaps Horus the Elder was not an Egyptian. Personally I tend to the view that the most humans are closely related with only a few outlier groups.
|
|