Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00471)

Steve:

[writing to Paul]

> The value of the
> philosophical system can be evaluated as a completely
> separate issue from historical problems, and frankly
> should be.
This is a point where I'd expect general agreement.
The theosophical philosophy does not stand nor fall
based upon the details of the personal lives of the
people who first wrote about it in the 1800's. I
don't think they would have cared what people thought
of them. I picture them as thinking, "Here is something
of value, a treasure, that I'd like to share with
others."

The merit of the ideas comes from their usefulness
in describing how life works. But the ideas aren't
simply fixed concepts. They're more like alchemical
symbols or dream images, offering something more
each time they're reviewed. There's a sense of
dialogue with them. They're like living things
rather that like a pretty butterfly mounted on a
pin on the wall, nice to look at but lifeless,
dead, and motionless.

> As you know, a fundamentalist shout site is no
> place to discuss serious issues in a disciplined
> manner.
There's shouting and hot tempers when people get
in close quarters with others, if they don't watch
the process, and get caught up in the excitement
of mutual name calling.

When we consider others of opposing views as
basically bad people, operating out of foul
motives, we'll describe them in a way that
infuriates them. They'll likely describe us in
equally uncomplimentary terms. Soon we're
boiling in anger and really putting them down!

This can be done overtly, like when we might
say, "Fuck you!" Or it can be done more subtly,
talking indirectly about "the lack of insight or
unevolved nature" of the other person.

Your comment seems to play into this. We all
would like to consider ourselves interested
in discussing serious issues. We all have our
own disciplined manner of doing so. None of us
would consider ourselves as shouters. No one
wants to think of themselves as fundamentalists.

In our writing, thinking, and approach, we're
all different. Some many be well meaning but
still get on our nerves. There are many ways
to deal with them. We can ignore them. We can
point out what we think are their errors -- but
it's not that easy to make people better. People
are the way that they are, and any changes are
self-made over a long period of time.

The other thing that we can do is to ignore
the little annoying remarks and say things
that bring out the better qualities in the
others we're with. Instead of making others
defensive and putting up barriers, that'll
encourage them to open up and show us their
nicer qualities.

-- Eldon