Theos-Talk Archives (June 2002 Message tt00039)

June 7 2002

Dear Friends:


As to "models" --

As I see and read it, Theosophy as expressed in and through The SECRET
DOCTRINE starts with those exactly.

H P B perhaps did not use our development and use of "models" as a
specialized term -- for events that could occur in a series of
potential futures and developments, dependant on any change off basis
we might pose, but the effect of choice was well known. And as I
understand it, it was then called Karma. Anticipation is another good
word.

But one way or another, the mental imagination whereby "models" are
created, implies also that in Nature ( in our Universe and in
ourselves) there is resident an "ideal." It is something that is
common to us all. It uses the already established rules, laws,
formations that for ages have been the interactive play-ground to
Spirit, Matter and Mind.

Statistics are our gross expectations of "norms" in process. Nature
however ( like a good computer) is rigidly held to an exact program
and employs every byte providing that those are preserved intact in
their due order.

Theosophy holds that Nature is a vast and al-inclusive medium in which
its sensitivity is infinite and extends from the minutest of
sub-atomic forces to those which encompass the entire living UNIVERSE.
Nothing is ever "out of place," nor is there any "dust heap"
somewhere, to which failures are relegated.

Everything is "in use," and that individual being has a RIGHT TO LIVE
and to be supported by all the rest. Hence brotherhood, karma,
reincarnation, the perfectibility of all beings, and of mankind, are
the concepts that Theosophy holds to be norms and universally
applicable so that no one "thing" is omitted from the entire purview
of evolution. It says that those infinitely sensitive laws operate
whether we recognize them or not, whether we like them or prefer not
to take cognizance of them.

Nature and the Universe as a "MODEL" is vaster and more carefully
attuned to life and lives than we have yet any concept of. We are
altogether too prove to consider the discarding of persons and objects
we don't like or don't want to have cluttering up our environment as a
right -- and our civilization and government deals out punishments,
torture and death (of the form) accordingly. Is that justice ? Is
such justice divine or merely a frail human imitation, tailored to
suit our prejudices and/or our ignorance?

There is a great deal to think of in this, in terms of ecology,
economy, and our adjustment to our environment as a sensitive
intelligence. We have many "models: to revise and reconstruct. And
it is because of that that Theosophy will only be popular with those
who seek to sow the concepts of mercy, generosity, unselfishness, and
help Nature to do her job without our interfering (under the force of
our personality) in its work -- in our well-intentioned, or our
ill-intentioned selfishness.

That's how I see it.

Best wishes,

Dallas

-----Original Message-----
From: gschueler
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 12:05 PM
To:
Subject: Models, Assumptions, and Logical Conclusions

"It must be remembered that the study of Occultism proceeds from
Universals to Particulars, and not the reverse, as accepted by Science
... Of a truth the amphorism of the Hermetic Wisdom, "as above, so
below," applies to all esoteric instruction; but we must begin with
the above; we must learn the formula before we can sum up the series."
(HPB CW Vol XII, pp 599-600)

HPB and the science of her day were unfamiliar with the modern
teaching of models and how modeling is conducted. Science has learned
the hard way that Truth can seldom be known with certainty, and so has
devised modeling techiques that approach Truth in its various aspects,
and then those models are used for making predictions. Even the
equations of mathematics are models of physical-world processes.

In the above quote, her "Universals" are what I call initial
assumptions, and her "Particulars" are what I call logical
conclusions. In modeling, we usually proceed from assumptions to
conclusions using the logic of deduction.

When we, as Theosophists, make certain "initial assumptions," from the
experiential Esoteric Tradition, the logical conclusions reached are
what I call Esoteric Theosophy. When we, as Theosophists, use the
written "core teachings" to make our initial assumptions, the results
are what I call Exoteric Theosophy. This is, I think, the only
difference between the two. But it is a very significant difference.

I have found that logic itself is a good tool for reaching conclusions
from assumptions, but like any model "garbage in equals garbage out"
and so our conclusions are only as good as our assumptions. These
assumptions are our givens. They are unprovable, and so have to be
taken on faith until validated by direct experience (and even then
they are still unprovable). For example, assuming that a self exists
leads to conclusions that are far different than when we assume a self
does not exist. Assuming that monads can be compounds is totally
illogical, but since Blavatsky did it throughout her writings we are
pretty well stuck with it, and so I am now using the term "indivisible
monad" (which should be a redundancy) as a name for a monad that is
really a single unit and not an aggregate. So when we talk about
"monads" we are really talking about what I have called I-Not-I
Monads, each a consciousness-center coupled to an appropriate vehicle
or body, each a self coupled to a not-self. Thus all of these monads
are inherently mayavic.

Blavatsky gave the world a very nice evolutionary model of Globes and
Planes together with a model of corresponding bodies and principles.
These models are workable, are functional, are interpretable as models
of inner experiences or observations, and so can be used rather than
simply talked about. Using them is part of the 3rd Objective and
should be done by all Theosophists on a daily basis and encouraged by
the TSs.

One of my own logical conclusions from these models is that her
evolutionary scheme is applicable only to statistical populations (ie
lifewaves) and not to individuals. Many others can also be found.

Jerry S.