Theos-Talk Archives (March 2005 Message tt00694)

Steve:

[writing to Paul]

> I have been studying Piaget for a test I have coming up, and he has a
> concept of "equilibration" which means as people assimilate (i.e.,
> take in new information) they are compelled to accomodate (i.e.,
> revise their belief systems to avoid dissonance.) If you want to
> avoid accomodating (not that anyone would) it may be necessary to
> aggressively filter out new information (i.e., avoid assimilating).
> That explains why theosophists are careful to read only
> theosophically correct points of view, preferably the same books over
> and over and over.

This is not particular to Theosophists, but applies to anyone following a
particular subject. People become interested in a particular topic and want
to learn about it. They want to see what it says, rather than spend their
time in questioning basic premises.

If I wanted to study Jungian Psychology, for instance, I'd want to hear what
practitioners and advanced students say. I'd learn the terminology, hear the
stories, and consider the ideas.

In student mode, I'd want to enjoy the experience of study and emersion in
that particular school of psychology. That is different than what I'd do in
seeker or doubter mode. As a seeker or doubter, I'd be questioning basic
assumptions of everything and be looking for something new that draws my
interest.

In a way, it's like with food. There may be a time to wonder about the
relative merits of different things I might eat and when I might be thinking
about what I'd like to eat at the next meal. Then comes the meal, and as I
am eating, I want to enjoy the experience. 

On this list, we have a combination of eaters and people wondering about
food, a combination of students of theosophical philosophical ideas and
people engaged in questioning basic assumptions and wondering what to
believe in.

> It also explains why they go into a rage when any
> southern fried librarians intrude with views that are not safe.

It depends upon the person and what they're busy doing. Someone in student
mode doesn't want to waste time on questioning basic assumptions that
they've already made. They do not have time to reconsider basic assumptions
at the moment since they're busy learning and studying. Intrusive
distractions are seen as an annoyance rather that as being helpful.

Others are in seeker mode, not heavily involved in learning something new,
but rather puzzling over what's true and what's not about every possible
thing. For someone in that phase, any learning and study of a particular set
of theosophical or metaphysical doctrines is a waste of time, since they
don't see the point in learning something when they're not sure how real its
foundations are.

> What
> it does not explain is how and why people choose which nonsense they
> wish to believe. That includes not just CWL but Joseph Smith, Ellen
> White, pupe Wojtyla, Elizabeth Prophet, and others.

The study of different metaphysical systems of though may sometimes end up
leaving people with a set of silly beliefs to replace a set of commonplace
ones, but otherwise unchanged. Or it can be a form of practice in thinking
differently, that aids the individual to think originally, enhance their
intuition, and to cultivate symbolic thought.

> It also does not
> explain why accomodating is such a dreadful thing, to be avoided at
> all cost. The catholics use horrible threats to keep their people in
> line, but CWL did not.

When someone is wanting to learn a new subject, they don't want the
bandwidth choked with doubters and naysayers, they want to see materials
related to their area of interest. That doesn't make them sheep, subject to
mind control, and unable to think differently.

On the other hand, when someone is questioning everything, in seeker mode,
they don't want the bandwidth choked with repetitive restatements of a
narrow set of dogmatic beliefs. 

> Intriguingly someone recently raised the argument that it may all be
> hogwash, but they have decided to classify it a religious belief, and
> therefore to examine it is disrespectful to the people who wish to
> believe it. That is of course mere evasion and not an honest search
> for the truth.

Both modes represent honest searches for truth. If we never take the time to
study and really learn something, we can be doubters, but only have a
superficial learning of things to share. If we study only one area, or never
take time to doubt and question and reconsider things, we can be students,
but become locked into an increasingly rigid viewpoint that misses much of
what is going on in life.

Over the years, I'd expect that most people would alternate between these
two approaches, sometimes being a student and other times being a seeker.
Both phases of life are equally useful; they complement each other. If the
person has an open mind, he or she will remember previous experiences and
appreciate people in different phases of file. The narrow-minded, though,
will take their current phase of experience as the only true approach and
will mock and scorn others living differently.

> How could
> one scientifically examine his claim that the logos is three little
> balls suspended in mid-air?

A metaphysical idea becomes a focal point for contemplation. It does not
have to be a fixed and lifeless set of words. It could be dynamic, offering
original insights each time it is approached. It's the same, for instance,
as with Zen koans. You could approach one on two occasions and give
different but right answers.

> Since HPB defined what theosophy is, and since CWL's stuff is totally
> idiosyncratic, it makes sense that theosophists would appeal to HPB's
> stuff as proof that CWL was not teaching theosophy.

There are many different ideas about what Theosophy consists of. One idea
might say that HPB defined it as a specific set of doctrines that other
writers could be compared to, should one want to see if the other writers
were talking about the same thing. 

Part of process of inner development that Theosophy offers comes from people
puzzling over what it really is. People will come up with different answers,
but in working it out for themselves, they're really engaged in a spiritual
practice. That practice may be effective for some and may fail for others,
but I'd say that there's value to it. 

Eldon