Square Peg or Round Hole?

He who would go to Anthroposophy expecting self-help & not get any would probably go to a butcher shop expecting to get a new suit.

Tags

  1. new suit
  2. anthroposophy
  3. expectations

Comments


Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-23 11:07:03 14748
trying to re-frame one of my comments to miss my point again, eeh?
That might be true if your point/comment were valid.  When you collect things into classes they do not belong then your comment needs reframing.  Nobody except you classes Anthroposophy as self-help.  The term itself post-dates Rudolph Steiner.  I would have to classify all religions, philosophies & sciences collectively as self-help to validate your comment & then what would be the point?


Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-23 11:17:22 14748
Fact is "Initiation" is a process of self improvement and  .... the point is ... your mileage will vary.  If you take the experience that Steiner's describes in minute detail to be the one you experience ... me thinks ... your expectations will be way different that what you end up experiening.  My way of sayin:  Your Mileage Will Vary.   I wish that all SelfImprovement books would emphasize that so that people would bring their own energies into the process and not just expect a fixed curriculum to unfold for them if they follow the methods. 
You assume by reiteration a fact not in evidence: Initiation is not self improvement as those words are in usage today. While your life may improve or not & there may be benefits to your material life or not, the primary aim of Anthroposophy is none of those. Initiation is about consciousness, in a way similar to Zen. It is an old zen saying: What did one do before enlightenment? Chop wood & carry water.  What did one do after enlightenment? Chop wood & carry water.


Mark de LA says
Actually, you might align with the heading on my group mark page which has been there since I made one. Then again, I can't tell at this time, you might be just a NOW cultist.


Seth says
M 2010-12-24 07:50:38 14748
Actually, you might align with the heading on my group mark page which has been there since I made one. Then again, I can't tell at this time, you might be just a NOW cultist.

Yep, not unlike the sentiments i expressed above.  

Wat's this NOW cult? It doesn't Google very well.

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-23 12:47:25 14748
source: M above
You words are increasingly material-world bound. It's a limit you impose on yourself.
Another case where you statements about me are false.   

What is a better truth is that i do not have any schism in my world between material and spiritual.  But i impose no limitations on myself thereby.  I do what i do, i feel what i feel, i experience what i experience, and i am aware of what i am aware of .... same as you.  To me the predicament in which i find myself is amazing, incredible, and i love everything about it.   But i am not going to lie to you or my children and say i know something about it that i do not.

My view is that it is you who are hung up on this "material-world" semantics that you got from our upbringing.  You seem to me to be wanting to reframe your perdicament for the pie you will get in the sky, rather than the value that is in the here and now.

You are hung up in calling people liars & assigning same to others.  I have distinctions, if you don't have them so be it. Your last statement is a banner of inaccuracy:

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-23 11:45:41 14748
M 2010-12-23 11:15:58 14748
seth 2010-12-23 11:07:03 14748
trying to re-frame one of my comments to miss my point again, eeh?
That might be true if your point/comment were valid.  When you collect things into classes they do not belong then your comment needs reframing.  Nobody except you classes Anthroposophy as self-help.  The term itself post-dates Rudolph Steiner.  I would have to classify all religions, philosophies & sciences collectively as self-help to validate your comment & then what would be the point?

My point has nothing to do with your semantic quibble.

I did, very intentionally, reclassify the concept called "Initiation" to be called "self improvement" ... but it might be even better coded as "self actualization" or "self realization".  I did that so you would think about it differently ... trying to unhack your brain here ... don't fight it.   I think all of these curricula come with a narrative. TheSecret, Sattori, etc ... they all have their narrative ... but these narratives are subjective and actual experience will vary by which culture you grow up in and what your own history brings to the table.  I know you don't believe that ... you take Steiner's world quite literally and expect that it is an objective fact ... like visiting New York or London might be.  Well, i don't ... and i'm not ashamed to say that publically.
So you are intentionally outside the facts on Anthroposophy and militantly proud of it - , eh? What does that prove? You words are increasingly material-world bound. It's a limit you impose on yourself. It is your loss not mine. I look at many ideas, philosophies, contexts & paradigms from many sources. Where the ideas, concepts & material lives & I can witness it in my own life or others I use it.  When it doesn't I discard it or reserve judgment. My current bug-a-boo is with the NOW-cult.  All this is a research project which continues for me life-long. I haven't turned out the lights yet on it all except perhaps, the idea that the material world is all there is.


C says
The Opra Winfrey-Eckhart Tolle, The Secret bunch. Basically, anyone who makes a religion out of focusing on the NOW.

Mark de LA says
source: ... Those who are aware to some extent of the holiness of truth know how absurd it is to imagine that it could be found in the arid, prosaic lectures of modern times, lectures in which there is no longer any indication that truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism when truth itself, in the way it is presented, has become utterly prosaic.
...R.S on Yuletide & Christmas Festival



Mark de LA says
P.2036
Exact thought must attend only to what actually is presented & forget all else!" 
... An interesting notion that showed up in today's reading. It reminded be that CFR chose mathematics to get around all the gobbledegook extant in the occult worlds. It is hard not to accept as "truth" that 2+2=4 unless you are a quibbler. Do you have a better one?


Seth says
M 2010-12-26 16:22:00 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:16:49 14748
M 2010-12-26 16:09:41 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:05:20 14748
M 2010-12-26 15:27:50 14748
P.2036
Exact thought must attend only to what actually is presented & forget all else!" 
... An interesting notion that showed up in today's reading. It reminded be that CFR chose mathematics to get around all the gobbledegook extant in the occult worlds. It is hard not to accept as "truth" that 2+2=4 unless you are a quibbler. Do you have a better one?

Nope!  But a base 10 ( of primes 2 and 5 ) while very human as far as digits go, might be replaces with a base 12 ( of primes 2 and 3 ) of which you recently expressed a love. But then 2 + 2 would still be just 4 ... so no, no improvement. 
I excluded quibblers.  You know that we use base 10. So, assuming base 10 and the cardinal numbers how are you going to quibble next?
... more like elaborating ... examining the space.  then too i arrived at agreeing that i cannot find a better truth ... how then was it a quibble?
I didn't understand what your "so no improvement" clause was referring to. But, then have we discovered an absolute truth here ?

I don't think so ... just a truth for which we don't know a better point of view upon.  But i could try to imagine one ... but not express it sufficiently to say it exists.  For example your so called absolute truth assumes an operation, {+}, and a set of names, {1,2,3,4 ...}, where given two names we can arrive at a third and that operation works on all of the names in our set and combines with other operations {*, -} in some coherent manner that only a in depth study of mathematics and it's history will reveal.  But how much of that is specific to the way the human mind works?  How much of it is specific to the geometric predicament of space and time in which we normally think?  Would a advanced insect culture which evolved in another environment necessarily come up with the same assumptions which were necessary to make the mapping work?  Could beings exist in a geometry in which those assumptions no longer held? 

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-26 16:05:20 14748
M 2010-12-26 15:27:50 14748
P.2036
Exact thought must attend only to what actually is presented & forget all else!" 
... An interesting notion that showed up in today's reading. It reminded be that CFR chose mathematics to get around all the gobbledegook extant in the occult worlds. It is hard not to accept as "truth" that 2+2=4 unless you are a quibbler. Do you have a better one?

Nope!  But a base 10 ( of primes 2 and 5 ) while very human as far as digits go, might be replaces with a base 12 ( of primes 2 and 3 ) of which you recently expressed a love. But then 2 + 2 would still be just 4 ... so no, no improvement. 
I excluded quibblers.  You know that we use base 10. So, assuming base 10 and the cardinal numbers how are you going to quibble next?

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-26 16:13:41 14748
M 2010-12-26 16:12:15 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:07:02 14748
M 2010-12-26 10:31:23 14748
source: ... Those who are aware to some extent of the holiness of truth know how absurd it is to imagine that it could be found in the arid, prosaic lectures of modern times, lectures in which there is no longer any indication that truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism when truth itself, in the way it is presented, has become utterly prosaic.
...R.S on Yuletide & Christmas Festival


i guess you realize that kind of stuff is pretty much where i part company with RS.

I guess you are dull to artistic truth & poetry.
I have no idea how you could possible arrive at that guess based upon what i have ever said. 
Rudolph Steiner arrives at truths through his artistic senses as well. Not all truths show up in formal logic & dry reasoning.

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-26 16:12:41 14748
Isn't the Secret the cult that Nathan is following with their Power of Attraction.  I'm not so sure that would be anything that i could relate to liking the now.  One has fanticise, visualizations, meditations for attracting, and a whole level of analysis and justification in the meta world of words and intentions ... but i for one can only actually do things and live in the now of time ... i can't do it tomorrow or whevever.  If i want to be here and present in my awareness, i know of only one choice ... and that is NOW.  I'm pretty sure the the Opera/Tolle/Secret bunch have a different twist on that.

It would be a conundrum to attract something which you don't already have at the razor-point of NOW. PR has some interesting points on desire at BofNK 23:45 et seq. You mentioned the Secret & I erroneously included it. It is of the same category of pellick though. You would have to ask Nathan about it. It think he was into something like it long before The Secret came out.
 

Mark de LA says
seth 2010-12-26 16:16:49 14748
M 2010-12-26 16:09:41 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:05:20 14748
M 2010-12-26 15:27:50 14748
P.2036
Exact thought must attend only to what actually is presented & forget all else!" 
... An interesting notion that showed up in today's reading. It reminded be that CFR chose mathematics to get around all the gobbledegook extant in the occult worlds. It is hard not to accept as "truth" that 2+2=4 unless you are a quibbler. Do you have a better one?

Nope!  But a base 10 ( of primes 2 and 5 ) while very human as far as digits go, might be replaces with a base 12 ( of primes 2 and 3 ) of which you recently expressed a love. But then 2 + 2 would still be just 4 ... so no, no improvement. 
I excluded quibblers.  You know that we use base 10. So, assuming base 10 and the cardinal numbers how are you going to quibble next?
... more like elaborating ... examining the space.  then too i arrived at agreeing that i cannot find a better truth ... how then was it a quibble?
I didn't understand what your "so no improvement" clause was referring to. But, then have we discovered an absolute truth here ?


Mark de LA says
M 2010-12-27 11:10:29 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:09:30 14748
For me, then, are you are saying that you are never certain about anything?

... perhaps even that you exist at all?

Maybe this blog is just an elaborate Eliza machine!


Seth says
M 2010-12-27 11:11:52 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:10:29 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:09:30 14748
For me, then, are you are saying that you are never certain about anything?

... perhaps even that you exist at all?

Maybe this blog is just an elaborate Eliza machine!

So here we have jumped from a truth which cannot be improved, (one which is true to everybody always), to nothing at all, (nothing exists, nothing can be believe in).  Me i don't do that.  I live in between those extremes.  The things i know about in my life are the things that work ... not just once, but again and again .... and especially those things which are confirmed from others ... things that work for me and also for you ... etc.  2 + 2 = 4 is an excellent example of one of these things that just works for me and i believe it works for you too.   But is it absolute?  Are you so very much prepared to justify that ... to prove that ... how would you even go about such a proof? 

Seth says
M 2010-12-26 16:25:11 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:13:41 14748
M 2010-12-26 16:12:15 14748
seth 2010-12-26 16:07:02 14748
M 2010-12-26 10:31:23 14748
source: ... Those who are aware to some extent of the holiness of truth know how absurd it is to imagine that it could be found in the arid, prosaic lectures of modern times, lectures in which there is no longer any indication that truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism when truth itself, in the way it is presented, has become utterly prosaic.
...R.S on Yuletide & Christmas Festival


i guess you realize that kind of stuff is pretty much where i part company with RS.

I guess you are dull to artistic truth & poetry.
I have no idea how you could possible arrive at that guess based upon what i have ever said. 
Rudolph Steiner arrives at truths through his artistic senses as well. Not all truths show up in formal logic & dry reasoning.
That wasn't the part of RS's paragraph where i diverged ... yes, truth (for some value of truth) is not just prosaic and logical and matter of fact.  It has passion and emotion and art and love etc ... it can be deeply felt and deeply effective.  I like what RS is saying about truth in that sense.

The part that offended me that i would diverge from is from this part of his paragraph ... especially the words that i will be blueing ...
source: snipped from RS's paragraph above
truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism
... I just interpret that as a hook into the rest of his curriculum and world view.  But that world view is too particular for me ... too much out of my time ... i cannot live into that world view ... i must make and or find my own in today's world. 


C says
seth 2010-12-28 03:46:49 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:11:52 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:10:29 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:09:30 14748
For me, then, are you are saying that you are never certain about anything?

... perhaps even that you exist at all?

Maybe this blog is just an elaborate Eliza machine!

So here we have jumped from a truth which cannot be improved, (one which is true to everybody always), to nothing at all, (nothing exists, nothing can be believe in).  Me i don't do that.  I live in between those extremes.  The things i know about in my life are the things that work ... not just once, but again and again .... and especially those things which are confirmed from others ... things that work for me and also for you ... etc.  2 + 2 = 4 is an excellent example of one of these things that just works for me and i believe it works for you too.   But is it absolute?  Are you so very much prepared to justify that ... to prove that ... how would you even go about such a proof? 
You seem to have missed the impact of not being certain about anything, which is a corrollary of having no absolutes, & traded same for "works for me".   I think if you examine things clearly, you would find the feeling of certainty beneath every belief you have. If you think you don't have any check it out again.  OTOH, you might be just a haggler or a zen master & I bow to your future of inquisitiveness & zen mind.


C says
I forgot the thingy about religion: where there no respect for the human as a reflection of the Cosmos & appreciation of the Golden Rule you have religions killing each other in the name of their man-made gods.


Seth says
C 2010-12-28 08:01:30 14748
seth 2010-12-28 03:46:49 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:11:52 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:10:29 14748
M 2010-12-27 11:09:30 14748
For me, then, are you are saying that you are never certain about anything?

... perhaps even that you exist at all?

Maybe this blog is just an elaborate Eliza machine!

So here we have jumped from a truth which cannot be improved, (one which is true to everybody always), to nothing at all, (nothing exists, nothing can be believe in).  Me i don't do that.  I live in between those extremes.  The things i know about in my life are the things that work ... not just once, but again and again .... and especially those things which are confirmed from others ... things that work for me and also for you ... etc.  2 + 2 = 4 is an excellent example of one of these things that just works for me and i believe it works for you too.   But is it absolute?  Are you so very much prepared to justify that ... to prove that ... how would you even go about such a proof? 
You seem to have missed the impact of not being certain about anything, which is a corrollary of having no absolutes, & traded same for "works for me".   I think if you examine things clearly, you would find the feeling of certainty beneath every belief you have. If you think you don't have any check it out again.  OTOH, you might be just a haggler or a zen master & I bow to your future of inquisitiveness & zen mind.

But i didn't miss your mention of not being certain ... didn't miss it at all ... in fact i addressed it directly.  Yes i did trade the term "works for me" for your "being certain" ... very intentionally i might add.  Being certain is just a emotion, a sensation, an attitude ... as such it is not all that very useful to me ... it is just for me ... just my little cookie from the universe.  But knowing how to do something ... knowing what works is, for me, the real fruit of my so called "knowledge".  But this IS the same topic, the switch of terms notwithstanding.

Apparently, unlike you, after examining things clearly, i do not find a ("the") feeling of certainty beneath every belief that i have.  I know i make mistakes .  See things incorrectly.  I have examples of that in my memory.  Would i not be a fool, should i then be consulting some habitual feeling of certainty about my beliefs?

C says
Somedays it seems to me that you intentionally offer a lack of comprehension.  On the following:
above: ...
source: snipped from RS's paragraph above
truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism

... is very appropriate for our own age of materialism which however has seen the bottom of the pendulum swing some time ago (probably about the time the 60's generation went woo-woo). It takes respect & reverence & some other of those nice words of RS to penetrate beyond the pragmatic & ossification processes that produce all those nasty things I mentioned before. If the only respect & reverence you have is for yourself so be it! Maybe you should watch the Devil's Advocate again & catch some of the pointers.


C says
Seth above continuing RWG: ... Apparently, unlike you, after examining things clearly, i do not find a ("the") feeling of certainty beneath every belief that i have.  I know i make mistakes .  See things incorrectly.  I have examples of that in my memory.  Would i not be a fool, should i then be consulting some habitual feeling of certainty about my beliefs?

...
From NLP the definition of a belief is a feeling of certainty about the meaning of something. If you have a belief that is what's going on. You will probably quibble because you have the belief (or not) that you are special (or not). You are wrong in your acessment of what "the" is in me.  I just don't quibble. Some quibble forever just to be right. At the center & continuation of this train of thought is the idea that while maybe we don't know the secret of the Universe with many answers at least 2+2=4 is rather obvious & can be demonstrated (CFR's criterion for proof, BTW). While you couldn't come up with a "better truth" about that while holding it in the normal context of symbols and grammar school arithmetic, you apparently couldn't simply accept it as the truth.


Seth says
C 2010-12-28 10:53:14 14748
Somedays it seems to me that you intentionally offer a lack of comprehension.  On the following:
above: ...
source: snipped from RS's paragraph above
truth must be sought by a pure, unsullied, well-prepared soul and that it will not be found by a soul inwardly unsanctified, whose feelings are not duly prepared for its reception. There is no longer any conception of this in our age of materialism

... is very appropriate for our own age of materialism which however has seen the bottom of the pendulum swing some time ago (probably about the time the 60's generation went woo-woo). It takes respect & reverence & some other of those nice words of RS to penetrate beyond the pragmatic & ossification processes that produce all those nasty things I mentioned before. If the only respect & reverence you have is for yourself so be it! Maybe you should watch the Devil's Advocate again & catch some of the pointers.

again, i have no idea why you offer me this lecture about respect.  Respect is great!  So what? And then again i don't get any particular connection between what you are saying about respect ... about which i have no problems ... and what RS actually said in what you quoted.  Hopefully the "you" your sentence, "If the only respect & reverence you have is for yourself so be it! " was not meant to apply to me, because if so it would be a false sentence.  So then why would you be saying it to me?  I don't want to get into RWG here, i am just really curious what connections  or observations you have made and what assumptions that you have in this regard ... because i really do not know what you are trying to tell me ... and i actually want to know, even if it would cast dispersions at own being.

Mark de LA says
Your lack of understanding meets my lack of understanding why you don't understand. I am not sure how to proceed from here hex#41, line 1. If, instead of offering only a lack of understanding, you dig into what I said & speculate a bit about what it means & how it does apply we might have a chance to bridge the gap.  OTOH, I'm good at dropping it right here.

See Also

  1. Thought The Future Supervens on the Past with 234 viewings related by tag "expectations".
  2. Thought One Truth XOR a collection or Singularities with 19 viewings related by tag "anthroposophy".
  3. Thought On alcohol & psychiatric meds with 10 viewings related by tag "anthroposophy".
  4. Thought Dangerous Anthroposophy with 0 viewings related by tag "anthroposophy".
  5. Thought conscious expectations with 0 viewings related by tag "expectations".
  6. Thought about: What you see in the world around you, is a reflection of who you are. with 0 viewings related by tag "expectations".