|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 20, 2010 14:58:50 GMT 10
The next installment is fairly brief: The misrepresentation is in setting up as a "straw man" an extreme, unqualified position, what was originally a not nearly so extreme, qualified analogy — beginning with, "Admitting some exaggeration" and followed by a clear specification of that exaggeration: My admitted exaggeration is due to our rituals being a peculiar form of enduring, temporal artifacts, which exist and change by virtue of their performance and transmission from generation to generation. Even so, some worthy Brethren are never going to be excited about our history.
As for what you have written, I have read much of your work over the years and note that it continues to mature from what you showed me of your doctorial dissertation. We have also discussed many historiological issues, so I believe I have a broad understanding of your opinions and would be surprised if there was any major gap in that overview. Still, if there is something you particularly feel I should read, please lend it to me and I will oblige. That said, I presume your paper stands alone, as it is written: I have certainly read the drafts provided and it is with that paper that I take issue.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 20, 2010 19:31:27 GMT 10
There is no reason to be shy about providing the full draft... Draft paper attached (you will need to be logged-on to open): Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Jun 20, 2010 20:25:15 GMT 10
any organisation (club, society, corporation, political party, etc, etc) which chooses not to learn from its past will inevitably fail. Is this assertion true, false or somewhere in between?
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 21, 2010 6:52:12 GMT 10
any organisation (club, society, corporation, political party, etc, etc) which chooses not to learn from its past will inevitably fail. Is this assertion true, false or somewhere in between?Indeed, as a bald assertion it lacks credibility. While I expect there to be a degree of truth, some examples of failed organisations might have provided an opportunity to to test the notion, enabling us to see if other factors may have been of greater significance in those cases.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Jun 21, 2010 14:54:08 GMT 10
any organisation (club, society, corporation, political party, etc, etc) which chooses not to learn from its past will inevitably fail. Once its history becomes the most appealing aspect of a group, that history soon becomes its epitaph For Masonry the truth lies somewhere between these slogans.
|
|
|
Post by lanoo on Jun 23, 2010 16:33:49 GMT 10
"For Masonry the truth lies somewhere between these slogans."
Okay but mine was not meant to be a slogan.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Jun 24, 2010 0:53:34 GMT 10
Perhaps "statement" is what he intended?
Masonry is about the self improvement of the individual, using the allegory of ritual as a guideline. History is interesting, but an adjunct to that process. Those who would emphasize history over self realization are missing the entire point of the exercise.
|
|
|
Post by Azaziel on Jun 24, 2010 15:04:27 GMT 10
Philip, is this the same Bob James who is on the Masonic light committee??
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jun 24, 2010 20:08:48 GMT 10
That's him. I am getting mixed messages (as you may gather from his emails on this thread) as to whether or not he supports or opposes (and to what degree) the resolution against Esoteric Research and Practice.
For me its a deal breaker. If the resolution is allowed to stand as it is, I'll look elsewhere. BTW, I'm generally regarded as being somewhat austere in my approach to matters esoteric and, as you know, I lament overly credulous speculations (e.g., R.H.). Even so, I will not stand-by and allow a mentality of accommodationist censorship take hold of the Craft. I may not be able to do much, but I will do what I can.
As a past National Secretary, I was once involved in a similar dispute in The Theosophical Society when the head of the Theosophy Science Group (an Astrophysicist) led a push to ban topics, which although sanctioned in early Theosophical texts, were now embarrassing to him and his group and which they deemed to be unscientific (e.g., Atlantis). I too deemed most of the topics unscientific and I reserved the right to argue against them if raised. However, for me, it was not right to ban such topics within a Society espousing free of thought. BTW, in the face of strong opposition they tried to say it might be alright to raise such topics as matters of "historical interest only." Fortunately, this too was defeated.
|
|
|
Post by lanoo on Jun 24, 2010 20:49:33 GMT 10
"I was once involved in a similar dispute"
"If you would have the message of the Gods to direct your life, look for that which repeats, again and again; for this is the message given you by the Gods, the karmic lesson you must learn for this incarnation. It comes again and again until you have made it part of your soul and your enduring spirit."
Marion Zimmer Bradley [Mists of Avalon]
|
|