Ottershrew said:One of the points, though, that I think Anart is making is: Is this actually externally considerate to the reader - especially to a reader whose first language isn't English? One of the most elementary things you can do is to ask yourself about any sentence that you write: How might this sentence be misunderstood by the reader? Now you're standing in the reader's shoes.
stainlesssteve said:With respect to the post of Bud's under scrutiny here, what I got was that Bud was feeling for a place where he could check the validity of fixed ideas, against the perceived pattern and purpose available to him in the great flux.
Relating this to the work concept of "lying", in the context of an intense group ethos such as we have here, built on massive contributions of (frequently) erudite and eloquent posts, and on commitment and courage, it seemed to me that Bud's message is couched in terms that allow acknowledgement of the value of what has had some duration, and also allows for feeling the shape of things to come, and the pain implied in any transition.
With respect to the work concept of " lying ", (also " cannot do "), I propose that these are liable to be over-emphasized, and can be self-fulfilling tenets, with consequences including wasted potential.
Particularly with respect to ISOTM, it is always crucial to remember that G was forming his group from people in Russia, of a certain very particular social background, which no longer obtains. Certain emphases need re-examination in this light.
stainlesssteve said:Anart, I am a visitor, acknowledged.
I have no intention of accepting any position such as moderator in any group, if it is ever offered.
ss said:I've been through plenty of group dynamics, such as you allude to; I know what you are talking about.
ss said:First, if you want a hermetically sealed crucible, you don't do operations in public.
stainlesssteve said:First, if you want a hermetically sealed crucible, you don't do operations in public.
It was all intellect running on emotional energy, which the 'classical mindset' promotes by promoting the idea that intellectual deliberation will finally solve any problem. Perhaps the missing ingredient for discerning the objective truth about anything is 'emotional intelligence'.
ss said:How exactly have I overstepped the guidelines, please?
Heimdallr said:stainlesssteve said:SS said:
Indeed, but it seems especially egregious that this comment is coming from someone who is not applying said courtesy (that kind of thing goes both ways). And nowhere does it say that common courtesy means we have to allow someone to come in to OUR house and tell us how we should run it. That, also, would be rude. (Hint: you're being rude)
from Our Vision for this Forum said:To create an environment for the stimulation, development and then the alignment of objective consciousnesses as defined and described by the Cassiopaeans with the able help of Georges Gurdjieff, Mouravieff, Castaneda, and many other sources available to us. The foundation of this forum is The Cassiopaean Experiment, the layout of the rooms is generally modelled after the work of Gurdjieff and Mouravieff, the decor and details are filled in by Castaneda and many modern psychological studies.
Perceval said:I think the singular point she was making was that Bud's post was a perfect example of how the 'predator's mind' functions. Technically, all of Bud's sentences made sense, but there was little or no useful point being made from the point of view of the average reader. As a result, the reader is left with a strange feeling of having read something without having gleaned any real information, and left somewhat confused, but also without being able to point to any problems of syntax. It was all intellect running on emotional energy, which the 'classical mindset' promotes by promoting the idea that intellectual deliberation will finally solve any problem. Perhaps the missing ingredient for discerning the objective truth about anything is 'emotional intelligence'.