Learning and growth

[aaronfransen]

Okay, I've been reading Ouspensky, and a question has occurred to me that perhaps I'm not understanding.

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

My question is what constitutes this learning? Besides introspection and observation, can the tools for growth come from reading, for example, whether it be books or web sites (although filtering out truth from deception on the Internet is almost impossible), or must growth come from some form of communion with another, ie. a Master.

Thoughts? Certainly in the years I've been following Laura et al, I *feel* like I've grown, but there are times when I feel about as dimwitted as a two year old in desparate need of a sugar fix (that's just a metaphor...as a diabetic I'm kinda aware of sugar's dangers! ;) )

 

[anart]

Okay, I've been reading Ouspensky, and a question has occurred to me that perhaps I'm not understanding.

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

My question is what constitutes this learning? Besides introspection and observation, can the tools for growth come from reading, for example, whether it be books or web sites (although filtering out truth from deception on the Internet is almost impossible), or must growth come from some form of communion with another, ie. a Master.

Thoughts? Certainly in the years I've been following Laura et al, I *feel* like I've grown, but there are times when I feel about as dimwitted as a two year old in desparate need of a sugar fix (that's just a metaphor...as a diabetic I'm kinda aware of sugar's dangers! ;) )

The basic point is that we cannot think with the way we think, so a person can go only so far (and it's not objectively far at all) on their own no matter how much they read and think they understand. To really learn and transform, you absolutely have to have external input from someone further along the path than you are. There is no other way.

 

[whitecoast]

Okay, I've been reading Ouspensky, and a question has occurred to me that perhaps I'm not understanding.

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

My question is what constitutes this learning? Besides introspection and observation, can the tools for growth come from reading, for example, whether it be books or web sites (although filtering out truth from deception on the Internet is almost impossible), or must growth come from some form of communion with another, ie. a Master.

Thoughts? Certainly in the years I've been following Laura et al, I *feel* like I've grown, but there are times when I feel about as dimwitted as a two year old in desparate need of a sugar fix (that's just a metaphor...as a diabetic I'm kinda aware of sugar's dangers! ;) )

The basic point is that we cannot think with the way we think, so a person can go only so far (and it's not objectively far at all) on their own no matter how much they read and think they understand. To really learn and transform, you absolutely have to have external input from someone further along the path than you are. There is no other way.

Hi aaronfransen. If you're interested in learning more about the limits of introspection as a learning tool, The Adaptive Unconscious thread provides a decent overview of Timothy D. Wilson's psychology book Strangers to Ourselves, and how trying to objectively observe our behaviour and get feedback from peers teaches us about our subconscious more than simple introspection can. Our "common sense" understanding of how our minds/emotions/personality work can often fall quite short of describing how our minds actually work.

 

[Kent]

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

In my opinion, putting someone "above" you is no different than putting a person on a pedestal. Better be careful of who a person puts on said pedestal. To me, it's safer not to do that. Too, I consider it a shortcut / spoonfeeding.

I'll use myself as an example here.

My biggest fight to date was trying to understand christianity. I was raised in it, but I knew it made no sense. It is one contradiction after another. The more time that passed, the more contradictions I saw.

So, over a period of several years, I went to outside sources in order to try and understand how it can exist in spite of these contradictions. I waded thru a lot of nonsense. People will state opinions as proven facts.

Then I thought "Since I see contradictions and corruptions, I'll just have to see what the early church thought, in order to get around the current "great apostasy" in these "last days"".

That did no good in explaining these contradictions, but it brought home the political history of the church and what it accomplished. If anything, christianity was even more vile back then than it is now.

So, to cut this story short, in order to try and understand christianity, I ended up leaving it in the dust. I didn't set out to do that, but that was the inevitable end result. I did it thru my own efforts.

I'm not saying teachers are bad. I'm just saying to not depend on them. A teacher can lead you by the nose to a place you don't want to go.

 

[anart]

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

In my opinion, putting someone "above" you is no different than putting a person on a pedestal.

Then you completely misunderstand the point. Have you read any Gurdjieff?

Better be careful of who a person puts on said pedestal. To me, it's safer not to do that. Too, I consider it a shortcut / spoonfeeding.

Read Gurdjieff.

I'll use myself as an example here.

My biggest fight to date was trying to understand christianity. I was raised in it, but I knew it made no sense. It is one contradiction after another. The more time that passed, the more contradictions I saw.

So, over a period of several years, I went to outside sources in order to try and understand how it can exist in spite of these contradictions. I waded thru a lot of nonsense. People will state opinions as proven facts.

Then I thought "Since I see contradictions and corruptions, I'll just have to see what the early church thought, in order to get around the current "great apostasy" in these "last days"".

That did no good in explaining these contradictions, but it brought home the political history of the church and what it accomplished. If anything, christianity was even more vile back then than it is now.

So, to cut this story short, in order to try and understand christianity, I ended up leaving it in the dust. I didn't set out to do that, but that was the inevitable end result. I did it thru my own efforts.

I'm not saying teachers are bad. I'm just saying to not depend on them. A teacher can lead you by the nose to a place you don't want to go.

You are missing the entire point, which is okay as long as you are willing to learn. Start with In Search of the Miraculous by Ouspensky and then read all of the work by G.I. Gurdjieff to get an idea of the line of force behind this forum and what we do here. Then you'll understand why what you've written here is so off base.

 

[Kent]

Then you completely misunderstand the point. Have you read any Gurdjieff?

I wrote that my post was "In my opinion". That's all it was.

I''m new to all of this. I'm about half way thru "adventures" and read some of the wave. But I am not new to being deceived by "teachers".

What I quoted is, to me, plain english, so I responded likewise, saying it was my opinion. It was

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

Perhaps there is another Gurdjieff definition of "above you" that I have yet to master. Is that where I go wrong?

Am I "off base"? That's entirely possible. Will I just take your word, or anyones word for it? No. Neither would I expect you or anyone else to take my word for anything.

I don't put anyone (a "teacher") above myself without checking things out. To do so would not be wise. And even then it pays to be on ones toes. Tell me, who would recommend otherwise? If you would, then boy I sure walked into the wrong bar.

One theme I've noticed in Laura's writing is that everything requires testing, no matter who says what. I've read several times that she does not simply trust what even the C's are saying. I think she's right; test everything. And that is what I am doing. Perhaps my doing is not as advanced as others, but we all start somewhere.

If you want people as advanced to a certain level, perhaps registration could be determined by taking a test?

Once burned, twice shy. One sees deception only after it's too late. What else is there but wasted time and effort (if the deceived is very lucky).

So, in time, I'll check out Gurdjieff.

 

[anart]

Then you completely misunderstand the point. Have you read any Gurdjieff?

I wrote that my post was "In my opinion". That's all it was.

First off, it will help you if you read this thread on Opinions - http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,3925.msg25911.html#msg25911

I''m new to all of this. I'm about half way thru "adventures" and read some of the wave.

Understood, but you read and agreed to the forum guidelines when you became a member here, and they clearly state what this forum is about - so - it would be helpful for you to keep that in mind.

But I am not new to being deceived by "teachers".

What I quoted is, to me, plain english, so I responded likewise, saying it was my opinion. It was

One of the things he mentions is that you cannot teach yourself, that you can only learn ultimately from someone who's above you.

Perhaps there is another Gurdjieff definition of "above you" that I have yet to master. Is that where I go wrong?

Am I "off base"? That's entirely possible. Will I just take your word, or anyones word for it? No. Neither would I expect you or anyone else to take my word for anything.

I don't put anyone (a "teacher") above myself without checking things out. To do so would not be wise. And even then it pays to be on ones toes. Tell me, who would recommend otherwise? If you would, then boy I sure walked into the wrong bar.

One theme I've noticed in Laura's writing is that everything requires testing, no matter who says what. I've read several times that she does not simply trust what even the C's are saying. I think she's right; test everything. And that is what I am doing. Perhaps my doing is not as advanced as others, but we all start somewhere.

If you want people as advanced to a certain level, perhaps registration could be determined by taking a test?

Once burned, twice shy. One sees deception only after it's too late. What else is there but wasted time and effort (if the deceived is very lucky).

So, in time, I'll check out Gurdjieff.

Please re-read the forum guidelines and try to understand that this is not your typical forum. It exists for a very specific reason and is run in a very specific way. Perhaps it is not the forum for you, I can't say that yet - but what is obvious is that it can only help you to get up to speed on the topics covered here and the body of work upon which this forum is based. That way, you'll understand why your stating your opinion is usually not really warranted. :)

 

[Kent]

OK, this is my last post. Ban me, delete me, whatever floats your boat.

I'll stick with reading the material outside this forum.

 

[Menna]

No one wants to Ban you...If you want to be here then put in a little effort and learn the guidelines. People here are willing to help with questions and concerns all they ask is for you to learn the ropes and by learning the ropes you will learn about yourself and do away with some of the junk.

 

[1984]

OK, this is my last post. Ban me, delete me, whatever floats your boat.

I'll stick with reading the material outside this forum.

Hi Kent - it might be a good idea to calm down and not react emotionally asking to be banned. You may see that you do indeed want to interact here. As Anart mentioned, this is not a typical forum. The guidelines are fairly specific in our goals here as a network. Perhaps you could spend some down time catching up on the requisite reading and then jump back in?

 

[Alana]

OK, this is my last post. Ban me, delete me, whatever floats your boat.

I'll stick with reading the material outside this forum.

That's quite a reaction after anart's friendly advice to read the forum guidelines, she even added a smiley face at the end. Are you sure this is what you wish for right now? Like 1984 says, it sounds more like an emotionally loaded response. From what you wrote in this thread it sounds like you have trusted the wrong people in the past, and as someone who has done the same myself, I can understand your reaction. But reacting like this has made regret things I've done and said because I was not "conscious" when I did and said them, it was just my "defenses" getting fired up and doing the deed and talk for me. In case this is the story with you too, I would follow 1984's advice if I were you, and take some time to relax and sleep on the subject, and if you continue to want to be banned then, we will comply with your request.

 

[anart]

That's quite a reaction after anart's friendly advice to read the forum guidelines, she even added a smiley face at the end. Are you sure this is what you wish for right now? Like 1984 says, it sounds more like an emotionally loaded response. From what you wrote in this thread it sounds like you have trusted the wrong people in the past, and as someone who has done the same myself, I can understand your reaction. But reacting like this has made regret things I've done and said because I was not "conscious" when I did and said them, it was just my "defenses" getting fired up

Yep, it basically means that the people who have duped you in the past are still controlling you because now you react to everyone as if they are the ones who duped you. They aren't.

Take a breath, take a break if need be, then return and read my responses to you as if they were said in kindness, not judgment - see what a difference that makes in your interpretation. The truth is the truth is the truth - just because you read it like it's an attack doesn't make it so...

 

[Buddy]

OK, this is my last post. Ban me, delete me, whatever floats your boat.

I'll stick with reading the material outside this forum.

IRL, I sometimes find a little arrogance refreshing but only when it's obvious that a person is in the right. Maybe it's due to me thinking of it as a useful tool to back down pathological people in some circumstances.

Considering your regard for Laura's work, I'd say you're just responding as your normal self instead of following your intuition here. I say that because you've made it obvious to me that we have some sympathies in common and I think you may be aware of that fact.

Also, I agree with anart regarding the very specific purpose of this particular forum. On other forums your replies might run a gamut from praise to outright slander, but of course you won't have to worry about any of that here.

 

[Alada]

Take a breath, take a break if need be, then return and read my responses to you as if they were said in kindness, not judgment - see what a difference that makes in your interpretation.

This is important thing to note, the tone of voice or emotion that we attach to whatever we're reading can completely change the message that comes across, and more particularly the intent of the message.

Some people read 'silently' as it were, others, myself included, tend to attach a voice and sound the words internally as they read. Now, if you read a reply from someone and attach an angry, judgmental tone to it you get a very different reaction internally than if you read it with a soft tone, full of warmth and concern for your being.

It took me a long time to realize this! It wasn't until one day upon reading a post – the author of which I usually always attached an angry tone to – and mistakenly reading with a different voice, thinking it from someone else – to whom I usually attributed a friendly voice – that the penny dropped! I realized the mistake and saw clearly then that what I had read had been received in a completely different way. I was more open to what was being said, more able to take the information on board and properly consider it, rather than automatically going into defensive mode.

We really are at the mercy of our reactions so much of the time. Part of what we aim to do here is to discover how we work, to find ways to work around our problem areas and get to that small part of us that can learn to balance them out.

 

[celestialvisionz]

I think it might be different for all people on how they might grow, For me I learn all the time by teaching myself, if I never taught myself anything I would know pretty much half of what is known now, experience is a form of growth also, Look at laura all she does is READ and I really do find that to be her source of growth, as mine.