The SES and Regional Schools in England

Discussion of the SES, particularly in the UK.
chittani
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby chittani » Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:38 pm

Woodgreen

You're missing the point which is that your recent posts refer to David Boddy and to Shantananda Sarasvati in ways that are defamatory - ie, you're slandering their good names without any evidence.

If you stuck to the facts I would have no problems - I would back up anyone who made true assertions about the SES or its members - but you're just dreaming these things up and saying the first thing that comes into your head - and forgetting that there are real people involved.

Classic internet abuse.

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby woodgreen » Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:48 pm

chittani wrote:Woodgreen

You're missing the point which is that your recent posts refer to David Boddy and to Shantananda Sarasvati in ways that are defamatory - ie, you're slandering their good names without any evidence.

If you stuck to the facts I would have no problems - I would back up anyone who made true assertions about the SES or its members - but you're just dreaming these things up and saying the first thing that comes into your head - and forgetting that there are real people involved.

Classic internet abuse.

Check out all my posts Chittani before you tell me I am missing the point. My recent posts did not refer to Boddy and SES - I checked out your posts and you took on Peter Hounam - not recommended to take him on in this Forum. Chittani, the bullyboys got you again. Are you a nice person in life or are you still clinging on to some SES thing that you are frit of. There are not not nice people but you seem to appear on this Forum to support them and attack us when when you do nothing. Sorry Bluemoon, but Chittani seems to be having a free ride on this forum - he/she is still following the SES version of life. Not concvinced about chittani, he does not take Lambie on, but hangs on to people who want to. Woodgreen
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby bluemoon » Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:05 am

Hi Woodgreen, chittani and Bonsai,

I just wanted to say thanks for your comments about 'capitulation' and defamation re my notes. It is true that I have to admit defeat, not quite the same as giving up I hope! I did try.

I did say to woodgreen I would get a cost for advice about my notes, which I have now done from a specialist. It would be between £1,500 to £2,500 most likely, and I simply cannot afford that.

So, I have had to make a decision about this and want to leave it at that.

Thanks again.

Bluemoon
Last edited by bluemoon on Thu May 24, 2012 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

chittani
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby chittani » Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:43 am

Woodgreen,

You're quite right that I don't campaign against the SES. Why should I do that? As my comments on here make plentifully clear, I have ambiguous feelings and views about the organization. I appreciate this forum because I can express those views sometimes.

I know many of the people involved personally, on both sides of the argument, and I see them all as human beings, some misled into doing wrong, others with a clearer view. I don't subscribe to the 'myth of evil', although many people who are either for or against the School do. I think you see it as an evil force in the world, and because of that belief you think you're some kind of crusader for good. In that sense (though not in others, obviously) you mirror the School loyalists, who see people on this forum as wicked.

The reality is unfortunately, as always with human beings, much more complex.

I don't subscribe to JAMR's view, which seems to be that cult and culture have some kind of moral equivalence. Unlike him, I do believe that the School has a moral duty to address its issues rationally and admit its failings, and to make amends. It has power over people, and it therefore has moral obligations. I don't think it has faced up to those obligations yet.

I don't really know what you're saying about Hounam. As I recall I made some ill-judged comments and immediately apologised, which he appreciated. I liked his book when I read it, and although it related to a time before I joined, I'm sure it was largely accurate and much-needed (as Shantananda remarked, it was "a shot across the bows" - ie the School couldn't just dismiss it). Nobody would publish a book like that now, though, maybe because however grudgingly, the SES did recognise the truth. Things have changed immensely, although because of the sentimentality of the School's devotion to MacLaren, clearly not enough. The old stuff still hangs about, like a room that hasn't been cleaned for years (ironic huh?)

I think you're trying to imply that maybe I'm one of "THEM". The reality is that I will support you if you say something true and well-informed, and I will disagree with you if you say something that I think is false. And I apply the same rule to people in the SES, where I called for reform for many years and set up two websites to promote debate within the organization. That approach did help a great deal, I believe.

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby woodgreen » Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:56 pm

chittani wrote:Woodgreen,

You're quite right that I don't campaign against the SES. Why should I do that? As my comments on here make plentifully clear, I have ambiguous feelings and views about the organization. I appreciate this forum because I can express those views sometimes.

I know many of the people involved personally, on both sides of the argument, and I see them all as human beings, some misled into doing wrong, others with a clearer view. I don't subscribe to the 'myth of evil', although many people who are either for or against the School do. I think you see it as an evil force in the world, and because of that belief you think you're some kind of crusader for good. In that sense (though not in others, obviously) you mirror the School loyalists, who see people on this forum as wicked.

The reality is unfortunately, as always with human beings, much more complex.

I don't subscribe to JAMR's view, which seems to be that cult and culture have some kind of moral equivalence. Unlike him, I do believe that the School has a moral duty to address its issues rationally and admit its failings, and to make amends. It has power over people, and it therefore has moral obligations. I don't think it has faced up to those obligations yet.

I don't really know what you're saying about Hounam. As I recall I made some ill-judged comments and immediately apologised, which he appreciated. I liked his book when I read it, and although it related to a time before I joined, I'm sure it was largely accurate and much-needed (as Shantananda remarked, it was "a shot across the bows" - ie the School couldn't just dismiss it). Nobody would publish a book like that now, though, maybe because however grudgingly, the SES did recognise the truth. Things have changed immensely, although because of the sentimentality of the School's devotion to MacLaren, clearly not enough. The old stuff still hangs about, like a room that hasn't been cleaned for years (ironic huh?)

I think you're trying to imply that maybe I'm one of "THEM". The reality is that I will support you if you say something true and well-informed, and I will disagree with you if you say something that I think is false. And I apply the same rule to people in the SES, where I called for reform for many years and set up two websites to promote debate within the organization. That approach did help a great deal, I believe.
Hello Chittanni, looks like you failed, and still do the SES failure i.e. picking on people on the Forum. If you wish to speak to me properly then do not use the SES to do so, especially as you failed to take them on. Looks like you are false and are one of them. ( Without Caps.). Take care and catch up. woodgreen.
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

chittani
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby chittani » Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:16 am

Woodgreen,

Calling me 'false', 'one of them' etc. is a personal attack. I questioned some of the things you said because I thought they were unjust (like tarring David Boddy with the Andy Coulson brush), but I didn't attack you.

If you can't bear anything you say to be questioned, don't publish it.

ConcernedMum
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:58 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby ConcernedMum » Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:19 am

HI Woodgreen

Sorry to butt in, but in this case, have to say that I think Chittani has a point. There are plenty of really valid complaints and points to be made about the SES and those involved, so it's important to stick to (as much as possible, we're all human) the facts. It undermines the valid points to bring in too much supposition as then someone arguing against the points (out loud, here or in their heads) can say, "well, that bit is a bit of a trip into random supposition, so maybe the rest of it is too" when the 'rest of it' is true. There is a moral argument against supposing bad things about people, but there's also a strategic one. People are more likely to believe what you have to say the more what you say is firmly based rather than supposed. I hope it's ok to say that. I'm sure I don't always follow my own advice but it is something I have learnt from all this (which is why I still engage as I find this fascinating).

I may believe (as may you) that lobbying for a company selling arms (as D. Boddy did for Lockheed in the 1980s) is always bad and intrinsically corrupt but it is perfectly legal activity. And it was a long time ago.

x
CM

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby woodgreen » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:11 am

Hi Concerned Mum, Chittani has no point so far as I am concerned -he/she seems to be in denial that the SES is a Cult and is dipping back into the Forum because he is maybe struggling coming fully out of the SES, some people have too do that, it is a tough call .I did too for a while. Not sure if Chittani has faced up to the fact that the SES is a cult and we are trying to do something about it. Chittani does not seem to have any answers to Bluemoon's problem about posting her paper .I have expressed my dissapointment about that issue. I have consulted my family and friends -we all agree. We go back a long way, unlike the SES in my life. xx woodgreen.
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby woodgreen » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:56 pm

chittani wrote:Woodgreen

You're missing the point which is that your recent posts refer to David Boddy and to Shantananda Sarasvati in ways that are defamatory - ie, you're slandering their good names without any evidence.

If you stuck to the facts I would have no problems - I would back up anyone who made true assertions about the SES or its members - but you're just dreaming these things up and saying the first thing that comes into your head - and forgetting that there are real people involved.

Classic internet abuse.

I missed this attack on me Chittani - to refer to David Boddy and Shantananda Saravati in the same sentence is classic SES . I do not dream anything and do not say the first thing that comes into my head. You are forgetting about real people - and I am one of them. Just like the SES likes to pretend we do not exist. If I have defamed them - by the way I think Shantanand is dead so no legal action there, then let Boddy take legal action against me instead of people like you interfering. Pity Boddy never posts his reconciliation on here - the reconciliation he promised to the pupils has never materialised, but hey he was ripping off Nelson Mandela et al who dealt with a real event in life. I will not bow my head to a Shantanand or anyone else in a cult, including David Boddy. If Boddy thinks I have defamed him then I'm sure he will let me know - and not through you Chittani. woodgreen.
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

chittani
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby chittani » Thu Jul 21, 2011 12:55 pm

woodgreen wrote: to refer to David Boddy and Shantananda Saravati in the same sentence is classic SES


Do tell, Woodgreen. Is it some kind of SES habit that you've noticed to include two different names in one sentence?

Oh look, I really don't want to get your goat. I've made my point, you don't agree. OK fine.

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby woodgreen » Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:37 pm

Given the history of the SES and the explanations of the people on the Forum, yes Chittani. Just our minds coming to terms with understanding what we have experienced, in different ways. Which is why we may have to agree to disagree about the School. Although some threads clearly agree - whatever our upbringings and backgrounds. Essentially we are all saying " something not right about this organisation". Whether we accept their good points and good people or not. At their high level they do not care, they use their influence, power, money etc. but leave many people struggling in coming to terms with their association with them. And they never apologise directly to the people they have affected. Why would they, until they are caught, like the Murdoch's in the spotlight? Still in denial it seems. That is all I still question. And yes JAMR, I too am very cynical about some aspects of life - and in my case the SES - because until I joined, and 3 years after, I exited, I was dealing with life's up's and downs. But afterwards, I took awhile to realise they had taken me for a mug, not financially thankfully, but in other ways. They love us all falling out on the Forum, by the way, because it was part of their divide and rule philosophy, one that somehow ( not Jung?!) permeates their thinking. woodgreen

PS I decided not to post tonight as it is weekend and we all deserve a rest from this stuff, but such is the nature even of the Forum that sometimes we have to. All I can say Chittani and JAMR is I think you are onside, but we all may have picked up some bad habits from the SES to greater or lesser degrees. Will we meet again in another life? Oh God forbid! Where would we start? Think I'll pass on that option! My Mother, God rest, when she was picking up some stuff from the cult ( she was worried about me, having never been near the SES in her life - but was a traditional Catholic) and knew something was going on, once said " Well if there is reincarnation I might as well come back as someone rich." Hope she has, but we have not reconnected yet Mum.!!" " You've not been dead for 100 years which was a Socratic thinking in the SES". And the Greeks are a bit bankrupt at the moment! Asleep in Christ/God was the message I got from her beliefs, i.e. not to be dabbling with the dead and " spiritualism" as some do in cults. Have to apologise once again to the genuine believers in reincarnation etc. But,cannot apologise if my Mum, as an ordinary Catholic, is somehow being disregarded in my ability to stand up for myself, whether against a wealthy cult, or any other people/organisations. Pretty strong woman my Mum - a female thing - if she was still alive she would just have learned that she might be about to be a great grandma -we hope so, but will wait and see. And would give the Cult a swipe! regards all. Can I have a rest now?
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby JAMR » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:28 am

Woodgreen, you said,

And yes JAMR, I too am very cynical about some aspects of life - and in my case the SES - because until I joined, and 3 years after, I exited, I was dealing with life's up's and downs.


I am sorry to hear that your life has had hardships, however as you say life does have its ups and downs and aside from dealing with pathological organisms breaching our immune system, and being under threat of physical injury or worse when we drive cars, play sport, mostly people are the cause of our issues. The SES does have attraction to the idea of knowing truth etc, and once hooked, its difficult to exit without feeling cheated and threatened. I certainly benefitted from the meditation and studies but was not prepared to be drawn in deeper. It might not be easy to find something to rely upon, and if there is no family or friends, or good health to lean on, you need to find resources within to do. It helps me to know that SES is just another social club of sorts, along with religious groups, business etc that all need to feed off of individuals and their contribution. Often they consume individuals, just as countries do this to their soldiers in wartime. The issues that wartime soldiers face when they return to civilian life make the SES problems very pale by comparison.

But afterwards, I took awhile to realise they had taken me for a mug, not financially thankfully, but in other ways. They love us all falling out on the Forum, by the way, because it was part of their divide and rule philosophy, one that somehow ( not Jung?!) permeates their thinking.


I see their process as classic social human nature in operation, neither its best nor its worst. In many ways I do not regret my time at the SES. I had no issue with much of the teaching or the people. The meditation is something I will retain for life (despite not practicing it currently) and I will find a less invasive way to do this than the SES. The exposure to Hindu religions and various philosophies was also good. Their reaction to our behaviour on the forum would just be a curiosity to me, I have no idea if we are under scrutiny as we post. Anything that goes against your thinking and culture is a threat, however I doubt that they are disturbed by what might be cooking up on this forum. Their concern is having negative publicity on a large scale, and there does not seem to be many people using this board, hardly enough to be a threat. If you and bluemoon do take up a legal attack, this might concern them.

My earlier advice to both you and bluemoon to move on from life at SES was well meant. Much as I enjoy debates about human social issues, SES is just a memory for me. My life has (and had when I was a member) many non SES aspects, meditation is probably the only material thing that I will actively seek to keep alive. If you feel the need to try and reform the SES, this is your choice, I just think you could use your time on earth in better ways.

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby JAMR » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:34 am

Chittani, you said,

I don't subscribe to JAMR's view, which seems to be that cult and culture have some kind of moral equivalence.


This is not my view. I hold the view that morals are relative and subjective and are neither imposed by a higher being nor arise in some in way independent of humanity such that it becomes absolute and objective.

My point about cults and culture is that humans form power based organisations and individuals are seeking to get advantages through membership of groups. This drive to get ahead is in competition with other members in the same group and in other groups. Groups do vary in how far they push relative morals. This means that we are able to judge that Nazi war crimes are morally unacceptable and worse than the Allied armies at the time although both were means by which their own members could be and were killed and the enemy killed injured and abused to some degree.

However organisations just reflect their members and people of different types do form organisations with vastly different morals. This means people who join and stay with the SES do share some common traits and will conform to certain behaviours, but many of the traits are reflected in all human institutions. The political infighting that happens in the SES, their imposed values and ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude, I see everyday in business, in sports clubs, in politics, in school.

Unlike him, I do believe that the School has a moral duty to address its issues rationally and admit its failings, and to make amends.


You are incorrectly attributing this to me. I would like the SES to change the way it works, just as I would like all human organisations to drop political power play between individuals and concentrate on the bigger issues that we face. Like, how the earth will sustain and support its inhabitants for my children and their children, if we are not able to set aside our selfish desire we will struggle to do this. We certainly face an asteroid impact as well an ice ages and global warming at some time in the future. If we spend our time playing power games at the level we do, any of these will destroy mankind totally. There is plenty we can do to address these, but it will happen slowly and haphazardly unless we set aside our inherently selfish natures.

All this is wishful thinking and is just my prejudiced view of the world and I do not offer it as morally right because its just my subjective view. Having said that I still play power politics as I strive to do the best for myself and my family. So much of any change would have to come from within, and frankly I dont think I am capable of being a better social citizen than I am, nor do I see why I should.

It has power over people, and it therefore has moral obligations. I don't think it has faced up to those obligations yet.


Its not part of human nature to accept responsibility because it does not make evolutionary sense. Any group or person will try and avoid responsibility and use power to get the best for themselves. Who has taken responsibility for the wars of the past millennia, the damage caused by invasions of native lands and their indigenous populations like Australia, Africa, the Americas, Taiwan, Japan, the Philipines? The invasions of alien plants and animals that upset the balance of nature in many countries. The overuse of antibiotics, pollution, misuse of pesticides and fertilisers. All these things stand out that no one really owns responsibility for this, although some groups work hard to address these and other issues, often they are not those responsible. Given the above what makes you think that the SES will ever take responsibility for its actions, when human beings almost never do, just as animals do not.

chittani
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:03 pm

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby chittani » Sun Jul 24, 2011 9:57 am

JAMR wrote:Its not part of human nature to accept responsibility because it does not make evolutionary sense. Any group or person will try and avoid responsibility and use power to get the best for themselves. Who has taken responsibility for the wars of the past millennia, the damage caused by invasions of native lands and their indigenous populations like Australia, Africa, the Americas, Taiwan, Japan, the Philipines? The invasions of alien plants and animals that upset the balance of nature in many countries. The overuse of antibiotics, pollution, misuse of pesticides and fertilisers. All these things stand out that no one really owns responsibility for this, although some groups work hard to address these and other issues, often they are not those responsible. Given the above what makes you think that the SES will ever take responsibility for its actions, when human beings almost never do, just as animals do not.


I don't expect the SES to do so, as such. All I was saying was that I think it ought to.

The idea that

Any group or person will try and avoid responsibility and use power to get the best for themselves.


is based on a very hard-line view of what evolution dictates. Human beings are the most successful animals not because we are the toughest, meanest and most selfish predators (we're not), but because we communicate and co-operate with others. We are the social animal par excellence. This means there is hope for us to learn and improve things, because it makes sense to do so. It's true that genocide is a product of human nature and will continue to happen for a long time to come, but it's also true that it has declined. Any human being is on average less likely to die a violent death than at any time in the past and, by the way, the world is slowly but inexorably moving from poverty and illness towards wealth and health, as the wonderful Hans Rosling demonstrates:

http://youtu.be/jbkSRLYSojo

My reason for thinking the SES ought to accept responsibility is that it's only by recognising the failures of the past (either personally or organizationally) that we can learn and grow. The people and organizations that cling on to the past and claim it's all perfect are those that age and die most quickly.

I accept your point that it's unlikely. What I see is an ageing and dying organization, too tired to learn anything new. And I have felt much better since I accepted that. But, you know, the SES didn't have to give up the fight in that fashion. You seem to suggest it's just the way things are, always and everywhere. I disagree. It could have renewed itself, as some other organizations have done in the past.

In recent years I've changed my view of spirituality: it's not about turning to the light and ignoring the dark (which is what the phrase 'good company' has been misunderstood to mean in the School). It's about accepting the dark as well as the light and resolving those contradictions within oneself.

This forum has been an opportunity for me to do that.

What does it do for you?

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: The SES and Regional Schools in England

Postby JAMR » Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:06 pm

Chittani, you said,
The idea that
Any group or person will try and avoid responsibility and use power to get the best for themselves.


is based on a very hard-line view of what evolution dictates. Human beings are the most successful animals not because we are the toughest, meanest and most selfish predators (we're not), but because we communicate and co-operate with others.


That depends upon how we define mean and selfish. From the perspective of most other advanced life on the planet we have created the most issues of any other predator and have most certainly made more life extinct than any other species. Being able to communicate and co-operate does not mean niceness, consider how well ant colonies do this and in their world they are arguably to nastiest predator around. Our communication and cooperation is suprisingly poor considering our mental capacity. Look at every topic on any forum thread and see how poor our communication is and how much conflict exists around trivia as well as important issues.

We are the social animal par excellence. This means there is hope for us to learn and improve things, because it makes sense to do so.


What does it mean to be social? The ability to live in 10 million inhabitants plus mega cities without totally destroying the integrity of the group? You say that this ability allows us to learn and improve things, however just what is our capacity learn? Does it mean we are capable of looking at things in a new perspective despite what others might think, or does it mean to look at things in a way that suits the group we belong to? Galileo offered a simple concept that of a helio-centric solar system, had the evidence to prove it, yet he did not get many takers, in fact he was vilified as a result. Protecting deeply held beliefs is what binds a community together, and despite evidence, they will defend it to the end. This is the crux of what it means to be social for humans. Have a look at this research to show just how well humans conform in the face of the learning that chimps are capable of doing. It illustrates that chimps make more independent thinkers than children and possibly explains why they are unable to live in large groups.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIAoJsS9Ix8

It's true that genocide is a product of human nature and will continue to happen for a long time to come, but it's also true that it has declined. Any human being is on average less likely to die a violent death than at any time in the past and, by the way, the world is slowly but inexorably moving from poverty and illness towards wealth and health, as the wonderful Hans Rosling demonstrates:


I agree with the outcomes, but I think that it is happening due to our ability to suspend our individuality in ways that allow groups to expand. Our actual output and productivity is far lower than the combined potential of our brains, partly because of the wastage in competition for selfish motives and the inability to think for ourselves. The lowering of aggression is not the same as co-operation. Any group, from family to club, company, nation uses lots of energy in counter productive behaviour due to deceit, greed, etc, overt violence is becoming less of an option, while lip service to co-operation along with deceitful behaviour is better rewarded. This does not mean there is no violence and no co-operation and communication, just that it is far more limited than one would expect from a species with our mental capacity. There is increasing weight for the argument that our large brains are needed due to the high levels of deceit we practice on others and the need to follow without question.

The youtube from Hans was really impressive, thanks for posting it.

My reason for thinking the SES ought to accept responsibility is that it's only by recognising the failures of the past (either personally or organizationally) that we can learn and grow. The people and organizations that cling on to the past and claim it's all perfect are those that age and die most quickly.


And some do, and some do not. I am not a great advocate for what others ought to do, except to see things as they are. I do this because the way things are is objective, they way they ought to be is subjective. I have plenty of opinions about the SES and other organisations that reflect what I want them to do, but I cannot see the value in expressing these unless I can back them up with something that is more than just my personal prejudice.

I accept your point that it's unlikely. What I see is an ageing and dying organization, too tired to learn anything new. And I have felt much better since I accepted that. But, you know, the SES didn't have to give up the fight in that fashion. You seem to suggest it's just the way things are, always and everywhere. I disagree. It could have renewed itself, as some other organizations have done in the past.


I am suggesting that the way the SES is, is the way it is. I am not trying to reform them, I have no intention of giving them any more of my energy and time than I already have. I work to reform other groups and make sure that I and my family benefit without being sucked dry by the group, always a challenging task. I think the SES will remain a niche group, it will attract a smallish group of like mined people, but will never get the same following as accorded to a larger religion like Christianity (not even in 1000 years). I also do not think it will disappear entirely. It will change and adjust, and it already has, and so have all the religions, as they get bent by the current cultural norms.

In recent years I've changed my view of spirituality: it's not about turning to the light and ignoring the dark (which is what the phrase 'good company' has been misunderstood to mean in the School). It's about accepting the dark as well as the light and resolving those contradictions within oneself.


I understand your point and react in a similar way, however I do not consider it to be something spiritual (if by this you mean metaphysical), I see most of this as socially mediated. Much of who we are is a reflection of our culture, and our guilt and fears and worries are caused by the contradictions of being social and individual at once. Too much selfishness and we get social pressure, too much social altruism and obedience and we lose our individuality. I do not think we need look outside ourselves or society to see how most issues like this come about. We still have to deal with existential anxiety, though society does it best to mask this as well from members.

This forum has been an opportunity for me to do that.
What does it do for you?


I find any debate on things, especially when I disagree with them, allows me to better understand the subject. When I agree with something, its not stimulating and I see no reason to spend time with things I agree with. If their are ideas I do not understand or disagree with, then I want to understand them. In many posts (on this and in other forums) I ask a lot of questions when I am not clear what is being said.


Return to “General discussion of SES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest