1st degree morality conundrum.

Ideas, Information and debate

Moderators: Peter Dowling, Peter Moir, MrBenn, Peter Taylor, JulesTheBit, middlepillar

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:50 pm

russellholland wrote:>Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive

Such is the reason for veiling Masonic "morality".


Well, quite. IMO most of time mystique is there to conceal the fact that there is nothing to conceal. I don't think freemasonry conceals anything of any value these days, and nor should it.

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:58 pm

> I don't think freemasonry conceals anything of any value these days

The various knocks have their origin in magical ritual.
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:20 am

russellholland wrote:> I don't think freemasonry conceals anything of any value these days

The various knocks have their origin in magical ritual.


I think anyone who wants to find out things about magical ritual will have other ways of doing so. I'm not actually sure that the knocks are concealed anyway, as anyone sitting in the room next door can hear them.

But anyway, generally speaking, by "of value" I mean of value to anyone outside of freemasonry. I think it would be a very bad idea for freemasonry to withhold or keep secret anything which is seen as valuable by people outside of it.

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Trouillogan » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:53 am

Richard Develyn wrote:
russellholland wrote:>Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive

Such is the reason for veiling Masonic "morality".


Well, quite. IMO most of time mystique is there to conceal the fact that there is nothing to conceal. I don't think freemasonry conceals anything of any value these days, and nor should it.

Richard

May I respectfully suggest you re-read your quote from russellholland.
User avatar
Trouillogan
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:15 am

Trouillogan wrote:
Richard Develyn wrote:
russellholland wrote:>Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive

Such is the reason for veiling Masonic "morality".


Well, quite. IMO most of time mystique is there to conceal the fact that there is nothing to conceal. I don't think freemasonry conceals anything of any value these days, and nor should it.

Richard

May I respectfully suggest you re-read your quote from russellholland.


"respectfully suggest"! That's always a bit ominous :-)

I'll just make two points here in case I'm misunderstanding anyone. I think it would be a very bad idea for any organisation to state or imply:

a) that it has secrets, and if you don't get it then you're clearly deficient in some fashion (i.e. the emperor's new clothes argument)
b) that it has secrets which are of value to everyone, but you don't get to hear about them because you're not "in"

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:27 am

>secrets which are of value to everyone, but you don't get to hear about them because you're not "in"

Several assumptions there that the genuine secrets:

- can be understood without preconditions such as particular experiences, skills or acceptances
- are of value to everyone - the candidate for the 30th is repeatedly told that he will be subject to dangers that he cannot know
- are available within particular groups that exist within Freemasonry - in 35 years I have never found such a group.
- need to be communicated as compared to emerging within the worthy - and manifested by the assistance of others.

The first group of preconditions is reflected in the work of the EA.

The second group of preconditions is reflected in the work of the FC. Who even attempts that work?

The third group of preconditions is reflected in the work of the MM but the ritual does not tell us much about that. The context of the MM work is implicit in the EA ritual and charges but rarely recognized.
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:43 pm

If we're simply talking about knowledge here, then I have no problem with what you're saying.

It's like doing a university degree in physics. You're not going to understand Quantum Theory, say, until you understand the more basic stuff, and you may not be able to understand it at all.

And - you have to join a university to study physics.

But there's nothing *secret* about Quantum Theory.

Corporations, of course, do have "secret" science, as have institutions such as Scientology, and that generates an awful lot of bad feeling.

I believe freemasonry should be like a university. No secrets, just a learning curve. Furthermore, given that the course is called The Betterment of Man, you'd best spread your wisdom across all men rather than just masons unless you want to go and live on an island with only masons on it :-)

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:41 pm

>Corporations, of course, do have "secret" science

Secret science has always been with us. Some of the more interesting applications can be found in Feng Shui, the Kabbalah and alchemy. Remote manipulation of energy (and thought) has been practiced since the 1960s.

Fortunately Freemasonry has lost its secret science although traces can be found by those with eyes to see.

>If we're simply talking about knowledge

Is it worth pointing out that "knowledge" is a reification?
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:17 am

russellholland wrote:>Corporations, of course, do have "secret" science

Secret science has always been with us. Some of the more interesting applications can be found in Feng Shui, the Kabbalah and alchemy. Remote manipulation of energy (and thought) has been practiced since the 1960s.

Fortunately Freemasonry has lost its secret science although traces can be found by those with eyes to see.


Again, I would say these things are more hidden than secret. A secret is something deliberately withheld (by my definition anyway :-))

russellholland wrote:>>If we're simply talking about knowledge

Is it worth pointing out that "knowledge" is a reification?


I'm not sure. The point I'm trying to make is that when knowledge has value it shouldn't be withheld. I don't think it matters whether you consider knowledge to material or not as long as we agree that it is valuable.

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby admin » Fri Oct 06, 2017 2:31 pm

I see Russell is regurgitating that dictionary he swallowed some years back.

For those who like me do not know the word

Reification - is making something real, bringing something into being, or making something concrete. Reification may also refer to: Reification (Gestalt psychology), the perception of an object as having more spatial information than is present.
Bill McElligott [PPGASwdB - PPGASoj]
admin@lodgeroomstore.com - skype: lodgeroomint
The Masonic Brotherhood of The Blue Forget-Me-Not

http://lodgeroomstore.co.uk/sales/
http://masonicjewellerystore.com/sales/
http://masonicbookstore.co.uk/store/
http://sell-buy.net/info/
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6907
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: Essex, England

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:32 pm

>the perception of an object as having more spatial information than is present.

Thus the state of knowing is magically transformed into an object that can be captured and transferred: knowledge.

Since knowledge can be transferred there is no need for experience. Reading is sufficient.

Similarly the state of being true to some reference (e.g. a wall is true to a plumb line) magically becomes the abstract truth - valid in all contexts.
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:15 pm

russellholland wrote:>the perception of an object as having more spatial information than is present.

Thus the state of knowing is magically transformed into an object that can be captured and transferred: knowledge.

Since knowledge can be transferred there is no need for experience. Reading is sufficient.


Do you believe that, though?

(you're going to think I just like arguing with you :-))

I suppose some knowledge can be reified (if that's a word), like 1+1=2. Most knowledge is too subjective to exist as an independent thing, or perhaps the truth is that most of what we think of as knowledge is really just opinion.

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:28 am

>Most knowledge is too subjective to exist as an independent thing

Perhaps it is more correct to state that knowingness is necessarily embedded within an intelligence.

So what is the nature of morality? Surely it is the customs (mores) embedded within a community.

If we take our use of the term "morality" to be literal rather than allegorical, can we describe what is peculiar about the morality embedded within Masonry?

If however we take "morality" to be a veiled expression then we must look for answers to those brethren that have the necessary knowingness.
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:09 pm

russellholland wrote:>Most knowledge is too subjective to exist as an independent thing

Perhaps it is more correct to state that knowingness is necessarily embedded within an intelligence.


I would say it was the same thing, rather than more correct.

russellholland wrote:So what is the nature of morality? Surely it is the customs (mores) embedded within a community.


No, I disagree with you there. I think the relationship between morality and community is very tenuous.

russellholland wrote:If we take our use of the term "morality" to be literal rather than allegorical, can we describe what is peculiar about the morality embedded within Masonry?

If however we take "morality" to be a veiled expression then we must look for answers to those brethren that have the necessary knowingness.


Allegorical morality? Sorry, you've lost me there :-)

I'm interested in what is peculiar about morality in Masonry. I guess that's what I'm trying to find out.

As for morality as a veiled expression? Honestly, I don't believe in super-brethren, with eyes that can see better than the rest of us or extra special knowingness. I also think that you should be very careful about veiling morality. The whole point about morality is to communicate the thing so that other people are convinced by your argument / example and we make the world a better place. Veils which are there purely to encourage people to go to the effort of parting them so they appreciate the morality better is ok, but take it too far and you'll obscure what should be revealed.

I also think that morality is a really complicated thing and I do not believe that freemasonry or any other organisation / religion / philosophy has all the answers. In my opinion the ones most likely to converge on any sort of truth are the ones which are both open about their beliefs and ready / willing to change.

I think if freemasonry is going to survive in our modern and very diverse world, it needs to state what it believes nice and clearly, and be open to argument. No veils. No mystique. Just open-ness and clarity (imvho)

Richard
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby russellholland » Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:14 pm

You may recall Albert Mackey in his The Symbolism of Freemasonry, page 10:

"The definition of Freemasonry that it is "a science of morality, veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols", has so often been quoted, that, were not for its beauty, it would become wearisome."

Notice that he refers to "a science of morality" not a peculiar system. Of course a science is a system, and a science of morality is certainly peculiar - although not at all unique. I would consider the Kabbalah, Feng Shui and the Hawaiian spirituality all to be sciences - enabling observation, hypothesis, experiment and peer review. Some forms of martial arts are also spiritual sciences.

Science enables great results from small efforts. To be able to use such a science to manipulate the morality of others is a matter to be kept secret - if only for self-protection.

Such a science of course has much broader applications than management of morality - hence my proposition that "morality" is a veiling.
russellholland
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
LRUK Grand Supreme Master
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 3:14 am

Re: 1st degree morality conundrum.

Postby Richard Develyn » Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:48 am

russellholland wrote:To be able to use such a science to manipulate the morality of others is a matter to be kept secret - if only for self-protection.


Eeek!

No way. No way. No way. No way!

Richard

P.S. Have you seen or read The Watchmen, BTW? I'm with Rorschach on this :-)
User avatar
Richard Develyn
LRUK Newbie
LRUK  Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:17 pm

Previous

Return to General Interest and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests