Henry said:
However, your message is quite vague. Can you give some examples of what you mean? What types of communication do you see as possible or necessary?
I have to agree with Henry - I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, Barbara, nor why you seem to be getting a bit frustrated with the input you've received so far.
Barbara said:
Well, the impression I got from your earlier post is that you were looking for something in the ideas expressed by Gurdjieff to have meaningful communications to those who are "hostile" to these ideas. At the same time you said that in the information you found on Gurdjieff there was much of it that was “ not very useful”. Kenlee 12-3-2007
The information is not very useful to me. Either it is a quote from Gurdjieff or one of the other 4th Way teachers is presented, often out of context, but with no elaboration by the one who is quoting.
An elaboration is really not necessary if one is familiar with the material. In order to become familiar with the material, one must invest a lot of time and effort - it is simply not something that lends itself to a quick understanding or casual discussion. No offense intended at all, it just seems that you're looking for a 'Cliff's Notes' version and that's not really possible.
Barbara said:
It is more useful for me just to go back to the original writings themselves and forget about discussion.
This might be a good idea, since at this point it is still rather unclear exactly what you'd like to discuss - again - no offense intended at all, but there seems to be a general lack of clarity in the purpose of the discussion at this point.
B said:
For the discussion to be useful, I would like to see an active exploration of the ideas, what they might mean when applied to particular, present day experience. I would like to see people with different interpretations of an idea carefully explore how the difference arises and what it might mean rather than try to prove use it as a platform for intellectual one upmanship.
Ok, this is what would make the discussion useful for you - yet you still give no concrete question or example while simultaneously demanding that the 'discussion' go a certain way. It's really rather a confusing way to go about things. Also, the fact that you allude to 'intellectual one upmanship' indicates that you might be missing a base of knowledge from which to work. If one doesn't understand the material, then one might feel that quoting the material is 'intellectual one upmanship' when, really, it is merely providing data to apply to the discussion at hand.
B said:
When I have read people who were hostile to Gurdjieff’s ideas, it was generally in the form of showing that his ideas were in conflict with some other dogma. I think that such people should stay with the dogma they find comfortable. Anyone who could legitimately criticize 4th Way ideas would have to understand them first, and I haven’t read anyone who came from this perspective.
So, you are saying that you are looking for someone to criticize 4th Way ideas who really understands 4th Way ideas? Again, I get the sense that you are putting the cart before the horse here, and that time spent truly studying the material might be more beneficial to you.
B said:
“Sure, try researching the concepts of "Service To Self" and Service To Others" in the Wave material and on this forum. Here's a good link to The Wave that explains the distinction. External Consideration always takes into account the free will of others. This opens up possibilities and does not close them, opening up new possibilities to think in new ways” Kenlee 12-3-2007
I tried reading this. I think that your explanation is clear. I agree with you. (If you want to discuss it, though, the distinctions of Service toward Others and Service toward Self make little sense to me when the only and highest value seems to be avoiding dominance. Perhaps it is only because I am reading a short piece in a longer discussion. I tried to understand the rest of the article but I don’t and it will take more time than I want to give to it right now.)
Unfortunately, to really understand the material, you are going to have to invest more time than you seem willing to invest right now. There is simply no other way to really grasp it to the point of being able to discuss it in depth the way you seem to want to do it. I get the sense that you're looking for a short cut and this material simply does not lend itself to such things.
B said:
I have seen people who seemed to be understanding each other in normal context. Even at my job, which, believe me, is not an example of an exoteric circle, we can focus in on a subject if it very specific. When a problem is idealized like this, it seems to implicitly say that it would take a miracle, or something completely outside any single person’s control to make any improvements. Maybe it would be possible to look for practical way to make small improvements in short periods of time.
You are missing the point, as Gurdjieff said, it is possible for understanding of one another to happen in the exoteric circle, but only in matters of no importance (to paraphrase).
B said:
Are there unconscious social norms at place that make real questioning of these ideas unacceptable?
Not to my knowledge, because 'unconscious social norms' would be purely mechanical and antithetical to 4th Way work. However, in order to question an understanding, one must have a grasp of what it is really about - so without a thorough knowledge, such a questioning would be rather meaningless since one wouldn't really even have the concepts or vocabulary to question effectively - and - this material simply does not lend itself to a quick or 'easy' interpretation that can then be discussed at the water cooler at work. In fact, it is not meant to be discussed at the water cooler at work since the vast majority of people have no interest in it nor use for it and that is certainly their choice to make.
Well, it seems I might be going in circles here, so, again, it might be best to start at the beginning with Henry's question if you'd like to move forward with this:
Henry said:
However, your message is quite vague. Can you give some examples of what you mean? What types of communication do you see as possible or necessary?