Theos-Talk Archives (April 1995 Message tl00174)

I have been following the "core concept" thread with interest.  I
once did a study on Freud and come to some tentative conclusions
that the current sciencific paradigm seems vitatlly connected to
the way we describe psycho-spirituality.  When I read core
concept I have the impression that this image is about the
hardness of reality - it definitely implies a pre-quantum view of
things.  Looking for a core is to look for a solid core.  This
"solid core" idea, especially in the realm of spirit, is
anachronist and has strictly monotheist implications.

What Astrea said about a constellation of ideas that are adhered
to seems much more healthy and in tune with our current soon to
be replaced paradigm.  I don't think it helpful for any group to
be without a currrent statement of living metaphors - archetypes
that are alive active and relevant but to concretize them is to
dogmatize and that will not serve the cause in the long run.  We
will be unconsciously uttering things that have absolutely no
experiencial root if we focus on "core concepts" too much.  When
I was more orthodox I tried that idea of getting the story
straight , returning to the fundaments and I feel it failed me
dismally.

In the past two weeks I have been writing a spiritual update for
a group of us that have clustered around an image called the
Watershed.  In the paper I tried to walk the line between core
concepts and nebulous metaphor.  Since the paper is spiritually
oriented, but not specifically Theosophical, I am a bit hesitant
to post it here.  Whatever it is it is not dogmatic so I can't
imagine it being flame bait.  Any feedback? What it would be
offered for in this group is a beginning model of for trying to
say what is moving spiritually without hammering it down.  I am
proof reading it so it might be a few days if the group discerns
that it might be helpful.  Any thoughts on this exercise?

Art