Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00488)

Open-mindedness and non-dogmatism can only be taken so far.  

In order to make any comparison between ideas, some dogmatism and arrogance
is necessary.  If one's own ideas are not considered to be better than
everyone else's, then whoever else's ideas are considered to be superior
would automatically be adopted as one's own.  The one who says that "there
is no religion higher than truth" implies that he or she believes that
there is objective truth to be sought, and that the value of all ideas is
dependent on how they conform to this truth.  If there is no objective
truth, education and truth-seeking have no meaning.

In all areas of life, extremes are what should be avoided.  One extreme is
to be completely dogmatic, closed-minded, and arrogant, automatically
assuming that one has nothing to learn from others and that all those who
disagree must be mistaken.  The other extreme is to be completely
open-minded, regarding all ideas as of equal value, never discriminating
between any of them, having no confidence in one's ideas, and believing
that one has nothing to teach others.  The optimal balance is somewhere in
between the two, being willing to both teach and learn from others.  The
ideal is both to admit the impossibility of not regarding one's own ideas
as superior and to admit the possibility of their being wrong.

A society devoted to spiritual growth should neither be a cult nor equally
open to all ideas.  Some authority is necessary, and there is a difference
in principle between defining a cult as a society which has a leader with
some authority and as one which has too much authority.  HPB was
emphatically opposed to dogmatism, and yet she wrote many dogmatic
statements.  There would be no purpose to having a society if no one is to
teach anyone else.  It is impossible to listen to anyone else without
intending to have faith, to some extent, in what they say, regarding them,
to some extent, as an authority.