Theos-Talk Archives (March 1997 Message tl00065)

Dear Bart and all,

This business of skeptics and their fundamentalism is of great
concern to me now as I write about Cayce.  I cannot find a
single example of a writer who has criticized/rejected Cayce's
clairvoyance who is not also obviously dismissive of *all*
clairvoyance a priori.  Thus their real, not very well
concealed position is "There is no such thing as clairvoyance,
therefore Cayce cannot possibly be an example of it."  On the
Caycean side of the argument is a lot of credulity with a few
writers making serious efforts to weigh all the evidence pro
and con.  If someone would argue that there is such a thing as
clairvoyance (GESP) and that Cayce does not appear to be a
genuine case of same, then I'd really be interested and would
have something to chew on.

With HPB the situation is similar but not so severe.  Until
recently the camps seemed to be a) there is no such thing as
ancient wisdom preserved in esoteric orders, and therefore
HPB cannot be a transmitter of it, and b) who are these mere
scientists to judge the unfathomable truths of The Secret
Doctrine?

Bart, I see a residue of true believerism in your attempt to
rescue SD anthropogenesis.  Intellectual honesty, IMO, requires
us to admit that it's just plain wrong from top to bottom.
That doesn't mean HPB didn't really get it from some esoteric
traditional source.  Nor that there might be tidbits of truth
in the scheme.  But as a picture of where humanity was in
evolutionary terms 10,000, 100,000, a million or 18 million
years ago, it's hopeless and unsalvageable.  Or, conversely,
contemporary science is hopelessly and unsalvageably astray.

Cheers,
Paul