Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00093)

----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerald Schueler <gschueler@iximd.com>
> Date: Wednesday, November 10, 1999 2:08 PM
> Subject: Evolution

> "Evolution" by its very definition implies
> progress=change over time.

Is it not usually used to describe change *for the better* over time?  I
fear I see no evidence for evolution that fits this ideal.  Even the
Darwinian "survival of the fittest" idea should allow for the
possibility that "fittest" is not necessarily "best."  I agree with the
I Ching that there IS change, and observe that there is a process of
*development* constaqntly taking place which does produce change over
time.  Whether this is "progress" depends on how we choose to define
"progress."

> Depending on how we want to
> define "spiritual" we could, in fact, say that anything spiritual
> is perfect and therefore in no need of any "progress."  This
> idea of a spiritual evolution is, IMHO, plain crazy, unless we
> define "spiritual" as something below "perfection."  Some
> would separate spiritual from divine and have the divine as
> perfect and the spiritual as still evolving. If this is how you
> see it, then you are at least consistant. But the offhand use
> of the term "spiritual evolution," as if we know what it means,
> throws off a lot of people and some outsiders read this and
> conclude that Theosophy is full of fruitcakes.

I conclude that Theosophy is full of fruitcakes, whatever Theosophy may
be.

Alan

http://www.soft.net.uk/ambain/