Re: Theos-World Re: On Criticism
Mar 07, 2007 05:14 PM
by Cass Silva
Me too Perry, my cult was catholicism. Also came to the conclusion yesterday evening that one cannot be insulted or effected by criticism if one knows their own worth.
plcoles1 <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I agree historical context helps give perspective.
In my case my history,as I have mentioned here before, was being
raised in the Jehovah's Witnesses which I left when I was 23.
The meme that is constantly reinforced in that cult is `beware of
critical thinking' this I now know is classic cult thinking and
So when I discovered the aversion to critical thinking in the TS a
red flag instantly went up.
This would be the same reaction from anyone who has escaped a cult.
Criticizing someone for the sake of meanness or personal gain is of
course outrageous behavior, this is quite a different thing from
asking valid questions in order to access the veracity of
information, very different.
PS you may be interested in this article :
--- In email@example.com, "Anton Rozman" <anton_rozman@...>
> Hi Perry,
> I am aware that putting the message in historical context you
> it can mean: Let's not talk about the problems, let's sweep them
> under the carpet. But nevertheless there are in my opinion some
> points in it, especially those two enumerated.
> So, in my view the question is, how to use the positive charge of
> critical perspective for the betterment of work.
> Best regards,
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "plcoles1" <plcoles1@> wrote:
> > Hello Anton,
> > This is interesting especially when taken in context of the time
> > (1933) which was not long after the disbanding of the Order of
> > Star.
> > Cheers
> > Perry
> > --- In email@example.com, "Anton Rozman" <anton_rozman@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Criticism
> > >
> > > I can recall no criticism of myself which, even though
> > substantially
> > > true, took into account those extenuating circumstances ever
> > > following in the wake of all mistakes, those saving graces
> > > witness to the sunshine however thickly enveloped by the
> > of
> > > intervening clouds. I can recall no criticism of myself which,
> > > though in a measure erring on the side of leniency, envisaged
> > > whole of the cause as it sought to demonstrate the effect. I
> > > recall no criticism of myself, in other words, which was not
> > partial.
> > > I am no less sure that any criticism I may make of others must
> > > equally be no less partial, no less oblivious of extenuating
> > > circumstances. No less unmindful of the sunshine while intent
> > > the clouds. I am not saying that criticism is never expedient,
> > never
> > > justifiable. I do not say that criticism may not be on occasion
> > > matter of duty. But I do say that criticism is a dangerous
> > > occupation, for almost without exception it is composed of
> > as
> > > well as of truth. I also say that ninety-nine criticisms out of
> > > hundred are both unnecessary and inexpedient, and that in the
> > > majority of the ninety-nine there is more of untruth than of
> > >
> > > I therefore say that we should all be infinitely chary of
> > criticism,
> > > infinitely chary, holding ourselves back from criticism at all
> > times,
> > > save most emergently, and then observing two rules of
> > (1)
> > > making the criticism to the individual who is the subject of
> > > criticism, (2) making the criticism to the individual whose
> > > conceive it to be to know it for the sake of the work.
> > >
> > > Casual criticism is intolerable. Criticism which is not certain
> > > reach the individual criticized is intolerable. Complaint
> > an
> > > individual which we have no intention of making to his face is
> > > intolerable.
> > >
> > > Can we not minimize criticism (1) by indulging in it most
> > > ourselves, and not communicating it to a third party save as we
> > also
> > > communicate it to the party himself, (2) by refusing to listen
> > it
> > > from others, save as a matter of urgent duty? And in all cases
> > might
> > > we not, as a matter of noblesse oblige, always declare with our
> > > criticism that we are well aware, and would wish taken into
> > > consideration, that our criticism must at the most be partial
> > > neglectful of circumstances which may go far to justify the
> > of
> > > the criticism, or at least to make it intelligible and not
> > unnatural?
> > > We know this is true in our own case. We know we are so often
> > > subject of misunderstanding. Let us have the grace to recognize
> > that
> > > in our own criticisms of others this ingredient of
> > > is likely to be present to no small degree.
> > > All this means a minimum of criticism, practically none at all;
> > > maximum of understanding and appreciation; understanding in
> > of
> > > misunderstanding. It also means that most criticism is
> > > misunderstanding in greater or in smaller measure; that when on
> > > verge of criticism we stop, we look, we listen, and then
> > > Who is there strong enough to remember to stop when on the
> > > when on the edge, or the precipice of criticism? The tongue is
> > > rebellious member of the body, and so often runs away with all
> > other
> > > members. Who will keep a rein on the tongue at all times,
> > it
> > > in servitude and restrain it from its habitual tyranny? Who
> > call
> > > attention to the sunshine instead of to the clouds? Who will
> > restrain
> > > the ear, another unruly member of the body, from hearing that
> > > it is hurtful to others to utter? Who has the courage and the
> > > brotherhood for this?
> > >
> > > G. S. Arundale
> > > Condensed from The Theosophist, April 1933.
> > >
> > > I will not judge my brother until I have walked two weeks in
> > > moccasins.
> > > Sioux Indian Saying
> > >
> > > Scanned from the Theosophical Digest, 1st Quarter, 1992.
> > >
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application