This actually may not be so much about loyalties, per se, as much as it is about validity of my reasoning process in regards to individuals and the respect I give them.
First, I do not have to agree with any particular detail in order to appreciate the whole schema. I find myself in disagreement with many people of certain specifics while in total agreement of either their whole argument or in agreement with the principle that is being forwarded.
Example: Gerald and I have several very serious conflicts over certain specific issues. However, there is no conflict over the general direction that I believe we are both headed on a parallel, if not identical, paths. Because of this, I would support Gerald in many endeavors even if by some personal value I must note any disagreement over a specific detail.
Second, I base my opinions on experience and the general consistency of approach, including the consistency that is inherent in constantly testing one’s own opinions and thoughts and modifying them as the evidence demands. My intimate understanding and knowledge of one’s particular area of expertise is not required. I can appreciate one’s approach without having to be immersed in it.
Example: I have the greatest of respect for Leo Gillis’ particular approach to an English Qabalah. I’ve witnessed it utilized for nearly eight years now but I understand only enough to appreciate its complexity and its sublimity. It’s not my approach to qaballa, but that doesn’t make it improper, incorrect, or incompatible with my own thoughts. But more so, Leo is consistent in both his positions and his ability to continue to evolve and learn. I have the greatest respect for his work and his presentations (even if I do think his website could be a bit more aesthetically, uh, enhanced LOL).
Third, I am much more impressed by academics than mystics. While I appear to be a very emotional person to some — and I am in many respects — my particular framework in life is very intellectually based. I make no apologies for that. I prefer the theoretical and academic over the practical but only so long as it all leads to a practical application or foundation at some point in time. I would hope that it is obvious that in order to develop the theoretical or work out the academic there is an element of practical that must be inherent in the development. One cannot propose theory unless one is willing to practice it to experience the results.
Example: Lynette is one of the finest researchers I know into specific areas of interest. While she appeals to my intellectual nature, there is an element of practical work that goes alongside her theories. None of them are merely black holes of information out of which nothing emerges. There is a reason that one of the three most important projects that I’ve developed in the last five years was submitted to her to entice her involvement therein. There is a very practical outcome — in my mind, at least — to the enormous amounts of academic work that has to go into that project.
Recent Comments