A Brother Asks... How are the Penalties Administered "Symbolically"?

Discussion in 'Masonic Education' started by coachn, Mar 2, 2018.

  1. otherstar

    otherstar Registered User

    202
    84
    28
    Then they are not casual references. You need to find a better word than allusion, no?
     
  2. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,067
    2,049
    133
    No. They are.
    Nah. The word "allusion" was used appropriately within context. The penalties are allusions AND they also point toward profound consequences.

    You need to get your arguments in order Bro.
     
  3. otherstar

    otherstar Registered User

    202
    84
    28
    Please explain how they are casual references and point to profound consequences. I think you are equivocating here.

    No, you need to take a logic course. You are using words as you see fit, not as they actually are defined. You've violated the first rule of logic: the principle of non-contradiction. A thing cannot be a casual reference and profound at the same time. It's either one or the other, not both simultaneously.

    I have a graduate degree in philosophy, and I have teaching experience at both the graduate and undergraduate level. I'm not easily duped. I'd give the initial article from this thread a B if it were submitted in my class because you do not use terms consistently, and frankly, your writing lacks a degree of focus and cohesion. You jump from point to point without fully establishing the connections between points, then you pronounce what you've written to be true and correct without fully demonstrating that it is so. You make inferences, not syllogisms (you do know what a syllogism is, right?). Bro....
     
  4. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,067
    2,049
    133
    You choose to see them as mutually exclusive. I do not.
    You might want to re-examine your premises and arguments on this.
    You certainly have a limited world view.
    I disagree and hence I shall boldly contradict your claim.
    You mean like something cannot be both a symbol and an emblem AT THE SAME TIME either?
    I disagree. It's not an either-or thing.
    I'm am truly saddened to hear you have invested your money and time in this direction.
    And you're teaching others to do the same? Did you not learn anything?
    And, the set up for ad hominem has occurred.
    There is it! So, is that a B+ or a B-?
    LOL! So, you're saying it's good enough for government work?
    <snicker> Yep. I'm delighted you noticed. The blog post was for Brothers who already knew what I was alluding to. I hope you might know a few.
    Wow! You got all that from a blog post and follow up commentary that never used those words. You truly are something amazing.
    Let's see... syllogisms... hmmmm.... like...

    If a man has not done the EA Work,
    and the EA Work requires circumscription of desires and subduing of passions,
    and to ultimately bring Order to the Chaos of an untamed heart,
    Then that man is likely to be an awesome example of what occurs when this work is not done.

    Nope. Guess I don't.

    I hope you come across less hostile when you are teaching our next generation.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  5. otherstar

    otherstar Registered User

    202
    84
    28
    Truth is not a "choice." Things are true or they are not.

    How can you say this without meeting me and just basing this on an Internet forum post.

    How do you know?

    LOL.

    Nice double-speak, or equivocation.

    You have the right to be incorrect.

    Thank you for the insult. So you're making an ad hominem attack? Thanks. You've just shown me your true character.

    I've got a second degree in Library Science, which is my main line of work. I've taught ethics at the graduate and undergraduate level.

    If you say so, but it never happened did it?

    I don't do plus or minus grades.

    Barely.

    You mean those who've bought the cool aid and read your other books that you are constantly promoting and selling?

    You like ad hominem attacks, don't you?

    You don't, because that is not any kind of logical syllogism I've ever seen. It's an argument, but not a syllogistic argument.

    I'm holding back given how much I find you, your attitude, your posts, your constant hawking of your books, quite offensive. When I taught, I always got every good reviews from my students. You are offering your opinion. I questioned it, pointed out some inconsistencies, and I've obviously upset you. My job here is done :)
     
    hanzosbm likes this.
  6. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,067
    2,049
    133
    Red Herring.
    Hey. You took liberty. Are you saying I can't?
    How do you know I don't?
    Thanks!
    As do you.
    Or the character I portray during an attack :D
    I'm glad you can execute a backup plan.
    LOL!
    Ah! Can't handle the challenge?
    Good. Then good enough.
    Ad hominem...
    I usually reflect what is shoved my way.
    If you say so.
    Ah! Holding back resentments. There's the driver for all your aggressiveness. Finally, the truth!
    Red herring...
    You offered your thoughts. I rejected them as being unsound. And now I know why.
    LOL! I've only reflected back what you shoved my way. You obviously didn't like seeing your reflection.
    1. You took an aggressive posturing from the beginning.
    2. You admitted to being a resentful malcontent.
    3. You admitted desire to upset me; that it was your "job".
    4. Your efforts to point out inconsistencies showed that you can't think effectively when dealing with things that upset you.
    5. You can't see that things can function two or more ways.
    6. Your taking things out of context was further evidence that you were grasping for anything you could to further your ill-directed cause.
    7. You hold yourself out as a highly educated teacher of ethics to our next generation.
    So, professor who teaches our next generation ethics.... How ethical is it to jump into a discussion, highjack a thread with a hidden agenda and do so with resentment in your heart and with ill intent toward your Brother?

    Thanks for providing the very points the blog post was conveying.
    1. Your word cannot be trusted.
    2. Your heart is bad.
    3. You are a torn man.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
    John.conroy and Warrior1256 like this.
  7. Bro. Stewart P.M.

    Bro. Stewart P.M. Lead Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

    2,443
    466
    103
    I need a taller pair of boots for this conversation.
     
  8. jermy Bell

    jermy Bell Registered User

    327
    272
    63
    Being severed in twain, who does that ? Some may think we still do. During a FC degree the candidate stumbled over these words. A few of us just grinned, but later found out the reason they didn't come back was because of this.
     
    Bloke likes this.
  9. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,253
    3,287
    183
    Wow!
     
  10. LK600

    LK600 Premium Member

    654
    710
    113
    Wow... So, they were okay with the other two similar penalties as written, but not so much with the third? Did they have a mentor who reviewed / answered questions with them?

    Masons... Masons do this! ;)
     
  11. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,387
    133
    A guy who didn't come back because we teach vocabulary lessons? And folks complain that we don't deliver. Dude, what we deliver is standards for you to live up to! Like, ya know, learning and stuff.

    Folks know it's both a reference to expulsion and to kosher rules, right?
     
    Glen Cook likes this.
  12. jermy Bell

    jermy Bell Registered User

    327
    272
    63
    Laugh if you will, but a lodge 15 miles away that I am a honorary member at ,looses 2-3 candidates a year, usually after the 1st degree, some have gone as far as changing their phone numbers . Most will stumble through their obligation and hesitate through the penalty part. Then you never see or hear from them again.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  13. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,253
    3,287
    183
    Brother, I hate to sound callous or unfeeling but anyone that would take these things seriously are either VERY un-informed or not the brightest bulbs in the pack. I have never heard of anyone quitting Masonry because they took the penalties literally!
     
    Glen Cook, Bloke and jermy Bell like this.
  14. Keith C

    Keith C Registered User

    805
    920
    93
    That seems odd to me. We are very clear in the education section before each degree to state that the penalties in the obligations are only symbolic and the true penalty for infractions is getting suspended or kicked out. Right before taking the obligation the candidate is again told that it is symbolic only.

    I guess our rituals are vastly different. That is not part of our FC degree.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  15. jermy Bell

    jermy Bell Registered User

    327
    272
    63
    Correction, I got the 2nd and 3rd mixed up. But I'm not sure if these people we're just curious when they joined, and took things seriously and got scared ? Idk. Sad for them. I always have fun anywhere I go where the company is good.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  16. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,253
    3,287
    183
    Same here.
     
    jermy Bell likes this.
  17. MasonicAdept

    MasonicAdept Premium Member

    244
    158
    63
    I am no philosophy major or anything, but if the penalties are NOT literal, then there is a PRACTICAL APPLICATION and MEANING for them and how they are applied to the Mason NOW.

    If the brother receives NOTHING MORE than understanding the IMPORTANCE of keeping ANY obligation, then the ritual has served its purpose.

    A wise man once said that:

    "Freemasonry is a BEAUTIFUL SYSTEM OF MORALITY, Veiled in ALLEGORY, and ILLUSTRATED BY SYMBOLS"

    The objective is to assists a GOOD MAN to discover a BETTER WAY of LIVING and THINKING.
     
  18. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,253
    3,287
    183
    I've always liked this.
     
  19. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,387
    133
    That does not happen in any of my jurisdictions. It's implicit not explicit. I find this disappointing but it does not bother me enough to push for change. After all we do require men to be of sound mind when they petition.

    If someone can't figure out that Grandpa is not in a blood club, they aren't of sound mind. If someone petitioned on a lark and flipped out when we expected them to put in actual work, they aren't sincere. If some lodge is losing multiple candidates per year to anything like that they need to guard the west better.

    We lose maybe a quarter of candidates when they learn how much work there is, but that's not what Brother Jeremey describes. I think of it as the "LBJ effect". Johnson took his EA degree but when he learned the amount of work needed he never moved forward to his FC degree.
     
    Bloke and Warrior1256 like this.
  20. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,253
    3,287
    183
    My point exactly.
     
    dfreybur likes this.

Share My Freemasonry