I'd be interested in seeing what you are calling the Ruby Tablet. I have a feeling that the RT you are talking about and what the RT I have access to is at the very least structured differently.
Yours will be much more up to date since mine stems from the late 90s and thus doesn't contain more current articles. On the other hand, that work wasn't that old when I was curious to get it.
I wouldn't for instance claim to have read the RT
With about 1400 pages already back then (and probably about 2000 by now), the sheer mass alone will prevent it. In this regard, I also see a danger in growing stock of information because a growing amount of information will become more and more difficult to manage.
Already by now, if I were to seek something specific in the TOS documents (25 years SoS included), it's difficult, even with full text search in the Windows explorer. And I don't even have all documents, nor am I searching for those I don't have (enough is enough, you see).
Now this isn't a big problem for me because I rarely take a look at these documents (havn't done so for years now), but the TOS would gain quite something if they had a librarian among their members. A library is useless if there is no kind of index system, and developing some information management system is what a librarian should be able to to. Since librarians tend to be intellectual people and the TOS considers itself as something rational, this goes well together, so there are chances that there are already librarians which could start such a project.
The I* for instance who joins, grabs the CT, and then doesn't talk about how his Initiation and understanding is developing will not last long.
Yeah, I bet.. in any kind of school, just reading a book won't make you an expert if you don't apply that knowledge. Like, uhm, I know how to control a helicopter theoretically, but if I had to actually fly one, I'd just crash.
I could only really compare it with University in a sense
Not at all. The point is while the advanced stuff won't figure in the basic lectures, everyone CAN go to the library and read the books with the advanced things. Whether the reader can make sense of them or not is up to him. Even a complete outsider can access the books. In fact, this freedom of information is one of the factors why modern science has produced more knowledge over the last two centuries than magical schools have done over millennia.
The point is that in science, every outsider can access the works, no matter how he gathered the knowledge to understand them, and start a discussion or throw in new ideas. Our lifetime is short, and concerning knowledge, we are dwarfs standing upon the shoulders of giants (i.e. past generations).
Magical schools, on the other hand, have been about secrecy. This approach fosters group think and belief because it tends to block out independent criticism. And it blocks progress. Proof? It isn't by magical means that we two are communicating with each other here, it is by technical means provided by science. Plus the fact that III+ mailing lists exist in the first place - this is because communication by magical means (psi, telepathy or whatever) obviously doesn't work as well as email.
There are a number of other factors why magical approaches by and large are systematically inferior to the approach science has chosen, namely that in science, arguments ad autoritatem are not accepted while in the magical domain, they are more than common ("because I'm priest", "because I am the master", "because I say so").
I NEVER heard such a phrase from a professor at my university, not even in cases where I was wrong because it was about things I hadn't learnt yet. In such a case, a professor would have described the plot in a very qualitative and simplified manner and cite one or two books for deeper research. Resorting to ad autoritatem "arguments" would have been considered as rude.
In the occult, they are normal. Good for the egos of those running the show, but bad for actual progress. That is logical because the purpose of such "arguments" is shutting down the discussion and not leading to progress.
Overmore, in science, it would be ridiculous if university X only opened its writings for people who had studied and graduated there. On the contrary, they WANT outsiders to read their articles because the further an article by some professor spreads, the better for his academical fame. They are not keeping things secret, on the contrary, they try hard to make them appear in "Nature" or "Science". As a consequence, a professor from university X will also be a professor when he changes to university Y.
In the magical domain, this is not that way. You may become a priest in the TOS, but go to the OTO, and you must start over again as Mr. Nothing. There are no common standards, every damned little group of occultniks thinks that they are oh-so-special. No wonder that there hasn't been much outcome. No real team work, rather all destroyed by some power-addicted ego-pushers. This isn't a TOS specific comment, but on the occult domain in general.
The open system in science helps greatly to detect fraud attempts - not only when filing the thesis, but also afterwards. The German defence minister just had to step back because his doctor thesis was a copy & paste fraud - uncovered accidently by someone from another university who wanted to use it as one of his main sources for his own thesis. Any student can access the PhD working of his professor, and any co-professor can do likewise. The chances for successful long term fraud are just minimised.
Now what about the occult? You have masters, priests and whatever that just had to take in some priests, socialise a bit with the right people, and all of a sudden, they got promote to that rank themselves. Since little is publicly available and the priesthood (with those con men inbetween) is controlling the access, chances for successful long term fraud are maximised by such a structure. Such a system will attract con men like a magnet will attract iron.
Science shows what could have been had in the occult, too, and the fact that it isn't that way really embarrasses me. It would have been useful to all - with the exception of course, of some narcissists hiding behind self-conferred ranks.
But maybe the explanation is that these people have good reason NOT to adopt the way of science - that might prove that the emperor is naked and that they are just con men.
Thinking of what Hagbard mentioned in the beginning, this trick to pull wool over people's eyes. Religion as opium for the people (and magic is also suited if the group is small enough). Priests have betrayed the people for millennia, cf. e.g. "Nietzsche - The Antichrist". Priests have always been allergical to such heretic questions undermining their authority, and since the gods didn't send lightning bolts, so stoning, stakes or exile into the harsh wilderness have been among their preferred means to deal with such an affront in order to secure their own power. Quite a Macchiavellian view, I admit it.
But guess why it didn't surprise me to see a priest trying to shut down such a discussion.
and your input in that regard, I am sure, would be more rewarding for all concerned. However the Setian DIR is for _discussion_ of Setian topics, not evangelical agnosticism.
