Ra's Adventures in Wonderland

[Patrick]

It is unlikely that there is a more pithy or eloquent description of the polarities of third density than service to others and service to self due to the nature of the mind/body/spirit complexes’ distortions towards perceiving concepts relating to philosophy in terms of ethics or activity.

What Ra says here is, given the propensity [of L/L Research and other humans] to distortion toward "ethics" or "activity", it is unlikely to give a more pithy or eloquent description of the polarities than "STO" and "STS".

I agree with you here.

However, we might consider the polarities using slightly variant terms. In this way a possible enrichment of insight might be achieved for some.

However, we, those of Ra, who are not prone to such distortions, might consider some variant terms. Vis-à-vis: the magnet.

One might consider the polarities with the literal nature enjoyed by the physical polarity of the magnet. The negative and positive, with their electrical characteristics, may be seen to be just as in the physical sense. It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet.

"it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet."

This really is quite as plain as day. I don't even see how anything could possibly be read into this quote. And yet so many discussions revolve around attempting just this kind of judgement.

I agree with you here too.

The confusion inherent with "STO" and "STS" then continues with the assumption that all entities are 100% polarized to begin with.

I still don't see this one. Where is this assumption that all entities are 100% polarized to begin with?

That is to say, a given entity is "51% STO AND 49% STS" or "95% STS AND 5% STO". But again, this conception bears no meaning. What is the point, if all entities are already 100% polarized? It also erroneously assumes that acquiring polarization from one path precludes the acquisition of polarity from the other path. Which is precisely what Ra does NOT say.

We don't start at 100% polarization, perfectly balanced between STS and STO. Right? We start at 0% polarization.

Hence, what they say is that an entity must be 51% polarized to graduate (from third density) on the positive path, and 95% polarized to graduate on the negative path.

These numbers are nearly meaningless to me and you already know that I, like you, do not like the terms STS and STO very much.

I think this following paragraph is more helpful to advance the understanding of each other's point of view.

Either path gains polarity through identification with the Law of One. Those on the positive path grow through identification of self as other (I AM YOU). Those on the negative path grow through identification of other as self (YOU ARE ME). Because of certain inherent difficulties pertaining to the negative path, it requires significantly more polarization to graduate upon it.

It really has little to do with ethics. Or even activity. As Ra so much as clearly stated.

Now I am starting to glimpse where our point of view may differ.

Here is how I see this.

Those on the positive path grow through identification of self and "others" as being One and all being the Creator (I AM YOU & YOU ARE ME). Those on the negative path grow through identification of self as being the Creator and others being something else (I AM THE CREATOR, YOU ARE NOT).

Of course, it's not possible to be something else, but it certainly is possible to have an illusion of this. Hence why the negative polarity is completely built on an omission of reality.