03-02-2009, 07:04 PM
Quote:Now let's not get too judgmental about judgment.
Ha!
Let's be clear about the two connotations we're using when we talk about judgment:
(1) the positive sense, in which we are trying to describe a phenomenon with our conclusion. "I judge a tree to be 30 feet high."
(2) the normative sense, in which we invest an arbitrary, emotional attachment in the conclusion. "I judge you to be an horrible person."
As I said before, it seems pretty obvious to me that Ra introduced the more scientistic terms "STO" and "STS" in order to better describe the energetic and philosophic qualities of the polarities without introducing the emotional attachments to the observation.
This does not mean that the second connotation has no purpose. It is in fact a catalytic aspect of our personality complexes. In the process of figuring out why we put some conclusions in one bucket, other conclusions in another, we are more likely to apply the first connotation of judgment to ourselves so we can arrive at more solid conclusions.
Ra, I believe, wants the seeker to be able to analyze not just the conclusions, but the buckets we put the conclusions in - our concepts of what it means to be "good", what it means to be "bad", etc. In answering these deeper questions, we are more likely to use the accumulated experiences that created the categories in a manner that helps us understand ourselves and benefit from the catalyst found in each construct.