Ganymede progression

I don't believe the terms in the progression were meant to be [strictly] picked by the teacher. They are all meant to be open and available to whoever is working on them to do in pretty much any order depending on their current relevancy in one's life.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: The other thing I did not like was the fact I found out there are like 30 to 40 terms in the lesson and I was given only 10. I didnt like that fact I could not choose and that others had judged me in such a way as to just decide I needed those. This came from someone who had NO interaction with me previously and I felt it was an unfair assessment.

I am perhaps approaching this from a different perspective, so I hope I don't sound like I am discounting your feelings on this. They're your feelings; you have every right (and perhaps even a biological imperative) to feel them.

Within the confines of this forum, "someone who had NO interaction with me previously" is an illusory concept for me. This isn't a verbal conversation at a dinner party, where words come out of folks' mouths, their vibrations fade, and thereafter the words live only within the memories of the listeners. I have "interacted" with people who were long gone from here before I ever arrived, in the sense that I have read the thoughts they chose to share and allowed their inferences and statements to resonate with me (or not). I have shared my own thoughts, feelings, arguments, fallacies, mythologies, experiences here over the years; barring the complete destruction of the site (and the Wayback Machine snapshots of it) or a breakdown in contemporary society as we know it, I will therefore "interact" in this way with people whom I will never know.

So maybe I am missing the purpose of labeling an assessment as "unfair" on that basis. But really, what harm does feedback of this kind do in any event? For example, let's say Knight X were to suggest to me that I could perhaps benefit from the Ganymede lesson on "resentment." Leaving aside the question of whether I actually have a personal issue with resentment -- and spoiler alert, yes I do, at times -- at the very least I should probably consider the question of what I am putting out there in my posts or messages that could be received in that way. After all, it's not just what we say, it's the manner in which we say it, yeah? Worst case scenario, I get an additional perspective on how my communications are coming across.

Arisaig wrote: Well yeah, stuff like that is in the IP... but I've been against such things in the AP and beyond for a while now. I dunno, just feels way too low level for knights and knights-in-training.

For clarity, I wasn't necessarily saying that I supported stuff like that being in either the IP or AP, I was just arguing that since that stuff is in the IP then it shouldn't be a weird new concept to people . As it happens, I agree with your thoughts about 'stuff like that' Ari.

As Atticus rightly says:

This is by no means IP level stuff. Unless one's responses to it are IP level. But that's not baked into the program.

Kyrin wrote: The other thing I did not like was the fact I found out there are like 30 to 40 terms in the lesson and I was given only 10. I didnt like that fact I could not choose and that others had judged me in such a way as to just decide I needed those. This came from someone who had NO interaction with me previously and I felt it was an unfair assessment.

I can understand you're frustration there. The version of the Lesson Maitre gave me was for me to pick 10 from the full list that I thought were most relevant to me. Surely if it was an AP lesson it should've been set by your TM?

As Senan correctly said, it is supposed to be heavily discussed and reviewed with your TM. As I do that for pretty much every lesson Maitre sets me, I kind of took that as a given. Sorry for not being clearer.




N.B.

Ari wrote: I guess. I just see people working through these lessons and their responses aren't really what I'd consider good enough

I hope you're not talking about me

Thanks for your thoughts Atticus. I might need to clarify a few points I made. By interaction I mean no two way interaction. maybe they do know me as you say, but I don't know them and therefore I don't trust them because trust is something earned. This is the very reason I'm such an advocate for the senior staff being more involved in daily threads. If they are not involved I don't know them and I don't trust them. Because I have no way to INTERACT with them. I can read a 100 Steven King books but it tells me nothing about what kind of person he really is.

And so "unfair" may not be a proper term, more "uninformed". Its really strange to me that no one knows the origin of this term of its meaning. Why Ganymede? What are we progressing? I know Alex has seen this thread because he has thanked others and my understanding is he produced the lesson. So why the silence?? What is the big secret? Once again this failure to answer just smells like... well you know.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: I know Alex has seen this thread because he has thanked others and my understanding is he produced the lesson. So why the silence?? What is the big secret? Once again this failure to answer just smells like... well you know.

Perhaps finding the answers to your questions is part of the lessons? Or put another way, would Daniel have properly received the lessons of "wax-on, wax-off" if his sensei told him up front why he was making him do them?

EDIT: Transparency is by and large a desirable thing, but sometimes you gotta retain a little mystery.

Brick wrote:

Ari wrote: I guess. I just see people working through these lessons and their responses aren't really what I'd consider good enough

I hope you're not talking about me

Of course not, you're great.