Ganymede progression

There may have been some confusion about what you were able to view, or about how the information was conveyed to you. In this thread, i haven't posted the actual text of the lessons only because I don't want to tread on Steve's toes. But it's by no means a secret.

Brick wrote: What did you find so weird about it that made you decline the lesson?

The only thing I think that's weird about it is the name. The rest of it seems pretty standard, I mean half the IP is basically 'write about your thought and feelings on *insert topic here*' :laugh:

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.

I've done stuff like it in my apprenticeship, with the chakras, but it isn't just my "thoughts and feeling about x topic", but a in depth analysing of my emotions, stresses, ect ect. That seems more on par of the higher standard that should be set beyond the IP. To regress down into IP level stuff after the IP just feels... meh.

Arisaig wrote:

Brick wrote: What did you find so weird about it that made you decline the lesson?

The only thing I think that's weird about it is the name. The rest of it seems pretty standard, I mean half the IP is basically 'write about your thought and feelings on *insert topic here*' :laugh:

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.

I've done stuff like it in my apprenticeship, with the chakras, but it isn't just my "thoughts and feeling about x topic", but a in depth analysing of my emotions, stresses, ect ect. That seems more on par of the higher standard that should be set beyond the IP. To regress down into IP level stuff after the IP just feels... meh.

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.

Atticus wrote:

Arisaig wrote:

Brick wrote: What did you find so weird about it that made you decline the lesson?

The only thing I think that's weird about it is the name. The rest of it seems pretty standard, I mean half the IP is basically 'write about your thought and feelings on *insert topic here*' :laugh:

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.

I've done stuff like it in my apprenticeship, with the chakras, but it isn't just my "thoughts and feeling about x topic", but a in depth analysing of my emotions, stresses, ect ect. That seems more on par of the higher standard that should be set beyond the IP. To regress down into IP level stuff after the IP just feels... meh.

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.

I guess. I just see people working through these lessons and their responses aren't really what I'd consider good enough. But oh well, prolly why I'm not in charge of education here.

Arisaig wrote:

Atticus wrote: 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.

I guess. I just see people working through these lessons and their responses aren't really what I'd consider good enough. But oh well, prolly why I'm not in charge of education here.

If the Ganymede Progression is something you choose to adapt with your own Apprentices someday, or choose to tackle yourself, you'll have the benefit of seeing the entirety of the work and the conversations about the work, rather than just what is recounted in a semi-public journal. My own journal doesn't adequately convey the depth of the spiritual awakening I have found here; even my capstone document is pretty much the 10% of the iceberg that one can see from the surface.

I've been tempted to try it, but I'm not sure if I'm ready for it. It's a lot of work and a lot of effort and a lot of potential navel-gazing i might not be prepared to handle.

Brick wrote: What did you find so weird about it that made you decline the lesson?

The only thing I think that's weird about it is the name. The rest of it seems pretty standard, I mean half the IP is basically 'write about your thought and feelings on *insert topic here*' :laugh:

I especially want to know the origin of the name and the deeper intent behind that. 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.

Beyond that it seems like a bit of busy work. I would much rather approach those things organically as they appear in my life and then evaluate vs having to force feed myself information with a goal of artificial regurgitation. It lacks context in that form and I find it ineffective.

I haven't completed any of these officially yet, but it is my understanding that what makes the Ganymede Progression different than the IP lessons is that the responses are not only written, but also intended to be discussed with a Teacher and regularly revisited. As we encounter different emotions and experiences in our lives, we can go back to these lessons and see how our perception of each concept has changed, progressed, etc. We can also discuss which areas we need more understanding of when we find ourselves failing at something consistently. I think the actual discussion taking place one on one about the responses would be the most valuable part, but this needs to take place inside of the trusted Teacher/Mentor partnership and will likely never be seen or acknowledged by anyone else. The written work may appear to be lacking on the surface, but the deeper conversations behind them may be much more valuable.

I do agree with you, Kyrin, that we need to be careful as teachers about assuming which lessons in the GP are more appropriate than others for our students. We can make suggestions, but ultimately I believe the student should engage in some real self reflection and decide which lessons are most applicable to their current situation. I'd be happy to go through these with you as our time permits and compare our responses. We could probably help each other see things we may be missing when we try to scrutinize ourselves.

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.