colleges, research organizations, internet discussion groups, even society itself is a large collection of people. It is only when people allow themselves to be rules by the most base ideas and feelings do we see problems (which can happen even by lone individuals with no organizations).
Quoting: BeukendaalMason 857923
Society is by and large a dangerous place for intelligent people to live in...
Quoting: Logos666 857945 And yet it is the intelligent people who benefit the most by their use of society and those who do not think intelligently are who are many times harmed the most (taken advantage of, swindled, ect). Unless you think people like Bill Gates, Carnegie, other powerful industrial leaders, and governmental leaders are not intelligent people.
People stear clear of each other not because they are "an independent, intelligent thinker" as they would be able to realise the benefits of association and collective support of others but because of their own, many times illogical and un-informed, perceptions of others (fear, hybris, ect).
Independant thought is openly welcome among Freemasons, hence the association and sometimes membership of many thinkers through out history (Voltiare, thought only for a few months, Samuel Clemens, Will Rogers, Manly P. Hall, Albert Pike, Booker T. Washington, ect). Of course like with all organizations (and society) adherence to a common (and at times changed) code of conduct is neccesary. With Freemasonry it is tolerance, morality, honesty, religious belief (of your choosing) and love (through brotherhood and charity).
Again you make assumptions about Jesus and Sokrates, if they would even wish to join or be accepted cannot be proven, nor disproven. And again you make assumptions about Freemasons and how Freemasonry has been organized and operates.
Freemasonry is neither "authoritorian bent" nor does it have "elite superiors". Masonry has elected officials whose duty it is to work for the benefit of their members and most of those who have become those leaders have not been "elite superiors".
Quoting: BeukendaalMason 857923
I did not say that the elite superiors are "elite superiors" (that is that they would be given that appellation). But the fact that you call them "leaders" or, more overtly, others are called "Grand Master" and what not, shows that that's what they are factually are in that organization.
Quoting: Logos666 857945 Then why use the term "elite superiors" and not say what you meant. What is a leader, someone who rules over others or someone who is put into their position to perform the work needed and requested by the membership? The Masonic leadership is always elected by the membership and answers to the membership. While given some powers to best perform their duties they still have to rely on the assent of the membership for budgets and to enact any changes. Members themselves are also able to propose changes, which again must be approved by the membership. You attempt to make "Grand Master" as some proof of what? Many who are not well versed in Freemasonry view words like "Master" and "Worshipful" (used in Freemasonry as the old english meaning of worthy of respect) in ways Masons do not.
The rights of the individual member is held as the highest importance and all members are equal.
Quoting: BeukendaalMason 857923
Does that include those who insist that they consider vows in the name of god by a human organization a ridiculous abomination ? Or is the right of the individual compromised by his membership as a mason in this regard ?
Does the right of the individual include his own dress code, or is uniformation somehow limiting this after all ?
For example, I consider all suit and tie symbolism as evil because it represents a willingness to kill for money and do the superior's bidding unquestioned (research the history of the tie, it is no coincidence that it was introduced as the standard in "good societies"). This is nothing in particular about Feemasons, but what if I would come to meetings like this:
[link to www.yamatuti.ch]
[link to www.chillcompany.ch]
It is an open secret that Freemasonry is flooded with bankers and businessmen, and you know their preferences.
Quoting: Logos666 857945 If they "insist that they consider vows in the name of god by a human organization a "ridiculous abomination" then why would they choose to join? Your point is moot.
Yes, members are free to wear (within basic societal constrictions) what they wish in a Lodge meeting. Although the suit and tie or tuxedo are commonly held "standard of dress" they are not universal, not enforced in any manner. They do allow all members to wear a "standard" wear as to not make others view them by their clothing but instead by their interior qualities. I know many Lodges that do not use suits and ties or tuxedos and have shown up at my Lodge several times in just a work shirt and jeans. So again you presumptions and beliefs wind up being moot. "An open secret that Freemasonry is flooded with bankers and businessmen, and you know their preferences". Yet another appeal to not fact but to supposition, not needed to be answered as it is absurd and only based upon your beliefs and prejudices.
A position like Master of a Lodge or Grand Master of a Grand Lodge are only temporary (1 to 2 years).
No one in Freemasonry is beyond scrutiny
Quoting: BeukendaalMason 857923
I'd like to test that, and until then I don't believe it. But I do recall that my brother was once visited and scrutinized as an applicant (and rejected). I find this very idea that FMs scrutinize me rather than the other way round completely laughable.
You and your predecessor, for instance, have already failed according to my criteria on several logical grounds. I am positive no reasonable dialogue with people like you would last much longer than a few minutes.
In my club, perhaps Einstein, Gödel and these folks would pass the test.
Quoting: Logos666 857945 If you have not looked into the actual operation and functioning of Freemasonry then it might be best not to attempt to make suppositions, if you really wish to show that you are as intelligent as you wish others to think, it might be best to do complete research before you attempt to tell others that you possess all of the knowledge.
Who says you cannot scrutinize Freemasonry (you have aptly shown that you have) and what makes you, or anyone else beyond scrutiny (your hybris?)? Freemasonry has certain standards (tolerance, morality, honesty, religious belief) that we hold our members to, if you or anyone else is not up to those standards or cannot maintain them, then why should we wish to associate, or continue to associate with you? Your hybris?
I care not that I "failed according to my criteria on several logical grounds" because they are your "logical grounds" and are not based upon logic but rather your own hybris.
