chaoschristian said:
I am a skeptic.
I don't accept the easy answer.
I always want to dig deeper than the face of things.
Face value has little to no value for me.
I want to see what's inside the box.
I want to see what's outside of the box.
I want to analyze the box under an electron-microscope and run bits of it through a particle accelerator.
I'm the kid who took apart all of his dad's farm equipment, just so see how it works.
I'm the annoying one that keeps asking, "Why?"
I'm the kid in the class that you groan at when I ask just one more question before the teacher moves on.
When you read this, does any of it resonate with you? Is there a correlation between being a TE and being a skeptic?
And is this quality something that acts as an irritant to our fellow Christians? Like, when we witness to our faith, but still go on asking questions about God, life, the universe and everything?
I like the four stages of spiritual development proposed by Scott Peck ("The Road Less Traveled"), which he refined from James Fowler's six stages, and which I will further refine according to my taste.
1. unconcerned or innocent
Scott Peck entitled this stage chaotic/antisocial. But I think more about how my boys react to religious and moral ideas as if they really haven't slightest idea what I or my wife are talking about. Scott peck calls the people in this stage "antisocial because, while they are capable of pretending to be loving, actually all of their relationships with their fellow human beings are self-serving and covertly, if not overtly, manipulative. Chaotic because, being unprincipled, they have no mechanism that might govern them other than their own will."
2. institutional / social / dogagmatic
Involves the giving up of self to the group to follow the thinking and ideas of the group. Learns the value of following, working in a group and learning from others.
3. skeptic
Learns to see the the falacies of rigid ideologies and rebels against trying to force reality to fit them. Scott Pecks says, "Invariably they are truth seekers."
4. mystic
Learns to see beyond the flaws in generalizations to the truths that are really there and to see the value of traditions inspite of their failings. Scott Peck sees the people of this stage as being "comfortable living in a world of mystery." I accept Scott Peck's name for this stage because of the idea in eastern mysticism that truth goes beyond the ability of words to express it. And so I think that the mystic goes beyond the limitations of words and sees a mulitfaceted reality by looking at the world from many different points of view. The beginning of this stage is when you start feeling skeptical about skepticism.
Scott Peck adopted these stages of spiritual development from his experiences as a psychiatrist where he found that his successes in helping peole were often associated with either leaving or with entering religious groups. So he concluded that he was helping them to move to a higher stage of spiritual development in
both cases. Though he warns us not to take these stage too literally, as if everyone must be in one stage only. The stages are merely representative of a process of development in how we relate to truth and spirtituality, which has many components that are not neccessarily all mastered at the same time.
So in conclusion I would say that the TEist can be in any of these stages, but that it is stage 4 which is most representative of the TEist because it requires embracing multiple points of view and doesn't require easy answers or that all answers have to in fact be provided at all. The mystic and the TEist both are willing to embace the full complexity of a reality that is both scientific and spiritual.
P.S. The obvious implication here is that I see myself as largely in stage 4. I can come off as both extreme skeptic and devout believer, adopting either role as it suits my purpose.
P.S.S. You know your a mystic when..... you find yourself sympathizing with both sides of a heated debate but when you speak your mind you end up being blasted by both sides.
