Schooled Vs. Self-taught

[Obsidian]

Wasn't sure where to put this so I thought I'd stick it here.

As a musician, there's a big difference and 'stigma' surrounded lessons vs. teaching yourself. Personally I sit on the fence a bit about it. I've taught myself piano, most of what I play on guitar and I've had vocal lessons. A pretty decent mix. My observations so far are that I would have advanced a lot quicker in the various fields had I had lessons however.

I'm wondering what some other people's stances are regarding the two schools of thought. How does it relate to your everyday life and your magical endeavors?

There's the old saying, "If I see further (or reach higher) it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants". I think that may well hold very true for Omnimancy given the origins and way the system came about.

My own views (especially in my music) is that lessons are useful but not to the detriment of your own research and work. Anyone can teach that a dominant 7 chord resolves nicely down a fifth but it doesn't mean anything to you or become useful without a lot of practice and really internalizing it. Learning how to feel it and hear it, apply it effectively and not be overzealous. That's part of the reason I've not ventured out for piano lessons (money being the other) because I would like to retain some of my individuality and experimentation without being told what is 'right' and how to play.

Sports are another place self-taught vs. schooled becomes a big argument. Can anyone suggest any other areas? Any thoughts?

[LordArt]

I've always been in the self-taught camp. I self taught myself programming, magic and a lot of things. My life has been much harder because of that. But I'm more of a trail blazer personality. I have the intellect and modivation to do what isn't normally done. (One or the other isn't enough as I've witnessed in others). If you don't have enough of either, you might as well take lessons. Yes, you'll end up being more molded, but you'll advance far further. Doesn't mean you can't keep your individuality within the mold. But I ask you, based on the fact it's taken 20 years to develope what people now learn in a little over 2, which was the easier path? Unless you have that level of modivation to keep going that long with everyone telling you "you are full of shit" or "it can't be done", don't take the self-taught route. Admittedly, it depends on your goals.

My $.02 for the road...

[Osele]

Art is absolutely right. I personally believe that it all comes down to necessity and interest.

If one has the necessity for something, and the interest to do it, they will do it, and do it well - irrespective of whether they attend classes or not. However, if one simply wants to do something, and doesn't really feel a pressing need for it, it might be better to take up lessons to make sure that s/he follows it through.

I think that's enough, but to elaborate a bit, it also does have an effect on your resultant system and knowledge of things: when self-taught, you will adapt and specialize in precisely what you have an interest in (in magic, for example, you could be very good with constructs but horrible at astral combat), but taking classes geared towards a general perspective will give you a grounding (assuming the classes are good) in the basics of everything.

[Obsidian]

In my life I've done both and I can definitely see the pro's and con's of both methods.

What you mentioned Art, being a trail-blazer, is an unfortunately all-too-uncommon personality trait these days. Being able to push forward and keep going despite others telling you you should pack it in is so rare, it's sad. For me, with music, I've had a lot of that but kept going despite it. I wasn't necessarily trying to blaze a trail but even working forward through established methods can be tough if other people give you hell for it.

As far as your magical system goes, it's definitely the easier route to be 'taught' rather than discover it or figure it all out the hard way but I wonder if that means the person will never really 'get it' the same way you do. Could be why no-one can take you on in combat effectively =P

I like how you worded it too Osele. If you NEED to do it you'll figure it out pretty fast. Sink or Swim. But if it's something you WANT to do lessons make it so much easier. I want to learn French and lessons will help me out. If I were over there and HAD to learn, lessons AND self-taught would probably be the best bet but you wouldn't have any choice but to figure as much of it out for yourself as possible.

Interesting point with the specialisation. I would argue that a smart person will, whilst specialise in some aspects, not let the other parts fall by the wayside but I know that isn't necessarily the case. If you're making a lot of progress on a certain topic it's going to be hard to take the time to work on the things you suck at.

My background is music (as I've said a few times) and the two different methods are very, very distinct. A lot of self-taught guitarists shun the schooled type because they feel it 'inhibits creativity' whereas the schooled ones will look down on the self-taught because it 'lacks technique'. With singers, a lot of them refuse lessons (despite vocal troubles) because they don't want someone to change 'their sound'. There's quite a big gulf between the two methods.

I've learnt lately for myself just how much quicker one can grow with a teacher (especially a good one). My guitar playing had been slowly improving but a good teacher stimulated more growth in two weeks than the 2 months beforehand. Obviously that rate isn't going to remain constant but it always makes me wonder how much further ahead I'd be if I'd started with the teacher earlier on.

[CameronD]

In my life I've had the best results with weight loss pills and done both and I can definitely see the pro's and con's of both methods.

What you mentioned Art, being a trail-blazer, is an unfortunately all-too-uncommon personality trait these days. Being able to push forward and keep going despite others telling you you should pack it in is so rare, it's sad. For me, with music, I've had a lot of that but kept going despite it. I wasn't necessarily trying to blaze a trail but even working forward through established methods can be tough if other people give you hell for it.

I'm a big fan of learning from others. No better way of skipping steps and rapidly learning what took much longer for others. I believe it's the same when it comes to Omni too.

[O_keeper]

@Master Art,

Good Day Sir,

Schooled Vs. Self-taught & Definitively if we mean magic here then i ve a natural question, to ask it simply i am putting it in points if you kindly shade the light of your learned opinion over it.

Self Taught

1. As said by some authors In Multiverse Knowledge/Info/Modus Operandi for energy manipulation is/was/will be always existing therefore it is not gained just acquired by the seeker, is it so or in the other words every pattern is pre existing in the super conscious nothing new is being created what ever is done is only the alteration,manipulation,reprogramming,redesigning of the existing, sort of evolution of existing?

2. It is upto the seeker's ability how much he may acquire is an old rhetoric heard it many times but does it count other factors like
external intelligent force guidance, subconscious translation, Past life experience of Techs/activation of memory tech from past life, Genetic factors etc?

3. Are there boundaries for self taught or are they pron to touch the limits accidentally if so then what will act as neutralizing factor in that situation or that will cause damage to the self i mean occult-lunaticism?

4. What may be the role of HigherSelf concept in it as for some authors it exist as omnipotent controller of the lower self, for some others it has to be cultivated,connected,accessed, made to work etc. what is the truth?


Thank you for taking time to answer it in advance

[LordArt]

My business and the virus has kept me busy. Sorry about that.

1. As said by some authors In Multiverse Knowledge/Info/Modus Operandi for energy manipulation is/was/will be always existing therefore it is not gained just acquired by the seeker, is it so or in the other words every pattern is pre existing in the super conscious nothing new is being created what ever is done is only the alteration,manipulation,reprogramming,redesigning of the existing, sort of evolution of existing?

Honestly, your question is very hard to follow because you are asking it all over the place. I have found no evidence of a "super consciousness". The things attributed to that are easily explained by other things or terms. The "super consciousness" idea is an easy stop point that people don't seem to look past because it fits with their deity-centric world view. As far as energy existing, I think on a true multiversal all dimensions (including multiple dimensions of time), the amount of energy is finite, yes. However, energy can be moved across time, so a point in time can have more energy than another point. Energy can be moved from one realm to another to change that balance, too. Matter/realm fabric can be turned back into more pliable energy. If you are asking something else, you need to be specific because I had a very hard time following what you are asking, so I might be answering a different question.

2. It is upto the seeker's ability how much he may acquire is an old rhetoric heard it many times but does it count other factors like
external intelligent force guidance, subconscious translation, Past life experience of Techs/activation of memory tech from past life, Genetic factors etc?

That is phrased like a statement, not a question. So again, I don't know what you are asking. I think you are asking "is what someone can accomplish limited by their personal talent or genetics?" Genetics has nothing to do with it. That is a physical thing. I would say motivation and intellect has more to do with it. On a purely soul level, everyone has the same potential. On a practical level, those that don't care to excel in something most likely never will excel in that subject. Some people have a hard time grasping different subjects, so tend not to learn those subjects. Hardware wise, however, they could learn it and become proficient. They just choose not to. Much like anything, nature talent helps. However, magic is a science, not an art. Art if you don't have the talent, your results will be poor at best (don't ask me to compose or sing). Science, as long as you do "the math", anyone can do it. One could argue that some can't do the math. In my experience teaching, everyone can do magic. How far they progress depends on their interest and motivation. Few are researchers and push the boundaries, but all can take their discoveries and use it.

3. Are there boundaries for self taught or are they pron to touch the limits accidentally if so then what will act as neutralizing factor in that situation or that will cause damage to the self i mean occult-lunaticism?

People are their own limits. Always have been. Some fall into the trap of a solitary, buying into their own false reasons why something is happening or able to happen. They do it because it's easy and it fits their narrative of the world and so decided never to look past it. They self-nerf/go crazy. A group setting that can validate actual occurrences keeps people grounded. However, even that can fall apart without new blood and if the crazies start running the asylum. Meaning, if there isn't enough push from the top of the organization to keep things grounded. This only works, of course, if the system of magic can do such verifications. Most aren't able or willing to, and end up becoming groups that deal in bravado and little substance.

4. What may be the role of HigherSelf concept in it as for some authors it exist as omnipotent controller of the lower self, for some others it has to be cultivated,connected,accessed, made to work etc. what is the truth?

One has to define a higher self to explain that question in detail. Based on what you describe, no, such a being isn't omnipotent. That is a limit of the observer. It is like saying the ocean is endless, until you sail across it or see the world from space. I suppose if all you ever have is a dixie cup to take water out of the ocean, the ocean is endless, but in reality it isn't. There are spirit guides and/or entities that have individual interest in an individual. Some more than others. They are not omnipotent. They have their agendas. Connecting/talking to your higher self or even inner self isn't hard. We teach it early on. We even have tech to "become one" with the inner. I hand it out at conventions, actually. In the end, the role that individual takes is individual. Some make themselves known, some keep to the shadows. Connecting/talking to your higher is just one more step, and certainly not a required one. Their role and origin I won't go into on a public forum. It is for the individual to find their own answer.

[O_keeper]

Master Art,

I am Grateful for such a detailed reply, infact the question became so typical because it covers my own understanding of many books by many authors thank you for being so kind & Honest to reply it.
You re Great & You R a Master i testify it.