Moral Ambivalence And Lodge Influence

I don't think this is a topic that comes to mind when we are talking about being. It's far more comfortable to talk about safe topics like banquets and ritual than the more personal disclosure required to talk about morality. If we think about it, masonry encourages living a virtuous life, having principles with a philosophical embrace. I thought religiouse practices had the same or similar goals. Both require an acknowledgement of a higher power. One determines the nature of of that higher power. The other does not. I have a sense that some brethren may have an advantage that philosophical schooling is available as they grew up? But in the main, it has been a passive experience.  The priest or minister lectures and comments. The congregation listens. A mason would not expect to have questions poised; what is G-d? How do we know? How can a man be influenced, be transformed to a higher state of thinking without questions?  Is understanding a requirement? How do we accomplish understanding without being willingly engaged with well informed mentors? We can't.  But we can explore meaning advancing our conversation thoughtfully, subtlely with diplomacy. Crase is easier until it is challenged, and then it falls apart. Ambivalence is easier in a secular world. It drains us emotionally. Confusion is no way to live, but suspending disbelief while we study- that is fundamentally sound if we are also open minded and willing to admit when our thinking is changing.  Confirmation bias, yes it exists but it does not prevail if we are taught how to examine thinking.  That's an important role and one that masonry has been plying for centuries. Is the objectivity of the scientific method, transformative?  If learning from mistakes and trying alternative approaches means we admit truth, then I would agree, my thinking will likely be influenced, like walking in the rain makes me want to carry an umbrella. Thoughtful men.