[asteram]

Czymra-

Yes, dogmas is plural. Dogmata is also an accepted plural.

Clarifying my point, what I was attempting to say was that the approach reminds me of those who say "anything that disagrees with my dogma is of the devil and evil." I don't have much use for dogma either, my definition of dogma being "accepted truths that may not be questioned". In the case of religious law, one who openly questions dogma is a heretic. I question everything, and though I accept certain things as proven to my satisfaction, they are still open to question.

For instance, the statement "I am alive" appears obvious, but am I really alive and experiencing my life right now, or am I already dead and experiencing a life review?

From your previous post:

"However, with the right open mind mind and attitude, that means that the previously learned isn't a system, but rather a pool of knowledge, the new information can easily be merged and embedded alongside the old, as they organically reference each other (or not) and by that very nature help redefine the old AND the new."

I agree with you completely on this. Life, knowledge, wisdom, and understanding are cumulative, or at least should be. Even things that I have learned in the past that have turned out to be wrong in a general sense often have parts that are right in a particular sense. I do not reject the things of value that I learned when I was coerced into becoming a born-again Christian as a young boy. I reject the dogma of sin and salvation, but even that part I recognize for its underlying symbolism and truth.

The goal is self-realization at the highest level of which I am capable, and I will gladly use whatever tools present themselves as long as they do not conflict with my inner compass and conscience. What I mean by that is that I will not use a "tool" that knowingly causes or allows harm to come to another in order to benefit myself.

Everything else is open, and I do mean everything.