“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

This evening however was different. You were polite to your guest and I recognize his presence. You were not, however, as polite with me. Ruburt was dubious about a session with company present. However he was willing to listen to me irregardless, and I must admit that in no way do I understand your cutting me off in such a brusque manner.

You know that I have no objections to your friend’s presence, since I stated this earlier. For that matter I welcome a witness, and it is time that you had one—for your own edification, not mine, and it should do my nervous pigeon Ruburt some good.

I wanted to reply in some manner to your friend’s question on evolution. However I shall do so in my own fashion per usual. I will speak later about last evening and about your reactions.

Self-consciousness entered in very shortly after, but not what you are pleased to call human self-consciousness. I certainly do not like to wound your egos in this manner. However the fact remains, and I can hear you all yell foul, that there is no actual differentiation between the various types of self-consciousness.

I would now suggest a brief break, and do not again crack up into many pieces. I give you this very slight evidence of my humor merely to show that I am not after all one to carry grudges.

I do become impatient, though I shouldn’t, with this implied insistence that evolution involves merely the human species, or rather that all evolution must be considered some gigantic tree with humanity as the supreme blossom.

This involves, to begin with, an almost impossible task. Data from the inner senses is vivid, it is reliable, it makes an impression upon the conscious individual. It is your insistence upon translating this material into physical terms that causes your difficulty. You do not insist upon seeing, feeling or touching a psychological experience, and yet you do not say that a psychological experience does not exist because you cannot hold it in both hands.

Why then do you insist that an inner experience such as telepathy or premonition does not exist because you cannot hold it in both hands? And yet in many instances such cases can be corroborated by others in a manner in which a purely psychological experience cannot be corroborated.

There is no way of measuring the inner experience, or the psychological experience rather, of someone who has lost a friend in death, but you do not deny that such an experience exists. Yet if two people see, in your terms see, the same apparition, then instantly we must speak in terms of the weight of the apparition seen, the color of the eyes. For any so-called extrasensory perceptions you insist upon twice the evidence, and under circumstances when the evidence is vivid in its own terms and must be translated first, before you will accept it, into the alien outside senses, which simply are not equipped to receive it. This is for Philip’s edification, I hope.

My dear Joseph, one word only: I would not leave you with the impression that I am truly displeased, or that I judge you unjustly. I do not want to hurt Ruburt’s feelings, and I have avoided making this statement thus far; however, for purely personal reasons I have been emotionally more involved with you in past instances. And I know your capabilities so well that when I seem severe it is only because I wish so for your happiness and success.

I suppose we judge those we love most in a harsher manner, but I should have known better and for once you have my apology. I think very much of you. I do not mean to push you too hard, and I certainly do not mean to make you feel inadequate in any manner. Your performance is actually very near excellent.