Raising the level of collective consciousness societally underlies what it will take to coordinate systemic change in the face of climate change, which requires a reconfiguration of the world system. Without the underlying level of collective consciousness that is minimally required, there is no chance of change happening in time to avert climate disaster. That is difficult enough, but that is only to initiate system redesign. Whether humans are intelligent enough to redesign a system that has developed through the historical dialectic to reach this moment. History is not encouraging on this. Prepare for a culling.
Real-World Economics Review Blog
4 ways in which humanity’s consciousness needs to shifthttps://rwer.wordpress.com/2021/11/01/4-ways-in-which-humanitys-consciousness-needs-to-shift/
The Week
https://theweek.com/china/1006663/china-moves-to-curb-excess-eating-and-food-waste
Related
Evonomics
Steven Klees | Distinguished Scholar-Teacher and Professor of International Education Policy at the University of Maryland
https://evonomics.com/klees-neoclassical-economics-failed-what-comes-next/
Message from the "primitives," who comprises what were arguably the only free and non-exploitive societies in history.
Common Dreams
'The Earth Is Speaking': Indigenous Activists Tell COP26 There's No Climate Solution Without ThemBrett Wilkins
56 comments:
1. Our evolutionary heritage is to live from hand to mouth.
2. Edward Bernays raised the level of collective unconsciousness to heights heretofore unseen.
3. Burn & repeat.
Sand has to be moist to make sandcastles.
Each grain of sand has to be within a size range, to be called sand.
Life has to be pleasant, to be a gift.
You are here to reproduce, although you may choose not to.
When it's time for you to go, you'll remember what was worth appreciating.
You'll have forgotten far more than you remember.
For some, it was about a beach.
For some, it was about the texture of sand.
For everyone, it was about their hierarchy of needs.
What Maslow described, Bernays developed hooks for.
Now they reel that sucker in.
Only a few, live to tell the tale.
Human child
“ Whether humans are intelligent enough to redesign a system that has developed through the historical dialectic to reach this moment.”
The system that you guys are complaining about at this moment was not developed through the dialectic method it was developed thru the scientific method…
Systems relying on the oxidation of the various hydrocarbons to create usable forms of energy were not developed via your Art degree dialectics…
You are complaining about them now at this moment via your dialectics and trying to argue for the dismantling of them … but they were not developed that way,,,
To be fair, you people should have to put a clock on it and if the water doesn’t come up by that date you guys should all have to commit seppuku… if you wanted to be fair about it…
If you want to be fair about sea-level rise... move to a low-lying atoll.
An example of the Dialectic aka Politics:
2021 Madagascar food crisis
By late July 2021, however, the situation was described as "famine" by outlets such as Al Jazeera and Time magazine. Al Jazeera published the story of a woman pleading for desperate help for her five-year-old girl in the Anosy region in the southernmost region of Madagascar. Also, Time quoted WFP's chief Beasley as describing the crisis as "climate change-caused" and the first in modern history to be caused by such phenomenon.
Now you have some context for Elon Musk's tweet.
The system that you guys are complaining about at this moment was not developed through the dialectic method it was developed thru the scientific method…
The current system arose from many factors, science being one them but not the only one. For example, the economic system rests on economic liberalism which assumes that market forces left to themselves result in an optimal cycle of production, distribution and consumption universally at equilibrium where it is operational and that this equilibrium is Pareto optimal. This is supposed to be economic science.
The reality is that such a system is an ideal rather than actual. In the real world, institutions matter and so does who controls these institutions. This is a matter of social status (class), power, and wealth. Different factions of the elites comes into conflict owing to the stakes (incentives) and this conflict among elites and elites with "the little people" is an aspect of the historical dialect. This is reflected in real time in politics and geopolitics, for example.
What is needed is a world system based on science. It doesn't exist yet, and the resistance to science in the world of politics strongly suggests that this will not happen anytime soon.
Science is a method of inquiry.
What else would we want in our toolkit?
Science is a method of inquiry.
What else would we want in our toolkit?
We also need politicians willing to implement the findings.
I mentioned previously about a theoretical physicist who ran for US president some years ago. One of his goals was to get into a position of being able to explain to others how science has already solved many of the most pressing problems facing the nation and world, and science also has a method for answering yet unanswered questions. He talked to many US politicians about this. Most agreed with him but then added that it was politically infeasible if one wanted to win election.
This is why the US doesn't have a scientific approach to problem solving.
Moreover, science itself is also infected with corruption, as some scientist hire themselves out for "research" that confirms the employers position.
"Science" is not just a theoretical matter. See Engineering Design Process. The "science" may be clear, but the process of implementing it through engineering leading to technological innovation may be challenging. When non-scientific factors supervene, such as politics, vested interests, ideology, etc., then the challenges increase.
One of the first steps is undertaking a "cost-benefit" analysis in term of actual objectives and resources to meet them. Since monetary considerations are irrelevant for currency sovereigns, the analysis should be independent of monetary consideration and focus rather on the real. Currency sovereigns would have to cover for currency users.
It should be obvious that the first real consideration should be lives rather than property or material conditions. But that cannot be done without considering a constellation of factors, such as ecology.
This is clearly a huge challenge and should be approached similar to the Manhattan Project or the US putting a man on the moon in response to the launch of Sputnik. Those pale in comparison.
The US doesn't have a science-based culture. The average US citizen is scientifically illiterate.
A basketball star who runs for POTUS and explains what science can do for us, may have a chance to be elected through charisma alone. Unfortunately, Washington swamp dwellers are not known for their democratic ethos.
One of the spawns of science is technology.
Some technologies are not in our long term interest.
What tools do we need to select what is desirable in the long term?
A cost-benefit analysis of consumerism would conclude that it is a waste of resources.
That by itself would be insufficient to combat the practice, and its stakeholders.
Ecological limits have been sketched out; what is lacking is a willingness to live within them.
Also, a majority of the population views nature (non-human life) in utilitarian terms. As something to be conquered, exploited, controlled, or transcended.
@ Peter Pan
Right. That is why meaningful political change is infeasible.
That leaves the top-down approach. Eco-authoritarianism, or authoritarianism pretending to be in service to ecology.
“ Arrogant enough to think science can solve the problems people create”
That’s NOT the scripture JR… the scripture is dialogue is vain/arrogant…
In science you are trained to yield to trutth… this is NOT arrogance… it’s the opposite..,
In dialogics you are trained NOT to yield to anything.., THAT is arrogance…
“Vain we’re they made in their dialogues” Romans 1
Kindness and cruelty coexist. Embracing one doesn't negate the other. Avoiding cruelty makes life less unpleasant, but it is a sanitized version. Experiencing the uncensored version leads to desensitization.
Science is a method of inquiry. When confronted with phenomena that can't be quantified within a system of measurement, it stumbles. Science has limits, thus other tools are required.
What does science say with regard to Earth's biosphere?
Live within our means.
My culture rejects this message. Canadians want to consume beyond the limits of the Earth. Most animals do. Consuming and breeding equals success, according to biology. Who is science, the new kid on the block, to argue against evolved behavior?
So we try other tools. Ethics, oppression, enlightenment. Only oppression appears to be scalable.
Cruelty can be observed, experienced (as perpetrator or recipient), therefore it exists. Cruelty is a part of life, since it is living things that observe or experience it.
An absence of compassion is indifference.
The opposite of compassion is cruelty.
Those who are indifferent to cruelty are callous.
Those who enjoy cruelty are sadists.
Most people aren't sadists, and are incapable of being so.
Some people are callous, but this is dependent on circumstances.
My mind tells me life is comprised of kindness, indifference and cruelty. It says life can be beautiful and horrific. Is it my heart that tells me to stay away from the cruel and horrific parts? If I were a sadist, would I seek out those parts instead of avoiding them?
Life involves suffering.
Most people want to avoid suffering.
I am a member of that tribe.
The collective consciousness already exists; the problems are all about power and intimidation by the few.
Most people want to avoid suffering.
Suffering is good for you. It builds character.
The Concept of Collective Consciousness.
Since Emile Durkheim coined the term and initially developed the concept, collective consciousness has been important in sociology.
The difficulty in approaching this rather abstract concept with precision lies in modeling it, which requires parameter identification and measurement procedure to the degree the study is scientifically based.
Sociologists attempt to do this through polling, as well as analysis of culture and traditions, institutional arrangements and behavioral criteria.
Commonality and solidarity are factors that is regarded as highly important in the collective consciousness of a society. The more functional, cooperative, harmonious, and homogenous a society, the higher the level of collective consciousness. Conversely, the more dysfunctional, individualistic, fractured, and heterogeneous, the lower the level of collective consciousness.
Lord Rama, returned home with his wife Mata Sita and brother Lakshmana on the auspicious occasion of Diwali.
This marked the beginning of ramarajya, the broad meaning of which is ideal society under perfect leadership. This is taken to be the supreme level of collective consciousness under enlightened governance.
In The Republic, Plato set forth a similar concept of the highest form of governance as the "rule of the best," which is a literal translation of "aristocracy."
I struggle with these interpretations Tom.
Ramarajya is related to "the world is a family" (vasudaiva kutumbakam). Both ideas emphasize appreciation of universality based on the oneness of being lived by individuals in enlightened society.
Plato's social and political philosophy has been compared with the Vedic tradition. Plato also viewed history as cyclical, cycling through four ages, with the golden age being the apex. (See Urwick's The Platonic Quest, for example). In ancient Greece, a similar notion of living a good life in a good society is found in Aristotle. Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics views genuine happiness as the by-product of unfolding full potential of life as an individual and as human being, living a good life in a good society through virtuous living. IN fact, Greek though can be characterized as centering on living a good life in a good society.
The Chinese tradition has similar concepts, expressed some what differently in Taoism and Confucianism. They also focus on living a good life in a good society.
There are somewhat comparable beliefs in Judaism, Christianity and Islam about a future golden age on earth as well.
The ideal of heaven on earth is common in traditionalisms, although it finds quite different expression both among different traditions and even within the different traditions.
This degraded in the West into the divine right of kings under Christendom. Liberalism was a reaction to degradation.
The American founding fathers were versed in ancient Greek thought and they based American government on Athenian democracy (where, ironically, slaves were the chief source of capital) and the Roman republic, taking individual liberty as the the ideal political life, based largely on both ancient thought and then contemporary English and French thought of the Enlightenment. (This concept of enlightenment is quite different from the spiritual understanding of enlightenment characteristic of Eastern traditions.
This set up a dialectic between traditionalism and liberalism that is ongoing.
Suffering is good for you. It builds character.
Spending time at Ogrish, have we?
The collective consciousness already exists; the problems are all about power and intimidation by the few.
Our collective consciousness is a result of power and intimidation by the few. Same as it was during the Cultural Revolution in China, or during the Rwandan Genocide.
What you speak of has existed in small communities. And even there, the locals may succumb to 'rural backwardness'.
You can’t build anything in a darkened room until the candle is lit. Everything in plain sight.
Traditional teaching (perennial wisdom) is clear that an ideal society, defined as a maximum of positive factors and minimum of negative factors in which the objectives of individual life and life in society, is only possible to the degree that the citizenry is "enlightened" in the sense of appreciating the one existence in all beings.
Evidence of this is love, based on feeling oneself in all. This is manifested behaviorally by the extent of observance of the golden rule, for example. Sympathy or empathy as fellow-feeing for all beings, is the basis for altruism, which is the foundation of ideal living and ideal society.
This leads to the unfolding of the full potential of individual human beings and also the community (family) of all beings, while treating the environment a "sacred." This is the ancient way, and it is this that the various wisdom traditions seek to develop through the various means that the sages have set forth. Outer phenomena are based on inner being.
This is a bit different from what sociologists mean by the level of collective consciousness but it is similar to it and compatible with it.
jrbarch: For me, the creative purpose of that human, in a universe that took so much care to set a perfect stage - is to know the Self.That is our Nature! We are not separate to the rest of the universe. Just like a tree or a cloud, we are given a purpose, as part of the dharma.
Tom: This is taught in these terms most explicitly in Vedanta, but it underlies perennial wisdom, which expresses the same truth differently in different cultures.
jrbarch: Some (me too) call the backdrop of the universe Mahamâyâ. The human drama an etching on its skin. Did not Meher teach that in some way?
Tom: Exactly so.
I have linked to Meher Baba's analysis of the present situation previously. Here it is again.
The New Humanity
I don't care where it is written. I just need to experience it for myself. Some find their own way. Some need a living teacher to help.
Well, that is the point of the perennial teaching. But even if one has not yet realized it oneself, it would still be nicer to living in a good society than a bad one, and it is also a lot simpler to lead a good life in a good society than a bad one. where one is marginalized or excluded.
"One not knowing a land asks of one who knows it,
he goes forward instructed by the knowing one.
Such, indeed, is the blessing of instruction,
one finds a path that leads him straight onward."
Rig Veda 10.32.7
in Abinash Chandra Bose
Hymns from the Vedas
Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1966, p. 59
a society is absolutely useless unless it point towards something that is real.
That is the basis of ideal society in the view of perennial wisdom. To the degree that a society distracts from that it is not ideal.
There is a resonance effect operative.
"He told them another parable: 'The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with[a] three measures of flour until all of it was leavened.'”
— Mt 13:33 NRSV
I should add that an ideal society is an enlightened society. A merely good society is a virtuous one. Traditionalisms, at least some of them, have aimed at ideal society in the sense of enlightened society, while liberalism in general and some traditionalisms has aimed at good society in the sense of a virtuous one.
“Wanting to reform the world without discovering one's true self is like trying to cover the world with leather to avoid the pain of walking on stones and thorns. It is much simpler to wear shoes.” —Ramana Maharshi
Someone said: “There is something I have forgotten.
”Rumi replied: There is one thing in this world that must never be forgotten. If you were to forget all else, but did not forget that, then you would have no reason to worry. But if you performed and remembered everything else, yet forgot that one thing, then you would have done nothing whatsoever.
It is just as if a king sent you to the country to carry out a specific task. If you go and accomplish a hundred other tasks, but do not perform that particular task, then it is as though you performed nothing at all. So, everyone comes into this world for a particular task, and that is their purpose. If they do not perform it, then they will have done nothing.
You say, “Look at all the work I do accomplish, even if I do not perform that task.” You weren’t created for those other tasks! It is just as if you were given a sword of priceless Indian steel, such as can only be found in the treasuries of kings, and you were to treat it as a butcher’s knife for cutting up putrid meat, saying, “I am not letting this sword stand idle, I am using it in so many useful ways.” Or it is like taking a solid gold bowl to cook turnips in, when a single grain of that gold could buy a hundred pots. Or it is as if you took a Damascene dagger of the finest temper to hang a broken gourd from, saying, “I am making good use of it. I am hanging a gourd on it. I am not letting this dagger go to waste.” How foolish that would be! The gourd can hang perfectly well from a wooden or iron nail whose value is a mere farthing, so why use a dagger valued at a hundred pounds?
Still you offer another excuse, saying, “But I apply myself to lofty tasks. I study law, philosophy, logic, astronomy, medicine and the rest. ”Well, for whose sake but your own do you study these? If it is law, it is so nobody can steal a loaf from you, strip you of your clothes, or kill you—in short, it is for your own security. If it is astronomy, the phases of the spheres and their influence upon the earth, whether they are light or heavy, portending tranquility or danger, all these things are concerned with your own situation, serving your own ends. If it is medicine, it is related to your own health and also serves you. When you consider this matter well, the root of all your studies is yourself. All these lofty tasks are but branches of you.
For Soul there is other food besides this food of sleeping and eating, but you have forgotten that other food. Night and day you nourish only your body. Now, this body is like a horse, and this lower world is its stable. The food the horse eats is not the food of the rider. You are the rider and have your own sleeping and eating, your own enjoyment. But since the animal has the upper hand, you lag behind in the horse’s stable. You cannot be found among the ranks of kings and princes in the eternal world. Your heart is there, but since your body has the upper hand, you are subject to its rule and remain its prisoner. —Discourses of Rumi
"Do not spill thy soul in running hither and yon, grieving over the mistakes and the vices of others. The one person whom it is most necessary to reform is yourself." —Ralph Waldo Emerson
That sounds like what Maharshi said, stated differently. But then again, Emerson was well-versed in Hinduism, among other religions. Sometimes it's helpful to see the same thing stated differently. A quote about Emerson:
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) was a poet, an essayist and philosopher. When he was in Harvard, he studied many books related to Eastern and Western Philosophies including Hindu philosophies. Books which studied are Gita, Upanishads, Manu, Vedas and Vishnu. Most of his ideas are quite similar to the concepts of Hinduism. This influence prevails in all of his writings such as poetry, essays and letters. In India therefore, Emerson is considered as one of America's the most important literary figure. Many Hindu religious scholars appreciate the work of Emerson. He was also influenced by Chinese philosophy, Persian poetry and German idealism. Not only Emerson but other Transcendentalists also came under the influence of such philosophies. Brahma, Maya, Hymn and Celestial love these are major poems and works in which Emerson shows influence of Hindu Philosophies. Emerson took most of the titles of his poems from Hindu concepts. He guides those people who want to explore Indian philosophies. This study analyzes a few research articles in order to ascertain about Emerson’s concentration for Hindu philosophies.
Someone said, “Why did you kill your mother?” The other answered, “I saw her sleeping with a strange man.” The first person said, “You should have killed the stranger.” The second one said, “Then I would be killing someone every day.” —Discourses of Rumi
So, I interpret Christ as saying people should have that experience. They should know that divine inside of them. But not to build a better society. That’s not the priority or the purpose.
This is the perennial teaching of the masters of wisdom: Everyone's responsibility is to work on themselves. Then one will automatically have an effect on others through the resonance effect. This is effect (from physics) is now being studied in cognitive science and psychology.
Now that spiritual practices are becoming increasingly common in the West, there is a sufficient population to do scientific research. There was some research historically but the population began to expand significantly in the 60s and since the 70s there are been a growing body of scientific research on inner development and also its effect on larger groups and even societies. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi played a large part in instigating this research, for example, and he inspired a number of scientists to undertake it.
Work on oneself is independently of others for recluses, but not for people in the world. Part of working on oneself involves one's relationships with others. The inner and outer go to together toward full integration of life. When asked, what bout others after recommending working on oneself, Ramana Maharshi responded, there are no others. That is to say, being is one, and our task is to realize this truth. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi pointed out that this is the basis of the resonance effect. Consciousness is a "unified field" in which activity (thought, word and deed) results in interference patterns, constructive and destructive. In Meher Baba's words, "Not we but one." So perennial wisdom is now being translated into modern concepts, including scientific an research is being done on the populations involved in following perennial teaching in the various wisdom traditions. The literature is now voluminous.
Even recluses that are not hermits generally live in monasteries, and monastic life is both individual and collective. Owing to their size and orientation, monastic life presents the possibility of ideal society in miniature. Monasteries also had an influence on the larger society through the resonance effect as well as some social contributions of the monks, like preserving wisdom by copying texts in the days before the printing press. These populations are also being studied now.
The perennial view of mystics and master, saints and prophets is a bit different from the thought leaders, sages and philosophers, especially in the West, where the worldview has been influenced by the ancient Greek notion of living a good life in a good society. From these thinkers the emphasis was on acquiring virtue, which requires character-building as the basis of a good life personally and a good society collectively. This is the emphasis regarding the inner life and personal development leading to living a good life in a good society.
Traditionalist and liberal views are mostly compatible and complimentary. But because the latter is emphasized in the modern liberal societies based on ancient Greek and Roman thought and practice, many if not most people who consider themselves liberals rather than traditionalists do not concern themselves with inner development as leading to enlightenment. But to the degree a liberal society is based on virtue it will be good society although perhaps not an enlightened one.
In addition, many traditionalists understand their tradition differently from the more mystically inclined that focus on the inner. They are more oriented toward belief in doctrine, performance of ritual and observance of codes of conduct. This, too, lead to personal improvement and cultures a good society, for the masters who set forth the traditions provided for these people too.
Your love is so fragile you can't bear to accept that there is cruelty on this planet?
I have yet to meet someone so sheltered, so innocent, that they believe everything and everyone is comprised of goodness. Not anyone over the age of 12, that is.
Pleased to meet you!
“Wanting to reform the world without discovering one's true self is like trying to cover the world with leather to avoid the pain of walking on stones and thorns. It is much simpler to wear shoes.” —Ramana Maharshi
It is simpler to wear shoes, meet with ordinary people, and realize that the world should not be reformed to suit your personal preferences.
The resonant effect is none of my business!
The is true. Ramana Maharshi said, your business is to know yourself. The rest is God's business.
It is true that by knowing oneself all else is known if one accepts the testimony of masters of wisdom.
"There cannot be anything hidden from the One who is everywhere present, for He is everywhere. And it naturally follows that when there cannot be anything hidden from this One He must also be All-Knowing, knowing everything.
"The infinite-Knowing is 'seeing' everything at one and the same time, and seeing it NOW. It is that Knowledge which does not begin and does not end; which is indivisible and continuous, and to which nothing can be added and from which nothing can be subtracted.
"It is that Knowledge which makes God at this moment know that which He knew when it occurred countless aeons ago, and makes Him know that which will occur countless aeons hence; that Knowledge which makes everything known to God simultaneously and NOW. It is the Knowledge of the Perfect Masters and the Avatar.
"In terms simpler to you it means that which you as individuals know at this moment I knew aeons ago, and what you individuals in ages to come will be knowing at a particular moment, I know now."
Meher Baba The Everything and the Nothing, 33 Beacon Hill N.S.W. Australia: MEHER HOUSE Publications, 1963, p. 58.
"How do I know everything? The nature of the infinitely complicated phenomenon—the Universe—is infinitely simple. But to know and understand this is infinitely difficult. When you know what Universal Mind, Universal Energy and Universal Body are and what their relation is to individual mind, individual energy and individual body you will understand how the Perfect Master knows everything.
"This all-comprehensive Knowledge is obtained in a flash. But to know everything in a flash takes an eternity in the illusion of time while you gradually die to your self. This dying to your self means completely losing yourself to God to find your Self as God.
"This dying to your false self is no easy task; raising a corpse to life is child's play compared to it."
Ibid., 35, p. 60
Your love is so fragile you can't bear to accept that there is cruelty on this planet?
Cruel people, yes, cruelty, no. Not one iota. If anything, the story of Joseph should have taught you that. His brothers intended cruelty, but they were just doing God's will. It is said that the greatest mystery in life is the merging of the personal will and the divine will.
You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good. —Genesis 50:20
I have yet to meet someone so sheltered, so innocent, that they believe everything and everyone is comprised of goodness. Not anyone over the age of 12, that is.
At the inward level, yes. Strip away the ego and what remains?
When the Shaykh (Halláj) said ‘I am God’ and carried it through (to the end), he throttled (vanquished) all the blind (sceptics). When a man's ‘I’ is negated (and eliminated) from existence, then what remains? Consider, O denier. —Rumi
...but they were just doing God's will.
Then it was His cruelty.
But I don't believe in God, nor would I absolve anyone if I did.
Does jrbarch accept that there are cruel people?
Let him admit or deny it.
I'm not asking him to be a judge, or to preside over a courtroom.
Moreover, I don't see how that admission would affect his spiritual beliefs in any way.
ego
Psychoanalysis
The part of the mind that mediates between the conscious and the unconscious and is responsible for reality testing and a sense of personal identity.
I suppose without an ego, one could walk through a bad neighbourhood at the wrong time and never realize they aren't a part of it. Even as the local residents beat them to death.
Without an ego, I suppose there would be no predators and no prey, and no hunger?
I suppose there wouldn't be much of anything.
...This all-comprehensive Knowledge is obtained in a flash. But to know everything in a flash takes an eternity in the illusion of time while you gradually die to your self. This dying to your self means completely losing yourself to God to find your Self as God.
According to Prof. Sam Vaknin, people with narcissistic personality disorder accomplish this in childhood. And it is painful - for them, and for everyone unfortunate enough to be in a relationship with them.
This all-comprehensive Knowledge is obtained in a flash.
This is true.
It is rare that divine inspirations come except suddenly,
and this, so that they be protected
from servants’ claiming them
by virtue of the existence of receptivity on their part.
—Al Hikam: A collection of 264 Sufi Aphorisms by Ibn Ata Allah Al-Iskandari
According to Prof. Sam Vaknin, people with narcissistic personality disorder accomplish this in childhood.
What you're describing here is something completely different. Because this comes slowly, we know that it is from the ego. The other is different because it comes suddenly. It is also transitory, leaving its traces behind.
Also, it is accompanied by the light of ten thousand suns.
“Our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we call it, is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all their completeness.”
— William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience
One cannot become a narcissist later in life, it is a response to trauma during the formative years. What is interesting about this disorder is they have no inner self. They construct an external object and then become it. They relinquish that which comes from within. As a consequence, they don't perceive other people as individuals in their own right. They are merely reflections of the narcissist's externalized self.
Instead of "I am, because you are", "I am, because you supply me with a reflection of the God I constructed."
Those who fail to provide narcissist supply, or are unwilling, are quickly discarded.
It is a slow process whereby the normal ego is destroyed and replaced with a grandiose construct. But it has to be replaced. Having no ego for an extended period of time would not be conducive to survival.
Narcissists can also 'recover' as they age, in the sense they no longer pass the diagnostic criteria for the disorder.
Fixed it:
Our normal waking self-awareness, rational self-awareness as we call it, is but one special type of self-awareness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of awareness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all their completeness.
Consciousness wasn't meant to serve as a stand-in, other than to indicate whether you are awake or asleep, or in another unresponsive state.
You are supposed to feel self-respect, self-worth, self-esteem, and have a conscience - these are symptoms of healthy narcissism. In other words, normal psychological development. Not pathological, not divine.
I meet people who are at peace with themselves, and people who have chips on their shoulders. The former put you at ease, the latter spread anxiety. They have the power to do this, just by being in your presence.
I don't bullshit myself into believing that everyone is good or kind or virtuous or divine. They are just people, at different stages of their life. Not all of them have a conscience, and not all of them are genuine in their social interactions. After all, what goes on in the public sphere is limited by pretense, namely courtesy and/or politeness. The same people can be altogether different in their private lives.
Why your perception of reality is reminiscent to that of an innocent child is a mystery to me. Nowadays children lose their innocence at a younger age. When it is lost, it doesn't return. Experience teaches you not to trust everyone you meet; or to assume they have good intentions. Experience reveals that the world is not made entirely of roses and sunshine. I think it's a shame when children lose their innocence before they absolutely have to.
But you're not a child. I expect people to grow up and describe the world as it is. Not sugar-coat it, or paint it black and white. If I were chatting with a nihilist, I'd have another set of critiques.
As for the world you create for yourself, that's none of my business. Unlike a nihilist, it should being you solace.
*bring* ^
I don’t have any spiritual beliefs – in fact I take great care to separate out what I have experienced and know for myself and what is belief: to an extent not many people around you would do actually. I have never met a personal god. I have met an universal energy inside of me, that I can only describe as divine.
What you don't experience cannot be defined as spiritual. It doesn't matter if your journey begins with a set of beliefs.
Light... ten thousand suns.
Like the Apostle Paul on the road to Damascus. Innocently going about his business rounding up Christians and then bam!... right out of the blue. A blinding light which literally left him blind for three days.
They call it the Damascene experience, also known as the conversion experience.
Like an epiphany?
Separate those who have had a conversion experience from those who have not. Include those who have acquired faith.
What to do with the rest. Do you write them off?
Do you dumb down religion to attract some of them?
Do you force them? Indoctrinate them?
If they go through the motions, perhaps they may see a spark...
How about a PSA (public service announcement)?
They are used to solve more down to Earth problems.
Here's another PSA by our oh-so-polite Aussie neighbours:
Honest Government Ad | Net Zero by 2050 (feat. Greta)
Epiphany anyone?
Peter Pan: Separate those who have had a conversion experience from those who have not. Include those who have acquired faith.
What to do with the rest. Do you write them off?
Do you dumb down religion to attract some of them?
Do you force them? Indoctrinate them?
If they go through the motions, perhaps they may see a spark
Tom: It is not necessary to have a conversion experience to engage in spirituality. While spirituality is found in the mystical traditions of the various religions, it is also found in non-religious wisdom traditions, including humanism albeit latently there. Various meditation practices that are non-religious are available, for instance, and many people open to spirituality that are non-religious or even anti-religious practice them.
Generally speaking, a basic requirement to be open to spirituality as a way of transcendence is viewing the naturalistic assumption of scientific method as a methodological assumption rather than a metaphysical principle about reality that assumes materialism and rules out non-ordinary experience as meaningful or significant.
If one rules out spirituality, then the substitute for religion is liberalism, which sought to preserve the non-religious aspect of the Judaeo tradition and integrate it will with the other other major pillars of Western civilization–Greek philosophy, Roman law and organization, and modern science.
For example, 18th c. liberalism integrated Judaeo-Christian moral values into Greek ethical thought to form the values system of the liberal West as the prescription for living a good life in a good society through character-building.
This was an integral aspect in the design of liberal education. Of course, liberal education, indeed education, was available only to the elites that had the necessary leisure. Eventually that was extended to the masses wen technology made leisure more available.
In addition, there are many religious people that reject spirituality as heretical. They follow the way of belief in doctrine, performance of ritual, and observance of moral codes. This sets up a dialectic between liberalism and traditionalism, for example.
Those who are committed to the pursuit of truth follow the way of knowledge. Those that are committed to art follow the way of beauty. Warriors follow the way of endurance. Etc. According to perennial wisdom, there are many ways that lead to the same goal, and everyone is already embarked on the way that will lead them to the goal of realizing who they really are, regardless of whether they are conscious of this yet.
This is the purpose of the universe, evolution, and life. So no worries. Everything is on track. This is the meaning of Meher Baba's "Do your best and then don't worry, be happy."
So there is something available for everyone. It's all good. No one is left out or left behind. The train is running on time and it doesn't make any different whether one is riding in parlor car with windows or it a closed-in box car. Everyone gets to the same destination that goes by many names and also no name, for in reality it is beyond name and form according to the wise.
Do you dumb down religion to attract some of them?
Religion is watered-down spirituality. It is also the gateway to spirituality.
As for the tension between the religious and the spiritual, it is because the religious think that what they see is all that there is. Rumi weighs in here:
Everyone begins this path from their own
place. The Koran is a double-sided brocade. Some
enjoy one side, and some the other. Both are true,
since God desires that everyone should gain
benefit from it. In the same way, a woman has a
husband and a child. Each enjoys her in a differ-
ent way. The child’s pleasure is in her breast and
her milk. The husband’s pleasure is in intercourse
with her. Some people are infants of the Way—
they take pleasure in the literal meaning of the
Koran, and drink that milk. But those who have
reached years of full discretion have another
enjoyment and a different understanding of the
inner meanings of the Koran. —Discourses of Rumi
Further to my comment, an example of the tension between the religious and the spiritual in Christianity.
Marguerite Porete
Marguerite Porete (French: [maʁɡ(ə)ʁit pɔʁɛt]; 13th century – 1 June 1310) was a French-speaking mystic and the author of The Mirror of Simple Souls, a work of Christian mysticism dealing with the workings of agape (divine love). She was burnt at the stake for heresy in Paris in 1310 after a lengthy trial, refusing to remove her book from circulation or recant her views.
The Mirror of Simple Souls
The title of Porete's book refers to the simple soul which is united with God and has no will other than God's own. Some of the language, as well as the format of a dialogue between characters such as Love, Virtue and the Soul, reflects a familiarity with the style of courtly love which was popular at the time, and attests to Porete's high level of education and sophistication.
Porete's vision of the Soul in ecstatic union with God, moving in a state of perpetual joy and peace, is a repetition of the Catholic doctrine of the Beatific Vision, albeit experienced in this life and not in the next. Where Porete ran into trouble with some authorities was in her description of the Soul in this state being above the worldly dialectic of conventional morality and the teachings and control of the earthly church. Porete argues that the Soul in such a sublime state is above the demands of ordinary virtue, not because virtue is not needed but because in its state of union with God virtue becomes automatic. As God can do no evil and cannot sin, the exalted/Annihilated soul, in perfect union with Him, no longer is capable of evil or sin. Church authorities viewed the concept that someone was above the demands of ordinary virtue as amoral.
Porete was right. In Sufism, we say that in the state of divine union, God covers His servant's imperfections with His qualities. God does not incarnate, but His qualities incarnate.
Generally speaking, a basic requirement to be open to spirituality as a way of transcendence is viewing the naturalistic assumption of scientific method as a methodological assumption rather than a metaphysical principle about reality that assumes materialism and rules out non-ordinary experience as meaningful or significant.
The scientific method does not rule out the supernatural. It has no comment on such matters. Nor does it have anything to say about someone's emotional response, which is the basis for spirituality.
If one rules out spirituality, then the substitute for religion is liberalism, which sought to preserve the non-religious aspect of the Judaeo tradition and integrate it will with the other other major pillars of Western civilization–Greek philosophy, Roman law and organization, and modern science.
If one rules out spirituality, there is no need for belief systems, or conceptual substitutes. If I ride a bicycle, and perceive that experience as ordinary, what further elaboration do I need?
If bicycle riding is a spiritual experience, then liberalism may not suffice. I may have to come up with an alternative that encapsulates the meaning of it.
Liberalism is useful in the public sphere, on topics such as ethics, or justice. For spirituality, which is personal, it may or may not be a workable substitute.
When liberalism or religion are part of the dominant culture, they stymie the development of spirituality. Culture is an opponent, unless it explicitly encourages us to find our own spiritual path.
Confident in his hunting abilities, Orion declared he would kill every animal in the world but Gaea — the goddess of the Earth. Angered by Orion's claims, Zeus sent a scorpion to kill him. Upon Orion's demise, Zeus turned him into a constellation, along with the scorpion that killed him. - Google
Orion's dog is there too.
Post a Comment