From Self-deception to Fellowship

In my early years the works of rebel scientists filled my imagination. I saw several original thinkers that produced novel observations, yet were reduced into expressing the observations through the existing context, rather than finding a better medium for explaining the observation. While the observations seemed legitimate, it was still the case that, without a better theoretical underpinning, there was little chance of refining the observed effect. So I ‘made up’ (cobbled together) my own idiosyncratic physics model, and realized soon how incompatible it was with existing theories. During this time, engagement with others could be quite pointless as I saw how identified people are to their education. The idea then struck me that knowledge that came too quickly would pervert the process of integration. It might produce yet another bastard child. Plus, I realized that because consciousness comes before its productions, the better place for ones focus is on consciousness. So even though I had a bad attitude to philosophy, because I thought of it as ‘toadies rationalizing the power pretences of their sponsors’, i retreated to this and to history and history of religion. Every narrative has its limitations but with discernment, the false and small narratives may add up to a larger coherent narrative. New context creation is far more relevant at this point, than are new discoveries. _________________

My efforts towards creating a new context centers around reformulating the meaning content of certain settled upon concepts. Every day we see the meaning content of various facts being twisted to conform to the needs of self serving actors. (Hamas/rockets/civilians> justified response). So the dog that doesn’t bark is more informative than most standard (vested interest) contrived commentary.

A different read on the archetypes may help to define a new context (psychical conditioning system). This is my humble contribution, please deconstruct as you feel necessary.

I think that the conditions in society reflect our misunderstanding of the archetypes. We have dreamed up an adversary to God and thereby, split reality. This seems understandable, in that things appear dualistically. But if we can create a psychical conditioning system that draws focus to the continuum, (self and other) rather than self vs. other, we may yet find a way through this maze.

The natural impulse of authority structures is to suppress ‘enthusiasm’. It is simply a perceived requirement for more efficient administration of large groups. Authorities also know that some enthusiasm is necessary to inspire and generate energy for larger purposes. No doubt 'authorities' will try to influence, direct or front run inevitable expressions of enthusiasm. But try as they might, this is not their natural world, and the enthusiasm of the masses may at any time find a point of focus and a methodology that can tame the depredations of corruption that are inherent in a mutual blackmail society.

By nature some folk are inclined to conform while others relate their identity to questioning and rebelling. The two styles of thinking can respect the legitimate element within the contrasting style. However for mysterious reasons there seems to be little space for this kind of observation in the mind of most partisans. Anyway this seems odd to me, and/or a perfect reason for self-deception to flourish, which it will as long as we mistake style as being substance. Then again, how does one not play to the audience? Fortunately a large share of humanity is driven by fellowship rather than a need to impose. This cohort will find its voice when it recognizes that current systems for organizing thought gives power to extremists, the very people that do not have the common interest in their heart.

Cut to the chase.

The positive polarity of order/religion/Ahriman/dogma is that it provides basis for the Law and repetition. The positive polarity of liberty/enthusiasm/Lucifer/imagination is the energy it provides for change. We need repetition to give ourselves time to internalize the stuff we learn and we need to apply imagination to reassess what we ‘think’ we have learned. Some of us however in becoming overly identified with one or the other impulse, unconsciously become propagandists for a false narrative (and thereby provoke negative relations between order and liberty). This game will be spoiled as we consciously recognize our unconsciousness drivers.

Of course there are interests (in us even), that cannot bear to see this game end and though I love this game, I’m confident the next will be even better.