Who's calling the tune?

Far be it from me to want to sound condescending. I know much of what I'm saying can come across like that, but it's not my intent. I can assure you of that. What I've been going on about over the last several posts is, at least in my mind, a pretty big deal. We may think that life is merely business as usual, we may want to believe things really aren't any different from how they've always been, and we may even wish that we weren't involved. But it's not, they are and we are. Once you take a step back and get a glimpse of the big picture, you realize that while a lot of the details are very similar, their context has shifted and that makes all the difference in the world.

We can also continue to believe that small, individual, often petty, decisions can get things going in a different direction, but we missed that opportunity. Things are, whether we like or not, coming to a head. As I never tire of pointing out, just about all that we have set up for ourselves, all the systems that we simply take for granted -- social institutions, schools, our economic and banking system, politics, religion, nations, you name it -- are broken. All of them are causing way more problems than they are producing benefits, and the various varieties of each are at odds with or in confrontation with the others. So, do we just let things take their course?

That is one option, no doubt about it. It's not my preferred one, but it's an option nevertheless. We can also decide that each of us will keep his or her own and try to overwhelm, overcome, or outright defeat the others. This the active side of simply letting things take their course. It will, in my estimation, merely accelerate the decline we're experiencing. Another option, of course, is to place the responsibility in the hands of our elected leaders and representatives. We all know they are devoted civil servants keen on making sure that we the people are well provided for. Or, we can take matters into our own hands and see to it that we each get ours and everyone else can fend for themselves. It is these latter two options that seem to be taking on most form in the West. Truth be told, a moment's serious reflection will reveal that both of them are naive and dangerous. Is this all we can do?

Not really. I believe our best option is to simply wake up. We've been gliding along in our fat, dumb and happy lives for much too long. We've lost sight of what's important in the grander, not the individual, scheme of things. It's time for us to become aware of ourselves, our decisions, and the consequences of our actions. In other words, we need to get smart about what else can be done other than business as usual. And it is long overdue that we finally become worthy of the name "human being": not acting towards others like we wouldn't want them acting toward us; recognizing that all of us, regardless of skin color, beliefs or culture all desire the same things and are entitled to the same things as everyone else, like peace, security, enough to eat, a modicum of happiness, and a bit of meaning in our lives; accepting that differences are not better or worse, they're only different and maybe there is something we can learn from that; standing up for what we know is right because it's right for everyone, without exception, and not for a privileged few.

It's not a long list, to be sure, but we can call the tune ourselves or pay the piper. It's up to us. It's up to each and every one of us.

Second verse, same as the first

Now, back to our previously scheduled program ...

We left off wondering whether the efficiency and deficiency of the apparent shift to the next structure of consciousness is being presented as an immediate choice. I know that there are a number of you who simply can't believe that we could be changing the fundamental way we think and interact with the world. It's not an easy notion to accept. All you have to do is turn on your TV or radio, or simply leave the house to run a few errands and you are likely to be overwhelmed by the sheer volume of stupidity you encounter. The ridiculousness of so much that we have to endure doesn't immediately indicate that something totally different is on the way. I understand that, believe me, but at the same time I'm here to tell you that this is an exceedingly narrow view of life and of humanity.

I will be the first to admit and acknowledge that we, as a species, are slow learners. It takes us forever to really get something, and when we do, we tend to forget it rather quickly. We keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again. The way we express our difficulties in coping have changed throughout the span of our existence, but a lot of the fundamental problems still remain. So, yes, I'm aware that there are many of you who simply believe that we humans are simply bad at best, or rotten to the core at worst, but this too is a too narrow view.

Exceptions confirm the rule. As bad as we can be as a species, we also know that we are capable of wonderful, if not wondrous, things, that we can rise to glorious heights of accomplishment as well. In other words, we have it in us, but it's just that most of us have managed to bury it so deeply that we have trouble finding it. We too often think we need to be hard, cold, and decisive because the state of the world forces us to be that way. But all of the truly great human beings were above average in the same down-and-dirty world in which the rest of us live. The truly great among us are great not because of the world, but in spite of it. That's something none of us should ever forget.

This is why I believe we do have a choice. In fact, I firmly believe that we always have had a choice, we just weren't aware of that fact. We have thought that the world is as it is, mostly because that's the way it is, and because most everyone around us told us that that's the way the world is and there's not a lot we can do about it. It wasn't true. It isn't true. It's a mere misperception of how things really are.

So, once again, we're faced with a choice, but this time around -- and this is where this shift differs greatly from those that came before -- we can win the big one, or we can turn out the lights. All of our genius and technological "progress" has provided us with a number of luxuries, that's for sure, but they've also given us the ability to completely destroy ourselves, to wipe our and many other species of life off the face of the earth. While some people are worried that one country (Iran) might get a (that is, one) nuclear bomb, there are already enough of such devices on "active duty" that if used would essentially force this planet to start all over again. And it took us about 15,000,000,000 years to get here this time around.

We humans have always been a particularly destructive species, but we could overdo it this time. We have a choice, but we have to want to make it, and we have to be aware of the consequences of our choice. A lot hangs in the balance. Are we up to the challenge?

Resurrection

Back in February, I took a break from my train of thought at the time for a brief Valentine's Day interlude. If I was willing to take a break for a pseudo-holiday, I should be willing to do the same for a real one, so today, is our Easter break.

Easter is, without a doubt, the most Christian of all holidays that we (pretend to) celebrate. I mean, without Easter, there's no Christianity, pure and simple. You would think, and it still amazes me, that Easter isn't a bigger deal than it is ... for Christians, that is. Could it be that they really don't understand what the holiday is all about? Perhaps. It's a great kiddy holiday, though, even if you're an atheist: what's not to like about chocolate, in whatever form it comes in? Valentine's Day may mean chocolate for the sweetie, but at Easter, it's chocolate for the whole family (as well as those disgustingly artificial and chemically laden marshmallow chicks, but, hey, haven't I been harping on the fact that there's an upside and a downside to just about everything?).

What Easter has in common with just about every other major religion on the planet, is what most people just don't get. The focus, the theme of this particular holiday is life after death (put in most mundane terms) or eternal life (in a more spiritual and uplifting sense). Now, I don't want to go into detail about or have an argument about who has the better heaven. Every religion talks about what happens after we die and the common thread is that if you were "good" (whatever that means in the given religious context), what comes next is good, and if you were "bad" (and the same caveat applies here), what comes next is, well, literally, hell.

Who's right and who's wrong is not important. Whether anyone is right or anyone is wrong isn't important either. What is important is the fact that throughout the entire course of human history, recorded or archaeologically discovered, this has apparently been a subject that has been on our minds. The Neanderthals took great pains in burying their dead; the Egyptians made a civilization out of it; there hasn't been a time, place, or people who didn't try to come to terms with the fact that we're only here for so long and then ... . Yes, Easter is the holiday at which we think about death - as natural a part of life as there can be - as well as life, in particular life after death.

I believe that Easter is as good a time as anything to think about such things. Americans like to avoid the subject; other cultures apparently can't get enough of it. Regardless of where you personally stand on the issue, you need to come to terms with it anyway. You can believe that you can blow yourself up and awaken to six dozen virgins or that you'll walk streets of silver and live in houses of gold, or that you don't wake up at all and just rot in the ground. It really doesn't matter. All that's important is that you give it some thought.

Having said that, though, and in keeping with the current flow of posts (apart from this interlude), there is increasing interest in the topic by lots of people. One of the more interesting approaches, I would like to add, comes from the world of hard science, believe it or not. The philosopher of science Jim Beichler has written a number of articles and books on the subject. He has developed a theory of physics which he believes shows, scientifically, that individual consciousness survives death. He's part of a growing number of scientists who are refusing to be silenced by the "accepted wisdom" of the scientific community and are demonstrating in rigorous and scientifically acceptable ways that there's more in this area too than meets the eye, or we'd like to admit.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. If you're interested in Bleicher's ideas, you can find him on academia.edu. Open your mind. Expand your horizons. Take a new lease on life.

Upsides, downsides, and time-compression

One of the features of the transition of consciousness that we are experiencing that interests me in particular is the rate of change. When looked at historically, we find that the efficient and deficient modes of each structure of consciousness has been shorter ... much shorter ... than the one that preceded it. I don't know why that is, but it appears that it is that way.

If you recall, I already outlined what I believe the time spans of the different structures of consciousness to be, and if we consider that our latest deficient phase is a mere 500 years in the making, well, I think you can agree that things seem to be speeding up. Could they be speeding up to the point where the emergence of the efficient as well as the deficient modes could be simultaneous? Could it be that right up front, we have to decide whether we want the efficient or deficient mode? I know that's a difficult thought to get one's head around, so I won't pursue it further. If you're so inclined, though, I invite you to think about just that "at your leisure".

This is, of course, only one way to understand the notion of time-compression. I mean, we all think that life is passing us by more quickly than we've ever experienced it before, and this applies to everyone, not just to us older folks. My children complain about "not having enough time" to get things done that need to be done, and everyone wants to know where their days went and why is my 20th reunion already being planned, and why there just aren't enough hours in a day.

Another way to think about time-compression, however ... and it's my preferred way (after all, the one just described merely depresses me at my age, and at my age, the last thing I need is depression) ... is that what we once thought over, dead, and long-forgotten turns out to be more up-to-date, current, and "now" than we ever imagined. Think about it.

More and more discoveries are being made to show that "humans" (however you may define the term) have been around, doing "human things", for much longer than we suspected. We've had to revise our "accepted anthropological wisdom". The advances made in understanding the human genome and consciousness are forcing us to rethink both biology and physics. What is surprising, however, is the fact that very ancient and long-forgotten "knowledge" is making a come-back. It could just be that the Ancient Egyptians knew more than we give them credit for. It could be that historical linguistics needs to be revised. We are becoming ever more aware of the availability of information and we are being challenged more than ever to deal with this information in a sensible and meaningful way ... and we're having a hard time doing that. Why? Because the things we are finding out are at odds with the things that we thought we knew, with what we have been made to believe is true. In other words, the very foundation of who we are is being called into question. This is a hard nut to crack, and it is one that most people will resist. Nevertheless, our future, our entire existence depends on the decisions we make now. No pressure. But if you don't know, you need to get smart fast.

So, for those of you who are so inclined, and for those of you who would like to think more, let me suggest a couple of sources: in physics, Penrose, Goswami, Greene, and Bleicher aren't a bad place to start; in biology, try Sheldrake; in philosophy, I recommend Midgley; for language and linguistics, Stan Tenen and the work of the Meru Foundation; as far as Ancient Wisdom is concerned, the best place to start is with René Schwaller de Lubicz; as far as mythology is concerned, try Hamlet's Mill by Santillana & Dechand. There's more. Much, much more, of course, but you have to start somewhere.

Start somewhere.