This society, this world, this form of being in which we live, is shaped, fundamentally, by the economic architecture of capitalism.
Everything about ourselves is eminently understandable if we only observed the language of our phenomenology. But, alas, this phrase probably only
means something to people who have taken up 'mindfulness' - or a general attitude of "non-judgemental curiosity
about the flow of your
The world reified in language, the language of our culture, of our academies, is brutishly unself-aware, simplistically assuming within a lattice-work
of complex constructions, designing life towards an arbitrary aesthetic, as if life didn't indicate one by its flows, its forms, and the access we
all have to this internal dynamism from within our own human experience.
People who are self-aware are self aware because they have practiced self-awareness
. They have followed the direction, worked earnestly, and by
doing so, restructured the teleodynamic flow of their internal experience. Mindfulness does not erase the past, but it nevertheless does the job by
providing the observant consciousness the means to influence the flow of experiences.
This happens through an intensely nuanced combination of
rational inquiry (science) and a meditative focus on body and breath. These two approaches address the two general forms of constraint on the flow of
human perception: top-down "predictions" of experiential causation i.e. what the meanings in the actions of Others means for your self-experience.
And bottom-up release of metabolic energy repeatedly trapped by the "top-down" assumptions, by extending the out-breath and so inducing the
sinoatrial node to relax flexion n diaphragmatic musculature.
A confused, paranoid, and prideful society
We truly do live in an ignorant naive world. Still, this impression can seem so wanton when there is still a presumption of "being on the right
track". There are only two concepts that are useful to our thinking about our flow of experience, and this extends from a scientific analysis of the
structure of communicative-processes. I speak certainly about this because it is IN YOU! Everyone can know from their own first person experience how
they experience certain interactions, what causes this feeling, how I respond to this feeling, and so on and so forth. Our society has bred confused,
paranoid and fearful people who are nevertheless to shame-phobic to acknowledge what is occurring within them.
Think of pride. Think of those times when someone says something slightly derogatory, and you respond in a way, with a sort of zest, that could only
properly be described as "prideful". The point with this example is that the human brain, as paradoxical as it sounds, is intrinsically 2nd
person oriented i.e. self-conscious
. We act in certain ways to bring about a feeling of self.
These types of actions occur most frequently
under some degree of duress, at work, or any social place, where performing the scripts and demonstrating certain social capacities brings about, as
we all want, exactly the types of experiences that make us feel good about "ourselves".
This is so monstrously reflexive that the only people who truly understand the magnitude of the problem are those with a curiosity in their own
experiences. Psychodynamical processes, related to pride, and in particular, how pride enters phenomenology right after a subtle registering of shame,
is ultimately why we have never yet established a truly stable, egalitarian society. It's not due to a lack of understanding, as systems sciences in
all fields - biology, psychology, sociology, business - is pointing in a good direction. However, even systems-scientists haven't properly
conceptualized the needs human beings actually have: to feel good, which requires being positively known by Others
to actually experience those
Being known, by the way, is not a neutral action, but a veritable creation event, which "spurs" the neurological hardware of the brain to generate
neural-connections that "correspond" to the form of expression - really, the spiritual presence of the Other - and so bring about a process, banally
spoken about as ontogenesis, when indeed, it is a creation event, fundamentally dependent on the presence of the enlivening Other to bring the brain
to species-typical proportions.
We do not know ourselves. Capitalism, and its intrinsic angst-ridden restless spirit, is responsible for the delusions we impose on ourselves.
Who here has ever encountered this? You say something to someone else about something they said you disagree with. Your explanation is complex - too
complex for them to understand, because unlike you, they have not been training their brain since childhood, and so, do not conceptualize as easily.
Their mind-brain is "constrained" towards only one acceptable action: Dissociation. First, implicit in the communicative-representation (the
language your speaking) is a question about capacity; remember, all human experience is intrinsically 2nd-person oriented. When I experience myself
struggling to understand something someone who disagrees with me
is trying to explain, it is actually being unconsciously redescribed as a
capacity issue: "I'm stupid if I can't understand" - and to not know something, to be ignorant, is to feel "less than" the person challenging
your knowledge. A capacity redescription therefore can be described as an adaptive-mechanism that avoids a conscious experience of shame. Mind you,
shame is the causative force in the subsequent "focus on the deficiency in the Other". We all know this. Psychoanalysts call it "projection". In
the situation described in this diagram, projection is seen as an active process
with two unconscious referents: the referents, mind you, are
neurobiologically inscribed echoes of past experiences. They guide our prospective minds by "avoiding actions" or ways of being that may elicit
negative feelings, and so jeopardize your ability to reach Michael Tomasellos 'species attractor: shared-intentionality.
Dissociation is generally about shame. When we feel shame, our body-brain-mind takes it as a poison. It is a constraint on experience - a constraint
on what "you let yourself" know. In this example, the shame of not having knowledge, and so experiencing yourself vis-a-vis the Other as
"less-than", cannot be consciously tolerated. It is, in fact, a little mini-injustice cast within the human cultural nexus. Whenever someone does
something like this, the correlation between self and world, breaks down. Delusions swarm between minds, ultimately socially finessed scripted that
regulate our affective experience, this being, ultimately, the judge in why we tend to act in unfair, arrogant, and abusive ways.
Think about it. Our conscious experience is INHERENTLY tinged with unconscious flows of affect that "speak knowledge" about what we fear, what we
feel we need, and what we don't want to see. Still, we are quasi-machines, built by by action-based sensory precision feedback so that every
"moment" between organism and world is attuned. But, much is "filled in". All our visual systems are imperfect constructions of the external
world, subject to real-metabolic time-scales and biological processes that color our phenomenology.