posted on May, 19 2017 @ 06:40 PM
Sometimes I have the funny thought: "am I the most self-aware person on Earth?". Its funny to me because I know it's a narcissistic thought, and
sharing it with others - something I'm driven to do - is ultimately about making known why those thoughts even pop up in the first place. It's not
only because I believe my work seems to legitimately unite the hard sciences and the soft sciences (humanities), and so provides a detailed 'guide'
to the nuanced phenomenology, psychology and the subtle interpersonal lattice-work of social forces that organize, constellate, and canalize the flow
of feeling, thinking and narrative-making with the Other's we interact with. It's mostly because I am a partial product of this world - driven by a
narcissistic ego-need to have others recognize my value as a thinker - the complexity and erudition that underlies my theories - in other words, to
seek as others seek, because I am creature of the larger system - just as you are. My enlivenment - health and wellbeing - is fundamentally
dependent on the interpersonal signs my biology has to process when I encounter Other's in my living. My "interpretation" of the signs, at the
nitty-gritty affective-procedural level - in my muscles stomach, and chest, is beyond my control. This is the proverbial "first arrow" of Buddhist
thought - the fact of immediate "embeddedness" in a world, and so continuity with it, that makes instinct and reflex an inevitable part of
You Cannot Control What You Feel: The Aleister Crowley fantasy of "do what thou wilt" is a sand-castle built on no sound
understanding of the natural world. A threshold will be reached - as it always is - where your cognitive mind - itself an emergent function of
social processing begins to interact with the dissociated/disavowed products of experience - those 'first arrows' which need to be
suppressed, denied, and ignored, because the actor/agent has such a faint, dysregulated relation to the facts which matter: indeed, as Philip
Bromberg, a well respected relational psychologist states,
[I]“Dissociation narrows ones range of perception so as to setup non-conflictual categories of self-experience” [/I]
This is logical and very consistent with dynamical systems theory. Just like the cell, our mind has "receptors", or self-states, which we
unconsciously assume in order to "metabolize", or psychoemotionally process, the needs we can't help but feel within any prospective Human-Human
interaction. These self-states just like the gene-protein receptor networks within cells, are partially dissociated from one another: separate systems
occurring in the same system, each operant at different times in relation to the 'signs' being offered by the environment. For example, a gene which
has protein receptors for glucose, will switch to lactose protein-receptors when glucose is no longer available and only lactose is. This switch is a
highly choreographed molecular chain-reaction where molecular messages from the environment (absence of glucose, interaction with lactose) triggers a
cascade of events where epigenetic regulation of glucose genes are turned off via methylation (for instance), and genes corresponding to lactose
metabolism are turned on, which leads to the propagation of protein-receptors that process lactose, which "out-compete" the glucose receptors.
All of this is cause and effect through a chain of networks that are partially dissociated from one another. Glucose and Lactose protein-receptors on
the membrane of a cell is a function of glucose and lactose in the environment. Correspondingly, self-states, which are "ways of being you" that
deal with some specific social culture, are 'activated' by being in that particular environment. The valuation of Others - how they feel -
'impresses' itself upon your unconscious via your brain, which enacts a self-state that will best handle (according to your brains unconscious
predictions) the present environmental interaction.
There is an 'utter' continuity here. Utter, because we have been living for so long without an inkling of the continuity that exists between
ourselves and the matter we are made of. My body is not "other", and yet there are cults - "left hand paths" as they are called - which operate
via that unbelievable fantasy of "changing nature", as if its laws weren't responsible for everything that exists: as if the wish to change nature,
or Human nature, wasn't essentially identical to suicide and non-existence.
Devaluing the body also is simultaneously devaluing the Other. Notice that I capitalize "Other" - because it is more real, in reality, than my name
"Michael". The people who fantasize about an arbitrary reality by which Humans with their arbitrary fantasizing arbitrarily imagine a world which
follows "no laws" are Humans have lost all contact with their bodies - and so are literally theorizing in an imaginary vacuum. $hitty thinking comes
from dissociated minds - who fail to recognize that the body and Other Humans - never mind nature and all "otherness", is essential to my being, to
my health, vitality and sense of wellbeing. To be dissociated from this is to lose control of yourself, and indeed, to subject yourself to a different
'ontological paradigm', at least with regards to what sort of dynamics rule Human affectivity - motivation: what sort of "idols" Humans worship,
in other words.
The Hebrew Bible is Probably True
Truth is truth. Yes, today, people still think that religion or science are different endeavors, when they are clearly not: nothing which happens in
Human minds is dissociated from physical dynamics within matter. No. Symmetry making and breaking in the brain is deeply connected to symmetry making
and breaking in interpersonal relationships. The mind we experience, in turn, materializes these many different relationships we have, Indeed - since
the Neolithic, we have been living in a widening world of relationships - and very different ones, too, which creates incompatibility, dissonance, and
so, a sense of threat - a deepening of egotism, etc.
You don't need aliens to explain Human egotism. You need a changing social world, an environment which entices and compels the Human (male) into a
sense of ownership and domination. It was the devaluation of nature - the conquering of her and "domesticating" of her, which entangled females,
other humans (usually strangers), and the body itself, into a relationship of estrangement.
This is the message of the first 4 chapters of Genesis. It's remarkable - and yet, what does this mean, that this book may be true, other than that
the nature of reality is not foreign to us - that it is intuitively accessible and not necessarily dependent on scientific ways of knowing.
The tale is primitive, but it is fundamentally RELATIONAL. 6 days "God" creates the world. Is this God, or is it us - the busy laborers, working
like ants in moving about our lives while at the same time creating and developing a technical orientation to reality that "opens us up",
materially, technologically, and finally, epistemologically and ontologically. Quantum physics sure seems like the result of "great work" - of Human
laborers in the "realm of Elohim" (powers, or laws of nature, in the Hebrew language)...