It is in the nature of love and care that responsivity - and responsibility - to the stimulations of the world around us leads to some sort of degree
of connection. This means, in effect, that loves binds, or synchronizes, the system-which-loves with the object-that-is-loved.
Yes, yes, "you" hate that. The "you" here, indeed, is a nice little fiction "you" tell "yourself" as a way to help "yourself". This is a
prickly paradox of a situation. Semiotically - or in terms of "meanings", everyone is attached to something. If it's Buddhism, you're attached. If
you're a believer in Gnosticism, those ideas "you" recruit are there to help "you". Ideas are not just semantic devices but also ontological
devices that are there to regulate the physiological flow of your bodies dynamics. The idea would stand there at the top of the precipice of your
being, serving "you" in helping your regulate your affect state, while at the same time "you" serve it: you're dependent on its particular
semiotic configuration with respect to the meaning and significance of life: for instance, if you believe in Gnosticism, your belief automatically
attaches negative significance to the physical world i.e. your body. This belief dissipates energy - in terms of your particular semiotic history -
"coherently". This belief has worked to help you: it both affords you a good sense of self, but more than anything else: it binds you to others -
both real and imaginal - with whom you are affectively in "need" of.
Whenever I post the above, or share the above figure with others, I can often tell whether or not the person "gets it" - inasmuch as understanding
something like this entails a certain degree of self-awareness i.e. the capacity to observes and recognize the semiotic differences of the forms of
experience we have.
We "have" identities, and we "have" a body. When the correct identification arises within the flow of my feeling in response to a particular
context, this is just the brain "shaping the flow" so that meaning/attunement/synchrony/coherence can be attained. Thus, every state the brain
assumes is a canalized response that has the neurological/physiological quality of being a "path of least resistance" with regard to the reduction
You Don't Choose Your Beliefs
You didn't choose your parents, and you didn't choose the traumatizing or enlivening experiences which shaped your brain-development. The fact is:
we are simply afforded directions by our environments, so that the world shapes us one way or another, with every thought-content being
"transversally" related to the bodies/events/cues around us. The topological perspective, developed by Felix Guattari in philosophy, Kurt Lewin in
psychology, and Rene Thom in the study of biological organisms, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Human minds function precisely with respect to
the activating influences around them - and of course, by the force of memory and the somewhat stochastic meanderings that the mind can take within
Dorion Sagan, the son of Carl Sagan, is a well-known and respected scientist who studies complex systems in terms of their semiosis. However, like
other 'materialists', Sagan is unable to afford any meaning to the activities of the minds of organisms besides noting that these activities are
really thermodynamic in nature.
Sagan is pulling a Darwin: in not understanding the nature of his own human semiosis, he moves proudly and
arrogantly in saying that life really has no meaning: this is just what the dumb human thinks.
There is a tinge of misanthropism in views like Sagan, even if he and I would agree on most things, I still find myself wondering: why is he so averse
to considering the deeper meaning of the world around him? Answer: Please see chart above.
The environment is not just full of others - but of evaluating others
. Do not think you're brain isn't keeping intimate track of the values
of the other's it lives with, as the identity states (read: value system) we assume, if not compatible with the identity states of others, will lead
to repeating experiences of "not being recognized", which hurts, is disenlivening, and from the perspective of the amygdala, a thread to be avoided.
So your brain learns, just as Sagan would say. It learns to 'dissipate energy' in a way and manner that will make interactions with others in our
environments coherent and synchronous - even if the objective truth quality of the interaction is tarnished by a fearfulness that can't see too much
meaning in the world, lest the mind be overwhelmed...
Why Do we Think/Feel This Way?
Since feeling is itself a cognitive - knowing - process, in that it tells us something about what we feel about something else (even if we can't
immediately discern the cause of a feeling, a simple reflection on what the body-mind needs will bring you to the right answer i.e. not eating,
sleeping, etc?) our feelings contain knowledge - and not just any knowledge. It contains the meanings of our ancestors: how they knew the world.
Indeed, our present day stories are permeated with the stories of the people of the past. The "ancestors" we so care about, however, were damaged.
The stories they told, last-ditch efforts at "holding at bay" the flood-waters of the unconscious. For humans over the last 8 or 9 millennia,
viewpoints like "Gnosticism" have been "attractors" in the way and manner energy is processed within the minds of a societies elite. The more
imperialistic - the more aggressive - the more antinomian, antagonistic towards truth, and convinced, that they and theirs is "right", even though
there are such obvious conflicts of interest I.e. obvious motives, for why this belief system exists in the first place.
The answer, of course, is trauma. Take the Jews in Egypt and the phenomenon of Judaism. Trauma - or being a slave of another - forces reason into
awareness. Thus, Jews aren't some "special" chosen people, and so its belief system not some special "truth". God, as understood by the Jews, was
a necessary force to help them get away from what the Egyptian elite had subjected them to. But was it real i.e. was it really the case, that the
Jewish God was THE God?
The imperialist experience is not unique to the Jews, of course. African Americans have become a sort of "chosen people" within the confines of the
trauma of being enslaved, sold, carted over the Atlantic, dehumanized as property, and subject to all sorts of other horrors, generation after
generation, so that the DNA of every slave became more and more about protecting the self from threat - from fear, from doing what the master doesn't
want you to do. You become what the Other wants you to be. Agency - or the feeling of being for oneself - is not allowed to exist in any real way in a
mind that grows around such horrible conditions.
To sum up this post: it is probably the case that Human beings are much a part of something ontologically larger as the cells which make up my body
create "me". I am above the cells that are me, yet the cells, of course, are important and necessary in themselves. I wouldn't want any part of my
body "fighting" with another part, and I'm pretty sure other wouldn't want that either.