If there is any discovery which the ancients could never had access to, it is the fact that early life trauma sets the 'tone' for how a human being
tends to experience the world around them.
I am often amazed by the deafened silence I sense at this site towards what this idea means. It is, short, an expression of human naivety - of being
"controlled by your emotions" - that someone cannot seem to recognize how differently humans think and feel when we have gotten through the early
years, and perhaps all of life, without the marring of our early brain-stem with fear, anxiety, and agitation.
Does it not matter that people today are insane i.e. cant seem to wrap their minds around the idea that their thinking could be different?
generalize and make statements such as I've heard from people here and elsewhere that the purpose of life and existence is "to disrupt the system".
How? How can you imagine that you're saying that isn't a just-so story?
A just-so story is a term used by philosophers and scientists for
ideas/beliefs that people want to believe,
rather than what reality actually offers in its expansive range of possibilities.
On the other end of wanting to believe, I see the extreme "feeling" of the Judeo-Christian world, no doubt deepest of all in the Orthodox Jews who
believe 613 mitzvahs constitute a secret message between God and Humanity (or rather, and somewhat counter-productively, between God and the "best" of
humanity) - which turns living into one one-stop nitpicking at how things or done or what a certain slip-up means for the soul. The
correlations-to-reality become so important that it displaces the human being itself, so that punishment follows those who find the system burdensome
- and so, fear, or the feeling of being "judged", non-stop, emerges within the self. Indeed, if something bad happens following such a mistake, and a
bad-feeling emerges, it is taken to be "God's voice", as opposed to, say, something that was said by another, and which, because I am human, acts upon
myself dynamical self-organization, and so, functions within me as the others "intention".
I am almost completely convinced people who subscribe to the religiosity of the ancient-near east belief systems, because of the non-stop trauma and
warring of the history, are holding extremely polarized views on reality - and this, I believe, is what dynamical systems theory, from a "topological
perspective", would undoubtedly endorse: extreme emotional piety to a particular concept/relation/or meaning, as an existential "whole", tends to
provoke/endorse severe anger and indignation against those others who violate what you define to be the core and crux of reality: people never like
addressing conflict, or inconsistencies, or problems, within their worldview: they seek completion, complete order, and complete control over the way
In my mind, Gnosticism (near east paganism) and Kabbalah (for lack of a better word, Judaism) are both exaggerated systems of speculation which take
their internal cues - i.e. references - from one another's characteristic of reality. The idea of "clear-perceiving", or recognizing what the other
needs, and taking a pleasure in being able to accommodate and connect with them, is an idea lost to a primitiveage that, because some sort of magic
exists, gave the human being an exaggerated sense of self-importance, as if reality - all of reality - was it's own narrative, and that all other
creatures and beings must fit within its own imagined purpose. Never mind that most creatures exist, and that all creatures manifest a purpose that
exceeds relevant metaphorical connectedness. It seems, actually, that the effort to "totalize" reality, drives humans #ing crazy. Why? Why oh why does
this feeling seem to persist?
Is it because early-life relational trauma, or what developmental psychology calls "Attachment theory", basically governs the dynamical patterns of
our responding in the world? And that, for instance, some people have far better unconscious regulation of their affective experiences than other
people, simply because they received a mixture of care/recognition, and a proper and well-timed induction of conflict to help promote growth?
Some people today want the world to end. They see time as "coming to an end" - and why? Because it must be, it must be. The self-fulfilled prophecy -
or the fact that the same ugly conditions keep rearing their head - is the reason. Trauma appears, brains fail to develop ideally, and so, feelings
are off - fears explode, anxiety grows, dejection magnifies, and reality, despite its infinite possibilities for creativity, becomes "alien".
Science, it seems, is the only belief system truly radical enough to suspend belief - not totality - but enough, so that ones own thinking, feeling
and needing can be weighed against the empirical evidence of objective reality. Such a view is very compatible with Buddhism, which shows, wherever
trauma rears its ugly head, remarkable interpersonal resilience, where lovingkindness is intuitively grasped to be a sine-quo-non of a meaningful
If you want to do one good thing in your existence, don't block the way for people to come together, to understand themselves, one another, and the
world around us, because science truly does offer us important knowledge that can help us give to the next generation what we know to be absent in our
own: a non-traumatizing, non-scheming, non-narcissistic, other.
The "Great Other" worry of Game of Thrones mythology is a trauma response: as if I give in to the other, I will lose myself. Indeed, while one school
of thought (gnostic) went to one extreme in its individualism (see Egypt, where this philosophy seemed to reach its extreme), the other went to the
other extreme, where identity itself was seen to be the thing to be given up.
Why can't people recognize that extreme views like this are mirror images of one another? There is no interpersonal communication, just a fantasy-game
of believing one God is fighting against another God, while the human being, so full of a capacity to help and change this situation, remains the
slave of the "angels" and "demons" its cedes self-control to. Such games will always be "tunnelling", and nothing more. The feelings felt describe the
emotions/affects/meanings that the meaning moves.
Such intense feeling can be real, to the experiencing subject - but not all encompassing - not being "beyond" what you think, and certainly not, given
we know viruses exist at the physical level, should "daimons" be trusted since they would operate just as viruses do within cells: they know the
inside structure, and so reconfigure the structure to support its continued existence.
I count myself as one of those people open to the mysteries of existence, but down-right irritated with the naïve religiosity of people who think all
of existence should be framed within the viewpoint of the human being i.e. as having no value in itself, or for itself. This is something both in the
occult community and the religious community which use "symbols" and believe such symbol using correctly constrains and explains reality as it is.
Only empirical science does that. Only empirical science offers us enough room outside our own traumatized heads to imagine a future where humans take
caring for one another as a worthwhile and beautiful thing.
edit on 16-8-2017 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)