Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I'd be interested in how you feel about the theory of the collective consciousness. I find it fascinating how, certainly in the UK, it is
spoken of as a matter of course in relation to the animal kingdom ut it is still somewhat taboo, within the scientific community, to acknowledge that
it is a part of human nature too.
I will share some thoughts on how collective consciousness is collectively used to isolate the individual which may explain the resistance. Perhaps my
actual feelings about a theory itself are in between the lines as why would I use it if I didn't have a favorable bias?
I think that the term "collective" used in the context of humanity has become somewhat of a perjorative given the associations with mob behavior or
oppressive regimes. The past century especially has given people pause to declare themselves any part of a perceived "hive mind", whether it be
because of atrocities committed by groups or because of glorification of the individual self. A collective is seen a structure in which we lose our
prized individuality and perhaps even our human rights.
With the animal kingdom, identification of their kind as
something other than human and something separate from, does not trigger the defense
mechanisms required to maintain the view in which we have been indoctrinated. We may freely speak of collectives within that sphere, without
triggering our conditioned responses. In fact, I will go so far as to say it helps us justify and alleviate guilt about our maltreatment of other
terrestrial species, the only salient aspect of their nature being that of their species, not the individual organisms. We can sleep comfortably
knowing that they are different and do not share any similar individual experiences. Especially important is to discount their individual
suffering.
Industrialization combined with a Protestant work ethic served to force people to cut ties with community and force them into large cities. With
minimal support from others, they could be exploited to work their lives away in factories, with minimal pay, no social mobility and no time for
liesurly activities. Conditioning the worker this way is important in that any will to serve another in an altruistic gesture is broken, to make him
believe that to give is to take away from one's self. With the support system cut off, you can manipulate the people by threatening their livelyhoods
if they do not cooperate. They cannot as easily object to their conditions since there is no safety net on which to depend. Note that I am not
necessarily discussing the availablity of welfare programs or transfer payments but also that of maintaining a circle of others who are there when you
need them and will happily assist you in less bountiful times. If an individual has that support, they can pick and choose the means of their survival
more freely, for whom they work and just what they are willing to do in that line of work.
Additionally, it is not to say that Protestantism itself is a necessary ingredient, just the view that individual material success is more important
than strong community bonds along with the idea that one must outcompete another to ensure their own survival, which creating a perception of scarcity
helps to reinforce.
Keep in mind that the ones that revered the bees were the ones that could also be considered the elite ruling class. They knew better about the
interdependencies and connectedness regardless of the lies they promulgated to those that served them. To an extent, they believed their own lies if
they needed to exhalt themselves so far above the peons. The beehive could be looked at as a symbol of hoarding the precious gold from those outside
the more priviliged community. Eventually though, the badgers outside get hungry, adapt, become immune to the stings and will raid the hive.
The scientific community, largely being raised within the masses and exposed to the societal, or even religious conditioning, will fall prey to the
now endemic cultural suggestions. They must serve to expand knowledge, rather than emphasizing individual recognition. It may be against the interest
of those in power, who wish to preserve the old ways, to discourage those in positions of intellectual authority from helping us restore our proper
awareness. Much like the lowly worker, they may be kept in line by threatening their means of livelyhood. Really, they are just lowly workers as
well.
The perception of separateness and complete self-reliance is an unnatural one, one used for control by fear. It is a shared delusion. Reject it.
Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
Lazy1981 and I are having a discussion on the Tips and Epiphanies Thread that Maban started, I posted a link to an article on the theory Chaordic
management and leadership structures. Quite fascinating, if you get a chance take a look, again, I'd be interested in your thoughts (as well as
anyone elses if they feel inclined - I am really, really taken with it - and need a little critique to counter my rose tinted view).
I suppose if I comment on this, I will comment over there in context. If you wouldn't mind, drop me into the thread with a link at the correct point;
the posts are quite lengthy. I had a peep and saw a lecture in progress on U.S. Constitutional law.
[edit on 6/5/2009 by EnlightenUp]