It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Universalism Vs Individualism (The Paradox Of A Dying Age)

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
In my opinion here in lies the problem currently facing humanity...

Like the astrologers believe that Pisces has the attribute of individualism and Aquarius that of synthesis the coming of the Age of Aquarius and the passing of the Age of Pisces is bringing with it a dualistic struggle between those of us that are synthesising with the universal and those of us that are struggling with this new age ideology and prefer to remain individualistic.

The problems that this poses are widespread and do not only impact on each human but it is also reflected in the way that we live... where we see factions of society struggling to leave the old forms of structure that have served us but are now old and dying... Industry and Commerce, Religion, Economy, Education and even to a large extent the stubbornness of some scientific convictions.

The fact is that we are seeing the chaos more evidently around us from the decaying society that can no longer cope with human demand for change.

We are crying out for free energy, self sustaining communities... the end of commercialism and materialism idolised.
Some are still so intoxicated with these addictions that they still rely on their daily fix of shopping, clubbing, drinking or just sitting in front of the box for their daily dosage of brain washing gumbo mind juice...

Personally i see the battles between those of us who want a universal world state and this encompasses the belief that we are all part and parcel of the one.. i also see the more pessimistic individual style of thinking which says to us that we should be our own leaders , each to their own.. and this is where conflict originates.

When you have a battle of ideologies of those that wish to come together through human trust and love and those who wish to remain separate through selfish preservation, fear and paranoia.

You may think that i am one sided and more for the whole Aquarius synthesis and you would be correct.
I think it is the only way that we can survive the coming world changes.. Like the old saying goes together we stand divided we fall... i think in this case it runs true.

Now i know many of the more individualistic minded... those of you who lack faith and choose to remain atheist will think that the age of Aquarius is just gibberish nonsense and i share your sentiment but what if you had to choose out of the two worlds manifesting... one where we are all separate from one another or one where we are all together... which would bring about a more peaceful world to exist in?

I would like to hear your thoughts and opinions on this and open up discussions...

Thanks for your time...

edit on 9-6-2011 by nakiannunaki because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 

It's possible that love will have to win out or the species will self-destruct.

As for individualism, I'm sure selfishness, ego, animal desires are a part of it.

But those things aside, there's a very good reason people choose to remain individualistic. They are sick of Kool-Aid.

The best defense against Kool-Aid is getting in touch with the spirtual forces within, and cultivating the capacity for independent, inspired, creative, courageous, and critical thought and emotional expression.

My ideal "collective" is a bunch of people, all having cultivated that individually in themselves, coming together for love and spiritual growth. My ideal "world order" is a "union of enlightened individualists".


edit on 9-6-2011 by NewlyAwakened because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by nakiannunaki
 



Why does it have to be either-or? Universalism makes me think of working for other peoples laziness. Individualism makes me think of excessive selfishness aka greed. Growing up my dad would say regarding my group of friends and I; "you're not a gang, you're group-motivated individuals" I have no problem working to help others, or for the good of the group. Just as long as the others, or group is as equally motivated to provide the same effort.

Why can't it be both?

edit on 6/9/2011 by Deafseeingeyedog because: Because because because



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deafseeingeyedog
"you're not a gang, you're group-motivated individuals"




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Interesting thread, and I agree with you on a few fronts. In the coming times I think that people will need to band together out of necessity. I am all for being part of a group that allows individualization. In others words, as long as the collectivism does not morph into a form of hive mind, nationalistic trance and allows self expression, tolerance and embraces individual differences, then lets start the process now.

Unfortunately, I think that many ideologies, religions, and cultural beliefs must first transform into a more unified approach. There's way too much complexity, too many "isms", religious sects, political parties, economic approaches to name a few, for people to agree with direction. I think that once simplicity happens (through societal collapse which I think is eminent), most things will become less complex and more free flowing. Hopefully when we reach that point, the old world and it's obsession with material goods and luxurious living will die along side it's mammoth of industrialized thinking.

edit on 9-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Well said. I agree, for the most part.


Originally posted by nakiannunaki

You may think that i am one sided and more for the whole Aquarius synthesis and you would be correct.
I think it is the only way that we can survive the coming world changes.. Like the old saying goes together we stand divided we fall... i think in this case it runs true.


With the only catch being that we have to apply that saying on a global scale.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
I think the key to all of this is coherency.

Coherency between what?

Individualism and universalism.

When there is a coherence, there is an agreement between the two, in terms of what "should" be done, etc.


For example, universalism to me will not be the relinquishing of personal power to a "group" in which I have no real say, similar to current systems of government.

Neither will I have total say over what everyone else does. However I will have total say over what I do as an individual, and everyone else is allowed the same liberty. This is taking full personal responsibility for yourself, empowering others with the same idea, and letting the coherence created therein take its natural course and letting reality unfold with the idea that nature is wise in its own ways.


You have thousands of members here who all live in different realities because we all have different beliefs. We have common beliefs too but the differences seem to noticeably set us apart and that is perfectly fine. There is nothing wrong with prodding each other with different views, but we should always allow others the freedom to decide for themselves, and assume for ourselves the same responsibility and to not blindly follow others.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
You talk about the selfishness of the individual, but what about the selfishness of the group when it wants to silence individuals?



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join