Direktlänk till inlägg 20 januari 2009

"all the mentors were illusions!"

Av dennis hägglund - 20 januari 2009 03:04

 Conscious is a conditioned inadequacy of mental outlook and perspicacity. And those who condition us with this inadequacy from the moment we are born are themselves conditioned, so that they condition us out of the same inadequacy.

What do we mean by an inadequacy? It means there is a reality, which is profoundly complex, having evolved in an infinite cosmos for nearly four billion years, and anything to do with this reality in realistic terms simply overwhelms the conscious. The conscious rebels, saying that this can't be right; it can't be this hard to see.

And you are now old enough to be conditioning others. How do you do it? Most of thinking is devoted to what to say to someone, and how to control your voice and expression so that the words are convincing, 'suspending disbelief' as the actors call it. This produces an alternate you for the person you are talking to. He meets, not you, but this character you have been inventing in your thoughts. And like any professional actor, you yourself are convinced that this character who is substituting for the real you is a good imitation of a living human being. This is the conditioned response! A living human being is an amount of encounter the conscious would find overwhelming. The conscious is put utterly out of its depth as it relates to meeting the real human being. A real person, your real self for example, can not be portrayed.

So the conscious is out of its depth in a real relationship or in a relationship with a real person, but it is not conscious of this discrepancy between what it is imitating and what is a real person. Look at the logic, the math, of it. People older than you have conditioned you. And now you are conditioning people. When these older people conditioned you they conditioned you to accept the invented characters as them, which is to say as real people. It is THESE "real people" you are contriving an imitation of for others to meet! These contrived people, these images you have had forced upon you since birth, are the whole population of your past, your memory and your experience. They are the sum population of conscious.

You think to make an image that other people will take for a real person, but your estimate of the real person is an image in the first place. The experience of images is an insulated and isolated mental compartment which assumes itself to be the sum of pertinent reality, and when you contrive to invent a person to pose as you are contriving to invent a pose to pose as, not a person. A person is something outside this insulated space, in the unconscious and the subconscious, things of mind that can't be conditioned, things waiting to be restored like your program files if you recognize that you have acquired a bug in your system.

Conscious can not exist in a real world. Anything that overwhelms the conscious by being too complex, to profound, in short too real, has to be pushed aside by conscious. It has to resist the urge to delve deeper when presented with the challenge. Realistic depth has no place in conscious, just like the latest version of Windows has no place in the first hard drive, when a megabyte seemed science fiction. Watch the conscious and you see that it can't be rushed, and so it can't get anywhere if the going is complicated. Reality has to be processed instantly. It can't take time. And the mind that does not take time is something the conscious has deposed, making it the subconscious and the unconscious.

In effect, then, conditioning, which is when we presume to be discovering the human world as the invented characters people think up to substitute in our experience for the scoundrels they have become, is a kind of sedative like the leaves the koala bear and the tree sloth eat. If you free yourself of the conditioning you wake up and process everything instantly, and your life resumes where it left off sometime in childhood.


To the conscious self (self being the illusion that conscious has real experience and therefore the experiencer or accumulator of the experience is a real creature or entity) man is something that was made by the man-made environment, made by progress. Man didn't exist before man had complex tools. But to the mind man has nearly four billion years of that living accumulating depth we have learned to call evolution. And this man of the mind has far more to be doing than the man of the conscious experience.

The sloth that is the essence of conscious has its reflection in everything else. Where man is a contrived or conditioned image all natural and wild species have no such image, and so they are nobodies in the conscious perspective. This means the conscious self can perpetrate any evil against these other species and it doesn't count, but not so according to the mind and its complete grasp of reality. So the conscious self does this, for example sacrifice the lamb on the altar to gain God's favor, and the mind does that, for example whack Abel with a big sharp hunk of flint fifty times. Then the conscious has a conniption fit. This is "obviously wrong": The bad boy has slain the good boy. God is asleep. We must all pray louder!

So the world fills up with wrongs that must be righted, and as long as conscious is substituting for mind these wrongs can only accumulate helplessly at an accelerating rate.

In the mind's perspective, which is in reality, man is as fond of any species as he is of man. Evolution is a process of diversification. Diversification is the first solution to the first problem. The first problem is being simple. How does one become complex? One diversifies! One generates estrangements! You are different; I don't get you so easily. Is the little bird neurotic? No. It merely lives faster! It experiences more hours per day than a larger bird, and a whole season in a day compared with our experience of time's passage. This is an aspect of "social distance". When you can cross a social distance you have become more complex, and so a more complex form becomes meaningful; and even a simple form becomes meaningful because it is different from complex ones.

Where we have the intelligence, in other words, we have the passion for life's natural diversity, because this diversity is what gave us or inspired in us the intelligence, and only this diversity can give us more intelligence when this amount has ceased to be a novelty.

If we did not provide social estrangement to each other we would not evolve, and so the diversity of life is sacred to the mind even as it is disdained by the conditioned conscious. We do not really have enemies; nature always has predators but has never had enemies. Conscious is our enemy, which is to say that we are our own enemies. The conscious provokes the mind. Acting out the lives of images provokes the real entities, entities that find out what to do by ways that are too overwhelmingly complex or profound for the conscious to follow or even suspect. You have to study for years to become an FBI agent, and yet that is simplistic compared to how real living things are moved to accomplish what passes for justice in the urgency to evolve.

This justice is not an eye for an eye, not a scale weighing pain out equally to perpetrators, not "fair", but a force that insists that the perpetrator must wake up to the natural or real consequence of the things he did as conditioned response or behavior. If one eye for one eye wakes him up, all the better, but when it does not... Which is usually the case even in nature; which is what inspires the forms of the predators. A tiger is not an antelope. An antelope could give another antelope an eye for an eye. When that is insufficient something built more along the lines of the apocalypse is required.

Waking up, acknowledging the summons to evolve, is the point of conflict and suffering. Not playing fair, cutting the pie into equal pieces. The conscious can't conceive of the mind's motivations. The world is like an egg. It has to hatch at a certain point in time. The conscious says that man has accomplished all the evolution God could possibly wish for us, and that man is a creature God should be pleased to see spreading throughout the cosmos. The mind says the egg will open up and the chick will not be fully developed, a lump of compost, if we do not get on the ball quickly.

The conscious view, the conditioned view, is that man left nature because he is too evolved to be part of anything so primitive. This was the voice of the Inquisition. Man needs to be purged of all that is animal in him. Animals are the beasts with demons instead of souls. And a child is susceptible to this gospel. He is convinced that he is incomplete, that he is like a chick in the nest whose only job is to open his beak, but that eventually he will have learned enough to be a full fledged person. It does not occur to a child that none of the adults have ever become full fledged, just as it doesn't occur to a well fed dog.

Few of us even notice a time somewhere close to middle age where we realize one day that there is a promise to ourselves we have not kept, and it is getting late, close to the point where the chance to actually mature has passed by. Always the fledgling; never the mentor. That's the normal lot. Because all the mentors were illusions!


    Kom ihåg mig



Av dennis hägglund - 26 januari 2009 03:20

  If we accept that evolution is an upgrading process, what is it that is not always remaining the same? Simple forms and niches are joined by more complex ones. Is the diversity of life becoming more beautiful, more graceful, more precious? And if s...

Av dennis hägglund - 18 januari 2009 08:02

  The most simple truth about oneself takes too many words to say. It is like cooking a meal every day that takes six hours to prepare and two seconds to eat. Meaning is instantaneous, so words are discourteous to it. It is hard to accept even benign...

Av dennis hägglund - 15 januari 2009 20:52

  The conscious is called that because it is consciously observable, and the subconscious is called that because it is not consciously observable. At one time even our species had a mind that operated without any aspect of the operation becoming obse...

Av dennis hägglund - 14 januari 2009 20:59

Gullibility is an opiate. The one who tries to correct it will seem more cruel than kind this side of time's horizon.   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Some thousands of years ago a nearly four billion year old process of evolution...


Fråga mig

0 besvarade frågor


Ti On To Fr
14 15
Januari 2009

Sök i bloggen

Senaste inläggen





Följ bloggen

Följ The Universal Sense of Reality med Blogkeen
Följ The Universal Sense of Reality med Bloglovin'

Skaffa en gratis bloggwww.bloggplatsen.se