We have determined that recovery from immoral and maladaptive behavior is achieved only through unequivocal acceptance of our condition, and our willingness to change. It is recognition of our moral infirmities that motivates us towards transformation. Do you really like who you are now? Are you truly satisfied with the person you believe you have become? While not liable for events beyond our control, we are responsible for how we react and interpret those events. As the cliché goes, while we do not have control over the cards we have been dealt, we are responsible for how we play the hand we have been given.
Our adamancy―fomented by religion and ego―that humanity is supra-special because of perceived hierarchal dominance is a consequence of three very human considerations. First, it is our awareness of being aware―the primary factor of our humanness―that offers hope, piques our imagination, and enables self-reflection. Second, it is recognition of this awareness that is human consciousness as we know it, an underdeveloped and fearful consciousness that compels the rationale that we are the chosen, and we resent our conditional discontent because we believe, as chosen, we deserve better. Finally, we have convinced ourselves that humanity is the apex of cognitive development, and that nothing supersedes our species except ethereal forms we create in our image and likeness.
Darwinism determines, if humankind is the successor to a species then it must also be the forerunner. Since 99% of all species that ever lived on our planet have been consumed by nature, logic dictates that homo-sapiens also has a shelf-life. In the current known universe (approximately 4% of total) there are over one-billion-trillion stars. Where, in this vast expanse of space and human nescience is the significance of our being? How does humanity maintain its perceptual superiority within such a great and formidable reality? Is there significance to our insignificance? The answer is a resounding yes. Our significance is sustained in our innate potential to improve our condition, to enhance, expand, and evolve, to embrace our virtuous and empathetic natures, to share these and other qualities with others―to lift the human spirit. Teilhard de Chardin (1955) hypothesizes we are entering the sixth epoch of complexity, the one in which the universe wakes up. Evolution guarantees accelerated complexity.
The only higher-power that needs to be acknowledged and accessed is extant within each of us, as all things have consciousness due to the consequences of involution-evolution, which logically claims that it is impossible for some-thing to evolve from no-thing.
Humanity’s evolved state of complexity demands reevaluation of its primitive concepts. We are children of the universe(s). Our god’s are earth gods. We were not created in their image and likeness. The origins of morality determine that we created gods in our image and likeness―only of intangible stock. They are our egos, endowed with the powers to which humankind aspires and does not believe is worthy. Promises proffered by our gods are manifestations of our own fears and desires. When we attempt to personalize what we call god, we minimize it with mundane language.
Courtesy of www.crystalinks.com.
Our impartial awareness of what little we know does not devalue our significance, it compliments, because it illustrates the premise of evolution, much like the bud anticipates the bloom of the rose, its awareness resident in the seed. Our higher power is reciprocal energy, reciprocity confirms our necessary participation; may the force be with us. Energy is the measurer of that which passes from one atom to another in the course of their transformation. We seek to transform and cannot help but do so. It is nature.
Let’s embrace the speculation that, rather than the infinite endurance of our egoic consciousness, our good moral character is validation of our significance―the immortality of our spirit that is passed between generations, the ever-evolving reconnaissance of our minds. Where would humanity be without the broad shoulders of those upon whom we stand, and where will that same humanity or its successor be without the formative actions of each generation on the one before and after? We are not useless, separate entities passing each other, autonomous and alien, like proverbial ships in the night; we are integral and interrelated to all things, the life’s blood of being, the ultimate, dynamic, creative ground of the universe(s). “I am in heaven, in earth, in water, in air; I am in animals, in plants, in the womb, before the womb, after the womb, everywhere.” Whitehead’s (1978) Philosophy of Organism states that the actualities of the world are fundamentally interdependent—every actual entity is present in every other actual entity, while his Principle of Process determines that the composition of an actual entity is a constant process of becoming, its being constituted by and the result of that same process. We belong to all things and all things are part-and-parcel of our being. We are, as all entities, active agents of all future becomings. Our conscious moments of experience are products of all past experiences of occasion and conduits to all in the future. As human beings, we are creativity itself; we evolve from creative occasions and all our present occasions of experience preserve and pass along the entire history of our universe. This perpetual act of creation is another example of the validity for which we desperately search: that of our advanced species laying the groundwork for a superior one.
The dynamic role of the future is being systemized by our present existing selves. With little asked of us other than participation in being, we evolve as increasingly complex things and, science informs, the higher the degree of complexity, the more substantial the consciousness. Self-consciousness evolves in organisms with increasingly complex brains. It did not first emerge with humans. Awareness of self-consciousness emerged. Humankind is no longer recognized as the center of the universe anymore than is our planet the centerpiece around which our tiny solar system revolves.
Too often we substitute complacency for contentment, grateful for brief moments of serenity but forgoing any hope of durable happiness because we have been instructed that such a phenomenon is only attainable in a spurious afterlife, an enigmatic supposition which values our existence in an ‘incredible’ world in lieu of the one we currently inhabit. Rather than accepting commendation for the hard work and obligations achieved by maturation, we condone this prevalence of despondency because we believe suffering is the predetermined causal to post-life fulfillment‒a destructive and psychologically counterproductive assumption. We worship sacrifice and interpret dukkha as suffering when it is more reasonably translated as discontent. Suffering denotes a predestined condition; discontent is something over which we have control. Rather than re-informing our perception of prevalent miserableness, we sheepishly embrace it! We cling to our illusions because it is easier than confronting life as we know it, even though life as we know it is our experiential state-of-nature. We loudly display our misconceptions of eternal consciousness, persuaded that it represents our being, our memories, our intelligence, our bodily organs, as they are supernaturally transported whole to an otherworldly plateau, one replete with joy and reconciliation.
To understand our reason-for-being, our niche in this vast wilderness of speculation, perhaps we should pay closer heed to those spiritual masters upon whose wisdom we precariously rely in attempts to see beyond the knowable horizon. They tell us to divest ourselves of the ego, of the desire for worldly goods, of our arrogant belief that humankind, an ignorant, childish, and childlike species, is the final, evolutionary apogee of consciousness.
As humans, we are inherently motivated to search for answers, yet ignorance of the events and circumstances that underscore the structure of our being promotes discontent and agitation. A certain calm urgency is required to grasp at the things that encourage homeostasis, a state-of-being achieved through transformation. We are energy. We are potential.
The acquisition of good moral behavior is easily impeded by the attractiveness of the old lifestyle, and it takes continued restraint to avoid repeating the same mistakes. The struggle for excellence does not eliminate the influx of triggers that have the power to alter our perception of personal value; the temptations flourish but, through a clarified understanding of the consequences of pandering to baser enticements, we make more profitable decisions. Again, “if we believe we know what the good (the best) thing to do is, and it is accessible to us, we will do the good” (Brody 2015). Through the elimination of any outside source as scapegoat, we accept full responsibility and continue our commitment to society as a contributing member to the evolution of excellence.
Full acceptance of one’s humanness involves an awareness of one’s connection with others and the world. Life may go on more or less as usual, but there is a deepened, intimate sense of involvement. … One no longer has to betray one’s true self, or the darker aspect of oneself, in order to feel in community with others. (Bauer et al. 1992)
Upon commitment to remedy, the conditions responsible for our maladaptive behavior loosen their destructive hold. The initiation to effect recovery underscores our desire for and transformation towards the greatest goodness.
Bauer, L., Duffy, J., Fountain, E., Halling, S., Holzer, M., Jones, E., Leifer, M. & Rowe, J. O. (1992). Exploring Self-Forgiveness. Journal of Religion and Health, 31 (23), 149-160. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27510687
Brody, A. (2015). Addicts, Mythmakers and Philosophers. Philosophy Now, 90. Retrieved from https://philosophynow.org/issues/90/Addicts_Mythmakers_and_Philosophers
Dewey, J. (1994). The Moral Writings of John Dewey. J. Gouinlock (Ed.). New York: Prometheus Books.
Erickson, E. H. and Erickson, J. M. (1988). The Life Cycle Completed (Extended Version). New York City: W. W. Norton & Company.
Kurzweil, R. (2005). Journal of Evolution and Technology, 20: 1, p. 15. Boston, MA: Institute for Ethics & merging Technologies.
Hanegraaff, W. J. (2005). Human Potential Before Esalen: An Experiment in Anachronism. On the Edge of the Future. p.21. Eds. Jeffrey J. Kripal and Glenn W. Shuck. Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Piaget, J. (1971). Psychology and Epistemology. (A. Rosin, Trans.). New York City: Grossman Publishers.
Steinhart, E. (2008). Teilhard de Chardin and Transhumanism. Quoting Kurzweil (2005: 15). Journal of Evolution and Technology, 20: 1, pp. 1-22. Boston, MA: Institute for Ethics & merging Technologies.
Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre. (1955.) The Phenomenon of Man. Tr.: Bernard Wall. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Thought.
Trimbur, C. (2015). Theories of Developmental Stages – Stages of Development. Psychology Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/183/Developmental-Stages-Theories.html
Whitehead, A. L. (1978). Process and Reality. New York: The Free Press (Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.).