POSSIBILITIES, in the Radius of the Three Contexts of Appearance. Part Three
Here are the links of the introduction and discussion of the context of the Individual,
and the second part of the context of the World.
We did arrive at some very clear propositions in these earlier threads. If it has proven difficult for you to work through them, a SUMMARY is in order. I’ll recapitulates our starting point and our three ground assumptions (axioms).
I could speak at length about gaining empowerment in the contexts of the individual (which includes mastery of the emotional equation) and the context of the world. I realise that my ideas are a maximum challenge to the held beliefs of transformation. It is very difficult entertain such a simplification that might make previous philosophies obsolete. Hence the limited participation. For instance, believing in transformation, requires the acceptance of “Levels of Being”, since in order to transform, you must move from “there to here”. What if there are no levels? If This is IT?
1. I chose three contexts where all people spend most of their time. What else is worthy of discussion? Actually we are each always:
• an individual, with the challenges of relationship and self-esteem.
• in the world, with the challenges to meet legal, economic and perhaps ongoing physical conflicts or war.
• and we always live in a context of possibility for growth and knowing.
A central theme of my writing, and what is up for discussion here, is that our abilities in each of these domains depends on our linguistic viewpoint, and what we believe is possible in our life. And it depends on our willingness to examine that, (just call it our self-talk). This is especially obvious in the individual and world domains and it is true in the beginning with the domain of possibilities. The domain of possibilities, must also have the possibility that this linguistic link is not totally true, or it would not really be a domain of ALL possibilities.
Some people might be saying that this third domain trumps the other two, and that by entering into this domain, you resolve all problems in the other two. I would hasten to observe that you don’t really resolve anything, if you are still carrying your old verbal baggage. You just avoid the feelings of urgency, and of course your conditions in domain one and two continue to deteriorate. Some of our discussions could be reserved for this third domain, (which is this discussion here), such as from the above posts:
• Epistemology, knowledge - how do we know what we know
• Metaphysics = Non dual existence
• Axiology, value & beauty
Values should be included somewhere, because what is the point of being human, if it is not to live a better life?
2. We noted above the (my) desire to avoid basing discussions on collective concepts, like “the Mind”, that make for a catchall term of our functions of mentality. We can find links between thoughts, words, memories, emotions and anxiety, but using an invented concept like mind obscures all these links, and substitutes more conceptual and invented “tendencies” that are not really verifiable.
We also noted that Memory is the father/mother of all human creativity, and without the notion of a past, thoughts and words would probably just circulate on a few hundred grunts and moans that gave hunter/gatherers their level of cooperation. Something like the thoughts and speech of a pack of wolves.
Let’s go back to the three fundamental assumptions:
I. Something is here, and we can perceive something about it, some of the times, (if it is in our window of human perceptions). I also said that we can’t know what percent of our perception is our own interpretation and what part is actually the perceived, but they are inexorably mixed. The interpretation fraction is what makes this medium “virtual”.
II. Then we could say the fundamental ability in any context, is the ability to play/create in this virtual world of communication and language. The reason that it can be moulded and “evolved” is only because it has a virtual component. It is fixed only to our dreams and imagination, but we are acknowledging that these are the building blocks of ourselves and the world as we know them.
III. Then any worthy philosophy adds to our ability to believe we are doing good in life (with synergy in all three contexts). A pseudo philosophy degrades our ability to believe we can direct our life in these three contexts. A pseudo philosophy may offer us only the excuses, so that we can learn to stomach what doesn’t work about our life. It might also numb certain feelings, to make us believe that the philosophy is working.
Arriving at any ability in axiom II. requires that we are able to recognise and deconstruct any faulty or possibly faulty philosophies, (of axiom III.). It seems better to streamline and simplify philosophies, if at all possible.