Get Happy, Be Happy, Stay Happy

I’ve been rereading the book Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution. The first time through, I found myself having some heavy-duty reactions and resistances to the spiritual underpinnings of this worldview. I put the book away and went about my business (which means, I continued reading more books, Web sites and blogs concerning the Big Issues of Life.)

I pulled the book out again to remind myself why intelligent people are attracted to the increasingly popular ideas of Eckart Tolle, as well as to the notion that people are now “waking up” and recognizing their “mission” to shift the consciousness of the world in order to save the world.

Sometimes I’m inconsolable after spending time surveying the state of the world and discovering the various and conflicting ways people think, believe and act. The problems seem insurmountable; the dialog among holders of different worldviews a grand waste of time. I often feel this way after visiting certain blogs and reading all the comments

I want the world to start over. I’ve always wanted that — during the time I was a Christian and now as an agnostic.

I took philosophy classes in college, but most of what I read went in one eye and out the other. I didn’t have the capacity to understand much of anything at age 18. I have a lot of catching up to do now that I’m, um, a bit older and wiser.

So this morning I’m reading about several of the great philosophers, including Hegel and Habermas. In my travels I came across this blog post, which I think is priceless.

Dialectic of Secularization
April 1, 2008 — Alexei

Habermas’ article, “Die Dialektik der Sekulärisierung” has recently appeared in Blätter für Deutsche und Internationale Politik. And its worth checking out. He ends his piece with the following,

Säkulare Bürger, die ihren Mitbürgern mit dem Vorbehalt begegnen würden, dass diese aufgrund ihrer religiösen Geisteshaltung nicht als moderne Zeitgenossen ernst genommen werden können, fielen auf die Ebene eines bloßen Modus Vivendi zurück und verließen damit die Anerkennungsbasis der gemeinsamen Staatsbürgerschaft. Sie dürfen nicht a fortiori ausschließen, auch in religiösen Äußerungen semantische Gehalte, vielleicht sogar verschwiegene eigene Intuitionen zu entdecken, die sich übersetzen und in eine öffentliche Argumentation einbringen lassen. Wenn alles gut gehen soll, müssen sich also beide Seiten, jeweils aus ihrer Sicht, auf eine Interpretation des Verhältnisses von Glauben und Wissen einlassen, die ihnen ein selbstreflexiv aufgeklärtes Miteinander möglich macht.

Here’s a quick English translation:

Secular citizens who would engage their fellow citizens conditionally, so that the latter cannot be earnestly considered as modern contemporaries [perhaps equals] in light of their religious convictions, descend to the level of a bare modus vivendi, and thereby forsake the recognitive basis of common citizenship. They must not exclude, a fortiori, religious expression of semantic matters, which might even uncover one’s own concealed intuitions, and which translate into civil reasoning. If everything should go well, it must do so for for both sides. Each one must engage in an interpretation of the conditions of faith and knowledge from their respective points of view, which makes a self-reflexive, enlightened cooperation between them possible.

And I like this amazing quote from Habermas (found in the Wikipedia entry). Habermas is an atheist.

Christianity has functioned for the normative self-understanding of modernity as more than a mere precursor or a catalyst. Egalitarian universalism, from which sprang the ideas of freedom and social solidarity, of an autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, of the individual morality of conscience, human rights, and democracy, is the direct heir to the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love. This legacy, substantially unchanged, has been the object of continual critical appropriation and reinterpretation. To this day, there is no alternative to it. And in the light of the current challenges of a postnational constellation, we continue to draw on the substance of this heritage. Everything else is just idle postmodern talk. – “Conversation about God and the World.” Time of transitions. Cambridge: Polity Press 2006, p. 150-151

That’s it for now. Just needed to get some stuff out to relieve my constipation.

Thanks to Thingy, I’m now in the possession of the provocative, ground-breaking, eyebrow-raising, heretical book Left in the Dark: The Biological Origins of the Fall From Grace, by Graham Gynn and Tony Wright.

Here’s an excerpt from the foreward by ethnopharmacologist Dennis McKenna (download the foreward for free here). I can’t wait to dive in. I can’t wait to see how it relates to what I understand about human development, neuroscience and consciousness.

“The progress of science, and indeed, of human knowledge, requires a dynamic tension between the mere accumulation of observations and ‘dusty facts’ and a synthetic process in which the accumulated results of scientific observation and inquiry are woven together into frameworks that, in the ideal case, create revolutionary paradigms that enhance human understanding of apparently discrete and unrelated aspects of nature. The hypotheses proposed in this book may well represent such a revolutionary paradigm. These ideas do not originate from the mainstream of academia, but rather are the contribution of two independent scholars. The history of science and intellectual inquiry teach us that, as is so often the case with truly novel syntheses, established scientific and intellectual institutions are too ossified, and too invested in the conventionally accepted worldview, to allow the introduction of a new paradigm without putting up considerable resistance.

“Resistance will more than likely characterize the response to this book; its authors will undoubtedly be denounced as mavericks, unqualified to comment on such a momentous topic as the evolution of human consciousness; the ideas put forth here will be condemned as heresy. Indeed they are heresy, in the context of what we think we understand about human evolution, particularly the anomalous evolution of the human brain and consciousness. But one is reminded of the famous observation of philosopher Arthur Schopanhauer: All truth, he said, passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; third, it is accepted as being self-evident. We should be wary of rejecting out of hand the premises of a hypothesis that may one day seem self-evident.

“Evolutionary biologists have long been puzzled by what is perhaps the chief mystery of human origins: the explosive and rapid expansion of the human brain in size and complexity over a vanishingly small span of evolutionary time. There is also the mystery of hemispheric lateralization and the apparent de-integration of the right- and left-hemispheric functions that we humans suffer. In this work, the authors postulate that it was not always so; the universal myth of a pre-historic Golden Age, they maintain, is a racial memory that reflects our primate evolution in an arboreal, rainforest environment in which humans possessed mental and psychic abilities that have since become lost or atrophied in the profane ages that followed.”

Download and read the entire foreward.

“We could all be suffering from an evolutionary glitch
that has affected how we perceive, think and behave.”

I’m constipated. A lot is goin’ in, but not much is comin’ out.

I’m literally full of information after days of gorging on books, Web sites and blogs. It’s like I’ve been going to a mile-long buffet table and going back for seconds, especially piling my plate with dense protein foods. I haven’t given myself time to digest anything, let alone absorb it, use it or eliminate the crapola. And I’m not the kind of blogger who can sit down at the computer and start dumping my thoughts onto the screen.

I’m suffering from vertigo too. Actually, that’s nothing new. I spin out all the time as I discover and learn more about the Biggest Issues of Life.

The other day I saw the photo below, and I ROTFLMAO’d. How can you not laugh? I suppose if you don’t like cats or have no idea what the abbreviations mean you could stare at it without cracking a smile. I love cats. But most of all I love how this scene perfectly sums up my general state of being. Enjoy!