Get Happy, Be Happy, Stay Happy

I received an email from Tony Wright, author of Left in the Dark, letting me know that the book is now available to view online in its entirety. If you enjoy pondering the mysteries of human development, especially those that seem to make no sense outside of supernatural or mystical explanations, you’ll love this perception-altering book!

If you like studying human consciousness and enlightenment (are we truly on an evolutionary trajectory to higher, better levels of consciousness?), Left in the Dark will provide a new frame for understanding this intriguing subject. But not to worry — it is a hope-filled message, a message that quite possibly can lead us to real, workable solutions to the mess we’re in today.

The human brain, over a period of perhaps a million years, expanded at an increasingly rapid rate then, some 200,000 years ago, this expansion suddenly stopped. There is, to date, no plausible scientific explanation for either of these linked events.

Religious and mythic traditions of paradise inform us that we once lived in a benign state of perpetual wonder and joy but from this we regressed. The reasons for this are obscure. Do these apparently unrelated perspectives have something in common?

The new theory presented here and in the Left In The Dark book suggests the extraordinary evolution of our brain was influenced by changes in the activity of our own hormones. Such a seemingly innocuous idea has dramatic ramifications. It not only explains a number of recently uncovered anomalies within the human mind, but also makes sense of the stories of human degeneration that are preserved in virtually all cultural myths and religions from around the world.

Both perspectives tell the same unexpected and shocking story — Humanity is suffering from a progressive neurological condition that has distorted our perception and altered our sense of self. This seemingly dire situation however has a positive side — we still have unimaginable potential just waiting to be unlocked. There is a very real possibility of regaining our lost perceptual heritage. (from the author’s Home page)

View the book online

Consider buying the book to support further research!

More from Tony’s site:

Virtually all cultures preserve myths with an almost identical theme; that from a past golden age humanity has suffered a progressive degeneration. Is this near universal tradition based on real events? The answer appears to be ‘yes’. Recent scientific evidence supports the idea that we suffer from an inherited hormonal condition that has damaged part of our brain. In an unexpected twist, it is the damaged part that is not only driven to play the major role in telling us who we are but also dominates our basic biological functions.

Such a scenario explains some extraordinary anomalies that have emerged from research into how our brains function. It provides an underlying reason for the present crises in health, from the dysfunction of the immune system to the declining age of puberty. It also makes sense of the diverse mystic and religious practices that are said to lead to enlightened states or ‘oneness with God’.

If our common experience of near constant low-level fear and anxiety is actually a consequence of a neurological disorder, there may be a fundamental solution to the problem. We all know that fear, distrust and a lack of connection lead to conflict and ultimately war. Such a solution therefore could be of crucial importance to our global future.

To find out more, read on…

Don’t be left in the dark Read the book!

WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD?

BARACK OBAMA:
The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a CHANGE! The
chicken wanted CHANGE!

JOHN MC CAIN:
My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he recognized the
need to engage in cooperation and dialogue with all the chickens on the
other side of the road.

HILLARY CLINTON:
When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken to cross
the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure — right
from Day One! — that every chicken in this country gets the chance it
deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn’t about me…….

DR. PHIL:
The problem we have here is that this chicken won’t realize that he must
first deal with the problem on ‘THIS’ side of the road before it goes
after the problem on the ‘OTHER SIDE’ of the road. What we need to do is
help him realize how stupid he’s acting by not taking on his ‘CURRENT’
problems before adding ‘NEW’ problems.

OPRAH:
Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he
wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn
from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I’m going to
give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and
not live his life like the rest of the chickens.

GEORGE W. BUSH:
We don’t really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to
know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is
either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

COLIN POWELL:
Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image
of the chicken crossing the road…

ANDERSON COOPER - CNN:
We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet
been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.

JOHN KERRY:
Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it!
It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken’s
intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.

NANCY GRACE:
That chicken crossed the road because he’s GUILTY! You can see it in his
eyes and the way he walks.

PAT BUCHANAN:
To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.

MARTHA STEWART:
No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a
standing order at the Farmer’s Market to sell my eggs when the price
dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider
information.

DR SEUSS:
Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the
chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I’ve not been told.

ERNEST HEMINGWAY:
To die in the rain. Alone.

JERRY FALWELL:
Because t he chicken was gay! Can’t you people see the plain truth?’
That’s why they call it the ‘other side.’ Yes, my friends, that chicken
is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay too. I say we
boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal
media white washes with seemingly harmless phrases like ‘the other side.
That chicken should not be crossing the road. It’s as plain and as
simple as that.

GRANDPA:
In my day we didn’t ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told
us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.

BARBARA WALTERS:
Isn’t that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening to the
chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story of how it
experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its
life long dream of crossing the road.

ARISTOTLE:
It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

JOHN LENNON:
Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together, in peace.

BILL GATES:
I have just released eChicken2007, which will not only cross roads, but
will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check
book. Internet Explorer is an integral part of the Chicken. This new
platform is much more stable and will never cra…#@&&^(C% ………
reboot.

ALBERT EINSTEIN:
Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the
chicken?

BILL CLINTON:
I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of
chicken?

AL GORE:
I invented the chicken!

COLONEL SANDERS:
Did I miss one?

DICK CHENEY:
Where’s my gun?

AL SHARPTON:
Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.

LANA WALKER-HELMUTH:
No one knows! No one will ever know!

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.