BORG Are The Future

The BORG, as depicted in Star Trek: TNG, are the future of humanity, as presently intentioned by the majority of the resources of the present civilization.  I suggest that, although this wasn’t directly depicted in Star Trek, it is clear to me that, not content with total control of every individual and every environment at some point in the distant future, the BORG returned to the roots of their civilization, their intention to re-engineer earlier generations of themselves so that they could control not only their present, but their past, thus leading to an ever-increasing control over their future.  This is the ultimate logical extension of their vision… and, it is, effectively, the logical extension of the dominant vision of humanity at this time.

Current trends in society, especially in military science, and in the expanding efforts of trans-national corporations to dominate the resources of both the earth and its people, betray the seeds of the BORG.  The individuals that unwittingly contribute to that effort don’t realize it, but they are headed for a BORG future along with everyone else.  That is the logical extension of the efforts being undertaken.  The sooner it is admitted, the sooner a better path can be undertaken.  The path with heart, even if it means going back to an agrarian lifestyle, is worth way more than the life currently being built every day by the vast resources applied through government and these corporations in their efforts to increase domination and control for purely upwardly serving objectives.  The “upwardly served” are simply those who keep on top of the heap, or who command the construction and maintenance of the present Tower of Babel.  What they don’t realize is that death comes to all, and those who die, return.  But when returning, what is the likelihood that you will again get to be “on top of the heap?”

Religious Reconciliation – Part Two

Part 1 of this post, which offered a set of principals for understanding the basis of religious reconciliation, ended with the following:

“As a spiritual seeker, one must recognize that all life is on the same invisible path, heading towards a greater and greater realization of the truth (logos) at the heart of all. However this quest takes form, it is sanctioned by the divine simply because of the fact that the entire system is the will of the divine. Love and humility means acceptance, not denial. So, we cannot, in love and honesty, deny the experience of any other.”

A mistaken interpretation of this principal would be to therefore accept violence and hatred, in all its manifestations, as something to be indifferent to. A further mistake would be to view such things as something to react to, to resist, to fight against.

The point that unites this seeming contradiction is that the only sphere within which one may constructively resolve the mis-perception or misunderstanding that leads to violence is within one’s self. We ultimately have no control over others, which is as it should be: how can we, in our own limited mind, have any idea what truly motivates another? But one can deepen one’s understanding of one’s own self and lovingly replace shallow understandings leading to painful experiences with deeper ones leading to love and happiness. When that’s done, we become a “transmitter” of peace, love, and the beneficial effect of self-imposed transformation.

When an individual transforms his or her own consciousness to embrace love and ever deepening understanding, it directly impacts the world, and becomes a whole new way of enjoying being in the world and interacting with others. This is how change manifests. Whether change actually manifests as one expects it to, or would want it to, can’t really be the business of the individual. That’s up to the Great Designer who set the whole thing up. But we know that through love, all things are transformed. By loving one’s self enough to penetrate one’s misunderstandings, or ignorance towards a more whole awareness, ripples of love set out on the ocean of the world. As parents must leave their children to follow their own fate, we leave these ripples to spread. But we also get to enjoy their effects as they reflect back to us.

In some instances, the waves of love cause unrest. Dramatic change often precipitates a period of chaos as there is an adjustment to the new principles that love induces. This is sometimes unavoidable. As long as the individual tends to his or her own garden of consciousness, the entire system is functioning in accord with its purpose.

That process is very interesting, too, because It’s really the fundamental nature of a republic, if you think about it. The system of a republic is intended to support the individual on this personal quest of inward growth (“pursuit of happiness”). So, the philosophy of a republic, an extension of Plato’s and Socrates’s teachings, is at its heart a philosophy for individual improvement, leading to social evolution as a serendipity. One might call it a natural, easy way whereby the change all wish for is actually manifest.

Of course, such change will never encompass the entire world. There will always be many individuals who cannot make the leap, or will not. But it is not anyone’s purpose to change that (although everyone must be held accountable to a set of livable norms — and that’s where law comes in). Rather, we each remain true to our own individual journey, loving that journey, loving those who journey with (or against) us, realizing the purpose of being in this world. Love isn’t a journey for the fainthearted. It’s a bold adventure, full of painful self-examination, surrender, and new joy in discovery and self-realization.  It’s always greater than we now believe it to be.

Religious Reconciliation – Part One

Scott Horton wrote a wonderful article on Harper’s (On the Peace Born of Faith) about the reconciliation of religions.  While reading it, I was struck by an obvious, but all too often overlooked principle as relates to this issue.

All religions have at their base a leader to whom one often refers as a Master, even as a Divine Representative on earth.  The followers of that individual, at the time of his/her life and after, look to that individual for guidance and direction.  The followers study and honor and attempt to live that individual’s teachings.  Every one of them would admit that they have not fully understood or realized (i.e. manifest) the complete truth of the Founder’s doctrine.  And yet, religious intolerance is the direct result of the belief that “I have realized the fullness of the doctrine of my teacher, and this is it; and what you suggest offends my understanding, and therefore runs counter to my teacher’s instruction.”  And from that, wars, violence and injustice proceed as if warranted and even Divinely Decreed.

The obvious truth is, how can a follower of a teacher from the dim past honestly believe they have completely realized the heart and soul of their teacher’s doctrine when that teacher is not present to comment?  The mind is a trickster and can easily trick one through it’s inherently limited perception and awareness.  Only a true teacher can set one straight.

Of course, such followers of a doctrine, can have many rationalizations with which they arrogate to themselves the authority to declare full and actionable understanding.  Mainly, they believe that the Teacher is actually in contact with them through their own mind and/or soul; or that God Itself has come into their consciousness and illuminated their understanding.  In essence, such a follower believes that they are no longer merely a seeker but are, in real terms, equal to the Founder of their religion or spiritual doctrine of choice.  And therein lies the hypocrisy and the crime.  The arrogance to assume that one has achieved equality with one’s Teacher, when that Teacher is not present, is profound in its far-reaching impact upon the life of the follower and the lives of others.

Reconciliation of religions comes through humility.  Only through humbly recognizing that one has not yet fully realized the Doctrine of their teacher can one accept that God is greater than one now knows It to be and that therefore there is more to know and one must be open to what currently seems absurd and contradictory.  God is great — whatever one now conceives of as God, God is yet greater.

Love demands acceptance of all that comes one’s way, and transcending one’s own peculiar beliefs, until actual realization begins to manifest.  At that point, one would have to see that all life belongs to God and all manifestation is therefore purposeful and, in some way that one may or may not yet have realized, all is splendid and excellent.  What we are offended by is merely something we have not yet understood; it is not something to be destroyed, unless it is a manifestation of ignorance within one’s own being.

The spiritual path is a personal and internal journey.  Each of us is on a path of self-reformation and realization of truth, which continually transcends what is presently known and perceived.  There is no way, in that situation, that any may truthfully judge the lives of others.  Moreover, recognizing that one is on this personal inner journey, we can appreciate that all are on a similar journey, albeit shaped by the spiritual needs of each one individually.  This is the basis for “Religious Reconciliation.”  As a spiritual seeker, one must recognize that all life is on the same invisible path, heading towards a greater and greater realization of the truth (logos) at the heart of all.  However this quest takes form, it is sanctioned by the divine simply because of the fact that the entire system is the will of the divine.  Love and humility means acceptance, not denial.  So, we cannot, in love and honesty, deny the experience of any other.  Again, there is the basis for reconciliation.

[Read Part 2]

Confusing Effect for Cause

“[our] sense of adventure is located within the ventral striatum [of the brain]” — summary of a conclusion of experiments done by Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging at UCL (University College London) this week as given in Harper’s Magazine (http://harpers.org/archive/2008/07/WeeklyReview2008-07-01).

I wouldn’t doubt that the original study offers considerably more granularity than the above “conclusion” implies, but the quote is an example of how scientific studies influence the culture and indicates a significant problem as to how those studies are interpreted by the larger society, but also by scientists themselves.  In essence, it points to how frequently we confuse effect for cause.  And maybe how easily we throw up critical thinking and just accept the most convenient analysis that lays to hand.

Does the above conclusion mean that when I die my sense of adventure will cease?  Even scientists seem all too hasty these days to conclude that there is a direct causal relationship between co-existing phenomena, a mistake first-year philosophy students are rigorously trained to avoid.  Studies (especially dietary and health-related ones) often look at what occurs when something else occurs, and too easily conclude there is a unmediated causal relationship between the action itself and the observed effects.  One year “Coffee is good for the heart;” the next, “Coffee causes heart disease.”  Or some such.

But, all that aside, wouldn’t an equally plausible hypothesis (which is a temporary assertion, pending evidence) be that that region of the brain might be a location that helps the soul or trans-physical mind (i.e. the part of the individual that’s not merely an effect of the body system itself, but transcending that organism) negotiate new experiences harmoniously by integrating the various biological systems of the body around a chosen response?