In ancient times, it seems that Men lived in mainly in a 'clairvoyant' consciousness; that is, Men did not regard thought as coming from themselves, but as 'inspiration' breathed-in from the gods.
Instead of Man thinking, the gods thought in ancient Man.
This required Man's thinking to be open to the gods - and this openness happened naturally, spontaneously - and indeed it could not be blocked.
Through history, 'the self' became more dominant in thinking - leading to the 'modern condition' of the self being almost-solely aware of itself: being trapped in Consciousness-of-Consciousness.
This can be envisaged as a divine plan for Man to become more free, that is to say more creative and originative of his own thinking.
But although that was the plan - it seldom happens; because it requires modern Men choosing to resume belief-in/ knowledge-of/ communication-with 'the gods' - whereas modern Man's assumption is that there are no gods, and 'the spiritual' is subjective, hence unreal.
To escape the subjective misery of CofC isolation; modern Man has again opened his thinking - but this time voluntarily.
But modern Man denies the reality of the gods. To what, then, is modern Man opening his mind?
The answer is that he has opened his thinking to The System: to bureaucracy, corporations and the mass media.
Instead of Man thinking, The System thinks in modern Man.
In Sum: Whereas ancient Man experienced the gods thinking in him; modern Man experiences The System thinking in him.
Where ancient Man's mind was spontaneously and unstoppably open to the gods - and his choice was between gods (i.e. between angels or demons, God or Satan); modern Man's mind is open to Totalitarian Propaganda - and his choice is between today's permissible variations in the message (i.e. between Labour/ Democrat or Conservative/ Republican; between focusing on antiracism, birdemic-healthism or the transagenda).
Thus; when modern Man thinks - he is trapped in the closed-loop of fluctuating hypothetical models; when he tries to escape into communal solidarity he stops thinking - and his mind is opened to totalitarian propaganda.
For as long as 'the gods' and 'the spirit' are rejected-by-assumption; for so long, modern Man's mind will oscillate between a prison-of-mirrors, and an open sewer for evil.
Very interesting and accurate. To an extent this was treated with (although long and a bit tedious for me) in Julian Jaynes The Origin of Conciousness and Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. I also think its a problem of "reason" have to agree with Kant that reason is just an idea not some super faculty and that reason gets us in all sort of trouble. Just the other day, an old friend was telling me his path to happiness consisted of unlearning and being less logical and more intuitive. Not having a television and not reading news has worked well for him to cast off as he calls it the crap in his head. I am doing the same....
ReplyDeleteBrilliant. I have recently been considering God as a super consciousness. We think, therefore we are, within his existence. Why his baseline will is always done, it is the foundation of all reality. "Put on the mind of messiah" and "let his will be done."
ReplyDeleteWhen we do, we are in harmony with reality's creative, divine intention. When we don't, it is insane futility. We have free will, but (best concept?) It's quarantined.
Your posts about thinking are very...well, thought-provoking haha. We are what we think. The hive mind you're describing is also the result of laziness, I believe. Modern people don't want to take their time and effort to truly understand the world, because that would require setting aside distractions such as careerism, entertainment, etc. Believing the mass media propaganda is much easier, and also allows them to avoid conflict...because most modern people are cowardly as well.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete"To what, then, is modern Man opening his mind? The answer is that he has opened his thinking to The System: to bureaucracy, corporations and the mass media. Instead of Man thinking, The System thinks in modern Man."
I like the term "totalitarian consciousness". System consciousness might be a good way to think about it, too.
The problem with system consciousness is it *can* be a good thing, and was -- to a greater or lesser degree -- a good thing when the system was aligned with God. However, system consciousness demands the individual relinquish freedom to an external authority, usually for some perceived greater good.
Freedom is not considered a high value within system consciousness. This applies to God-aligned, traditional Christian systems and -- especially -- to God-opposed, diabolical systems.
Thus, contrary to what traditionalists assert, the solution does not lie in abandoning our current demonic system and returning to a more God-aligned one. The solution seems to be in abandoning system consciousness altogether and focusing on freedom as one of the highest values.
To my understanding, modern man did not go wrong when he turned his back on God-aligned system consciousness to gain freedom; he went wrong he turned his back on God to gain freedom.
The gods thought in Ancient Man. The Church thought in Christendom Man. The System thinks in Modern Man. All three are thinking "in". True spiritual freedom and creativity suggest that we should not focus on "thinking in" but rather on "thinking with". So instead of God thinking in man, we should open our minds to thinking with God. Thinking with God is creativity; creativity is freedom with God. (If that makes sense!)
Frank - yes, that's it.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that freedom-creativity must be understood spiritually, divinely; which is ruled-out by Modern Man.
Modern Man is stuck with the secular analyses of freedom which is either freedom-from liberty/ license, or freedom-to - which is approximately 'human rights'; and both of these concepts have proven to be a failure and a sham.
I think it is easy to see that romanticism was the dawning of awareness in freedom as creating, and that this ought to be the goal of Men - but romanticism was swiftly de-Christianized or wholly secularized - or else regarded as subjective merely. Aside from a few individuals, Romantic Christianity has hardly yet been tried.
> Aside from a few individuals, Romantic Christianity has hardly yet been tried.
ReplyDeleteI want you to know I take what your write with complete sincerity and actively apply it in my life to the best of my mortal, sinful, flawed capacity, realizing that I'm merely scratching the surface of the iceberg right now.
The clothes do fit. I believe it to be true and this is continually being reaffirmed to me. This mode of thinking has drastically improved my spiritual state over the last few years so far as I'm actually able to "do it" without hesitation and distractions. It has clarified my thinking and the "feedback" I get seems directly proportionate the amount of effort I put in and my sincerity.
I see a rather clear trajectory of where I need to turn next and where I fall short, and notice more than ever the purposive nature of many things that happen in my life now and how my own thinking and alignment with God at any given moment has a noticeable influence on it.
This is a brilliant insight, and dovetails nicely with a major lesson I learned in early 2020 - that Ahrimanic evil just loves a good critique, because it makes it more efficient, soulless, and hellish. In attempting to shield my family from Ahriman, I strengthened Ahriman. We had to completely disengage from the system to be free. What you say is true: I did the System's thinking for it!
ReplyDelete"Instead of Man thinking, the gods thought in ancient Man."
ReplyDeleteDid this evolution in consciousness take place world-wide simultaneously, or was it first an Eastern Hemisphere change which was spread to the Western Hemisphere in the Modern Age? Were the Indians of the Americas (apart from Aztecs and Incas) still thinking and seeing in the old way when the Europeans arrived?
@ap - No, it is not the same everywhere. But I don't know how it works in other cultures, races, and places - probably because it isn't really relevant or necessary for me to understand.
ReplyDelete