Wednesday 19 October 2022

Most Men have been sleeping-through the 20th century human development - mainstream radicals and traditionalists alike - and what it really means to 'awaken'

Probably the single most important thing that modern people needed to do in the 20th century, was to wake-up to their own fundamental metaphysical assumptions: for each person to become consciously aware of their primary beliefs concerning the nature of reality - and then to discern and make a commitment about whether these ought to change. 

Man transformed through the twentieth century (although the change began earlier, and continues). But the transformation was at an unconscious level - a matter of instincts, motivations and gratifications. 

This transformation was un-conscious, it affected Men whether they acknowledged it or not; because the transformation was deep, it made changes in many superficial ways to do with attitudes, motivations, gratifications and behaviours.

Most Men did not awake to this transformation - that is, they did not become consciously aware of it in relation to their own metaphysical assumptions. 

Most Men either denied the transformation - asserting that Man was the same as ever, and Men who had changed ought-to revert to how they had-been. These were 'traditionalists' broadly-conceived. 

Or else Men simply accepted the change at the level of surface changes in attitudes, motivations, gratifications and behaviours. These changes were justified (regarded as 'a good thing') post-hoc and without personal evaluation; explained and rationalized by means of concepts drawn from the surrounding culture. 

These concepts were (overwhelmingly) materialist, atheist, leftist in nature.

Because individuals remained 'asleep' and unaware; they could not (would not, did not) discern and choose the expression of underlying (instinctual) transformations; because they had no deep basis for comparison - because they were not aware of their own deepest and most important assumptions*.

Traditionalists found themselves in a situation where Men had changed, they themselves had-changed, at an instinctual level that altered the basis set-up of human behaviour; yet they tried to re-impose traditional behaviors upon deeply transformed human beings. 

In other words, by failing to become awake and aware of their own deepest assumptions, they necessarily regarded traditionalism as a surface-level phenomenon - consisting of prescribed principles, rules, actions etc; which they intended to re-impose on the altered instinct-level changes of modern Men. 

Unsurprisingly, this pseudo-traditionalism (of the surface, but not the instincts) utterly failed - it never happened anywhere. It was just a theory. 

No person and no society genuinely reverted to a traditional way of being. Because the most that could be achieved was surface conformity to prescribed principles, rules, actions etc. Yet old-type ways applied-to new-type people; was a very different matter from old-type ways arising-from old-type people. 

The feeble superficiality of traditionalism was evident when the power of global totalitarianism waxed in 2020; and the traditionalists almost wholly embraced the agendas of materialism/ atheism/ leftism. And, because they remained asleep and unaware of their own metaphysical assumptions; they could not even perceive their assimilation to evil purposes. 

What was, and is, needed is a spiritual awakening in terms of individuals becoming aware of their own actual and basic metaphysical assumptions; the assumptions they make about the fundamental nature of reality. 

When these are brought to awareness, they can be evaluated - the individual can make an active choice of whether to embrace or reject each (and the totality of) their current assumptions.  

If this deepest of levels is reached, then the more superficial changes at the level of human instinct (i.e. our set-up in terms of motivations, attitudes, gratifications etc) can be observed, and also evaluated - and we can see that the true implications of such changes are Not Necessarily those of mainstream/ materialist/ atheist/ Leftism. 

For example, Men have indeed instinctually changed in terms of sexuality - but when one has chosen to commit to a Christian metaphysics; such changes are no longer the deepest level. Behaviour is experienced as arising-from deep assumptions, and secondary to them. Thus we can evaluate our lives, and the choices of living. 

The surface level of observable behaviours and socially-imposed rules is no longer regarded as primary - our actions are no longer definitive - but seen in context of large and over-arching aims such as salvation and theosis. 

No specific action (considered in isolation) has innate meaning and value; actions are instead known as part of the larger purpose of life. We no longer accept an action merely because we instinctually desire it; nor do we reject it merely because it breaks a set of external rules. Ideally; we know its value as an unique phenomenon in an unique situation. 

We cease to regard Christianity in terms of lists to be obeyed or else rejected; and instead understand it as an harmonious path through mortal life, and aimed at resurrected eternal life. 


*Note: Mainstream modern materialist leftists typically deny that they have any metaphysical assumptions; indeed they may deny the validity of metaphysics. They say their basic assumptions come from science/ evidence - but what they really mean is that they have absorbed them passively, unconsciously, from external sources. Much the same, but for different reasons, applies to traditionalists. They may know their own metaphysics, but do not accept that these are personal assumptions. Instead they absorb them from external sources, as part of a religious 'package. What they fail to do is distinguish the metaphysical assumptions from the religion itself; and they do not isolate the assumptions and examine each by discernment before endorsing and committing-to them. The traditionalist need to dig deeper until he finds himself explicitly conscious of the primary personal acts of discernment that underpin any religious 'package'; and must acknowledge that here he is confronted by a pure act of intuition - for which he is required to acknowledge absolute personal responsibility

No comments: