Dialogue ~ 26

In dialogue 25, I wrote: “Socrates pointed out that in the moment of perception of any ‘suchness’ as heat or whiteness for example, that thing will be in motion between the active element and the passive element; the passive element comes into a state of ‘perceiving’ (although it does not become a perception as that would be a thing in itself) whilst the active element becomes ‘such and such’ e.g. hot or white (but not a ‘suchness’, in other words it does not take on any given quality of that which is being perceived).

And, “This is fascinating to consider in terms of what it means to be human. Is it possible that we are a vehicle of perception, literally building our world view of ‘what is’ from one moment to the next, as we alternate between perceiving and perception? What do we mean by knowledge, in that by the time we (being transitory or process) could say anything about anything, aspects of it (and ourselves) would have changed? Knowledge (and for that matter science) would be nothing other than story (identifications, impressions or fragments which have been pieced together, much as in the construction of language); its only cohesive element would be meaning.”

Is it meaning, in its guise of appearing as ‘the truth’ which has been fought over for centuries, with one tribe after another as claiming to have received a clearer worldview than others?

Meaning is how we define ourselves; it is how we relate to one another as well as to the natural (and supernatural) world.

Further, it is on the basis of how we define ourselves, that we formulate and navigate a moral code of behaviours and of what is important to strive for, not only in terms of any personal aspirations and values but of what constitutes our progress as a species. It appears to be natural for groups to not only seek to preserve their common values or wisdoms but to encode that knowledge for the use of future generations.

A topic for many years has concerned the relationship of science and religion and of whether a secular worldview can co-exist peacefully with one of a superstitious or magical perspective. Then too, is an ever present story line of the conflict of the soul which takes up its residence in the pastures of good or evil. Conflict has much to do with the cherishing of hope and faith of ascendance from a world which doesn’t appear to make sense and which has seen more than its fair share of struggle, pain and death.

In the midst of a community in which one’s survival and purpose is contingent upon productivity, hard work will be regarded as a virtue; So it goes ~ within every group and for every value there is seen to be a turn of the wheel which works in support of or against a momentum.

At the knee of a grandparent, a child might listen to an epic story and inevitably insert themselves into the story line in order to extract an essence of ‘if that is who I am and what I wish or don’t wish to experience in life, then that is what I have to do or not do’. Essentially, at the heart of this story telling is social conditioning.

How powerful is social conditioning for when it comes to an individual establishing meaning for what is being experienced in life? Social conditioning is rooted in our assumptions about the nature of reality. Unless we are willing to question what it is that we understand of the world, then tribes and ideologies will always be in conflict with one another.

Let’s look at the nature of duality; how can we be certain that it exists? Is duality the same as polarity or are we making an assumption about the medium in which something resides? Surely it follows that being able to define and to describe something other than myself would suggest that there is a subject and an object?

It is on the basis of an assumption about relationship that some of our most cherished theories concerning motion, velocity and power have come into existence; it is at the very essence of Euclidian geometry. Marvellous calculations to be sure and yet are only made possible through ‘perception’ which as we have heard from Socrates, is not a tangible or fixed phenomenon in itself. Then too, there is an inescapable conclusion that death extinguishes life; Nature seems to prime us with a beginning and an ending of all things, even as we concede that there are cycles.

What if there is something more to the eye, than perceiving of tension as existing between two extremes? If we correlate movement with life, indeed the essence of any freedom and creativity, then does death or the great unknown resemble inertia? If I value life, then does it follow that I must be as active as I am able, within the scope of my abilities and existence, to strive towards my ideal? Is it not my assumption about ideal which is in fact blinding me to perceiving as good anything other than seems worthy of pursuit of my goal?

Clearly, when all is said and done, an idea itself is valued more highly than life and life is being utilised in the process. What is the relationship between thought and life? The narrative that is engaged with is crucial for both reason and meaning. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “What lies behind us, and what lies before us, are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.”

What happens when a group (irrespective of it being family, tribe, nation or worldwide) sets the narrative for what gives to life meaning and purpose? What is the nature of a person’s will in being able to discern and forge one’s own path? Is it a case of as the saying goes, ‘if you cannot be the miller, you must be the grain’ in other words, ‘act or be acted upon’? Does the human will diverge into streams of its being: that which is in pursuit of reason and that which is in pursuit of faith and does adherence to the one preclude the other? Is that which is recognised as one’s truth nothing other than hubris?

I remember being asked a question many years ago and it was this, “Do you fear or do you love?” This is important to look at in terms of one’s orientation rather than by way of any particular response to whatever life might bring. Orientation refers to being; are you at cause or caused by? Simply put, are you at home in the universe or are you trying to find your way home? What more potent question is there to put to oneself in life? Anything else is secondary and is but smoke and mirrors.