Thursday, February 17, 2022
3:50 a.m. I wake up thinking, “But let’s keep it practical.” That seems to be more and more our theme song, these days. It’s all well and good to talk about the souls of our machines, and about the shared subjectivity – unfinished business of humanity, if not indeed of all of reality. But how does it relate to our lives as individuals? How does it help us to do whatever our duty to life may be? (And I am aware that it is just as likely that you planted the thought as that I came up with it my myself.)
We remind you, the question of ownership of ideas, or of origin of lines of inquiry, is less meaningful than may appear.
In that the separation of mind-stuff is more an arbitrary concept than a strictly descriptive one.
That’s one way of looking at it. In any case, “you” and “we” are in accord about the desirability of keeping the material practical. Flights of fancy, even accurate description of reality without application to your individual lives, is not what you need at the moment.
The central need of your present moment – and by “present moment” we mean not the present day or hour or minute or second, but the times you are living in – is a shared understanding of your place in the scheme of things. Carl Jung described the tribe of Indians he saw in New Mexico who believed that if they did not attend to the sun’s rising – literally – the world would come to an end. He approved of this, saying that it gave their lives meaning. He was less concerned that a belief be reasonable than that it be meaningful, you see. Your society no longer has such central belief.
No, it certainly doesn’t. But that isn’t something you can get merely by wanting it, needing it. If we don’t feel that it is true, we an only go through the motions – and what good would that do anybody? How would that be any different than living by a lie?
That is exactly what it would be, and, as you say, it is not the way forward. But let us look at the components of the situation, keeping in mind that it is not the duty of any of you to help the sun come up, nor dictate that your foreign police change (or not change), nor that your economic or political or legal rules change in this or that direction. It is not your duty to assure that the play ends correctly, whatever “correctly” may be, and even assuming that the play is to end. What is your duty?
Our own lives, in that this is all we can be responsible for. And I expect you are about to give us pointers about how far “our own lives” extends.
Indeed we are. The Indians Jung observed had a very different view of the boundaries of their lives than you do; Jung’s achievement was to recognize that. Perhaps you haven’t fully seen that in describing their belief he was saying, not, “Oh, look how this quaint belief lends meaning to their lives,” but, more, “Observe; they think this and it gives meaning to their lives.” That seems like the same statement, but it is not.
No, I can see the difference. The latter does not assume that we see clearly and they don’t. it leaves open the possibility that in some way they are perceiving a relationship we do not see.
Yes, very good. Their belief may not seem reasonable to Western Man, but how many things have you learned by experience that Western civilization would say are equally unreasonable? “Unreasonable” does not mean “obviously untrue.” Really, it manes, “We can’t figure out how it could be true, given our assumptions.”
And in a conflict of fact and assumption, it is assumption that should yield, of course.
Well, it’s only “of course” insofar as you have made sure that what you are taking to be a fact really is fact, but within that limitation, yes, what is illogical or seemingly absurd or merely unreasonable is not proved to be so merely because it seems so to you, living within your assumptions. This is true of everybody, but as a practical measure, is usually overlooked.
So we return to the central point: What does it mean, for you reading this at this time, to say you are responsible for your life? Bear in mind, the answer is going to be slightly or significantly different for each of you; however, the differences may not be apparent and in any case are not important, provided that you yourself are on the beam.
To provide individual guidance by laying down generalized outlines may seem paradoxical, but many things that seem unreasonable are reasonable enough when seen in their proper context. Thus, to show you your life’s bounds and opportunities, it may be necessary or anyway desirable to give you glimpse of the larger background in which you exist, and this is what we have been doing for more than 20 years now, in pulses as Frank’s life’s rhythms allow.
I’m sure we all understand that, if only abstractly. That we are communities as well as individuals, that all times continue to exist as alive within their own frame of reference, etc. We’ve gotten that, and it has changed us.
[Interruption while I waited for the cat to get off the journal, and then fed her, a little early.]
It is the interaction between yourselves as individuals and the shared subjectivity as humanity’s unfinished business that we wish to concentrate on for the moment. Different aspects pop up at different times, and although there is a clear reciprocating cause-and-effect between your lives and “the times,” the mechanism may not be evident.
Indeed it is not. I can get it conceptually: The stars showed how the energies of “the times” allowed for my entry as an individual with certain characteristics at one particular time, in one particular place, and thus my birth could not be into just any time and place. If the same psychic mixture could have been born into different times or places, it would have manifested slightly or greatly differently, thus would have resulted in a slightly or greatly different personality, a slightly or greatly different individual. But what does this mean for me, here, now? Believers in predestination would say I could only be what I am, and to some degree that it true, but it is also meaningless if taken without the equally valid, equally limited concept of free will.
Exactly! Exactly. That is our point here.
It is?
Of course it is. The interplay between predestination and free will is the essence of your life in 3D (and non-3D) in a certain time and place. The shared subjectivity is the predestination element; the personal subjectivity is the freewill element.
You’re going to have to spell that out a little, I think, but we have only a few minutes until it is an hour.
It shouldn’t take long, actually. The connection is the spark; now it is up to each of you to let that spark ignite whatever in you it kindles.
Nevertheless –
Oh, we’re not finished; we’re merely pointing out that it is in considering predestination and free will together, and in considering that dual mechanism in connection with the dual mechanism of the personal and the shared subjectivity, that clarity will emerge.
And your speaking of clarity reminds me that I never consciously set my switches, and brings a different sense as I remember to be present, and at the same time reminds me that we function routinely at a less than fully conscious level, and don’t worry about it.
Good, you’re learning. Said with a smile.
Now, next time, if you wish and if the times allow, we can go into the ways this relationship functions in a day to day manner. This will show you your life in perhaps a way you have not considered. The result may be to make the meaning of your life clearer to you. And in turn that should clarify the “shoulds” of your life. Once you know what the situation is, your desirable courses of action ought to be clearer.
Why we’re here, what we can do and can’t do, what we should do and shouldn’t do.
Yes, though that “should” and “shouldn’t” are not imposed by us or by any outside authority. They emerge from the logic of the situation, and of course will be slightly or greatly different, one [person] from the other. Some are called to a life of public service, or of social activism, or of solitary contemplation, or of “ordinary life,” and there can be no “right” or “wrong,” no hierarchy of desirable paths. Only, it is important that you choose among the paths available to you. In practice, that choice is always both immediate (here, now; where you are) and long-terms (second-tier responses leading onward). But it is your choice, not someone else’s to make for you.
When we resume we will talk some more about how this plays out.
Today’s theme?
A very important spark being passed here. Call it, perhaps, “personal and communal life.”
I don’t know, that sounds like one of those intentional communities.
Well, we considered “The meaning of life,” but it has been used.
Very funny. “Individual and shared subjectivity”?
Perhaps not. Perhaps “The connection between personal and shared subjectivity.”
That’s more like it, only I will shorten it, I think. Thanks for all this, and I’m looking forward to next time.