Of course, it’s not real, otherwise, it wouldn’t be non-material would it? But it’s there alright, make no mistake. You ARE a non-material spirit, at the core.
A subscriber of mine called my attention of the work of Jeremy Griffith on “the human condition”. (www.thehumancondition.com)
He’s very boastful and claims he’s solved everything. He has “THE answer” to the human condition. He doesn’t, not at all, but that hasn’t stopped him from getting a substantial following by shouting from the rooftops—more typically an American marketing strategy than an Australian!
The trouble with Jeremy’s work is he’s a certified biologist. He thinks that’s a strong credential but I think it’s his main problem! Like all scientists, he completely ignores the non-material spirit. He concedes that we are conscious but it’s all down to the brain, as far as he’s concerned.
The brain-as-being fantasists by definition spurn and deny any transcendental or paranormal effects, such as out-of-body (OBE) experiences, telepathy, remote viewing or past lives (metempsychosis). That’s not good enough for me… it’s certainly not honest. In fact, some would say it’s junk science to hold that position!
Since Jeremy totally ignores the non-material spirit and its experiences, it means he’s got a problem with animal instincts, which he says are to blame. Instincts are transferred in the genes, according to his model. What? Migrating birds’ instincts to fly from northern Europe to Africa, without even the guidance of adults to show them the way, is an “instinct” in the animal’s DNA?
Nah! Jeremy just hasn’t heard of morphogenetic fields (learning and knowledge fields), or he doesn’t believe in them. Either way, his problem is then further compounded by the fact that Rupert Sheldrake, a very fine scientific investigator, has produced ample evidence for the fact that morphogenetic fields in learning and knowledge transfer are real. Instincts and knowledge in the genes, on the other hand, have no scientific support, because it’s nonsense.
There are two other problems with Jeremy Griffith’s writings:
- He fails to mention earlier and other sources. This is typical behavior of someone who wants to be a guru; to be THE leader of the pack and not have his opinions contradicted or anticipated by anyone else.
- His writing is AWFUL, boring, repetitious, same same same, page after page. I think readers deserve better than that!
Is there anything of value then in his “revelations” (which are not new)? He is certainly right to point to the ultimate conflict between the animal self or “creature”, as I call it, and the higher sense of conscious self as the essence of trouble. But Jeremy offers no real explanation. However, I can fill that in; it’s simple: the creature has different drives than the higher self.
The creature wants to survive, so all that stuff about spreading genes and assuring a continuing protoplasm line is true as far as it goes. As a result, the creature’s main emotion is FEAR: fear of death, fear of lack, fear of opposition, and fear of displacement.
The non-material spirit (and this is the crux, which Jeremy Griffith ignores) has no fixation in time or space and so cannot “die”; it cannot UN-be. Therefore fear is not appropriate.
Instead, the main emotion of the spirit is LOVE. Its main drive is not survival but PURPOSE.
There must be a reason behind it all.
THE Tangled Wing Phenomenon
My understanding of human nature goes beyond mere biology; it’s far bigger, beyond time and space, beyond this world, infinite in Being, unsurpassable in emotional intensity, that such beauty is hard to endure in our mere physical form. I call this state a limitless being. It’s several levels beyond ecstasy and bliss.
It is something I have always aspired to but not reached in this life. Yes, I guess I’ve been close for a few fleeting and magical oceanic moments. What Abraham Maslow called “peak experiences.
But then… damn, you need a pee or a cup of coffee, the phone rings, or some such. The creature doesn’t like you being “out there”! It will always bring you back.
That’s the problem: the creature’s self gets entangled in the metaphorical wings of the sublime spiritual entity and brings it down, so it cannot fly free. Melvin Konner, anthropologist MD, referred to this as the “biological constraints on the human spirit.”
So What About Irrationality?
I’m glad you asked that because I think it’s far more profound than Jeremy Griffith thinks. It’s not just the one stork who wants to fly east, while the others flying south, and then it gives itself a bad time from guilt, as he claims. That can’t explain cruelty, violence, murder, sexual depravity.
There are genuine articles of logic and rationality. A person gets into a bind because he or she believes that something is right (when it isn’t). I think people only do what (they think) is right. In studying this issue over the best part of 50 years, I have come to certain conclusions; you could call them a theorem (not exactly an axiom, which is something self-evident, but more of a theorem, which you can demonstrate).
I call this important model my Tri-Partite Theorem. It’s only fancy old talk (Ancient Greek/Latin mix) for “3-part theorem”. It goes as follows:
- IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR A PERSON OR ORGANISM TO ACT KNOWINGLY AGAINST ITS OWN BEST INTERESTS. If it appears to do so, it’s only because appearing to act against its own best interests is in fact in its own best interests. This means that each individual does what they do only because they calculate that it is the right thing to do, no matter how crazy.
- EVERYTHING A PERSON OR ORGANISM DOES IS RIGHT AT SOME LEVEL. This follows from 1. A behavior or construct may not make sense until the full context is viewed, but the context need not be known for the action to be judged “right”. Finding the context of thought, belief, emotion, or behavior and changing it upwards is the best “cure” for bad ideas and bad behaviors!
- TO GET A PERSON TO CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOUR, YOU HAVE TO SHOW THEM A BETTER WAY OF ACHIEVING THE SAME OUTCOME. Better in this sense means allowing greater service to self and others, with fewer negative drawbacks, in the same or more “Channels of Being”.
Parts 1 and 2 give a considerable handle on why people do crazy and destructive things, even in moments of full lucidity and integrity. They don’t! At least not from their own point of view…
And you know what’s lovely about human motivation I have found over the last 50 years or so? It’s that—when you find the context—it’s nearly always a matter of love and joy! Spite is not part of the calculation. But spiteful behavior comes about in the effort to retain or restore love in some way!
That’s rather lovely; awesome in fact.
Well, I’ve left myself needing to explain to you about my Channels of Being, the zones of emotion beyond bliss and how to make the Tri-Partite Theorem work for the good of all. Stand by!
To your good health,
Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor
