Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Healing the Wounds and Wounding the Heels of History

When the inferior reader hears of O, he only laughs at it; it would not be O if he did not laugh at it, for its blinding superabundance of Light is taken for darkness. --Lao Tzu, D'oh! Te Troll

Our ideological adversaries are not living in reality. Indeed, that is what makes them our adversaries. People who don't live in reality necessarily become bitter, frustrated, resentful, and aggressive, especially toward those who do live in reality. They think that by attacking reality and those who live in it, they can somehow transform their unreality into reality, but of course it never works. Reality always has the last word.

Since I once worked in a mental hospital, I saw up close how this process plays out in deranged individuals. But the most helpful things I learned during my internship at Camarillo State Mental Hospital were that, 1) Charlie Parker once slept here, and 2) the most disturbed people are not qualitatively different from the Normals, only quantitatively different.

In other words, in the decompensated psychotic person, one is able to "see" unconscious processes that are more hidden in the non-psychotic. In fact, "decompensation" refers to the breakdown of psychological defense mechanisms that keep primitive unconscious material and processes at bay; analogously, think of what would happen if your skin began to break down. Defense mechanisms are very much like a semipermeable membrane between the ego and lower vertical, just as your skin keeps your insides in and the outside out. (And you might also say that religious metaphysics keeps the upside up and the downside down.)

Changing or possibly grinding gears for the moment, Walter Russell Mead writes that everyone in the Anglo-American world, whether secular or religious, is within the Abrahamic tradition, which is one of the things that sets us apart from unsuccessful cultures. Abrahamic religion "holds that history has a shape and a purpose: a beginning, a middle, and an end."

In the Abrahamic tradition, history is "the name for a period in the human story in which certain problems need to be solved. History in this sense is not synonomous with the full term of human existence. History is a period and a process through which humanity solves (or is given a solution to) certain sets of problems before moving on to the next and higher stage in its existence."

Abrahamic ideologies "largely see the human story as consisting of three stages: prehistory, history, and posthistory." Seen in this context, history "is not just the passage of time" -- indeed, Abrahamic peoples are intrinsically "historical" and never really see time in this meaningless, ahistorical way. Rather, history involves "the accomplishment of a task. Something is wrong with the world; the world has been wounded. History is the process by which what is wrong is set right, what is broken mended. History may look chaotic and meaningless, but everything that happens is ultimately part of the healing process..."

Now, the main difference between Abrahamic religion and Abrahamic atheism or materialism is that the latter regards the former as just a stage on the way to the atheist's superior "post human" knowledge and insight, while the religionist would regard the atheist as existing at a sort of right angle to the stream of historical development, paddling around in a shallow and irrelevant little self-created eddy. He is like a drop critiquing the ocean of which he is a part, and imagining himself superior to it. But in any case, the atheist cannot help thinking that existence and history have a purpose, thus the fervent attempts to evangelize their posthuman (in reality infrahuman) faith to the faithless faithful.

For example, our obsessive-compulsive troll -- like the Camarillo psychotic -- reflects this tendency writ large, in that he cannot stop himself from trying to convert us to his mode of darkness in order to convince himself that darkness is light. Such a fruitless enterprise is doomed from the start, being that the light shines in the darkness and the darkness comprehends it not, but that doesn't stop darkness from trying. Indeed, darkness is an inevitable byproduct of the Light, so where there is self-giving Light there is envious darkness. The process is entirely reactionary, a consequence of the cosmic nescience at the vertical periphery of creation.

In the words of Schuon, such a person regards his own "extrinsic explanations as essential factors of truth," objectifying what is only subjective and dragging truth "down into the depths into which it has itself fallen." The whole enterprise is absurd, since "one cannot enclose the universe within 'human subjectivity' while at the same time allowing for a point of view beyond this subjectivity..." Man is either a fragment of the Absolute or he is nothing. A part apart from the whole isn't even a part, just a nothing.

We can all agree that something is wrong with the world. In the absence of time, we could never set it right, so history is indeed an opportunity to mend what is broken and participate in what Jews call tikkun olam, the "repair" or "perfecting" of the world. In Raccoon parlance we refer to this ultimate Adventure of Consciousness as "Cosmotheosis," or the divinization or sanctification of the lower world (i.e., Thy will be done, down here as it is up there), which can only be accompliced through human co-creators, since only we have vertical freedom of movement toward Light and Truth.

In other words, we are the "lens" through which the white light of the Absolute deigns to undergo the adventure of color, each of which is a beautiful fragment, so to speak, of the pure Light. If we could not suffer pain, falsehood, and color, we could not suffer joy, Truth, and Light. This is why human existence is such a guilty pleasure. O, felix culpa!

Mead writes that secular modernism "is the youngest member of the family of Abraham." With the exception of a personal God, it "faithfully reproduces the most important pieces of the Abrahamic paradigm," and believes that its version of the faith will prevail in the end. Secularists still "adopt the core structure of the Abrahamic idea of history to tell their own stories of the world." (Mead goes into considerably more detail in defense of this thesis, but to a Raccoon it is soph-evident. Once a Raccoon "gets it" he moves on.)

The other "master narrative" of our time is the sudden flowering of human potential of the last several centuries. As Mead writes, "nothing in humanity's past prepared it for change this dramatic in so many fields over such an extended period of time." Because we are a relatively young species and exist within the heart of this ongoing explosion, it is difficult for us to see it.

But don't worry -- Petey sees it just fine. He would disagree with Mead as to when the noospheric explosion (i.e., psychogenesis) commenced, situating it instead about 35-40,000 years ago, when merely genetic proto-humans suddenly and inexplicably began exhibiting distinct signs of humanness, such as the fully realized artistic images on the underground cave walls of Europe. While the explosion continued afterwards, we couldn't see it because it was happening so slowly, just as we can't see the Big Bang happening, even though we're right here in the center of this rapidly expanding cosmos.

What happened with modernity is that we became aware of the exploding noosphere, since time suddenly "sped up," but mainly in the Anglo-American world. With the arrival of science, democracy, the rule of law, and free market capitalism, for the first time "history became a real presence in human lives" (Mead).

For example, the Muslim world is still stagnating back in that earlier time, so that to them, we are aliens from the future bearing weird and often threatening gifts such as computers, airplanes, antibiotics, and Victoria's Secret catalogues. While they eagerly accept most of these gifts -- i.e., bin Laden is never far from his computer or frilly underthings -- they would like to pull the future back into the past, when none of these gifts existed, but still keep most of the gifts. Thus, they are not just premodern, but pre-ironic.

As for the left, they simply want to force us all into a weird, anti-human future which cannot exist except in the form of a projection of fantasy. They are post-ironic.

Mead writes that "Marx is to progressivism what Thomas Aquinas is to Catholicism," in that he explicated "the fullest and most systematic expression" of the secular leftist myth that still animates them today, even (or perhaps especially) if only unconsciously. The less sophisticated the leftist, e.g., our obsessive-compulsive troll, the more he is an unconscious disciple of Marx.

Again, Marxism shares elements of the deep structure of Abrahamic religion, including a romantic "garden of innocence" (i.e., the classless society of early humans), the fall into oppression, exploitation, and class warfare, Marx's revelation of the true laws of history, and the culmination of "the establishment of a higher, final way of life that fully meets human goals and needs," i.e., the triumph of the working class. Thus, Marx didn't so much turn Hegel as Abraham on his head.

But having turned Abraham on his head, leftists also turned Brahman, or reality, upside down. For under the reign of the left, the roots of the cosmic tree are situated below, begaialed and mayared in the muddle of matter. Having literally transplanted the tree of life into sterile soil, they accomplished a feat of clay, deluminating the light in one fallen swoop, subverting That which makes man Man, and embracing the fantasy that they could build a new and improved reality "from the bottom up," absurdly beginning with matter. They could force their vision on a recalcitrant mankind in the same way one can mold matter or Nancy Pelosi can whip her craven band of chestless men into submission.

In short, in order to do this most effectively, a large and coercive state is required to do the molding and speed history along toward its appointed utopia. Needless to say, there is a big difference between forcing time and being pulled or lured by the eschaton.

Mead writes we are faced with the eternal choice of the Glorious Revolution and its descendent, the American Revolution and its vertical empire of liberty; or the French Revolution and all its deformed, envious, dysfunctional, unproductive, vindictive, and tenured descendants. Our cosmic duty, as it were, is to preserve the radical spiritual revolution of America's founding seers, as we heal the wounds and wound the heels that time and history have made and made possible.


Anonymous said...

In other words, in the decompensated psychotic person, one is able to "see" unconscious processes that are more hidden in the non-psychotic.

Such a fruitless enterprise is doomed from the start, being that the light shines in the darkness and the darkness comprehends it not, but that doesn't stop darkness from trying. Indeed, darkness is an inevitable byproduct of the Light, so where there is self-giving Light there is envious darkness.

Hm, it occurs to me that the delusion that one is some kind of vessel of light is a classic symptom of psychotic delusion. Didn't Schreber describe himself as having rays of light shooting out of his head and anus? Had yourself checked lately?

Gagdad Bob said...

Far be it from us to argue with a man who fantasizes of light shooting from our behind.

Russell said...

"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something that he can understand." -- Bertrand Russell

Petey said...

Ain't it the truth. Our guest not only doesn't know what he doesn't know, but doesn't wish to know it. Again, that is pneumacognitive suicide.

Anonymous said...

C'mon, people! Don't pretend I'm the only one who sees ribbons of sunshine streaming from Bob's butt!

Gagdad Bob said...

I guess this makes me assholier than thou...

Beavis said...

Heh. He said Butt Light.

mushroom said...

which can only be accompliced through human co-creators

This is a concept I've picked up from OC that I have been dwelling on lately, and it has helped me a great deal.

Otherwise I get to thinking I'm hanging around because it's the only place I've found to get a decent cup of coffee.

Or a bowl of catfish gumbo.

f/zero said...

There's enough for everybody.

Van said...

"Our ideological adversaries are not living in reality. Indeed, that is what makes them our adversaries. "

Yep. And especially from the very start of modernity, replacing what is real with what they feel reality should be.

The otherwise odious Fichte said one thing correctly, "Grasp my metaphysics, Madame; you will then understand my ethics."

If metaphysically you believe that you cannot know reality or what is True... what else could possibly follow but the ugliness of the left?

Van said...

Gagdad Bob said "I guess this makes me assholier than thou..."


aninnymouse squeaked "the only one who sees ribbons of sunshine streaming from Bob's butt!"

I've always thought it looked more like bolts of lightning from his arse", but maybe that's just me.

Grant Maher said...

Atheists may serve some purpose we are not aware of. That has to be factored in.

The Chairman, the Keeper of the Cage, etc, may have some purpose in fielding the atheists and fence-sitting agnostics onto the world stage, although they don't seem to fulfill any purpose in the evolution at first glance.

When I've meditated on it I've recieved indications It is doing so in order to develop a certain material prowess on the Earth, as a necessary step in further developments in the spiritual field.

By all means slug away at them if that's what you feel but you may be, to the Owner, an yapping dog of some sort.

AlanG said...

Long time reader - very rare commentator .. .

All this talk of Ass-Light reminded me of:

Hope the link works (it's safe) - enjoy!

Tigtog said...

To Gagdad.

Today's focus on the concept of light and dark and its eternal battle reminds of Zoroastrianism. I ran into a couple of Fire Temples recently in Azerbaijan and am curious to know whether you have studied the Avesta? Are you by chance a Yazad?

dwongmeichi said...

Was it Leary that said: "Tis better to light one joint than curse the darkness", it was something like that. Abraham, dear kind soul, created such a Verschrankung for mankind and manunkind that we may never disentangle,and perhaps it is in the heart of that enmeshment that we become the light, and we are safe as long as it does not blind us...welcome to my world.

dwongmeichi said...

I actually googled D'Oh thinking it was a reference to Anne Desclos's Histoire D'O OH how silly I felt when I found it to be a Homer Simpson reference, Homer not quite Sir Stephen, but it all ties in after all this talk about people and their behinds. OH well I hope this comment appears, my erudite one vanished into cyberheaven.

Gagdad Bob said...


Only studied a bit of Zoroastrianism, enough to know that the Persians never should have left it behind (not that the Muslims gave them a choice) and to use it for the occasional pun -- cf. p. 253, f. 7.

Nick said...

"But in any case, the atheist cannot help thinking that existence and history have a purpose, thus the fervent attempts to evangelize their posthuman (in reality infrahuman) faith to the faithless faithful."

This is a most interesting reality; in that we cannot escape purpose and meaning not matter which way we turn. It is vexing that atheists will deny any purpose in nature or creation and yet themselves pursue totally purpose driven and meaning seeking lives! Surely its better just to acknowledge that purpose and meaning seeking are inherent and exist bottom up and top down throughout the Kosmos. Its the as above so below consideration. I feel myself to be inherently full of purpose and meaning granted me from the deeps and the heights of the Kosmos. I am a macrocosm of meaning seeking and realising just as is the developing cosmos.
What a frightful flatland of narcissistic voidness the alternative atheistic darkness is (at least to this punter).

pappy d said...

I see no reason to doubt that 'scientific' Marxism will be recognised as a religion some day. Any faith starts out by claiming that it's rational & that its right answers are formulated on the objective facts.

It's highly unscientific to hold that all men are created equal, but it's as morally sound as moral reasoning gets & I suspect that, on some level, Marx was trying to perfect Christianity much as Jesus & Paul were trying to perfect Judaism.

As an Abrahamic religion with roots in a particularist perspective, Marxism is triumphalist & hostile to the notion of duality. Because they anticipate total victory over heresy & error, the end (of history) justifies the means. Thus, they embraced universalism like Christianity & Islam & wiped out their enemies like in the Torah.

It wasn't the first time that the faithful were convinced they were hastening the Millennium.

I just ordered your book. I hope it's as good as your blog!