|
Our experiences are products of the senses. Every waking moment is spent in either conscious or unconscious observation. The instincts answer for the unconscious conditions that require action and the reason responds to stimuli that enter our mind through conscious engagement. Science originates in that type of observation that is not only conscious but has intention. Passive individuals experience reality without questioning its nature and thus their learning is limited. Those who are observant nurture a receptivity to the details of experience, the information that comes through the senses, in order to gain greater freedom of choice. When I asked myself where such receptivity or intention came from desire seemed the obvious answer. Desire drives our looking, our searching and our scientific inquiry.
As human beings we are accustomed to a certain relationship with desire. Many think of this faculty as a primitive instinct, a regressive tendency toward satisfaction of the body or ego. Perhaps this is the result of our confusing desire with indulgence; indulgence being a magnification or distortion of desire. Desire itself is nothing more than wanting and that wanting is directed at an object. If the object is good, then so is the desire that compels one toward it. Desire for learning is wanting to gain from experience an understanding of reality that allows for greater happiness. Let us, from the beginning, embrace our desire to know as a healthy faculty of the human mind. Of course, to expect that we will know or the feeling that we do know is an indulgence of this desire.
So to satisfy one’s desire to know in order to develop a deeper understanding of reality and its laws, one must be actively engaged with experience. The desire that drives that engagement is often indicative of some intuitive direction. In other words, to live rationally or scientifically one’s feelings are invited variables of the observed phenomena for these feelings are the seeds from which hypothesis is born. Hypothesis is the attitude or perspective from which we re-engage with the phenomena or experience.
If the scientific process is the method by which we collect evidence to support a hypothesis and that hypothesis comes from an unknown place within our psyche then scientific engagement should aid in our self-discovery, because of its dependence upon our unique responses to experience. For that reason when I sought to unify my ideas I found science to be the best paradigmatic parallel to self-realization. One’s existence becomes realized as a result of an active engagement with reality that is driven by one’s intuitive drives (desires) and a courageous application of hypotheses.
Of course, there are those that find the notion of self-realization somewhat romantic. In response to the attitude toward self-discovery that posits self-discovery as an unnecessary aspect of either scientific reasoning or social progress I ask those of you so inclined to utilize the following work with the exception of this notion. If it is at all an accurate art then it would be aided by being proven in spite of this handicap. Being stripped of any notion of pre-existent self you purists can engage in science that is applicable only to those beliefs formed as the result of experience, rather than seeing those beliefs as objects in themselves, things that are innate. In this way one discovers principles that govern the world, while others enrich their understanding of those principles that govern the self. When human beings are involved it is difficult for me to understand how those interested in societal forces can deduct self-discovery from their calculations. Purists, however, in utilizing the following principles will develop an understanding of the principles that govern reality and thus secure a higher probability of happiness and contentment; these feelings have a way of mellowing extremism and magnifying romance and faith.
For unhappy people active engagement with the problems of life can be a daunting challenge. To give oneself to observation is to open up to the desire to learn or grow and those feelings can be scary for those already experiencing the bitter loss of their hopes and dreams. However, the faculty of desire and the ability to learn is given to us for that purpose; to attain happiness through confrontation with our fear. To dismiss these tools is to live in committed hopelessness. It is understandable why some would live in depressed paralysis, as much deliberate observation is needed in order to find accurate information regarding the nature of reality. Many false methodologies exploit our desire for happiness to gain profit and the majority of our tested hypotheses will turn out false. Our experiments will often fail to give us any recognizable rewards. These failures are painful, to be sure, but when one understands that the goal is enlightened understanding, a consistent contentment within one’s self in reality (true happiness), and that that goal is attainable: then what choice is there but to pursue the only goal that makes life worth living? Keep in mind, that the observation of one’s environment for the purposes of growth demands patience and detachment concurrent with a controlled but passionate desire for learning and as we decline as a species, the levels of engagement increase as these necessary traits simultaneously decrease. Of all the endangered species on this planet the one I am most concerned about is my own.
In the moment of active engagement, whereby a human being confronts reality and its unknown quantities, experience (the object) begins to express itself in the form of information. Details accumulate quickly. This can be overwhelming as the amount of phenomena and their infinite variety of interactions lends to a difficulty in finding one’s place among the seeming chaos. Three things can happen in this moment, the first stage of scientific inquiry, where a human being is bombarded with the infinite nature of objects. One, he/she can go back to passivity overwhelmed by the task of learning and in that passive state become another object of fate. Two, he/she can take all of the information and attempt to find unifying principles that govern the parts, thus moving further into the scientific process and this development of unity, the atonement of information, is the gestation process of hypothesis and the need for experimentation arises from that hypothesis having uncertainty as its primary attribute. However, there is a third possibility, outside of passivity and science, that is the most troubling of the three types of engagement with reality and that is; one can maintain one’s state of observation indefinitely becoming lost in obsessive attachment to the problem, to the unknown quantity.
Every object in its relationship to the infinite universe reflects that infinitude perfectly. To know the complete nature of an object is impossible. At best we might develop a familiarity with the focus of our studies and that familiarity has the practical benefit of allowing us access to our intuition. When we face the complex reality with a will toward learning and then propose a hypothesis to explain the phenomenological relationships we are lumping the familiarities of our experience into themes and categories that enrich our worldview and thus enrich our inner life.
The only object that we can know fully is our self. To attempt to know another completely, as some do when they fixate on the problem, lost in the aforementioned obsessive observation, is to become a reflection or recreation of the problem or experience. It is to be possessed by it. And since this is not our aim we must perpetually be on guard against an indulgence in observation. As we meditate upon observation I discourage this voyeuristic tendency for observation does not alone make a science. The seduction of the problem is great and the object of our research, because of its infinite complexity, can sometimes become a fascination that obscures the infinite complexity found in every object. And so to detach from this complexity as though it is something outside of our selves is to affirm our own individual arbitration of the laws within which we exist. Just as doctors wear masks to protect their bodies from the diseases that they are fighting against, so must we, working for justice, equality or progress, remind ourselves of the goal and beware of the beauty of the problem.
Certainly clear, detached and objective observation of phenomena is an important aspect of scientific living, especially when one is dealing with threats to one’s survival. However, when one understands the whole arch of a scientific experiment he/she will see that the majority of useful (new) information is collected after the application of hypothesis via experiment. In other words, an over-lengthy period of observation is actually working against the efficient growth of the understanding.
In the introduction I asserted that I would not spend too much time in the cathartic fellowship of the crisis. What I meant is that many who call themselves social activists maintain that title of civic esteem merely by finding new ways to describe the problem. They are observant but in no way intuitive or scientific. Some of their methods may appear like active engagement but they are merely educating people on the nature of the problem. They, who prod the system, sharing their bravery with the audience, very rarely offer a solution. In other words, these men, whom I have referred to as the fellowship of the crisis, act without hypotheses. They imply that observation will alone lead to progress. They add nothing to our quest for survival for they are presenting aspects of the phenomena with which we are already familiar. It is important for those of us who maintain some spiritual vitality to be aware of these false David figures throwing stones at the giant but never braving to behead it. Their taunting of the powers that enslave us does nothing but grant us more observation of the problem. They can be valuable as such but after a while the problem becomes simple enough that it requires the bold expression of a solution; not yet another defense of the hopelessness of our condition.
Always remember that the problem is seductive. The complications of a system that works to destroy us has a beauty to it and afalse logic that some begin to feel about as others do of poetry. I pity those who read the newspapers all day long as if they are the only ones who can sift the truth out of the lies. They are having their time wasted and they don’t even know it.
Some of our greatest works of literature are nothing more than descriptions of the problem. When reading something that excites my sense of justice and human decency I ask myself if there is any solution in the work. Is the author proposing some reasonable engagement that will work to correct the problem or is he/she dividing me against an enemy exploiting a natural tendency toward the “us and them” attitude? Poetic works of observation shed light on the machinery of evil and that has its place but an overabundance of such works is evidence of rampant fear. It is a specific fear of confrontation, engagement, and the use of one’s intuition that is evidence of our dire state. Those who indulge in the consumption of these works of description are working to repress their belief that something is wrong by finding consolation in alliance with the bitter complaints of the literate class. They are sedating themselves with judgment of the enemy and thus denying a very real threat that demands action.
I have presented in my meditation on observation a description of a problem specific to observation. Pitfalls such as this can be found everywhere in a corrupt society and I will try in this work to point out the most common dangers to our desire for active engagement with life. The hypothesis, remember, is that progress is possible in spite of these pitfalls. In order to find that progress this section implores you to avoid spending too much time in studying the architecture of the agencies that work to destroy us. Rather, develop an architecture of progress and see which structure weathers the ravages of history. One does not need to know how a lion thinks in order to kill one.
A beneficial observation is not much more than an acknowledgment that a problem exists and a brief description of the features. Real science takes place in the confrontation with the problem trusting that our intuition will guide us to an augmentation of our understanding. It is in the mortal struggle with the giants that loom over us that we discover the true strength of the humanspirit. Now that I have addressed the technique I will move forward with a short description of the problem, the threat to our survival as I see it.
|
|
|
