Athiesm Remix

So atheism.

"Atheism."

There are alot of videos on the web about that.

"Yeah, I've watched a few. What about them?"

Does it every get tiring?

"Tiring, of what? Dismissing God?"

Well, you think after dismissing the traditional God and the dogma, you'd wonder, is there anything else?

"I guess."

But they don't.

"Really? I'd say they find the deeper questions in science."

Ah, yes, science! Wonderful term for such a diverse investigation of our physical universe. Of course, exploring the ins and outs of our cosmos will be unending and awe-inspiring. A look at the stars has always brought wonder. But I wonder, what has the establishment of science also brought us?

"Well, let's see. Besides its benefits?"

Yes, besides technology, health, long life, computers, internet - all of that.

"Besides the double edged sword bit, you know, pros and cons of science. What else is perhaps catching our eye too much? Are we getting lost in science somehow and missing something else?"

Who knows.

"Well, I'm asking you if this is what-"

-I mean, yes. Explore it a little more. You're getting warm.

"Okay- so we have science, science gives us a particular view of the world. Lets see... Analytical, intellectual, critical analysis. Bit by bit. Cautious yet open."

Ideally.

"Ideally. And this is just about how it approaches everything. Through a scrutinizingly careful study, repeated experiments and the resultant data."

True, true.

"What's wrong with that? It goes wrong, yes, but it's also a wonderful tool. It has helped us survive the ages."

Well, let's get back to square one. Religion and science. This is a fake dualism, I think, because they're not opposites at all. Science, in the history of our civilization, has for the most part tried to dispell theories of our universe that are not as carefully thought out and tested. In other words, they asked: 'Prove it.'

"So the arguments for atheists is, for the most part, that science dispells the myths of religion, and enables us to understand people and the universe in a deeper, more complex and meaningful way than fairy tales."

Yep. And that's right.

"Oh. So then what's your problem with all of this?"

It's only so right.

"Elaborate,"

Well, if we only viewed the world this way, it is saying more about ourselves and less about the rest of the world. There are a number of things that science, in this very cautious and narrow way, enable us to achieve, and certain things it is quite frankly slow to catch onto. For instance, that the spiritual experience can be deeper than fairy tales. Their cautious attitude slowly may turn to negligence of the wonder that was the mother of science to begin with. Instead, they reject it, assuming things that may not be accurate.

"Alright, I'm getting the picture here. Get back to atheism? Not all scientists are atheists."

Right. This is often the argument they use though. That science gives us all answers, inevitably. But this, even according to science, is a striking assumption- that this method, though often cautious, can answer every question in the universe - or that the universe can be understood through answers! These are of course our own subjective experiences - thought, questions, consciousness. These things may or may not necessarily help us understand anything objectively. Science itself, by definition, would call this notion absurd. It would instead answer: Who knows? We may find out if we continue. And that is a more healthy response.

"So what are they really relying on? It seems that the assumption is more of an ideal."

People love ideals. They can escape into the safety of certainty in them.

"Hmm, so it's really just finding another ideal to dwell within. Another castle to defend the insecurity of the unknown."

Something like that.

Succinctly

Recently I've been playfully and painfully exploring our sense of self, what it is (or is not), and how it is reinventing itself, day to day, hour to hour, and even moment to moment. These investigations have led to compelling discoveries about our own nature, our sense of self, and directly impacting our societies past and present. These characteristics influence everything: from science to culture, to religion.

What is it? Our continual reinforcement of a self as an independent center, the daily constraint and overall control of ourselves and our environment, because we have been taught to be ashamed of our nakedness, our transparency that we are born with and die with. Science, religion, patriotism, ideals, all of these things are attempts to escape our own fear of this unknownable consistency which we are made to vanish in. The nameless and the wordless terrify us, yet deep down we are indeed boundless to ideas, thoughts and time. It is this we try to escape, but the escape is a facade. It is as futile as Alan Watts describes as a, "Snake biting its own tail."

Digging Into Paradox

I'd just like to share one thought about the traditional evolutionist/creationist debate. Are not both ends of the spectrum merely trying to create a narrative? A story for us? They are trying to write our past, as accurately as possible (For their own viewpoint, of course). Yet, is this digging into the past really going to help us solve the debate? Perhaps we should spend more time in the present moment, as it will reveal more to us than digging up bones ever could. Presence, patience, awareness, reflection on the now. Imagine what scientists would discover already dynamic and whole, in this moment? Perhaps that is for future-scientists to tango with. My point is, it's always, already now.

It's been a while,

And it may or may not be longer. I've been taking some down time at home to relax, play some games and socialize. I'll soon be back to blog again, as I've found some interesting things while surfing. In the meantime, though,

Farewell Arthur C. Clark (More on your parting words later).

Hello Eckhart Tolle, (Review of the internet class with Oprah to come).

Watching a few videos has made me reflect on the whole atheism thing, and I'd like to share a few thoughts. 

new cat! his name is sammy. I almost named him "Azeroth the Hungerer" because of his size, but alas. (Pics to come)

that's it for now, expect these blogs in no particular order....

Swimmies in the Deep End

I'd like to point out that this was greatly inspired by a friend of mine, for now we will call Owl. I was reading her blog and felt a spark of blogging inspiration. Thanks Owl!

A few blogs back I was inspired to critique and explore my major, sociology. I wrote a few questions that I thought were necessary, but forgotten in the classroom. I have one more:

Can our understanding deepen?

That is, can we understand ourselves, collectively and individually, at deeper and more inclusive levels?

The term is often called holistic. It's how one thing builds up on another, increasing depth, complexity and development in response to environment and change. There's a little bit of physical proof, sitting inside your skull right now. It's your reptilian brain stem. The very, very early state of the brain which handles our bare instincts. Wonderful thing. Causes problems sometimes, but necessary nonetheless. And it was necessary before we could develop the mammalian brain. It's not that the mammalian brain was predetermined, or pre-destined by some archaic, dogmatic faith or oppressive scientific law. Nope! It was, for the most part, spontaneous, intelligent reaction to adversity. So many variables go into evolution that I won't even try to explain them all, or even pretend I know half of them. What I'm getting at here, though, is that evolution exists. It naturally builds on previous states to emerge a new trait. The previous aspect is right there, doing what it always has. The reptilian brain is not "unequal" from the mammalian, for the two could not exist without each other.

So holistic things are inter-dependent as well. We have a world that is a wonderfully complex, hidden dynamic. Like an organism, there are parts, whole-parts making up other whole-parts. Is it any wonder, then, or even truly arguable, that our consciousness, our own mind does not reflect this harmonic universe? Is it any wonder that new stages of awareness, built on previous ones, can pop up in response to our own development and potential growth?

When a child is not raised in contact with other human beings, parts of his or her brain are actualy undeveloped. Because of this, you can make an argument that any such "evolved consciousness," is entirely dependent on your upbringing. That's only partially true. Yes, we are social beings. We need interaction to develop. But that interaction, that level of understanding that is imparted onto the next generation, has shifted and grown observably. You can witness the emergence of worldcentric thinking, pluralism and humanities as more dominant thought processes, as technology, globalization and worldviews emerge and interact.

So, what is more simplistic here? Can evolution, seen so colorfully enriched in our modern perspective, really be labeled "linear?" Or is it perhaps the view that, even in the deep end, we must wear swimmies that is truly the simple one? If people are diving in, there's no need to stop them. Just accept them as you accept the multiplicity of perspectives. Embrace depth with inclusiveness. That is the meaning of integral.

Relative Pitfalls

There was an awesome presentation today in sociology, where a student had to describe the development of societies. She presented it as an introduction in a basic linear chart: Hunter-gatherer, Pastoral, Agrarian, Industrial, Post Industrial. Afterwards, my professor raised the good point: Try to see the different societies as co-existing. They are not necessarily linear. She asked the class:

"What dangers does this sort of evolutionary thinking provide?"

Student hands shot up, and one by one they called out the dominant flaws:

"It can be oppressive , as if those other societies are "less" human than our society."

"It assumes that the best way to go is Industrial, when it really isn't necessarily so."

"Marginalizes those who are in the lower "levels."

All good points! Of course, I had to play devil's advocate once again. I raised my hand and asked, "But what are the pitfalls of not at least including linear-development in a greater, very relative scheme?"

I continued, "It's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You can't just dismiss the developmental aspect of societies. Yes it's not completely linear, but it's not to say it doesn't exist. Maybe if we embraced a vertical and a horizontal thinking system we could understand it better, because it is complex."

The class raised their hands again, repeating the same arguments as they did before.

I tried to clarify myself, throwing out the word "holons," and described a few metaphors (Galaxies, solar systems, planets, increasing complexity). The most that I got out of it was that it was interesting that, "linear views in social sciences persist."

Alas. This is just a ramble. An irritated ramble. It's alright though, as frustrated grip fades, I'll just end this with a passing but important point:

To hold relativism to an extreme is to undermine your own value. No one view is right, except for that view. Accept all cultures, beliefs, societies as equal, except for values that don't agree. And I'll leave that paradox for any readers to poke at.

Nirvana Body

So what happens when it all finally clicks? When the ego collapses utterly into the divine, when the self discoveries the infinity of love abounding? Is it different for me than it would be for you? We're all unique, for sure. But there seems to be a handful of characteristics, if you will, "before" and "after." As a sociologist, I find myself constantly dabbling into these sort of studies. The empirical poking and prodding method may not be able to grasp the wisdom behind nirvana, kundalini, satori- perfectly fine by me. What it can do, though, playfully and with passive observations, is list a few characteristics about this elusive, mystical state. Believe it or not, there are some physiological traits of this experience. They do not reveal to us the insides of samadhi, only the outsides. So, I promise nothing in this entry that will reduce the mystic to scientific variable, a lab rat, test tube or statistic. Instead, I only offer what empirical science can tell us, and leave it up to the wonderer you are to take a leap into the unknown.

Mystical states are often a process, or transformative growth. One could call it a metamorphosis of you, totally and completely. It's a revolution, J Krishnamurti would call it. A revolution of the bodily state, the mental state, and the spiritual state. To be a mystic misfit, it takes the right tools to unlock a natural process that is already within you. Nope, I won't get into metaphysics. Way too complex for me. There are so many metaphysical theories on the subtle and psychic world, that to try to squeeze them all in this blog would totally lose the point. While you read this, remember that there are exceptions, and that enlightenment is not always so rough a transformation. This is really describing the dramatic, sudden shift that occurs often enough. Keep in mind that it may take years, it may take days. It may be blossom like a flower or rage in like a thunderstorm. We'll be dancing in the lightning for today.

So I'll keep it to the point, and in a nifty list. What's enlightenment like?

The End of Becoming

1. the body.

In The Three Pillars of Zen, there's an wonderful chapter that actually describes a number of satori experiences by both westerners an easterners. In fact, all of these are first-hand accounts. If we wanted to know "what's enlightenment like," we couldn't have found a better answer than by those who have gone through it. So, how do they explain it? The first aspect they often describe is a bodily change.

Hallucinations- Visual blots of light, shapes, figures. These are common.

Tremors- The body may start shaking violently. Not a seizure, but often enough the practitioners must lie down for a while.

Fainting- Literally, just passing out, with a combination of other characteristics on the list.

Sensation of Dying- many feel as if everything is being let go, and they go through a death-experience, the "death pose." UG Krishnamurti described his own experience like this. He actually thought he was about to die, and lied on his bed to let it all go black.

Blackouts- Where am I? Hours vanish, in and out of consciousness.

Intense Pain- The body goes through varying levels of pain. Yikes. Discomfort, aching, or sometimes even total-body pain.

Sweating- Nothing more to say. Usually accompanied by fever.

Often the Roshi will have the person taken care of. A blanket, some water, some rest are all important. The sensations can come and go over a few days, as in two noted cases (one of which is Krishnamurti's).

2. The Mind

The Mind and Heart go through an intense period as the body wrenches through the shift. A severe depression might arise, a disconnect from the outside world, or a hypersensitivity may occur (Asking not to be touched, etc).

Sometimes, the experience is described as an accumulation of all your troubles, your pathologies, your crisis or in other words - your shadow self bubbling up to the surface. You may feel as if every pain and fear you have ever felt is happening now.

3. The Spirit

A sense of many lifetimes may arise. You may feel disconnected from a sense of self. There's no "I" anymore, it's dying. You may feel that your past lifetimes are all coming to the surface. Just like your shadow self, your subtle self is shifting.

The Constance of Being

Often after these intense periods of time, the individual feels absolutely refreshed. There is a strange calmness and resonance in everything. The people, the cars, the plants and animals - it all feels and looks, and is - so vibrantly alive. It becomes difficult to differentiate things anymore. You start to just see things without labeling them. UG Krishnamurti, after his experience, went out for a walk and had to have a flower explained to him. "What is that?" Is replaced by a simply acceptance of everything that arises.

Thoughts seem diminished. They are present, but like everything else that arises, they are neither grasped nor let go. They just come like wind, rain and clouds.

A sense of self is still there, but so tiny the awareness is no longer "my" awareness, little "i" is now just "I am"-ness.

Past and Future as Now

Many times, individuals feel a sense of "timelessness" in which they see past and future in the present. They claim to, sometimes, look at someone else and see their former lives, or even their future lives - just as naturally and as easily as normal sight.

As you can see, the list is dynamic and not conclusive. Not set in stone at all. What it does show, however, are tendencies. Tendencies for gravitate towards these traits. What's it mean? Probably ripples on the pond, the moon's reflection on the surface, when "I-am-ness" manifests totally in a human being. What these ripples will show, however, is that the empirical eye can observe them. That the half blind vision of science, studying bit-by-bit of the kosmos, can begin to see connections, and hopefully a bigger picture here. This is not some crazy "inner attitude" that people can dismiss without a second thought (although this does happen...), what I hope is that other scientists will start taking this seriously, and join the mystics in their song.