So long as we keep expecting that what funnels through public discourse are choices that lead to results we are stuck in the nightmare fantasy of control.
Brexit. Trump versus Clinton. All of the day’s public questions are mired in manipulations. We remain complicit so long as we feel we must make the choice our habitual role leads us to see as unavoidable. We eagerly hyperventilate. We burn with hatred for the other side, “How can they be so stupid, venal – plain wrong?”
We’re asked to play the game as we’re warned, “This isn’t a game!” By those who are certain that if we abandon our place on the barricades, “Everything will go wrong!”
It’s a common expression. We consider the two must go together, “How can we feel good if we’re not secure?”
Here’s John‘s recent comment on An Exploration, Navigating Without a Map:
Tony, I have read and re-read your original posting, and I think I have a better grip on where you are going with it. Qualitative v.s. quantitative differences are different as night and day. They are tangible v.s. intangible. Rational v.s. irrational.
I keep returning to the lessons of futility. We are admonished to, “Try harder!”in the face of that which we cannot change, leaving us spinning our wheels….
It has to do with cause & effect….
But this is only part of what’s going on.
“(Taoism) isn’t a process of learning more facts or greater skills. It is the unlearning of wrong habits and opinions.” — Alan Watts
It’s not just the Singularity Boys who get this wrong….
What is unlearning?
I just stumbled upon Donald D. Hoffman‘s work in The Atlantic Magazine.
It was one of those exceedingly rare moments when a crucial new piece is added to the puzzle.
He’s a cognitive scientist. He’s been studying the roots of perception and his research has led to his articulation of a key missing link if we’re to clarify our position and move into a coherent relationship with what-is.