| Achieving the New Civilisation|
|17 Aug 2005 @ 09:05, by John Oates|
Outstanding, compelling motives for changing the world
NCN NewsLog – Social System Design
OUTSTANDING, COMPELLING MOTIVES FOR CHANGING THE WORLD
You can't solve a problem with the same kind of thinking that created it. (A.Einstein)
We won’t achieve a new civilisation/better world until the great majority really want it and agree about how it should be. But people presently don’t think alike and don’t agree. Yet it’s urgent. How can humanity be persuaded?
Looking at fixed, resistant minds and the seeming impossibility of getting through to them, the first thing to consider is the constitution of the mind. How is it possible that so many different beliefs and opinions are held when the brain structure that furnishes the mind is essentially the same in all humans? How is it that all humans have a deep sense of right and wrong, or that they have some concept of truth? How is it (if my understanding is correct here) that nobody, whatever terrible inhumanities they may have committed, ever admits to being fundamentally evil or devoid of good?
In answer to the above questions I have been truly forced to the conclusion that humans possess two minds, the conscious, that contains the self, and the postconscious, the source of our morality and of conscience.
A most compelling motive for change is the realisation that we have these two minds, the conscious, and the postconscious, and that until we open the former to guidance by the latter we shall be INCOMPLETE.
This conclusion needs to be consciously accepted as true and loudly proclaimed, on the grounds that it is undeniable, being arrived at by the postconscious itself, whose function is truth.
Another most compelling motive for change is the realisation that humanity is highly intelligent but basically LIVES BY INSTINCT, in disharmony.
The conscious mind is chiefly motivated by the instinctive drives to which its reasoning is geared, even when the action that results is not sensible to the intelligence, such as hunting animals for pleasure alone. Consequently the conscious mind is suggestible, and capable of so reasoning as to justify any action despite conscience, the still small voice that derives from truth, not instinct. In a similar way the conscious mind/self might adopt a belief or faith, such as that in God for some supposed advantage and, in self-support, determinedly defend that belief with false reason. It deliberately ignores the postconscious that would reason otherwise, yet the conscious ultimately claims to be true and not evil because part of its being, though largely ignored, is the true postconscious.
Consider what the conscious mind, that does all of the self’s thinking, is made up of. At the earliest age it begins absorbing its parental prejudices and tries to make sense of the information, much of it bizarre, crazy and threatening, that reaches it from outside. Influenced by these impressions and accompanied by a variety of differently conditioned minds, the conscious goes to school, there to be taught by also differently conditioned minds who represent the outside world, the Machine. As the conscious goes through school it is further conditioned, wittingly or unknowingly, by the Machine and in readiness for going out and serving the Machine. As it proceeds it perceives contradictions, and political attempts at resolving them that breed further differences of position. In response to all this the conscious forms its own opinions that others accept as right or reject as wrong, depending on the stand they take.
In this way successive generations of human enter the Machine arena, prepared to think and act according to their conditioning yet entertaining doubts and questions that they are usually unable to make sense of, however, because of the disorganised chaos of their conscious minds. These are the parents of the next generation. It is such conscious minds that are being asked to change their ways and their world. But it is out of this Machine world that they carved their identity. This identity is all they’ve got and seems likely to be all they’ll ever have, so their ego defends it, right or wrong. This is their place in life and, one way or another, they will fight for it.
It is necessary to make clear to people that they are not asked to shed their protective identity but to embrace that other part of themselves that is a vital part of their identity but which they have previously discounted or ignored – their postconscious. Changing the world for the better is a matter of MAKING OURSELVES WHOLE.
The postconscious does not enter the conscious arena, nor does it want to, but it does pass on to consciousness certain true conclusions by way of conscience. The fact that it was isolated immediately following the human mutation has worked to our advantage. The isolation of the postconscious gave it the freedom and independence that made truth its function. This is the only possible function of the mass of neurons etc that furnish a mind that is fully aware of essentials but entirely free of any outside interference or instruction
The postconscious’ function is MORAL TRUTH.
The postconscious is the other half of human being. The two halves require to work together, combining to make a complete mind whose wish and responsibility is then to realise such moral truth in the world, for that is the way for supremely intelligent life to behave. So the postconscious is the guide, and the conscious is the executive that follows this guidance in everything it thinks and does.
Most of our problems are caused by the instinct-based Machine and its competitive money economy. They will evaporate when the Machine is abandoned and we turn to LIVING INTELLIGENTLY.
You can imagine a conscious self/mind reasserting itself, despite the postconscious but, in this new civilisation with the accent on moral truth, any misbehaviour would meet with disapproval and condemnation so strong as to prevent it. Furthermore, when the practice of competitive money economics is abandoned, many hazards will be avoided and problems solved. For example, the health-hazard of smoking. In an ideal society without a money economy there would be no incentive to grow tobacco and sell it on a huge scale, so the temptation to smoke would not arise.
Air pollution and consequent global warming may have been unforeseeable but that which caused much of it, the burning of fossil fuel in aeroplanes and cars, was brought about by the Machine for reasons of profit, not human need. An ideal society would not have blindly forged ahead with the industrial revolution, not would it have put air and road travel for pleasure higher on its agenda than worldwide provision of water, food and shelter. Such a society would have had no reason or cause the building of Salisbury cathedral and so would have deprived some of us of a thing of beauty, but neither would it have tolerated the slums of Calcutta or, to some degree, of every large city on Earth.
The Machine encourages the manufacture and sale of arms for profit, and sets up competitive leaderships who may well resort to war to settle their differences. The competitive money economy automatically produces winners and losers, and the latter frequently resort to crime to redress this imbalance. The Machine uses competitive education to staff the upper echelons with winners who are then reluctant to support worthy reforms that would curtail their power and privilege. A humantrue society would not oblige or encourage anybody to do these things.
As human beings we are presently INCOMPLETE because WE ARE LIVING BY INSTINCT. We need to MAKE OURSELVES WHOLE, in accordance with MORAL TRUTH, ie we need to LIVE BY INTELLIGENCE
17 Aug 2005 @ 21:04 by : crisis management...
through crisis creation. HU-MANAS is still being In-Vented. Break your crayons and draw outside the lines. Infinite accord with the 'Creative' is the essence of the 'Receptive.' Do some "Dimentional Analysis." "
"The minute an idea for a project is conceived, it's too already too late to think of it from scratch."--Christopher Alexander
"Teach people how to think not what to think."
How is the, how was the, object (HU-MANAS) oriented in the first place? Where was that first place? In the beginning is the seed of all that is to come. The beginning is very important, yes? ;)
Welcome to the club.
17 Aug 2005 @ 22:23 by jstarrs : I dunno..
..I'm thinking most people have a problem with one mind, let alone two.
Maybe it's just a question, as you say, of realizing that certain ethical attitudes like altruism are more rewarding for oneself & others than a limited self-cherishing behaviour?
18 Aug 2005 @ 09:34 by : Achieving the New Civilisation
to vaxen....yes, how to think, and the ultimate objective of thought is one and the same truth..recognising it as it comes from our own postconscious mind or from the minds of others. May I suggest you visit www.humantruth.org ?
to istarrs : hello again. The problems we have always had are due to the fact that we use the lesser conscious and ignore the higher postconscious. When the two are working truly together our lives will be much more straightforward. Bringing them together is the urgent recipe for change.
Thanks for your welcomes
Other entries in Articles
16 Oct 2010 @ 11:48: Character
25 Nov 2009 @ 15:02: Letter to thinkers
2 Nov 2008 @ 11:10: The Wrong Reality
12 Mar 2008 @ 17:14: The Vital Necessity for Agreement
1 Jul 2007 @ 11:35: True Communication
4 Mar 2007 @ 13:04: Introduction to Wrong Reality, the book
14 Jan 2007 @ 13:33: Morality first
5 Dec 2006 @ 11:37: Determining the Future
3 Dec 2006 @ 12:28: The root causes of crime
25 Oct 2006 @ 15:18: Spreading the Word