“If successful, anger breeds arrogance,
if foiled, resentment….
When fortune removes its adversary,
it turns its teeth on itself.”
~ Seneca, On Anger
“Truth is a pathless land….We have built in our images a sense of security – religious, political, personal. These manifest as symbols, ideas, beliefs. The burden of these dominates thinking, relationships and daily life.
“These are the causes of our problems, for they divide us from each other in every relationship.”
Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895-1986)
We are self-determining. We make up our own minds. We think for ourselves. We cut through other people’s b. s. and discern the way things really are. Right?
Wrong. In fact, these concepts are almost completely bogus.
Our attitudes toward life and self are built on our life’s experiences. We are influenced in our thinking and reactions to events by other things that we may not even recall. We did not paint our own picture of the world and reality. In large part, it was shaped by things out of our control: other people’s ideas that they passed on to us verbally and by example, trauma (physical and psychological pain or harm), and the experiences that we have viewed through those questionable filters throughout our lives.
Like it or not, to a huge degree our thought processes are based on experiences that probably have little or no actual relationship to what’s happening in our lives now. These are the “images” that Sri Krisnamurti spoke of: the unconscious acceptance of the “symbols, ideas, beliefs” that were shaped by our perception of them, which were in turn shaped by things mostly outside of our control.
In short, unless we have learned to discern the difference between these ideas that have been colored by our beliefs, prejudices, and fears and the reality of what is happening, and unless we make a concerted effort to apply reason to our observation of the world, we aren’t really thinking for ourselves at all.
The Buddhist teacher Charlotte Joko Beck taught of a man who decided to take his little boat out on the lake one foggy morning. He really loved his little boat and took great care of it. Having just finished a careful paint job, he was quite proud of his work.
As he rowed through the mist, he suddenly felt a bump. Looking around at the bow, he saw that he had collided with another boat. He was immediately enraged: his new paint job had probably been marred, there might have been other damage, and who was that careless jerk who was paddling around on the foggy lake? [I know – but that’s the way we think, isn’t it?]
On closer inspection, he saw that the boat was empty, a line dangling into the water from the front.
“Oh, gosh! Someone’s boat got untied and drifted out into the lake. I’d better tow it to the marina for safekeeping until the owner can be located. Nice little boat; I’m sure the owner would hate to lose it!” In a few heartbeats, he realized that the facts were nothing like he’d thought and his perception of reality shifted.
How often do we fly off the handle when confronted with things that fail to conform to actual reality? How often do we react to our perceptions of fact, instead of considering other possibilities? How often do we disregard out part in something and seek immediately to shift the blame?
Obviously we can’t take the time to analyze every little thing that happens and causes fear or confusion (and aren’t they really the same thing?); but when we do have time, why not move out of the comfort of our pre-judged ideas, our fears, and the things we take for granted and look at life from a different angle? Are we afraid that we might find that we were actually wrong? Is it easier to float along in other people’s mental rut, or is it better to work at really thinking for ourselves?
This is a repeat of a post back in 2014. It may not seem to have anything to do with recovery, but since recovery is about learning to think clearly as much as anything else, and since the problems some folks have with the idea of religion can hinder recovery, I believe the relevance merits repeating it.
It seems to me that, philosophically speaking, there can be no actual conflict between science and metaphysical issues such as religion. I think the “conflict” is mostly a construct designed to divide (and hopefully conquor) for economic and/or political purposes.
As a discipline, science involves only things that can be observed, measured and quantified. Metaphysics involves things that cannot be measured, observed, quantified, or shown to exist or not exist using scientific methods. As any logician will tell you, failure to prove something does not constitute proof of anything. Therefore, there can be no discussion of metaphysics based on science, and “science” as a discipline cannot have an opinion, pro or con, on metaphysics.
Logic and observation can confirm scientific principles, but even in those cases it can only predict probable outcomes based on observation. Those who believe in metaphysical matters can believe whatever they want, and science can neither prove nor disprove it. Thus, it seems to me that no conflict can exist except in the minds of those who want it. Continue reading
Sobriety is unexplored territory. You have to paddle your
own canoe to get there and you can’t take a taxi.