Kierkegaard’s dilemma was that despite his love for Regine he believed himself to be incapable of becoming a good husband, so to spare her he breaks off the engagement, telling her he was never truly serious about their relationship in the first place.
He wrote a lot about anxiety. He stated that, when we become anxious, we are overtaken with fear and trembling, as if we were on the edge of a precipice and afraid of falling. Then he said we should jump; take the leap into faith, embrace God for whom all things are possible.
He also tells us that either we shelter ourselves in the illusory belief that the individuals, doctrines and institutions we rely on for self-fulfillment are sufficient (bad) or we dismiss our worldly distractions, realize our declining physical body and face the existential horrors of life (good).
I think he thought about things too much. He should have just gone out and had a good time once in a while.
I’ve been wondering about this most incredible idea, that, quantum mechanically speaking, there may exist any number of universes. As hard as I try to visualize such an idea in my limited three-dimensional capacity to imagine spatially it all seems pretty much beyond comprehension. When I add time to the mix I can sort of get an idea of it all. After all, the world as it is right now is not quite the same as the world as it is right now. A micro-second in the past or the future might define an entirely separate reality, a parallel existence.
I wonder if these separate realities float around, bump into each other and maybe intersect for brief periods. Is it possible the remarkable sparkling landscape you saw last week was of another world never to be seen in your reality again? Maybe realities are nested within each other. Do the places you glimpse through the trees and bushes on that familiar winding trail through the woods have a certain other-worldly feel?
I find such thoughts intriguing. I revel in the possibilities, and, as long as I don’t think too hard about trying to define the multiverse in three-dimensional terms, I remain content in the limitations of my understanding.
I’ve been reading that most of us limit our perceptual awareness, our capacity to absorb the complexity of the world around us by separating out, isolating and placing our experiences into conceptual boxes.
According to what I find to be very credible sources, everyone would acquire a greater understanding and avoid a lot of discomfort if we could see the inter-connectedness of all, including us, that is before our consciousness. I guess the idea is that ‘seeing’ should supersede ‘thought’. Seeing before labeling, judging and categorizing might provide the means to realize stasis and existential harmony. Of course it all happens moment by moment; enlightening insights will constantly be interrupted by the thoughts daily functioning requires; no one and done here.
So, I’m thinking, I’m thinking too much; I need to clear my mind and just See the ebb and flow of existence; it may lead to a greater understanding of the predicaments that I regularly experience; at the very least ‘just seeing’ might temper the petty discomforts my delicate ego tends to create for me.
I’ve been reading that quite a number of people these days are relying on various chemical enhancers to improve their intellectual functioning. As I understand it, widespread use of psycho-stimulants like Ritalin are being used to prop up memories and quicken access to stored information (quicker even than a Google search, I guess) for those wishing to function more effectively or maybe just to appear smarter than they really are. There are also those out there seeking more intense religious adventures than they might otherwise experience using psycho-stimulants like psilocybin which have apparently been used for millennia for the purpose of traveling to the far reaches of consciousness.
I find this idea of psycho-stimulation somewhat intriguing in light of my own diminishing memory, which, of course, I can attribute to the considerable amount of information processed and experiences experienced which has come with aging. I do find myself a little slow on the draw when it comes to participating in fast paced conversation as well. Considering the eye opening potential psycho-stimulants may offer as consciousness ex pander and a means of subordinating personal ego perhaps some experimentation is in order. Getting to a deeper understanding of mankind, the environment and universe has to be a good thing. Maybe our politicos could benefit from a bit of psycho-stimulated enlightenment.
I’ve been thinking, lately, about what it might mean to realize an extended period of calm, peacefulness and tranquility; halcyon days of pleasant meanderings through a benevolent natural world and happy encounters with grounded, enlightened people. It seems a bit of a fantasy requiring, in this day and age of political unrest and perpetual world-wide tragedy, a sort of head-in-the-sand dismissal of reality.
Maybe I’m just allowing myself to be distracted, not seeing the whole forest, lost among the trees. I suppose I could strive to remain awake in the moment, not get overly obsessed with situations beyond my control, you know, realize the world around us is ever-changing. I, perhaps, need to reacquaint myself with a Nature in constant flux and modify my sense of propriety so as not to assume it should be for everyone, everywhere.
Can right mind, I wonder, see a reality in which all live happily ever after; if not, how about a centered life free of the sufferings of expectation?
The thinking seems to be these days among neuro-scientists and phenomenologists that the concept of Self is an artificial construct evolution has foisted upon us in the interest of fending off extinction. By providing a focus upon which to differentiate options for action, evolution has provided, over considerable time, the means to improve our potential for personal survival. I’m guessing things like:” is that Sabretooth Tiger looking at me thinking about a meal in which case “‘I’better think about reacting” and so forth, has developed and perpetuated the myth of the Self.
So, I guess there really is no ‘Self’ other than a concept our consciousness has found useful to limit possible choices in order to provide some bit of stability within our limited sensible abilities; which also means the ‘World’ our artificial ‘Self’ recognizes is but a tiny fraction of what is actual out there existing around us.
But our sense of Self, researchers assure us, is pretty much impossible to eradicate as enlightening as it might be to do so. We can, though, I suppose, think seriously about growing our world awareness through meditation which is, after all, a ‘Self’ subordinating enterprise.
It appears that the very best, the only, really, reality anyone can hope for is a virtual one. Apparently our virtual world is limited to but a tiny fraction of the reality around us. Our virtual world is, I guess, the result of our need to pin down, create a static conceptual world that we, our “I”, is the center of separate from you, the other.
I do catch a glimpse, occasionally, of a richer reality which is available, according to the sage advice I’ve recently been reading, by simply ‘awakening’ to the moment, realizing with open mind what’s before me. So, what I would like to do is get better in touch with the immensity and complexity of the fluctuating, ever-changing reality that I know is out there.
I guess part of the solution may require looking past dualistic concepts like existence/non-existence which tend to lead to ideas of extinction or eternal survival, getting in the way of immediate sustained perceptual awareness. And then, too, I suppose subordinating ego, by-passing that annoying sense of ‘Self’ will also be necessary.
I will attempt, today, to embrace the moment, allow distracting concerns , past and future to pass by and stay focused in the now; no rushing around; everything in good time.
It appears neuro-scientists, brain researchers, have determined that there’s an innate sensibility, a pre-language understanding that all humans and some other mammalian species have in common. The theory is that this sense of existential commonality could only have occurred after the evolutionary neural development process that first produced a ‘self-model’ or individual identity in our early ancestors and that through observation and mirroring their cave mates, social connectedness and empathy developed from which cultures and civilization followed.
So, I’m beginning to understand that what I am, who I understand myself to be, my personal identity is little more than a particular aspect of neural development no more or less significant in the greater stream of consciousness than the world experienced through my sensual awareness.
Along with the sense of personal identity I’ve inherited self-consciousness, moral second guessing and the anxieties that go along with the desire for social inclusion as well as all sorts of other desires that have a tendency to pre-occupy my consciousness, all of which temper the positives a bit.
One could romanticize, I suppose, that a step back on the evolutionary scale would offer a simpler mental engagement. At the very least social media wouldn’t be an issue.
I understand that neuro-scientists are going to great efforts these days to make sense of what exactly constitutes consciousness. A lot of their efforts are about correlating conscious experiences, like the world view before us or our sense of time extension, with specific brain activity, what synapses fire when and where it’s all happening.
No easy task, I guess, but one particular difficulty these researchers are having is how to deal with extreme subtleties of consciousness, those experiences that defy verbal representation, like the aesthetic response one might have when hearing a particular musical refrain or the ineffable responses to the smell of flowers on a spring day. To make matters even more difficult the same sounds or the same odor may not elicit the same conscious response experienced a second time.
It seems to me reducing conscious experience to specific brain activity isn’t necessarily a desirable enterprise anyway. Perhaps allowing the ineffable to remain ineffable is a breath of fresh air.
I’m being led to understand, through some quite credible readings, that it’s likely physiological variations, like elevated heart rate or shortness of breath or even a stubbed toe precede emotional states; which means, I guess, one might be more likely to develop romantic feelings for a jogging partner or feel an excessive animosity for an athletic opponent after spraining an ankle.
So, I was thinking about this after my bi-weekly exercise regimen the other day when it occurred to me that I did indeed feel a sense of bonding with and good will toward my companions, nothing romantic you understand, but a familial closeness with the good people in our group. Whether I would have developed those same feelings had our relationships developed as, say, library board members I don’t know but I do kind of doubt it. I suppose one could over-intellectualize the issue, debating which came first the heart palpitations or the feelings but better, I think, to just keep exercising and let nature take its course.