Dialogue ~ 3

I finished my last blog with: “Where does this leave us however, in terms of what many have been suggesting, in that we should dismantle and discard those cultural stories which are no longer serving us and establish new ones which are? Are utopian ideals nothing more than chasing rainbows or setting out to revamp any existing furniture in a room? How many are truly willing for a mould to be broken?”

Is there some form of psycho-emotional tension which exists between knowing and believing? In the worlds of science and technology, albeit slowly on occasion, there is generally a willingness to question the basis on which prior assumptions and conclusions have been reached and to stretch and open towards new ones. Why do religious and cultural beliefs prove more resistant to change? Concerning what we interpret as the natural world, why is there more willingness for information or knowledge that has been acquired through observation, validation and experience to be re-examined, than there is with regard to the functionality of a metaphysical world, who we are as a species and of how we fit into the cosmos?

Part of the problem appears to be because academia of our western culture encourages us to put those who are regarded as specialists on various subject matters onto pedestals. It generally seems to be agreed that individuals are more likely to be considered as specialists because of the quality or duration of education that they have received. In the religions of the world, specialists are those who have either put themselves forward, or it has been agreed by their community, as having been chosen by God. Such specialists are considered to be more worthy or pious than everyone else. What is confusing for me is that even if the information that an individual has to contribute is unique or holy in its nature, why is it taken for granted that it has to be held aloft and rendered inappropriate to question?

Other than any potential threats of violence, intimidation or of being ostracised, could a reason be that it has been perceived by some groups that to challenge, that is to say, to question ‘the one who has seemingly been touched by God’ is to question God in effect – perhaps not so much if the ‘chosen one’ happens to be female (they have not fared so well in the past). Whatever the reason, with regard to matters concerning what God wants or has put into law, there has been a tendency for tribal communities around the world to submit to the leading human authority of the day.

Cultural beliefs appear to be resistant to change because of an inherent human need to feel a sense of belonging and contribution to a given tribe or community and the fear of being made an outcast. The cultural story or predominant paradigm is almost like a ‘holding pattern’ for a group – it offers a sense of identity and encourages social cohesion and co-operation; it is hypnotic, perhaps mythic in its effect. What causes for an element to go rogue and how does change manifest within a system?

What has to be noted is that the challenges facing our global world are not wholly emerging from differing religious views, but are about the gaps which are beginning to widen between cultures. This is crucial for all of us to address, as beyond the seeming contrast which exists between lifestyles of the rich and poor, what is effectively on the table is whether we perceive of ourselves as belonging to a reductionist, mechanistic world in which we are encouraged to strive to gain control and an upper hand on our surroundings and one another ~ or whether we recognise that we are participants of a dynamic, intelligent, interdependent and co-operative system in which every contribution has value to the whole; such value incidentally, is not something which can be defined and placed into any given hierarchy by any one of us.

~ The shift of our times has to do with a transition from the perception of hierarchy (master and slave) into an integrated and holistic worldview; not either/or but both/and; qualitative and quantitative ~

To clarify, the paradigm shift emerging from within a complex and multicultural world is not about one paradigm simply replacing another; ergo it is not antagonistic or competitive, rather it is transformative. Just as a science of quantum mechanics has embraced that reality appears as particle and wave (or object and process) according to how it is being observed, so too will a paradigm shift be comprehended as including for both mechanistic-reductionist and holistic models.

What is exciting is that this paradigm shift will be revolutionary in its application of how human beings will view themselves in the midst of their environment; the very fabric of relationships will take on a different hue – it has to because the change that is occurring is embedded within the human experience itself of being interconnected with one another and integral within the cosmos. Some cultures and communities have known of this and been experiencing it for some time, but what is occurring now is that this experience is opening up for individuals around the world, as they are literally awakening to their true nature and of their relationship with the world.

What I see as occurring is that the concept or thought about what is meant by separation is being revisited. The definition of separation is: “the action or state of moving or being moved apart” and “the division of something into constituent or distinct elements”. From the moment we are born, we are being coached by those around us that we are individuals and are separate from our environment; in many ways this is essential for us to become self-aware and to learn about and be encouraged to take responsibility for our actions. Perhaps there has been some reluctance to question this, as the very way in which we perceive is rooted in apparent distinctions between things and what we learn is more a case of attributing meaning to these distinctions – this body of knowledge that travels with us is our cultural story and we instinctively tap into it before making choices about what it is that we would like to experience and how we should show up in the world.

We have assumed that life – the very essence with which we are imbued and the fabric in which we participate is somehow neutral and passive – literally waiting for us to make a move, almost like throwing a stone into water - the consequences of which are generally viewed as predictable, short term and local. Incidentally, this doesn’t tally with what quantum mechanics has revealed about the nature of the cosmos, in that atoms and molecules can be instantly connected across time and space and the realisation that everything which exists is not showing up randomly, in isolation or by accident; which by necessity has to include the events in our lives and the people that we meet.

For some people, life is exciting in that they have an impression that the ‘world is their oyster’ and they are empowered to confidently stride out with a burning desire to make their mark, responding only in so far as to make adjustments to what it is they are doing in order to get what they believe they want.

For others, an uncertainty of life instils a sense of fear or caution; it can even bring about a sense that life wants something ‘from them’ and a greater sense of being which many have labelled as The Creator; to which they regards themselves as subservient.

If there is an unconscious belief of being separate from life, as in the image of an entity that is swimming in the midst of an infinite body of water which is watching their every move, then when things are going well, such a person might acknowledge that as blessings of a benevolent deity or of just having luck on their side; when things are challenging or not going so well, there is dissatisfaction, particularly with what appears to be the lot of others in comparison and there is a sense of being a victim. In such cases, it is tempting to listen to the advice of others in how one should live one’s life or what to do to get results. What follows is that although a person might think they know, they won’t actually know which way they are pointing - how could they when they have not located – that is to say, have come to know - what is at the core of their being?

So to return to what I said earlier: “What I see as occurring is that the concept or thought about what is meant by separation is being revisited … Perhaps there has been some reluctance to question this, as the very way in which we perceive is rooted in apparent distinctions between things and what we learn is more a case of attributing meaning to these distinctions - this body of knowledge that travels with us is our cultural story and we instinctively tap into it before making choices about what it is that we would like to experience and how we should show up in the world.”

Is it possible then, that it is the framework itself, by which we view who we are and how life is and to which we have historically attributed meaning, is adjusting? Isn’t that what is meant by a paradigm shift? We glimpsed something new through the science of quantum mechanics and now it appears as if the revelation of this has taken root and is beginning to grow and to refresh our collective psyche; what is important is that as our collective vision adjusts, so too does what we are individually capable of perceiving and as this is a system with a feedback loop, its effects could be quantum in nature.