THURSDAY, JANUARY 8 2009

Ahhh, Sweet Mystery of Meaning

Local Discussion Forums

Ahhh, Sweet Mystery of Meaning

Bob Johnston | 06.02.07 | 03:26 PM |
0
Not yet rated
Bob Johnston's picture

Hi Lawrence, again you've sent up some great questions from the bottom of the Grand Canyon. You may well feel you have discoursed with me enough but I just couldn't resist taking a crack at responding. I have repeated your questions with my responses following each, respectively.

#1) Why is man so enthralled about the concept “meaning?” Why do we find it so important?

My 'working assumption' is that women and men, feeling the existential vacuum inherent in not having solved the Mystery of Life, are deeply curious about where we came from, why we're here and where we're going, if anywhere, after bodily death.

I find the question of "meaning" important because having a valid and reliable answer would give me more confidence that I am on the 'healthiest' path authorized and supported by the Mystery. One study by the Massachusetts Department of Health, Education and Welfare shows a positive causal relationship between a lack of life purpose and meaning and prematurely fatal heart attacks.

Having selected at least subjective answers in the form of 'working hypotheses' (assumptions which work for me in everyday life) to your questions, Lawrence, helps satisfy my curiousity to some degree and reduce the unsettling ambiguity about the purpose of my life. Further, because the stress level and emittance of toxic cortisol are markedly reduced, my mind-body health is enhanced thereby.

#2) What does meaning really mean?

My dictionary tells me that the word "meaning" can be used as a verb or noun. I have discovered that "meaning" for me most of the time is an action verb which implies a process of growth and evolution in integral consciousness. Thus, meaning evolves as a process of my soul's consciousness expansion and development of empathy, understanding and healthful behavior -- individually, socially, ecosystemically and life between lives. Those values confirm that I, along with every other being, am a vital constituent of Nature, participating in and contributing to the creative evolution of humanity and our ecosystem.

#3) How many levels of meaning do you perceive there to be?

My working hypothesis is that there are fundamentally two realms within my concept of integral meaning: one is the transtemporal which is beyond but includes the temporal realm within itself (the transtemporal); and second, the temporal realm which includes ten temporal spheres of consciousness and meaning for me.

Please see the attachments for a textual Overview of the Ten Spheres of Consciousness and Meaning plus a graphic depicting The Ten-Plus Spheres of Consciousness.

#4) How does the concept of “mystical” relate to the concept of “Meaning?”

Referencing again my two realms of conscious awareness and meaning, the transtemporal realm to me is implicit (only implied), therefore more intangible, mystical and more subject to speculation, for example, the imperceptible 'mind' energy within and around molecules, humans, trees, animals, birds in nature.

The second, the temporal realm is more explicit, therefore more tangible and less mystical, and more physically visible and therefore more objective, for example, physically visible molecules, humans, trees, animals, birds in nature.

To my way of feeling and thinking, the single common denominator of both 'mystical' and 'meaning' -- implicit and explicit -- is infinite timeless Mystery, which seems akin to what Ervin Laszlo calls the "quantum vacuum".

The definition of mystical and meaning depends on one's perception and interpretation of perceptions as to what one subjectively projects unto them. In other words, the meanings each individual projects ultimately lead home to The Mystery. Just maybe, that in itself is the ultimate Meaning . . . we are each responsible for formulating our own ultimate meaning, none of which are 'right or wrong' within our niche interdependent and intercommunicating with all other entities in their niches.

My way of preventing myself from becoming identified with and dogmatic about my subjective beliefs is to preface all my affirmations with "My working hypothesis is ____________. It is subject to change pending receipt of new (to me) valid and reliable data." In other words, for me there are no absolutes other than "Right now I am consciously aware."

#5) If meaning is an independent reality from man’s perception (i.e. meaning does not require man's thinking about it . . . it exists with or without our thinking about it ... it is a universal constant ) the concept must have its polar opposite.

What is the conceptual opposite of “Meaning?”

To me, Lawrence, on the surface the conceptual opposite of "Meaning" is: Without a known explicit objective or projected implicit meaning. However, I must be quick to acknowledge that could be a statement of meaning, too. Reminds me of the snake chasing and biting its own tail.

#5) Assume that there is no such concept as “meaning” at any universal dimension including higher levels of knowing. The concept just does not exist! And if that is so … What must man turn to as an alternative concept to contemplate? (This one may take a while but I am very interested to read all of your posts)

On a philosophical level, I think I already responded to that question above in #4.

Practically speaking, however, in order escape being trapped in the circular process of a closed system I again turn to 'working hypotheses' as an alternative concept. Pending further scientific evidence and/or intuitive insights my most fundamental working hypothesis is as follows:

While I am agnostic about the existence of an autocratic creator God, Goddess, Goddess-God, Allah, Jahweh, Brahma, Zero Point or some equivalent thereof, I think it logical there probably exists an infinite timeless aware, intelligent, mysterious experimenter mind-spirit Source of all which evolves temporal forms and who delegates to each of us constituent-entities -- from molecules to galaxies and universes -- self-management (autopoeisis -- see Swimme and Berry 1994) responsibilities within healthful parameters, and who expects us to participate with It in making decisions about new options for experimentation and carrying out evolutionary projects on Earth and its ecosystem.

For me, it then follows that if one perceives temporal events from her or his freest inner place of transparent, centered, balanced, timeless awareness, every perception is an interdependent option, every interpretation of every perception is an interdependent option, and every response to every interpretation is an interdependent option with caveats and consequences for more or less good or ill.

Each consequence may be more or less controllable, only influenceable, or too large, swift, and strong to be controllable.In the latter case all one can do is adapt in as healthful way as possible.

Again. my working hypothesis is subject to change pending new scientific evidence and/or intuitive insights reality-tested in the laboratory of my everyday life.

Having written the above, Lawrence, I would be remiss if I didn't cite the work of Michael Newton (2004) who has found certain commonalities among the reports of about 7,000 of his clients under life between lives hynotherapeutic regression over a 30-year period. I have found his empirical painstaking research methods impeccable and results compelling even though he doesn't make claim to having scientifically confirmed data. Following is a summary of his findings which you may find useful, at least as a working hypothesis, in your pursuit of meaning.

1. The soul can not be defined because it has no limits that are perceived about its creation. The most consistent reports of its demonstrated essence is that the soul represents intelligent energy which is immortal and manifested by vibrational waves of light and color.

2. All human beings have one soul that remains attached to its chosen physical body until death. Souls play a part in the selection of their next physical body during their reincarnation cycles. The soul typically joins its physical body after conception between the fourth month and birth.

3. Each soul has a unique immortal character. When joined with the human brain this character is melded with the emotional temperament, or human ego, of that brain to produce one personality for one lifetime.

4. Souls reincarnate with human beings for countless lifetimes to advance through levels of development by addressing karmic tasks from former lifetimes. Souls grow in knowledge and wisdom through this learning process while pondering their thoughts and deeds in past lives with peers under the direction of teachers.

5. At the moment of physical death the soul returns to the spirit world, the source of its creation. Since part of a soul's energy essence has never left the spirit world during incarnation, the returning soul rejoins with that essence of itself. This, spiritual learning never ceases for the soul. The spirit world also offers souls the opportunity for rest and reflection between lives.

6. Souls appear to be members of specific spirit cluster groups to whom they have been assigned since their creation. The teachers of each group are the personal spirit guides of members of that group. Members of these groups reincarnate with the soul and assume meaningful roles during a soul's life on earth.

7. Rather than being defined as a place of ultimate non-action, or Nirvana, the spirit world appears to be a space of soul transition into higher forms of energy with capabilities for creation with advancement. The spirit world has an area of influence which is undefined except that it includes our universe and nearby dimensions.

8. No earthly religious deities are seen in the spirit world by returning souls. A soul's closest connection with the divine is with their personal spirit guide and members of a council of benevolent counselors who monitor the affairs of each soul. Souls from earth feel and sense the presence of a God-like Oversoul or Source emanating from above their counselors. The spirit world is composed of highly advanced non-reincarnating soul specialists who regulate the work of advancement for the souls in their care.

9. When incarnating souls develop to a high level of experience, performance and wisdom they will cease to incarnate and become advanced beings themselves who assist the still-incarnating souls.

10. The ultimate goal of all souls appears to be the desire to seek perfection and conjoin with the Source that creatively evolved them (if actually true this could provide the basis for 'ultimate meaning' for our lives).

REFERENCES

Laszlo, Ervin (2004). Science and the Akashic Field. Rochester, Vermont:Inner Traditions

Newton, Michael (2004). Journey of Souls. St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn Publisher

Newton, Michael (2004). Destiny of Souls. St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn Publisher

Swimme, Brian and Berry, Thomas (1994). The Universe Story. SF:Harper San Francisco

DiscoverDeclareShare

Member Comments:

Submitted by Lawrence Carson on June 5, 2007 - 9:58pm.

Well my friend I had to really slow down and read your post twice. Either I have adopted many of your present "belief friends" or you have been snooping around a portion of my soul-spirit still hanging out in the "Akashic Fields." :-) Thank you for your time and invested thoughts.

So now that we have pondered five (5) of my questions about beliefs, here's the sixth. How's your sixth sense Bob? :-)

What we are about to delve into now is, (as you say) a hypothesis about one of the seven variables contained within and thus makes up the "Universal Operating System" of the Universe. So here is the question:

What is the relationship between "meaning making" and beliefs?

And yes ... after you post your answer to this one ... you can just tell I have about four follow ups. :-)

Submitted by Bob Johnston on June 7, 2007 - 8:39am.

Hi Lawrence,

You asked, "What is the relationship between 'making meaning' and beliefs?"

As you probably very well know that's a heavy question, at least for me. Let's hope I've answered it in a way so clear you won't have to read it twice. Here goes . . . yes, another 'working hypothesis'.

Even if one perceives everyday events from her or his freest inner place of transparent, centered, balanced, timeless awareness (transtemporal consciousness), every perception is subject to multiple optional beliefs about what the perception means to him or her in light of their particular value system.

I think the assumption we sometimes make is that there is only one possible perception (belief) of a given thing or event and therefore one meaning (interpretation) for each. I have come to see that if I stop to question a perception and say to myself, 'Okay, Bob, that's one perception. What are other possible perceptions, therefore beliefs, therefore meanings of the event I just witnessed?' I can, with some 'outside the box' of my involuntarily conditioned values . . . come up with not only alternative perceptions but also alternative beliefs and meanings, some or all equally valid depending on the situation I am in.

A rather simplistic illustration of my hypothesis is a scenario in which ten people witness an auto collision from presumably the same vantage point at the same time. Called as witnesses, each under oath truthfully describes what they believe they perceived at the scene of the accident. Trial attorneys have told me each of the witnesses testimonies are usually, for whatever reason given, somewhat different, sometimes very different, all because the perceptual filters of each differ. Now imagine that you have the capacity for imagining the perceptions of at least a few of the ten. For me, just going through that exercise of expanding my consciousness of possible optional perceptions is a transformative act all by itself.

The reason for that phenomenon, as you may know, is our perceptions are subject to multiple optional interpretations and beliefs directly related to the perceptual filter(s) each of us have been involuntarily conditioned (enculturated) to deploy since shortly after our conception in our mothers' wombs. In that early state of innocent unquestioning gullibility we are taught to believe our significant authority figure's preferred perception of a thing or event and it becomes our preferred way to perceive and interpret its meaning . . . right, wrong or indifferent. In that innocent open way we acquire perceptual filters complete with their biases.

As we mature and develop the ability to question our involutarily conditioned responses to events, one way to reduce the cognitive dissonance caused by our perceptual filters is to identify the cultural heirlooms -- beliefs, values, attitudes, intentions, etc. which comprise the filters -- we find in our memory data banks, take them out, wipe off the cobwebs and dust, then decide in the light of our expanded consciousness how we may want to use them, if at all, in the future. Here I would be remiss if I didn't remind myself that any belief, value, attitude, behavior, etc. I decide to forget and repress will go into that potentially troublesome state Swiss psychoanalyst Carl G. Jung (1958) called "the shadow." So I make it a point to remember that my castoffs are still there as possible options even though I don't deploy them. If I don't retain them in my consciousness as possible options they may, when the 'right' conditions prevail, just pop up as a bizarre compulsive act.

If interested in taking a look at a more detailed process for expanding your conscious range of perceptions (beliefs) and the meaning (interpretations) of them you may want to read my SIA blog at
http://www.shiftinaction.com/node/2075 titled Cocreative Self-Management Development System: My Ten-Step Affirmational Process
.

Assuming I have answered at least part of your question to your satisfaction, I'm ready to either continue with this one or take on your next four to which you alluded in your last post.

Have a superb day, Lawrence!

Bob

REFERENCE
Jung, Carl G. (1958). Psychology and Alchemy, Bollingen Series XX. NJ: Princeton University Press

Submitted by Lawrence Carson on June 7, 2007 - 10:15pm.

Nice shot Bob ... but not so fast. First we need to ponder the fourth just a little longer. Here is an alternated perspective you may wish to download and test. :-)

Your "beliefs" cajoled you into writing, and I quote ... "Okay, Bob, that's one perception. What are other possible perceptions, therefore beliefs, therefore meanings of the event I just witnessed?"

Nice going. I believe you have three of the seven variables of the Cosmic Operating System. Seriously!

However, please notice the order in which you placed those three constructs:
1st you wrote "perceptions", then ...
2nd "beliefs", then you wrote ...
3rd "meaning".

In my current opinion ( = a collective library of beliefs ) I might suggest you place your beliefs off to the side for a moment and be open to an alternate sequential order ... or ... an alternate "belief system" as follows:

In sequential order ... 1st of all, the "MEANING" making process ... creates 2nd ... BELIEFS ... then "BELIEFS" frame a person's ... 3rd "PERCEPTIONS" or "Assumed Realities" by acting like a + (positive = attracting) or - (negative = repelling) bias filtering process. (Sort of what "The Secret" is trying to tell us.

Beliefs actually set and control what comes in-to and what stays out-of one's conscious screen of awareness, i.e. ones filtered reality. The movie of the mind does not reveal nor notice the filtration effects of "generalization", "delegation", "distortion" nor "denial."

Therefore ... to gain advanced progress in achieving "A Conscious Shift In Awareness" , one needs to consciously "know how" to take charge of ones "sub-conscious" filtration processes .. and that requires that we first must learn how we subconsciously give birth to our beliefs (+ and - biased driven filtration processes).

Then one needs to experientially discover how to create new beliefs - by consciously learning how one makes meaning out of intangible's ... and then how to hold those newly birthed beliefs in a delicate "polar balance" with their pre-existing beliefs. And remember, beliefs do not like foreigners invading their captured territory of "Mans Mind." Beliefs will generally attempt to kill the host before turning loose what they previously have staked out what they think as "theirs". And yes ... beliefs do not need man to think ... they just need us to protect them from outsiders.

So the sequential process order - in my current opinion - is:
1st - Meaning Making
2nd - Belief Creation
3rd - Perceived Reality

:-)

Try it out for a few days and let us know what you "feel". Don't tell us what you think. Too many beliefs creates a flood of too many words. Just feel it out for a while and then let us know what your experiential inward journeys in-forms you.

:-)

The thoughts expressed here in are purely from independent belief systems and do not necessarily represent, nor denigrates the person typing these hypothetical concepts into words. Any resemblance to fact could be purely coincidental

I might be off line for a while as I am going to attend a Hopi ceremony.

P.S.
Inspire the spirit of man ... to create a world of dignity ... peace ... and joy.

Submitted by Bob Johnston on June 4, 2007 - 10:55am.

Hi Lawrence,

Here's another piece you may want to take a look at: Basic Beliefs About One's Life Purpose at http://www.shiftinaction.com/node/2286.

Best wishes,

Bob

Share This Page

User login