» Home

The freedom of the experience of our lives

The ultimate freedom philosophers talk about, especially existential philosophers, is not so much the world, but our experience of the world. In the words of psychotherapist Irvin D. Yalom:

Nothing in the world has significance except by virtue of one’s own creation. There are no rules, no ethical systems, no values; there is no external referent whatsoever; there is no grand design in the universe…

To experience existence in this manner is a dizzying sensation. Nothing is as it seemed. The very ground beneath one seems to open up. Indeed groundlessness is a commonly used term for a subjective experience of responsibility awareness.  p. 221, Existential Psychotherapy

He adds: ‘we constitute the world in such a way that it appears independent of our constitution’ (p. 222). and ‘Our sense data tell us that the world is “there”, and that we enter and leave it‘ (p. 222).

It’s true isn’t it? That’s what we experience on waking and sleeping. But the fact is, equally clearly, that on sleeping we do not leave this world any more than we enter it again on waking. Though some theosophists might disagree with that statement. Leadbeater claimed our souls went on nightly journeys, whether we remembered them or not.

My central question in this post is: if we believe we don’t have free will, what influence do we have on our own lives?

This may sound like theory, but in my teaching days I taught kids with all kinds of diagnoses. One kid who was diagnosed as having ADHD told me: I can’t help it, I have ADHD. Which implies that even if he could have changed something about how he functioned, he wasn’t going to try because the adults in his world had given him the ultimate excuse to stay hyper for the rest of his life.

No amount of scientific studies proving how much our genes and environment steer us, can change that basic fact: if we don’t take responsibility for our lives, no one can. In his chapter about responsibility Yalom shares his experiences in the challenge of helping patients take responsibility for their own lives.

However, he also notes (p. 268) that ‘Many therapists are professional advocates of responsibility but secretly, in their own hearts and in their own belief systems, are environmental determinists.’

To combat this secret tendency in the heart of his audience, he goes on to share what it is that makes us know there is freedom of sorts. First of all (p. 271): we shape our own environment. Some people create conflict wherever they go. Others find helpful people wherever they go. The difference is in the person, the environment follows.

However, to take responsibility of our lives is ultimately, as Yalom suggests, to take responsibility of our experience of our lives. He quotes the ancient philosopher Epictetus who said: (p. 272)

I must die. I must be imprisoned. I must suffer exile. But must I die groaning? Must I whine as well? Can anyone hinder me from going into exile with a smile? The master threatens to chain me: what say you? Chain me? My leg you will chain – yes, but not my will – no, not even Zeus can conquer that.

Back to Yalom goes so far as to say: One’s attitude towards one’s situation is the very crux of being human (p. 272)

So, what do you all think? Is there free will? Are we fated to experience life in a certain way?

Bookmark and Share
4 Comments

How hard is it to discuss free will?

I have loads of notes waiting to be turned into blogposts on the topic of free will, which is why I decided to write a series of posts about the topic. But first I want to note an observation about the comments to my first post in the series last week.

First off: neither the Dutch, nor the English post in the series got as many responses as I’m used to. Second: none of those responses really discussed my own first take on the topic. This is not a complaint, just an observation. Next: I find it very hard to respond TO these comments. Now why is that? Why is it hard to discuss free will?

I think it has something to do with the fact that the main issue here is: how conscious are we? One commenter rightly noted the Gurdjieff (and Freud I may add) did not think we were free beings. It was Gurdjieff’s main goal to help us BECOME free. Apparently he did think that was possible, but only to those who had faced their own lack of free will first. But isn’t that a paradox?

So: how conscious are we? And what is consciousness?

Consciousness is another very sticky subject. Defining consciousness is hard. Sticking to any one definition is even harder. But for the purpose of this discussion the main issue seems to be: are our conscious selves (as opposed to our unconscious drives, conditionings etc) in control of our lives? The answer to that one has been clear in psychology for a century and the answer is NO.

BUT, and this is more recent psychological research, perhaps we CAN influence our own unconscious. That is: by integrating our conscious and unconscious, perhaps we can get more control of our lives.

Which brings me back to why it is so hard to discuss free will: perhaps because this question touches on one area in our lives it is hardest to have full self-knowledge about.

Had you all noticed how hard this issue is to talk about?

Bookmark and Share
5 Comments

Free will, culture and responsibility

There is a consistent stream in our culture that everything is determined by circumstance: genes, conditioning, wealth… But most aside from genes, all those are the product of people acting on each other. The free will debate can also be framed as a responsibility debate. Who is responsible? If there is no free will, does that mean there is no responsibility? Or the other way around: if we choose our destiny, does that mean we’re to blame if something goes wrong? Like an earthquake?

In the philosophical debate there are few contenders on the outskirts. Few argue that everything in our lives is free will. Those who talk about The Secret and The Law of Attraction are very close to this extreme view. They feel we are responsible for everything that happens in our lives. Whether it’s a financial crisis, unemployment, alcoholism or Katrina.

On the other side of the spectrum there is an equally small group that argues that people are totally determined in what they do: genes, God and circumstance determine everything. Most philosophers are somewhere in the middle: there are things outside our control, but there are also things we actively choose.

Even theologians generally don’t think God’s omniscience implies lack of free will on our part. They’ve  created a view called ‘middle knowledge’. God knows our options and our free will and choose to let us make our own mistakes. This does not necessarily mean He knows the outcome. (I hope I summarized that correctly)

The second world war brought the debate to a head: who among the many colluders were really responsible? To what extent can Germans a nation be blamed for what happened? The Nuremberg trials were an exercise in trying to determine the extent of moral and legal responsibility. Based on the idea of ‘crimes against humanity’, they were revolutionary in trying people for things that were legal for them to do. This illustrates, as the movie ‘the reader’ does too, that there are few black and whites in these things. The result of the whole social process was black, but on an individual level most people lived in grays. That’s the most scary thing about the Second World War: that it was so easy for things to turn out awful.

Politicians, philosophers and theologians chose, en masse, to put individual responsibility first after that. Cultural relativity can only go so far. Mass murder and genocide are evils that needs to be fought.

Or in other words: ethics and law are not the same thing, but ethics became law at Neurenberg. For a while.

This is the first in a series I’m doing on free will.

What do you all think: do we have free will? Do we have responsibility? Are we determined by genes, neurology and circumstance?

Bookmark and Share
7 Comments

Uplifting science news: universe and environment

The Dec. 2009 issue of Scientific American seems unusually boring at first sight. At a more thorough reading though, it has some interesting tidbits relevant to this blog:

A bouncy universe

Recent theoretical physics calculations by Horava split time from space in the General Theory of Relativity. The result is that cosmologically it’s no longer a big bang that’s predicted as the s art of the universe, but more of a big bounce.

In ordinary words this means that time is, within this theory, no longer a dimension like length. The question why time has a direction (we can’t go back in time, while we can walk up and down a road several times), unlike the other dimensions of space, is solved. But more importantly this new theory predicts the measurement of illusory matter, that’s really not there. Dark matter is now a maya of science, instead of a question to be solved.

Another issue that this theory helps deal with is of a more metaphysical kind. Blavatsky supports ancient Hindu thought in saying that the universe is periodically recreated. This fits a ‘bouncy’ theory much better than a big bang with a continuously expanding universe.

Before we go all ‘Hallelujah’ over this, the theory does have the slight problem that when the earth and planets are allowed to be realistic, instead of perfect spheres, the prediction no longer fits the observed results… Further mathematical creativity may solve this problem though. (p. 8)

Upcoming solutions to environmental problems

It’s no secret for you, my readers, that I consider environmental problems to be the most serious problem facing humanity. I don’t just mean climate change btw. The whole last issue of Scientific American is devoted to solutions to such problems. I’ll share the ones I thought most promising.

  1. A no money down solar plan.
    Isn’t this smart? Your electric company will install your solar panel, and you get energy for less money than before, while your provider (who has to make money somehow) obviously ALSO makes money off that same energy. No more buying expensive equipment hoping for monetary gains in future. Instead, if this plan goes through, you just sign up for a plan and get cheaper energy as a result. I imagine such a plan would include maintenance etc. Everybody wins and we’ll finally get some serious energy from a renewable source. (p. 28)
  2. Cement as a carbon sponge
    It’s a small paragraph in the magazine, but I think it’s genius. As they say ‘Traditional cement production creates at least 5 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, but new materials could create carbon neutral cement. ‘ Novachem proposes Magnesium oxide to make cement that naturally absorbs CO2 as it hardens. If they can find a workable procedure for this, it would mean CO2 gets absorbed from the atmosphere in the production of cement. This has the advantage of less heavy material being brought on site, reducing traffic related CO2 emissions. They only call this carbon neutral BTW, because the very moving of anything still brings carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and the production of magnesium oxide probably also uses energy which comes from non-renewable energy sources. Still, the idea is beautiful and sounds practical. (p. 33)
  3. Saltwater crops
    Less prominent than the energy debate, the fresh water problem has been on the mind of environmentalists for as long as the energy problem. With growing populations worldwide, it becomes necessary to feed humanity on ever scarcer fresh water. Instead researchers in Adelaide, Australia, are developing salt resistant plants: rice and wheat for instance. This would be a tremendous help in countries near the sea where salt water is always plentiful and fresh water scarce. Israel and Bangladesh come to mind. (p. 33)
  4. Solitary honeybees
    I’m sure most of you have read about the collapse of honeybee colonies. The disorder has killed off more than a third of honeybee colonies since 2006. The blue orchard bee may be able to pick up where the honeybee left off: one solitary bee can pollinate as much territory as 50 honeybees, apparently. (p. 33)

An environmental problem: methane

As the climate changes and ice melts, a green house gas is released: methane. On p. 45 Scientific American reminds us, with vivid photographs of this issue. Very impressive is the picture of a flame coming out of the ice: the methane being burned by scientists as it is released from the ice.

Unfortunately methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so this is something likely to increase global temperatures.

An ancient computer

In 1900 an old artifact was found at the bottom of the Mediterranean ocean. At first glance it seemed insignificant. Closer scruteny made it seem a clock from second century BC. That in itself was marvelous: a clock that old was a unique find. But recent research shows that this wasn’t just a clock: it was a calculator. That is: closely related to our computers. As the researchers note: just before their society collapsed, the ancient greeks came closer to our socities technology than we would have thought possible. (p. 52-59)

Bookmark and Share
Leave a comment

A year of spiritual blogging: time for some statistics

At the end of the year it’s time for statistics. All Considering has now been up about 18 months and is developing a steady readership. Over the whole year it had 48,542 visits from 155 countries according to google analytics. Most (29,284) of those visitors came from the USA. 215 people are now subscribed to this blog. I’ve blogged about Buddhism, Christianity, Spiritual Growth and more.

In terms of traffic the most significant event was my post about mindfulness, which drew 7000 visitors from stumbleupon on one day. In the two weeks that followed, it got about 30,000 visits, dwarfing all my other traffic.

Taking that post out of the equation, the following posts were popular as well (some written in 2008):

  1. Did Buddhism win the best Religion of the world award?
  2. Honesty is the best policy… except…
  3. If you see the Buddha, Kill Him – an old Zen koan
  4. Are humans meant to be vegetarian?
  5. The difference between spiritual growth and personal development?
  6. My disillusionment with Jiddu Krishnamurti
  7. “Love is the opposite of fear” ?
  8. Osel Hita Torres – aka Lama Osel goes on to make movies
  9. Organized religion versus science and atheism
  10. Intelligence and wisdom: not the same thing

    In terms of comments the following posts were popular in 2009, with each over 10 responses and contributions:

    Bookmark and Share
    1 Comment

    Merry Christmas

    I’m not the best at reminding myself to attend to holiday greetings, but this year I’m so wrapped up in preparing for Christmas, that I had to remember to give you all my greetings too. Quite suitably, today is the day of the winter solstice – when earth, sun and the centre of the galaxy align, as they do each year. Yes, that’s a 2012 hint.

    We’ll be celebrating a small Christmas – my parents, one brother, his girlfriend, my grandmother and an uncle – at my place. I’ve chronicled my decorating of the place on my lens ‘how to decorate a small space for Christmas‘. So those of you who are sorry this blog turned out less personal than I promised, can satisfy their curiosity a bit. Look carefully and you will see that Blavatsky got moved off the mantle because her picture isn’t in a gold frame :) Don’t worry. I’ll put her back after the holidays.

    Speaking of Blavatsky, I did a piece just now with Blavatsky Quotes about Christmas on my new ‘My Spiritual Quotes’ blog. The blog’s a mere three blogposts for now, but I will keep you apprised on any new posts on my newsletter and this blog as usual. The design is also not quite finished, but don’t you love that sunset? It’s based on a sunset I photographed just outside the International Theosophical Centre in Naarden. I mean for this new blog to have quotes about spiritual themes that are all attributed. There are a lot of spiritual quotes sites already. For this blog I will not regurgitate quotes that are already circulating online, usually without proper source referencing. Instead I’ll be finding you all quotes directly in the sources I mention. For instance I did a post on happiness quotes and found some great research on the subject of which I abstracted the best tidbits.

    If you want more Christmas reading, here’s a Blavatsky Christmas Story: From the Polar Lands.

    Oh, and I do wish you a very merry Christmas and a happy new year.

    Bookmark and Share
    2 Comments

    Michael Mirdad interview

    As promised, here’s some questions I had for Michael Mirdad, author of ‘You’re Not Going Crazy…You’re Just Waking Up! The Five Stages of Soul Transformation Process’, and his answers.

    1. You say that nearly every process of learning is ultimately about understanding and experiencing greater levels of unconditional love (p. 14). What do you mean by ‘unconditional love’ and how would you describe it?

    Unconditional love means to love everyone and everything unconditionally. This means loving all without a hesitation of whether or not they are worthy of this love. It also means having respect for everyone and everything. It isn’t the same as the love we often feel as human beings, including romantically. When we love unconditionally, we are expressing the highest form of love that a human being can experience. It’s a Divine expression that exists in the heart and soul of every being–although not yet developed in every being.

    2. You say there are three states of mind or levels of consciousness. Can you explain the difference? And how does one avoid over estimating the ‘level’ one is at?

    There are basically three levels of consciousness that you will reside in as you go through the soul transformation process: Victims, Students and Masters. Victims allow crisis to destroy them and fail to see any lessons to learn from the ordeal nor do they allow themselves to heal whatever brought the crisis to them. Such behavior of denial usually keeps attracting similar lessons to the Victim–again and again.

    Students do their best to participate in the changes life throws at them to improve their lives. This allows them to learn their lessons, as all good Students do, which in turn more likely allows them to move across the bridge to the new, re-building phases.

    Masters are individuals who have developed enough spirituality within themselves that they have graduated, more or less, from being mere Students on the path. Masters can be so courageous that they actually don’t wait around for the next change that life throws at them. Instead, they know how to recognize what exactly it is in their life that needs to be dismantled and brought to a new level of experience. Masters choose to initiate changes of anything that would hinder their greater good.

    3. You quote a variety of spiritual teachers from East and West, but your main inspiration is ‘A Course in Miracles‘. What’s the most important thing the Course has taught you?

    Well, ACIM is certainly one of the most powerful books available and is referenced in the “Crazy” book, I generally don’t associate with it more than other similar materials. Nevertheless, a couple things that the Course shares that almost nothing else has effectively done, is the difference between the ego and the soul, as well as the difference between reality and illusion.

    To understand more completely the difference between our Spirit, our soul, and our ego, let’s use the human body as a roadmap of sorts. Our Spirit then resides in the upper three chakras (located in the head and neck); Our humanness resides in the lowest three chakras (located in the root, navel, and solar plexus chakras); and our soul is then located in the remaining center (heart chakra) that sits directly in between our Spirit and our humanness. Our Spirit is the Divine spark or I Am Presence that resides in us all, untouched by our wounds or limiting belief systems.

    This is why, how, and where we can literally say that God is within us and yet is also in Heaven. Heaven in this case is high up in the heavens–the heavens that float up above our body and soul–in the upper chakras.

    Our soul, on the other hand, is the part of us that believes it can separate from Spirit and is therefore off on some journey down into the “Garden of Eden” (within our hearts) and has begun a journey into the universe. Having then bought into the idea that we have separated from Spirit, gone into the universe on a journey of learning and experience, we fell (from the Eden-like state within our hearts) into an even great state of separation and created the world of our humanness, wherein our newly densified identity (ego) was given the reins to rule and control who we believe we are and chooses for us what is real and valuable and what is not.

    So, where we are now is as follows: Spirit is forever sending a loving call for us to return to our True Identity. Our heart and soul hears the call and is always doing all that it can to speak to our fear-based humanness and convince it to release its beliefs and attachments and to rise up and go Home. The ego part of our humanness resists at all costs, knowing that when we rise into love, fear (and its source–the ego) ceases to exist.

    Nevertheless, every time we allow ourselves to listen to the higher calling of our Spirit and soul, making healthy choices in our lives and doing all that we can to be loving and forgiving, we dismantle the ego’s hold on us and rise into a higher level of consciousness–closer and closer to our True Nature–God.

    4. The three early stages (dismantling, emptiness and disorientation) all sound very painful. Can one speed up the process?

    Yes, we can usually speed up the process by practicing responsibility and by learning the lessons that got us into the crisis in the first place. In other words, since we are there to learn, the sooner we do it, and with humility, the sooner we will get to the other side. One of the dangers though, is in our refusing to let go of control. This is certainly the issue that slows us down the most.

    5. You describe the goal of the five stages as ‘waking up’. What do you mean by that?

    The term “waking up” is meant on a few levels. First of all, it is referring to our need to wake up on a personal level and become more active, conscious participants on our spiritual path. Second, it refers to our need to wake up from the hypnotic control that this illusionary world has over us. In other words, the crisis’ in our lives are literally “wake up” calls to help birth us into becoming spiritual beings and not just human beings.

    6. You use the word ‘God’ a lot, but from your occasional references to It, I gather that you’re not talking about a personal God. What’s the meaning of the word ‘God’ here?

    As you’ll find in my books and teachings, I often say that God is more likely to be experienced by humans as a feeling–such as love, peace, and joy, rather than seen–such as an actual Being. So in some ways, it’s not personal at all, in the sense that God is not personified or made into a limited being with form. And yet, God is indeed personalized in that it is literally brought into your very heart and soul as a feeling that is tangible and indeed very personal.

    7. What’s the relationship between us and God?

    Simply stated, God is the part within each of us that remembers our Divine Nature. This Divine Nature is sometimes referred to as our I Am Presence but, by any name, it is all that really exists and is constantly knocking at the door, meaning calling to us from the center of our mind, asking us to wake up and rediscover who we really are.

    8. Surrender plays an important part in your book. What does one surrender to? Why is surrender important?

    Surrender is crucial in so many ways. Surrender demonstrates that we are open to learning and are willing to release our ego nature. Surrender means that we are open to being guided from a Source that is higher than our limited selves. Surrender is an essential ingredient to get us over the bridge between our old, limited lives to the new life that awaits us when we learn to follow Spirit as our Guide.

    PS. I noticed in Katinka’s blog that the Re-Building Stage is not totally understood. The main point here is not that we will now move on the new lessons and problems. The point of making it over that bridge into a new level of love and trust is that when we learn to function from this new level, we tend to attract less problems. Also, if indeed we do have a crisis, we tend to be able to move through them far more quickly and with greater ease.   Love & Light, Michael Mirdad

    Bookmark and Share
    4 Comments

    The five stages of the soul transformation process: Michael Mirdad

    Two weeks ago I wrote about spiritual evolution from the perspective of long term cycles. This week I will go into the more practical day to day questions relating to our own soul transformation process. Personally I can’t take 2012 seriously enough worry about it. I do however have to deal with personal challenges just like anybody else. Michael Mirdad, known mostly as a teacher of sacred sexuality, has brought out a book that addresses these issues: You’re Not Going Crazy…You’re Just Waking Up! The Five Stages of Soul Transformation Process. Mirdad looks at the process of spiritual transformation as a cycle consisting of 5 stages. We will go through these stages again and again as we let go of the past and reinvent ourselves. The only way to avoid them and step out of the cycle is to become so aware of our own growth process as to learn the lessons needed without life needing to give us a hint.

    That last sentence will probably mean very little to you unless you already know his work. So here are the five stages Michael Mirdad talks about. The explanation is mine:

    1. Dismantling: when your life seems to be falling apart.
    2. Emptiness: when your emotions catch up with all the changes and you feel depressed and alone.
    3. Disorientation: when your mind tries to make sense of it all, and can not.
    4. Re-building: when hope comes into your life because things are starting to change.
    5. A new life in which you’ll probably be making new mistakes and get caught up in new illusions.

    As Mirdad says, the first three can be summed up as dismantling and the last two as re-building.

    I hinted in my introduction at the way that Michael Mirdad points to to avoid having to go through the dismantling phase again and again: it’s by becoming a master of your own path. He distinguishes between three kinds of people (p. 15): victims, students and masters. The victim let life’s troubles wash over them without seeing them as opportunities to heal and learn. This means they will never get to the rebuilding part: they will keep cycling through the various dismantling phases (1-3). Students do their best to participate in the changes life throws at them to improve their lives. This allows them to bridge over to the re-building phases (4,5). Masters, in this sense, are individuals who ‘have the spiritual awareness to “be the soul itself” that initiates the Soul Transformation Process. Masters don’t wait for life to dismantle – they will themselves actively dismantle those aspects of their life that block their spiritual path.

    Michael Mirdad is a student of ‘A Course in Miracles’, so it’s no surprise that he sees unconditional love as the main lesson to be learned (p. 14). Stay tuned for an interview on this blog with Michael Mirdad…

    In his interview with me Michael tells me I did not describe the rebuilding phase very well. Here’s what he says about it: The main point here is not that we will now move on the new lessons and problems. The point of making it over that bridge into a new level of love and trust is that when we learn to function from this new level, we tend to attract less problems. Also, if indeed we do have a crisis, we tend to be able to move through them far more quickly and with greater ease.

    Bookmark and Share
    Leave a comment