Truth vs Falsehood (41 page)

From consciousness research, one can quickly confirm that the adoption of an attitude immediately invites in that entire field of consciousness, which then unwittingly begins to dominate the personality and thoughts. What are considered to be ‘my thoughts’ are merely thoughts common to that particular energy field and are not really personal at all. It is well to avoid rather than oppose negativity and resist the temptation and illusion that one can play with it and not get burned. The nonintegrous fields of consciousness contain seductive programs that are extremely cunning. They have been crafted and refined over the centuries and are thereby cloaked and disguised in seductive presentations. Jesus Christ said do not oppose that which is negative but merely avoid it. Research as well as extensive clinical experience demonstrate that one cannot really just ‘play’ with the fire of nonintegrity; therefore, the spiritually aware learn to discern that which is a lure. Those who exploit and make great profits and gains have learned how to take advantage of the gullibility of naïvetè and how to refine the glamorization of the lure, making it extremely seductive, as is currently represented by the downside of the entertainment media.

Spiritual Foundation — The Basics — Part II

While the frantic person flails in the water and drowns, the more evolved person learns how to float. The ultimately buoyant sea that supports spiritual progress is the overall, powerful field of consciousness. It is the power of this field that precludes the possibility of even death itself. Man has intuited and known this since the very beginning of civilization and has been aware that life cannot be extinguished but can only change form. (That statement calibrates at 1,000.)

Choices determine consequences, which is a mechanism that is really impersonal and operates automatically because energy fields are invited in as a consequence of choice. The individual, as a consequence of choices, is like an iron filing whose position in the field is the direct consequence of its own decisions. To accept this reality is simultaneously uplifting and freeing. At the same time, it is frightening and brings about some degree of consternation. Therefore, the only true freedom in the universe is the freedom of choice, which is the gift received by mankind. One then realizes that there is no hand on the tiller but one’s own and that “I myself am heaven and hell” (cal. 700+). The acceptance of this overall truth brings the strength of resolve instead of futile wishing.

What really frightens people about spiritual reality is that it confronts one with the reality that their destiny is solely within the power of their own hands. Heaven, like hell, is the result and consequence of one’s own choices; therefore, the key to freedom is by the grace of the given karmic inheritance of all mankind by Divine ordinance.

Philosophers and Philosophies

Intellectual Disciplines

Inasmuch as the mind cannot innately discern truth from falsehood, its only defense is reliance on reason and the intellect. Thus, education is of benefit on many levels. To the unevolved ego, however, the capacity to think is subverted from reason to rationalization in order to justify emotionalized positions. The distortions of truth then tend to fall into stratified levels concordant with concomitant levels of consciousness in society.

Above consciousness level 200, truth is valued for its own sake, and, therefore, education and erudition are respected. To the self-centered ego, however, the requirements of truth are resented because they would threaten personal belief systems. Thus, morality, ethics, and responsibility are seen as oppressive and are rejected. In so doing, rationalizations by lower mind replace the dialectic and requirements of honesty so that even blatant, gross falsehoods are put forth as truth or ‘facts’, even though they have no basis in reality. (Historically, “bearing false witness” [cal. 140] is anathema, even in primitive societies.)

In the current ‘cultural war’, politicized sociology, sophistry, and rhetoric have now significantly replaced reason and verifiable truth. Even history, language, mathematics, and science, as well as the ethics of responsibility or accountability, have been attacked and repudiated. While these relativistic positionalities could be excused or overlooked as adolescent, naïve, and regressive, another element of this decline emerges that reveals the motivation behind the regression, that of ‘justified hatred’.

While distortions of truth characteristic of consciousness levels 130-195 may sound attractive to the uneducated, they are the sheep’s clothing for anger, envy, and malice, and justification for paranoid distortion. The hate is thinly rationalized and publicly explosive. The irate orator with reddened face and distended neck veins shakes with emotion and wild gesticulation, with much finger-pointing indignation. The same inflation is seen in displays of animal behavior.

Sophistry and rhetoric were carefully analyzed and refuted by Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates around 350 B.C., when agreement and discussion were finalized. They have, therefore, been considered a closed matter for over two thousand years by more evolved integrous thinkers. Yet, in each generation a large percentage of the population calibrates below 200, and so self-interest dogma pops up again in new clothes and replaces truth at whatever cost. Thus, to subvert truth for gain has persisted strongly, and is, in fact, the primary underpinning of war and genocide. The ‘virus’ of catchy phrases crosses over generations, as explained by the study of mimetics (browse “mimetics” on the Web).

As previously cited, in recent times the distortions of Marx have again cost the lives of millions of people and resulted in chaotic civil disasters that afford every opportunity for the waiting right-wing fascists to vulturize the consequent social debris and chaos. The infectious meme (central idea) is that of
blame
—the weak person’s substitute for integrity. Blame calibrates at 180, and, like a cancer, it weakens and operationally actually denigrates the blamer and lowers the blamer’s level of consciousness so that the pseudo-victim then becomes the literal, actual, real victim.

Aristotle, however, did see a value in rhetoric in that truth has to be presented properly in order for it to be accepted. In fact, he described in political/social/ philosophical terms one of the basic tenets of consciousness research—that truth is a consequence not only of content but also of context. Thus, he described the ethical use of rhetoric as a means of effectively presenting truth, i.e., inclusion of not only dialectically correct logic (“Logos”) but also the integrity of the speaker (“Ethos”), and the quality of the audience (“Pathos”). While problematic philosophies and positionalities appear to emotionalize and utilize (via lower mind) the illogical cant of “pleading the case,” the discipline and laws of the dialectic of science and reason are strict, demanding, and inflexible. Verifiable truth is independent of how one might ‘feel’ about it, which is irrelevant, personal, and basically narcissistic and biased.