posted on Dec, 25 2008 @ 09:13 PM
I have heard more than my share of personal revelations and, personally, identify with Robin Williams assertion, "reality, what a concept!"
I doubt if I can begin to imagine the burden of carrying thoughts, insights, experiences that feel so real to you, all alone.
I would simply say to the individual who took a huge risk in sharing such very personal experiences that most of the people in the world have no way
to relate to what seems very real and urgent, even hopeful, to you. That is the nature of our psychological defenses. Things that we are unable to
relate to are managed unconsciously, so that we avoid feeling afraid. That is to say, our reaction pushes scary stuff away to keep it at a safe
distance from where we perceive we are.
When I began to peer down Alice's proverbial "rabbit hole" about 15 years ago, it was in a professional capacity. I began to hear of things that I
did not want to be "real," but the conviction in the voices of those who shared them compelled me to continue to listen. I had no one to talk to
about what I was hearing. That is, no one who would listen seriously. What little I might reveal was dismissed with logic and confident skepticism,
even arrogance. My professional colleagues assured me that my clients were, simply, delusional or saying things because they enjoyed my attention.
I believe it was Jerome Frank who once said, and I paraphrase, people will almost invariably sacrifice their freedom for a sense of security. And,
like it or not, you (the reader) and I are a lot more like sheep than individuals with independent minds. Speaking personally, I find that I can only
handle so much information at a time before I must retreat and process whatever I heard.
I would say with all due respect to the individual who risked posting, that (and here is where I begin to sound a bit whacky and paranoid) that the
very way we think, analyze our own thoughts, apply logic to understand the world and our experiences, has been shaped from the very beginning by
family, community, education, political forces, and, definitely, the media.
Benjamin Whorf had an hypothesis (not to the extreme I am suggesting) which I believed he called, "linguistic relativity hypothesis." That our
language shapes how we think . . . about everything! Our language is heavily influenced. If you doubt this, recall the time when you began to apply
rules of grammar and syntax.
I do not mean to sound arrogant or even suggest that I know anything. If there is any ultimate meaning or explanation for "what is," I am totally
convinced that each of us have only a few pieces that fit into an infinite puzzle. I am of the opinion that in those pieces of the puzzle that we
have more than half probably do not fit into that infinite puzzle at all and will in time have to be discarded. It is all very humbling. It is also
my personal belief that no one on earth has all of the pieces.
I am acknowledgling that this is my opinion. My opinion is based on what I have experienced so far.
My personal theory, which paradoxically, is not supposed to be shared, is that it would be best to keep our perceptions of "what is" private. I am
violating that theory right now. I know I am. So, in doing that, I give up the right to criticize any individual who shares her or his perceptions
regarding "what is."
My life experience has convinced me, at least so far, that we are clueless. That does not feel very good. But it is sort of a beginner's mind
position, where we start knowing nothing and are open to that which may be revealed. At least that is what I am working toward. Being open to
revelations of "what is," is something that can really make one feel crazy. Again, I think, speaking for myself. that I continue to hold onto some
basic premises, and in doing so, limit fully apprehending "what is." If you have any thoughts on how to avoid that, I'd be intrigued to hear them.