Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 3:43 am

Zen Macrobiotics: the art of rejuvenation and longevity
by George Ohsawa
edited by Carl Ferré

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


George Ohsawa Macrobiotic Foundation Chico, California

Other books by George Ohsawa in English include: The Art of Peace; Cancer and the Philosophy of the Far East; Essential Ohsawa; Four Hours to Basic Japanese; Gandhi, the Eternal Youth; Jack and Mitie; Macrobiotic Guidebook for Living; Macrobiotics: An Invitation to Health and Happiness, Order of the Universe; Philosophy of Oriental Medicine; The Unique Principle; and You Are All Sanpaku. Contact the publisher at the address below for a complete list of available titles.

First (Mimeograph) Edition 1960
Second Edition 1962
Third (Oles) Edition 1965
Fourth Edition 1995
Fifth Edition, slight edits and index added 2013 Jul 1

© copyright 1995 by George Ohsawa Macrobiotic Foundation
PO Box 3998, Chico, California 95927-3998
530-566-9765; fax 530-566-9768
gomf@ohsawamacrobiotics.com; http://www.OhsawaMacrobiotics.com

Published with the help of East West Center for Macrobiotics
http://www.EastWestMacrobiotics.com

ISBN 978-0-918860-73-6

Preface to the Latest Edition
by Carl Ferré

For the past fifty years many people have purchased, read, and been inspired by what has become known as “the flame of macrobiotics.” The third edition of Zen Macrobiotics by George Ohsawa was published by the Ohsawa Foundation in 1965 and was revised, edited, and annotated by Lou Oles and Shayne Oles Suehle. Thanks to their efforts Zen Macrobiotics contains some of Ohsawa’s strongest and most direct suggestions for rejuvenation and longevity.

When we became aware in 1995 that the seemingly endless supply of copies of the third edition had all been sold, we planned to reprint it in the same successful edition and format. However, Herman Aihara, founder and president of the George Ohsawa Macrobiotic Foundation, wanted some misconceptions arising from the Oles edition corrected. He showed me a copy of the original mimeograph edition that Ohsawa himself printed in New York City in 1960. Following this edition, Librarie J. Vrin published Le Zen Macrobiotique in French in 1961. There also was a second English edition of Zen Macrobiotics between the mimeograph and Oles editions.

A careful reading of each edition showed that the Oles edition greatly improved the mimeograph edition and that there were two major differences. First, there were many sections added to the Oles edition from other Ohsawa writings. Since they have been part of Zen Macrobiotics for so long, we decided to leave them in the fourth edition. For those interested, the major parts added were the seventh condition of health added to chapter three, the entire chapter on yin-yang theory, most of the chapter on macrobiotic food for infants, and the entire section of appendices.

The other major difference is more significant. The mimeograph edition contained 240 recipes, of which only 50 appear in the Oles edition. There are many references in the Oles edition of Zen Macrobiotics to recipes in Zen Cookery. However, Zen Cookery never did contain all the recipes; also, the numbering system was not consistent with the numbers referred to in Zen Macrobiotics. Thus a lot of confusion has existed for many years.

It is with great joy that we announce the return of all the recipes from the original mimeograph edition to the new Zen Macrobiotics. These recipes will be very helpful in developing any cook’s intuition; however, they are not designed for those beginning macrobiotic cooking. Often there are no quantities of ingredients given, no cooking temperatures, no length of cooking times, etc. Those new to macrobiotic food preparation should first study Basic Macrobiotic Cooking by Julia Ferré to learn the procedures of whole grain and fresh vegetable cookery. This book makes a fine addition to any cook’s library. Also, many of the recipes in this edition of Zen Macrobiotics are spelled out more completely in Zen Cookery, previously also published as The First Macrobiotic Cookbook.

The main reason we decided to print the recipes as found in the mimeograph edition is that they show a side of Ohsawa that is often missed. The recipes themselves show a great variety of possibilities, both in preparation style and in ingredients used. Further, it shows that Ohsawa’s main goals and objectives were freedom, peace, and happiness. He taught that the best way to achieve these goals is through health and the easiest way to health is through eating appropriate foods for one’s condition. Over the years much more emphasis has been placed on proper eating than on the true objectives of freedom and happiness.

The greatest misunderstanding from Zen Macrobiotics in all its editions has been generated by chapter five, Ten Healthful Ways of Eating and Drinking, in which Ohsawa clearly states the best way to health and happiness is by following diet number seven—grains only and as little as possible to drink. According to Herman Aihara, this advice would have been changed by Ohsawa once he understood Americans better. After all, Ohsawa came to the United States for the first time late in 1959 and wrote and published Zen Macrobiotics specifically for Americans early in 1960 without much knowledge of local customs. His dealings with the West were almost exclusively with the French.

Ohsawa told Herman that the French always cheated on their diets and that is why he recommended a number seven diet as the best. In this way he overstated the case so that they (the French) would eat more natural foods. Again, according to Herman, Ohsawa had no idea that Americans had the will power to eat only grains for unusually long periods of time.

Today, the most common advice is to use the restrictive diet number seven as a fast for a maximum of up to ten days, especially if recipes similar to those found in the Principal Food chapter are used. Noting that some of the dishes in that chapter contain vegetables, it is questionable whether diet number seven was ever intended to be grains only. And, we can be fairly certain that eating only brown rice for extended periods of time was never Ohsawa’s intention.

The misunderstanding over number seven diet in the 1960s led to some controversy. Zen authors objected to Ohsawa’s linking of the spiritual practice of Zen with such an austere and restrictive diet. Many people still believe used the term “Zen” to capitalize on its popularity at the time. However, Ohsawa’s intention may have been more fundamental. The original title of his manuscript was Macrobiotics: The Biological and Physiological Foundation of Zen Buddhism. Ohsawa wanted people to realize that theory and practice are equally important. Just as meditation is key in Zen practice, eating appropriate foods for one’s condition is central to one’s spiritual growth.

Liberty has been taken in changing book references to those available today and comments have been added in cases of changed macrobiotic opinion. These have been indicated by inserting bracketed material—[ed.]. In this way advice that is no longer commonly accepted macrobiotic practice can be left for reference with today’s opinion in brackets for your evaluation. Still, in the interest of space and time, minor changes made in the Oles edition that served only to improve the work have been left without annotation.

The fifth edition contains a new index thanks to the tireless work of Alice Salinero and Kathy Keller along with minor edits by Kathy. The editor’s notes also contain minor corrections.

Whether this is your first reading of Zen Macrobiotics or your second or greater, we are certain you will benefit as countless others have by “the flame of macrobiotics.”

Preface to the Third Edition
by Shayne Oles Suehle

During his lifetime, George Ohsawa wrote more than 300 books and papers. This volume is considered the primer of the macrobiotic philosophy of Oriental medicine.

All of Ohsawa’s basic thought is herein touched upon. But to those previously unacquainted with macrobiotics and its many implications in the realms of ancient and modernized Oriental philosophy and science, perhaps the main thrust of the macrobiotic way of living is its rediscovery of ancient basic truths regarding health.

The general path of Western medicine, from the Greeks and Egyptians on to the giant research centers of the present, has been in the direction of seeking cures for disease. Oriental medicine, on the other hand, has for 5,000 years pursued a path whose goal has been the unity between the individual and “the way”—the way of nature herself, the eternal law governing all plants and creatures, the creation of an equilibrium between man and his biological destiny.

Western medicine has only recently begun turning its eyes toward this latter view, re-examining its own cure-oriented premise and gradually adapting its technology to ancient precepts of health. The amalgam of these two views is now known as “preventive medicine.”

Zen Macrobiotics, therefore, should be considered as a guidebook whose aim is happiness → through health → through nutrition.

In a period when the soil, water, and very air of this planet is being bombarded with contamination through technology, no single individual is immune from the ravages of being alive in the twentieth century. Under such a violent assault upon each person’s biological integrity, “preventive medicine” appears likely to be man’s best defense of his “biological castle,” his body.

Zen Macrobiotics, therefore, is presented to the reader as a last-best-hope. Health can be achieved. Health can be maintained. Man stands, precariously, between his dreams of a good world and his all-too-vulnerable mind and body.

It is the aim and hope of this book that each reader, by understanding its message, will find his own “way” to follow the dreams of his imagination through coming ever-closer to the biological dream of freedom from illness by preventing disease.

Forward: Two Ways to Happiness

Happiness is the goal of everyone in this world. But, what is happiness in the Occident, or more particularly, in the United States?

Happiness was defined by Oriental sages some thousands of years ago as a state of being that is determined by five factors:

1. A joyfulness resulting from a healthy, productive, and exciting longevity;

2. The freedom from worry about money;

3. An instinctive capacity to avoid the accidents and difficulties that could cause premature death;

4. A loving realization of the order that governs the infinite universe; and

5. A deep comprehension of the fact that one must be last in order to become the first forever. This implies the abandonment of the goal of being the victor, the winner, or first-in-line in any situation since the attainment of this goal guarantees one’s being last eventually. Everything changes in business, politics, science, marriage, in all of life—there is always a new winner. That which is the height of fashion today is out-of-date tomorrow. The man of humility, he who has no fear of being last, therefore, knows a contentment that is the essence of happiness.

Oriental philosophy—biological, physiological, social, economical, and logical in its scope—teaches the practical way to achieve such happiness. It prohibits the explanation by any teacher of the deep significance of the structure of the infinite universe and its order. The student must discover this significance, the path to happiness, for himself. Accordingly, there are no theoretical discussions, only practical ones. Schools and professional education are considered unnecessary, the makers of slaves. Further, the slave mentality is clearly seen as the cause of all misery and unhappiness. (It is interesting to note that the majority of great men have been autonomous— self-made.)

In this guidebook, I have avoided a complete explanation of the yin-yang philosophy of happiness, of the concept of supreme judgment and the keys to the kingdom of heaven for two reasons. First, so many works have already been written on the subject,1 and second, the intellectual/conceptual understanding of such philosophy is utterly useless if there is no practical result. To theorize is not enough; one must actually achieve a happy life that continually grows fuller.

The swimming of even the smallest fish cannot be mastered without first getting into the water. If you are interested in and excited by the Oriental philosophy that guarantees the five elements of happiness outlined above, please try the macrobiotic technique in this volume for a week or two. I can still recommend it after having taught it for more than forty-eight years; I am convinced that it is the fundamental way to happiness. The alternate way via philosophical, intellectual, conceptual, theoretical study is difficult, tiresome, endless, and disappointingly fruitless.

Above all, remember that this philosophy, that which I have called the Unique Principle, is practical. It is not merely another one of the medical methods that pretends to restore bodily health while actually increasing the number of sickly, diseased people through endlessly new pharmaceutical products and surgical operations. It is simply a practical discipline of life that anyone can observe with great pleasure. It restores both the health and the harmony of soul, mind, and body that are essential for joyful living.

Preface to the First Edition: From Health to Peace

All the great religions of man were born in the Orient—the light from the East. Thanks to them, the people of that part of the world lived for thousands of years with relatively few cruel wars. (This included the Japanese, whose country had always been called the land of longevity and peace.)

Yet, everything changes in this ephemeral, floating, relative, and limited world that we inhabit. With the importation of Occidental civilization, Asiatic and African countries that had been colonized gave up their traditional ways and naively and peacefully adopted the manner of the West.

Western civilization has since grown more powerful; war has progressively become more violent while modern science, which we admire very much, has emerged as the new religion of man.

May we hope that both this strikingly new, productive civilization and the ancient civilization of health, freedom, happiness, and peace will become complementary—the two arms of oneness?

For forty-eight years my goal has been to accomplish just this, and at last I think I have found the way.

You in the Occident should study our five-thousand-year-old philosophy. With this dialectical, paradoxical, non-violent tool you will be able to solve not only scientific, social, and medical problems, but you will discover the way to achieve happiness and freedom. Study and reach an understanding of our simple, practical, and stimulating viewpoint. Remember, we imported everything from the West for more than one hundred years, sometimes voluntarily and sometimes not; it is now time for you to import this ageless, priceless treasure from the East.

First of all, learn about Eastern eating and drinking— macrobiotics, the structural basis for health and happiness.2

In Japan, for example, eating and drinking were once considered to be the most divine art of life. Whereas we, on the one hand, developed a method based on thought-out, well-established principles, Americans, on the other hand, appear to be guided only by taste and pleasure in their food habits.

Macrobiotics is the fundamental way of eating and drinking in the Zen Buddhist monastery where it is called “Syozin Ryori,” the cooking that develops the supreme judgment. This is consistent with the belief that physiology precedes and determines psychology. By contrast, what is customarily served in Chinese and Japanese restaurants in the United States appeals to the low, sensory judgment; it completely eclipses higher judgment. The true masters of Oriental cooking can prepare food according to macrobiotic principles that not only tastes delicious but also creates health and happiness.

You, too, can learn hundreds of ways to cook and eat, each one different from those usually found in restaurants, markets, and home cooking, and each one designed to promote your well-being.

If the food industry in America were to adopt and industrialize macrobiotic food and drink, we might witness the first food revolution in the history of mankind and the first all-out war on human sickness and misery.

To My Readers

If you should decide to study our five-thousand-year-old philosophy in order to realize infinite freedom, eternal happiness, and absolute righteousness, understand that you must do this on your own, independently, by and for yourself, as do all animals, birds, insects, and fish. First of all, make up your mind to conquer your sickness—not his or hers, but yours!

Learn the nature of your disease and its cause. If you are only interested in the disappearance of symptoms, difficulties, or pain, you have no need to study this book. This unique philosophy does not deal with symptomatic medicine.

Assimilate and come to understand the Unique Principle thoroughly; you must live it in your daily life. (The philosophy of Far Eastern medicine is quite sufficient—there is no need to read and memorize thousands of very complicated books.)

Observe the macrobiotic diet as it is explained. If you cannot find a specific treatment for the disease you are interested in curing, apply one treatment or another or combine several treatments described in Chapter 10—according to the symptoms you have. Do this cautiously and systematically and you will achieve success.

You yourself can be the creator of your own life, health, and happiness.

Table of Contents:

• Preface to the First Edition
• Preface to Second Edition
• Preface to the Revised Edition
• Chapter 1: Waste Lands
• Chapter 2: In the Wool-Shed
• Chapter 3: Up the River
• Chapter 4: The Saddle
• Chapter 5: The River and the Range
• Chapter 6: Into Erewhon
• Chapter 7: First Impressions
• Chapter 8: In Prison
• Chapter 9: To the Metropolis
• Chapter 10: Current Opinions
• Chapter 11: Some Erewhonian Trials
• Chapter 12: Malcontents
• Chapter 13: The Views of the Erewhonians Concerning Death
• Chapter 14: Mahaina
• Chapter 15: The Musical Banks
• Chapter 16: Arowhena
• Chapter 17: Ydgrun and the Ydgrunites
• Chapter 18: Birth Formulae
• Chapter 19: The World of the Unborn
• Chapter 20: What They Mean By It
• Chapter 21: The Colleges of Unreason
• Chapter 22: The Colleges of Unreason (cont'd.)
• Chapter 23: The Book of the Machines
• Chapter 24: The Machines (cont'd.)
• Chapter 25: The Machines (cont'd).
• Chapter 26: the Views of an Erewhonian Prophet Concerning the Rights of Animals
• Chapter 27: The Views of an Erewhonian Philosopher Concerning the Rights of Vegetables
• Chapter 28: Escape
• Chapter 29: Conclusion
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:32 pm

Part 1 of 2

Gregory Bateson’s Theory of Mind: Practical Applications to Pedagogy
by Lawrence S. Bale
November 1992
copyright© 2000 by Down 'n Out Press All rights reserved

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


This is how Jung describes the relationship of the individual to the collective unconscious according to this diagram:

I have often been asked about the "Geology" of a personality, and so I have tried to picture this after a fashion. Diagram 10 shows individuals coming out of a certain common level, like the summits of mountains coming out of a sea. The first connection between certain individuals is that of the family, then comes the clan which unites a number of families, then the nation which unites a still bigger group. After that we could take a large number of connected nations such as would be included under the heading "European man." Going further down, we would come to what we call the monkey group, or that of the primate ancestors, and after that would come the animal layer in general, and finally the central fire, with which, as the diagram shows, we are still in connection. [91]

Image

A = Individuals.
B = Families.
C = Clans.
D = Nations.
E = Large Group (European man, for example).
F = Primate Ancestors.
G = Animal Ancestors in general.
H = "Central Fire."

Figure 1. Jung's diagram of the geology of the human personality (from Analytical Psychology, p. 133).


-- The Jung Cult: Origins of a Charismatic Movement, by Richard Noll


Gregory Bateson was one of the first scholars to appreciate that the patterns of organization and relational symmetry evident in all living systems are indicative of mind. We should not forget that due to the nineteenth century polemic between science and religion, any consideration of purpose and plan, e.g., mental process, had been a priori excluded from science as non-empirical, or immeasurable. Any reference to mind as an explanatory or causal principle had been banned from biology. Even in the social and behavioral sciences, references to mind remained suspect. Building on the work of Norbert Wiener and Warren McCulloch,1 Bateson realized that it is precisely mental process or mind which must be investigated. Thus, he formulated the cybernetic epistemology and the criteria of mind that are pivotal elements in his “ecological philosophy.” In fact, he referred to cybernetics as an epistemology: e.g., the model, itself, is a means of knowing what sort of world this is, and also the limitations that exist concerning our ability to know something (or perhaps nothing) of such matters. As his work progressed, Bateson proposed that we consider Epistemology as an overarching discipline of the natural sciences, including the social and behavioral sciences: a meta-science whose parameters extend to include the science of mind in the widest sense of the word.

Ideally, teaching should entail an unending search for theoretical and methodological perspectives that inspire and challenge teacher and students alike. In that spirit, this essay presents an overview of the cybernetic principles that influenced so much of Bateson’s work, and discusses his understanding of the concepts information and communication, which are pivotal elements of his “cybernetic epistemology” and his theory of mind. The essay concludes with a brief rendering of Bateson’s “learning theory,” and since the essay reflects the highly abstract and formal tone of Bateson’s work, at various junctures along the way some of the practical applications that this complex material may have for pedagogy are indicated.

The Cybernetic Paradigm: A Brief Introduction

The term Cybernetics was coined by Norbert Wiener, at the end of World War Two, in reference to the, “entire field of control and communication theory, whether in the machine or in the animal.”2 As such, cybernetics has become a master concept which assimilated a number of analytic methods, including computerization and simulation, set theory, graph theory, net theory, automata theory, decision theory, queueing theory, game theory, and general systems theory. As is apparent in the wealth of available literature, cybernetic processes became discernible to many theorists, not only in biological systems, but also in the sub-organic and supra-organic world—from microphysics to organic life, through social groups, to the biosphere of our planet, and beyond.

The introduction of cybernetic principles led to the identification of systemic invariance or isomorphisms throughout the observable cosmos. Here we should note that whether or not employment of the cybernetic paradigm has been appropriate in each instance remains an area of dispute. Nevertheless, once perceived, the recognition of such patterns has fostered a valuable epistemic shift: from consideration of discrete “entities,” to the discernment of whole systems. The recognition of systemic patterns also initiated further disclosure of the logic evident in the behavior and interaction of systems, enabling theorists to frame the formal characteristics inherent in whole (e.g., cybernetic) systems. The properties of such a system are identified as fourfold:

1. The system is a holistic and cannot be reduced to its parts without altering its pattern. Artificially composed aggregates, wherein the constituent elements can be added or subtracted without altering the overall system are not included.

2. The system is self-regulating, stabilizing itself through negative feedback loops. Thus, cybernetic systems respond to information. They scan their behavior to determine its outcome, and if this “input” or feedback communicates a match with the system’s “coded requirements,” the system maintains its output, its behavior, in order to maintain the match (i.e., it maintains a steady-state). If the system “learns” that its coded requirements are not being matched, it modifies its behavior on the basis of such information.

3. The system is self-organizing. If a mismatch between sensory input and “internal code” persists, the system searches for, and encodes a new pattern with which to operate. Thus, in the passage of time, differentiation and complexification of the overall system may emerge through positive feedback.

4. Moreover, the system is understood as a differentiated sub-whole within a systemic hierarchy. The “environment” in which a system exists is also a whole system, a meta-system. Whether ecosystem, animal, organ or cell, systems consist of subsystems that operate within a hierarchy of progressively inclusive meta-systems. As a subsystem, the system’s characteristics and operations are co-determinative components of the larger system within which it is an integral component. Thus, a system may be understood as Janus-faced. As a whole, it faces inward, i.e., the system is concerned with maintaining its internal steady state; as a sub-whole, the system faces outward, responding to its environment (a meta-system) in a potentially infinite regression of relevant contexts.

Spurred by the enthusiasm with which cybernetics was received, systems research has been applied to many fields of scientific enquiry. Such research supports the evolutionary view that over time, through self-organization and mutual adaptation, systems tend to form structural hierarchies, i.e., they fashion progressively larger, more inclusive systems out of preexisting sub-systems. Furthermore, in the patterns they exhibit, these new systems generate unique qualities, including more complex organization and inherently novel forms of operation.

The view which has subsequently emerged discerns a complementary relationship between the morphic nature of systemic integration and systemic differentiation within a hierarchical universe. Systemic differentiation and integration are conventionally understood as delimited by the channeling of energy, matter and information to maintain and generate form.3 Also, through the cybernetic interaction of their patterns of operation, systems tend to complexify and form hierarchies. Hence, in the realm of astronomy, hierarchical restraints are understood as gravitational; in the hierarchy from microphysics to organic life, cybernetic restraints are understood as electrochemical forces; and in social and cognitive hierarchies, such constraints are understood as operating in the communication of symbols.4

Notably, such research has also revealed that this phenomenon is delimited by hierarchical restraints of a morphic nature.5 That is, in each of these realms the hierarchical constraints are related to pattern formation, not substance or quantity. Each step between the hierarchies advances the development of form toward increasingly complex organization. Also, systems proponents point out that in asserting the irreducibility of levels, the hierarchical view of cybernetic/systems theory conflicts with traditional monism, as well as with dualism and pluralism.6 That is, since hierarchical constraints produce both novelty and organization, causal or generative relations necessarily exist between the levels.

Hence, the cybernetic/systems view of observed reality is hierarchical: the universe is understood as a hierarchy of systems, wherein each higher level of system is composed of systems of lower levels. In this view, each level of the hierarchy cybernetically builds on more basic levels of organization: integrating pre-existing subsystems and micro-hierarchies into novel patterns; and fashioning new, more inclusive systems. Therefore, as observed in embryology, evolution and child development, growth and learning occur incrementally or step-wise. Whole systems never begin from scratch. Their growth is inevitably based upon the organization of pre-organized components. They are both delimited and enabled by hierarchical constraints that permit stability, economy, and speed in the unfolding of new forms of life and more inclusive hierarchical levels.

Since their introduction, investigation of the holistic, self-stabilizing, self-organizing and hierarchical traits formally identified in cybernetic systems has also spread into the social and behavioral sciences. Thus, the informational nature of cybernetic processes: including the concepts of feedback, mutual causality, and self-regulating systems—i.e., that cybernetic systems adapt to and alter their environments through sequences of self-stabilization around steady states—have been adopted and fruitfully employed in these disciplines.

Arguably, the most significant contribution of cybernetics to these disciplines stems from an appreciation of the informational character of the processes evident in cybernetic systems. Along with other vital insights, this view supports a collapse of the supposed dichotomies between “subjective” and “objective” data. Consequently, through the employment of the cybernetic paradigm, phenomena previously dismissed as non-empirical—including feeling, emotions, cognition and perception of meaning—were judged accessible and relevant to scientific inquiry. In summary, we may note that the principles underlying the cybernetic paradigm have been recognized as a valuable means of conceptualizing humankind, not only as a biological entity, but also as a social and cognitive being.7

Some scholars have objected to the “dehumanizing” effect of applying principles derived from machines to the study of human beings. Yet, the aim of employing cybernetic theories in the social and behavioral sciences has never been to reduce identity formation—e.g. subjective learning processes, unconscious symbolic processes, etc.—to the principles of system organization. What is claimed, is that cybernetics provides a legitimate analogy, although not an exact one, “which explains a much wider variety of outcomes in terms of the significance of information,” than has previously been available.8 As such, cybernetic principles also hold valuable insights for the field of pedagogy.

For instance, we may assume that a classroom of students (including the instructor) rapidly becomes a holistic system comprised of self-stabilizing, self-organizing personalities, each of whom perceives the class through their own set of past experiences, and each of whom is concerned with maintaining an internal, or personal, balance of predefined expectations and goals. Hence, any “new information” that enters the holistic, and mutually causal system of the class will be uniquely perceived and responded to by each personality within the class. Each personality within the class will receive-organize-translate information according to their own set of self-stabilizing patterns— patterns that have succeeded, over time, in allowing the “individual” to “fit” within the context of a learning environment. From this perspective teaching is a dialogical process in which the teacher’s primary role is one of establishing or communicating contexts wherein the students may effectively perceive and assimilate “new information.”

Since every person in the classroom is a holistic, self-stabilizing, self-organizing system, but also a participant in a larger more inclusive system—e.g., the learning environment or class, which also operates as a holistic, self-stabilizing, self-organizing system—a crucial component of the dialogical teaching process must include a recognition and enhancement of the “feedback circuitry” that enables the larger context of the class to operate as holistic system. As a holistic unit, the class develops it own history of interaction, and as anyone who has led a class will note, no one part of the system can effectively exercise unilateral control over the entire system. In short, the class co-evolves, and every member of the class develops their own strategies for appropriately responding to the messages of interrelationship(s) that govern a class’ becoming. In this intricate and complex process, an effective teacher must be skilled at dialogical and trans-contextual communication: i.e., communicating contexts wherein diverse systems (personalities) can effectively exchange information; recognizing and effectively responding to various manifestations of negative, positive and regenerative feedback; and, assisting students in the largely unconscious processes of learning to learn.

Envisaging the Negentropic Realm of Mind: A Realm of Communication, Information, and Learning

Our consideration of Bateson’s model of mind, his cybernetic epistemology, and his theory of learning, necessarily begins with his criteria of mind. The criteria listed below are intended to differentiate the phenomena of thought from the much simpler phenomena observed in material events. Hence, the six criteria of mental process are intended to provide a list, “such that if any aggregate of phenomena, any system, satisfies all the criteria listed, I shall unhesitatingly say that the aggregate is a mind and shall expect that, if I am to understand that aggregate, I shall need sorts of explanation different from those which would suffice to explain the characteristics of its smaller parts.”9

Criteria of Mind 10

1) A mind is an aggregate of interacting parts or components.

2) The interaction between parts of mind is triggered by difference, and difference is a nonsubstantial phenomenon not located in space or time; difference is related to negentropy and entropy rather than energy.

3) Mental process requires collateral energy.

4) Mental process requires circular (or more complex) chains of determination.

5) In mental process, the effects of difference are to be regarded as transforms (i.e., coded versions) of events which proceeded them. The rules of such transformation must be comparatively stable (i.e., more stable than the content), but are in themselves subject to transformation.

6) The description and classification of these processes of transformation disclose a hierarchy of logical types immanent in the phenomena.

Bateson argues that using the above criteria the mind-body dilemma is soluble. He also asserts that, “the phenomena which we call thought, evolution, ecology, life, learning, and the like occur only in systems that satisfy these criteria.”11
From the above discussion of the cybernetic paradigm, the degree to which the informational nature of cybernetic process has informed Bateson’s criteria is readily apparent. One might insist that he has reduced mental process to the operations of cybernetic systems. However, he consistently maintained that the criteria are intended to be employed as an analogous and metaphoric model of mind. Above all, the criteria are intended for use as a tool of abduction, e.g., comparing that which is shared among apparently unrelated phenomena.

In part, the aim in this essay is to consider how the model of mind, or mental process that emerges from Bateson’s criteria of mind relate to the phenomena of learning. After all, it is “mind” that learns. Therefore, we should examine each of the criteria before moving on to discuss the practical applications of Bateson’s theory of learning.

1) A mind is an aggregate of interacting parts or components. The model of mind mapped out by Bateson’s criteria is holistic, and as with all serious holism it is premised on an interaction of differentiated (as opposed to separate or individual) ‘parts.’12 Holistic systems require a differentiation of parts, or there can be no differentiation of events and functioning. Therefore, mind is understood as an aggregate of differentiated parts, which at their primary level are not themselves mental. These ‘parts’ in combined interaction constitute wholes, or whole mind systems. In more complex instances, some of the ‘parts’ of a mind system may fulfill all the necessary requirements of the criteria. In this case, these ‘parts’ are also recognized as minds, or subminds. In either case, mind or mental process is understood as immanent in, and emergent from “certain sorts of organization of parts.”13

With this foundation for understanding mental process, we may now consider the nature of the relationships within which mind is immanent, or out of which mind emerges, i.e., how the relationships between the ‘parts’ interact to create mental process.

2) The interaction between parts of mind is triggered by difference, and difference is related to negentropy and entropy rather then energy. Here, the informational nature of cybernetic process is first incorporated into the criteria, and we encounter a clarification of the concept “information,” as distinct from “energy” and “matter.” We are also introduced to the limitations of knowing in this model of mind.

Beginning with an idea as the basic unit of mental process, Bateson defines an idea as, “A difference or distinction or news of differences,” adding that more commonly we refer to complex aggregates of such units as ideas.14 Of course difference is a nonsubstantial phenomenon that cannot be located in space or time. The difference between an egg and an apple does not lie in the egg or in the apple, nor does it exist in the space between them.

In agreement with Kant, Bateson notes that even the simplest of objects “contain” an infinite number of differences, but only differences which make a difference are used in forming mental images—ideas, or aggregates of ideas. Mind responds only to the differences in its environment that it is able to discern. And in this process, the holistically bonded ‘parts’ that comprise mind systems act as a sort of filter or sieve, sorting, selecting and collecting and subsequently decoding information, i.e., differences, or news of difference.15 Ideas (news of difference, images, maps) about things is what get into the working circuitry of mind, but mental systems know nothing of “things-in-themselves” (Dinge an sich).16 In short, mind systems are influenced by maps, never territory.

This suggests why Bateson feels cybernetic models and metaphors are most appropriately applied to the realm of mental process, i.e., mind systems. Given the importance of information and communication in cybernetic theory, and the unique status of information (news of difference) as a nonsubstantial phenomenon that nevertheless influences, governs and controls a cybernetic system, it ought to be evident that cybernetic models best exemplify mental process. Thus, the use of energy and matter as explanatory principles is clearly inappropriate—except in those instances where they function as information and thus have communicational value.

Consider the fact that in the realm of communication and information, zero has a “causal” value because it represents a difference, it is different from one, and zero (quite literally, no ‘thing’) may thus be used to explain a response in both the realms of communication and mental process. In this context, quantifiable concepts such as power, gravity, and energy, etc. are applicable only in the so-called “hard sciences”—i.e., realms of explanation used in exploring the physical realm of material events. In contrast to cybernetic systems (including our computers), atoms, molecules and stones do not respond to information. There is no evidence that these entities scan their behavior for its result, nor do they modify future behavior on the basis of such information.

Thus, in contrast to Laszlo and others, Bateson feels we should reject the application of cybernetic feedback principles in describing and explaining atomic, subatomic and electrochemical realms of physical existence. He also believes that given the preponderance of metaphors and explanatory principles borrowed from the energetics and hard sciences, we must totally re-think most of the theoretical basis underpinning much of the social and behavioral sciences.

3) Mental process requires collateral energy. Although the interactions of mental process are triggered by difference, “difference is not energy and usually contains no energy.”17 Mental process requires some amount of energy (apparently very little), but as a stimulus the nonsubstantial phenomenon of difference does not provide energy. The respondent mind system has collateral energy, usually provided by metabolism. If we kick a stone, it receives energy and it moves with that energy. However, if we kick a cat or a dog, our kick may transfer enough energy to move the animal, and we may even imagine placing the animal into a Newtonian orbit, but living organisms generally respond to stimuli with energy from their own metabolism. In the control of animation by information, energy is already present in the respondent, the energy is available in advance of the “impact” of events.

4) Mental process requires circular (or more complex) chains of determination. Since the central themes of this holistic model are drawn from the recursive nature of cybernetic systems, there is a fundamental emphasis on circular causal chains in mental process. Here again, mind is understood as immanent in the combined interaction of the differentiated ‘parts’ of the system, and this interaction depends upon the existence of a network of circular, or more complex, chains of determination, i.e., the parts of the system are connected and interact within a closed circuit. Since the system is circular (i.e., recursive), effects of events at any point in the circuit will move around or throughout the system, eventually producing changes at the point of origin. Thus, “a special sort of holism is generated by feedback and recursiveness,” in the system.18

Moreover, in accordance with the regularities discovered in cybernetic systems, the closed circuitry—in combination with the effects of time—generates a holistic matrix in which no one part of the system can exercise unilateral control over the system as a whole. Each part is controlled by information moving throughout the closed circuitry of the whole system. Such systems are subject to the effects of time, and therefore, each part must adapt to the time characteristics of the system. Thus, each part must adapt to the effects of its own past action within the system.19 Hence, the mental properties of the system are understood as immanent, not in any one part, but within the system as a whole. For example, mental process (e.g., mind) is understood as immanent in the circuits of the brain which are complete within the brain; mental processes are similarly immanent in the circuits which are complete within the system, brain-plus-body; and mind is immanent in the larger system — person-plus-environment.20 The resulting image requires that we eliminate the commonly held notion that mind is to be identified as residing only within the boundary of our physical body, and is somehow radically separate from others:

. . . there is no requirement of a clear boundary, like a surrounding envelope of skin or membrane, and you can recognize that this definition [of mind] includes only some of the characteristics of what we call “life.” As a result it applies to a much wider range of those complex phenomena called “systems,” including systems consisting of multiple organisms or systems in which some of the parts are living and some are not, or even to systems in which there are no living parts.21


The resulting image also suggests that authoritative methods of teaching are not going to be as effective as apprenticeship methods of instruction. Like it or not, instructors cannot effectively foist their will upon the mind system of a class, nor upon any “individual” student within the class. One may exercise authority, but unilateral control is not a valid option, and any attempt to exercise dominance will only succeed if the student(s) “submits.” The end result of an authoritative “lesson” of dominance cannot be predicted or controlled, and although the students are often unaware of the fact, they are in control of their personal and collective dialogical learning processes.

We might want to pause here and consider how this inclusive image of mind suggests that the context of a classroom or a learning environment full of students ‘is’, or becomes, a holistic mind system —comprised of teacher, students, and technological extensions of mental process (books, computers, microscopes, etc.). Also, consider how the physical context of the classroom contains “context markers” (blackboards, desks, visual aids, the flag, etc.), that communicate the message(s) (information available only to mind systems) that this context is different from other locations, it is a learning environment.

We should also note that the feedback loops which maintain the holistic nature of the larger more inclusive mind system identified as “a class,” represent a fundamentally dialogical process. Thus, each person in a learning environment operates as a holist mind system in dialogue with themselves, while simultaneously participating in the (often silent) dialogue of the larger mind system that can be recognized as persons-plus-environment. Moreover, the mental phenomena described here undoubtedly reflect not only primary and autonomic process, but also the complex interaction of social behavior. If we are going to effectively create contexts in which students can learn, we would do well to have our methods parallel the dialogical principles that bond mind systems across a broad spectrum of primary and social levels of mental process.

5) In mental process the effects of differences are to be regarded as transforms (i.e., coded versions) of events which proceeded them. The phenomena of coding, an integral element of feed-back in cybernetic systems, is incorporated into the model through this criterion; and again, we should note that the model assigns unequivocal limitations as to what mind systems are capable of knowing, largely due to this phenomena. That is, the process in which information is translated and encoded into a new form—for only then is information available for further stages of a system’s performance—limits the perception of mental systems to images that are reminiscent of the shadows in Plato’s allegory of the cave.

The perspective added to the model by this criterion emerges out of information theory, but this is not a “garbage in, garbage out” use of the information processing model. After all, Bateson was one of the founders of the family therapy movement, and he does not suggest that our minds are simply an information processing apparatus. He vehemently opposed such simplistic and vulgar application of cybernetic theory. The model of mind drawn by the criteria applies to all mental systems, but on a gradation of complexity. The concept of “information in,” “information out” is appropriate enough for computers, and perhaps single cell animals; but clearly not for the complex interaction of families and classrooms, nor the personalities who—when bonded together through communication—form these more inclusive mind systems. The transformation of information referred to in this criterion is intended to include influences from the sum total of a personality’s contextual learning experiences, e.g., a construct of biological, cultural and social habituation.

This criterion also effectively places mental process in what Bateson refers to as “the world of communication,” which is a realm of explanation wherein the only relevant entities or “realities” are messages. This is the realm of mind, in which relationships and metarelationships, context, and the context of context—all of which are complex aggregates of information or differences which make a difference—may be identified in a potentially infinite regress of relevant contexts. Consider Bateson’s comparison of the Newtonian world and the world of communication:

The difference between the Newtonian world and the world of communication is simply this: that the Newtonian world ascribes reality to objects and achieves its simplicity by excluding the context of the context—indeed excluding all metarelationships—a fortiori excluding an infinite regress of such relations. In contrast, the theorist of communication insists upon examining the metarelationships while achieving its simplicity by excluding all objects.22


Bateson suggests that the world of communication (the realm of mental process, and learning) is a Berkeleyan world, but the good bishop was guilty of understatement. “Relevance or reality must be denied not only to the sound of the tree which falls unheard in the forest but also to the chair that I can see and on which I may sit.”23 Our perception of a chair is communicationally real, but in the realm of mental process—the world of communication—the chair on which we sit is only an idea, a message in which we put our trust. There are in fact no chairs or tables, no birds or cats, no students or professors in the working circuitry of the mind, except in the form of “ideas.” Dinge an Sich or things-in-themselves are inaccessible to direct inquiry. Only ideas (difference, news of difference, images or maps) and information (differences which make a difference) about “things” are accessible to mind:

Ideas (in some very wide sense of that word) have a cogency and reality. They are what we can know, and we can know nothing else. The regularities or laws that bind ideas together—these are the (eternal) verities. These are as close as we can get to ultimate truth.24


At this juncture, considering the importance of “context” in learning and pedagogical theory, we should pause and consider what exactly context might “be”? The list of criteria we have thus far examined suggests that: A context is nonsubstantial phenomenon which cannot be located in space or time. Or perhaps we should say that a context is a constellation of differences; not a ‘thing’, but rather a mental image or a map—a recognition of the differences that make a difference within a set of relationships. Here, it is interesting to note that the Artificial Intelligence movement (which has little in common with Bateson’s ideas, other than it also grew out of cybernetic theory) falters on the concept of context. The most powerful computers cannot be programmed to recognize and distinguish the differences that mark a given context as separate or different from any other context.

6) The description and classification of these processes of transformation disclose a hierarchy of logical types immanent in the phenomena. This final criterion applies the concept of logical types to the mutual causal and hierarchical characteristics of the cybernetic paradigm, and employs the result in the model of mental process. We have previously observed that mental process requires circular or more complex, causal relations, and that the closed circuitry of whole mind systems generates a holistic matrix in which the mental properties of the system are immanent within the working circuitry of the system as a whole. Thus, mental process is both immanent in, and inseparable from the realm of physical appearances. Mind is immanent in, and emergent from certain sorts of organization of parts. Nevertheless, mental systems are not isolated monads. They have the capacity to unite with other similar systems, thus forming systemic hierarchies comprised of differentiated sub-minds.

This view requires that we regard mind as an interpenetrating process that includes (or, is included within) other mental systems, in sequential moments of time. The mind system(s) in which sub-minds participate is thus discerned as a meta-system, where perceived levels of difference separate progressively abstract and inclusive levels of logical types. The mental properties of a sub-mind are co-determinative and mutually causal components of the larger mind system within which it is an integral component. Again, we find that like cybernetic systems, mind systems are Janus-faced: as a whole, the system “faces” inward, i.e., its dialogue with itself is concerned with maintaining the integrity of its internal steady state (the system’s knowing is its being); as a sub-whole, the system “faces” outward, responding to perceived differences in its environment, and differences communicated to it through pathways or networks of recursive circuitry within the larger mind system—the meta-system of which it is a differentiated part (knowing how to appropriately fit and adapt preserves the system’s being). All of which occurs within a virtually infinite regress of relevant contexts.

“Any object may become a part of a mental system, but the object does not then become a thinking subsystem in the larger mind.”25 When mental systems do unite with other similar systems, they become operational (i.e., “thinking”) subsystems, or differentiated sub-minds within a larger mind that is subsequently formed. Mental systems are thus understood as forming hierarchies of levels of difference; i.e., such difference as is evident “between a cell and tissue, between tissue and organ, organ and organism, and organism and society”:

These are the hierarchies of units or Gestalten [whole mental systems], in which each subunit is a part of the unit of the next larger scope. And, always in biology, this difference or relationship which I call “part of" is such that certain differences in the part will have informational effect upon the larger unit, and vice versa [the larger unit will have to have informational effect upon the subunit].26


With informational effects moving between or being exchanged throughout the system, the non-substantial phenomenon of difference produces substantial, i.e., “real”, effects. In keeping with Gestalt theory, this is a uniting or combining of information that results in a new order of information or the creation of a logical product—something more than simple addition. An apt analogy is that of self-organizing Chinese boxes, each one dialogically fashioning itself to fit inside the other, ad infinitum. This combining of ‘parts’ results in something more on the order of multiplication or fractionation,27 with each level of difference in the systemic hierarchy forming a pattern of interaction that represents a difference of logical type.

Bateson’s intent with this final criterion seems to mean that the description and classification of mind systems discloses a dialogical hierarchy of logical types, where each logical type—each level of mental process—is distinguished by a level of difference. Each level of difference also represents a context where similar systems may form larger Gestalten and operate as subsystems. Thus, viewed through the hierarchic structure of thought and the “world of communication” proposed by cybernetic theory, the hierarchies of levels of difference evident in the natural world are a result of informational patterns of interaction.

Self-organization, self-stabilization and mutual adaptation (all governed by informational feedback loops) act as hierarchical restraints that regulate something like an “osmotic” flow of information that is dialogically exchanged within and between the differentiated levels. Levels of knowing that we experience (for instance) as the “self;” that separation between our personal knowing/being and the knowing/being of the living environment—the natural world in which we live, sharing our interpretation of experience, learning, adapting, and growing; the world of mental process with which we co-evolve.

Characteristics and Potentialities of a Mind System

Below is a list of the distinctive traits and potentialities of mind systems that exhibit the six criteria. This includes all living organisms, as well as any component of a living system that fulfills all the criteria, and thus exhibits a degree of autonomy in its self-regulation and operation: for example, individual cells; organs; and aggregates of organs.

The model of mind advanced in this essay is a radically inclusive paradigm: extending the meaning of mind well beyond its previous boundaries; and where warranted, recognizing mental process in systems that do not include living components. Here we should also note that this model totally discredits the traditional view of arrogating mind to our species, alone. As we review these characteristics and potentialities of mind systems, we should bear in mind that the six criteria propose a holistic model of mind which operates as a totally integrated system. They are useful as a description and explanation of mental process only in combination, and we should expect any such mental system to exhibit the following distinctive traits or attributes:

1. Mind systems will exercise some degree of autonomy or self control: the recursive nature of feedback loops within the system’s circuitry give the system information about itself and allow the system to exercise self-regulation.

2. Mind systems will exhibit a capacity for death: either through the randomization or disassembly of the multiple parts of the system or through the breaking of the circuitry that gives the system information about itself, thus destroying its autonomy.

3. Mind systems will exercise the capacity of self-correction: thus, we may recognize that they exercise purpose and choice.

4. Mind systems will adapt to their environments through sequences of self-stabilization around steady states: therefore they exhibit stability (steady state), extreme instability (runaway), or some mixture of these two.

5. Mind systems will learn and remember: they exercise the ability to change and adapt in response to internal or external differences in their environment; and they fashion some degree of ordering or predictability through the stochastic process of trail and error.

6. Mind systems will exhibit some capacity to store energy.

7. Mind systems will be influenced by “maps,” never “territory.”

8. Mind systems will be subject to the fact that all messages are of some logical type: thus, the possibility always exists that they will commit errors in logical typing.

9. The culmination of our synopsis is the principle that mind systems will have the capacity to unite with other similar systems, and thus create still larger wholes.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:33 pm

Part 2 of 2

The Logical Categories of Changing Mind: Bateson’s Theory of Learning

While highly formal and abstract, Bateson’s criteria of mind and the model of mind he presents offer valuable insights for pedagogy. His model of mind is intended to be understood as a relational process rather than a ‘thing’ that is somehow disassociated or separable from another ‘thing’ (the “body”). His insights introduce a rigorously formulated basis for what I call removing “ego” from the process of teaching, replacing authoritative modes of instruction with more dialogical modes of instruction, such as mentoring and apprenticeship. Taken seriously, his concept of mind insists that teaching must address the whole person—physical, emotional and intellectual—in dialogues that cut across a wide range of contextual boundaries and communication pathways.

One significant implication of Bateson’s holistic and dialogical notion of mind is that when the patterns of interaction we commonly refer to as “minds” actually do connect via communication, the relationship thus established triggers or releases a potential for change that may bring about a profound transformation of the “entities” involved, as well as the larger mental systems in which they are embedded. Hence, the insight that mental systems become thinking subsystems of larger holistic minds (more inclusive Gestalten) suggests that when genuine dialogue occurs, we enter into a process that holds the possibility of experiencing one another in a manner that is as integrative and consequential as that which is evident in the integration of a living organism.

Equally significant implications of Bateson’s work emerge when we consider his theory of learning. Bateson examined the phenomenon of learning in several essays written between 1942 and 1971. He presented his theory of learning from more than one perspective, addressed a number of related agendas, and fine tuned the details of his work over time. Since my aim in concluding this essay with an examination of Bateson’s learning theory is to help us explore the relationship between the phenomena involved in learning and the contexts of learning we attempt to established in a classroom, it is not be necessary to detail all the nuances of this sizable body of work.

For Bateson, the key to understanding the learning process is the phenomena of change, context, and the recognition of context of contexts. “The whole matter turns on whether the distinction between a class and its members is an ordering principle in the behavioral phenomena” which we call learning.28

The word “learning” undoubtedly denotes change of some kind. To say what kind of change is a delicate matter. However, from the gross common denominator, “change,” we can deduce that our descriptions of “learning” will have to make the same sort of allowance for the varieties of logical type which has been routine in physical science since the days of Newton. The simplest and most familiar form of change is motion, and even if we work at that very simple physical level we must structure our descriptions in terms of “position or zero motion,” “constant velocity,” “acceleration,” “rate of change of acceleration,” and so on.29


Bateson employs the theory of logical types to delineate a set of five classes of learning labeled Learning 0 through IV, with each higher class encompassing the lower classes of learning. Learning IV is a special type of learning that is not readily accessible, and since this level of learning “probably does not occur in any adult living organism on this earth,”30 our focus is necessarily limited to examining Learning 0 through III.

Before continuing, we should note some of the difficulties posed by language. The terms “higher” and “lower” convey a considerable surplus meaning, with “higher” suggesting a “superior” value and “lower” suggesting an “inferior” value. In this discussion of learning theory we should not fail to recognize that the first four levels of learning are potentially available to everyone. Just as the class “furniture” is no better or worse than the subclasses included within it—”table” or “chair,” for example—Learning 0 and Learning I are also to be understood as no better or worse than Learning II or Learning III. All four are potentially a part of the human experience and thus equally important. It is precisely our awareness that this is the case which is commonly difficult to perceive and understand.

Learning 0: Zero learning is “the simplest receipt of information from an external event in such a way that a similar event at a later (and appropriate) time will convey the same information: I ‘learn’ from the factory whistle that it is twelve o’clock.”31 This type of learning represents a context where a person exhibits minimal change in response to an item of sensory input, be it simple or complex. Learning 0 lacks any stochastic process, i.e., it does not contain components of trial and error, and it is typified “by specificity of response, which—right or wrong—is not subject to correction.”32 This level of learning may be identified in phenomena that occur in various contexts, and here a brief list of such contexts may help illustrate the intended meaning:

(a) In experimental settings, when “learning” is complete and the animal gives approximately 100 per cent responses to the repeated stimulus.

(b) In cases of habituation, where the animal has ceased to give overt responses to what was formerly a disturbing stimulus.

(c) In cases where the pattern of the response is minimally determined by the experience and maximally determined by genetic factors.

(d) In cases where the response is now highly stereotyped.

(e) In simple electronic circuits, where the circuit structure is not itself subject to change resulting from the passage of impulses within the circuit—i.e., where the causal links between “stimulus” and “response” are as the engineers say “soldered in.”33

Although Learning 0 does not contain a component of trial and error, at this level of learning we are capable of at least two types of “error.” If the context offers a set of alternatives to choose from, one may correctly employ the information that signals these available alternatives, but choose the wrong alternative; or, one may misidentify the context and thus choose from a wrong set of alternatives.34

If now we accept the overall notion that all learning (other than zero learning) is in some degree stochastic . . . it follows that an ordering of the process of learning can be built upon an hierarchic classification of the types of error which are to be corrected in the various learning process. Zero learning will then be the label for the immediate base of all those acts (simple and complex) which are not subject of correction by trial and error. Learning I will be an appropriate label for the revision of choice within and unchanged set of alternatives; and Learning II will be the label for the revision of the set from which the choice is to be made; and so on.35


Learning I: In common, nontechnical parlance this level of learning is generally what we mean by the term “learning.” It is often referred to as trial-and-error learning, instrumental learning, or conditioning. “These are cases where an entity gives at time two a different response from what it gave at time one.”36 This level of learning covers a broad range of phenomena, including rote learning, a rat learning which turn to make in a maze, and a person learning to play a Bach fugue. In essence, Learning I may be recognized when, with repeated practice, new responses occur.

Here, it is important to note that without the assumption of repeatable contexts there can be no learning of this sort . . . “we may regard ‘context’ as a collective term for all those events which tell the organism among what set of alternatives he must make his next choice.”37

Without the assumption of repeatable context (and the hypothesis that for the organisms which we study the sequence of experience is really somehow punctuated in this manner), it would follow that all “learning” would be of one type: namely, all would be zero learning.38

If all learning were zero learning, all behavior would be genetically determined, and we would be little more than genetically programmed automatons, in which case our physical, emo-tional, and intellectual life would amount to Pavlovian responses. However, if the premise of repeatable context is correct, “the case for logical typing of the phenomena of learning necessarily stands, because the notion ‘context’ itself is subject to logical typing.” Either we reject the notion of repeatable context or we accept it, and by accepting it, we “accept the hierarchic series—stimulus, context of stimulus, context of context of stimulus, etc. This series can be spelled out in the form of a hierarchy of logical types as follows”:

a) Stimulus is an elementary signal, internal or external.

b) Context of stimulus is a metamessage which classifies the elementary signal.

c) Context of context of stimulus is a meta-metamessage which classifies the metamessage. And so on.39

Bateson insists that the concept of repeatable context—and by extension the above hierarchic series of contexts—is a necessary premise for any theory that defines learning as change. Moreover, “this notion is not a mere tool of our description but contains the implicit hypothesis that . . . the sequence of life experience, action, etc., is somehow segmented or punctuated into subsequences or ‘contexts’ which may be equated or differentiated by the organism.”40

This all raises the question as to what sort of creatures we are that we can identify a context, or further, that we can recognize a repeatable context, or a context of contexts? Since we may respond to the “same” stimulus differently in differing contexts, what is the source of information necessary for us to recognize the difference between Context A and Context B? To answer these questions, Bateson introduces the term “context markers,” and employs this term to designate the signals or labels with which humans and quite likely many other organisms classify or differentiate between two contexts.

When we enter a classroom on the day of an exam, everyone in attendance knows that on this day, for the duration of the examination, their activities will differ from those of other times in the “same” classroom. Similarly, it is reasonable to assume that when a harness or some other apparatus is placed on a dog, who has had extended experience in a psychological laboratory, the smell and feel of the equipment, as well as the setting of the laboratory, all act as signals with which the animal marks that he is about to undergo a series of not unfamiliar contexts. Such sources of information may be referred to as “context markers,” and at least for humans, there must also be “markers of contexts of contexts.”41

When we attend the performance of a play, the playbills, the stage, the curtain, and the seating arrangement, etc., act as “markers of context of context.” If a character in the play commits a crime, we do not go out and summon the police, because through these “markers of context of context” we have received information about the context of the character’s context. We know we are watching a play. In contrast, Shakespeare uses a twist of irony in Hamlet when, precisely because Claudius ignores several “markers of context of context,” the King has his conscience prodded by the play within the play.

In the complex social life of humans, a diverse set of events can be identified as “context markers.” If I pick up my keys, for whatever reason, my wife is apt to ask where I intend to go. In this instance, my keys are a “context marker” that for my wife signals my intention of leaving the house. By way of example, Bateson offers the following list:

(a) The Pope’s throne from which he makes announcements ex cathedra, which announcements are thereby endowed with a special order of validity.

(b) The placebo, by which the doctor sets the stage for a change in the patient’s subjective experience,

(c) The shining object used by some hypnotists in “inducing trance.”

(d) The air raid siren and the “all clear.”

(e) The boxers handshake before a fight.

(f) The observances of etiquette.42

The notions of repeatable context and defining “learning” as change are not foreign to the field of pedagogy. For centuries, instructors have tacitly recognized and fashioned context markers (employing visual aids, and other less obvious means), as I indicated earlier in this essay. What I find most valuable (most practical) in this theory of learning is the elegant clarity with which Bateson focuses our attention on the phenomena of context, repeatable context, and context markers as somehow central to understanding and encouraging those changes we designate as “learning.”

Learning II: The next higher level or logical type of learning entails changes in the process of Learning I, or learning about learning.43 Learning II is recognizable as “corrective change in the set of alternatives from which choice is made,” and this includes “changes in the manner in which the stream of action and experience is segmented or punctuated into contexts together with changes in the use of context markers.”44

Simply put, Learning II represents the generally unconscious phenomena wherein we learn about and classify the contexts in which learning takes place. For example, when we first learn to play a musical instrument, it usually takes a considerable amount of time to play with few errors. Yet, as we continue to play and learn new pieces, the speed with which we learn to play at the same level of performance increases. We have learned a pattern or class of behaviors, for instance “guitar playing,” and we are able to progressively transfer skills acquired in learning one member of that class, “folk guitar,” to another, “classical guitar.” For anyone who has contemplated the processes involved in this type of learning (riding a bicycle, mathematical and language skills may also be included as examples) it is evident that much of this kind of learning takes place outside of our awareness.

Bateson argues that, “an essential and necessary function of all habit formation and Learning II is an economy of the thought processes (or neural pathways) which are used for problem-solving or Learning I.”45 The phenomena of learning occur within a hierarchy of perceived and classified contexts and meta-contexts in which our percepts are continually being verified or contradicted. However, as with typing or riding a bicycle, Learning II affords us the advantage of not questioning the details of our actions. We may carry on “without thinking.”46

Some types of knowledge can conveniently be sunk to unconscious levels, but other types must be kept on the surface. Broadly, we can afford to sink those sorts of knowledge which continue to be true regardless of changes in the environment, but we must maintain in an accessible place all those controls of behavior which must be modified for every instance. The economics of the system, in fact, pushes organisms toward sinking into the unconscious those generalities of relationship which remain permanently true and toward keeping within the conscious the pragmatic of particular instances.47


Learning II amounts to habit formation, e.g., it allows generalities of relationship that remain true to settle progressively further into the unconscious, and we should note that this pattern of learning is not restricted to classifying the contexts of acquired skills, such as operational tasks. Consider the premises for what is generally referred to as “character,” or definitions of “self.” In this instance, Learning II saves us from having to continually re-examine the abstract, philosophical, aesthetic, and ethical aspects of many sequences of life. For precisely this reason, Learning II can create problems for anyone attempting to reconstruct the context of the classroom system.

. . . Learning II is a way of punctuating events. But a way of punctuating is not true or false. . . It is like a picture seen in an inkblot; it has neither correctness nor incorrectness. It is only a way of seeing the inkblot. . .

The practitioner of magic does not unlearn his magical view of events when the magic does not work. In fact, the propositions which govern punctuation have the general characteristic of being self-validating. What we term “context” includes the subject’s behavior as well as the external events. But this behavior is controlled by former Learning II and therefore it will be of such a kind as to mold the total context to fit the expected punctuation.48


In other words, patterns of learned behavior regarding our interrelationship with the milieu in which we are embedded tend to become more and more generalized and come to determine the bias of a person’s global expectations. Consequently, one may then anticipate that one’s existence is orderly and structured, or simply chaotic; mostly punishing, or mostly rewarding. These more general relational patterns develop early in life and quickly drop out of awareness, and since what is learned is a way of punctuating events, what then happens is that we tend to mold our environment to fit the expected punctuation.49

The self-validating nature of this process renders it notoriously difficult to reverse because the personality involved is unaware, and he or she will unconsciously manipulate their perception of the environment to fit their expectations, and subsequently bypasses other learning opportunities. For instance, overcoming the expectations of a “fit and proper” learning environment, whether from students, parents or administrators—expectations controlled by former Learning II, and therefore, largely unconscious—poses a difficult task for anyone attempting to reconstruct the learning contexts of the classroom system.

Still, we are called upon to “educate” our students, and a close analysis of the words we use to describe the patterns of relationship and definitions of “self “ commonly called “character” reveals that no one is dependent, liberated, or competitive, etc. in isolation—all perception and all learning are essentially interactional. It follows that if (as scholars such as Bateson and Klaus Krippendorff suggest) in the operation of our perception we are all cartographers, then our role as educators is to communicate contexts and meta-contexts wherein our students may construct, explore and reexamine some of their most fundamental reality constructs. The “context markers” we broadcast will signal meta-metamessages with which the students may choose to punctuate or classify the context of their lives. If we are successful in our task, the dialogical learning environments we fashion can offer our students an experience “like entering the cartographer on the map he or she is making.”50 Like the border on a map, our “context markers” frame the information within the dialogue, setting the stage for the emergence of self-discovery.

In such systems, involving two or more persons, where most of the important events are postures, actions, or utterances of the living creatures, we note immediately that the stream of events is commonly punctuated into contexts of learning by a tacit agreement between the persons regarding the nature of their relationship—or by context markers and tacit agreements that these context markers shall “mean” the same for both parties.51


In the above quotation, note that Bateson brings the contemplation of “contexts of learning” back to a discussion of systems, involving two or more persons, and the nature of their relationship. Although he does not plainly state his intention, we can fairly assume this reference to systems is a context marker that refers to his theories concerning mental process. Also, note the importance of “tacit agreement” and “context markers” in the operation of the stream of events that may lead to the change in punctuating events that he designates Learning II, e.g., the largely unconscious process of “learning about learning.” This suggests that in structuring the contexts of our classroom(s), we must be able to present and successfully communicate context markers in our postures, actions, and utterances—as well as in the physical layout of the learning environment—such that the students can enter into the tacit agreements that enable Learning 0, Learning I, and Learning II.

The above leads to our consideration of Learning III. This type of learning involves a radical modification or expansion of one’s set of alternatives, e.g., “Learning III is change in the process of Learning II, e.g., a corrective change in the system of sets of alternatives from which choice is made.”52 This level of learning can be identified as a radical shift in perspective, or as developing the ability to cross the “boundaries” of different learning types.

The very definition of this type of learning suggests that paradoxes and logical difficulties arise when we attempt to apprehend such phenomena in logical discourse. Yet, without claiming personal knowledge, we may suppose that at this level of learning previously constricted awareness is released and new frames of reference are accessible. Here, Bateson cautiously observes that:

Learning III is likely to be difficult and rare even in human beings. Expectably, it will also be difficult for scientists, who are only human, to imagine or describe this process. But it is claimed that something of this sort does from time to time occur in psychotherapy, religious conversion, and in other sequences in which there is profound reorganization of character.53


The profound reorganization of character that characterizes Learning III limits the usefulness of this level of learning for our discussion, but may disclose something of the nature of learning that has been left out of our previous discussion. First we should note that there can be a replacement of premises at the level of Learning II without the achievement of any Learning III. Hence, the profound reorganization of character indicative of Learning III is not a transposition of subclasses at the level of Learning II. However, such a transposition (exchanging one set of habituation for another) in and of itself must certainly be an accomplishment worth noting. Yet, the question remains, how are such transpositions achieved.

Bateson suggests that one is “driven” to level III by “contraries” generated at level II, and it is the resolving of contraries that constitutes “positive reinforcement” at level III. I would suggest that since all learning cannot be the product of rote memorization, the experience of contraries, and their subsequent resolution, is the key to understanding much of what “moves” one through each of the previously discussed levels of learning: Learning 0, Learning I, and Learning II. Therefore, we may employ Bateson’s concept of Learning III as an extreme example of all transitional experience “between” the levels of learning.

Precisely because it constitutes learning about Learning II, Learning III proposes paradox. Learning III may lead to either an increase or a limitation, and possibly a reduction of the habits acquired in Learning II. “Certainly it must lead to a greater flexibility in the premises acquired by the process of Learning II—a freedom from their bondage.”54 My point is that we may make similar observations concerning the relationship between the punctuation of experience that occurs between Learning 0 and I, or between Learning I and II.

Beyond the necessary components of rote learning and habituation, one is most likely driven, or nudged, into “higher” levels of learning through paradox and contraries. Similarly, any skill or ability that is integrated into one’s mental system through the process of resolving paradox and contraries will lead to greater flexibility in the premises that govern the “lower” levels of learning. This “resolution of contraries” will, in itself, positively reinforce one’s having learned a given “lesson.” In structuring the contexts of a classroom system, we certainly should not attempt to drive our students into a Learning III experience. However, we should be able to learn how to fashion challenging contexts, which allow for safely experiencing contraries and paradoxes. Apparently, this is the experience that is needed in order to nudge one’s “self” into “higher” levels of learning.

One final word concerning the processes involved in Learning III. In a sense this entire essay has been an invitation to the sort of “reorganization of character” that characterizes Learning III. Our brief examination of the holistic, self-regulating, self-organizing, mutually causal (hence, dialogic), and hierarchic characteristics of cybernetic systems was intended to set the context for considering a major portion of Bateson’s work. Given the fact that it is mind that learns, the explication of the holistic and dialogical model of mind which emerges out of Bateson’s criteria of mind—including his understanding of information, and his concept of the “world of communication”—was intended to prepare the contextual frame for considering Bateson’s learning theory. Clearly, the views thus presented invite the reader to reexamine commonly held dualistic notions concerning the “self,” as well as similar notions concerning the relationship between “self” and “other.”

Bateson’s views thus propose a radical reexamination of the principles that govern the instructor/student/classroom system. To be sure, the principles examined in this essay are not the only means of reaching the conclusions I have incrementally drawn along the way, nor do I claim that the principles here presented, and the conclusions here drawn are the only viable rationale around which we should reconstruct the classroom system. My intent has been merely to offer an alternative optic (one of many such valuable resources) through which we may view learning and pedagogy. These concluding observations are not simply standard disclaimers, offered as a means of conveniently bringing the essay to closure. It is my conviction that if the ideas presented in this essay are taken seriously, they call for a profound reorganization of the way we approach instruction and learning in the classroom. In this sense the above is an invitation to the sort of “reorganization of character” that is the hallmark of Learning III.

WORKS CITED

Bateson, Gregory. Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1979.

------. Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1972.
------. “Afterword.” In About Bateson, pp. 235-247. Edited by John Brockman. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1977.
------. “The Message is Reinforcement,” in Language Behavior: A Book of Readings in Communication. Janua Linguarum: Studia Memoriae Nocolai Van Wijk Dedicata, Series Maior, no. 41, pp. 62-72. Edited by Johnnye Akin, Alvin Goldberg, Gail Myers, and Joseph Stewart. The Hague and Paris: Mouton & Co., 1971.
------. “The Cybernetics of ‘Self’: A Theory of Alcoholism.” Psychiatry, 34 (February 1971): 1-18; reprinted in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III: Form and Pathology in Relationship, pp. 309-337.
------. “Form, Substance, and Difference.” General Semantics Bulletin 37: 5-13. The Nineteenth Annual Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture, delivered at New York, January 9, 1970; reprinted in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part V: Epistemology and Ecology, pp. 454-471.
------. “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication.” in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III: Form and Pathology in Relationship, pp. 279-308. [Expanded version of “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication, and the Acquisition of World Views.” Paper presented at the Wenner-Gren Symposium on World Views: Their Nature and Their Role in Culture, Burg Wartenstein, Austria, August 2-11, 1968.]
------. “Style, Grace, and Information in Primitive Art,” in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part II: Form and Pattern in Anthropology, pp. 128-152.
------. “Minimal Requirements for a Theory of Schizophrenia.” A.M.A. Archives of General Psychiatry 2 (May 1960): 477-491; reprinted in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III: Form and Pathology in Relationship, pp. 244-270.
------. Comment on “The Comparative Study of Culture and the Purposive Cultivation of Democratic Values,” by Margaret Mead, in Science Philosophy and Religion; Second Symposium, Chapter IV, pp. 81-97. Edited by Lyman Bryson and Louis Finkelstein. New York: Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., 1942; reprinted as, “Social Planning and the Concept of Deutero-Learning,” in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III: Form and Pathology in Relationship, pp. 159-176.
Bateson, Gregory, and Bateson, Mary Catherine. Angels Fear: Towards an Epistemology of the Sacred. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1987.
Brockman, John, ed.; Bateson, M. C.; Birdwhistell, R. L.; Lipset, D.; May, R.; Mead, M.; and Schlossberg, E. About Bateson. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1977. “Afterword” by Gregory Bateson.
Krippendorff, Klaus. “The Power of Communication and the Communication of Power: Toward an Emancipatory Theory of Communication.” Communication 12 (July 1991): 175-196.
Laszlo, Ervin. Introduction to Systems Philosophy. New York: Harper Torchbook, 1973.
McCulloch, Warren S. Embodiments of Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1965.
Vickers, Geoffrey, Sir. Value Systems and Social Process. New York: Basic Books, 1968.
Whyte, Lancelot L. “The Structural Hierarchy in Organisms.” In Unity in Diversity: A Festschrift for Ludwig Von Bertalanffy, pp. 271-285; Vol. 1 of 2 vols. Edited by William Gray and, Nicholas D. Rizzo. New York: Gordon and Breach, 1973.
Wiener, Norbert. Cybernetics—or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1948.

NOTES

1 Warren S. McCulloch, Embodiments of Mind (Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1965). McCulloch was a key member of the group that did the original work in cybernetics, and he is referred to by Bateson more often than any other modern scientist.
2 Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics—or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1948), p. 11.
3 However, following Bateson many theorists reject the use of energy and matter in this context—except in those instances where they act as information and thus have communicational value.
4 Ervin Laszlo, Introduction to Systems Philosophy, pp. 57-117; also, pp. 177-180.
5 Lancelot L. Whyte, “The Structural Hierarchy in Organisms,” in Unity in Diversity: A Festschrift for Ludwig von Bertalanffy, pp. 271-285, edited by William Gray and Nicholas D. Rizzo (New York: Gordon and Breach, 1973), p. 275.
6 Ervin Laszlo, Introduction to Systems Philosophy, p. 175.
7 Sir Geoffrey Vickers, Value Systems and Social Progress (New York: Basic Books Inc., 1968), pp. 176-209.
8 Ibid., pp. 183-184; see also, pp. xi-xxii.
9 Gregory Bateson, Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1979), p. 92.
(Hereafter — Mind & Nature)
10 Ibid., p. 92.
11 Mind & Nature, p. 92 [emphasis mine].
12 Ibid., pp. 92-94.
13 Ibid., p. 212.
14 “Glossary,” in Mind & Nature, p. 228.
15 “Form, Substance, and Difference,” in Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1972), pp. 457-461 (Hereafter — STEPS).
16 Ibid., p. 459
17 Mind & Nature, p. 100. Qualifying the word triggered, Bateson notes that, “Firearms are a somewhat inappropriate metaphor because in most simple [nonrepeating] firearms there is only a lineal sequence of energetic dependencies. . . In biological systems, the end of the lineal sequence sets up conditions for a future repetition,” p. 101n.
18 “Afterword,” in About Bateson, Edited by John Brockman (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1977), p. 243.
19 “The Cybernetics of ‘Self ‘: A Theory of Alcoholism,” STEPS, p. 316.
20 Ibid., p. 317.
21 Gregory Bateson and Mary Catherine Bateson, Angels Fear: Towards an Epistemology of the Sacred (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1987), p. 19; this work was posthumously reconstructed, edited and co-authored by Bateson’s daughter, Mary Catherine Bateson.
22 “Minimal Requirements for a Theory of Schizophrenia,” in STEPS, p. 250.
23 Ibid.
24 Mind & Nature, p. 191.
25 Ibid., p. 94.
26 “Form, Substance, and Difference,” in STEPS, p. 464.
27 Mind & Nature, p. 86.
28 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 282. Bateson addressed learning theory in several essays. The above, written in 1964 and given its final form in 1971, gives his definitive accounting on the topic. Also see, Gregory Bateson, Comment on “The Comparative Study of Culture and the Purposive Cultivation of Democratic Values,” by Margaret Mead, in Science Philosophy and Religion; Second Symposium, Chapter IV, pp. 81-97, edited by Lyman Bryson and Louis Finkelstein (New York: Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., 1942); reprinted as, “Social Planning and the Concept of Deutero-Learning,” in Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III: Form and Pathology in Relationship, pp. 159-176; also, “The Message is Reinforcement,” in Language Behavior: A Book of Readings in Communication, Janua Linguarum: Studia Memoriae Nocolai Van Wijk Dedicata, Series Maior, no. 41, pp. 62-72, edited by Johnnye Akin, et al. (The Hague and Paris: Mouton & Co., 1971).
29 Ibid., p. 283, n 3. Subtly maintaining his distinction between the mental and physical sciences, Bateson notes that, “the Newtonian equations which describe the motions of a ‘particle’ stop at the level of ‘acceleration.’ Change of acceleration can only happen with deformation of the moving body, but the Newtonian ‘particle’ was not made up of ‘parts’ and was therefore (logically) incapable of deformation or any other internal change. It was therefore not subject to rate of change of acceleration.”
30 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 293. Bateson’s description of Learning IV clearly marks it as a special instance of learning: “Learning IV would be change in Learning III. [Which probably does not occur, but . . .] Evolutionary process has, however, created organisms whose ontogeny bring them to Level III. The combination of phylogenesis with ontogenesis, in fact, achieves Level IV.”
31 Ibid., p. 284.
32 Ibid., p. 293.
33 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 284.
34 Ibid., p. 286. Bateson notes that, “There is also an interesting class of cases in which the sets of alternatives contain common members. It is then possible for the organism to be ‘right’ but for the wrong reasons. This form of error is inevitably self-reinforcing.”
35 Ibid., p. 287.
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid., p. 289.
38 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 288.
39 Ibid., p. 289.
40 Ibid., p. 292.
41 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 290.
42 Ibid., p. 290.
43 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, pp. 292-293. Bateson notes that “various terms have been proposed in the literature for various phenomena of this order. ‘Deutero-learning,’ ‘set learning,’ ‘learning to learn,’ and ‘transfer of learning’ may be mentioned.”
44 Ibid., p. 293.
45 Ibid., p. 302.
46 “Style, Grace, and Information in Primitive Art,” in STEPS, pp. 128-152; see, p. 148.
47 “Style, Grace, and Information in Primitive Art,” in STEPS, p. 142.
48 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, pp. 300, 301.
49 Ibid., p. 301.
50 Klaus Krippendorff, “The Power of Communication and the Communication of Power; Toward an Emancipatory Theory of Communication,” p. 192.
51 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 298.
52 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 293.
53 Ibid., p. 301.
54 “The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication,” in STEPS, p. 304.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:46 pm

I Do Not Believe in Ghosts
by David L. Miller
New York Times
November 15, 1987

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


ANGELS FEAR Towards an Epistemology of the Sacred. By Gregory Bateson and Mary Catherine Bateson. 224 pp. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. $18.95.

KENNETH BURKE once said, ''A person has the right to worship God according to his or her own metaphor.'' Gregory Bateson's metaphor came to be ''metaphor'' itself, as his anthropology crept, like Yeats's rough beast, toward a new vision of religion. This is made interestingly plain by Mary Catherine Bateson's intelligent and loving editing of her famous father's last manuscript (he died in 1980), ''Angels Fear.''

At the end of his life, Bateson believed that ''we are not going to get far unless we acknowledge that the whole of science and technology . . . springs out of and impinges on religion.'' The way was prepared for this view in ''Mind and Nature,'' in which Bateson affirmed a holistic unity among human mental processes and culture and biology. He described there how this connection is only comprehensible metaphorically, particularly in metaphors which are familiar from religion.

For Bateson, ''it becomes evident that metaphor is not just pretty poetry, it is not either good or bad logic, but is in fact the logic upon which the biological world has been built, the main characteristic and organizing glue of this world of mental process.'' Indeed, metaphor is the clue, the link to what others may find diverse and oppositional. ''Metaphor'' itself is thereby the metaphorical connection between science, cybernetics and epistemology, on the one hand (''this book is not much concerned with truths about things - only with truths about truths''), and, on the other hand, poetry, parable, anecdote, humor, play and myth (''it is time to reverse the trend which since Copernicus has been in the direction of debunking mythology''). As Mary Catherine Bateson properly remarks, her father's method is ''insight through analogy.'' ''Angels Fear'' is an essay in discovery, an uncovering of ''the natural history of the relations between ideas.''

This is all bound to bother those who feel that the work attempts to reinvent the wheel of being, that it is one more instance of science coming late to what philosophers and theologians have known all along. It is also bound to irritate those who deem amateur philosophizing and theologizing hopelessly unsophisticated. Such readers will think that the ideas of Wittgenstein, W. V. O. Quine and John Searle render this book epistemologically beside the point, that Nietzsche, Heidegger and Derrida make it look naive in literary terms and that it is theologically simplistic in the face of the work of Mircea Eliade, Paul Tillich and Bernard Lonergan.

Bateson anticipated those objections: ''The logic boys say they have new and better models.'' But the fact is that, by reading this work of the Batesons through such prisms as are provided by conventional academic wisdom, a reader may rush foolishly to conclusions that even angels would fear. For in fact, ''Angels Fear'' is not one more instance of the cultured despisers of religion experiencing evangelical rebirth.

Bateson is holistic, to be sure, but he is not literal about that; ''uniformity is surely one of those things that becomes toxic beyond a certain level,'' he says. He is against dualisms, but he is not using religion to fill the gap between mind and body, ideology and politics, subject and object, thinking and feeling. Rather, he names the connection between these opposites with a paradoxical image borrowed from C. G. Jung, who in turn took it from ancient Gnosticism - ''pleroma/creatura.'' Implied in this image is the idea that the fundamental connection is not between two substances, mind and matter. Rather, mind (or Bateson's ''god'') is the pattern and fabric, texture and weave (pleroma) in all matter (creatura).

Unlike the adherent of conventional piety (or conventional scientism, for that matter), Bateson affirms discontinuity and difference as an integral part of order in the world: ''This gap is inevitable and necessary.'' ''All knowledge has gaps.'' ''Gaps are a characteristic of Creatura.'' Bateson knows that his perspective is metaphorical and indirect. He speaks eloquently and compellingly in praise of secrecy and noncommunication, precisely on behalf of the goal of openness and connection, and he gives many examples - from Coleridge, Greek myth and cybernetics - of metaphor in everyday life. For Bateson, the ''angel'' (the Greek word originally meant ''messenger'') appears in the gap rather than in the certainty. He detests the literalism of current cultural pieties: ''I do not believe in spirits, gods, devas, fairies, leprechauns, nymphs, wood spirits, ghosts, poltergeists, or Santa Claus. (But to learn that there is no Santa Claus is perhaps the beginning of religion.)'' ''When the bagel is eaten, the hole does not remain to be reincarnated in a doughnut.'' In Bateson's religion, ''in the asking of questions, there will be no limit to our hubris; and . . . there shall always be humility in our acceptance of answers. In these two characteristics we shall be in sharp contrast with most of the religions of the world. They show little humility in their espousal of answers but great fear about what questions they will ask.''

BATESON lived in the gaps, betwixt and between. Not that he, or the book, idealizes the absurd. Mary Catherine Bateson has masterfully pulled together what must have been a hodgepodge of several years of reflections. As a connecting device, she engages her father in dialogue about the book and its ideas. The imaginary conversations are often constructed from notes of real ones, but just as often they are purely fictive. This strategy works. It aids the reader and is appropriate to the content of Bateson's argument.

Bateson's liminal stance is understood best when he speaks about the ''unacceptable solutions'' to the mind-body problem represented by supernaturalism and materialism: ''Very simply, let me say that I despise and fear both of these extremes of opinion and that I believe both extremes to be epistemologically naive, epistemologically wrong, and politically dangerous. They are also dangerous to something which we may loosely call mental health.'' So he takes as his task ''to explore whether there is a sane and valid place for religion somewhere between these two nightmares of nonsense.'' Especially, he hopes that the metaphoric view may provide ''a new and badly needed humility.''

I believe there is a clue to this humility, and to this book, in the shifting title. Bateson began the writing in 1978. His daughter tells us that it was to be called ''Where Angels Fear to Tread,'' but that he often referred to it as ''Angels Fear.'' She retained the latter. This title appropriately, if subtly, calls up notions of angelic reticence and humility rather than an image of fools rushing into religion. But there is also a hint of a missing apostrophe in the title, like the one omitted in Joyce's ''Finnegans Wake.'' This opens the possibility that fears may be viewed as angelic. For in profound fears one may discover a response to the question the anthropologist shares with the Sphinx and the Psalmist: ''What is the human?'' Deep in such fears are the angels - ''deep unconscious philosophies,'' as Bateson calls them. ''The myths in which our lives are embedded . . . are built deeply into character, often below awareness, so that they are essentially religious, matters of faith.'' It would seem that Bateson knew both the humor and the truth in some wag's saying: ''A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a 'meta' for?''

David L. Miller, the Watson-Ledden Professor of Religion at Syracuse University, is the author of ''The New Polytheism'' and ''Three Faces of God.''
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:02 pm

Great chain of being
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 4/14/19

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Image
1579 drawing of the Great Chain of Being from Didacus Valades, Rhetorica Christiana

The Great Chain of Being is a hierarchical structure of all matter and life, thought in medieval Christianity to have been decreed by God. The chain starts with God and progresses downward to angels, demons (fallen/renegade angels), stars, moon, kings, princes, nobles, commoners, wild animals, domesticated animals, trees, other plants, precious stones, precious metals and other minerals.[1]

The Great Chain of Being (Latin: scala naturae, "Ladder of Being") is a concept derived from Plato, Aristotle (in his Historia Animalium), Plotinus and Proclus. Further developed during the Middle Ages, it reached full expression in early modern Neoplatonism.[2][3]


Divisions

The Chain of Being is composed of a great number of hierarchical links, from the most basic and foundational elements up through the very highest perfection: God.[4]

God sits at the top of the chain, and beneath him sit the angels, both existing wholly in spirit form. Earthly flesh is fallible and ever-changing, mutable. Spirit, however, is unchanging and permanent. This sense of permanence is crucial to understanding this conception of reality. It is generally impossible to change the position of an object in the hierarchy. (One exception might be in the realm of alchemy, where alchemists attempted to transmute base elements, such as lead, into higher elements, either silver or, more often, gold—the highest element.)[1]

In the natural order, earth (rock) is at the bottom of the chain; this element possesses only the attribute of existence. Each link succeeding upward contains the positive attributes of the previous link and adds at least one other. Rocks possess only existence; the next link up is plants which possess life and existence. Animals add motion and appetite as well.[1]

Man is both mortal flesh, as those below him, and also spirit, as those above. In this dichotomy, the struggle between flesh and spirit becomes a moral one. The way of the spirit is higher, more noble; it brings one closer to God. The desires of the flesh move one away from God. The Christian fall of Lucifer is thought of as especially terrible, as angels are wholly spirit, yet Lucifer defied God (who is the ultimate perfection).[1]

Subdivisions

Image
Orthodox Christian icon of nine orders of angels

Each link in the chain might be divided further into its component parts. In medieval secular society, for example, the king is at the top, succeeded by the aristocratic lords and the clergy, and then the peasants below them. Solidifying the king's position at the top of humanity's social order is the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings. The implied permanent state of inequality became a source of popular grievance, and led eventually to political change as in the French Revolution.[5] In the family, the father is head of the household; below him, his wife; below her, their children.

Milton's Paradise Lost ranked the angels (c.f. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite's ranking of angels), and Christian culture conceives of angels in orders of archangels, seraphim, and cherubim, among others.

Subdivisions are equally apparent among animals. At the top of the animals are wild beasts (such as lions), which were seen as superior as they defied training and domestication. Below them are domestic animals, further sub-divided so that useful animals (such as dogs and horses) are higher than docile creatures (such as sheep). Birds are also sub-divided, with eagles above pigeons, for example. Fish come below birds and are subdivided between actual fish and other sea creatures. Below them come insects, with useful insects such as spiders and bees and attractive creatures such as ladybirds and dragonflies at the top, and unpleasant insects such as flies and beetles at the bottom. At the very bottom of the animal sector are snakes, which are relegated to this position as punishment for the serpent's actions in the Garden of Eden.

Below animals comes the division for plants, which is further subdivided. Trees are at the top, with useful trees such as oaks at the top, and the traditionally demonic yew tree at the bottom. Food-producing plants such as cereals and vegetables are further subdivided.

At the very bottom of the chain are minerals. At the top of this section are metals (further sub-divided, with gold at the top and lead at the bottom), followed by rocks (with granite and marble at the top), soil (subdivided between nutrient-rich soil and low-quality types), sand, grit, dust, and dirt at the very bottom of the entire great chain.


The central concept of the Chain of Being is that everything imaginable fits in somewhere, giving order and meaning to the universe.[1]

The Chain

Image
St Thomas Aquinas classified all beings by rank.

God

God is at the top of the chain and is also external to creation. God exists outside the physical limitations of time and space. He possesses the spiritual attributes of reason, love, and imagination, like all spiritual beings, but he alone possesses the divine attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. God serves as the model of authority for the strongest, most virtuous, most excellent type of being within any category.

Angelic beings

Angels are beings of pure spirit who have no physical bodies of their own. In order to affect the physical world, angels build temporary bodies for themselves out of particles of earthly elements.[6] Medieval and Renaissance theologians believed angels to possess reason, love, imagination, and, like God, to stand outside the physical limitations of time.[7] They possess sensory awareness unbound by physical organs, and they possess language. They lacked, however, the divine attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence of God, and they simultaneously lacked the physical passions experienced by humans and animals. Depending upon the author, the class of angels is further subdivided into three, seven, nine, or ten ranks, variously known as triads, orders, or choirs. Each rank has greater power and responsibility than the entities below them. The most common classification is that of Pseudo-Dionysios adopted for example by St. Thomas Aquinas.[8]

• Seraphim (seraph is the primate, or superior type of angel)
• Cherubim
• Thrones (Ophanim)
• Dominions
• Virtues
• Powers
• Principalities
• Archangels
• Angels

Image
The mediaeval scala naturae as a staircase, implying the possibility of progress:[9] Ramon Lull's Ladder of Ascent and Descent of the Mind, 1305

For Medieval and Renaissance thinkers, humans occupy a unique position on the Chain of Being, straddling the world of spiritual beings and the world of physical creation. Humans possess divine powers such as reason, love, and imagination. Like angels, humans are spiritual beings, but unlike angels, human souls are "knotted" to a physical body. As such, they are subject to passions and physical sensations—pain, hunger, thirst, sexual desire—just like other animals lower on the Chain of Being. They also possess the powers of reproduction unlike the minerals and rocks lowest on the Chain of Being. Humans have a particularly difficult position, balancing the divine and the animalistic parts of their nature. For instance, an angel is only capable of intellectual sin such as pride (as evidenced by Lucifer's fall from heaven in Christian belief). Humans, however, are capable of both intellectual sin and physical sins such as lust and gluttony if they let their animal appetites overrule their divine reason. Humans also possess sensory attributes: sight, touch, taste, hearing, and smell. Unlike angels, however, their sensory attributes are limited by physical organs (they could only know things discerned through the five senses). The highest-ranking human being is the king.

Animals

Image
Charles Bonnet's chain of being from Traité d'insectologie, 1745

Animals, like humans higher on the chain, are animated (capable of independent motion). They possess physical appetites and sensory attributes, the number depending upon their position within the Chain of Being. They have limited intelligence and awareness of their surroundings. Unlike humans, they lack spiritual and mental attributes such as immortal souls and the ability to use logic and language. The primate of all animals (the "king of beasts") was variously thought to be either the lion or the elephant. However, each subgroup of animals also has its own primate, an avatar superior in qualities of its type.

• Mammalian primate: lion or elephant
o Wild animals (large cats, etc.)
o "Useful" domesticated animals (horse, dog, etc.)
o "Tame" domesticated animals (housecat, etc.)
• Avian primate: eagle
o Birds of prey (hawks, owls, etc.)
o Carrion birds (vultures, crows)
o "Worm-eating" birds (robin, etc.)
o "Seed-eating" birds (sparrow, etc.)

Note that avian creatures, linked to the element of air, are considered superior to aquatic creatures linked to the element of water. Air naturally tends to rise and soar above the surface of water, and analogously, aerial creatures are placed higher in the chain.

• Piscine primate: whale
o Aquatic mammals
o Sharks
o Fish of various sizes and attributes

The chart would continue to descend through various reptiles, amphibians, and insects. The higher up the chart one went, the more noble, mobile, strong, and intelligent the creature in Renaissance belief. At the very bottom of the animal section, we find sessile creatures like the oysters, clams, and barnacles. Like the plants below them, these creatures lack mobility, and are thought to lack various sensory organs such as sight and hearing. However, they are still superior to plants because they have tactile and gustatory senses (touch and taste).

Plants

Plants, like other living creatures, possess the ability to grow in size and reproduce. However, they lack mental attributes and possess no sensory organs. Instead, their gifts include the ability to eat soil, air, and "heat." Plants did have greater tolerances for heat and cold, and immunity to the pain that afflicts most animals. At the very bottom of the botanical hierarchy, fungi and mosses, lacking leaf and blossom, are so limited in form that Renaissance thinkers thought them scarcely above the level of minerals. However, each plant was also thought to be gifted with various edible or medicinal virtues unique to its own type.

• Trees, with the primate: the oak tree
• Shrubs
• Bushes
• "Crops" (such as wheat)
• Herbs
• Ferns
• Weeds
• Mosses
• Fungi

Minerals

Creations of the earth, the lowest of elements, all minerals lack the plant's basic ability to grow and reproduce. They also lack mental attributes and sensory organs found in beings higher on the chain. Their unique gifts, however, are typically their unusual solidity and strength. Many minerals, in fact, were thought to possess magical powers, particularly gems. The mineral primate is the diamond.

• Lapidarical primate: diamond
• Diamonds
• Rubies
• Emeralds
• Sapphires, etc.
• Metallic primate: gold
• Gold
• Silver
• Iron (and steel)
• Bronze
• Copper, etc.
• Geological primate: marble
• Marble
• Granite
• Sandstone
• Limestone, etc.
• Minute particles (gravel, sand, soil, etc.)

Natural science

From Aristotle to Linnaeus


Image
Linnaeus' classification of animals with mammals ("Quadrupedia") first and worms ("Vermes") last, echoing the scala naturae

The basic idea of a ranking of the world's organisms goes back to Aristotle's biology. In his History of Animals, where he ranked animals over plants based on their ability to move and sense, and graded the animals by their reproductive mode and possession of blood (he ranked all invertebrates as "bloodless").[10]

Aristotle's non-religious concept of higher and lower organisms was taken up by natural philosophers during the Scholastic period to form the basis of the Scala Naturae. The scala allowed for an ordering of beings, thus forming a basis for classification where each kind of mineral, plant and animal could be slotted into place. In medieval times, the great chain was seen as a God-given ordering: God at the top, dirt at the bottom, every grade of creature in its place. Just as rock never turns to flowers and worms never turn to lions, humans never turn to angels. This was not our lot in life. In the Northern Renaissance, the scientific focus shifted to biology.[11] The threefold division of the chain below humans formed the basis for Linnaeus's Systema Naturæ from 1737, where he divided the physical components of the world into the three familiar kingdoms of minerals, plants and animals.[12]

Scala naturae in evolution

Image
The human pedigree recapitulating its phylogeny back to amoeba shown as a reinterpreted chain of being with living and fossil animals. From a critique of Ernst Haeckel's theories, 1873.

The set nature of species, and thus the absoluteness of creatures' places in the great chain, came into question during the 18th century. The dual nature of the chain, divided yet united, had always allowed for seeing creation as essentially one continuous whole, with the potential for overlap between the links.[1] Radical thinkers like Jean-Baptiste Lamarck saw a progression of life forms from the simplest creatures striving towards complexity and perfection, a schema accepted by zoologists like Henri de Blainville.[13] The very idea of an ordering of organisms, even if supposedly fixed, laid the basis for the idea of transmutation of species, for example Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.[14]

The Chain of Being continued to be part of metaphysics in 19th century education, and the concept was well known. The geologist Charles Lyell used it as a metaphor in his 1851 Elements of Geology description of the geological column, where he used the term "missing links" in relation to missing parts of the continuum. The term "missing link" later came to signify transitional fossils, particularly those bridging the gulf between man and beasts.[15]

The idea of the great chain as well as the derived "missing link" was abandoned in early 20th century science,[16] as the notion of modern animals representing ancestors of other modern animals was abandoned in biology.[17] The idea of a certain sequence from "lower" to "higher" however lingers on, as does the idea of progress in biology.[18]

Politics

Allenby and Garreau propose the Catholic Church's narrative of the Great Chain of Being kept the peace for centuries in Europe. The very concept of rebellion simply lay outside the reality within which most people lived for to defy the King was to defy God. King James I himself wrote, "The state of monarchy is the most supreme thing upon earth: for kings are not only God's Lieutenants upon earth, and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself they are called Gods."[14]

The Enlightenment broke this supposed divine plan and fought the last vestiges of feudal hierarchy by creating secular governmental structures that vested power into the hands of ordinary citizens rather than divinely ordained monarchs.[14]

However, scholars such as Brian Tierney[19] and Michael Novak[20] have noted the medieval contribution to democracy and human rights.

Adaptations and similar concepts

The American spiritual writer and philosopher Ken Wilber uses a concept called the "Great Nest of Being" which is similar to the Great Chain of Being, and which he claims to belong to a culture-independent "perennial philosophy" traceable across 3000 years of mystical and esoteric writings. Wilber's system corresponds with other concepts of transpersonal psychology.[21]

In the 1977 book A Guide for the Perplexed, British philosopher and economist E. F. Schumacher wrote that fundamental gaps exist between the existence of minerals, plants, animals and humans, where each of the four classes of existence is marked by a level of existence not shared by that below. Clearly influenced by the great chain of being, but lacking the angels and God, he called his hierarchy the "levels of being". In the book, he claims that science has generally avoided seriously discussing these discontinuities, because they present such difficulties for strictly materialistic science, and they largely remain mysteries.[22]

See also

• Figurative system of human knowledge
• History of biology
• The Ladder of Divine Ascent
• Natural history
• Plane (esotericism)
• Sphere of fire

References

1. Arthur O. Lovejoy (1964) [1936], The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-674-36153-9
2. "This idea of a great chain of being can be traced to Plato's division of the world into the Forms, which are full beings, and sensible things, which are imitations of the Forms and are both being and not being. Aristotle's teleology recognized a perfect being, and he also arranges all animals by a single natural scale according to the degree of perfection of their souls. The idea of the great chain of being was fully developed in Neoplatonism and in the Middle Ages.", Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy, p. 289 (2004)
3. Edward P. Mahoney, "Lovejoy and the Hierarchy of Being", Journal of the History of Ideas Vol. 48, No 2, pp. 211-230.
4. Lovejoy, (1964). This theme permeates the book, but see e.g. p.59
5. Censer, Jack R. Censer; Hunt, Lynn (2001). Liberty, Equality, Fraternity: Exploring the French Revolution. Penn State Press. p. 21. ISBN 0-271-04013-0.
6. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica (PDF). p. 588 – via Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
7. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica (PDF). pp. 603–605 – via Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
8. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica (PDF). pp. 1189–1191 – via Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
9. Ruse, Michael (1996). Monad to man: the Concept of Progress in Evolutionary Biology. Harvard University Press. pp. 21–23. ISBN 978-0-674-03248-4.
10. Singer, Charles. A short history of biology: A General Introduction to the Study of Living Things. Oxford 1931.
11. Allen Debus, Man and Nature in the Renaissance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978).
12. Linnaeus, Carl (1758). Systema naturae per regna tria naturae :secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis (in Latin) (10th edition ed.). Stockholm: Laurentius Salvius.
13. Appel, T.A. (1980). "Henri De Blainville and the Animal Series: A Nineteenth-Century Chain of Being". Journal of the History of Biology. 13 (2): 291–319. doi:10.1007/BF00125745. JSTOR 4330767.
14. Snyder, S. "The Great Chain of Being". Grandview.edu. Retrieved 2017-01-05.
15. "Why the term "missing links" is inappropriate". Hoxful Monsters. 10 June 2009. Archived from the original on 2 April 2012. Retrieved 10 September2011.
16. Prothero, Donald R. (1 March 2008). "Evolution: What missing link?". New Scientist. 197 (2645): 35–41. doi:10.1016/s0262-4079(08)60548-5. Retrieved 4 August 2018.
17. Ehrlich, Paul R.; Holm, R. W. (1963). The process of evolution. New York: McGraw-Hill. p. 66. ISBN 978-0-07-019130-3. OCLC 255345.
18. Ruse, Michael (1996). Monad to man: the Concept of Progress in Evolutionary Biology. Harvard University Press. pp. 432–433, and passim. ISBN 978-0-674-03248-4.
19. Reid, Charles J., Jr (1998). "Book Review | The Medieval Origins of the Western Natural Rights Tradition: The Achievement of Brian Tierney" (PDF). Cornell Law Review. 83: 437–463.
20. Novak, Michael (1 October 1990). "Thomas Aquinas, the First Whig: What Our Liberties Owe to a Neapolitan Mendicant". Crisis Magazine (October 1990).
21. Freeman, Anthony (2006). "A Daniel Come to Judgement? Dennett and the Revisioning of Transpersonal Theory" (PDF). Journal of Consciousness Studies. 13 (3): 95–109. Archived (PDF) from the original on July 3, 2012. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
22. Pearce, Joseph (2008). "The Education of E.F. Schumacher". God Spy.

Further reading

• Arthur O. Lovejoy: The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press (1936)
• E. M. W. Tillyard: The Elizabethan World Picture (1942)

External links

• Dictionary of the History of Ideas – Chain of Being
• The Great Chain of Being reflected in the work of Descartes, Spinoza & Leibniz Peter Suber, Earlham College, Indiana
• The Chain of Being: Tillyard in a Nutshell
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:53 pm

Holism
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 4/14/19

Holism (from Greek ὅλος holos "all, whole, entire") is the idea that systems (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic) and their properties should be viewed as wholes, not just as a collection of parts.[1][2]

The term holism was coined by Jan Smuts.[3][4]

Field Marshal Jan Christiaan Smuts PC, OM, CH, DTD, ED, KC, FRS (24 May 1870 – 11 September 1950) was a South African statesman, military leader, and philosopher.[1] In addition to holding various cabinet posts, he served as prime minister of the Union of South Africa from 1919 until 1924 and from 1939 until 1948. Although Smuts had originally advocated racial segregation and opposed the enfranchisement of black Africans, his views changed and he backed the Fagan Commission's findings that complete segregation was impossible. Smuts subsequently lost the 1948 election to hard-line nationalists who created apartheid. He continued to work for reconciliation and emphasised the British Commonwealth’s positive role until his death in 1950.[2]....

From 1917 to 1919, he was also one of the members of the British Imperial War Cabinet and he was instrumental in the founding of what became the Royal Air Force (RAF). He became a field marshal in the British Army in 1941, and served in the Imperial War Cabinet under Winston Churchill. He was the only person to sign both of the peace treaties ending the First and Second World Wars. A statue of him stands in London's Parliament Square.....

As Colonial Secretary, he opposed a movement for equal rights for South Asian workers, led by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi....

Smuts and Botha were key negotiators at the Paris Peace Conference. Both were in favour of reconciliation with Germany and limited reparations. Smuts advocated a powerful League of Nations, which failed to materialise.....

Smuts' formulation of holism has been linked with his political-military activity, especially his aspiration to create a league of nations. As one biographer said:

It had very much in common with his philosophy of life as subsequently developed and embodied in his Holism and Evolution. Small units must develop into bigger wholes, and they in their turn again must grow into larger and ever-larger structures without cessation. Advancement lay along that path. Thus the unification of the four provinces in the Union of South Africa, the idea of the British Commonwealth of Nations, and, finally, the great whole resulting from the combination of the peoples of the earth in a great league of nations were but a logical progression consistent with his philosophical tenets.[55]
....

During his service as Premier, Smuts personally fundraised for multiple Zionist organisations.[64] His government granted de facto recognition to Israel on 24 May 1948 and de jure recognition on 14 May 1949....However, Smuts was deputy prime minister when the Hertzog government in 1937 passed the Aliens Act that was aimed at preventing Jewish immigration to South Africa.....

Smuts lobbied against the White Paper of 1939.[67], and several streets and a kibbutz, Ramat Yohanan, in Israel are named after him.[65] He also wrote an epitaph for [Chaim] Weizmann, describing him as "the greatest Jew since Moses."[68] Smuts once said:

“ Great as are the changes wrought by this war, the great world war of justice and freedom, I doubt whether any of these changes surpass in interest the liberation of Palestine and its recognition as the Home of Israel.[69]
....

One of his greatest international accomplishments was the establishment of the League of Nations, the exact design and implementation of which relied upon Smuts.[70] He later urged the formation of a new international organisation for peace: the UN. Smuts wrote the first draft of the preamble to the United Nations Charter, and was the only person to sign the charters of both the League of Nations and the UN.

-- Jan Smuts, by Wikipedia


Alfred Adler considered holism as a concept that represents all of the wholes in the universe, and these wholes are the real factors in the universe. Further, that Holism also denoted a theory of the universe in the same vein as Materialism and Spiritualism.[3]:120–121

Synopsis of Holism and Evolution

After identifying the need for reform in the fundamental concepts of matter, life and mind (chapter 1) Smuts examines the reformed concepts (as of 1926) of space and time (chapter 2), matter (chapter 3) and biology (chapter 4) and concludes that the close approach to each other of the concepts of matter, life and mind, and the partial overflow of each other's domain, imply that there is a fundamental principle (Holism) of which they are the progressive outcome.[3]:86 Chapters 5 and 6 provide the general concept, functions and categories of Holism; chapters 7 and 8 address Holism with respect to Mechanism and Darwinism, chapters 9-11 make a start towards demonstrating the concepts and functions of Holism for the metaphysical categories (mind, personality, ideals) and the book concludes with a chapter that argues for the universal ubiquity of Holism and its place as a monistic ontology.

The following is an overview of Smuts' opinions regarding the general concept, functions, and categories of Holism; like the definition of Holism, other than the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, the editor is unaware of any authoritative secondary sources corroborating Smuts' opinions.

Structure

Wholes are composites which have an internal structure, function or character which clearly differentiate them from mechanical additions, aggregates, and constructions, such as science assumes on the mechanical hypothesis.[3]:106 The concept of structure is not confined to the physical domain (e.g. chemical, biological and artifacts); it also applies to the metaphysical domain (e.g. mental structures, properties, attributes, values, ideals, etc.)[3]:161

Field

The field of a whole is not something different and additional to it, it is the continuation of the whole beyond its sensible contours of experience.[3]:113 The field characterizes a whole as a unified and synthesised event in the system of Relativity, that includes not only its present but also its past—and also its future potentialities.[3]:89 As such, the concept of field entails both activity and structure.[3]:115

Variation

Darwin's theory of organic descent placed primary emphasis on the role of natural selection, but there would be nothing to select if not for variation. Variations that are the result of mutations in the biological sense and variations that are the result of individually acquired modifications in the personal sense are attributed by Smuts to Holism; further it was his opinion that because variations appear in complexes and not singly, evolution is more than the outcome of individual selections; it is holistic.[3]:190–192

Regulation

The whole exhibits a discernible regulatory function as it relates to cooperation and coordination of the structure and activity of parts, and to the selection and deselection of variations. The result is a balanced correlation of organs and functions. The activities of the parts are directed to central ends; co-operation and unified action instead of the separate mechanical activities of the parts.[3]:125

Creativity

It is the intermingling of fields which is creative or causal in nature. This is seen in matter, where if not for its dynamic structural creative character matter could not have been the mother of the universe. This function, or factor of creativity is even more marked in biology where the protoplasm of the cell is vitally active in an ongoing process of creative change where parts are continually being destroyed and replaced by new protoplasm. With minds the regulatory function of Holism acquires consciousness and freedom, demonstrating a creative power of the most far-reaching character. Holism is not only creative but self-creative, and its final structures are far more holistic than its initial structures.[3]:18, 37, 67–68, 88–89

Causality

As it relates to causality Smuts makes reference to A. N. Whitehead, and indirectly Baruch Spinoza; the Whitehead premise is that organic mechanism is a fundamental process which realizes and actualizes individual syntheses or unities. Holism (the factor) exemplifies this same idea while emphasizing the holistic character of the process. The whole completely transforms the concept of Causality; results are not directly a function of causes. The whole absorbs and integrates the cause into its own activity; results appear as the consequence of the activity of the whole.[3]:121–124,126 Note that this material relating to Whitehead's influence as it relates to causality was added in the second edition, and of course will not be found in reprints of the first edition; nor is it included in the most recent Holst edition. It is the second edition of Holism and Evolution (1927) that provides the most recent and definitive treatment by Smuts.

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts

The fundamental holistic characters as a unity of parts which is so close and intense as to be more than the sum of its parts; which not only gives a particular conformation or structure to the parts, but so relates and determines them in their synthesis that their functions are altered; the synthesis affects and determines the parts, so that they function towards the whole; and the whole and the parts, therefore reciprocally influence and determine each other, and appear more or less to merge their individual characters: the whole is in the parts and the parts are in the whole, and this synthesis of whole and parts is reflected in the holistic character of the functions of the parts as well as of the whole.[3]:88


Progressive grading of wholes

Smuts suggests "rough and provisional" summary of the progressive grading of wholes that comprise holism is as follows:[3]:109

1. Material structure e.g. a chemical compound

2. Functional structure in living bodies

3. Animals, which exhibit a degree of central control that is primarily implicit and unconscious

4. Personality, characterized as conscious central control

5. States and similar group organizations characterized by central control that involve many people

6. Holistic Ideals, or absolute Values, distinct from human personality that are creative factors in the creation of a spiritual world, for example Truth, Beauty and Goodness.

See also

• Antireductionism
• Antiscience
• Atomism
• Emergentism
• G. E. Moore § Organic wholes
• Gaia hypothesis
• Holarchy
• Holistic education
• Holism in ecological anthropology
• Holism in science
• Holon (philosophy)
• Interdisciplinarity
• Organicism
• Organismic theory
• Panarchy
• Polytely
• Synergetics (Fuller)
• Synergy
• Systems theory
• The Story of 'the Blind Man and the Lame'
• Writers:
o Christopher Alexander
o Buckminster Fuller
o Arthur Koestler
o Howard T. Odum
o Allan Savory
o Eric Scerri
o Herbert A. Simon
o Victor Skumin
o Ken Wilber

Notes

1. Oshry, Barry (2008), Seeing Systems: Unlocking the Mysteries of Organizational Life, Berrett-Koehler.
2. Auyang, Sunny Y (1999), Foundations of Complex-system Theories: in Economics, Evolutionary Biology, and Statistical Physics, Cambridge University Press.
3. Smuts, Jan Christiaan (1927). Holism and Evolution 2nd Edition. Macmillan and Co.
4. The first publication of Holism and Evolution was by Macmillan and Co. in 1926. Smuts published a 2nd edition in 1927 and there have been at least three subsequent reprints; Compass/Viking Press 1961, Greenwood Press 1973, and Sierra Sunrise Books 1999 (a version edited by Sanford Holst). The full text of the 1927 2nd edition is available on the Internet Archive site, and this is the source used in updating the Holism page.

References

• von Bertalanffy, Ludwig (1971) [1968], General System Theory. Foundations Development Applications, Allen Lane.
• Bohm, D. (1980) Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-7100-0971-2
• Leenhardt, M. 1947 Do Kamo. La personne et le mythe dans le monde mélanésien. Gallimard. Paris.
• Lipowski, Z.J. "Psychosomatic medicine in seventies". Am. J. Psychiatry. 134 (3): 233–244.
• Jan C. Smuts, 1926 Holism and Evolution Macmillan, Compass/Viking Press 1961 reprint: ISBN 0-598-63750-8, Greenwood Press 1973 reprint: ISBN 0-8371-6556-3, Sierra Sunrise 1999 (mildly edited): ISBN 1-887263-14-4

Further reading

• Descombes, Vincent, The Institutions of Meaning: A Defense of Anthropological Holism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2014.
• Dusek, Val, The Holistic Inspirations of Physics: An Underground History of Electromagnetic Theory Rutgers University Press, Brunswick NJ, 1999.
• Fodor, Jerry, and Ernst Lepore, Holism: A Shopper's Guide Wiley. New York. 1992
• Hayek, F.A. von. The Counter-Revolution of Science. Studies on the abuse of reason. Free Press. New York. 1957.
• Mandelbaum, M. Societal Facts in Gardner 1959.
• Phillips, D.C. Holistic Thought in Social Science. Stanford University Press. Stanford. 1976.
• Dreyfus, H.L. "Holism and Hermeneutics". The Review of Metaphysics. 34: 3–23.
• James, S. The Content of Social Explanation. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, 1984.
• Harrington, A. Reenchanted Science: Holism in German Culture from Wilhelm II to Hitler. Princeton University Press. 1996.
• Lopez, F. Il pensiero olistico di Ippocrate, vol. I-IIA, Ed. Pubblisfera, Cosenza Italy 2004-2008.
• Robert Stern, Hegel, Kant and the Structure of the Object, London: Routledge Chapman Hall, 1990
• Sen, R. K., Aesthetic Enjoyment: Its Background in Philosophy and Medicine, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1966

External links

• Media related to Holism at Wikimedia Commons
• Brief explanation of Koestler's derivation of "holon"
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article: "Holism and Nonseparability in Physics"
• James Schombert of University of Oregon Physics Dept on quantum holism
• Theory of sociological holism from "World of Wholeness"
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:55 am

Social and Resource Development Fund: "About Us"
by sardfund.org
Accessed: 4/15/19

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


ABOUT US

Social and Resources Development Fund (SARD) is a non-profit organization established in 1997 by the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) to help mobilize resources and support development efforts of Tibetans living in South Asia. Its head office is located at Dharamsala, Himachal Pradesh, India. It works in almost all development areas including education, health, livelihood, skills training, environment, culture, arts and crafts, capacity building, gender empowerment, relief and rehabilitation, shelter, governance, institutional building and advocacy. It endeavors to support a minimum level of development for all sections of the community but focuses primarily on marginalized groups, including women, children, the youth, elderly people and people with disabilities.

To achieve its mission, SARD acts a nodal agency for development assistance provided by bilateral, multi-lateral and other institutional funding agencies such as EU, USAID, DANIDA, Tibet Fund etc. Over the years, it has gained vast experience and the capability to coordinate and implement a wide range of humanitarian and developmental programs, in partnership with various Departments of the CTA and other civil society organizations. It is permitted by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India to receive any amount of donations and foreign contribution for relief and development purposes, and was assigned with permit No 182450041. All donations received by SARD are exempted from tax.

NED [National Endowment for Democracy] programs in dictatorial countries vary along a spectrum of possibility. Although there are no opportunities to work inside North Korea at the present time, a very different picture emerges in a country like China, where the Endowment is able to aid both external programs that provide access to independent ideas and information and that defend human rights, including those that support the rights of the Tibetans, and internal programs that promote democratization, worker rights, and market reform....

ENDOWMENT-FUNDED HUMAN RIGHTS PROGRAMS IN FY02 AND FY03

Training Programs


China (Tibet): Tibetan Youth Congress organizes intensive leadership-training courses for Tibetan college students in India, facilitating their involvement in the political struggle for democracy and human rights in Tibet.....

Tibet: The Social and Resource Development Fund provides one-time grants to Tibetan grassroots organizations, associations and ad hoc committees working to inform and educate their communities about democracy and human rights.

-- A Survey and Analysis of "Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: The U.S. Record 2002-2003": Hearing Before the Committee on International Relations House of Representatives, 108th Congress, First Session, July 9, 2003
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:01 am

Grant Funding for the Tibetan Exile Community Thanks to USAID
by Tenzin Samten
Contact: A Digest of Tibetan Issues, News and Community Information
October 5, 2016

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


The United States Agency for Information Development (USAID) has awarded a grant of US $23 million (£18m) to the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA). The grant is to strengthen self-reliance and resilience in Tibetan communities in South Asia and will be paid over the next five years (October 2016 – September 2012).

The funding originates with the United States government and is being routed through USAID. It will be used mainly to fund improved livelihood for Tibetan refugees, and for leadership development.

Image
Dr Lobsang Sangay, Sikyong or Tibetan Prime Minister

Dr Lobsang Sangay, the Sikyong, or Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile said in a press conference that for improving livelihood the grant will be used for, “integrated development projects, non-banking financial cooperation and maintaining cultural aspects of Tibetan communities which are very important”.

For the leadership component, Dr Sangay said, “It’s essentially building human resources and capacities of Tibetan people as a whole. Our focus is on CTA and staff at the moment”. He explained that the CTA has already started two to three week training courses for senior CTA staff and that this will continue.

Sikyong said the first year will be mainly for assessment and the remaining four years will be about actual implementation of the new initiatives. He requested that all Tibetans take part in the assessment programmes so that their concerns, aspirations and proposed projects can be considered.

In addition to support for developments for health and education and for the sustainability of Tibetan settlements, funds will be allotted to building community libraries with wifi, community workshop centres and playgrounds.

USAID is the lead United States Government agency that works to end extreme global poverty and enable resilient, democratic societies to realise their potential.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:14 am

Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey, World Goodwill and the False Light of the World
by Terry Melanson
© 2001 (Last Update: May 8th, 2005)

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Image
Lucis Trust Logo

Alice Ann Bailey, a leading disciple of the Russian theosophist Madame Helena Blavatsky, formed the Lucifer Publising Company in 1920. 1922 saw the organization's name changed to Lucis Trust though the advancement of the Luciferian beliefs remained true. Beliefs that in Blavatsky's words: “oppose the materialism of science and every dogmatic theology, especially the Christian, which the Chiefs of the Society regard as particularly pernicious.”

Lucis Trust promulgates the work of an "Ascended Master" who was working 'through' Alice Bailey for some 30 years. The Lucis Trust Publishing Company and their many fronts and organizations worship an "Externalized Hierarchy" of "Ascended Masters," who carry out the work of a Luciferian "master plan" for the establishment of a permanent "Age of Aquarius" ruled by one "Sanat Kumara", the "Lord of the World."

Lucis Trust is a powerful institution that enjoys "Consultative Status" with the United Nations, which permits it to have a close working relationship with the U.N., including a seat on the weekly sessions, but most importantly, influence with powerful business and national leaders throughout the world.

Through its founding of World Goodwill, Lucis Trust is "aggressively involved in promoting a globalist ideology":

Authors and participants in its various conferences read like a Who's Who of globalist insiders. Featured on its website, for example, is the Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities, put forth in April 1998 as a companion document to the notorious UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Signatories to the World Goodwill document include: Helmut Schmidt, former chancellor of West Germany; Malcolm Fraser, former Australian prime minister; Oscar Arias Sanchez, former prime minister of Costa Rica; Shimon Peres; Robert McNamara; Paul Volcker; and Jimmy Carter.

... it is as much a political organization as an occult religious one.

- New Age Roots, by Steve Bonta


Lucis Trust is run through an international board of trustees whose membership is said to have included: John D. Rockefeller; Norman Cousins; Robert S. McNamara; Thomas Watson, Jr. (IBM, former U.S. Ambassador to Moscow); Henry Clausen, Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, 33rd Degree, Southern District Scottish Rite and Henry Kissinger. This would then tie Bailey's influential occult organization into the international conspiracy of elitists, including the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Bilderbergs, and the Trilateral Commission.

I've been able to confirm some of these connections through Lucis Trust's involvement in the Windsor International Bank and Trust Company, where on its site, the Windsor Bank plainly states that its “a Member of, Advisor to, Affiliate of, Friend of, Benefactor of, or Contributor to, the following Organizations, to name several:”

• International Fund For Development
• The Hall Family Foundation
• The Rockefeller Foundation
• WHO/Habitat For Humanity
• The Lucis Trust (NGO); United Nations
• National Resources Defense Council
• Capital Missions Company
• Investors Circle
• The Coca-Cola Foundation
• Fellowship For International Education
• International Monetary Agency
• International Center For Educational Advancement
• Christian Children's Fund (Worldwide)
• BAMPAC (Black America's Political Action) • Fellowship For Reconciliation
• National Institute For the Advancement Of Science
• International Association For Environmental Cooperation
• World Wildlife Federation
• Council On Foreign Relations (CFR)
• CARICOM
• NAFTA
• MERCOSOR
• Council Of Emerging Nations
• Freedom Communications, Inc.
• The European Institute (Foreign Affairs Magazine)
• United Nations Association of The USA
• The NAACP (National Association of Colored People)
• The Royal Heritage Charitable Relief Fund

IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT: After I posted this discovery, the Windsor Bank promptly changed their page and deleted all traces of the connections which I exposed above. As of this writing they no longer have a web presence. I've been able to salvage a copy – thanks to Google's Cache — of the page as it appeared when I wrote this Lucis Trust expose: Here is the original.

One disturbing aspect is the blatant targeting of children. Lucis Trust directs an activity called Triangles in Education, which is partnered with groups that "make some contribution to the task of laying the foundations for the new education." This, according to Bailey, is part of the overall work of the New Group of World Servers, "a band of obedient workers and servers of the WORD." The word being the teachings of her channeled Master Djwhal Khul, through her voluminous occult works. The word, has also been heeded by the likes of Robert Muller — former assistant Secretary General of the United Nations and winner of the UNESCO Prize for Peace Education in 1989 for his World Core Curriculum. He said, "The underlying philosophy upon which The Robert Muller School is based will be found in the teaching set forth in the books of Alice A. Bailey by the Tibetan teacher, Djwhal Khul."

The Overshadowing

Image
Alice Bailey

Alice Bailey was born on June 16th, 1880 in the city of Manchester, England. She was raised in an orthodox christian family which she would say later, made her very unhappy and a bad tempered little girl. "Life was not worth living," she said, and the feeling of worthlessness, and a certain amount of curiosity about life and death led her to attempt suicide three times before she was even fifteen.

At the age of fifteen her first mystical encounter occurred while her family had gone to church. While she was in a room reading, a man wearing a turban on his head suddenly entered her room. Startled, and not being able to say a word —an obvious out of place character in 19th century Manchester — this stranger spoke to her:

“He told me there was some work that it was planned that I could do in the world but that it would entail changing my disposition considerably; I would have to give up being such an unpleasant little girl and must try to get some measure of self-control. My future usefulness to Him and to the world was dependant on how I handled myself and the changes I could manage to make. He said that if I could achieve real self-control I could then be trusted and that I would travel all over the world and visit many countries, "doing your Master's work all the time" ... He added that He would be in touch with me at intervals of seven years apart.”

- Unfinished Autobiography, by Alice Bailey, 1951, Lucis Trust, pp. 35-36


This was to be Alice Bailey's first contact with her Master Koot Humi. These contacts with "Secret Chiefs"; "Familiar Spirits"; "Angels"; and "Ascended Masters" is a common theme in the annals of history and has been the origin of many religious, prophetic and occult movements throughout the centuries. Zoroaster, Mohammed, John Dee, Francis Bacon, Aleister Crowley, Helena Blavatsky, Joseph Smith, Edgar Cayce and Benjamin Creme immediately come to mind.

In 1917, after the breakup of her first marriage she moved to the United States, where she was introduced to the teachings of Theosophy. It was during this period that she had met, and married, her husband Foster Bailey (33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason). She turned out to be a good pupil, Bailey soon rose through the ranks and became the editor of the American Theosophists' newspaper.

“For the last 125 years, New Age leaders worldwide have followed the false light of Theosophy; they now whisper sweet lies into the itching ears of the powerful — politicians, media moguls, UN officials, foundation grant makers, and Anglican bishops. As the West moves into a post-Christian era, the influence of the New Age movement grows.”

- A Comprehensive Expose of The New Age Movement, by Penn Lee


The encounter with her fated second "Master" — and soon to be writing partner for an international esoteric movement — occurred in 1919, while having a quiet time on a hill close to her house. She heard a note of music sounding everywhere which was followed by a voice (Djwhal Khul) that asked her if she was willing to write some books. Having refused, saying that she wouldn't engage in any psychic practices, the voice gave her three weeks to reconsider. Alice completely forgot about the subject when the voice made its appearance as scheduled. Agreeing to give it a try for a few weeks the first chapters of Initiation, Human and Solar were written. After about a month, Alice got scared; refusing to do anymore work the Master Djwhal Khul told her to discuss it with her Master Koot Humi. Koot Humi confessed that it was, in fact, him that told DK to contact her and he gave Alice permission to proceed — after giving Mrs. Bailey the proper technique for enhanced telepathic communication.

Between 1919 and 1949 (her death), she produced twenty-four books, including an autobiography, nineteen of these books were supposedly written by her Tibetan Master DK (Djwhal Khul). During the intervening years, Alice Bailey spent most of it working out what she referred to as "The Plan." The results of which, influenced the birth of many New Age groups: The Church Universal and Triumphant, Benjamin Creme's The Tara Center, the Robert Muller Schools and The Temple of Understanding, to name a few.

The Networks of 'Light'

Lucis Trust


Fifty years at the United Nations plaza. Currently located on Wall Street in New York. Lucis Trust provides worldwide financial support for the Arcane School, World Goodwill, Triangles, Lucis Publishing, Lucis Productions, Lucis Trust Libraries, and the New Group of World Servers. Maintains the UN meditation room.

The Arcane School

Founded in 1923, the school gives correspondence courses in meditation and the occult from its branches in New York, Geneva, London and Buenos Aires.

World Goodwill

Founded in 1932, the organization is recognized by the United Nations today as an NGO. World Goodwill works directly with the "world federalists," and is part of the work to "Externalize the Hierarchy" of "Illumined Minds," which will usher in an "Age of Maitreya."

Triangles

Founded in 1937, Triangles is the name of a global network of cells, whose members pray a "Great Invocation," especially on the full moon, when members of Triangle can be influenced by the astrological signs of the Zodiac.

We haven't even scratched the surface yet on the influence of Bailey and her Master's teachings. Let's look at a comparison by two writers who talk about Lucis Trust's World Goodwill, which when compared, illustrate both sides of Lucis' agenda; the manipulation of politics towards a New World Order, and the manipulation through occult means to manifest the "Plan" of the "Hierarchy".

From Dark Majesty, by Texe Marrs, pp. 139-40

The Secret Brotherhood has developed the social and political art of networking to a fine science. World Goodwill, in its newsletter of 1986, No. 2, listed a number of groups that have participated in its World Service Forum. Such groups include those that are connected with World Goodwill's centers in London, New York, and Geneva. The list is absolutely mind-boggling in its scope. In London, groups that have actively participated include the United Nations Association, the Teilhardt Center, the International Broadcasting Trust, the Buddhist Society, the Scientific and Medical Network, St. James' Church (Piccadilly), Emerson College , International Health Research Network, Habitat International Council, the Schumacher Society, the New Economics Foundation, World Health Organization, Peace Through Unity, the British Holistic Medical Association, the World Wildlife Fund, and World College.

In New York, World Goodwill gives credit to the following organizations for their involvement in its work: the Earth Society Foundation, Clergy and Laity Concerned, Waldorf Education, UNICEF, Emmaus, Hale House, the United Nations Association, the Peace Corps, the US Mission of the United Nations, the Better World Society (CNN founder Ted Turner's group), the Foundation for Global Broadcasting, Fellowship and Prayer, the Institute for Cultural Affairs, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Bank for Social Responsibility, Habitat for Humanity, The Christophers, the Institute for Community Economics, Women's World Banking, Tibetan Buddhist Learning Center, Environmental Action Coalition, the Catholic Worker, the Nicholas Roerich Museum, the International Center for Integrated Studies, the Sri Aurobindo Society, and the Mead Institute for Human Development.

In Geneva, Switzerland, we find the following groups to be participants in the programs of World Goodwill: The International Commission of Jurists, Pax Christi International, Transnational Prospectives, Amnesty International, the United Nations University for Peace, and the Bureau for Affairs of Non-Governmental Organizations of the United Nations Organization.


From Target: Faith and Freedom

World Goodwill is a non-governmental organization (NGO) accredited with the United Nations while its parent, Lucis Trust, enjoys the prestigious "consultative status" afforded those non-governmental organizations on the roster of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Increasingly, powerful deep pocket NGO's, which are neither elected nor accountable, are received as the voice of "civil society." Those NGO's, which the United Nations selectively elevates to "consultative status," are called upon by ECOSOC as advisors representative of civil society. Both World Goodwill and Lucis Trust are engaged in Earth Charter advocacy. World Goodwill's spirituality is patently pagan. The following declaration is taken from their promotional material.

"During both the full moon and new moon periods there is there is a similar emphasis on the work of energy distribution in meditation .... we consciously align with the rhythmic pattern of energy flow each month, we become a part of a planetary meditative process carried forward at all levels of consciousness and with great creative potential for anchoring the seeds of the coming the coming civilization and the germ of the new culture."

If World Goodwill so unblushingly advocates neo-pagan meditative practices, its overt promotion of an occult "plan" for the governing of the universe is nothing short of chilling:

"There is an inner government of the planet known under such different names as the spiritual Hierarchy, the society of Illumined Minds, or Christ and his Church, according to various religious traditions. Humanity is never left without spiritual guidance or direction under the Plan... The widespread expectation that we approach the "age of Maitreya," as it is known in the East, when the World Teacher and present head of the spiritual Hierarchy, the Christ, will reappear among humanity to sound the keynote of the new age.... There are millions of mentally alert men and women in all parts of the world who are on rapport with the Plan and work to give it expression. They are people in whom the consciousness of humanity as one interdependent unit is alive and active... These beliefs give a new dimension to spiritual reality .... They provide opportunity for cooperation with the spiritual evolution of humanity... there is no group so likely to ensure that humanity achieves this most difficult goal as the men and women of goodwill .... requiring only courage... to initiate action to prepare for the New World Order."


In considering the above information one can't help but wonder whether these organizations, which are aligned with Lucis Trust, believe in the "Plan", as World Goodwill put it, "to initiate action to prepare for the new world order." I believe that they do, and it is my intention to prove that conviction throughout this site. And specifically, that it is a spiritual plan — a plan that, if giving a thorough evaluation from their own writings, can be seen as nothing less than satan's attempt to implement a totalitarian demonic throne upon the earth, and humanity's forced worship through Luciferic Rites. For "when the Great One appears," Master Djwhal Khul said 'through' Alice Bailey, "he will take the Mysteries Religion preserved by Freemasonry and make them public."

Lucis Trust has truly become a powerhouse for the New Age ideal; the transformation of society by, and through, occult initiatory means. The respect that Bailey's teachings receive, and the reverence for her Master, is without equal. She has successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of many concerning the true meaning and source of her teachings. What exactly is the teaching and message delivered by her Master? This will be the subject examined in part two.

The Secret Doctrine

In the occult Satan (or Lucifer) has traditionally been associated with the sun, the harbinger of spiritual light. Esoteric philosophy teaches that it is this "great being", not the God of the Old Testament, that was the true redeemer and benefactor of mankind in the Garden of Eden.

There's a few works in the occult that have stood the test of time, and have become "bibles" in their own right. These are revered and studied by all seekers on "the Path". The works of Aleister Crowley, Alice Bailey, Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, Albert Pike, Manly P. Hall, Benjamin Creme, Castaneda, Kenneth Grant, Eliphas Levi and many others laying a foundation of pre-packaged self-enlightenment.

Some claim to be revealing great esoteric knowledge past down through sects, and orders long forgotten. Other works claim to be channeled from "Secret Chiefs" or "Ascended Masters." I offer these quotes from Blavatsky's The Secret Doctrine in order to show the, typical, reversal philosophy espoused. Blavatsky's philosophy also serve to illustrate where Bailey first encountered her heretical views in the first place. As we will see in part two, Mme. Blavatsky taught her pupil well - their spiritual philosophies are virtually identical.

Image
Adam and Eve, Serpent in the Garden

Once the key to Genesis is in our hands it is the scientific and symbolic Kabbala which unveils the secret. The Great Serpent of the Garden of Eden and the "Lord God" are identical ...

Stand in awe of him, and sin not, speak his name with trembling ... It is Satan who is the god of our planet and the only god ...

When the Church, therefore, curses Satan, it curses the cosmic reflection of God ...

In this case it is but natural ... to view Satan, the Serpent of Genesis as the real creator and benefactor, the Father of Spiritual mankind.

For it is he who was the "Harbinger of Light," bright radiant Lucifer, who opened the eyes of automaton (Adam) created by Jehovah, as alleged; and he who was first to whisper, "In the day yea eat there of, ye shall be as Elohim, knowing good and evil" -- can only be regarded in the light of a Saviour. An "adversary" to Jehovah ... he still remains in esoteric truth the ever loving "Messenger"... who conferred on us spiritual instead of physical immortality ...

Satan, or Lucifer, represents the active ... "Centrifugal Energy of the Universe" in a cosmic sense ... Fitly is he ... and his adherents ... consigned to the "sea of fire," because it is the Sun ... the fount of life in our system, where they are petrified ... and churned up to re-arrange them for another life; that Sun which, as the origin of the active principle of our Earth, is at once the Home and the Source of the Mundane Satan ...

- The Secret Doctrine, Volume I, page 414, Vol II, pgs. 234, 235, 243, 245


One has to keep in mind, where this heresy originated. Blavatsky claimed to have 'received' it from disembodied spirits called "Secret Chiefs." These "Inter dimensional", or demonic, beings seem to be appealing directly to the intellect. Our intelligence, after all, is a thing of great pride, isn't it? And where would we be, had it not been for the "benefactor," the Serpent of Old. Then the obvious conclusion would have Jehovah being the "Adversary." This twisted sensibility is very appealing to those who practice the occult. It also shows that in the end, when all the cards are laid on the table, its ALWAYS about that one selfish being, already condemned, and hell bent on bringing mankind with him.

***********************************

Alice Bailey & Master Djwhal Khul: A Satanic Communion
by Terry Melanson
© 2001 (Last Update: May 7th, 2005)

“Preparation too must be given to the developing of higher psychic powers...Hospitals and schools will appear under the direct guidance of the Masters; Teachers... will train the minds of the pupils to be responsive to direct inspiration from above. ”

- The Externalization of the Hierarchy, pp. 516-517


As we have seen in part one, Lucis Trust is, today, intimately connected with Elite Politics through its World Goodwill. We haven't yet, however, examined the occult teachings of Bailey as they were related by her Master Djwhal Khul. Her 24 books, combined with the Beacon magazine, Triangles, and the Arcane School indoctrinate students into what Bailey describes as the "Ageless Wisdom" teachings. The Arcane School, founded in 1922, boasted 20,000 graduates by 1954. This occult university is more active than ever and continues to be the main training ground for New Age disciples.

The bulk of these occult teachings, in Bailey's books, are from her channeled Tibetan master Djwhal Khul (DK); the "Plan" according to the Hierarchy of Ascended Masters. Through a series of group-initiations and group-meditative techniques the Hierarchy directs the "New Group of World Servers" to implement a "New World Religion" of which humanity as a whole can aid the "will of the planetary logos". "Emphasis should be laid on the evolution of humanity," so says Master DK through Bailey, "with particular attention to its goal, perfection. (The Externalization of the Hierarchy, p. 588)" The objective is "the helping of the Great Ones and the rendering to Them of that intelligent assistance which will make Their plans for humanity materialize." (Ibid., p. 516)

One way to "materialize" the Hierarchy's plan for humanity is through Lucis Trust's Triangle networks. Their goal is the practice of occult meditation "the science of energy flow and energy relationships." Lucis Trust states that "occult meditation is a means of consciously and purposefully directing energy from a recognized source to the creation of some specific effect." (Source) International participants "sit quietly for a few minutes and link mentally with other members of their triangle, or triangles. They invoke the energies of light and goodwill, visualizing theses energies as circulating through the three focal points of each triangle and pouring through the networks of triangles surrounding the planet. At the same time they repeat the Great Invocation." (Source)

Her 30 year telepathic connection to Master DK was what some would un-hesitantly call demonic possession. Her husband Foster Bailey said, "During the long course of the work the minds of the Tibetan and A.A.B [Alice Ann Bailey] became so closely attuned that they were in effect — so far as much of the production of the teaching was concerned — a joint single projecting mechanism." (The introduction to Cosmic Fire) The technique is called in the occult the "overshadowing" — a euphemism for demonic possession, or as Bailey liked to call it "the science of impression". Moreover, the Hierarchy has "overshadowed" many in the intervening years up to the close of the century — the growing modern practice of channeling and psychic astral projection bears out this prediction of a half century ago:

“These methods of overshadowing will largely be the ones used by the Great Lord and his Masters at the end of the century, and for this reason They are sending into incarnation, in every country, disciples who have the opportunity offered them to respond to the need of training men and woman to recognize the higher psych ism, and the true inspiration and mediumship, and to do this scientifically. In fifty years time, the need for true psychics and conscious mediums (such as H.P.B., for instance [Helena Petrova Blavatsky]) will be very great if the Masters' plans are to be carried through to fruition, and the movement must be set on foot in preparation for the coming of Him for Whom all nations wait.”

- A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, pp. 757-758


Ten Seed Groups

Early on, Master DK informed Bailey of the Hierarchy's plan for "The Ten Seed-Groups". These seed-groups were to infiltrate all sectors of society, and be "esoterically anchored" with "new approaches to divinity." I have no doubt that today's New Age Movement is the result of the Hierarchy's "scattering of the seed", as Bailey put it, and that today's, arguably, open pagan society can largely be traced to this occult "plan". The Ten Seed Groups were "embryonic, like germinating seed". Through their occult practices these ten groups would work directly "under inspiration from the Hierarchy via the focused minds of the group." From Alice Bailey's Discipleship in the New Age - Volume I, p. 35-40, The Ten Seed-Groups consist of, and carry out their mission in following ways (excerpts from THE NEW GROUP OF WORLD SERVERS, emphasis mine):

1) Telepathic Communicators

Summary of Work


Telepathic communication from soul to soul through: from mind to mind through integration; between humanity and Hierarchy (inner government of the planet) through Science of impression.

2) Trained Observers

Summary of Work


Dissipation of world glamour, illusion and maya through illumination.

3) Magnetic Healers

Summary of Work


Through "magnetic living". Through laws of life — laws of health and right human relationships. Through continuity of consciousness.

4) Educators in the New Age

Summary of Work


Education through inflow of the light of knowledge into "instinctual man". — Through inflow of the light of the wisdom into "intelligent man". Through applied knowledge, expressed wisdom and occult understanding in "spiritual man".

5) Political Organizers

Summary of Work


International understanding through communication of the divine (political) Will into races and nations, **linking the department of the Manu (the Ruler of the human race) with men.**

6) Workers in the Field of Religion

Summary of Work


Through transcendental mysticism. Through transcendental occultism. Through transcendental religion.

7) Scientific Servers

Summary of Work


Through development of new hypotheses to substantiate the next step forward. Through sensitive reaction to spiritual energies and forces. Through release of energy to relate spirit and matter and precipitate the divine Plan.

8) Psychologists

Summary of Work


Through relationship of the human kingdom to the sub-human and the super-human kingdom. Through a study of the divine Plan for the five kingdoms of nature.

9) Financiers and Economists

Summary of Work


Through a study of the nature of prana or etheric energy. — Through study of deflection of this form of concretized energy into constructive channels and "ways of light". — Through study of the law of supply and demand.

10) Creative Workers

Summary of Work


Through linking life and form. Through philosophical relationship of synthesis and the Plan.

Truly an occult conspiracy of the highest kind, and worrisome at the very least for anyone — both Christian and non-believers alike. When you factor in what I've shown in part one — Lucis Trust's influence over international elite politics — it's downright chilling! The most revealing part of the seed-groups is the fact that the political organizers link "the department of the Manu (the Ruler of the human race) with men". The Bible already tells us that "the ruler of the human race" is Satan (John 12:31 & 14:30; Ephesians 6:12; Luke 4:6-7; 2 Cor. 4), then it follows that "the department of Manu" must be but another name for the deceiver. This is indeed the case. In Frontier Science/Social Change, Paul Von Ward relates, "Hermetic Principles...comprise part of a body of knowledge allegedly given to humans by an advanced being more than 5,000 years ago. He has been known by various names, including Thoth or Seth in Egypt, Manu in India, Hermes in Greece, and Lucifer or Satan in the Judeo-Christian tradition."

Idolatrous Incantation

Invocation


a formula for conjuring

Mantra

a mystical formulation of invocation or incantation

Image
Oct. 1982. Full page advertisement in Reader's Digest

As mentioned before, the Great Invocation is sounded while the Triangle networks of "light workers" meditate to cause the "energy flow" of the Hierarchy to enter and influence humanity. The present version, giving in 1945 and shown above, was the third installment of a series of Invocations giving to Bailey by Djwhal Khul.

According to Lucis Trust, "The Great Invocation if given widespread distribution, can be to THE NEW WORLD RELIGION what the Lord's prayer has been to Christianity." The wording was intentional, so that Christians would not become suspicious. In Discipleship in the New Age II, p.165 we find, "I [Djwhal Khul] have so worded and rendered the Invocation [so] that the Christian world, through its churches, may not find it impossible to use." This represents a calculated deception on DK's part. On pp. 150 and 156, we learn: "It can be so presented to the masses everywhere, the general public, will be prompted to take it up and will use it widely... The meaning of this Invocation has been expressed in terms which are understandable, in a measure, to the average person because of its familiar wording, based on many Scriptural terms. But the true inner implications and significances are... not superficially apparent... They mean one thing to the ordinary man...; they mean another thing to the man upon the Probationary Path...; these words mean still another thing to the disciple...; to initiates and to the senior Members of the Hierarchy, they convey a still higher and more inclusive significance."

That is indeed the case, and the actual words used are giving a totally opposite meaning when examined under the light of Biblical Scripture, and compared point for point with Bailey's writings (she often quotes scripture — the interpretations of which are giving by her channeled Master). See Ph.D Robert A Herrmann's web page A Modern Manifestation of Absolute Evil for his paper called A Scientific Analysis of the Writings of Alice A. Bailey and their Applications for a treatment in DK's (Bailey's) deception. For instance:

• Light = Luciferian Enlightenment
• God = Satan
• stream forth = overshadow
• love = various forms of Scripturally defined evil or, generally hatred.
• Christ = Antichrist
• little wills of men = the claimed unintelligent, weak and inferior desires of individuals; especially those that follow conservative Judeo-Christian doctrine.
• purpose = to prepare for the appearance of the Antichrist
• Masters = demons or demon controlled individuals.
• race of men = "humanity" as ruled by Lucifer
• plan = complete domination in preparation for and after the appearance of the Antichrist.
• seal the door where evil dwells = violent, if necessary, eradication of those that follow Judaism, conservative Christianity, some liberal Christianity, and other similar orthodox religions. [note: this is so because of the "separativeness" of these religious views. Djwhal Khul calls this evil, and that it must be eradicated for the Hierarchy's plans of the New Age-New World Religion to proceed. In multiple passages DK identifies the Jews and Christians as the spirit of separativeness, i.e., John 14:6, and Exodus 20:3]
• power = often hideous and actual destructive forces.

The Great Invocation has now been translated into 50 languages and is the mantra of the New Age. It has even received the attention of world dignitaries at the UN where it has been sounded at many official conferences and during the opening ceremonies in 1992 at the UN's Earth Summit in Rio. During a talk given by Ida Urso at a Lucis Trust Arcane School conference in 1995, the connections between the UN and the Great Invocation were explained: "It is no coincidence that we are celebrating both the 50th anniversary of the Great Invocation and the United Nations. Both in different ways are pivotal to the Plan... let us together complete the triangle of light... let us contemplate that world body--'the hope of humanity'--which was conceived just 50 years ago under the impulse of the three spiritual Festivals (falling on March 28th, April 27th and May 26th)... It was on April 25, 1945 two days previous to the full moon of Taurus and the Festival of Wesak [note: the best time to recite the Great Invocation, according to Lucis Trust, as the energies of the Hierarchy are in alignment with the Earth] that delegates from 50 nations, met in San Francisco for a conference known officially as the United Nations Conference on International Organization... On this period the Tibetan Master tells us: 'Not for nothing is this conference being held during the five days of the Wesak Full Moon. It will be a time of supreme difficulty, in which the Forces of Light will face... the forces of selfishness and separativeness.'" It seems the dreaded UN was a spiritual undertaking in alignment with the luciferic light.

Whenever the Invocation is recited, according to Lucis Trust's booklet on the subject, that individual "allies himself with the spiritual Hierarchy," whether he knows it or not. And in Discipleship p. 156, Bailey writes, "it embodies the divine intent and summarizes the conclusions of the thinking of the planetary Logos."

Luciferic Initiation

Some background is necessary on Chakras and the Kundalini, in order to proceed further with this expose.

In Hindu occult practice (the main root of the New Age Movement) there are 7 major centers for kundalini energy. By occult methods using meditation, drugs, visualization, yoga and whatever means necessary, initiates seek to awaken the sleeping fiery serpent (kundalini) for a "higher" state of consciousness.

Image
Kundalini Serpent: Coiled Prana Energy of Kriya Yoga

This kundalini energy is visualized as an entwined serpent which rises from the base of the spine to "enlighten" and eventually dissolve the ego — to become a god incarnate, thereby preventing further incarnation on the physical plane. The New Age disciples believe in reincarnation and are taught by the demonic Hierarchy that this is the only way to stop the endless cycle of Karma — to evolve into Gods...(i.e. Gen. 3:5).

That is the goal and the techniques vary, but as one "ascends" through the 7 progressive chakras, each is an initiation unto a higher consciousness, until finally when you reach the point of union with "Sanat Kumara", "Shiva", "Vishnu", "Lord of the World" or what they most blasphemously call the "Christ Consciousness".

Satan's deception is that through each successive chakra the occult initiate actually does perceive a shift in consciousness, which to him it seems, is a progressive shift. The occultist now feels his contact and psychic telepathy with the Hierarchy getting stronger. As he continues, the initiate invariably reaches a point of no return. There is no turning back and all those doubts he failed to heed — being the "right" path or not — are finally revealed to him...it's too late. They're his! This is called the Luciferic Initiation.

Texe Marrs put it best when he wrote, "These feelings, voiced by so many who have received a Luciferic Initiation, are significant. They point to two inescapable facts: (1) The initiate recognizes that he is coming into close contact with dark, evil forces, and a spirit of fear engulfs him; and (2) after the initiation, his mind is patently altered. This is what New Agers call the Kundalini or Skaktipat experience, technically termed a Paradigm (World-view) Shift." (Mystery Mark of the New Age, p.39)

Bailey's Planetary Logos

For the Greeks the Logos was the divine pattern found in humans. The plural of logic. The Hebrews had a similar view, which they called Dabar. Dabar was also a representation of a divine pattern, and they thought that it could only be found in certain things. An example would be Moses receiving the Word(Logos) from God through the Ten Commandments. It was known as the means through which man can receive the wisdom of God. The Apostle John was aware of this concept, and he used it to appeal to both the Greeks and the Hebrews of his time. "In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word (Logos) was with God...and the Word (Logos) was made flesh, and dwelt among us." (John 1: 1,14) It was a particularly forceful way of teaching the Divinity of Jesus as the Logos. Consequently, this plural aspect in the Logos was to be a defining factor for the Church's teaching of the Trinity.

Jesus has always been the Logos. So when Bailey's teacher and mentor, H.P. Blavatsky, wrote, "...actually the 'Serpent' was the 'Lord God' himself, who, as the Ophis, the Logos, or the bearer-of divine creative wisdom, taught mankind to become creators in their turn...", [1] Christians must have been horrified. Bailey's own "Planetary Logos" carries on in the Luciferic tradition...she didn't call her organization Lucifer Trust for nothing!

SHAMBALLA The Holy City / Will or Power, Purpose, Plan Life Aspect / Ruler: Sanat Kumara, The Lord of the World, The Ancient of Days, Melchizedek / Planetary Head Center, Spiritual Pineal Gland

THE HIERARCHY The New Jerusalem / Love-Wisdom Consciousness Group Unity / Ruler: The Christ, The World Savior / Planetary Heart Center

HUMANITY The City, Standing Foursquare / Active Intelligence Self-Consciousness Creativity / Ruler: Lucifer, Son of the Morning, The Prodigal Son / Planetary Throat Center


And so it is, Alice Bailey's "trinity". Notice that Lucifer is the Ruler of Humanity. He's also identified with something called the "planetary throat center." This is a clue that she is talking about chakras. Lucifer, or rather, luciferic energy is released when the 5th chakra (throat) is awakened. Notice how Sanat (Satan) Kumara is also identified with the "spiritual pineal gland" and "planetary head center", this would correspond to 7th chakra — chakras are also called "energy centers", so Bailey's "Planetary Centers" fits within the chakra teaching, and Bailey calls her Logos "Logoic kundalini."

What's more, each chakra is a Logos unto itself. Bailey says that the "Planetary Logos" is called the First Kumara, "the one Initiator," and "he came to this planet from Venus." [2] An allusion to Lucifer and his traditional association with Venus (Son of the Morning). Elsewhere, she writes that "the goal for the planetary Logos is God Consciousness",[3] and that the "illuminating light of the fifth Logos (Lucifer- 5th throat chakra) is felt at the third initiation." [4] And she makes another statement that the "Venus scheme" was "signalized" by the "Venusian planetary Logos on His fifth chain(chakra)". [5]

Image
Chakras, Throat Chakra, The Beacon

According to Hindu tradition, each chakra center also has its associated color. If you look at the drawing at top-right you can see that the 5th chakra (Lucifer) is given the color blue. Below it is a representation of the throat chakra bathed in its characteristic blue "light." Look familiar? It should! The Reader's Digest full page ad I've shown above also has a blue glow.

In part one I displayed the Lucis Trust logo and it too features this streaming blue light. The New Age Symbol invented by Foster Bailey has a plethora of symbolic imagery. The symbol, according to Lucis Trust, is "set in a limitless field of blue, which signifies the sphere of life expression of our solar logos...superimposed upon the triangle of new age forces is the five pointed star of [Anti]Christ. The Star is blue because it represents as much of the solar quality to which humanity can respond." You can see this symbol on the front cover of Lucis Trust's Beacon Magazine (bottom-right), which also displays the blue light of the "logos".

In Initiation, Human and Solar, Bailey mentions the five-pointed star as the final two initiations and "it descends upon him, merges in him, and he is seen at its center." The five pointed star "blazes forth" and "he enters within the flame." A perfect description of the Luciferic Initiation if there ever was one! This, she says, "puts a man in touch with the center in the Body of the Planetary Logos."

What made me realize the significance of Bailey's blue symbology was a short snippet, almost written in passing, in an e-mail sent to a list that I'm on: "Blue is Masonic Blue Lodge for Blue Light eyes of Horus the "Watcher". The United Nations has Blue Flags and Helmets. Blue is for the Occultic "Blue Lips of Death." It was sent by Pointman (some of you know him), so I knew it was an important part in their secret symbology. As I started checking into it, I realized he was absolutely right, and I had been working on these Lucis Trust pages at the time, which immediately brought the whole thing into perspective.

_______________

Notes:

[1] The Secret Doctrine Vol. 2, p.215
[2] http://www.netnews.org/bk/astrology/astr1264.html
[3] ................../bk/fire/fire1008.html
[4] ................../bk/fire/fire1178.html
[5] See note [2]

“The new world order must meet the immediate need and not be an attempt to satisfy some distant, idealistic vision. The new world order must be appropriate to a world which has passed through a destructive crisis and to a humanity which is badly shattered by the experience. The new world order must lay the foundation for a future world order which will be possible only after a time of recovery, of reconstruction, and of rebuilding.

In the preparatory period for the new world order there will be a steady and regulated disarmament. It will not be optional. No nation will be permitted to produce and organize any equipment for destructive purposes or to infringe the security of any other nation.

The new world order must be appropriate to a world which has passed through a destructive crisis...

We are concerned with only one subject, the ushering in of the new world order.

...the present world order (which is today largely disorder) can be so modified and changed that a new world and a new race of men can gradually come into being. Renunciation and the use of the sacrificial will should be the keynote for the interim period after the war (WWII), prior to the inauguration of the New Age.”

- Alice Bailey: Quotes From Various Works (all 24 books have been electronically indexed and are searchable here)
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi, by Wikipedia

Postby admin » Tue Apr 16, 2019 2:51 am

Part 1 of 5

In Resonance with the Living Earth: Newsletter 2019 #1
by World Goodwill
https://www.lucistrust.org/world_goodwill
Accessed: 4/15/19

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


About World Goodwill

People of goodwill are those who think and act with a measure of loving understanding and of concern for the well-being of all. The energy of goodwill is potentially a powerful force for social change – yet its power remains largely unrecognized and underutilized. World Goodwill fosters understanding of this energy and the role it is playing in the development of a new humanity.

It is the thoughtful, planned action of networks of goodwill that is driving the response to all the problems of our age: from poverty, poisoned race relations and environmental destruction through to sentimental spirituality, despair in thinking about the future, and the crises of materialism and selfishness. People of goodwill from all cultures, faiths and professions are creating, through their words and actions, a new world where sharing, cooperation and right relations are taking root and spreading. Never before in the history of the planet has goodwill been so active.

The diversity and variety of initiatives means that the people of goodwill can never be organized into one unitary movement or network. Every community has its people of goodwill. It is goodness and love, in their most basic human expressions, that are driving the momentum of change, challenging all of the habits of separative thinking and action. Recognition of the sheer abundance of goodwill action as it exists today and the countless movements drawing on the energy of goodwill changes the way we see what is happening in the world. It is empowering and it gives us grounds upon which hope and faith in the future can grow. Truly, goodwill has the potential to become the keynote of a new civilization of wholeness.

To bring in the new day and the human well-being which is our spiritual birth-right, we need a deeper sense of reality based on spiritual values, and a new perception of humanity as a unit of divine life within an ordered and purposive universe. The following six recognitions can provide a basis for this deeper understanding:

1 Humanity is not following a haphazard or uncharted course – there is a Plan. This Plan has always existed and is part of the greater design of the Cosmos. The Plan has worked out through the evolutionary developments of the past, and because of the special impetus given it from time to time by the great leaders, teachers and intuitives of the human race. This leads to the second key recognition.

2 There exists an inner spiritual governance of the world led by enlightened beings whose ideas inspire all forward-thinking evolutionary progress in human consciousness. They are known under such different names as the spiritual Hierarchy, the society of Illumined Minds, or Christ and His Church, according to various spiritual traditions. Humanity is never left without spiritual guidance or direction under the Plan.

3 There is a widespread expectation that we approach the “Age of Maitreya”, as it is known in the East, when the World Teacher and present head of the spiritual Hierarchy, the Christ, will reappear among humanity to sound the keynote of a new age.

4 There are millions of mentally alert people in all parts of the world who are in touch, either subconsciously or consciously, with the Plan, and work to give it expression. In them, the consciousness of humanity as one interdependent unit is alive and active. They regard the many differing national, religious and social systems in which they serve as modes of expanding human consciousness and ways by which humanity learns needed lessons. Through their living example, they give humanity a new and better vision of what life should be.

5 The heart of humanity is sound. Our era is notable for the growth of goodwill and altruistic endeavour. All the crises, wars and catastrophes of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have been unable to crush the human spirit.

6 The Plan for humanity is based on the principles of sharing, co-operation, practical brotherhood, right relationships between all people and between nations, and goodwill in action.

These recognitions give a new perspective on spiritual reality and place our present crises in a wider context. They provide opportunity for co-operation with the spiritual evolution of humanity and increase our capacity for freedom.

There is no group so likely to ensure that humanity achieves this most difficult goal as people of goodwill. Provided they can overcome inertia, they are in a key position, requiring only courage to express goodwill, and to initiate action to prepare for a new global civilisation.

Organisation

Founded in 1932, as an activity of Lucis Trust, World Goodwill programs and publications are administered by an international group operating through headquarters in London, New York and Geneva. There is no membership and programs are available to all people of goodwill without charge. The work is funded entirely by donations.

Alongside countless other groups, World Goodwill is an accredited Nongovernmental Organization with the Department of Public Information at the United Nations. It maintains informal relations with a wide range of national and international nongovernmental organizations. The Lucis Trust is on the Roster of the United Nations Economic and Social Council. World Goodwill strongly believes that the UN should be supported as the main hope for humanity’s future.

Objectives

In promoting recognition of the power of goodwill in our time, World Goodwill has three primary objectives:

• To help mobilize the energy of goodwill through education, and through subtle action with programs that draw on the power of thought. At the heart of every human being there is a reservoir of goodwill accompanied by deeper warrior-like qualities: the will to good and the will to love.
• To foster a universal spiritual perspective on the future, centered on the idea that all faiths throughout history have anticipated an age of peace and justice, ushered in by a World Teacher Who embodies divine principles. The rising tide of goodwill in the world today is a sign that the appearance of such a teacher, expected by different traditions under such names as the Christ, the Kalki Avatar, the Bodhisattva, Lord Maitreya, the Imam Mahdi, and the Messiah, is now imminent.
• To study the causes of major world problems in such a way as to reveal universal principles, spiritual practices and actions that contribute to the healing, transformation and resolution of the problem.

Mobilising Goodwill

Focussed enlightened public opinion can be a major factor in world reconstruction, but it has been little used up till now. The major need today is to educate world public opinion in the significance of goodwill as a powerful creative energy and way of life; and to mobilise people everywhere to establish goodwill as the keynote of the coming new civilisation. World Goodwill aids in this task by:

Advising individuals and groups on how to increase their effectiveness in service.

Co-operating with the world service activities of other groups

Supporting the work of the United Nations and its Specialised Agencies as the main hope for humanity’s future, including a blog and Facebook page on World Goodwill at the UN.

Meditating on the energy of goodwill (Goodwill Meditation Group); the Cycle of Conferences (helping create a positive mental climate for conferences taking place on specific world problems); and the Twelve Spiritual Festivals (focusing on the spiritual energies available within the annual lunar cycle)

A Worldwide Educational Program which includes:

A Website and Publications in many languages presenting the principles underlying right human relations, and the fact of a divine Plan as a spiritual reality working out in crucial areas of human affairs, including education, religion, economics, politics, etc. Publications are available for distribution.

The World Goodwill Newsletter, Commentaries and World View articles, highlighting the energy of goodwill in world affairs. A universal spiritual approach is presented to topics of current concern.

Study Papers dealing with some of the world’s major problems.

World Goodwill Seminar, an annual meeting in London, New York and Geneva. Through meditation, talks and discussion the work of groups and individuals actively meeting world need is highlighted. Broadcast globally on video.

The Reappearance of the Christ

This is a time of preparation not only for a new civilisation and culture, but also for the coming of a new spiritual dispensation.

At the end of an age human resources and established institutions seem inadequate to meet world needs and problems. At such a time, the advent of a teacher, a spiritual leader or avatar, is anticipated and invoked by the masses of humanity in all parts of the world.

Today the reappearance of the World Teacher, the Christ, is expected by millions, not only by those of Christian faith but by those of every faith who expect the Avatar under other names – the Lord Maitreya, Krishna, Messiah, Imam Mahdi and the Bodhisattva.

Distortion and mis-understanding surround this central fact of divine response to human need. This is inevitable but unimportant. The fact of transition into a new age is important. Preparation by people of goodwill is needed to introduce new values for living, new standards of behaviour, new attitudes of non-separateness and co-operation, leading to right human relations and a world at peace. The coming World Teacher will be mainly concerned, not with the result of past error and inadequacy, but with the requirements of a new civilisation and with the reorganisation of the social structure.

World Goodwill distributes literature on these themes. A world prayer, the Great Invocation, is distributed on a world-wide scale in many languages and dialects.

World Goodwill also co-operates in organising the annual World Invocation Day, with special focus on the use of the Great Invocation worldwide.

Problems of Humanity

The problem of establishing right relationships between people and between nations is of urgent concern in a world in crisis. The immediate spiritual problem is that of offsetting selfish separateness by the technique of trained, imaginative, creative and practical goodwill.

World Goodwill provides a series of study papers on the major problems of human progress. Emphasis is placed upon underlying causes and emerging trends rather than on a factual survey of events. The use of the trained mind in reflective thought and meditation is encouraged.

The problems dealt with include:

• The Psychological Renewal of the Nations

• Children, Youth and Education

• Capital, Labour, and Employment

• The Racial Minorities

• The Churches and Organized Religion

• International Unity

There are many lesser problems but these are the major ones with which humanity is at this time confronted and which must find solution. This will be done by the establishing of right human relations.

The formation of study groups is encouraged so that through study, discussion and meditation a “thoughtform of solution” may be generated and local forms of service activity initiated.

Practical Aims

To encourage people of goodwill everywhere to establish right human relations between races, religions, nations and classes

To assist people of goodwill in their studies of world problems, and in the effective application to these problems of goodwill, co-operation and sharing for the common good.

To co-operate with other organisations in constructive activities contributing to world unity, stability and right human relations.

To make available up-to-date information on constructive current action in the main areas of human life through regular publications on issues of world interest.

To aid in establishing goodwill as the keynote of the new civilisation.

To create a worldwide contact list of people of goodwill.

To support the work of the United Nations and its Specialised Agencies as the best hope for a united and peaceful world.

World Goodwill is an activity of the LUCIS TRUST, which was founded in 1922 and is a registered educational charity in Great Britain. (Charity Nº 216041)

***

GOODWILL IN WORLD AFFAIRS

Exploring world events through the lens of goodwill, via our newsletter, commentaries and World View articles

NEWSLETTER 2019 #1 - IN RESONANCE WITH THE LIVING EARTH

In 2018, the World Goodwill Seminars in London, Geneva and New York focused on the theme In Resonance with the Living Earth. Over two days, speakers from diverse backgrounds shared their experiences and insights on how humanity can bring itself more into resonant harmony with the other kingdoms of nature, both spiritual and material. The positive significance of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as practical guidelines for humanity to become a more responsible steward of the animal and plant life and the minerals of the planet, received special attention at the meeting held in UN Headquarters in Geneva.

Hylozoism – an unusual word for an ancient concept: that all matter is alive. When we take this thought seriously, then the idea emerges of the Earth itself being alive, and the life of our species being an integral part of this great Life. And we can expand the thought still further, seeing humanity as an active participant in a Kosmos thrilling with the energy of Life, evolving purposefully towards states of increasing perfection. This vision has always been part of the ageless wisdom tradition, and is also held, in varying degree, by a number of religious faiths.

As noted in New York, it is humanity’s responsibility to help raise the vibration of the lower kingdoms, through sympathetic resonance, as part of this Kosmic perfecting process. Unfortunately, over the last few centuries, we have been neglecting this responsibility, and the results of this neglect are now imperilling our own survival.

Recognition of this fact, and intelligent, compassionate responses to it, informed the presentations at the meetings. In Geneva, the key importance of the will qualified by good was recognised, and it was observed that as “the dynamic energy of the soul, will can lead us to realise our purpose based on a fraternal vision of humanity. It is then that competition will give way to collaboration, and sharing will offset any selfish attitude.”

If we ponder how the future of our relationships with other beings might look, we could conceive of it as a vast collective meditation upon other beings as co-participants in the great web of life. If the mentally focused insights of a more patient and humble science can blend with the heart-filled connection with other beings that has always been available, then a truer cooperation among the various kingdoms of nature, mineral, vegetable, animal, human and spiritual, can arise. In this future, where diversity of form and function is not just accepted but celebrated, we should be able to develop ways to sense and cooperate with evolutionary purpose.

One Theme, Three Locations, Many Presenters

In order to contain the material within the space of one issue, this year we have opted to give a short extract from each speaker’s presentation, staying as close as possible to their original words, so that their energy will hopefully be conveyed. As previously, there is biographical information and a link to the full video of each presenter in the article.

Vita De Waal reflects on the importance of sound as a harmonising element and how this was already recognised in ancient times in the design of sacred spaces.

Jeremy Dunning-Davies warns of the danger of placing too much faith in mathematics as a guide to understanding the physical universe.

Marco emphasises the importance of international cooperation, and how cooperation can challenge us to radically shift our perspective.

María Crehuet Wennberg notes the need to bring an end to our obsession with economic growth, and to build a new culture based on personal responsibility and interdependence.

Giles Hutchins shares his thoughts on how to learn from living systems, and use these insights to help build healthier systems and organisations which are life-enhancing.

René Longet explains the emergence of the key concept of sustainable development.

Jen Morgan considers the ways in which diversity, a central aspect of living systems, can strengthen groups and societies.

May East points out the interdependence of the SDGs, and speaks about the next step on from sustainable development, the regenerative approach, which designs for evolution.

Takeo Inamura & Takeshi Muranaka discuss how their objective in creating a card game based on the SDGs is to help individuals recognise the interdependence of the goals, and their own personal responsibility in helping meet the goals.

Mary Stewart Adams invites us to reflect on the wider cosmic relationship of humanity with the starry heavens and how this connects with our responsibilities to the natural and spiritual world.

In Resonance with the Living Earth – Past, Present but... what about the Future?

Vita de Waal is the founder and director of the Foundation for GAIA and the NGO Alliance on Global Concerns. She chairs two NGO Forums working with UN programmes and is on the Board of an ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Places of Religion and Ritual. Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#vw

Everything in our three dimensional universe is subjected to movement. All movement generates sound and resonance which has oscillations, waves, frequencies, speed and direction. Movement can create turbulences, currents, orbits, time, sound, harmonies, rhythms, colours, diversity, continents, regions, root races, seasons, days, nights, and everything in between. Movement can be upward or downwards, inner, outwards, spiral clockwise or counter clockwise, be yin, yang, hot, cold, light, dark, creative, separative, generative, degenerative, attraction, opposition, birth, decay, sickness, health etc.

In the three dimensions which we inhabit, change is the norm, change is law, because there is sound and movement all the time. Therefore, if we want to stop something, keep something as it is or was, that is completely unnatural.

Adolf Zeising wrote in 1854 of a universal law... in which is contained the ground-principle of all forms... in the realms of both nature and art, and which permeates, as a paramount spiritual ideal, all structures, forms and proportions, whether cosmic or individual, organic or inorganic, acoustic or optical; which finds its fullest realization, however, in the human form. In that sense, for him, the human form was the pinnacle of this coming together.

The human dimension is important. While there is a unit in time, it is how we use it. Take the monkshood plant (aconite) that can be used to heal but in too large a dose can kill, or sound itself, which can be used to heal or to torture. Free will is a human prerogative and the use of it determines if we use this in harmony , in resonance, with universal law or not.

It is said that Pythagoras pondered for several years upon the laws governing consonance and dissonance. Since it seems that there are immutable constants in all of reality, there must be immutable laws that govern these. Therefore, to Pythagoras, music was related to the divine science of mathematics, its harmonies regulated by mathematical proportions.

The basic belief that geometry, proportion, mathematical ratios and harmonics were found in music was already known by ancient civilizations and used in the building of prehistoric sites. This re‑discovery has opened up a new field of study, archaeo‑acoustics, which analyses the acoustic properties and use of ancient megalithic sites and Neolithic caves.

The prehistoric El Castillo cave in Spain was already used by hominids 40,800 years ago. Sound was recorded within this cave at a position where individuals would have observed the ritual by a shaman. Subsequent analyses identified a frequency‑dependent amplification of recorded sound intensity for frequencies approaching 100 Hz, with the greatest effect observed at 108 and 110 Hz. This frequency range around 110Hz stimulates a certain electrical brain rhythm associated with intuition, creativity, holistic processing and inducing a state of meditation and tends to induce trance‑like states.

Pythagoras created his musical scale starting with note A that resonates at the frequency of 111Hz. Recent findings of MRI research shows that the brain switches off the prefrontal cortex, deactivating the language centre, and temporarily switches from left to right-sided dominance. Today, mindfulness meditations are not only used for relaxation but also for healing and a study showed a lengthening of telomeres (strands of DNA) that tend to shorten with age, leaving chromosomes vulnerable to deterioration. Telomeres are shorter in people with chronic disease and high stress and longer in young, healthy people. Researchers correlate a lengthening of telomeres with meditation.

Archaeo‑acoustics show that sound at Newgrange in Ireland which was built during the Neolithic period more than 5,200 years ago and the 5,000 year‑old Hypogeum in Malta resonate both at 111 Hz. Bone analysis on location showed the Maltese to be a healthy population. It is likely that many more discoveries will be made about living in resonance with our Living Earth!

***

What’s Wrong with our Present-Day Scientific Thinking?

Jeremy Dunning-Davies is a retired senior lecturer of Hull University in the departments of mathematics and physics. Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#jd

I initially went to University to do pure mathematics but became more interested in Applied Mathematics. As a young research student I remember a Professor giving me a problem to look at which I took home and really worked at, neatly underlining the final answer in red. I brought it in the following day very pleased with myself and gave it to him. He studied it for a while and then suddenly looked up and said “This is fine but what does it mean physically?” I was completely taken aback. He said “What’s the use of a mathematical equation if you don’t know what it means physically?” This was a turning point for me and I think it summarizes what’s wrong with a lot of modern day science where the focus is on trying to make physics fit the mathematics rather than the other way around.

The problem goes back quite some time. In the 19th Century, most activity in physics was going in the direction of electromagnetism. People like JJ Thompson were all working on it, and we had a theory of Relativity by Lorentz that included the ether. Then came Einstein’s papers of 1905 on Special Relativity although nobody took much notice at the time. However, around 1920 his work suddenly came into vogue and Lorentz’s theory was pushed into the background. At this point, science suddenly dispensed with the ether and you could no longer mention it. Then the problems began.

Recently, the CIA released one or two documents containing material possibly linked with Nikola Tesla. I’ve got together with Rich Norman, Scientific Advisor of Thunder Energies Corporation in Florida, and we’ve been talking about an ether in connection with this newly released work and there seem to be possibilities that we can rewrite at least some results without recourse to quantum mechanical ideas by simply using the properties of an ether. It seems you just don’t need quantum mechanics, which is a lovely theory even if people are a bit uneasy about some areas of it. Einstein of course, was very worried about quantum mechanics right to the end of his life.

Our work on the ether and electromagnetism is in harmony with Wal Thornhill and the Electric Universe movement. This group stresses the importance of electromagnetic fields and electric currents present in space, which takes us back to the Scandinavian scientist Kristian Birkeland who used to go out and observe the northern lights and then conduct his own experiments. These were called the Terella experiments and he could actually recreate the aurora in a scaled down form in his laboratory.

Birkeland came up with the theory of how the sun and the earth are linked through a flow of charged particles. But at the same time a British geophysicist, Sydney Chapman, came up with a lovely mathematical theory whose conclusions were the exact opposite of what Birkeland’s experiments showed. Birkeland’s work was totally dismissed in favour of this mathematical theory. It was only in the 70’s that they were able to verify that in fact Birkeland was correct and Chapman wrong. A fact that has never really been made public. Unfortunately, this sort of thing is happening all the time.

The electric universe movement is coming up with explanations of phenomena that orthodox astrophysicists cannot explain but which they seem reluctant to discuss. However, there’s lot of research going on at NASA now that links up with Electric Universe theory. And it may surprise you to know that General Relativity is not used very much at all. Organisations like NASA use Newtonian mechanics – they don’t need supposed corrections from General Relativity. So is General Relativity correct? Is it necessary? It’s a lovely theory. Relativity is what I loved best in my final year as an undergraduate at university but why was I attracted to it? Put simply, I loved the beautiful mathematics!

With Special Relativity, not only did Einstein get rid of the ether, but because he used this mathematical transformation called the Lorentz Transformation, he brought in all those peculiar anomalies such as the Twin Paradox, Time Dilation etc., and yet if look at the work of James Paul Wesley, an American theoretical physicist, you don’t need the Lorentz transformation. If you just accept that E =mc2 which is an experimentally provable result, you can derive theoretically every useful result that comes from Special Relativity. I know this because I’ve done it. Wesley is a name not known to many though.

I don’t want to decry mathematics. It has its place, but when you study physical phenomena – maths should be secondary to the physics – you use it as a tool. No more; no less. A result from maths that makes a prediction should be examined observationally and/or experimentally to see if it matches up with the physics: – the maths shouldn’t dictate! You don’t force some physical phenomena that has been witnessed to conform to some mathematics that has been dreamt up in separate circumstances.

So if you ask me what’s wrong with science today I would say too often the physical end result is being made to link up with some theory rather than the theory being secondary to the physics of the situation. There are plenty of examples – I’ve just mentioned a few. Beautiful mathematics in isolation from physical reality is the thing from which we really have to get away.

***

International Cooperation: an added bonus, a duty, a necessity or an unstoppable natural tendency?

Marco has worked for over twenty years in international service organizations, in the field and at headquarters. Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#mr

We all have experienced those moments in life when we need to make sense of things in our own world. Those moments are indeed quite interesting. And we know that we cannot make sense of things all the time. To be successful we need to have that urge, the moment needs to be ripe.

When we make sense of things, we give them focus, purpose and direction. We give them meaning both as pieces and as a collective. It is quite an important moment of synthesis. Normally a cycle closes and a new one opens. It is a foundational moment.

It seems to me that this is one of those moments, but on a planetary scale.

Over the past 73 years a few spectacular and unprecedented things have happened:

• the forging of a planetary plan based on an agreement, i.e. based on an expressed manifestation of will – that is the UN Charter and the SDGs;
• an incredible development of international law to address complex issues, as the basis of the existing world order;
• the number of sovereign states has almost tripled;
• the number of associations and private entities and companies has exponentially grown;

My impression is that over the past 73 years there has been, and is still happening, an explosion of will! Let alone the fact that from 2.5 billion we have now become over 7.6 billion and growing – that's a lot of individual wills to engage with! A lot of will and thus force at disposal!

That is not a small thing.

The world has become, to say it with the political scientists – multipolar. A multiplicity of centres of will, active and pursuing their interests.

This may mean that traditional ways to use will, exercise will, may no longer be applicable, nor useful.

We witness the challenges that a multipolar society is representing for our conception of democratic government and exercise of power, as it has been developed over the past roughly 2500 years.

That will require, probably, the search of a new paradigm to channel and use constructively all that will energy that is entering into manifestation through the growing numbers of individuals and organisations.

The test we are facing is one of the use of collective will, group will. How to forge a truly collective will out of individual wills.

Is cooperation the tool to find a new paradigm for the collective use of will toward the continued evolution of the planet?

Yet, are we familiar enough with cooperation?

Indeed, how can we expect nations to cooperate if we, as individuals, even well-intended individuals, do not cooperate, or do it with difficulty? How can we expect our nations to cooperate with others if we, as people and citizens, do not give the right guidance to our governments through carefully thought-through and heart-born models and ideas based on our daily testing and divine instinct?

There is a need to speak more about cooperation, and not just as a beautiful thing, but also the challenges it brings to us, as individuals and as groups, in order to identify ways to overcome them.

Cooperation by default goes beyond the consciousness of an individual and requires the individual to cross that border and enter into the other's shoes. It is about entering an unknown space which can be discovered and mapped only together with others... indeed in cooperation with others!

As such cooperation is not necessarily a means to an end... rather a means to discover ends. In other words, it is important to appreciate the difference between: cooperating to get something done vs cooperating for the sake of it in order to allow and then figure out what to get done.

***

A New Ethical Culture: Values and Alternative Projects for a Finite Planet

María Crehuet Wennberg is responsible for the Energy Policies of the Associació de Micropobles de Catalunya and is vice-president of CMES (Collective for a Sustainable Energy and Social Model). Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#mw

"In the near future the knowledge society will make place for a society of a new ethical culture, a place where we will all be in a position to host the seed of generosity, the only engine capable of positively transforming everything we know."

What do we need to become that new society? Where are we now?

In mid-September, European scientists and politicians met in Brussels under the headline: Last call. Europe, the time has come to put an end to dependence on growth. These scientists raised the point that: Growth is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve due to falling productivity gains, market saturation and ecological degradation. If the current trend continues, there may be no growth in Europe in a decade. Right now the answer to this problem is to try to activate growth by expanding debt, dismantling environmental regulations, extending working hours, and social cutbacks. This aggressive pursuit of growth at any cost fragments society, creates economic instability, and destroys democracy.

They propose four actions, to start slowing down:

1. Set up a special committee in the European Union Parliament on the future of Post-Growth.
2. Incorporate alternative indicators in the macroeconomic frameworks of the EU and its member states, indicators that should have greater importance in decision-making processes than those currently held by GDP.
3. Transform the Stability and Growth Pact into a Stability and Welfare Pact.
4. Create a Ministry for Economic Transition in each of the member states. A new economy that focuses directly on human and ecological well-being could offer a much better future than one that is structurally dependent on economic growth.

There are already many organisations working in this direction. Yet ideas of all these movements that are penetrating the minds of a part of society are also being manipulated by big lobbies taking over the discussion in order to continue selling whatever it may be. It is trendy to do so under labels of ‘ecological’, ‘green’, ‘sustainable’, ‘alternative’... Do we fall into the trap? Do we see the signs that warn us of danger? Or do we continue to drive carelessly and at full speed towards the abyss?

This new culture must change many things – for example:

• the social framework in which we move from a system based on individualism to one based on engaged and active citizens;

• technocracy must give way to real democracy;

• the secrecy that hides so much corrupt behaviour must perish in the face of real transparency;

• the ‘hard’ economy that lives at the expense of the weakest must be replaced by a ‘soft’ economy that knows how to share;

• that attitude of only thinking about this generation needs to make a turn towards a deep respect for the environment and to think that any action has an impact, and that this must be beneficial for many generations (Native Americans said that we should think at least until the 7th generation before deciding on an act);

• we must also rethink globalisation which, although in itself a good idea, has only served to benefit the big lobbies by impoverishing local economies, so we must rethink producing and consuming 0 km products;

• the laws that, necessary in the beginning, have become a rigid corset that oppresses us and that we should learn to accept flexibility, yet being strict at the same time;

• change the monologue of a single actor that is the State for a choral work whose actors are the entire society.

To build that kind of society it is essential that its components, all citizens, be responsible and inter-independent.

This new culture must be based on individual change, knowing and understanding that no change is really strictly individual: if a person changes, that change ends up influencing the family, the neighbours, the neighbourhood, the municipality, the region, the nation and the Planet, until it reaches the entire Universe.

Nothing is impossible.

***

Sensing Evolutionary Potential: Co-creating Magnificence with the More-than-Human

Giles Hutchins is a keynote speaker, adviser and executive coach at the fore-front of a [r]evolution in leadership consciousness and organisational development, stimulating head-space and heart-knowing for forward-leaning leaders and organisations to become vibrant, purposeful and future-fit. He is the author of three books, and his latest TEDx talk is entitled [R]evolution: Separateness to Connectedness. He blogs at http://www.thenatureofbusiness.org Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#gh

There are three levels of learning from nature, three levels of activating the logic of life. The first one is living systems design, (which Jen and Dominic have already explored a little – for example, permaculture). Living systems design involves ways in which we can look at the patterns and life principles that we find within the living systems that we operate in, and apply these to our ways of designing products and processes. So this is biomimicry design, this is permaculture, this is closed-loop economics, circular economy, waste equals food, industrial ecology, biophilic design in our workplaces. There is a lot of really interesting work going on in this area at the moment, lots of innovations, very exciting.

Then there is applying living systems logic to our human cultures and our organisations. This recognises that our organisations aren’t machines, that they are actually living systems. When we can see that there are essential life dynamics that we can apply to our own ways of approaching life, we can see that there is an essential dynamic of divergence – opening up; convergence – bringing together; and out of that tension of the two comes emergence – the way in which we find our flow, the way in which we deal with our evolutionary potential.

So divergence in business is in terms of diversifying: distributing decision-making, decentralising it to empower people to make change happen at the local level, as mentioned by Jen. Also, as Jen said, this involves embracing diversity, but not just diversity of age, creed, culture and gender, which is very important, but also in terms of perceptual horizon – how we see things. This brings in different parts of the system, people from different silos, people from different parts of the stakeholder ecosystem, so the organisational membrane permeates more readily. This increases the relationality of our organisations, making them come alive, moving out of the mechanistic, soul-sapping cultures that we’ve got caught up in.

Now, divergence needs to be balanced with convergence, otherwise the organisation becomes too chaotic, too amorphous. That convergence has traditionally come through power-based hierarchies of control, because of the patriarchal, ego-explosion, scientific management thinking that we talked about earlier. That approach doesn’t help, because it undermines the divergence. So instead, we want convergence to come through a sense of purpose, as Jen discussed. And when we say a sense of purpose, we don’t mean rejigging the mission statement, or putting a new values charter on the wall: we mean deeply developing a resonant sense of purpose within the organisation. Extraordinary things happen when people resonate with the organisational sense of purpose, but for us to deeply resonate, for this sense of purpose to touch our humanity, it means that the organisational sense of purpose has to be, in some way, enhancing life. It needs to be life-affirming, because that is what turns us on. And sociological studies show that it can take as little as ten to fifteen percent of people in the organisation deeply resonating with that sense of purpose for a shift to happen: it becomes easier to let go of those power-based hierarchies of control, and allow more divergent ways of operating to happen. The organisation comes alive, and we find emergence flowing.

Finally, we come to the third level, living systems being…

***

Human Values and Sustainable Development in the World of Today

René Longet is the President of the Fédération genevoise de coopération, and the vice-president of SIG, specialist on sustainable development. Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#rl

What gives Sustainable Development to us?

In 1987, the notion of Sustainable Development was born: A development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Two concepts are inherently present: 1) the “limitations imposed by the present state of technology and social organization on environmental resources” and by “the ability of the biosphere to absorb the effects of human activities”; 2) “Sustainable development requires meeting the basic needs of all and extending to all the opportunity to fulfil their aspirations for a better life. A world in which poverty is endemic will always be prone to ecological and other catastrophes.” (http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf § 27)

Economics: We need an inclusive, utility-oriented economy that can nurture the common good. In 2011, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) defined a green economy as: “one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.” 1

Cultural: Sustainability is finding the right balance between needs and means, being and having, today and tomorrow, North and South, humanity and nature. We need to modify the concept of progress, become involved ourselves to make the best choices as well as speak about responsibility and the long term.

Political: The World needs an inclusive governance, as well as a rebuttal of the neo-liberal viewpoint that the economy needs no regulation. Such a theory is false, as it fails to account for numerous environmental and social costs which are not reflected in the actual price. Thus markets are daily misrepresented; we cannot consider markets without regulation or regulation without markets.

So the State ought to be: accountable for equity, provide help to the weak in their relation to the strong, informative and vitalising, transparent, efficient, supporting engagement and determining priorities. The great challenges concerning the territorial dimension require global regulations, since financial exchanges, migrations, climate, oceans, biodiversity all transcend national boundaries.

***

From Concept to Action

In 2000 the Millennium Declaration2 and the 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)3, to be reached by 2015, included the elimination of extreme poverty and hunger, a pledge for primary education for all, the promotion of gender equality as well as women’s autonomy, and the reduction of infant mortality.

The June 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) concerned two principal issues, the contribution of green economy in the elimination of poverty and the institutional framework for sustainable development.

The final document, called “The Future We Want” 4 proposed the replacement of the MDGs by the goals of sustainable development; they “should be action-oriented, concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in nature and universally applicable to all countries, while taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities.” (§ 247)

In September 2015, the UN General Assembly adopted the document Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (or Agenda 2030 5), including 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), “with 169 associated targets which are integrated and indivisible.” (§ 18).

The proper orientation of financial flows as a function of human needs – as defined by the SDGs – will enable us to fulfil the assigned tasks. The economy will be sustainable or it will not be, and conversely, sustainability will be economical or it will not be.

Towards a Sustainable Economy

A lot of goodwill is manifested through the social and solidarity economy6, and fair trade7, these being two forerunners in the present world of what the future economy should be. Innovative producers who propose services or goods of ethical, environmental, or social quality remain in the background, being too much ignored by markets and consumer choice. This has to be changed.

Orient financial fluxes in the right direction

A noticeable proportion of the investments are engaged in non-sustainable, unethical or even a destructive manner, as is the case with coal, nuclear energy or agribusiness. There is also the Dark net of economy absorbing yearly about $35'000 billion! In order to realize the whole of the 17 SDGs, i.e. to bring the world towards sustainability, we would have to invest between $5’000 and $7’000 billion yearly. Therefore, we cannot claim that this money is not available!

Replace the universally used but misleading GDP

The GDP basically ignores anything which has not some monetary function… and adds apples and pears together: anything involving consumption being welcomed. It is time to replace it with indicators of sustainable development, of human development or – as the example of Bhutan8 shows, of national happiness, or the notion of ecological footprint9, an approach developed during the second half of the 1990s by Mathis Wackernagel. It does not include social aspects (“a social footprint”) but the link is evident: exploitation of resources leads to a deepening of inequalities and a sharpening of conflicts concerning access to resources. In a sustainably managed community, social cohesion increases, the ecological footprint decreases, and the economic web becomes sounder.

_______________

Notes:

1 Towards a Green Economy, UNEP, Nairobi 2012, p. 9 https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/c ... sis_en.pdf

2 http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm

3 http://www.un.org/fr/millenniumgoals/background.shtml

4 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.as ... 288&Lang=E

5 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.as ... 0/1&Lang=E

6 Laville J.-L., Cattani A.-D., Dictionnaire de l’autre économie, Coll. Folio Actuel, Gallimard, Paris 2006

7 http://www.fairtrade.net

8 http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/w ... ressed.pdf

9 http://www.footprintnetwork.org

***

Reflections on Earth Stewardship

A small selection of thoughts which were collated into a booklet for the seminar. To obtain a copy, please go HERE or download the PDF.

If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration. Nikola Tesla

I, the fiery life of divine essence, am aflame beyond the beauty of the meadows, I gleam in the waters, and I burn in the sun, moon, and stars .... I awaken everything to life. Hildegard of Bingen

This is one of the greatest challenges of our time: to convert ourselves to a type of development that knows how to respect creation. Pope Francis

The whole order of nature evinces a progressive march towards a higher life. Helena Blavatsky

There are no unsacred places; there are only sacred places and desecrated places. Wendell Berry

***

Relationships for Change: A Path towards Resonance with all of Life

Jen Morgan is a strategist/entrepreneur working to ‘co-design and co-create strategies that can help accelerate human evolution and the thriving of all life on the planet.’ Jen is the Co-Founder of the Finance Innovation Lab – a globally recognized organisation for social innovation, and is currently Executive Director for The Psychosynthesis Trust. Video at worldgoodwill.org/video#jm

So let’s talk about Nature’s quality of diversity. Going back to the earlier example of the lake in New Hampshire, the lake survived for many hundreds of years, it evolved, it adapted, and it was perfectly working in balance and harmony. Till one year, there was a human intervention, when the local town wanted to attract as many fishermen as possible, so they over-stocked the lake with bass fish. In less than one year, the lake was dead: when I lay on the dock, there was no movement, no life. And it was almost what it feels like now: we have these mega species dominating our financial system, or the energy supplies, or the high street retailers. When I walk down the high street now, I don’t feel like there’s much life, it’s rather dead.

So what does diversity mean in groups? What do I mean by diversity? While I think that in groups and organisations in our society, diversity of race, age and gender is important, I think we are at risk of getting caught up in diversity of appearances rather than diversity of qualities. What I think is important in groups – and especially when we speak about vested interests – is to bring in diversity of thought, of capacities, diversity of emotions, diversity of energies. And this is what I think is important in social change.

Diversity for me is a moral imperative, but it is really a strategic imperative. And by strategic imperative, there are two main things that I mean in that. So it’s a strategic imperative because it does provide more resilience: we can pool our experiences, our capacities, our skills together, to almost act as a buffer against some of the shocks to our human systems, such as climate breakdown, and being in the midst of the sixth mass extinction of species on Earth. We are just on the edge of what we are going to experience in terms of shocks to our system.

The second strategic imperative that I believe that diversity brings is around coming up with better solutions. When I was leading the Finance Innovation Lab we brought all kinds of people together: activists, bankers, psychologists, academics, grass-roots organisers, to think about how could we build collective intelligence, to really shift the financial system? So for example we would bring activists and entrepreneurs together with policy makers, and one of our successes at the time was to create national policy that really allowed new entrants to come in much faster. That, in itself, will hopefully soon disrupt vested interests, so that the financial system is more diverse.

Another example is where we brought together the policy makers with the activists to work with entrepreneurs who were creating brand new disruptive business models, new currencies and financial products. So what we can do with this diversity is to see more of the whole, and see what was more relevant, at all of these different levels, so they could be implemented faster.

So what does it mean for me, as an individual in a group, thinking about diversity? This is a lot of what we teach at the Psychosynthesis Trust – skills that I’ve had to learn as well, around holding paradox. When you are in a diverse group, there are many different truths, and there’s One Truth; and there’s all this multiplicity, and you want to bring Unity together. How do you hold paradox in the groups that you are in? The other skill that I’ve had to learn is around really embracing conflict: when you bring in diversity and have different perspectives, there is often tension and difference, and that often leads to conflict, so how do you embrace conflict as a generative source, and how do you really appreciate difference?

So in the groups that you are in, how diverse are your groups really? How could you bring in more diversity of quality in these groups? And how are you developing your skills to synthesise diversity in groups and in yourself? In psychosynthesis we teach about the sub-personalities, so what I’ve had to learn for myself is how different parts of myself can work together so I have more coherence – how can my mystic side work with my pragmatist side?

***
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36171
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

cron