Here’s a couple of essays I wrote in college. They say formal education takes away your creativity. I say, it only does if you let it! You can be academic and still creative!
“The creative adult is the child who survived,” Ursula K. Le Guin.
I grew up in Royal City Washington, one of the most rustic middle-of-nowhere places in the entire state, raised by Mormons—very religion oriented people—who taught me certain morals and dogmas. I am a product of my parent’s and community’s beliefs, all but defined by a contrasting rebellion which I acquired at a young age. In the Mormon faith individuals are baptized at the age of eight, and at this time I did not want to be, forced into doing so by my parents, which was the trend of such until I turned eighteen and decided for myself that I would no longer be involved in a religion I shared neither belief nor interest with. Throughout my years of living in this religious environment and chastise-imposing town, I lived up to some expectations while falling short of others, accepting my part in both my home and community yet denying the role others wanted of me.
At a young age I took on the role of the joker, always making fun, always using innuendos and sarcasm to keep things lively and everyone smiling, or, in most cases, offended. I have always shared these traits with my family, siblings and parents alike, yet taken them to extremes in the past. This could be attributed to the school atmosphere—kids being kids, you might say—but my family had a much stronger effect on me than school ever did. Others like me, class clowns they were called, usually had some sort of home-grown condition driving them to become as such, whether being a lack of attention or possibly even abuse of some kind. I saw this in others and once entering high school and gaining a small similitude of self-awareness began searching for the reason behind my own behavior. Throughout my searching, both within and without, I have made several discoveries. We all become like those we surround ourselves with—if we allow this to happen, that is—friends and acquaintances alike. Who our family is we have no choice about, but a choice always stands, in this case whether we choose to be around them or not and how we allow them to become involved in and affect our lives and decisions. Regardless of all else, we are the ones who choose how our environments affect us and nothing, not even our own family, can change who we are if our minds are set to a purpose.
Despite the obvious fact that our world has quite a large hand in shaping who we become—so large, in fact, that on occasion we appear to have no choice—there is always a choice and we always have ways of escaping situations. It is my belief that everything happens to us for a reason, and, in most cases, this means we allow things to happen to us rather than creating or controlling situations, ultimately submitting to the ways life tosses us around like ragdolls instead of gripping the reins and harnessing the tempest. Another prime example of someone’s environment only partially affecting who they became is the story of The Other Wes Moore, telling the tale of two men with the same name who grew up only miles apart in the city of New York, one becoming very successful on Wall Street, the other gaining a life sentence in prison. These men’s stories were so close and yet so far from one another, but then circumstances arose and their paths diverged virtually as far apart as possible. As one began and eventually embraced military school, the other established an extensive drug cartel, each one heading down the path they chose, leading them to their eventual fates.
Arguments could be made that their lives turned out how they did because of their individual situations, each one with adverse influences; yet this theory is flawed in light of our freedoms of choice and desire. “There is no stronger force on Earth than the will to live,” says an anonymous source, which speaks to me on many levels, one of which being that absolutely no one can stop the force that is our passion to live our lives how we wish. In his graduation speech to Kenyon’s class of 2005, “In His own Words,” David Foster Wallace discusses this, yet from a completely different perspective. He refers to our “default settings,” and how we each see things around us only in ways that we are directly and immediately affected by, and how we want them to or think they should be. This he relates to everyday occurrences such as driving in traffic and being in line at the supermarket. We each allow these things to affect us in certain—mainly negative—ways and, just as Wallace discusses, we must divert from our “default settings” in order to create a more concordant environment for us all to live in, not that his speech is about morality, as he states and restates many times throughout. But I digress. Wallace’s speech is also about the unconscious adulation of material possessions. And let’s not forget narcissism, which I believe to be one of the strongest inner voices one can have, compelling them to do things both beside themselves—a dangerous thing—and the environments they live in. Coming back to the anonymous quote above, one’s own personal motives, whether self-righteously rooted or otherwise influenced, are the strongest forces in life. This can relatively be associated with ranging circumstances, meaning that such forces could be simply one’s desire to live a life of success, or one’s desire to remain alive, seeding the primary root to the quote, “no stronger force…than the will to live.”
Wallace tells the story of three fish, two younger and one older. The older fish asks the younger two, “How’s the water?” and as he swims along one of the younger fish says to the other “What the hell is water?” His speech goes on to relate this to our lives and how we always seem to overlook the obvious and see only what our minds have been programmed to see. A smart mind is dangerous, an overused cliché which I actually find to be rather profound, as I believe that the collective consciousness of the planet is waking up and realizing things, such as the oppressive corporations and “governments” that keep the rest of us slaves to their money machines: subservient and brainless. Once again a choice is presented: to live in submission or to fight the power and do something about our current situation. Either way, we can allow ourselves to be cowed and controlled or live our lives how we want and actually gain something from this sordid life. Wallace states that “The capital T-Truth is about life BEFORE death,” meaning that we come out of this life with something to show for, that we have made a positive difference on the world we left behind, such as Martin Luther King Jr. discusses in his essay “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”
In this letter, King is writing to his fellow clergymen in response to a letter that they sent to him. Their letter was intending to explain to him that they felt he was being an extremist and doing things that were “unwise and untimely,” implying that he was being pugnacious and rash (203). His response was quite extensive and very direct. He addresses each of their arguments in turn and not only shoots them down but outright denies them and provides proof and examples as to why his actions were both wise and timely. He explains that things must be done in such a manner that invokes progress as he makes examples of both religious and secular stories and instances to illustrate and prove his point. As we all know, the issue at hand is segregation. King’s argument is simple: to stop segregation and become active in just recourse. His letter is to men of all races but mainly to the white clergymen, beseeching them to become involved in the injustice that engulfs the country, all but saying that they are the ones who are doing injustice by not acting. He compares their actions to that of the Germans during the time of Hitler, asking whether they thought it to be right for the Germans to follow the law and turn their Jewish neighbors over to the Nazis to be killed, or to break the law and aid the Jews in escaping their deaths.
Such as I would ask, do you think it right to judge someone by their sexual preference? Or their religion? How about their opinion on abortion? Many of us want to provide our view of justice and incorporate it into the very laws we live by; but the truth is we are all different and each of our views is convoluted and fashioned by what we have been taught to believe is right or wrong, influenced by our upbringing and our surroundings both at home and away. Our minds have been spellbound and shaped to fit that of the media and what our government and “superiors” would like for us to see as important and relevant and, in most cases, such is passed down from generation to generation, as parents and children tend to think alike. But we must break the cycle of mindlessness! The world today is a cesspool of conformists who act as they are told and think as they have been conditioned to. But why must it be this way? Why must our lives and everything about them—our habits and inclinations, our spending trends and styles—be determined by what is considered acceptable or common? Because this is how we have been cultivated and harvested to live and be, to think and even to feel. Our very emotions have been planted into us like seeds in the field. But there is a solution. To fight these tendencies and make a cognitive effort to help others see the error of their ways, spreading the awareness and developing a more mindful way of living and a supportive way of life, just as King would agree.
His essay discusses the separations we as a society place and allow to be placed between us. We segregate ourselves based on caste, race, and even sex, separating not only our lives but our opinions and perspectives. What progress is to be made as such? How are we as a civilization expected to grow and develop when such vast rifts exist? King goes on to discuss the inexorable manifestation of, “The yearning for freedom…” of the oppressed; in this case the blacks (213). Those who suffer from oppression and tyranny will eventually and absolutely grow weary of their captivity and make a stand, just as Dr. King and others did during his time. His movements were considered extreme but he repudiates this claim and relates his actions to others’, and gives examples directly out of the bible as to why his actions, like theirs, might have been considered “extreme,” but they were for reasons that might not have been quite as horrific as others. One story in particular stood out to me:
In that dramatic scene on Calvary’s hill three men were crucified for the same crime—extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth, and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation, and the world are in dire need of creative extremists. (214)
As he concludes this illustration he further proves his lack of extremity and his mere active pursuits of justice, which could not possibly be considered extreme when viewed as such, especially when compared to his example of Christ. King’s use of the word environment in this section further demonstrates my argument, as we are all products of our environment, yet we do not have to be, or rather should not be in many circumstances. Our world is shaped to fit the molds that have been laid out for us and, just as Dr. King relates, often times these are not just designs to be living up to. “An unjust law is no law at all,” meaning that a law can merely be defined by its fairness, and natural law is the only thing that can dictate what this truly means (208).
Otep Shamaya, the lead vocalist of her self-titled band called Otep, is a self-educated poet, anthropologist, and philosopher. In many of her songs and poems she discusses the hierarchy of civilization and how we are each affected by the actions and decisions of those above us on the proverbial totem pole. In one of her songs, “Smash the Control Machine,” one of the lines says: “Happy little slaves pulling minimum wage,” further conferring the forms that have been laid out for us and the brainwashed masses engulfing our world, living only to be reaped. Her views are rather cynical and pathological, yet the ethical standpoint remains. We are each human beings and “created equal,” as Thomas Jefferson said, yet we do not grow up to be, as the world we live in today raises us to believe.
We each grow and develop differently, adopting certain features of our environment and the people in it while discarding others. Many of us are completely unaware of this, yet there are individuals that decide who they become and make a conscious effort to shape their lives to their wills. These particular people are living against the grain, you could say. Some decided they do not want to end up like their parents, poor and drunk; others grow to defy everything their parents ever taught them, rebelling because they don’t want to be told how to live. In the article, “Ethnic Differences in Trajectories of Depressive Symptoms: Disadvantages in Family Background, High School Experiences, and Adult Characteristics,” a study was done which discovered that generally young adults suffer from depression because of “anxiety and uncertainty” due to a provisional period in life, but then as stability and structure form, depression lessens. Later in life, as physical health declines, loved-ones become scarce, and occupational changes are imminent, if not a reality, depression returns. Variables such as family background and high-school experiences are clearly deciding factors in many situations, not race, just as the study was expected to disclose. What did make a large difference was the prosperity of the person’s family. Those from wealthier families declined in depressive symptoms after the anxiety of early adulthood passed while others from poorer backgrounds did not exhibit this decline. But what was the true reason for their waning in depressive symptoms? Was it the stability of their parents? Or could it simply have been a trait passed down by parent, to go through life with more positive dispositions? As everyone knows money does not buy happiness, but with it comes a resolve that allows one to be impervious to the apprehensions of life. Yet is it not the money that conveys this, but the attitudes of those who have it. They are not susceptible to the worries of life because they are cognizant not to be, the epitomes of bliss because they want to be, not because they have the means to. We all have the means to be happy within ourselves. You could say that their worries are removed, which is true in relation to finance, but what about the remainder of things? The wealthy still have to deal with the inevitable: accidents, sickness, and especially death. The list goes on. Why, then, do these people not feel depressed if they still face the pains of life? Because they make an effort not to.
Furthermore, another study showed that similar factors played a role in the percentage of obesity among youth living in Canada as stated in the article, “Neighborhood Socio-economic Status and the Prevalence of Overweight Canadian Children of Youth.” Youth in “deprived neighborhoods” suffered from obesity, while lack of safety and rises in social disorders also factoring in, including the education level of the father and the physical activity of the child or youth. Now the latter is pretty self-explanatory, as we all know that physical activity dictates one’s weight especially when coupled with yet another issue associated with disadvantaged neighborhoods: poor dieting habits. These neighborhoods are generally located near fast food restaurants and fewer grocery stores where healthy food is affordable. Yet these circumstances are still avoidable and completely controllable. Children and their parents eat fast food because it’s easy. No one wants to make the effort to prepare food themselves, let alone shop for what is healthy. In other words, what it boils down to is laziness, lack of activity. One’s weight is directly related to the amount of calories they take in compared to that which they burn off every day, and what leads to this is simple: sloth and gluttony, two of the seven “deadly sins,” which actually have merit as one’s weight is also directly related to their health in many ways. Just as the article states, diabetes and cardiovascular disease are both caused by obesity. All of the variables mentioned in this study are associated with the “socio-economic status” of each of the families but these situations are manageable, governed by none other than our government.
To reiterate, our government and the organizing corporations of the world have placed around us the conditions we live in. Not only do they control everything about our lives, but they place certain things in our heads, such as the notion that we are deprived or that we could never get ahead, stuck in the slums we live in. But who is to say that we are in such bad circumstances? No matter how bad you’ve got it there is always someone out there who has it worse than you do. Each of our parents taught us this. So why is it set in all of our minds that what we have is not enough, and how can this particular inkling not have a positive effect on us to inspire passion to better ourselves rather than a sense of hopelessness? The American dream is to be wealthy and own material possessions. Who lead us to believe that this is what is desirable in life? The government, the media, and those “successful” who train us to think that money truly can buy happiness.
The self-titled author of The Other Wes Moore, believes, as I do, that it will take the efforts of everyone who is willing to make the changes necessary for our world to live up to its true potential, just as Dr. King and David Wallace discuss, claiming that the true injustice is sitting idly by and allowing such atrocities to take place all around us while those who are the problem and those becoming the problem collide on planes intersecting with the contingency of a supposed buffer. We can separate ourselves all we want but the truth holds: not one of us is any better or worse than the other, and nothing can bring us together aside from a collaborative effort to make this happen, which a lack of has created the world we live in today: a senseless mass of servants who let their environments circumscribe who they are, nullifying the purposeful option of deciding for themselves. So, it is not our environments that shape who we become, but the allowance of it, the acquiescence that would eventually lead to our destruction if not for the endeavors of the few who have unconditionally fought for the good of the many throughout history, who do so today, and, with any luck, will continue to do so in the future.
King Jr., Martin Luther. “Letter From Birmingham Jail.” 50 Essays. Ed. Samual Cohel. 3rd ed. Boston:
Bedford. 2011. 179-81. Print.
Lisa N. Oliver, and Michael V Hayes. “Neighborhood Socio-economic Status and the Prevalence of
Overweight Canadian and Youth.” Canadian Journal of Public Health 96.6 (2005): 415-420. PRoQuest. Web. 9 May 2012.
Moore, Wes. The Other Wes Moore. New York: Spiegel & Grau Trade Paperpacks. 2008. Print.
Walesman, K, G. Gee, and A. Geronumus. “Ethnic Differences in Trajectories of Depressive Symptoms:
Disadvantage in Family Background, High School Experiences, and Adult Characteristics.” Journal
of Health and Social Behavior 50.1 (2009): 82-98. ProQuest. Web. 9 May 2012.
Wallace, David Foster. “In his Own Words.” More Intelligent Life. 19 September 2008. Web. 4 June 2012.
Yin and Yang of Technology
What do you think about technology? If you’re like anyone else you think it’s great! Technology has led us to where we are today: a golden age of discovery and abundance of information, this attributed to the internet and ease of access to it. Search engines have become man’s new best friend. You can almost instantly find the answer to any question involving anything, literally. Today, arguments have become virtually extraneous thanks to Google, but what has technology really done for us? It has replaced everything that mankind was meant to do for himself and made tasks as simple as the push of a button. Not that I don’t enjoy and appreciate the technology that we have today, but our elders said it, “We have it way too easy.” Technology has made us lazy, it has made us weak, and it has made us senseless, granted not all of us, there are those who regularly labor arduously or workout at the gym, exercise their minds or educate themselves, but what of the masses? Most people sit behind a computer or a television all day, both at work and at home, and never have to exert themselves in the slightest. What you do for a living doesn’t always affect your physique but in many cases it does, and your career does not always determine your level of intelligence, but, again, many times it does. Someone with a master’s degree generally has a much higher I.Q. than say a high school dropout—not that this is news to anyone—but there are individuals who excel that haven’t even finished school, contrastingly there are those who went to ivy league graduate schools yet have absolutely no common sense. However, technology has dumbed down the masses into thinking that democracy truly exists or that socialism is the way to go. Technically it is our government that has brainwashed our world, technology simply a tool to do so much more efficiently. But, more on that later. Technology has replaced anything and everything that we are meant to do for ourselves. Our society is completely codependent upon itself—wrap your mind around that for a second—and our economy is a prefect reflection of what our society has become. We ship things overseas because they are cheaper that way, but do we ever stop to think about the ones making them, working for pennies an hour, reeling from the completely disconcerting hard day’s work that was not even close to worth the pay? Well that is what we are facing here in America—by this I mean working for next to nothing while our government basks in OUR earnings—and I for one am not okay with it! But I digress. We are all completely reliant on our society and the economy to remain exactly the way it is. What would happen if the economy were to fail, as it most certainly appears to be looming toward? It will be the end of our world as we know it. Production will stop. Distribution will stop. Transportation will stop. Our world will be turned upside down. And how did we get here? Technology.
What an amazing tool the internet has become, to have access to virtually any subject desired. Every day the gap closes further and further between what there is to know and what can be found on the internet. Then again, perhaps the rift is expanding. “The more we know, the more we don’t know,” this saying has been stated and reworded many times, but I am using Matt Ridley’s words to illustrate how, in many subjects including science, we have used technology to make new and grand discoveries that always lead to yet another discovery. Today scientists believe they have finally come to the end of a long line of discoveries that explain the cosmology of the Universe: the Higgs Boson, or “God,” Particle. Physicist Brian Greene—and many others, of course—believes that the Higgs Particle is exactly that: the end result of a long anticipated discovery that explains the Big Bang Theory. I won’t get into the specifics, but put simply the particle is nearly undetectable and considered “fundamentally irremovable,” as Greene states. The particle does not provide proof of God, as the title suggests, but it does go a little further than modern physics cares to share. What he does say in his explanation is that the Higgs Particles, which make up what they refer to as a Higgs Field, are comparable to Ether, also known as Prana, which is defined as “the energy of the sun and connecting the elements of the Universe,” on Wikipedia. Prana, Tachyon Energy, Chi, many beliefs and dogmas have a word for this form of energy and many describe it as the “energy of spirit.” Scientists around the world have made discoveries and theories that lead them to believe in God, or at least in a higher power. These theories, although may in fact be on to something, I believe to be scientists ways of admitting that they don’t have the answers to everything and that they never will. An example is dark matter or dark energy, formerly known to inhabit everything everywhere throughout space, which has been rebuked in light of this new Higgs Particle. Thanks to the technology today we have come a very long way from the wheel, and we will continue to make progress, but science will never be able to mimic what nature does and perhaps realizing this will be what saves our species and ecosystem from certain eradication.
Science “is the production of ignorance,” says Mitt Ridley in his article “Science is the Exploration of Ignorance,” meaning that no matter what we discover there will always be something else to discover from previous discoveries and so on. It is a never ending cycle that only serves to mystify all fields of science and begs a leap into yet another field of study known as philosophy, which is the other side of the coin headed by science, or perhaps vice versa. Without philosophy asking the questions about the Universe, how would science know to answer them? Cosmology is known as the study of the origin of the Universe and it is discussed on both astronomical and philosophical levels. But where does this leave technology? Well, it has been a tool in both fields which feed off one another, as where would we be now without the technology to study our Universe and all of its elements? But then this leads to the question: where does this leave us as a society, as a species? To rely on those who study such things for all of the answers, once again going back to the discussion that technology has taken away from our individuality. How can we expect to survive and make any further progress after our economy has crashed and our governments crumbled, stopping all funding and transferring of energy and resources? By reverting back to our roots of living off the land. This is what we are facing and soon.
A little background on the subject. In 2008 Washington Mutual failed, the largest bank in American history to do so. In addition, I think we all remember the bail outs that took place that same year. In short, many people were given mortgages for homes that shouldn’t have, and these people, having been told that the value of their homes would increase only to have the adverse outcomes, walked away from their mortgages for lack of the means to pay them. Many banks were given a bail out option for the government to pay these mortgages—from money being printed out of thin air, but more on that later—virtually becoming the owner of these banks. Now, the Federal Reserve is quite illusory, having the appearance of wealth, but our deficit only stands to further each and every year, and many countries have realized this, as the value of the dollar continues to decline and yet more and more of them are being printed by the day. Virtual money, that’s what’s being printed, pieces of paper that no longer have a value in gold or silver. I read a statistic once that blew my mind: only 3% of the world’s money is physical money, the rest is in the computer system or cyber space, if you will, which I think is a good way to describe it, seeing as how it has no value anyway. You see? Technology stands to further bring us into a delusional world where everything’s intrinsic value is no longer taken into account, rather how much “cash” one can get for it, and now, even as we begin to run out of resources, we continue to milk our exhausted Mother Earth further and further to support our insatiable consumerism. What a mess!
Now, having said all that, technology has done much more good than evil, and it has done so much for us to get here that we have come a very long way in the process. We continue to understand more and more about our world and the Universe, making discoveries that lead to positive results. Once again the topic of God, or instead higher dimension, presents itself. Scientists across the globe are beginning to believe in higher dimensions and energy fields that are much more than electromagnetic. The Higgs Field being a perfect example, but it goes much, much deeper than that. An example is the torus, which is known as a “donut shaped” energy field that surrounds everything in the Universe. The Earth itself has a torus. Our galaxy has a torus. Everything down to the atom has a torus. But what good is a torus? Well, the movie “Thrive” can more accurately answer this question, but for simplicity’s sake, a torus is a way to produce free energy, or rather infinite energy. There is too much involved to explain how, but if you are interested you should watch the movie. Anyhow, my point is that technology has taken us a long way and it continues to further us from our primal ancestors, yet we also extend further from being self-sustaining and into a codependent society that looms toward a complete global meltdown the further we go on living this way.
On a lighter note, we continue to make positive futures for ourselves and our offspring by making innovative and versatile theorizations and studies, aided by the technology that has become available in recent decades. What I mean by this can more easily be explained by the definition of a paradigm shift, also known as a scientific revolution, which can simply be described as “a change in the basic assumptions, or paradigms, within the ruling theory of science,” according to Wikipedia. Thomas Kuhn, scientist and author of “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” written in 1962, explains that a paradigm shift is when the scientific community in any given field changes their “paradigm” or way of looking at something and defining its parameters in a new way. He explains that paradigm shifts occur periodically as new discoveries and theories shine light on the errors of those before and changing completely what is thought of a particular subject or its constituents. It is not an easy process as older scientists, or simply ones who have attached to certain principles, refuse to accept new ideas that put holes in their core belief systems. Kuhn uses this image, which can be seen as either a duck or a rabbit, to illustrate how certain ambiguous data can be perceived completely differently depending on how you are looking at it and what you expect to see. This is one of his controversial viewpoints that have opened doors to new understandings, upsetting the very perspective of science itself. The development of a paradigm shift often takes many years to finally be accepted globally. Kuhn’s book itself is considered a paradigm shift, inviting adaptability and open-mindedness to the field of science. Many scientists reject his view of this and continue on their closed-off paths toward oblivion. I realize this statement is a bit harsh, but without people like Kuhn progress would be minimal and discovery would go unnoticed and outright robbed of its verity, as is happening on a global scale as our governments refuse to allow such things to make it to the media.
Colloquially a paradigm shift is known throughout deliberate followers of the New Age Movement as a shift toward a new understanding of spirituality and consciousness. The New Age Movement is the largest paradigm shift in human history, which can be argued against, but I believe to be true since it brings all religions together and shares the love of God that is present in each and every one of them. Contrary to popular belief, if you believe in God and strive to share his love, then you are a part of the New Age Movement.
Science and spirituality are finally joining as they were meant to! Well, rejoining is more like it. Albert Einstein said it perfectly, “The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology.” Up until about two hundred years ago science and spirituality went hand in hand. Pythagoras, Leonardo da Vinci, Socrates, Plato, some of the greatest minds in history studied things that modern science is just beginning to revisit, such as mass consciousness and Sacred Geometry, but something happened along the way that labeled spirituality, and anything that even points in its direction, as superstition. Sacred geometry is the most basic and fundamental field of study in the sciences, building the foundation for geometry, physics, chemistry, and many other subjects. From the basis of the Platonic Solids and the Phi Ratio—not to mention the Fibonacci Sequence—Sacred Geometry is like the blue prints for the physical reality, mapping out anything and everything in existence. All of the ancient cultures studied such things, as the Flower of Life, the image of creation from which everything in our dimension springs from, can be found anywhere that civilization can.
Sacred Geometry is even present in technology, computers are based on the Phi Ratio, and even architecture is based upon it. Yet modern science still does not acknowledge its cogency. Why? Because of technology and the corruption that has come with it, which has given our government ways to control anything and everything that we see on television and access on the Web. Obviously it hasn’t got to the point that China is at, but here in America we are still limited in what we can see online and definitely what we see on television and in the media. Our news is nothing but a pall of despondence that continues to darken, only reporting the malice and atrocities that occur, attempting to scare and control us even further. Again, I realize this is a rather bleak statement, but I only wish to spread the awareness of the positivity that we should be seeing every day, that many people are living every day! Jim Carrey put it flawlessly, saying that what we see on the news is not an accurate depiction “of what the world is, or what the world wants,” which struck many who were listening in their very souls quite literally.
Nassim Haramein, a physicist of the modern age proves mathematically that infinity exists within the finite and that one cannot exist without the other. This is only the tip of the iceberg, but he goes on to prove that God exists, alleging that infinity exists within each and every subatomic particle, going out into infinity and coming back into the physical in a never-ending cycle that passes its experiences on to the consciousness of the Universe. This, to me, sounds a lot like the akashic records, which are described very nearly to what Haramein claims to have discovered. The akashic records, which are “metaphorically described as a library” according to Wikipedia, are said to contain all empirical knowledge of humanity. But a scientist claiming to have unearthed something discussed by the spiritual community? Unheard of! Of course it is. In the world we live in, we will never hear about such things and most people would not believe them even if they saw the evidence with their own eyes. Why is this?
Well, people are living in a dream. A dream controlled by fear. In this dream we work for our living instead of coexisting harmoniously, sharing everything as it was meant to be shared. Our government makes us work for our living so they can live off of us. We are forced to pay for everything, therefore losing our divine right to anything that was created for us to share equally, not to purchase. If the world did not work this way, there would be no starvation, no poverty. Although it may seem, I am not talking about socialism, where everything is owned by the government, but true democracy where everything is shared by the people. Everything used to be a bargaining, from clothes to supplies to rations. Now everything is no longer taken by true value but it’s supposed “worth.” How much is your computer or your car really worth? A few—or, in many cases, much more than a few—pieces of paper that don’t really mean anything? Or perhaps a virtual measure of those little pieces of paper, since 97% of our money is made and exchanged in this manner. Gold was once the currency and money was meant to hold the “worth” of the gold, but how can a piece of paper be worth the same as a precious metal or something that can actually be put to use? Not that this is how the dynamics work, but they did at one point in time. In whose reality does it make sense to exchange something that is completely worthless for belongings with actual value? Which is not to say that they “belong” to us anyway. We don’t own any of these material possessions—if anything they own us—but we simply borrow them for the time that we live here on Earth. When we pass on everything that we “owned” goes on to become someone else’s, always making its way back to Mother Earth where it began and indefinitely resides. And what do we do with these “possessions” when we’re done with them? We throw them away, rather than passing them on to someone else who could at least make a semblance of use out of, if not fully utilizing, them. Is this justice? Of course not, but then who really cares about justice? Well our ancestors did. Ancient civilizations lived much simpler but they also lived in concordance and harmony, living as true cultures rather than isolated nations to be separated from the rest of humanity. Ironically we live very similarly to the way they did: apart yet together simultaneously. We separate ourselves into societies, yet exchange resources as if living together. But what is the difference between then and now? Love and fear. Our world is currently controlled by fear and our ancestors lived together in love. Sure there was war, just as there is now, but many civilizations lived harmoniously regardless of geographical divisions. Today the entire world lives in fear, even those of us who are supposedly “free.” We as humans have two basic emotions: love and fear. We cannot have them simultaneously, therefore we either live controlled by one (fear) or free with the other (love). Technology has given these malevolent men we call our “politicians”—more accurately fascists—the means to spread fear on a global scale and control the multitudes with the knowledge that they could blow us into oblivion with the push of a button, end our lives with the pull of a trigger. So simple, so efficient. And so I ask again, what do you think about technology?
Akashic Records, Wikipedia
Brian Greene, The God Particle
Mitt Ridley, Science is the Exploration of Ignorance
Nassim Harahein, Sacred Geometry and Unified Fields
Paradigm Shift, Wikipedia