|
Glen -
You are being uncharacteristically imprecise (I think). If you are attributing (non)dualism to the province of Spiritualists, then I point you to the many uses of Dualism in: Science: Subject-Object observation or multiple conflicting models (e.g. wave/particle duality)Are you arguing *against* monism, against the idea that everything is part of a single thing (e.g. the Universe, the Multiverse)? I think I hear that your task is with what you call "New Thought" religions and in particular their alleged idea that dualism is the source of suffering and the related assumption that suffering is bad? As a good Calvanist (I'm guessing a good New Englander like Nick has his own dose of this) I tend to embrace suffering when it comes my way (and feel it is inevitable that it will) if not outright seek it (nope, no Penitentes in my family tree that I know of!). I find that many "New Thought" philosophies/religions seem to adopt (adapt/corrupt?) the Buddhist notions of suffering (Dukkha) which arises from various sources: Aging/Illness/Death; Clinging to the illusion of no-change; Clinging to the illusions of identity/existence. Without being a proselyte of any particular form New Thought , I would suggest that what they are saying (the core message, not what the fringe and the wannabes are saying) is that a great deal of what we experience as suffering (fear, anxiety, anger, loathing, etc.) is rooted in the illusion of a strong self-other duality. I believe this is roughly the dichotomy (speaking of dualism) between those in "the West" who are trying to respond to the increased scope and magnitude of Islamic State (and similar) violence with angry violence in return and those who are trying to understand how these people and their violence are part of a bigger pattern that includes us. In your terminology, the Dualist sees IS, etc. only as a threat to be hammered back into the ground (think Whack-a-Mole) while the NonDualist perhaps sees IS, etc. as a "natural" response to the conditions the participants have been put under. The Dualist, despite suffering acute fear-of-other may well be more-happy than the NonDualist who does not have the benefit of a "simple answer" who must suffer *some of* the same fear as the Dualist as well as the angst of guilt (perhaps) for recognizing one's part in the larger pattern yielding the acute symptoms underway. That said, I've been irritated by "New Age" thinkers from my earliest awareness of them for their propensity to co-opt the language of science for their purposes, as well as replacing (IMO) healthy optimism with polyanna wishful thinking. My own personal philosophy (despite my own Libertarian roots) includes the belief that if I can relax into non-dualism, "I" will not only be "infinitely happy", "I" will cease to exist. There is a bit of a paradox in this, as as much as "I" would like to exchange my various modes of anxiety and distress for the calmness and "just so" ness of the nondualistic perspective, such an exchange would ultimately mean the elimination of the "I" who is contemplating/willing that change. I hope I have done something more than just stir the cauldron bubbling in your head. - Steve
|
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
