We have learned well from mistakes made in the modern era (well, mostly, and then, maybe only some of us). We have seen that reason itself, far from a monolithic, transformative force, is a system of logical consistency (as implemented by higher brain functions) that proceeds from fundamental principles that are often emotionally held (lower brain functions). These fundamental principles can often come into conflict with one another, leading to discrete systems of thought that can be at tension. The more firmly dogmatic adherents cling to their opposing systems of thought, the more violently the systems will clash. So reason in the end is another tool, and like a tool, can be used to fashion divisive weapons or constitutive bindings, and it can be wielded by individuals or power alike.
Given this, we can’t simply proceed by reason alone. We have to consider the driving engines behind reason as part of the equation: our lower processes themselves. Our subconscious processes, our emotions, our basic needs, all of these processes are an inseparable part of us and constrict our avenues of thought in ways we don’t yet entirely understand. They also play a large part in our practical actions, and contribute to formations of power structures in time and space; they play an important role in the eventual physical manifestation of ideology and how complete or incomplete that ideology will appear given social, political, and environmental contexts, and finally, and perhaps most importantly, they play a part in the apprehension of bare reality. Their existence in us ties us to life itself and we cannot escape this fact. The sciences themselves have firmly established that we aren’t the rational creatures we thought we were.
Of course, at this time, these processes are hard to observe objectively. Perhaps in time the sciences will generate frameworks to better understand these things, but for now the best we can do is discuss the subjective experience of these processes and the nature of our consciousness. We can also discuss somewhat subjectively the interactions of these processes and how they end up forming culture. A better understanding of these partially understood or even misunderstood processes could lead to a better understanding of reason and ideology themselves as formative forces in our material world.
And let’s not forget that we are all thinking, yet feeling human beings. As we sit here now and discuss these issues and think about the best ways humankind can revise its societies, it would be beneficial to consider in our analysis our own subjective experiences and how they relate to our ideology formations and our metacognition. Admittedly, these questions overlap pretty heavily with those of the metacognitive process, but the issues emphasized in this section will be of a more subjective and even spiritual/cultural nature, issues that are more difficult to analyze systematically. They are issues we have to approach with a more artistic/literary/spiritual mood. The more angles we can cover, the more opportunities we have for additional insight.
For example, has our society reached a point of collective over-analysis? Have we exhausted our traditional avenues of thought? How effective are we in instantiating these ideas in the first place as the world continues to change (and at this time of instability, change rapidly)? To cite a subjective experience, have you not become startled at a point when myriad answers to a question could have equal validity, and that they all seem to be simply different angles to approach the same thing? Have you become startled at how 2 dimensional our ideological systems seem? Perhaps we must occasionally remind ourselves that these things are constructions in time; they can be good constructions that are consistent with what we observe in reality, but it is also important to keep in mind that we as a culture are constantly in flux.
Witness brilliant minds dropping away from the traditional frameworks to pursue certain spiritual paths, such as in Surrealism or in the drug culture in the 60s, or as with the countless minds delving into various systems of spiritual thought; when we begin to realize how interconnected even the intellectual disciplines are, and how they inform one another indirectly and by intellectual bridges administered by thinkers with interests in multiple fields, we see that oftentimes to break a pattern of thought (could this be part of the mechanism leading to the famed paradigm shift?) one has to fall outside of the normal avenues.
Perhaps it is best to let it go at times and enter more organic and fluid modes of thought, which could lead to more creativity and a sound mind, as opposed to constantly trying to work through endless, twisted up, convoluted instantiations that are themselves unable to completely account for the complexity of the realities under them. However, those instantiations themselves throughout history have proved useful in advancing knowledge, even if accidentally. And so we see that logical analysis and artistic/spiritual pursuits inform one another in culture. So pursue all possibilities.
Posts tagged with “Culture and Consciousness” will seek to address these issues.
