“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”
— Philip K. Dick (1928 to 1982)
In my previous article, I briefly mentioned the philosophy of Solipsism, which basically supports the notion that reality cannot be known and there is no such thing as objective truth, which is a suitable belief system for those who attempt to live in separation from The Truth. Solipsism facilitates a psychological convenience for individuals who are apathetic towards the great question of “why do we exist?” and it functions as a padded room for those who find The Truth uncomfortable or even painful to acknowledge. Since perception is individual and dependent on multiple factors such as personal experience, ability to recognize, and emotions, our relationship with reality can often feel lonely when we can’t quite get our perceptions across to other fellow mortals. This inability to be understood can be frustrating and alienating which can be a draw for some to Solipsism, which in latin means Solus (alone) + ipse (self).
Whether or not the subjective feeling of loneliness is experienced, this in itself has no impact on reality, just as gravity doesn’t care if you believe you are a potato or a guy named Moe who delivers moccasins in exchange for money. Gravity, one of the consistent manifestations of Reality, functions as it functions, without fault. If one mortal misperceives this force of nature and tests “the Will of God,” be it through some extreme act of defiance, or under the influence of some chemical concoction that produces a belief of invincibility, that course of action based on a weak foundation of misperception will lead to an uncomfortable outcome. Discomfort and pain is what Objective Reality provides to our subjective body, mind, and spirit when our perceptions are misaligned, because potatoes lack the sensitive nerve system that human beings were gifted.
Rather than resisting or avoiding, there is great benefit to wholeheartedly accepting the natural messages that our nervous system detects, our emotions feel, and our thoughts think. Once we accept these avenues of information transfer, be it via the body, mind, or spirit, our experiences help to interpret these messages. The clearer we are able to see and receive sensations, emotions, and thoughts, and additionally, the more patient we are in our attempt to interpret and find correlation with our experiential past, the more likely we are to come to innerstand the nature of reality in that moment, and rather than simply believe, we will successfully KNOW {K + NOW = Knowledge in the Now =}.
Alternatively, when we consciously or habitually choose to resist or avoid the messages available as we live out our relationship with the ever unfolding living moment, “The Now,” we lose the opportunity to experience fulfillment and true wholeness. This sense of lack often compels a life of addiction and neediness, where solipsistic individuals seek external validation from the outside world in the form of echo-chambered friendships, excessive engagement in distracting activities like shiny objects, netflix bingeing, ten hour video game marathons, shopping “therapy,” self destructive approaches to sport, common alcohol & drug abuse, and gluttonous overeating. The practices of self-indulgence can easily take hold of any weak willed mortal when the tipping point of a simple pleasure begins to turn into an addiction that oozes into any inner void we have.
For this reason, one who crosses the line and departs from their true feelings, accurate thoughts, and real life experiences is subtly lulled into a state of resistance and avoidance of reality; this unchecked temptation slithers its way into the weak minded and with every passsssssing moment becomes habit. That habit grows out of misperception, as misperception becomes delusion (separation), delusion solidifies into psychosis (torment), and psychosis grants the experience of a living hell (torture) where a vicious cycle of denial of reality is perpetuated….like a seed of rot, a false perception grows into a prison for the mind.
When it comes to our individual walk through our own unique lifetime, there are innumerable pitfalls and seemingly unsurmountable hurdles that we’re bound to encounter in this manmade society that sits somewhere between Mother Nature and Father Sky. Our society has speedily advanced in greatness in its dealings with nature’s physical aspects, yet on a whole our vision of the energetic and spiritual components of nature seems to be blurred at best, and at worst obstructed. If this were not true, then there would not be a prevalent use of anti-depressants and other mind numbing chemicals in children and adults. Rather than figure out what is troubling our spirit, we toy with biochemical approaches, legal or not, to either numb our uncomfortable perceptions or outright suppress them. This leads me to the grand question of this article:
“Does everything happen for a reason, or is your ability to read these words just some random and meaningless act of existence?”
Those who believe life is a meaningless act of existence may:
Take their very breath for granted with each passing moment
Blame anybody and anything else for their difficulties
Avoid or mock those who hold differing beliefs, rather than communicate honestly
Propagate the tenets of Solipsism (there is no such thing as Objective Reality)
Avoid, resist, or fight against mental, physical, or emotional pain
Have a difficult time with silence
Those who believe everything happens for a reason may:
Recognize the breath is a gift, freely given from the first to the last
Have graceful patience when encountering differences
Accept responsibility for difficulties
Listen to mental, physical, or emotional pain in order to truly resolve the issue being presented
Seek to understand the various degrees and layers of cause and effect
Know that there is more to life than individual pursuit of desire and comfort
Most people are aware of the short comings of our medical system in that it’s super good at treating the body like a machine, yet shortchanges the process of actual healing that lead to spiritual growth. From the physics of hip replacements to the chemistry of anticoagulation (while being on the forefront of exploration into the realm of trans-humanism), the health sciences wing of humanity chooses to deal with its troubles and problems with either surgery or pills, by force or manipulation, yet does little to nothing to guide and coach people through their walk with the holy spirit. This statement is so true that it likely rubs many readers the wrong way….good. For those who have the false perception that all of creation is nothing but mathematics and code devoid of a Higher Intelligence that Rules from High Law, Just Order, and True Love, you are welcome to continue down that path to hell as there is nothing to stop you from taking that path, other than your God Gifted FreeWill.
Bonus Question: Does FreeWill even exist?
Answer: Stop reading this article….this is not a command, but an option. The absurdly timeless debate of whether or not FreeWill exists is exhausting, yet needs to be addressed given its relevance. Each individual on this planet is responsible for the situation we were born into. The all too common and immature beliefs of denying personal responsibility and even blaming our ancestors serves to resolve nothing, yet breeds helplessness, anger and frustration; what’s worse is the attempt to rationalize God away through the based line of thinking that (a) since discomfort and pain exist, therefore (b) God does not because (c) if God is loving, what kind of god would create such a painful situation? The answer is found when a hurting individual finally realizes what Love is.
Love is Truth. Love is not telling somebody what they want to hear in order to not hurt their feelings: Love finds a way to deliver the message as gracefully as possible in the time allotted. Love is not catering to another’s delusions. Love beckons honesty, piety, and authenticity. In my first few months of nursing in the KGH Emergency Department, I was tasked for the first time in my life, to clean out the debris from the superficial tissue of the abdomen that belonged to a young woman who had fallen off her bike and skidded along gravel. When the ER Physician saw that I was torturing this woman with gentle, prolonged strokes because I was afraid to hurt her even more, he came over, took the antiseptic scrub brush from my hand and said “Neil, I know you’re a nice guy and don’t want to hurt people, however, sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind,” and after asking the patient if she was ready, he vigorously scrubbed the potential source of infection out of her abrasions. She lived.
When it comes to matters of psych-emotional disease, “scrubbing the wounds of the psyche” is no easy task. Because this task is difficult, it is not readily addressed in an effective manner, and now we have 8Billion people who are supposed to communicate in order to get minor and major tasks done. It’s not uncommon for the most simple things to get overcomplicated because communication is becoming simultaneously neutered and volatile, largely because it is difficult to bridge the gap between one’s inner world and another’s, yet we all share this planet. We’re a big mixing pot of cultures, socio-economic status, and age groups and these obvious differences combined with the pace of society makes common ground more uncommon. To top this off, every individual has their own motives, whereby some are altruistic and some are utterly selfish. How are we as a species supposed to work out our differences in order to move forward when people cannot even agree on whether or not beliefs trump reality? The answer is in nature.
Like any other natural process, from the nucleus of a cell, to the collection of cells known as a tissue, to the various tissues that form organs, from organs that form a body, all healthy physical manifestations grow from the inner to the outer as an appropriate response to the ever-changing outer. Therefore, if we are to impact the outer world in a beneficial manner, we must begin with addressing the holes of our own character that we’ve neglected due to unawareness or discomfort. After this first step, we can then make the important distinction between choosing to respond wisely or reacting fearfully. Making this distinction is how we start to exercise our own FreeWill. Once we’ve made a wise choice, our WillPower will inevitably be challenged and tested. It is up to us to engage this process and adapt accordingly.
In order to exercise our FreeWill and strengthen our WillPower, we must conquer our own animalistic desires. When we as individuals are ruled or dominated by our basic survival mentalities that are rooted in fear, we limit ourselves of the potential that is available to us. When we step out of fear we begin to live life on a whole new level. In order to step out of fear though, first we must muster the courage to face it, and this is done by openly accepting every uncomfortable sensation, feeling, and thought we experience. Depending on each individual, the specific approach will vary; the important thing is that the approach is taken in an acutely honest manner.
From moment to moment, on our own, or with help, it is imperative to never, never, never give up and to do whatever scares us most. Like a kid trying to sleep at night, who believes the boogie man in the closet is going to get him any moment, the only way to defeat the boogie man is to not hide under the covers until morning, but to approach the closet, open it, and look him directly in the eyes. As he smiles, smile back, knowing the source of your true strength is inside of you, and nobody can take that from you unless you hand it over willingly.
Typically, as an adult, the world gets more complicated than our childhood bedroom, and the terrain requires greater attention, because while the boogie man is just one, there are many people we must interact with; some people are genuinely sincere and loving, while some are sincere, loving, and imperfectly mistaken. Moreover, there are obliviously ignorant NPCs who have not yet realized their potential and unenthusiastically run on autopilot while serving to perpetuate automated lifeless systems; and more alarmingly, there are legitimately evil individuals who are self interested and will manipulate and attempt to control your own will if you are unskilled at identifying their intentions.
The gift of your life is for you, so believe whatever you want, The TRUTH is that REALITY will function regardless of how much you comprehend. It is totally up to you how much meaning you wish to give to your own existence, though be warned, from moment to moment, every single thought, choice, and action has an equal consequence, and if you falsely believe you can outsmart or outspeed Creator God’s system of growth and development through apathy or outright defiance, time will prove your foolishness. If you attempt to distract yourself, to suppress reality, or laughably try to convince reality it is as you falsely see it, you are not biding yourself any time, nor are you fooling anybody but the one you see in the mirror. The cycles of Karma will continue and both the comfortable and uncomfortable messages of thought, feeling, and memory serve to aid you on your journey. How well you are able to interpret these messages will determine how well you are able to surf the ups and downs generated by the Natural Laws of Objective Reality.
Real
adj. actual, true. Probably before 1325 real having physical existence, actual; later, genuine or authentic (1440); in law, pertaining to property (1444); borrowed from Old French reel, real, from Late Latin realis actual, from Latin res matter or thing. —reality n. 1550, quality of being real; reborrowed from Middle French realite, and directly from Medieval Latin realitas, from Late Latin realis real.
Perceive
v. Probably before 1300 percyven to see or observe; also perceiven become aware or conscious of (probably about 1300); borrowed through Anglo-French parceif, parceit, and parceivre, Old French percoivre, parcevoir, from Latin percipere obtain, gather, grasp with the mind, (per-thoroughly + capere to grasp, take). —perception n. Before 1398 percepcioun act of perceiving.
Experience
n. About 1378, borrowed from Old French experience, learned borrowing from Latin experientia knowledge gained by repeated trials, experience, from experientem (nominative experiens), present participle of experiri to try, test (ex — out of + a lost verb *periri to go through, with surviving past participle peritus experienced, tested). —v. 1533, to test, try, from the noun. The sense of feel, suffer, undergo, is first recorded in 1588.
Believe
v. Before 1393 believen, earlier beleven (about 1386) and bileven (1225). The Middle English forms develped from Old English belyfan (about 1000) and belefan believe, which replaced a variety of Old English dialectal forms including Mercian gelefan, Northumbrian gelefa, and West Saxon gelyfan believe, Old High German gilouben (modern German glauben), and Gothic galaubjan to believe, literally, to make palatable to oneself, accept, approve, from Proto-Germanic za-laubjanan. —belief n. Before 1400 belyefe….to believe…..By the 1400s the distinction in the final consonant was developing to differentiate belief and believe, as seen in the pattern proof — prove and grief —grieve.Experiment
n. Probably 1348, a proof of evidence; also probably before 1350, a test or trial; borrowed from Old French experiment, learned borrowing from Latin experimentum a trial, test, from experiri to try, test. —v. 1484, ascertain by trial, from the noun.
Artificial
adj. About 1390, in the phrase artificial day the part of the day from sunrise to sunset; later (probably about 1425) made by man, not natural; borrowed through Old French artificial, artificiel, from Latin artificialis of or belong to art, from artificium art, skill, craft; —art n. About 1250, cunning, trickery; borrowed through Anglo-French art, from Old French art, from Latin artem, accusative of ars skill. The early use of the word in English centered upon the meaning of skill, scholarship, and learning. The application of “skill” to the arts, such as music, dancing, drama, and literary composition does not appear before 1600.
Natural
adj. About 1250, borrowed from Old French naturel, natural, and directly from Latin naturalis, from natura NATURE; —n. Before 1325 naturel a natural ability or capacity; from the adjective. The meaning of a person with a natural gift or talent is first recorded in 1925. —natural history (1587) —naturalism n. Before 1641, action arising from natural instincts; later, close adherence to nature or reality in art and literature (before 1850); formed from English natural + -ism. —naturalist n. 1587, one who studies natural rather than spiritual things; formed from English natural + -ist. The meaning of a student of natural history is first recorded in 1600. —naturalize v. 1559, implied in naturalized; formed from English natural + -ize, and perhaps, in some instances, borrowed from Middle French naturaliser, from Old French natural, naturel, natural + -iser -ize. —natural law (probably about 1425) —natural science (before 1393)
Nature
n. About 1275, bodily processes, restorative power of the body; later, innate character or disposition (about 1380), and inherent creative power or impulse (about 1385); borrowed from Old French nature, and directly from Latin natura birth, character, from nasci be born; see NATIVE (etymology).
The meaning of the features and products of the earth is first recorded in 1662. Nature in the sense used in human nature is found in 1526.
Mineral
n. Probably before 1425, a substance obtained by mining; ore of a metal (before 1449); earlier, a variety of the philosophers’ stone (before 1393); borrowed from Medieval Latin minerale something mined, from neuter of mineralis pertaining to mines, from minera mine.
Plant
n. Before 1376 plante young plant, sprout, cutting; earlier as a surname Plant (1301); found in Old English (before 830) plante; borrowed from Latin planta sprout, slip, cutting, and later reborrowed into Middle English from Old French plante and directly from Latin planta; perhaps derived from *plantare to drive in with the feet, push into the ground with the feet, from planta sole of the foot.
Animal
n. About 1330, borrowed through Old French, or more likely directly from Latin animal. The Latin word was originally the neuter form of animalis having the breath of life, animate, from anima life, breath, which is related to animus mind, spirit.
Man
n. Old English (before 725) man, mann, mon (pl. men, menn) human being, person; later adult male (about 1000); cognate with Old Frisian monn human being, man, Old Saxon man, Middle Dutch and modern Dutch man, Old High German man, singular and plural (modern German mann, pl. manner), Old Icelandic madhr, Swedish man, Danish mand, from Proto-Germanic *manwaz. In addition, Old English had manna, cognate with Gothic manna, from Proto-Germanic manon.
In all Germanic languages, the word originally had the twofold sense “human being” and “adult male human being,” was mainly assumed by a derivative (German Mensch, Swedish manniska, Duch mens, etc.). The primary sense of Old English man was “human being.” The words wer and wif (meaning man and woman) distinguished the sexes. By the late 1200s wer (Old English wer) began to dissappear, replaced by man in the sense “adult, male human being.” —v. Probably beore 1300 mannen supply (a ship, etc.) with men; from the noun. The sense of take charge, manage, is first recorded in 1338, and that of behave like a man, act with courage, is found about 1400. —manhood n. Before 1250 manhede human condition, nature, or form; later, manliness (before 1300); also manhode bravery (before 1333).
Woman
n. About 1250 woman; earlier wumman (probably before 1200); developed from Old English (about 1000) wimman, plural wimmen, alteration (by assimilation of f to m) of wifman, plural wifmen (before 766), a compound of wif woman, wife + man human being;(currently, 2023) an adult female human.
The formation is peculiar in English, and not found before 766 in Old English, the more ancient word being wif wife. From about 1400 woman and women became the regular spelling for the singular and plural (corresponding to man and men).
Human
adj. Probably 1450 humaigne, humayne of or belonging to man; borrowed from Middle French humain, learned borrowing from Latin humanus, probably related to homo (genetive hominis) man, human being; cognate with Old English guma man (which did not survive into Middle English except in the form bridegroom, from Old English brydguma), Old High German gomo, Old Icelandic gumi, and Gothic guma, from Proto-Germanic *zuman. —n. human being Before 1533, from the adjective. For about 250 years human and humane shared the meaning “of or belonging to man,” but in the 1700s the meanings differentiated in spelling and pronunciation so that human with its stress on the first syllable, retained the original sense and humane with its stress on the last syllable, became restricted to the sense of merciful, kind. The process of a differentiation of meaning, however, was gradual, beginning about 1500.
Humane
adj. kind, merciful. Probably about 1450 humaigne, humayne of or belonging to man; later, having qualities befitting human beings, gentle, friendly, courteous (about 1500); variant of HUMAN. In the early 1700s, this word became restricted in use to the meaning kind, merciful.
Humanism
n. 1812, the belief in the mere humanity of Christ, possibly borrowed from French humanisme (1763). However, humanism has been used in association with several systems of philosophical thought. In the sense of the Renaissance revival of interest in the classics, humanism appeared in 1832, pattered on the earlier (1589) humanist a classical scholar; borrowed from Middle French humaniste, from Latin humanus. Humanism, as a pragmatic system of thought, was introduced in 1903 by C.S. Schiller, who wrote in 1907, “Humanism…is merely the perception that the philosophic problem concerns human beings striving to comprehend a world of human experience by the resources of human minds.” —humanistic adj. (1845).
Humanity
n. About 1384 humanite kindness, graciousness; borrowed from Old French humanite, from Latin humanitatem (nominative humanitas) human nature, humanity, from humanus HUMAN; The meaning of mankind or the human race, is first recorded as humanyte (about 1450). — humanitarian n. 1819, one who affirms the humanity of Christ; formed from English humanity + -arian, as in unitarian, trinitarian. The meaning of one devoted to human welfare, a philanthropist, is first recorded in 1844 and was originally disparaging, connoting one who goes to excess in human principles.
Angel
n. About 1300 angel, aungel (with g as in gem), replacing earlier angel, angles (with g as in gust), a fusion of Old English engel and Latin angelus. The later Middle English angel, aungel are a fusion of Old English engel and Old French angele, angel, aungel, from Latin angelus, from Greek angelos, originally meaning “messenger.”
The Greek word was a loan translation in the Septuagint of Hebrew mal’akh messenger, angel; and angelos may have been suggested by the related Greek angaros royal mounted courier.
The Old English engel was a borrowing of Latin angelus. Other Germanic languages made a similar borrowing of the Latin: Old Frisian angel, engel, Old High German angil, engil, Old Icelandic engill. —angelic adj. About 1385, borrowed from Old French angelique, from Latin angelicus, from Greek angelikos, from angelos angel.
Demon
n. Probably before 1200, borrowed from Late Latin daemon, demon evil spirit, from Latin daemon spirit, from Greek daimon (genetive daimonos) lesser god, good or bad spirit.
Cyborg
n. (1) a man-machine hybrid, a human modified by integrated machinery to have extended powers (1960- Manfred Clynes, Nathan S. Cline), a blend of the first elements of cybernetic and organism. (2) An organism, often a human, that has certain physiological processes enhanced or controlled by mechanical or electronic devices, especially when they are integrated with the nervous system. (3) a person who is part machine, a robot who is part organic (4) a robot who has an organic past.Trans-Humanism
God
God or god n. Old English (about 725) god Supreme Being, deity; cogate with Old Frisian, Old Saxon, and Dutch god Supreme Being, deity, Old High German got (modern German Gott), Old Icelandic godh, gudh, and Gothic guth, from Proto-Germanic *zuaan. The Germanic words for god were originally neuter, but after the Germanic tribes adopted Christianity, God became masculine syntactic form.
FreeWill
n. About 1300 philosofie knowledge, body of knowledge; later philosophye (before 1333); borrowed from Old French filosofie and later philosophie; also borrowed directly from Latin philosophia, and from Greek philosophia love or pursuit of knowledge, philosophy (philo- loving + sophia knowledge, wisdom, from sophos wise, learned).