We create reality by interacting with it

We create reality by interacting with it
Joseph Chilton Pearce

You find it in all cultures the same appearance of the pointing syndrome.  This finger pops up and he found that was true in all cultures.  That’s the pointing syndrome.  Then the minute he’s on his feet running out in to the world, every new object he sees his first impulse is to point toward it, he points toward the new object that he has no structure of knowledge of and immediately looks back to check that out with mama or the caretaker.  Why does he do that, to see if the caretaker cognizes that object.

When these cracks occur, what do you see?

To really get in to that you have to look at the whole formation of the egg from the beginning.  What Piaget spoke of is structures of knowledge. The child isn’t born into a world they look out and see the world, they must build up a structure of knowledge of that world point by point, object by object, and make the orientations and the special discriminations and so on, associative thinking.  But it’s a built up process and that takes place of course very early in life.  For instance, if I get too far afield you’ll have to stop me, but we look at the work of Blurton Jones, he was one of the Ethologists in Britain under the great Nobel Lariat, and Blurton Jones talked about the pointing syndrome, that the little infant strapped up in its highchair babbling away, practicing full names, practicing the language as speech, will begin to point, but the whole fist, will begin to wave his fist as he talks at a certain period.  You find it in all cultures about the same appearance of the pointing syndrome.  And then after a few, let’s say a week or so, of these gestures like this, this finger pops up and he found that was true in all cultures.  That’s the pointing syndrome.  Then the minute he’s on his feet running out in to the world, every new object he sees his first impulse is to point toward it, if he’s out in the open, if he’s in the nest that is an extension of the mother, that pointing syndrome is much different.  But if he’s out in the wild it’s very pronounced and he points toward the new object that he has no structure of knowledge of and immediately looks back to check that out with mama or the caretaker.  Why does he do that, to see if the caretaker cognizes that object.  That means does that object fit in with the world that I’m designed by nature to fit in to?  So you can get the signal, as a whole bunch of people point out the mother doesn’t have to say a word, if she herself inwardly cognizes the object, the infant picks it up through signals we’re not aware of and charges over to taste it, touch it, feel it, smell it and so forth and do what Piaget said, build a full conceptual structure of knowledge of what that object is and then through associative thinking he can apply it to all sorts of other objects.  The second thing is the demand on the parent for a name for the object.  What is that mama?  What is that Daddy?  The reason for that being that naming it gives it absolute permanence and a secure place within the whole structure of knowledge he’s building.  Without the name it will be what Piaget called a shallow dimensional structure of knowledge which soon just dissipates and disappears.  It’s not permanent.  What makes it permanent is the name for it because naming is an act of language and speech and language is distributed throughout the whole body.  And the act of naming it, as Luria, this is the Great Alexander Luria, another of our child developmental people, said that naming and attaching a word to that object coordinates the entire body’s system into that learning.  It becomes a total bodily process, not just some shallow dimensional image that’s going to disappear.  So the name is as critically important as anything else.  The name then of course becomes a generic name which can encompass many, many variations with it through associative thinking.

Is this is enculturation moment to moment taking place?

I wouldn’t call this enculturation, this is perfectly natural spontaneous process that both infant, world and parent are involved in.  There’s no discrimination here other than if the parent is not cognizing that, the infant doesn’t want to cognize it because there are, at the same time, a million other things they can spot visually, point toward and interact with it and they pick out by nature, and you find it in all mammals, they center on those objects shared with the parent.  Now what about the ones that are not shared with the parent?  They’re transient.  That reminds me of Blurton Jones’ comment he found this in all cultures without exception at that same stage of development.  And the other phenomena was the peculiar notion of the child of pointing at the things that weren’t there, demanding a name for them, and we don’t see them.  They weren’t part of our parent’s world view and acceptable part of that world so the parent can’t take part in that.  The infant isn’t getting a full response between concept, percept and the structures and knowledge in the brain and so then of course the same thing is passed on to their infant, that particular kind of event which is not going to be recorded and paid attention to.  He did a lot of study about the quasi hallucinatory phenomena of the early child and he estimates that 50% of all the pointing and demand for a name that go on are for objects that to an adult are not there at all.  As a father of five and having gone through this five times with my children I know the child’s frustration can get very, I’ve had them grab me by the hand, “That Daddy!  That Daddy”  “What’s that Daddy?”  And you can’t make a response because you are not cognizing that.  You have conceptual perceptual structures of knowledge in your brain to register that.  And it’s not moral failure on our part or blindness or anything else, it’s just the way the genetic system organizes a world view.  Then when we get into the cultural part of it, the cultural part of it is far more pervasive.  It builds on that.

Who are we really?

Who are we really?
Joseph Chilton Pearce

The cosmic egg is in effect culture, culture being a virtual reality created by forcing us to comply with sets of behavior from the moment of birth on and modifying our own behavior and world view according to that of our culture around us.  This includes the world as we’ll ever know it so to escape this is not an easy thing.  It happens continually.  But the culture denies any experience that is not part of culture.” Our true development begins when we transcend the limitations imposed by culture and this implies discovering a new identity.

What is the cosmic egg?  What is the crack?  And what do we see when we look through the crack as opposed to looking through the egg?

Of course the cosmic egg is an ancient imagery.  It really is I think the end of ages.  Looking at the world we experience as the cosmic egg and when you say I began with my book “Crack”, of course my discovery of the “Crack”, “Crack in the Cosmic Egg” was long before that, just really long before that time.  I would summarize by seeing the cosmic egg as the whole realm of thought in which we are born and brought up and that shapes our whole perceptual conceptual system.  We think we have a perception out of which we then draw some conceptual ideals.  But the truth of the matter is you can never draw a line between concept and percept. They each derive of the other, one of those strange loop interacting processes within the mind brain.  The sum total of all this that makes up our livable world and gives us a place in which to be, we could call it culture, I call it culture, or the cosmic egg.  The cosmic egg is in effect culture.  Then we have to define culture and I would simply say almost a virtual reality created by forcing us to comply with sets of behavior from the moment of birth on and modifying our own behavior and world view according to that of our culture around us.  The culture around us includes the world as we’ll ever know it will be that culture.  So to escape this is not an easy thing.  It happens continually.  There are breaks or cracks in our cosmic egg continually but the eggs moves instantly to seal the crack.  That was a comment I made in my very first book.  Oh sure we’ve got a crack in the cosmic egg but that egg will re-seal in a big hurry and maintain stability of the cultural structure.

The sealing of it over is generally from the whole ambient in which we’re taking part, the whole culture.  And to find that trying to move through a crack in that cultural egg brings sensor from everyone you meet because as Suzanne Linder said, “Our greatest fear is a collapse into chaos,” should our ideation, our idea of what things are, our whole conceptual system, should that fail us, because then we’re in chaos and we really are afraid of that.  So if we break through into a realm beyond the cultural realm, immediately the whole culture is going to point their finger at us.  We fell that and then we’re suffering not only isolation from the culture but the fact that we are a threat to the culture.  Let this happen to even the infant child a few times and it’s an unpleasant place to be.  So little by little we capitulate and give in to the cosmic egg and don’t go near any boundaries that it sets up for us because it’s risky in every sense.  The scientific world operates that way.  The religious world operates that way.  The social, all the rest of it, their boundaries which maintain themselves and you don’t break those boundaries lightly.

The Inner State of the Union

Yuval Noah Harari describes in a recent book, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind how ‘story,’ the capacity to imagine and share meaning through symbols and images, is the defining capacity that sets Sapiens apart from all other species. When focused inwardly ‘story’ sculpts the social-image we believe ourselves to be, what we call ‘me.’ When directed outwardly this same story creates culture. Culture and our social image are reciprocal mirrors of the other, each giving rise to the other, reincarnating the enchantment moment by moment. Both are stories, images, but we treat the image is if it were an independent, concrete reality. This is our basic flaw.

Themes: 
culture

Our Children Need Heros

There are so few who have the depth, experience, point of view and intellectual rigor as Noam Chomsky.

In the final analysis the overarching theme of Joseph Chilton Pearce’s life work is the anti-intelligence, anti-development force that ‘culture’ exerts on nature’s billion year agenda for human growth and our transcendent development. Transcend means ‘overcoming limitation and constraint.’ Joe argues, and has for 50 years, that the greatest force to overcome is the ultra-conservative, fundamentalist nature of ‘obey or pay’ culture.

Themes: 
parenting
culture
birth

How Culture Shapes The Human Brain

The power of Touch the Future’s Academy is its ability to create relationship. A dramatic illustration of this synergy is in the relationships between four interviews:

(New) Joseph Chilton Pearce on The Death of Religion and Rebirth of Spirit

(New) Darcia Narvaez, PhD on Neurobiology in the Development of Human Morality

(Now indexed w/tanscripts) James W. Prescott, PhD on Sensory Deprivation and Brain Development and

(Now indexed w/transcripts) Jean Liedloff of the Continuum Concept on her experiences with stone age tribes in the Amazon.

This constellation began with our discussion with Darcia Narvaez exploring her and neuro-scientist Allan Schore’s new book on the relationship of neuro science and morality, something James W. Prescott has been describing for years. What is morality? Our capacity to be kind to others. Indeed, this capacity is innate; however, like all capacities it must be developed and this cycles back to nurturing or its absence in early childhood with what we call nurturing directly impacting how the brain forms structurally and functionally.

Themes: 
culture
morality
sensory deprivation
brain development

Applying findings to large populations

Applying findings to large populations
James W. Prescott

80% of cultures could be accurately predicted or classified in terms of their peaceful or violent behavior from this one single measure of whether the infant was carried on the body of its mother all day long. I could predict the remaining 20% has to do with whether the cultures permit or punish adolescent sexuality. Cultures that are very repressive towards sexual expression, what I call sexual affectional bonding, are violent cultures and the cultures that permit adolescent sexual expression are non-violent cultures.

And so the question, I said what’s the best strategy to really document this on a really broad scale.  One can look at clinical studies, developmental studies, but they are always highly select samples, it’s not generalized too far with them, and they’re very costly.  So I thought that a better approach would be to look at a large human population’s cultures, going back to the primitive cultures, the pre-industrial cultures, that certainly one would think that there were cultures that varied on this one specific variable of how they rear their children. 

Fortunately a member of our National Advisory Council, at that time was Professor John Whiting, who’s a Professor of Cultural Anthropology at Harvard University who published extensively on child rearing practices and later behavior.  I remember asking John, was there a systematic database on this and he said well as a matter of fact there is and if it exists you’ll find it in Arby Texture’s volume of “Cross Culture Summary”, which had just come out and published in 1967, which is a massive statistical summary of the statistical correlations in our relationships among a large number of variables that had been developed and quantified by Culture Anthropologists on 400 cultures.  This was the sample and Texture’s cross cultural summary. 

Fortunately there was information on child rearing practices, specifically related to whether infants were carried on the mother of the body all day long and those that did not.  Those ratings were done by Culture Anthropologists, Dr. Barry Bacon and Chown.  And fortunately there was also information on violence.  Those were the two that I wanted to link up with.  And Dr. Phillip Slater had developed codes on violence and warfare.  So, when I combined those two measures I selected every culture in that 400 culture sample in which those two bits of information were available.  That yielded 49 cultures. 

And low and behold what I found was that 73% of the cultures could be accurately predicted or classified in terms of their peaceful or violent behavior from this one single measure of whether the infant was carried on the body of its mother all day long.  That measure was increased in predictability when I published that in 1975 and the futurist, Body Pleasure and Origins of Violence.  It was reprinted in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists and a number of other places.  And then I was informed by three different Cultural Anthropologists that there were errors in the original quoting. 

But every time a correction was made it increased the predictability so that I could now predict with 80% accuracy the violent or peaceful nature of these cultures from that one variable of maternal infant physical affection. The bonding that occurs with this body contact.  Then the second half of the story where I could predict the remaining 20% has to do with whether the cultures permit or punish adolescent sexuality. And basically the cultures that are very repressive towards sexual expression, what I call sexual affectional bonding, are very violent cultures and the cultures that permit adolescent sexual expression are non-violent cultures.

So that when you combine the two of issues, the two variables of affectional bonding, the maternal infant relationship, then adolescent sexual relationship, I can accurately predict with 100% accuracy the peaceful or violent nature of these 49 primitive cultures distributed throughout the world.  Now there’s no other theory or database that exists that match that and I can specify the sensory systems about it involved, the brain mechanisms involved, and that’s why these cross cultural studies are so successful, those were built on solid experimental scientific evidence.

Natural is regarded as demonic

Natural is regarded as demonic
Joseph Chilton Pearce

this book is starting off on the notion that creation, which simply means how is it that anything is and how is it that there is something rather than nothing, a question that’s been asked for many thousands of years? Creation and evolution are absolute twins, completely different and yet absolutely necessary to each other, creation being the ability to bring life into this universe. Evolution being an impulse within the creative process to overcome any obstacles and restraints.

In fact when my wife wanted to breastfeed her child in the hospital and they referred to it as a barbaric practice.  And when I championed that in a talk I gave at Columbia University one time, this doctor hopped up on the stage and said I was trying to turn everything back a thousand years and force women into a caveman kind of mentality, etc., etc.  And so the idea that has grown and been fostered by the scientific process is of anything that is natural as essentially demonic. And we see nature dying on every hand around us in many, many ways as the result of that.  We’re killing the natural process and that means the Earth itself.

Well this book is starting off on the notion that creation, which simply means how is it that anything is and how is it that there is something rather than nothing, a question that’s been asked for many thousands of years? Creation and evolution are absolute twins, completely different and yet absolutely necessary to each other, creation being the ability to bring life into this universe. Evolution being an impulse within the creative process to overcome any obstacles and restraints. It’s rather like a great river flowing swiftly along and any obstacle like a rock or something throws the flow out and so on and so forth. So, evolution is an impulse within the process of creation whereby the reality is to overcome any obstacle or constraint to its full expression. And we find that every created object sooner or later hits its restraint and obstacles. And so, the evolutionary process is to move beyond that, incorporating the best parts of that which we move beyond as the foundation for the next great creative acts which removed beyond the limitations and constraints of the first one. And so we find this incredibly beautiful picture all of the sudden of the constant ongoing and evolving of the human spirit through these different forms. 

That’s what we start off with then in that book.  The absolute necessity of evolution has a critical part of the creative process. Part of that was the revulsion I had developed recently in the arguments in schools and so on and so forth and parent groups of the argument between Creationism and Darwinism or evolution. And not realize these two forces which are always maintaining a certain critical balance for the life process to work. That was one of the things starting it off then. One of the final ending parts of this was death as a critical part of the evolutionary process. You might say death and evolution then become what Douglas Hoffstarter would call a “strange loop,” what I called a mirror-to-mirror function.

For instance, there are all sorts of indications that the human organism could be organized very simply that it would never wear out. A lot of stuff has happened recently which shows that the human body can function without any of the inputs we once through were critical to it. We have many people who now live without any intake of food at all and so on. We don’t need to go into all those things. We have for a long time known that the human being can undergo some of the most extreme conditions and come through them without being touched, the fire walking where they go through a pit of fire that would melt aluminum on contact, a hundred of them at a time, and only know ecstasy from it and so on. So, these incredible capacities of the human that are never developed, but were they we would find the human might never be subject to anything like death again. Well then, why would death be maintained?  Simply in order to keep the system moving beyond limitation and constraint.  Eliminate all that and you’ll suddenly find yourself in the position of total stasis, everything freezes. Nothing moves anymore, movement itself being essential. There are no static fixed things. Who was it in the theory of Quantum Theory, Quantum Theory never leads to anything because no such thing exists. Only relationship.

Well, in this book I have several really clear illustrations of creation of something out of nothing, creation (x-ing and helo) out nothing at all which is a strict no-no in all academic theory. And if you get down to the level of micro, into the micro level like Margulis and Sagan and others that have examined now with the electronic microscope and we find spontaneous creation of nothing taking place right and left. But no one would admit to that in the scientific world because it’s sacrilegious.  So, the beginning of the book is on the necessary pairing of evolution and creation, simply to kind of knock some of these stupid ideas that have cropped up in our schools, in our politics. Look at the ways it’s entering into politics and so forth. And then I get on into, I would say our prescriptions being written for curing the human ills. The academic world writes its prescriptions for how to cure us. The scientific world has these vast realms of prescriptions for altering our behavior. The political world with these prescriptions, the Capitalistic world and all this with their prescriptions for solving the problems.

The rebirth of spirit

The rebirth of spirit
Joseph Chilton Pearce

There is a growing awareness of the death of spirit and the rebirth of the spirit is a real possibility as our only saving grace and one interesting part of that is, my friend Robert Sardello saying, the way to organize all this is through surface of the Earth instead of looking at the Earth as simply a source of rape and pillage in our mining and all these things that we’re doing. Just suddenly return to our senses and realize we must serve the Earth, protect and nurture her because she is our Mother. She is our nurturer. From her must come our nurturing and protection and if we don’t, then we have given in to the forces of darkness on every hand.

There is a movement to open to the human spirit and it’s a very real and valid movement, but on the other hand, it’s almost like a race against time. We look at the Kogee, in fact on that great island right off of the coast of Columbia in South America, and the Kogee who have been saying over and over that the Earth is dying, that all the great snowcapped peaks are going, the snows of Kilimanjaro, whatever it was, they’re not there anymore. The whole shape and structure of the Earth is being radically changed by forces we have released. So, we’re in a time of real peril and the rise of the human spirit is an attempt to counter ideas. So it’s a conflict between the forces of darkness which I relate religion to and the forces of light through the great spiritual giants who have appeared on Earth and they generally always meet with disaster. So, in the end, in the current crisis that we face, we find this force of darkness reaching all the way back into conception and the womb itself to we can easily say contaminate the human species. The child is being destroyed as a true human even before birth and people will say what are you talking about?  And you have to really look closely at all the stuff coming out and you’ll find we’re in a dire plight concerning the next generation.

We have our, what is it, baby Einstein. We have the women wearing things around their pregnant bellies, the sound waves are now are going to profoundly improve the human. The child will be born a genius, and all these things that are going on which represent the attempt to take over every tiny facet of the natural intelligence of our Earth and turn it into the servant of intellectual invention. Of course that’s exactly what Goethe warned against and so many others have.  As you say, Shelly with their Frankenstein’s, she clearly saw what we have going on today. There is a growing awareness of the death of spirit and the rebirth of the spirit is a real possibility as our only saving grace and one interesting part of that is, my friend Robert Sardello saying, the way to organize all this is through surface of the Earth instead of looking at the Earth as simply a source of rape and pillage in our mining and all these things that we’re doing. Just suddenly return to our senses and realize we must serve the Earth, protect and nurture her because she is our Mother. She is our nurturer. From her must come our nurturing and protection and if we don’t, then we have given in to the forces of darkness on every hand.

I think of the Mathematician Kurt Godel, an unknown Mathematician. Russell and Whitehead had come out with this incredible work in mathematics that was the bible of the whole scientific and academic world for two or three decades because it was a remarkable work of intelligence and intellect and skill to show through mathematics any proposition, anything that the human mind could come up with, through mathematics the truth or falsity, the validity, the worth of that could be tested mathematically and mathematics emerges then as the final, final rock bottom bastion of truth and how we can find truth in life is through mathematics.  And this was of course embraced by the whole scientific academic world. No institution of learning or higher learning would dare not acknowledge this. 

Godel came along, he looked at it, saw the absolute infallible kind of nature of the argument and then selected, looked at the argument from kind of the back and front, they looked at the time of starting at the end and working their way to the beginning, that isn’t what he did but he found that very theorem they had come up with to be used to show the absolute falseness of the theorem itself. The theorem would disprove its own self if looked at from just a slightly different point of view. So Godel really represented a remarkable feat of mind in that respect, sort of a self-corrective function going on. That seems to be the case in a lot of it, finding that science as a mode of thinking, a way of being.  Creating the civilization it has could arise only in Christianity. Why, because only Christianity had demonized the body and all physical things which automatically included the Earth.  The Christians, certainly more than the original Muslims, really considered the Earth their enemy. Natural process was unnatural and so on, and embracing of death, leading to the happy hunting grounds, as preferable to allowing nature to flourish. And we look at the great systems of thought that arose out of that. People don’t realize that Freud showed a tremendous fear of the natural process and spoke of our great enemy, nature, who does all this to destroy us with earthquakes and he goes on, a very neurotic mind, that the only possible protection we had against this ruthless, mindless destructive nature was to band together under the guidance of the very finest scientific principles.  He then says, of course, that which was said five centuries ago by the first of the Bacons, wrest nature to her knees, force from her all her secrets and use them to control her totally. 

And that became the great driving force behind all scientific process that finally emerges as victorious about a hundred years ago. To then speak of natural process is almost to be unscientific. And to allow a child to grow up in their natural state would obviously mean illiteracy, ignorance, barbarity, brute-ness, back to the cave man and so forth.  Whereas you’re talking about returning to the true spirit and nature of what the human being should be and was at one time. And he know he was at one time because of the few remaining cultures who live in a reality system totally different than ours.  And we don’t believe that.

Science as a Frankenstein field

Science as a Frankenstein field
Joseph Chilton Pearce

One of our Presidents they started talked about well this practice has caused all these various problems.  Oh that’s alright.  Our scientists will take care of that.  And of course the scientists, he got to looking at finely they’re the root causes of it and they had no intention or meaning of being that and they’re a nice good bunch that go home to their families at night. There are no demons in the crowd but the overall result of the activity, of that field of activity, is demonic and destroying us.

One of our Presidents they started talked about well this practice has caused all these various problems.  Oh that’s alright.  Our scientists will take care of that.  And of course the scientists, he got to looking at finely they’re the root causes of it and they had no intention or meaning of being that and they’re a nice good bunch that go home to their families at night. There are no demons in the crowd but the overall result of the activity, of that field of activity, is demonic and destroying us.

Our then judging everybody by this criteria that has come in.  We look at the illustrating Aborigine, there were 500,000 of them.  Now they’re down to a handful and assigned the worst place in Australia to live, gave him out of the way.  And yet friends of mine who have lived with them for years say that the difference in the reality structuring of the brain and the kind of reality they move in has no resemblance to ours. So we find these field effects themselves that we’ve brought into action here. They’re jealous Gods and are out to destroy the lesser Gods. We think of all that as Mythology and nonsense and we’re living it at every hand right now. Well I think I’ll stop at that point.

We are our own worst enemy. Rudolph Steiner saw our dilemma coming to a head a couple of thousand years ago. That we really got into this mess of a complete misinterpretation of what everything was about. Riane Eisler, for instance in “The Chalice and the Bladed” recognizes that several thousand years ago we got off on the wrong foot and once we did a power took over which she calls the “male dominator force.” And once it takes over it simply works for one thing and this preservation of that force itself. And out of that has come a growing crisis in our, not our civilization but our species’ survival. Steiner claims that what now have this mythological business of Golgotha of crucifixion and so forth, that what was underneath it was a struggle between the forces of nature which are beneficial, benevolent, love and so forth, and the forces behind this male dominator culture.  Men will automatically rankle at this and try to turn it into a gender war. None of that’s involved. The problem then, what Steiner saw is the battle between two essential forces of nature resulted in religions. Religions became the symbols of those forces.

Nature became the great enemy. Alfred North Whitehead, one of our really smart cookies, said science as a practice could only have arisen in a Christian nation. Why? The Christians were the first ones to demonize the body. Everything about the body was bad in order that we renounce the body and embrace the soul. The soul of course, was that which could be then more or less engineering by the Christian establishment. It was another form of kind of political control. But, in demonizing the body we automatically were demonizing the body of the Earth, and so from that point on the husbanding of the Earth as nearly every civilization before that had considered their number one priority. We honor the Earth. We take care of the great Mother. And suddenly the great Mother was the great demonic who was there only to be raped, pillaged, and turned into profit for us on every line. Now this happened a long time ago. It’s been effect for a long time.  In fact the Cathars and the other, what were those, the Knights Templars, and that means the Knights of the Temple, those who maintained the temple. They came along and tried to overthrow this whole thing and they were all slaughtered off in their wealth and they were the ones who built Chartres Cathedral, probably one of the half dozen greatest acts of man. And they funded it and everything else and engineered and designed that and to this day, from everything I can find out and my friends who spent a great deal more deal on it than I have, say that just the experience within that particular design has a tremendous effect on us. Now all this was a nurturing of the human spirit who in turn then will turn around and do everything to nurture the Earth that gives him birth. So what do they do? Well the Knights Templars were falling upon to the King and slaughtered every last one of them and the Cathars and so on and so forth that all that takes place. And this goes on in one form or another over and over and over.

What we’re facing today is simply the final gathering of the demonic forces of destruction. As my friend Robert Sardello said, “The scientific creation of the atom bomb was the final, final demonstration and act of pure hatred of life itself.” Oppenheimer saying this one of the most beautiful sights of man and you look at it again and you find it the symbol of cold hatred against life itself. So, the fact that we now of course have more of this than anybody could ever use, there’s this leading to the final point of the death of the human spirit unless something happens. So I say in the death of religion lie the seeds for the rebirth of the human spirit. And of course I am a Jesus man and an anti-Christian Jesus man. Church represents religion and Jesus was the absolute of religion.

The death of religion as we know it

The death of religion as we know it
Joseph Chilton Pearce

There is a negative intelligence as well as a positive intelligence. The quality of the intelligence involved is beside the point. The point is its organizing factor in the human psyche, in our brain structure itself. And the way children’s brain structures are being changed by the violence in which they’re being born into, begotten by, etc.

My argument has been that that’s not who we are. We are now acting against our natural state. Who we really were created by the evolutionary process on this Earth has in a comparatively short time become demonic.

Hate radio constitutes about two-thirds of all radio activity. Morris Dees who has that Southern Poverty Law Association estimates that even just from the election of Obama that the organized militia hate groups in America has jumped from 400 up to close to 1000 now, each of which is devoted to the overthrow of the government to re-establish a white supremacy and so on and so forth. And they’re arming to the teeth. That’s the disturbing thing about it and they’re not in Mississippi, they’re over a surprising segment of the population. So here we have a field effect which attracts and adds to its own effect. These are psychological states we could call them. They’re states of mind and what we have to get used to is the fact that these field effects are forms of intelligence. There is a negative intelligence as well as a positive intelligence. The quality of the intelligence involved is beside the point. The point is its organizing factor in the human psyche, in our brain structure itself. And the way children’s brain structures are being changed by the violence in which they’re being born into, begotten by, etc. A friend of mine who said in all probability the vast majority of children were begotten, conceived in a state of alcohol or rage. Silly statements like that and yet something has gone really haywire that you find the serious problems arising in children as they do today and the high suicide rates being predominant above all.

The death of religion I think is not a foregoing conclusion because religion crops up in all sorts of different ways. But the death of religion as we have known it is a major issue today and in its dying throws this religious process is ready to kill off the whole world to try to maintain its own state. One of the big problems we face is not recognizing the extent of what intelligence is. We think intelligence has something to do with what we have learned, etc., etc. All life is an expression of intelligence. That’s what really Darwin was showing us on every hand, that these forms that appear and so on are examples of an incredible intelligence or creative intelligence. Once set in motion they tend to maintain themselves, to replicate themselves. Not just through sexuality but through the whole mental processes spawned by that. At the same time we have the clear examples of the few cultures left on Earth that somehow or other missed all of this. Even by now we’ve been writing about all this through the generations ago in the fifties and sixties and by now they’re probably mostly destroyed and gone. One of the things this technological corporate destructive society took over, one of the first things they did was eliminate all the competition. That is any mindset which was not in keeping with it, our intelligence simply began to get rid of it. Now it’s a very strange phenomena, this is, but if we take an anthropological study like Robert Wolf gave us not long back from his years and years with a very elusive mysterious kind of forest people in Malaysia called the Signoi and to find that they moved in a universe, in a world, in a reality structure vastly different than ours and surprisingly superior to ours except in its lack of the technology. And since we now judge the worth of a culture only by its technology we can’t imagine flying saucers coming down that don’t represent the superior technology and therefore they are superior people. We look at Jean Lideloff’s work. Now a society of people that were incapable of judgment or animosity or violence in any conceivable way. They were incapable of it, but as a result we looked on them as extremely primitive when they’re probably the last civilized people on Earth. So my argument has been that that’s not who we are. We are now acting against our natural state. Who we really were created by the evolutionary process on this Earth has in a comparatively short time become demonic.

M: And turned against like itself? A demonic would mean..

Right. We’ve become a culture that is cannibalistic. We’re feeding on ourselves and of course destroying our Earth at the same time.  But everyone is convinced we can cure all this through scientific process.

Pages