Sensory Deprivation & The Developing Brain

Author: 
James W. Prescott

Sensory Deprivation & The Developing Brain - One of the best overviews of the collected works and research of James W. Prescott, PhD. There are two fundamental issues. One is the issue of the bonded and unbonded child. The other is full gender equality. Until women are able to control their own body, and not just reproduction but the whole spectrum of her sexuality, it will be very difficult to achieve the first step which is the bonded child. Just look at all the violence against women, the rapes, domestic violence, battered women, it's epidemic, as is child abuse and neglect.

Nothing Compares

They say, breast is best. Well, duhhh. But wait, I’m a guy. What do I know? The overarching question is why have a baby? Hormones, of course. No one can win an argument with hormones. There is only one correct answer, to nurture the healthiest, happiest, most awake, aware, sensitive and responsive human being possible. Having a baby is all about the baby. It is the ultimate ‘giving back.’

Themes: 
bonding
breastfeeding
culture

Two dramatic expression of culture change

Two dramatic expression of culture change
Joseph Chilton Pearce

I’ve talked to literally many thousands of teachers. The two things I’ve been getting; children are coming in year by year far less educable, less available to any kind of educational process. At the same time we have children of exceptional brightness, brighter than any children that old line teachers have every come across. The vast majority of our children being uneducable and this little group appearing who are intelligent beyond any level we have had.

Now this brings to mind, by the way, something we really should look at very quickly right here because we are talking about some rather negative things. In the past few years we’ve had two clear phenomena going on at the same time. Since I’ve talked to literally many thousands of teachers and had many workshops and groups for teachers and educational districts and so on, the two things I’ve been getting increasingly over the past few years, well first of all came the recognition by old line teachers that the students coming in year by year, into kindergarten, were far less educable, less available to any kind of educational process. It wasn’t the educational process was broken down, but that no educational process was going to fit these children on a rising level. More and more uneducable children every year and now we know it’s very critical. At the same time, starting about three or four years ago we had our first signs of children of exceptional brightness, brighter than any children that old line teachers have every come across. I heard this first of all from Principals and Superintendents of school districts where there was a very high elite kind of population of high managerial classes and so on. And now I’m beginning to hear it all over the country. Teachers who are saying their getting kids in, a minuscule little handful, who are off the graph in ability, brilliance, readiness, openness and so on, even as the percentage of the educable children is growing by leaps and bounds. So we have these two strange phenomena happening. The vast majority, how we’re moving toward the vast majority of our children being uneducable and this little group appearing who are intelligent beyond any level we have had. They’re off the graph. 

Now I’m going to stick my neck out and say two things here, first of all from what I’ve been able to find these children are coming from essentially close to middle age parents of a highly successful intelligent resourceful marriage situations, where they have not had children, all of the sudden they realize the gates are closing on that. Their time is running out and suddenly they’re filled with a passionate desire to have their own children. These children are brought into the world by highly mature people who have worked out their affective problems, who have relaxed all of their anxieties about the world. They have made it in the world. And who passionately want this child. So the child is born in to the world, even though they might be born in the worse hospital kind of a situation, all the rest of the factors compensate for it. But these are the women who are born birthing at home. These are the women who are taking charge of their life because they have taken charge of their life and succeeded with it. So the child is born into optimal nurturing, optimal situation all the way around, and in contrast with the rest of these poor damaged children they seem off the graph. They’re probably just the first normal children we’re seeing again. Wanted, loved, nurtured, given the right environment. So the saving remnant is appearing and from the most obvious and logical kind of a source. 

M:        Well, when the whole norm is shifted so low, we get back to normal.

J:          Yes, this point should be made, educated, skillful, new generation of upper level intellectual people. We’re introducing upper level intellectual people here on our level which has never been done before. Even at the same time it’s bought at the price of a huge percentage of the population who are in severe troubles. So, it’s not just that we’re coming back to the norm, there’s a possibility we’ll hear a new norm and move onto a new level. The other thing is that we should never think that this is because these people are in their upper thirties when this takes place, that that’s the answer. The 18 year old girl can provide exactly the same thing were she allowed maturation. Were she given the appropriate nurturing environment. As it is, this 35 or 36 year old woman who is making a highly successful mother and is taking charge of her life, she has had to work through all of the disasters befalling this 18 year old and the fact that she’s worked through it, that puts her into a position to be the appropriate mother. She should have, had she received the proper nurturing environment herself, she could have been at that state at 18 as easily. That is we’re not dealing with an age factor here. These are again social environmental factors that we’re dealing with. 

I remember back in the sixties when I dropped out of a college teaching and substitute since I had no teacher’s credentials and had never taken an educational course, some student in high school and I was really shocked to hear the teacher say to these girls, to try to stimulate them to do their homework and all, “Don’t you want to make something of yourself? What do you want to do, just get married and spawn children,” as though that were the pits, the bottom line of all failure. So the model for them constantly was just what you’re talking about and had been for quite a long while. The mother was the failure. There was nothing else she could do except to spawn children. Now the fact that this thing held up as the model, she’s had to work through all that, that strange new mythology. And the ones who succeed are then free of all of that and this fees them to go ahead and be what she could have been as easily at 16 for that matter. After all, nature provides that capacity very early and maturation was designed to be far earlier than it is. As I said adolescence is an arbitrary construct we’ve designed for unwanted laborers. There’s no place for them and adolescence gets longer and longer and longer every year. Now, it’s really running up into the twenties. The fulfillment that these women feel, the sense of fulfillment is of course enormous because now they have accomplished on both levels. I don’t think we should ever imply that a woman is not capable of doing all these things.  That would be a tragedy.  They’re showing on every hand that they can get it out there in the marketplace and run the corporations as well as anybody else. That’s a foregone conclusion. Again, the issue is do they really want to do that?  I think a lot of them are getting forced into that by the role models.

Changing perception of women

Changing perception of women
Joseph Chilton Pearce

We have a couple of generation of women who are extremely angry. They’re angry at men because intuitively they realize they had been interfered with by a male intellect. There are a lot of women who are unwilling to condescend you might say to nurturing a child, who if they get pregnant will put that child right into a daycare center as soon as possible.

One of the tragedies of this whole thing has been the change of characteristic within women themselves which no one is aware of and would be terribly bad political talk at this stage, but we have really a couple of generation of women who are extremely angry. They’re angry at men because intuitively they realize they had been interfered with by a male intellect. And a lot of women who are unwilling to in any way condescend you might say to nurturing a child and who if they get pregnant will put that child right into a daycare center and so on.

The way of bringing about some change in that probably with all the vested interest and since we’re dealing with extremely powerful forces, it’s probably not possible on a large statistical level. I look at this period of history from the scientific term which is taken from the Greeks a “stocasism.” Nature operates by mass profusion with a high degree of intent which is very selective. Nature will produce seven million eggs on the female ovary at birth, they’re all there complete, in hopes of getting two or three of them through the net, produces quintillions of male sperm. Why? Because nature’s abundant in the creative process. Anything is cheap. And if six of them hit target, fine, you know, out of quintillions of them, quintillions, literally that high a number.

Now, we find that when situations start radically breaking down, one of the first things is we have a rapid population increase. Any time nature’s agenda starts being interfered with there’s a rapid population increase. Simply nature steps up the stochastic process. This is seemingly very cool. When I first began to realize this is how nature operated I was terrified with it. It scared me to death and then I felt a great bitterness and resentment about it. I didn’t like it. But by in large what we have to look for here now is not the broad mass to suddenly overnight in time undergo a radical change because the damage is too deep. But I’m always hoping that simply we will appeal to enough people that enough people will undergo the necessary steps, that you’ll have a nucleus who can maintain the system when the rest of the system starts disintegrating. 

I think of there again of Ilya Prigogine’s dissipated structures and then when a coherent structure hits a certain point of disequilibrium it doesn’t take much energy to bring it in order out of its chaos. In other words if it were a large scale stable system it takes an enormous energy to bring about change. Probably we’ll have to wait until this instability hits a certain peak but then we must have some prepared people and it isn’t they’re going to rush out and physically manipulate the whole situation. It’s simply that their presence will furnish what we call the chaotic attracter to bring a new order out of the chaos. And that sounds very grandiose but I think it’s extremely practical. So I think that we do know. It’s like the A student as the model for the Bell Curve in the classroom. You see by having that A student there that we can all focus on we can maintain the stability of the system. But you can’t make every student an A student and you’re not going to bring every person around to this way of thinking.  All we can do is appear and it will take probably a higher intellectual circle of people. 

There’s a certain elitism here, I’m afraid, but we’ve got to look at it totally head on. When I hear the talk about population control and I’ve heard an argument from a religious person not long back that all of our current ways of trying to control the population was so bad that what we had to do was elevate their sexual appreciation to a very high level and make them aware of the sacredness of the procreative act so that they would enter into it from an entirely different level and then I would go out and I would see some of our lesser informed citizens and I would think of what would happen if you approach them from that standpoint. Of course it’s ludicrous. You don’t stand a chance of anything like that. The only appeal we can make here is to probably and enlightened portion of our population.

Dramatic cultural changes

Dramatic cultural changes
Joseph Chilton Pearce

The infant unlocks the true nature of the woman and gives to her the greatest stature as a woman, being a mother, just as a mother unlocks the hidden potentials of that infant. It’s a dynamic. Each is bringing the other to their fulfillment and that’s the beauty of it. It’s always there. You can’t destroy it.

You’ll find that within the same time frame of the breakup of the nuclear family, when the extended family begins to simply be made almost impossible to maintain or we elect for these small compartmentalized, everything in its neat little tidy segment of society. Along about the same time that began to take total hold of us and change the whole nature and structure of family as it is, at the very same time was the separation of infant and mother becoming the common practice and finally hitting that water shed at World War II, moving from 30% of the mothers to 97% of the mothers and suddenly becoming nationwide. And at the same time you’ve broken up your extended family and so everything is isolated. Then to expect an isolated young mother who has no access to other mothers, who has no access to grandmothers and so on, on a daily basis, for consultation, assistance, and so on and so forth. You have a very difficult situation and the mother is at risk herself in that situation.

You cannot overnight, within a short period of time like that, eliminate that intelligence informing the brain system. I think of a very close association of mine, close kin, who was certainly born under the most disastrous situations in the hospital and had a very, very bad beginning and whose mother was one of the most anxiety ridden persons in the world and followed immediately by siblings which created a great situation of tension and rivalry, a lack of nurturing, and brought up in that kind of a situation. Everything really negative and with a lot of anxieties and negativities and so on. A lot of problems. And you would think that this individual would have difficulties in mothering. But nevertheless this particular individual, just by a good prenatal indoctrination and educational process, and a good solid birth education before it happened, and by the time the birth took place this particular woman was enormously confident and entered into the whole birth process with a feeling that she didn’t need anybody there. I must say that it was not just a natural birth but the separation simply never took place and there was this enormous, what we think of as bonding. This woman was 35 when she had this child, her first child, and she breastfed this child for three years and nurtured it in every way. There was this enormous unbreakable, separation never took place. 

She displayed every mammalian instinct known to man or beast in a perfectly beautiful magnificent form simply because it was all activated within her and she did it spontaneously. She didn’t read a single book on mothering. She read books on the prenatal care of herself. She did prenatal exercises. She’d watch her diet. She talked to her infant in-utero. She did all of these things and absolutely controlled the birth situation. She was in charge from beginning to end. It was a very quick birth of course because she was so relaxed and totally confident. Her confidence was enormous.

And then of course once that little baby came out and she took it, nothing was ever going to separate her from it. And it was a most successful affair. So there it always is. The brain has that enfolded within it. And what I found here, we had an extremely neurotic and timid and uncertain, hesitant, unsure, woman who was transformed completely in her personality and her behaviour patterns and everything else by the birth experience. Precisely as Kennel and Klaus and even MacLean implies, that the infant unlocks the true nature of the woman and gives her her greatest stature as a woman, as a mother, just as a mother unlocks the hidden potentials of that infant. It’s a dynamic. Each are bringing the other to their fulfillment and that’s the beauty of it. It’s always there. You can’t destroy it.

Empathy

Do we really understand empathy?
Joseph Chilton Pearce

I was struck in New Zealand by the fact that the children are so kind to each other. I hadn’t seen that in a long, long time. We were certainly kind to each other. We were never willfully unkind because it’s painful to us. When we were 10 and 11 years old we would discuss things like that, that these things were painful to us. That’s empathy but today we have what is called children without conscious.

Do we understand what empathy means anymore? It’s an empty word. The ability to perceive the emotional state of another and the capacity of it to suffer. That certainly is eroding. The willingness of children to inflict pain on each other. I was so struck in New Zealand by the fact that the children are so kind to each other. I hadn’t seen that in a long, long time. They were certainly kind to each other. There was very little battering among us. We were not willfully, fights would break out when I was a child back in the thirties but we were never willfully unkind to each other, or even to a child from the other side of the tracts or anything else. We were never willfully unkind to them because it’s painful to us. And I remember discussing that very thing among my little friends. When we were 10 and 11 years old we would discuss things like that you know, that these things were painful to us and that’s empathy but that’s a natural part of our system. That is the human nature and how quickly that erodes. We think of Alastair Cook again in his experience of coming through America’s great Hobo Camps and scenes of extraordinary poverty, as a very wealthy young man, and never feeling the slightest, slightest fear for his own well-being back in those terrible times of the depression in the thirties because we still had that connection, that connection with the heart. We had not been completely broken at that point.

The fascinating thing is the dual role of the emotional system or the affective system of the brain in one of its parallel processes the quality of its relationship you see and when that is coupled with the basic structure that presents us with our world, what we would think of as the physical sensory motor system, that affective system, then enhances it, it broadens, it opens up the dimensions of that lower system and that same affective system can couple with the intellectual system or what you refer to as the metaphoric symbolic structures.

And then with that you have a whole other ballgame that opens up which is the emotional aspects of learning, state specific learning, the fact that the quality of the emotional state at the time of learning and as an integral part of the learning itself, permanently apparently. Now then we have the, in this dual role of this affective emotional system, that it can then in the same integrate all three levels into an incredibly open-ended system so that perceptually we’re open on a whole universal level. Conceptually, from the highest level, we’re opening on a whole universal level and emotionally we’re opening on a universal level. That’s of course moving toward the real fulfillment of our humanness in early life, certainly in the first 15 or 20 years. 

And then you find again that critical emotional response which means the affective system, the evaluative system of the limbic structure which connects together into a functional unit, all three areas of the brain, if at birth it undergoes a radical separation and breakdown of its environmental process which is the mother, then you have a complete different form of perceiving of how the world is. The world is going to shape accordingly. You’re going to filter the world through the needs to maintain the integrity of a highly, highly threatened system. If the whole society is in that then suddenly you’re dealing with a totally different reality structure itself.

We look at the Australian Aborigine who moves in a world quite radically different than ours. It embraces all sorts of states and potentials and possibilities that are literally inconceivable to us.  We can’t conceive of it at all because if we could conceive of it at all that would open up the possibilities of perceptionality. So there again we keep getting back to if there’s closure in the beginning then you’re dealing with a closed world from then on.

Quality of life vs. Standard of living

Quality of life vs. Standard of living
Joseph Chilton Pearce

It started long before but World War II was the final water shed of these five major things that I pick on and they’re only kind of five mountain tops of the intellects interference with the natural process and then of course the fact that this creates problems vastly faster than the intellect can solve and finally the culture self-destructs from the overload of insoluble problems.

The interesting thing about the quality of life as opposed to standard of living, as the quality of life erodes we adjust to it. We used to have what we called grading on the Bell Curve. You put your most stupid student down here and he got the F, your brightest student got the A.  the bulk of them fell in the middle and got a C. What was found, and this was in many, many states and their classroom experience was if we gauged our presentation and our whole focal point on the C student, the whole curve slid toward the idiot end. We had to concentrate on a presentation for the A student with the A student as the model and that kept the curve stable. 

Now it rapidly became undemocratic to do that. This was not fair. And as a result the curve started sliding downhill. Your model imperative is right there. Quality of life must be held always as the prime goal, as the prime consideration and then standard of living will have to take care of itself. But as quality starts eroding, if we treat that erosion, the eroding state as our norm, it can only contribute to the erosion itself.

So now we are all getting immune to violence. The teenager is immune to violence. It’s an accepted aspect of life. There used to be in a state of high fear and anxiety and rage. This is the human norm now. We don’t know of anything else, so to speak, as a society. We’re actually losing our capacity to conceive of anything other than the rather terrifying situation in which we are rapidly moving. So the problem of standard of living, which we substitute for that, here we keep cranking up more and more goals for a better standard of living in which we think will then institute the quality of life, which of course is a radical error. 

One of the things I’ve been doing is pointing up to five unprecedented, historically unprecedented, phenomena that have occurred, particularly in the last 50 years, that have eroded the quality of life, that have literally brought about severe changes and those of course were first of all hospital technological childbirth and then the daycare is a result of hospital childbirth not economic factors. And then television, and there the problem is not the content but the problem is the neural damage. That is the same kind of neural damage that’s being created by the other two things; the failure of the system to open up and development but close into the lowest defense processes. And then the attempt that we’ve been making to interfere with the natural growth pattern of the child, not allowing the child to be a child but to try to make them prematurely highly precocious intellectual adults, which we do out of our fear of the child not surviving the economic world and achieving a high standard of living, even though that’s bought at the price of the quality of life. 

And so in Japan where they’ve become completely mad over there, then of course the suicide level of their children too has increased at any enormous rate. And then finally looking at the way intellect and the fears of the intelligence of the system, the introduction of the various kinds of chemical hormonal, synthetic chemical hormonal processes into the meat, dairy and poultry industries, which is again for economic gain, and seriously break up the genetically encoded growth patterns of the child so we have premature sexuality now in 8 and 9 year old, both males and females. They’re getting the ability to beget and conceived and we have hostile forcible rape at an all time epidemic high in 9 year old males and pregnancies in 9 year old girls. Menarche in 8 year old girls is at an all time high and people don’t realize that this has never happened before in human history. There’s no historical precedent for it at all. But we rapidly began to adjust to that and we simply assume that children are, you know they are always sexual, and we assume that these adult processes are just occurring in the children for a number of reasons. 

The question is would we have so interfered with nature and brought about such a wildly imbalanced destructive process had we not first of all been cut off or again the separation factor? To be cut off from the mother artificially or arbitrarily is to be cut off from nature. It’s to isolate us and alienate us from that which we then turn around and try to dominate.

I’m sure one of the reasons for our high degree of battering of women by males is because having been cut off from that which is so terribly critical to our well-being, cut off from it arbitrarily, then it becomes… the source of our greatest need becomes the source of our greatest fear you see. And having betrayed us once, to the child, the infant male cut off from the mother, he has been abandoned by her and he will never again trust a female in the same way because he’s the source of the greatest pain he can ever conceive of, is that terrible abandonment that he knows. And the same way with the greater mother of the earth, I’m convinced that there’s a great correlation between the rape of the earth, as we call it, going on now, the rape of women going on now between males, and a male intellect that is cut off from the mother, that separation factor at birth.

And this started after all, it’s interesting enough, back in the 19th Century and even before when it first began only in the highest levels of society. First of all in the royalty, only the wealthy, the primitive poor still delivered in a natural fashion. And so we find the rise of, for instance, a highly technological scientific mind willing to unleash on earth a hundred million tons of violent carcinogenic waste a year. The rise of that came from your higher intellectual levels of your society who then unleashed kind of the whole technological nightmare, industrial nightmare, on the world, all of which again is bought at a complete disregard of the consequences to the body of the self or world. And so you are quite right.  We can’t say it started with World War II, it started long before but World War II was the final water shed of these five major things that I pick on and they’re only kind of five mountain tops of the intellects interference with the natural process and then of course the fact that this creates problems vastly faster than the intellect can solve and finally the culture self-destructs from the overload of insoluble problems.

What I learned today with Carly Elizabeth - Nine weeks old

In the quiet moments when Carly melts into my arms there is attunement, resonance, shared meaning, trust, respect, appreciation, curiosity, wonder, all moving, changing and so much more, embodied, nonverbal, silent. This silent, reciprocal attunement is the essence of bonded-attachment and that creates a safe-place for play.

Themes: 
bonding
culture
parenting
play

Beyound Adolescence

The radically changing female role
Joseph Chilton Pearce

Now let's look at how the female role has changed since World War II. 100 years ago 96% of the population of America lived on farms.  The farm was the whole life blood of the nation, 96% of the population lived there.  By World War II, by the end of World War II 4% of the American population lived on farms, 95% lived in the cities.

Now let's look at a couple of other things, and I've got to do this in a hurry, female role has changed dramatically since World War II.  Let's look back.  There is just a marvelous book that came out about the role of women and the whole history of early America.  We have women in the kitchen.  The woman in the kitchen but, the kitchen of what, the American farm.  100 years ago 96% of the population of America lived on farms.  The farm was the whole life blood of the nation, 96% of the population lived there.  What was the heart of the farm?  The kitchen.  A farmer without a wife in America was absolutely crippled.  What did she do?  She ran the kitchen, the heart of the whole enterprise.  She ran the kitchen gardens, the putting up of all the food, the taking care of the cows and the chickens, the source of their direct food.  She kept the books, literally.  She was the bookkeeper of the organization.  She brought the children into the world, she nurtured them, she fed them, she fed the hired hands, she educated the children, whatever education they got, and they all ended up remarkably well educated by in large, certainly all literate.  All of this she did.  She was the kingpin.  Literally the hub around which this huge enterprise called the farm rested. 

Read their accounts of life in those days and don't think it was grim, it was not necessarily grim at all.  I've read magnificent, glorious accounts of her role in that time and how she met it and the joys therein.  This also was the extended family.  She was the hub of an extended family which was not just a nuclear family of mother, father and child, but a great extended family.  There were many people there to help her, to take over, to give her rest a bit from those children and so on and so forth, and so it was a big give and take and a community in itself. 

Little by little this started changing dramatically and by World War II, by the end of World War II 4% of the American population lived on farms, 95% lived in the cities.  Now what do you have happening?  You have a woman whose place is in the home and whose place in the home is in the kitchen, that isn't the hub of anything.  You see, all of the sudden the kitchen doesn't mean anything.  You have all sorts of prepared foods, the kitchen's an instantaneous place, it doesn't require much and so on, and you have this whole huge industry to fill that kitchen with what it needs and so she doesn't really need to even be there so to speak, and we say, ah, the mother's place is in the home and in the kitchen, it wasn't. 

You see the kitchen was not that in the 19th century, it was the center of everything and so we put the mother to work during World War II because we had to have her in industry and all of the sudden she discovered something interesting.  In this great shift that's taking place all of the sudden there's no place there in the kitchen really for her to flourish but she can flourish just as well in the marketplace.  She discovers that she can run the industries.  She can do anything out there that anybody else can do and that's what she wants to do.  She discovers she has loads of talents and capacities that can now be expressed in totally new ways.  They can't be expressed in the kitchen any longer, it doesn't count for much anymore.  You see what I'm talking about.

So now we have this dramatic shift in change of the woman but, immediately everything polarized.  What I heard in the fifties and sixties, now I was teaching in the college at the time, but what I heard coming out of the high schools was the constant demand by the teachers of their young women students.  "What's the matter with you, don't you want to make something of yourself?  Do you want to just stay home and have babies?"  As though that were the lowest single act they could do.  The failures, the drop-outs, the quitters would stay home and have babies.  What did that do the mothering instinct of the whole species?  It denigrated, put it as the lowest item of the whole social speed.  What's the answer to this whole thing?

When we get into the issue of day care you see.  So if she began to have children there was only day care, so she could go out and take care of her rightful place in society.  I've heard many young pregnant women sitting there at their office, their desk, say to me, as I come in we talk about her pregnancy and she says, "oh, yes I'm only going to have to be gone for two weeks and I'll be right back on the job, I'm not going to lose much time".  She's apologetic for the time she's going to take off to have her baby.  "Oh I'll be right back", as though she's abandoning her post, and so we have day care, and it's a bad situation.  It's a bad solution.  She's no longer the hub of that whole universe.  The answer is what is happening in so many other countries.  Let her simply take her infant with her.  That's what's happened throughout human history.  Never did the woman abandon whatever she was doing, she put the infant in a little sling and went right on with her work.  I was the last of 8 children, all born at home. 

My father was a newspaper man, he owned newspapers, and my mother didn't like to stay at home at all and we had hired help.  We couldn't have hired help, and my mother would come home, she'd have her baby, and all of us were born at home, but then she simply lugged us off to the newspaper office.  She liked to run my father's newspaper.  He was the editor but she kept him going and I cut my teeth on linotype.  I mean my world was the world of that newspaper and I loved every minute of it.  It was a fantastic place.  I had lots of other worlds, I had woods and streams and rivers and all that kind of thing too but I could be with my parents in their work day world and I wanted to be. 

With this young boy here, he was here all day yesterday, he's right here in the marketplace, he's right here at the scene of action you see and I certainly was too and my brothers and sisters were too.  That's one solution.  What we have to do is have industry simply provide for the care of the children, of the mothers so the mothers have continual access to those children as needed.  It would save the nation trillions of dollars.  We find that child under age 4 can take about two hours of separation from the mother and they love it but after that the old anxiety starts coming in.  So you've got about a two hour period at a time and then the mother needs to check in.  How easy it would be to have day care right there in any industrial or any office situation.  You have to incorporate that into the society rather than this terrible polarization and separation.  This striation of society, locking these kids up in a special place completely isolated from the rest of the society, it isn't working.  It isn't working now and it won't work. 

So the answer is not for women to have to do an either or thing if they don't want to.  If they elect to stay home and have children then we should give them every conceivable opportunity to.  IF they elect to work and have children we should make that work too and make it possible because we pay a dreadful price when we don't.  So these are some, I'm just thinking of some of the approaches that we can take to this but at base is the critical issue of the revival of the nurturing one, the mother, the matrix, the source from which everything in our species derives its energy and its strength and without that we're in trouble.  That's what my book is about.  That's what most of my books have been about.  That's why I concentrate on the mother rather than on the father.  I know that's a thorny issue, in fact I've received just really extremely excited letters of condemnation over that kind of a position but I thinks it's a strong position and I think I'm right on the factor of nurturing of our young as the critical issue.  And, nurturing of the male species.  They're a fragile species.  That intellect is here for a very special purpose, don't think it isn't, but you have to nurture it.  You have to take care of it or it will destroy itself.

Do you remember what Richard Wagner, that enormous genius of the 19th Century said, he said "he spotted Cosima", unfortunately this is the wife of Hans Von Bulow, but that didn't stop him for a minute, and he said "in that woman I saw that which would save me from myself", which was one of his great motifs running throughout all of his great dramas.  That the man sees in the woman that which will save him from himself and of course then the whole species is lifted up.

Beyond Adolescence

Dreaming an undeveloped intelligences
Joseph Chilton Pearce

My proposal is that there is this incredible intelligence, power, force, which we can say expresses itself in an evolutionary fashion which is always there to move on us, to wean us away from the lower structures into that highest of all structure.  And the reward system?  Here in this limbic structure.  Here in this emotional cognitive system and its direct connections with the heart.  So what evolution must do is wean us from seeking our rewards in all these intellectual plays with the physical system and show us that there are incredible awards even greater than that in this totally unknown open potential system, and then that is where evolution would achieve its greatest end. 

In studying some of the recent work of Jay Dackenbaugh and others in dream research there at the University of Virginia at Stanford University and up in Canada, suddenly it occurred to me that dreaming is one of our most undeveloped intelligences.  Simply waiting for developing.  Carl Jung laid out a magnificent plan of action towards starting to develop dreaming as an intelligent activity, and now it's really getting into full swing.   And some of the things you can do with that modality are awesome.  I haven't gotten into any of that today and I won't have a chance but you ought to look into what's going on in group dreaming, shared dreaming, lucid dreaming and so on.  Beginning to discover we can develop it rather than just use it.  And the same thing is certain of the frontal lobes.  What then do the frontal lobes have inherent within them? 

You want to know?  Nothing.  Nothing at all because they have inherent within them everything.  At a certain point everything is nothing.  That is they represent simply the total and complete unknown.  The unknown.  Now the interesting thing about the frontal lobes and the realm of potential which they have inherent within them is you find out what the possibilities of them are only by interaction or participation with them.  Only by an entry into that realm and then the unknown articulates or forms according to the nature of your entry into it so that you're constantly getting reflected back still, a knowing, which is a reflection of your own way of moving into the unknown.  I tried to get into that in the last two chapters of my book, "Evolutions End", it's a rather tricky subject.

I would refer you to Meister Eckhart, one of my certainly primary heroes of life, when he said, "to enter into that you must drop all known’s, everything known".  He said, "no name, no identification, no knowing can be carried into it whatsoever".  He called it "the cloud of unknowing".  Other people have written about "the cloud of unknowing".  What does it mean?  Well you're entering into darkness, you're entering into the unknown but it articulates this way, pure light or pure being as you enter into it.  So it's a purely participatory process and it's infinitely open and possible.  That is really the end of evolution.  Evolution's looking for a way to surpass itself in effect.  Evolution is looking for a way to move beyond its own physical process of evolution and we are it.  I think even the discovery of things like lasers and all that is simply, which never existed before, these are just little examples.  Evolution breaks through with this and enlightens the mind of the discovery and he writes it all down feverishly and it brings something totally new into the world, into the whole universe.  You don't find it anywhere else.  So that's what all that is part of this whole evolutionary scheme. 

Now, this is going to wind us up for this business of adolescence.  I would summarize it by saying, what we need in this new lexicon of the spirit is emphasis of the fact that there's no giving up of anything because we have nothing to give up.  That's ego on our part to think we have anything we can trade off with this evolutionary process, function, you can call it whatever you like.  As a result, there's no denial because when you start denying, you're saying there are parts of evolutionary process that should not be evolved.  See we carry it all with us.  We are the total evolutionary process, you find it all within us, that's what Maclean kept saying.  And, we carry it all with us, or none of it really.  So that's the other part of it is no denial, no trade-off, but instead the incorporation of the lower into the higher and that's something we can't ourselves do. 

So my proposal in my book is that there is this incredible intelligence, power, force, which we can say expresses itself in an evolutionary fashion which is always there to move on us to wean us away from the lower structures into that highest of all structure.  And the reward system, what do the biologists now say the reward system of the brain is?  Here in this limbic structure.  Here in this emotional cognitive system and its direct connections with the heart.  So what evolution must do is win us from seeking our rewards in all these intellectual plays with the physical system and show us that there are incredible awards even greater than that in this totally unknown open potential system, and then that is where evolution would achieve its greatest end.  The problems with that is of course establishing access to this open-ended field and learning to operate as simply a field within a field and all of that of course plunges us into some heavy philosophical kind of stuff we can think about.  The access to the field is done through models.  I don't know how you can do it without a model. 

You have to have the idea somewhere planted in your mind.  I think the reason for the appearance of semantic abstract language at age 11 is not just that we might understand physical or chemical terms and so on and so forth, but only through an abstract semantic language could we have presented to us the possibilities of an open-ended structure that has no content but creates content according to the nature of our entry into it.  So it never repeats itself and it's never the same from instant to instant but everything is always new.  It's a very exciting proposition.

Well what we want to talk about, I think of that marvelous question someone asked, it was such a heartfelt question, all this is just great, this is exciting and we hear a lot about this and it's kind of the new age, but what are we going to do specifically.  What can we do about the riots?  What do we do about the kids killing themselves and so on.

The first thing I would think of is in applying some of this would be to distinguish, and I've talked about this before, being responsible to the world and responsible for the world.  I'm responsible to the world.  Every action I make I have to make in response to the needs of my situation, the situation of the world I'm in.  But I'm not responsible for the world.  The minute I think I'm responsible for the world I will start and project out there all the business you see.  Really that's kind of playing God.  It gets us into some pretty tricky areas.  So we're not responsible for the world, we're responsible to the world. 

As a parent I was not responsible for my children, I was responsible to them.  I'll make it clearer.  There is a certain amount you can do for your children as a parent and believe me, if you're a parent you know this to be true, there comes a certain point where no more can you do.  And you just have to go along behind for a while and pick up the pieces of those kids and put them back together as best you can.  You've done all you can.  My teacher George Jaydar once said, "we've done all the damage to them we can do by the time they're 11 years old".  Well that might be true but nevertheless we are responsible to them, even when we are not responsible for them.

Pages