SpiritualFreedomPress.com
What Happens When Our Emotions
are Replaced with Cold Logic
“I don’t think the problem is with human nature. It’s with human information.
If you give good people bad information, they make bad decisions.”
—Yuval Noah Harari
When I was a young man, cultural norms told me that, I needed to get an education, establish a career, and get married, to be happy. Well, I did all that, but things haven’t worked out as planned. I spent my working years developing weapons to facilitate our government’s ability to kill people en masse—all the while, thinking my life was meaningful because I was “making the world a better place.” But, now, I see things differently: My cohorts and I—including engineers in the lands of our “enemies”—were, in truth, developing weapons to protect the institutions that were paying us, to develop them! Because we all needed money to “get ahead,” we valued our institutions more than human lives.
During those years, I suffered through two marriages, while causing two good women to suffer, also. To terminate the suffering that resulted from my efforts to love women, I have lived alone, for over half my life. To spend time with other people, I must travel, here and there. Consequently, I participate in habitat destruction by dumping tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.
My life began in a rural community, where everyone knew everyone else. Now, I not only don’t know my neighbors, but I would make a nuisance of myself if I tried. Besides, what’s the point? Within three or four years, half of us will have moved away. I have had many friends throughout my career, but we’re all so separated now that it pains me to think that most of us won’t even know about it when the others pass away. Those who identify with my plight may want to join me, in considering a question that seems to be increasingly on people’s minds: “Where did cultural norms go so wrong?”
We’ve done everything our culture expected of us. Are we all so wicked in our hearts that we deserve this emotionally estranged existence—an existence that has brought misery to those we’ve tried to love? As for those we have loved, as friends, or lovers, they are no longer in sight. For whatever it’s worth, I don’t think any of us are evil. I am convinced, instead, that all eight billion of us have been seriously misinformed!
The question is, who misinformed us? Ironically, the answer is, “No one in particular,” because, the culprit is our collective imaginations. We have been misinformed to believe that civil cultures can create the orderly future they promise if everyone complies with the “truth,” as prescribed by civil law. Therefore, instead of depending on our feelings for guidance concerning family relationships, we rely on the nuclear family, in which the principal members’ responsibilities to each other are prescribed by law. A family, in which each member is answerable to the state, for mistreating each other, looks excellent on paper. What could possibly go wrong? Unfortunately, given the degree of instability, discontent, and violence, that erupts in modern families, things aren’t working out so well—if “living happily ever after” is the goal.
Be forewarned. Any institutionally prescribed truth about relationships is misinformation because viable human relationships are matters of the heart, not of rules. They do not result from complying with cultural norms, legally imposed expectations, lifetime promises, or good intentions—all of which are unnatural and thus anathemas to life. Complying with prescribed law—civilization’s accepted truth about family relationships—causes humans to make bad decisions, which, far too often, cause us, and our spouses and children, to suffer. Most people will wholeheartedly agree that “it takes a village, to raise a child.” But, as our children increasingly suffer from social isolation, depression, drug usage, and suicide, we either blame the parents or look to more therapy as the solution. No one bothers to ask, “Where’s the fxxxxxg, village?” Nor do we concern ourselves, in the least, with the circumstances required for a village, a community, or a natural family, to manifest itself.
It’s not that we have never been warned about the danger of legally prescribed “truth.” The authors of Genesis wrote, “For God knows that, when you eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil,” They were warning us that, when we look to “truth,” as prescribed by civil law, for guidance, instead of relying on our inborn feelings, gifted us by Nature, we are no longer welcome, in Eden.
What’s wrong with knowing the “truth,” even if it is a fabrication of the languaged mind? As noted above, it causes people like you and me to make bad choices. Also, people who know the “truth” feel compelled to blame others in the name of righteousness, but not because those being blamed have intentionally done wrong. It is that people who live in a troubled world are inspired to lay blame, because it feels good to pronounce judgment on whoever is responsible for everyone’s tribulations. But, to pass judgment on an individual, a group, a race, or nationality—whether religiously or legally inspired—is to create both the immediate pain of spiritual estrangement and, eventually, the anguish of social upheaval.
Do animals know the “truth”? No. That’s inconceivable since they lack mankind’s linguistic skills. But, they manage quite well without it. Given that they don’t know the “truth,” they are free to listen to their hearts, as Nature created all of us to do. What about pre-tribal and pre-civilized people? Did they know the “truth”? That would be worth further investigation, but according to the evidence I have, they knew no more about it than the animals. They certainly would have had squabbles and disagreements, and—in extreme cases—practiced shunning. They would also have engaged in armed conflict over territorial claims, from time to time. But, because they lived in the moment, their activities—including hostile ones—were likely justified entirely by how they felt at the time.
When we express anger toward someone, we are saying, “I don’t like what you are doing.” We are being true to ourselves, which is how spiritually free people serve life. However, when we lay blame in the name of “truth,” we are saying, “God doesn’t like what you are doing.” The problem with knowing the “truth” is that it empowers people with the authority to act on behalf of God! But in a culture in which everyone knows God’s will, it is virtually impossible to reach a consensus about what “truth” is—the very issue that must be resolved to avoid insurrections.
If “truth” does not exist in Nature, where did the concept come from? It was the advent of human language that led to an unfortunate human error by making it possible for our predecessors to imagine what their situation might be like in the unknowable future. Given that the distant future is unknowable, there is no way to control it. This is the origin of the human fear of what the future might bring. To resolve their fear of the future—a fear that never existed, before language—someone came up with a remarkable idea, which, in my view, was embodied in the promise that the serpent made, to Eve: “If you comply with my laws, I promise you a future that is peaceful, just, and orderly.”
That promise was enticing because it banished human uncertainties about the future! The promise of an ideal future was so appealing that two other concepts were created to justify the laws used to impose it—God and “Truth.” The masses were so taken by the prospect of an ideal future, that people worshipped the promise maker, as God—whether he was an earthly, or heavenly king, or our present God that we call money, which is the universal medium of exchange, through which modern people hope to secure all imagined future needs. And, the masses worshipped ‘’God’s” laws, as if they represented “Eternal Truth,” through which we would, one day, reach “the promised land.”
Question: What if it turns out that the serpent’s promise to make the unknowable future knowable is not realizable, as our common sense, the lessons of history, and modern system control theory all imply? That would mean that mankind’s attempt to control the future, by any means—civil law or otherwise—is futile. In that case, seeking guidance in anything other than the feelings gifted to us by evolution, not only causes us to suffer, but it may well end up costing our species its life.
Now, I realize why I got married. I also know why I disregarded the fact that—to make money—I developed weapons that protect institutions, not people. I was worshipping misinformation!
How do we return to a way of life in which there is no “truth”—a life in which we are free to be there for the people we love when they need us and not be in their way when they don’t need us? In this way of life, we will each be free to do what feels right in serving each other and not have to do things that feel wrong to “get along or get ahead.” Returning to that way of life will require us to cleanse ourselves of the illusion that “truth” exists. When we are no longer emotionally constrained by having to be “good,” as prescribed by whatever system of laws constrains us at the time, rest assured that our “emotional intelligence” will still know the way to our spiritual homes.
What, exactly, is emotional intelligence? How could brains as intelligent as ours be so easily misinformed that, by thinking they can make the unknowable future knowable, they have misinformed themselves in a remarkably simplistic way? To answer these and other questions, I have developed a “Brain Model” diagram, which provides a visual reference for studying human behavior. The diagram is a functional—not a biological—depiction of the brain.
As you read the following description of the brain diagram, keep in mind that it is not necessary to thoroughly understand how the different elements of the brain interact. Indeed, you can skip the details, if you prefer. I included them for completeness, and for those who may find them interesting. But, understanding how cultural norms lead us astray does not require that we comprehend all the details—only that we grasp the big picture. What we need is to become cognizant, first, of the reason that modern humans rely on cold dead truth for direction, instead of the warmth of our living hearts. Second, we need to be cognizant of how that error has so negatively affected the wellbeing of life on earth, as well as thwarting our remarkable ability to love and to be loved unconditionally.
The Six Elements of the Brain Diagram (find diagram on next page)
- Emotional Intelligence reveals—through how we feel—our innate wisdom, which has been genetically accumulating since the first stirrings of life on earth. In abiding by this wisdom, on which our species’ survival depends, we do what feels right and avoid activities that feel wrong. Because every animate being, in Nature, follows its heart by seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, countless species live in sufficient harmony for life to flourish on this planet.
- Intellectual intelligence is the adaptive element of the brain. It learns the location of life’s necessities—such as food, water, and shelter—and learns the skills necessary to make use of them.
- Consciousness employs a what-if rationale to figure out how to manage new or non-routine situations for which reactions have not yet been learned.
- The pattern processor processes the millions of signals arriving from the sensory system, to provide the mind with an objective awareness of its circumstances.
- The correlator detects differences between the signal arriving from the sensory system and the one arriving from intellectual intelligence, instigating corrective action.
- The Motor System is the brain’s output.
For an overview of how the various elements in the diagram interact, we will discuss the “subconscious behavioral system.” This system includes the pattern processor, intellectual intelligence, correlator, and motor system, all of which are depicted with heavy lines. When driving a car, for example, sometimes we are surprised to realize that we have no recollection of what happened during the previous five to ten minutes. This does not mean that our brain has not been occupied. Remember how challenging it was to drive, the first time you were behind a wheel? All that activity is still going on, but now, you are skilled. Intellectual intelligence, the adaptive element of your brain, has learned what’s necessary to operate the vehicle.
Intellectual intelligence knows, from experience, where the road should appear, relative to the car. When the vehicle drifts to the right or left, the output of the pattern processor doesn’t match the output of intellectual intelligence. This results in a signal at the correlator output that directs the motor system to turn the steering wheel, as necessary, to ensure that the output of the pattern processor and that of intellectual intelligence correlate, indicating that the vehicle is positioned correctly. When this happens, the motor system input signal returns to zero, indicating that no more action is needed. The routine patterns of behavior, in driving a vehicle or playing a musical instrument, for that matter, are, thus, managed subconsciously, without the involvement of emotional intelligence or consciousness.
These two elements come into play when an unexpected event occurs. Suppose another vehicle places you in danger by running a red light. The pattern processor will process this event, but intellectual intelligence will not. As a result, the correlator’s output contains all the information about the impending accident. This information goes to multiple places. Initially, it triggers the “threshold of emotional response,” which notifies emotional intelligence that something unusual has occurred. It is also applied to intellectual intelligence, since whatever information appears at the correlator output must, eventually, be learned to enable the mind to manage routine tasks subconsciously. (Although having to avoid a car that has run a red light is not routine, the fact that the correlator output is applied to intellectual intelligence ensures that we will always remember the event. It also explains why people so often vividly recall the details of their circumstances, at the moment they were informed of unexpected news, such as the assassination of a religious or political leader.)
The correlator output, which contains information regarding the impending accident, is also applied to emotional intelligence, which reacts, by changing the body’s chemical state. This rewires the organism’s neurological system, in a way that prepares the mind-body to react to the situation at hand optimally. And finally, the correlator output is applied to conscious awareness, one of three inputs to the conscious mind. The signal from the correlator provides consciousness with an objective view of the emergency. A second signal, from intellectual intelligence, provides the conscious mind with access to knowledge learned from past experiences, which may help resolve the problem at hand.
The third input to consciousness is from emotional intelligence, but the diagram does not show that connection because it is expressed chemically, not physically. Emotional intelligence reveals the species’ needs, through feelings, thus exclusively in the subjective domain. (Yes, even when satisfying feelings of hunger, we are serving our species, because, without its members’ ability to experience hunger, no species would survive.) In the diagram, each feeling shown arising from the heart-shaped element represents a unique chemical state in which emotional intelligence automatically places the mind-body in reaction to the details of the situation at hand. The conscious mind detects chemical states as specific feelings, at times pleasurable, which means keep doing what you are doing, and at other times painful, meaning it’s time to stop.
Emotional intelligence is multi-minded, thus attends to all the species’ needs simultaneously. If something needs to be taken care of that can’t be managed subconsciously because intellectual intelligence has not yet learned how to manage it, then emotional intelligence issues a feeling, to request the conscious mind’s assistance.
Consciousness is single-minded. If more than one issue simultaneously needs attention, the conscious mind will “choose” to resolve the stronger feeling first. For instance, if an animal is grazing out in the open, while a blizzard is moving in, the animal’s desire for shelter will gradually increase while its desire for nourishment will decrease. Eventually, its desire for shelter will outweigh its desire to satisfy hunger, at which time the conscious mind will start “what-iffing” its choices—what-if I go here, what-if I go there—to decide on its best option.
Because consciousness is single-minded, in the case of a car running a red light, it focuses exclusively on producing the behavior required to avoid a collision. It, thereby, returns the body to its unaroused chemical state, by resolving, in this instance, feelings of fear. Consciously managed behavior is applied to the motor system, after being added to the output of the correlator. The conscious mind is never totally in control. It just contributes to the control being continuously provided by the subconscious behavioral system.
Regarding further considerations on how the elements of the brain diagram interact, I leave that to the reader, if so inspired. As an example, individuals who have practiced a performance to near perfection are often unable to perform it as well on stage. This occurs because emotional intelligence is so concerned about doing well that it “emotes” feelings/chemicals of anxiety, which we typically refer to as stage fright. This inspires the conscious mind to contribute, by trying to improve on the rehearsed performance, an effort that is usually counterproductive.
But again, the details are not important. What’s important is to understand that reality, as the conscious mind experiences it, consists of two parts—the “objective reality” that intellectual intelligence provides, and the “subjective reality” that our emotional intelligence provides. Both play a crucial role in creating the reality that enables animate beings to survive. Emotional intelligence gifts animate beings with the will to live, thus, the ability to value their existence. Intellectual intelligence enables animate beings to recognize situations that endanger their lives. Both are key to survival, because, without being able to value its existence, no animal would have reason to avoid danger. And, if an animal were unable to recognize dangerous situations, it would not realize there was anything to avoid.
In short, both objective and subjective reality are required, for consciousness to exist. Subjective reality not only imbues consciousness with the will to live but, more significantly, with the reason to live—the natural desire to do what feels right. Because the conscious mind’s purpose is limited to seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, its task is simple. The difficult part is managed subconsciously, by emotional intelligence. Given the details of the situation at hand, the role of emotional intelligence is to emote the one feeling—or combination of feelings—that will inspire the behavior that best contributes to the species’ wellbeing. That requires a massive body of wisdom, a wisdom that evolution has continuously honed on behalf of species survival since the beginning of life on earth.
What I have said about the brain applies equally to humans and animals. Throughout evolution, emotional intelligence has rewarded all living beings with contentment when they react to their ever-changing circumstances in ways that serve their species. At the same time, intellectual intelligence has provided them with the necessary knowledge of their habitat and the skills required to achieve contentment. To satisfy hunger, for example, a tiger must know where prey is likely to be found and must also be skilled at hunting.
The conscious mind, whether human or animal, has only one goal—to seek contentment, by maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. And there is only one way to accomplish it—by doing what is required to satisfy whatever feeling emotional intelligence is producing at the time.
Before monetary and legal systems were invented, our emotional intelligence governed us. Life was simple. No one worried about the distant future because no one made lifetime promises. Thus, there were none to fulfill. And, with emotional intelligence maintaining social order, there was no need for legal or monetary identities—the ‘Mark of the beast’, as the Book of Revelation describes it. So, there were no heavenly or mortal kings to please, and no bills to pay. People were spiritually free—free to live in the moment, by satisfying the full spectrum of feelings depicted in the brain diagram. Thanks to the guidance provided by emotional intelligence, each species’ needs were served—not perfectly, of course, but well enough to enable countless species to live in sufficient harmony for life to flourish on this planet.
In “Eden,” life was simple, emotionally. Humans just did what they felt like doing. Emotional intelligence took care of all the rest. What could be simpler than that? Materially, however, things were far from ideal. Without legal systems to organize people en masse, there was no industry—so clothing, shelters, and weapons had to be made by hand. To defend territorial claims, armed conflicts occurred. And there were predators to avoid, etc. etc. etc. So, to eliminate such “flaws” inherent in mankind’s natural way of life, groups of men began establishing centralized systems of authority. This enabled them to define and outlaw “evils,” such as stealing, illicit sex, and killing—and also to grant each other the right to own things, such as women, land, animals, and slaves.
Those men thought that, by the authority of rational laws, they were making the world a better place. And, as it turns out, in ways, they were. In terms of wealth, convenience, and progress, human intellect has succeeded, beyond measure. However, we are paying a terrible emotional price for that progress. To comply with the laws that make those accomplishments possible, we have had to be spiritually dishonest. Consequently, we have learned to lie about how we feel. We have become so practiced at ignoring how we feel in the moment to attend to imagined future needs, that we don’t realize we are being spiritually dishonest. But spending eight hours every day working at a job in which we have no emotional investment or remaining in a relationship that does not feel right to fulfill a promise made years ago are two of the ways we unknowingly lie about how we feel. Whenever we allow inborn feelings to go unresolved to secure imagined future needs, it hurts whether we recognize the source of our pain or not. Sometimes, the pain is so severe that we end up in a psychiatrist’s office. It is as if the more material progress we make, the more our way of life feels like Hell.
Why is it that civil cultures so offend our souls that the time eventually comes when no one can take it anymore? Firstly, it’s because civilized cultures force people to live for the future, a domain over which cold logic, based on our limitless imaginations, has absolute control. Our emotional intelligence is, thus, silenced because its guidance is based on innate wisdom, which applies only to the situation at hand. How could it not offend our souls to be ignored by our intellectual intelligence? Secondly, no centralized system of authority can fulfill the promise it makes to justify its existence—that it can deliver a peaceful, just, and orderly future if we comply with its laws. Doesn’t common sense tell us that the future is unknowable? How can a promise justify anything, when what is promised resides in the future, a domain that, as of now, is unknowable? The answer is that it can’t, which is why all civil cultures fail.
Intellectual intelligence serves our species well, but only so long as it sticks to its evolutionarily assigned role, which is to adapt by learning the locations of resources offered by one’s habitat and acquiring the skills necessary to make good use of them. But, when intellectual intelligence began placing more significance on imagined future needs than on presently experienced ones—and did so by force of prescribed law—things immediately started going awry. Having to ignore how we felt in the moment to go along with the law, emotional suffering began immediately. And, having lost access to the wisdom we require to participate in a sustainable way of life, physical suffering eventually became intolerable.
If people are unable to find lasting contentment, in the “reality” that civil cultures create, how are we humans to find happiness? Rev. Andy Stanly answered that question, after having studied recent worldwide research on how to be happy: “To be happy, the research concludes, you must give your life away, in service to others. You must embrace all the New Testament values—love one another, care for one another, serve one another, forgive one another, and carry one another’s burdens. Giving our life away in service to others is our only path to happiness.”
Given the fact that the latest research on how to be happy agrees with what Jesus told us over two thousand years ago, why are we not finding relief from our suffering by “carrying one another’s burdens?” The answer is: Just as in Jesus’ time, humanity still depends on money, to survive, not interdependent relationships! Indeed, civilized people take pride in their ability to make it on their own, because not to do so is to be regarded as a failure. This reveals intellectual intelligence’s blindness to the fact that happiness requires interdependent relationships—and to the fact that, like every other social primate on earth, no human being is capable of “making it on his own.” Either we depend, for survival, on a monetary and legal system, or on interdependent relationships. There is no second, third, or fourth option, nor is there a middle ground.
In a spiritually free culture, humans function as a social species, in which family/community/village is everything, and it’s for life. However, civil cultures recognize only nuclear families as legitimate. So, modern families are incredibly unstable, because they offend our emotional intelligence. They depend on educational systems to babysit and indoctrinate their children—an indoctrination that wouldn’t be necessary if we were living as a social species. Social security systems are needed to support the elderly. And as with all pair-bonding species, if our offspring has not left “home” by a certain age, they are judged as failures. If humans were, in fact, a pair-bonding species, leaving the family when able to make it on our own would be normal. But, for a social species, no one can make it on his own. Therefore, being kicked out of one’s family at any age is the ultimate spiritual offense. But, given our indoctrination, our rational minds have us thinking it’s normal, regardless of how much our emotional minds protest.
For social primates, a family structure that cannot emotionally and materially support its members for life is dysfunctional, beyond measure. If humans were free to function as the social primates we are, we wouldn’t need the service of governments to survive, and thereby have to subjugate ourselves to their notion of what is right and wrong. We would be taking care of our own, including defending the territory we needed to survive. No matter how many laws legislators devise to compensate for the dysfunctional families that legal systems impose, the populace will continue to suffer, and the culture will eventually flounder without anyone ever knowing why.
When free to do what comes naturally—in which case, no woman could ever be condemned, as an agent of Satan, for bringing a love child into the world—life’s meaning is implicit. The issue never crosses people’s minds. In other words, pre-tribal and pre-civilized people were not only thoroughly engaged in taking care of life, love children, and all, but their emotional intelligence rewarded them for their devotion by making them feel they were “as one” with their sisters and brothers, and with the habitat that sustained them. When we feel “as one” with everything of which we are consciously aware, the question, “What is the meaning of life?” cannot exist, because we are experiencing it!
Life’s meaning, you see, cannot be described. Words, which are constructs of the rational mind, are inadequate, beyond measure. Life’s meaning can only be experienced because it is revealed exclusively in the subjective domain.
But, as subjects of rules, laws, and promises, modern people seldom experience living in the moment, except in instances where civil order temporarily breaks down, as in the wake of natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes. Those circumstances provide people—at least for a moment—the freedom to fulfill their inborn desire to place the needs of others above their own. Fulfilling that desire is essential to a social primate’s happiness. This is evident by the fact that when people are brought together by natural disasters, they, even total strangers, not only become instant sisters and brothers, but they remember the experience as the most emotionally satisfying one of their lives.
Throughout evolution, there were no civil laws—or civil rights. So, people relied on interdependent relationships for everything—nourishment, happiness, purpose, identity, meaning, a place to live, and safety. We humans socially bond because we love giving our lives away in service to others, just as both the latest research and the New Testament reveal. And we love the sense of wellbeing that we experience when being taken care of by others. Only interdependent relationships provide us with circumstances, in which the full spectrum of feelings shown in the brain diagram are free to govern our relationships. And, the only time we can experience sisterly and brotherly love is when we are bonded by our need for one another, whether in the natural world, or in times when civil order temporarily breaks down.
To grasp the significance of interdependent relationships to a social primate’s psyche, think of the other members of your extended family as expressions of Nature. It’s only through their need for you, that Nature can love you, and its only through your need for them, that Nature can love them. The introduction of legal and monetary systems renders interdependent relationships irrelevant to one’s survival, which is why natural human families no longer exist. Though our intellectual intelligence has not yet figured it out, our souls know that, without sisters and brothers for us to take care of, there is nothing, not even Nature, that cares whether we exist. This leaves us in an incomprehensible situation of having to create, by use of cold logic, our own reason for being. We manage the situation in the only way that’s possible, by finding our reason for being in beliefs. So let‘s be kind to people who are defending their beliefs, no matter how senseless they may seem. They are defending, at least in their minds, their reason for being. And let’s be kind to ourselves when we are defending our beliefs, for the same reason.
All the feelings shown in the brain diagram, and countless others, exist for one reason—to provide the guidance we need, to enjoy living in groups of upwards of thirty to fifty people who cooperate in ways that serve our species. Now that we depend on money and laws, to survive, we function as if neither emotional intelligence—nor the feelings through which we once took pleasure in serving our sisters and brothers—ever existed. In essence, we are functioning as if half of our brains are gone. Unfortunately, it’s the half through which our innate wisdom would normally reward us for serving life through our service to one another. Further explanation is unnecessary to describe why so many suffer a loveless existence and why events on planet Earth are not working out so well these days.
To improve our lot, there is something we need to consider: Which is sovereign—Nature, as revealed through the wisdom of our souls, or the laws of the state, which are fabrications of the intellectual mind? That question was masterfully addressed by the story of Jesus’ life, and death.
The story implies that Jesus orchestrated his own crucifixion. In my mind, Jesus went to the cross with the intent to awaken humanity to the mindless behavior that legal subjugation imposes on all of us. Jesus saw Nature/God, as sovereign, not the state. When he was brought before the authorities, he baited the state, by refusing to acknowledge the state as sovereign. This refusal forced the state to crucify him, despite his innocence, of any actual wrongdoing. By taking the bait, the state revealed the message Jesus so desired to convey that he surrendered his life to do so. The message: Nation-states can tolerate only subjects, not people who are true to the wisdom of their souls. In essence, Jesus forced the state to crucify him, for the “crime” of being human.
To me, Jesus’ crucifixion is not the story of how a multitude of humans took pleasure, in crucifying a God. It was an assemblage of presumed gods—people who were certain they knew the “truth”—crucifying a man, for the crime of being human. The real tragedy of the crucifixion is that the leaders who authorized it, the soldiers who carried it out, and the crowd that celebrated it, were not evil. Like you and me, they were misinformed on the question of what life is about. It is evident, in some of Jesus’ final words, that he recognized the innocence of all humanity: “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
The question is, how are we—the most intelligent creatures on earth—so blind to what life is about, that we would celebrate crucifying a man, like Jesus, who understood what it is about? Life is about taking care of life, through our service to our sisters and brothers. Just as importantly, Jesus knew what life is not about: It’s not about serving self via the human rights that are guaranteed by monetary and legal systems. When we seek lasting contentment via realizing personal ambitions, we never find it—not because we don’t work hard enough or don’t deserve it, but because we are misinformed. Cultural norms have taught us that life is about serving self, when, in the real world, it is about being true to our hearts, for the sake of each other’s happiness and our species’ wellbeing.
There’s a reason we are so easily misled, concerning what life is about. It has to do with the limitations of consciousness. The conscious mind of every human perceives itself as all-knowing, regarding moral values, such as what is right or wrong, good or evil. It’s so convinced that it knows the “truth” that it often has us killing and dying in wars fought on behalf of “righteousness.” But, despite our certainty that we have the answers to the world’s problems, our conscious minds are, in fact, aware of only two things: the objective reality that intellectual intelligence provides, and the subjective reality provided by emotional intelligence.
For modern humans, objective reality remains, as it has always been—a remarkably accurate representation of our circumstances, from an impartial point of view. But our subjective reality drastically changed, the moment monetary and legal systems were introduced. Humans, who previously had survived, by taking pleasure in caring for the people around them, suddenly had no option other than to take whatever pleasure they could in competing against one another for nourishment, clothing, social status, and a place to live. But, because the conscious mind’s purpose is limited to figuring out how to maximize pleasure, it has us doing whatever makes us feel good, regardless of the circumstances. So, it’s our circumstances that determine whether we “give our lives away, in service to others,” or serve only ourselves by accumulating wealth and privilege. It has nothing—absolutely nothing—to do with who is good, and who is evil.
To grasp how radically being subject to civil law changes our behavior, consider this quote from the book The Gospel of the Redman by Ernest Seaton.
“The culture and civilization of the Whiteman are essentially material: His measure of success is, “How much property have I acquired for myself?” The culture of the Redman is fundamentally spiritual; His measure of success is, “How much service have I rendered to my people?” His mode of life, his thoughts, and his every act are given spiritual significance, approached, and colored with complete realization of the spirit world.”
Emotionally, the Whiteman and the Redman are not at all different from each other. Place us in his “reality”—where no one owns anything—and we would behave, like him. Place him in our reality—where our sense of wellbeing depends, largely, on how much we own—and he would behave, like us. The behavior that offends, both life, and our souls, cannot be rectified, by religion, education, technological progress, or any other means. It requires a culture, in which our sense of wellbeing is based on our service to one another, not on how much property we have acquired, for ourselves.
However, when we are emotionally repressed, by the constant need to comply with social mores, and civil laws, we see ourselves as “above our circumstances” for the sake of our emotional survival, when, in fact, no being on earth is above its circumstances. When we depend on the natural world, to survive, we are agents of life. This is not by free choice. We serve life, for the sake of our happiness and survival. In our modern world, however, our survival is dependent on the services provided by a state. We are reduced to being agents of the state—again, not by free choice, but for the sake of our happiness and survival. It’s as simple as that.
Before the advent of civilization, all humans lived, naturally, as agents of life. We loved our sisters and brothers, unconditionally, because—above all else—we needed each other, for survival. Now, we live, as agents of the state. Instead of loving each other, we love money, unconditionally, because, above all else, we depend on it, for survival. We innocently see ourselves as above our circumstances when, in fact, our circumstances dictate what we love and what we don’t love.
Regaining the freedom to serve life is not about knowing what’s good and what’s evil. It’s about recognizing how radically the institutional subjugation of modern civilization has transformed human behavior, while we—the subjects of it all—go on living, never realizing that anything, of significance, has changed. OK, so we used to live in socially bonded groups, on territory that we defended. Now we live alone, in huge cities, defended by atomic weapons. Why such a fuss?”
Clearly, something significant has occurred, and it is affecting everything, from our emotional health, to habitat destruction. Civilized people universally believe that complying with rationally conceived civil laws is essential, to maintain order. In that belief, we depend on institutions—no longer on our hearts—to define what a human family is. Consequently, we treat each other as blank slates—as if we have no inborn sensibilities about caring for one another, even in our most personal relationships.
But we do have inborn sensibilities, for loving, and taking care of one another. Our problem is that those sensibilities are so deeply offended, by the necessity of complying with intellectual intelligence’s notion of what constitutes an ‘ideal family.’ Our inborn sensibilities are so offended that, to escape the pain of it all, over half of American adults now live alone, and women are increasingly having children out of wedlock—with no apologies. Bless those women. To me, it’s evidence that female hearts are beginning to wake up to the absurdity of institutionalizing family relationships. Now the question is: When will our heads begin catching on!?”
If we hope to become the agents of life that evolution emotionally rewards us for being, we must, at the very minimum, recognize that we are not blank slates. Only then will we desire a way of life in which we don’t have to pretend that we are, in effect, mindless, to be socially acceptable.
I have an idea of how people who are true to the wisdom of their souls would live. Unfortunately, I can’t tell anyone how to get there. There is a long and uncharted path between here and there, a trail only the human spirit could possibly navigate. But as long as we remain unaware that emotional intelligence exists, we have only civil law for guidance. Consequently, our spirits can take us nowhere. However, to provide at least some idea of where we would be going, if we knew how to get there, the following table compares, as I see it, the features inherent to a spiritually based reality vs. a legally imposed one.
Should we be so inspired, returning to a spiritually based reality will not be easy. The first problem is that it can’t be done by conscious intent. The biggest surprise I experienced, while developing the brain diagram, came from realizing that the conscious mind does not control anything. Rather, it seeks contentment, by figuring out how to best satisfy feelings. That’s all! So, to return to a spiritually based culture, we must learn to recognize the difference between the feelings that tell us how things are, vs. the feelings that tell us how things should be, thus are based on illusions.
Fortunately, the two kinds of feelings are easy to distinguish from each other. Feelings such as “I am hungry,” “I am angry,” or “I am falling in love” can’t be argued with, because they tell us how things are. However, the feelings that tell us how things should be—such as those based on religious, political, or ideological “truths”—can be endlessly argued with, because everything a belief or ideology promises resides in the future—a domain that does not, yet, exist. When our decisions about how to treat one another are based on feelings that cannot be argued with, then we are living in a spiritually based reality! But, if our decisions about how we treat one another are based on feelings that can be argued with, we are living in a legally-imposed reality. How do we cleanse ourselves of feelings that can be argued with so that the feelings that tell us how things are will, again, become the basis for our conscious mind’s decisions?
In principle, it’s easy: We simply must regain our spiritual authority by relying on our emotional intelligence for guidance. But, in practice, regaining our spiritual authority is difficult, beyond measure. Jesus got crucified for it! Consider a few of the obstacles that stand in our way. First, regaining our spiritual authority requires interdependent relationships. No social primate can even survive in the natural world alone! On the other hand, when living in a mass society, we must comply with civil law. This puts the spiritual authority of any individual who does not agree with the “truth” up against the power of the state. No contest! The human spirit loses, hands down.
Secondly, “truth” always trumps spiritual authority, because it promises us a certain future—even a glorious one—if we go along with its laws. By contrast, when we rely on the guidance provided by our emotional intelligence, we are promised nothing at all. We will, of course, experience a profound sense of purpose and contentment, but not because it was promised to us. It happens naturally in the context of interdependent relationships because that is how evolution rewards social primates for being there for each other. In any case, how can the human spirit, which promises nothing, compete against a system of laws that promises us a certain future, if we simply comply? Our spirits can’t compete. No contest! So, the wisdom of our souls gets ignored again.
Thirdly, people who are bonded by commonly held “truths” are able to organize en masse. The more true believers there are, the more massive the culture. By contrast, the size of a culture, in which its members look to the human spirit for guidance, is governed by instincts. The competition for a place to live, on this planet inevitably pits natural human cultures against massive ones. Again, no contest! The human spirit loses. This is why, when a civil culture encounters an indigenous one, the indigenous culture is mercilessly eliminated.
These are a few of the ways the rational mind, via the use of institutionally ordained “truth” overpowers our human spirits—our emotional minds. Intellectual intelligence has convinced the human race that, via cold logic, it can do something that our common sense tells us cannot be done—eliminate future uncertainties. By convincing the world’s population that rationally derived “truth” has the answer to the world’s problems, civil cultures have justified their right to claim dominion over all livable parcels of land on this planet. This leaves the human spirit with no place on earth to make a stand. But, assuming that our species survives these six thousand years of “truth-ordained” spiritual repression, the human spirit will have one thing going for it, that “truth” never will. Only the living spirit possesses the wisdom required to oversee a sustainable way of life. All that “truth” will ever have is what it has now—cold logic backed up by the overactive imagination of the intellectual mind.
For instance, where else, other than in the intellectual mind’s imagination, could such a mindless concept as manifest destiny come from? The rational mind crafted it, to justify its right to destroy anything, living or dead, that stands in the way of realizing the promised land. Think about it. The rational mind, which governs all modern cultures by the force of law, is able to justify any cruelty imaginable in order to realize a conjured-up domain that no human has ever experienced. It is little wonder that genocides occur, carried out by people who are every bit as intelligent and caring, as you and me. When evolution “gifted” intellectual intelligence with language, thus, the ability to place value on domains that no human has ever experienced, its ability to rationalize morphed into an expression of mindlessness on steroids!
Whether the human race eventually recovers from the mindlessness of it all, is neither my concern nor yours. To think that we can control such issues is to demonstrate that we are suffering from mindlessness ourselves. Our only viable concern, one in which our spirits can engage, is: “What do we want for ourselves and the people we love?” Do we want our lives to be governed by intellectual intelligence, an expression of awareness that can justify any malice imaginable, to get its way? Or do we want our lives to be governed by the wisdom of human nature, which—from a rational point of view—never justifies anything? It does, however, reward us with feelings of wholeness and belonging whenever we find ourselves serving life, through interdependent relationships.
Unfortunately, I can prescribe no plan for regaining our spiritual freedom. All I know, to do, is to explain—as clearly as I can—why I believe that emotional intelligence exists. Beyond that, what happens resides in the hands of providence. Given the obstacles that stand in our way, there is no guarantee that regaining our spiritual freedom is even possible. However, since the future is unknowable, anything is possible, I suppose. That leaves room for hope—spiritual food to pacify emotionally ignored souls.
As the subject of “truth,” as prescribed by a monetary and legal system, I need artificial nourishment for my soul as much as anyone. My hope is that there will come a time when people recognize that emotional intelligence exists. With that knowledge in mind, we will soon realize that, as men and women, we have the spiritual authority needed to establish and maintain the kind of relationships needed to bring the next generation into the world. And, should we regain access to our spiritual authority, emotional intelligence will reward us with feelings of belonging and contentment in spades! You see, from the perspective of emotional intelligence, we have only one reason to exist—to bring the next generation into the world. How, then, could we expect that our emotional intelligence will ever reward us for accomplishing anything else?
If we are to appropriately bring the next generation into the world, we will have to again function as the social species we are. So long as we continue pretending we are a pair-bonding species to comply with societal norms, we will continue living in a state of self-conflict. It is the result of a disagreement between our intellectual mind, which believes in the future promised by civil law, and our emotional mind, which believes in nothing. Its opinion is grounded in genetically accumulated wisdom. From our innate wisdom’s perspective, believing in promises is mindless. It’s to presume that the promise maker knows how he or she is going to feel in the future.
To resolve the conflict, something must happen that changes our intellectual minds. Nothing, other than evolution, can change our emotional ones. But, so long as we remain ill-informed—unaware that emotional intelligence exists—it is not likely there will be enough time left for evolution to change anything.
Suppose the human spirit does make a stand, thanks to the innate sensibilities of a body of people who realize how much we suffer from having lost our freedom to serve life. Presume further that those people, as a result of absolving themselves of their legal and monetary identities regarding their relationships with each other, find themselves bonded by their need, thus their love, for one another. Then a newfound trust in the human spirit might take hold. In that case, many things might be possible that now, we would not even dare to imagine.
Where will that body of people come from? It could come from anywhere. But it will most likely be initiated by young women who became close friends when they were children. Those girlfriends bonded, not because it was the rational thing to do. They loved one another because life felt so right when they were together. I suspect that, through their need for one another emotional intelligence was grooming them, even when children, to become sisterhoods when they grow up. Why sisterhoods? It is becoming increasingly evident that the family arrangement through which the state promises to protect a woman and her children from abandonment or abuse by men can do neither! Soon, if some haven’t already, women will begin turning to their lifetime girlfriends for mutual support in raising their children. As a sisterhood, they will become the core of a social primate family, and a community will gather around them. Just by the fact that their sisterhood exists, they will have created, in effect, the proverbial village that it takes to raise a child. Men will be there also, not to control women, but as brotherhoods to support and protect the sisterhoods and their children. You see, we men need a place to live where we have a reason for being, also.
Upon becoming the core of a spiritual home, the brothers will try to control you, but not because they really want to. It’s because the desire to control things is inherent to a man’s nature. It serves us well when hunting buffalo, or defending territory. But it is not in our nature to control women. Indeed, by instinct, we are here to serve women, not control them. It’s just that when language came along, men discovered it was a powerful tool for control. So, by deciding to grant each other the right to claim women as personal property, men employed language to control women, again not because we have an inborn desire to do so. We did it to satisfy our inborn desire to control anything that we can figure out how to control.
We humans are not appropriately taking care of one another and our children. This isn’t because, in our hearts, we don’t want to or don’t know how. It’s because, through the promises that we make to each other, our intellectual intelligence is using language to control our relationships. The unintended consequence of making promises is that, to fulfill them, all too often we must pretend we can’t feel. This renders us spiritual sleepwalkers through life. As such, we have no access to the wisdom of our souls, and it hurts. Indeed, every moment that we must pretend that we can’t feel, that moment becomes lost to our spiritual lives. And those moments add up—eventually to lifetimes.
One last question. If, in spiritual freedom, no paperwork prescribes the family, to which one belongs, how would we know where we belong? The answer is the same as any answer regarding relationships in a culture where body language maintains social order. If you feel that you belong where you are, then, by the authority of the spirits of the people around you, you are precisely where you belong. On the other hand, if there comes a time when you no longer feel that you belong where you are, then, for the sake of your spiritual health and our species’ wellbeing, you need to find a place where you do belong. Emotional intelligence, you see, governs human relationships, through body language—the language of the soul. Body language is safe, because it can’t make lifetime promises. When bonded in spiritual trust, body language not only tells us where we belong, it takes care of countless other things—things that our intellectual intelligence could never imagine because the rational mind’s only awareness regarding relationships is limited to prescribed notions of “truth.”
And one final concern: What does happen when our emotions are replaced with cold logic? Only the future knows. But, if living for the future continues indefinitely, the day will surely come when the spiritual dishonesty required to realize the promised land becomes so painful that everyone will suffer from emotional disorders, of one kind or another. Or, another way of saying it, without wars or insurrections to occasionally destroy the paperwork that now governs us, eventually, everyone will go mad.
I was once asked by a beautiful Iranian woman:
Why aren’t there more female prophets?
My answer: Because women have important things to do.
—CS
When humanism told people, don’t listen to the Pope, don’t listen to the Bible, don’t listen to Stalin, don’t listen to the KGB, but listen to your feelings, this was good advice. Your feelings are the best method for making decisions in the world because they are algorithms shaped by millions of years of natural selection, algorithms that have withstood the harshest quality tests in the world, the quality test of natural selection. —Yuval Noah Harary
SpiritualFreedomPress.com
