Shadows on the Wall: Myth, Reason, and the Quest for Gnosis

Shadows01

– By Patrick Ryan
Since the advent of human cognition, humanity has made its main purpose to focus all of its energy and creative ambition on the postulation of thought into coherent structured forms able to translate an entire universe of meaning. These structures were itself only a reverberation of the so called “objective” reality — a participatory juxtaposition with the end result being a reflection of the very observers themselves. The interwoven riddle in this proposition is that reality itself is inherently mythological, with objectivity being only an automatic and instinctual lift into the light of the imagination. “REALITY IS SLIPPERY!” the Faery folk exclaim! Claiming to know the whole and complete truth of ANYTHING is a recipe for mass cognitive perceptual crash, leaving one potentially bitter and or in utter denial. The unquenchable thirst of postulating the truth of the situation has left us in a dire stupor – often times leaving us unable to decipher between the subjective version of truth from its objective twin.

The longing for a finite, digestible basis for a given hypothesis is a necessary one. We need to come to a basis of understanding — A concrete foundation through which to base all of our other thoughts and ideas from. Science was birthed from this impulse and has served to identify and acknowledge phenomena in our universe that were seemingly invisible prior. As in the case of Descartes, renunciation of everything until reaching a repeatable conclusion was the name of the game. Humanity strives for the laws of nature from which we could be aware of our limitations. But at what cost? We’ve been led astray by our own arrogance of believing we could encapsulate Truth – imposing a schism on an aspect from the whole. Quantifying aspects and shards of this truth? Absolutely, but making the error of confining a given phenomenon to a static and rigid representation is a grave error of human thought.

That’s not to say one shouldn’t indulge in his or her meme-making endeavors. Quite the contrary—bringing ones inner vision to manifest is perhaps the primary purpose and goal of the imaginative intellect. With the fundamental realization that what’s called ‘objective’ is so incredibly vast, complicated,and mysterious that human thought can be seen as a tapestry of inner creative vision that colors the void left by the objective. Despite this, stable patterns emerge, often with its own myriad of complexity and detail. Through these patterns, analysis and observation can chart a relativistic chart of the immediate fractal fluctuations. Modern science has embraced this idea fully and unapologetically, often times without any room for change or alternatives. What today is known statistically as the “bell curve” has dominated our scientific aspirations often undermining the very essence of scientific inquiry itself. With Cartesian thought, the bell curve served the purpose to condense, marginalize, and voraciously neglect the necessity of uniqueness and spontaneity. It served as a way cognitively stifle our innermost impulses and creative longing; a way to make us identify with “everybody else” and where we lay on an imaginal hierarchy. This ideological scalpel deconstructs and dissects everything in its path, often times abandoning direct experience as a type of perceptual fallacy.

Science shall soon come to a time when it is best served in a renegade and radical fashion; one outside the shackles of corporate and governmental interests, and into the domain of exploring our inner collective tapestry into infinite depths. Is it possible to make an art of science? Many say nay, science is our way of DISproving in order to come to a clearer vision and understanding. But I ask, is it possible for science to already be an art? Exploring the implications of the individual observer in experimental design, along with phenomena such as the placebo could serve as doors into the vast relationship between subject and object; the alchemical dance of the Caduceus pursued until realized or otherwise disproven!

Ignoring the shadows in favor for the light is a shortsighted approach to reality. Perhaps the new form of humanity shall transcend its dogmatic reliance on dualistic thinking and instead embrace the intricate and unfathomably complex dynamics of the relationship between light and shadow. Now is the time to explore the possibility that Plato’s realm of Eidos is Nature Herself! Just as the mystics of old have relentlessly reminded us – SAMSARA IS NIRVANA. We’ve been fooled into chasing God the Father only to neglect and rape our Mother. Nature provides the blueprint through which the entire cosmos operates – as a holographic copy through which the universe reveals us to ourselves. It’s time to reconcile the philosophical cold war of Aristotle and Plato; may we unite self and other to unchain the epistemological shackles and gain a new perceptual peak. There’s nothing to run away from nor any safe abode to console us. Let us embrace perceptual finitudes in order to awaken to the infinite. Let us allow ourselves the possibility of ignorance in order to be struck into gnosis.

-Patrick Ryan is a Writer, Poet, Digital artist, and explorer of transcendental realms. He is the co – founder of Free Radical Media and co-host of the Free Radical Media podcast.

4 thoughts on “Shadows on the Wall: Myth, Reason, and the Quest for Gnosis

  1. Ben

    a nice thought-provoking piece here. Korzybski’s “the map is not the territory” quote comes to mind. perhaps to truly know the territory would imply having to ‘be’ the entirety of that territory – and we as humans are certainly not that…yet, at least 🙂

    to provide an extension on your twins analogy – subjective and objective realities could even be viewed as siamese twins not just regular counterparts, separated throughout the course of their space-time(s) but joined at the beginning (and end?) of the ‘big event’.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “to provide an extension on your twins analogy – subjective and objective realities could even be viewed as siamese twins not just regular counterparts, separated throughout the course of their space-time(s) but joined at the beginning (and end?) of the ‘big event’.”

      Yes! I totally love this!

      Like

  2. Patrick – thanks for sharing. You asked me for an interview and now I have a better idea of your perspective. Unfortunately Plato’s view are structurally wrong, based on the wrong math, but of course there’s no point arguing since people are mind-controlled. Even Roger Penrose in a recent talk bemoaned the fact that mathematicians misunderstand Godel’s Theorem, thinking it just means incompleteness when, as Penrose emphasizes, it shows math is logically inconsistent. A.K. Dewdney does point out these two options – inconsistent or incomplete – but math professor Luigi Borzacchini is more explicit, the foundations of Western math from Plato arise from a deep disharmony in music theory.

    So for example the term “meme” is actually itself a NeoDarwinian concept – one I disagree with. NeoDarwinian thought is deeply embedded in mainstream culture since the 1980s as it paralleled the Reagan Revolution, which is basically the Fourth Reich as the U.S. global empire. So then physics and genetic molecular biology really ignores the depth of the ecological crisis or else thinks we can engineer a techno-fix. David F. Noble traced this problem in his “Religion of Technology” book back to the 9th Century NeoPlatonic philosopher John Scotus Erigena who advised the Carolingian Empire of Franks.

    Anyway obviously we are dependent on science and modern technology as our new mythology – but as I’ve posted recently Penrose and Hameroff have turned to relativistic quantum theory to explain consciousness, a model that even includes precognition and other mystic experiences. Dr. mae-Wan Ho of quantum biology biophoton research also includes paranormal spirituality in her model and both Hameroff and Ho rely on ultrasound resonance of microtubules for alchemical transformations of reality. The situation of modern science is so dire that I dubbed it the Strong MisAnthropic Principle – that the acceleration of space of the universe and the slowing down of time are inversely proportional to the acceleration of time and the closing in of space on Earth due to the ecological crisis. We are in the Sixth mass extinction but it’s the fastest one in the history of life on Earth. Still we know from ecology that mushrooms can concentrate nuclear radiation so that the rest of life can recover and also that algae is the source of oil and algae eventually will recover from the acidification of the oceans.

    It’s difficult for us to accept that quantum physics has rediscovered that the ancient Pre-Socratics were correct because even the view we have of Pythagoras is wrong since he was lied about about Plato and Archytas. Peter Kingsley has documented this in detail but also mathematically the Pythagorean Theorem is from Archytas and Eudoxus and Hippias – it covers up the non-commutative time resonance of non-western music theory, again rediscovered in relativistic models of quantum physics. The basic issue here is that the original human culture, the Bushmen, last separated from modern humans 125,000 years ago, have never declared warfare and have relied on the males all to do spiritual trance dance training. Just like the Pythagoreans, the Bushmen have been lied about based on their enslavement by the Bantus and the white genocidal colonialists – most of the anthropologists have projected their views onto the Bushmen, except for a few like Dr. Bradford Keeney, Megan Biesele and Elizabeth Marshall Thomas (and her parents). So humans survived a long time without modern science and as Dr. Bradford Keeney has documented the shamanic healing tradition has enabled great feats – just as qigong science has documented.

    But these training traditions are very different than modern science which is actually based on a different male psychophysiology. For example the Corbett Report just posted an expose dialog with Wayne Madsen, Sibel Edmonds, etc. about the child sex abuse trafficking rings that are used by the males running the world. I posted a youtube comment about how I’ve been a radical progressive activist for 20 years getting arrested 8 times, and organizing campaigns that have achieved results but now I mainly sign petitions. I said at least start a petition on the issue but I’ve signed some already – but I said the issue is to focus on the solution which is really male ejaculation addiction based on the “sex sells” fixation of late capitalism. This issue goes back to the misogyny of Plato where the philosophers knowingly sucked off the young males’ energy. Of course my comment got deleted as people don’t want to deal with this issue – the presumption is that celibacy creates the perverts like with the priests of the Church. But the yoga training and trance dance training changes this and quantum biology reveals the secrets of why and how. The fact is the original human culture is the same as modern humans are – biologically – and yet the original human culture had no idea was homosexuality is and the whole culture is based on the spiritual training through a worldview of complementary opposites, male and female principles. Obviously this is very different than modern science which is based on symmetric logic. Even Penrose is a Platonist – but he admits that when you get to the proto-conscious realm of the universe then the origin of time is vastly asymmetric and yet science is in great denial about this – he realizes that asymmetric time is the great mystery of science that is being ignored.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Drew,

      Thanks for the well articulated reply. Much appreciated!

      Care to elaborate on exactly how Platos views are structurally wrong? I’ve heard arguments in a similar vain and it typically goes back to a comparison with the pre-socratics understanding a missing piece that Plato seemed to had missed, namely that reality is in flux.

      “…when you get to the proto-conscious realm of the universe then the origin of time is vastly asymmetric and yet science is in great denial about this – he realizes that asymmetric time is the great mystery of science that is being ignored.”

      Interesting. I’ve never really delved into such an idea. I always intuitively imagined the universe becoming MORE symmetric the higher one gets up the fractal.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s