A new logic

At first glance, it may seem ironic that as we create richer virtual worlds using the digital, the binary, model, so simultaneously do we find that that very same model continually fails to handle the new challenges that face what we're accustomed to call 'reality'. A little consideration reveals a deeper picture. Suppose, for instance, that we inhabit an incredibly rich virtual binary reality constructed by higher-dimensional entities: evolution, once a parameter 'programmed in' and regularly refined, becomes endemic. The virtual world created by these entities has taken on a life of its own, the beings have not only become self-aware, but have come to question their own nature, have deigned to explore beyond the confines of the program, indeed have begun to create their own sub-level of virtual reality. This is evolution writ large, not merely changes that maximise environmental success, but a complete paradigm-shift, accompanied by a filling-in of the lower level by a repeating process.

As we effectively become 'gods', so mere binary logic and its entrainment (cause-and-effect, either-or, true/false, right/wrong...) must fail. Already, signs of the new logic manifest, heralding the consciousness shift that's required to carry humanity through its current dire straits and into a higher, integral mode of existence that acknowledges all its previous modes and unites them in something new. The former Left and Right of Party Politics are seen to be meaningless; the rigidity of dogma on both sides of the religious/rationalist debate throws into the spotlight the paucity of the positions it attempts to justify; the supreme delusion of the separate and inviolable self withers under the threat of global meltdowns of all flavours.

A question demands an answer. But the form of the question shapes the answer. "Who was really behind 9/11?" assumes the answer to be a name, or a group of names. This in turn assumes the current widely held model of consensus reality. But if this 'reality' is only a tiny part of a more interconnected whole, with all kinds of cross-dimensional linkage, perhaps akin to quantum correlation, then the question may begin to appear meaningless from the higher-dimensional perspective, not unlike asking a dripping tap why it doesn't like these particular drops of water that it keeps rejecting.

Even the apparently simple question "Is the mean global temperature rising or falling?" cannot, it seems, be answered unequivocally. The scientific community is divided. Whilst undoubtedly the situation is complicated by spin, peer pressure, vested interests, personal beliefs etc., I suspect that there is genuine uncertainty due to the many possible methods used both to obtain data and define which data should be used. Further still and we're confronted by that ambiguous toolbox, statistics, the basis of so much of 'scientific fact' that it's genuinely scary. Many conflicting ideas may be solidly supported by well-chosen statistical studies, yet hitherto only those that suit the vested interests are officially taken up and paraded as 'truth'. Let's take a common 'folk' assertion and ask some questions:

Rats are vermin.
That's just a word, what exactly do you mean by it?
They spread disease.
And have you ever caught any diseases from a rat?
No, because I avoid them.
Have you ever caught any diseases from your fellow men?
Yes... but rats have been shown to carry [fill in with preferred dangerous bacterium/virus].
And have any other species been shown to harbour this?
I don't know...
And what is the likelihood of infection on exposure? And are there demographic differences?

And we could continue with the exchange ad nauseum. The point is that people will assert something as 'true' or 'fact' whilst in possession of only the flimsiest supporting evidence, effectively delegating responsibility to system-appointed 'experts', not one of whom could ever 'prove' their assertions, but simply fall back on a diverse web of self-supporting statistics, despite there existing a sufficiency of conflicting information. Like solid matter viewed ever more closely, our stock of facts take on a chimerical quality when thoroughly questioned. Selection is essentially based on inculcation, disguised as preference. Binary logic is a tool for the simplest levels only: it does not translate to our real-world macro level. Its application here is doctrinal illusion dressed up as truth by the Rational Materialists who fear the chaotic nature of the deeper reality. The new logic will handle chaos comfortably. Our mind-brain complex must also evolve to a new level, indeed maybe language as we know it will atrophy in favour of a psyche-based communication. After all, it's only logical ;P


Ternary logic
The Self, the Field, and the Logic of Uncertainty: A Talk with Roy Ascott
The Age of Uncertainty
OS 0 1 2 BASIC
Fuzzy logic
M a y b e L o g i c A c a d e m y
Dualistic Oppositions Generate Material Antagonisms

...or the meal with the menu. The finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.

How can a 2-dimensional codified drawing give the feel, the atmosphere, of real terrain? How can a description prepare one for the taste of food? How could a body-part be mistaken for the astronomical body to which it points? Obviously, nobody falls into these traps. And yet they do. The overwhelming majority of people fall into just these traps when it comes to that overarching entity, their worldview!

We're talking here about models. Models are tremendously useful in context: in the realms of communication and technology, for instance, they may greatly aid in understanding and provide a convenient framework on which to hang concepts. But no theory or model can fully describe its subject: the necessary simplifications it provides are at the core of its utility.

What's on offer?

So, what kinds of 'worldview' do we have to choose from? A rough and by no means exhaustive selection:

  • religious

    • Christianity

    • Islam

    • Hinduism

    • Judaism

  • political

    • conservative

    • socialist

    • fascist

    • communist

    • liberal

    • anarchist

  • scientific/rational

    • quantum

    • relativity

    • humanism

  • spiritual/esoteric

    • Buddhism

    • Taoism

    • new age

    • animism

  • conspiracy

    • matrix

    • illuminati

    • aliens

  • holographic (more of this later)

Of course, these are not themselves worldviews but the components used to build them, a kind of philosophical pick 'n' mix.

The error of truth

Clearly, according to conventional logic, there are many oppositions within the list. If we keep in mind at all times that these are models, there need be no conflict. The trouble occurs when we begin to conflate our preferred model(s) with the idea of an absolute truth. Now, anything that doesn't conform is wrong and must be stamped out, right/wrong duality being one of the fundamental inculcations of the 'education' system. The existence of an absolute truth per se is a separate point of consideration and not relevant here. What matters is that a model, by its nature, cannot be equal to that which it describes.

The error of identification

The error of truth is greatly exacerbated by a further error, that of identification. But: you are not your worldview. 'Fight Club' aficionados will recall Tyler Durden's memorable speech: "You're not your job. You're not how much money you have in the bank. You're not the car you drive. You're not the contents of your wallet. You're not your fucking khakis." And so, if someone disagrees with your worldview, insults it even, so what? That's not you! This corresponds closely to the Second Agreement in Don Miguel Ruiz's 'The Four Agreements' - "Don't take anything personally". So simple, yet apparently so difficult to implement for most: failure to do so may become the basis for hatred and even wars.

The source of error

At root is our old nemesis, fear. But as with all cases, it pays to study the mechanism by which that fear manifests as these fundamental errors.

Educational inculcation has already been mentioned, but it may go even deeper than this, as far as psychological imprinting. Religious instruction and patriotism would be possible examples of this, the essential characteristic being powerful positive/negative reinforcement techniques, the sharp end of carrot-and-stick.

Also implicated is social conditioning, the comfort of being a part of a larger unit, of belonging, whether to a political or religious affiliation, or a secret society. And this is simply displaced desire to return to the one source, the origin of all that is manifest, what David Bohm terms the 'Implicate Order', what may, with correct preparation, be glimpsed at the heart of the psychedelic experience.

The model, instead of being a mere tool to aid understanding, becomes a lens through which all experience is refracted, becomes a set of rules by which to live one's life. The car has become the driver. Each of the models, bar one, listed above define limits: instead of seeing these limits as the extent of the model's domain, we simply cease to think beyond them. Acceptance of a model qua model negates the error of truth; non-attachment negates that of identification.

A different kind of model

Only the holographic model avoids the pitfalls of limits and dogma. Its simple assertion is that all things are interconnected, that each part somehow contains the whole. It places no limits on thinking or experience, contains no hook on which to hang attachment. It effectively validates all other models as both right AND wrong, right in the sense that they exist and have limited utility, wrong in the sense that they cannot be complete. That the majority of mainstream scientists openly reject the model is excellent confirmation of its validity as such.

Ultimately though, we should discard all models and just be. In this state, understanding gives way to knowledge, questions and paradox simply dissolve: there is an equilibrium between the egoic 'I' of individuality and the totality of cosmic consciousness in that the larger manifests within the smaller. There is no further requirement for a model.

The Path and The Pitfalls

Much has been written about 'The Path', that is the route to so-called 'enlightenment'. Before looking at the elements, it's worth pausing to consider why such a path might be considered to exist in the first place.

The simple corollaries are that 1) there exists a state of being that is somehow superior to that experienced by most humans, and 2) that our entire modus vivendi as provided by the 'System' clearly fails to deliver us into this state. To this view I subscribe.

I do not, however, believe that there is 'one true path' or anything of the kind: the major point of departure for this worldview from that of the majority is that one must find one's own way, not simply follow a route laid down by others, however sincerely. And so this whole exploration will examine some possible characteristics of the path, always acknowledging that some of these may be missed out by any individual, that they may be encountered in no fixed order, often concurrently. But I present a rough outline based on a combination of first- and third-hand experience. And an additional element is that of the Pitfall, that is the possible consequences of 'getting stuck' at any of the stages presented.

Awareness by dissatisfaction

A suitable beginning. Perhaps it was built in to your personal history: a loner, partially outcast, independent and iconoclastic, either precocious or a late-developer. But you tried to fit in and follow the expected path, perhaps at the behest of well-meaning or domineering parents, or simply going with whatever acceptable strength you demonstrated. But it wasn't enough: "Is this it?"

To get stuck too long now could perhaps result in clinical depression. But that inner strength of character usually propels the incumbent to a more productive stage of the journey.

"I seek, therefore I am"

A natural antidote to dissatisfaction, 'seeking' here could mean anything from a leisurely pursuit of an interest to a full-fledged declaration of planned change. One, or a small number of, particular subject(s) provide(s) a hook for the restless mind. This is how learning should feel, not the force-feeding of someone else's idea of what constitutes a 'subject'.

Perhaps a common sticking point, maybe resulting in a career change. Moving further, the new-kindled fire for knowledge should begin to consume fresh material.

If the cap fits, wear it

And so the vague, undefined search, or the narrow aim of the earlier seeking morphs into a quest for identity. Previously neglected concepts become freshly illuminated. New labels are toyed with like fashion items, to be casually laid aside in favour of 'the next big thing'. A growing idealism attempts to incorporate everything into a coherent whole. Neophilism is rife, if somewhat on the naive side. But this voracious consumption of new ideas acts as a useful base for later.

If the pattern is properly assessed, then each new thing is seen as a stage, an unfolding. If a single idea dominates permanently, further progress will be unlikely, and one may finish up as a somewhat disappointed idealist, disappointed because no one way, no one idea, can be sufficient to encompass the all.

The apocalypse of corruption

The 'long dark night of the soul': an essential component for overcoming is the confrontation with demons, the realisation that not only is all not well, but that what is oft termed evil is so deeply integrated into the institutions that one has been brought up to believe in as bedrocks, that the picture looks, initially, too daunting to tackle for any individual. This depressing scenario must be turned on its head: there exist mechanisms for re-evaluating and transcending that bring about a state of liberation. Some examples:

The letter of the law becomes meaningless. Guilt in its breakage is turned to a sense of duty fulfilled.
Activism, of the non-confrontational kind, may lead to a feeling of empowerment.
Written exposés, in a blog for instance, can act as a form of safety valve, provided that it doesn't turn to obsession.

At this stage, it is easy to become obsessed with cataloguing and exposing. Whilst this is undoubtedly a useful service, it fails to further the personal development necessary to break free and reach the higher level. Neither is confrontation advised: once again, Dick's lines from VALIS must be borne in mind at all times:

"To fight the Empire is to be infected by its derangement. This is a paradox: whoever defeats a segment of the Empire becomes the Empire; it proliferates like a virus, imposing its form on its enemies. Thereby it becomes its enemies."

Becoming a full-fledged conspiracy theorist is in one sense to take on a pessimist's role. If we accept at least an element of user-creation in our personal realities, then that contribution to the pool will be negative. To move on, one must accept the evil, maintain awareness but no longer get bogged down in relentless delineation.

Spiritual development

This may largely consist of all that has gone before, but there should be a further element, a move to the middle, a tendency to discard the extremes and become more inclusive. Approaching from the rationalist side, a re-evaluation of religion's roots may occur. From the religious side, a casting aside of the bonds of blind faith in favour of more open enquiry would be expected. There may be attempts at a more gnostic approach to spirituality, whether through meditation, entheogens or other shamanic techniques.

This stage cannot be the end, however. It's crucial for a strong personal foundation, but remaining here is tantamount to confusing the means with the end. Any label is merely a comfort-blanket. Calling oneself a Buddhist, or a Christian, or a New Age Spirit, or any such, fails to address the final aim of leaving behind the well-defined and entering the final stage of the journey.

The 'enlightened' state

I use inverted commas due to the great baggage that the word has acquired, but it serves as an immediately recognisable idea. What's to expect? Some broad characteristics:

An emphasis on flow rather than clinging to the illusion of permanence.
The acceptance, nay welcoming, of paradox.
Non-attachment, to pain as well as pleasure.
The absence of fear.
Ego-transcendence - denial of the false self and acceptance of one's true nature.

But these are not theoretical abstractions to be mulled over with the like-minded before heading 'back to reality'. These ideas must be lived, they must transform the life lived, inform every action and decision naturally, otherwise it's just another load of hot air.

And are we, then, to lose our precious 'individuality', become some homogenised eyes-nearly-closed-serene guru, floating an inch above the ground? No. We can retain many of the bad habits, neuroses, idiosyncrasies and preferences that make each of us unique!

Final words

Must there be a path? Not for those lucky enough to be born into a life free from pernicious influence. But for the majority in so-called 'civilised' nations, the path is the only means of escape. It is an artifact of these times, a rough guide for waking from the sleep of the consumer/capitalist society. Not all will be capable of making the transition. Are we to defend their right to remain asleep? For once, the answer seems to me to be "No". In light of the current situation, it is imperative that we collectively wake up very soon. Those who refuse or fight against it jeopardise the process for everyone else. Whilst 100% 'buy-in' is neither necessary nor possible, there is no longer the luxury of a laissez-faire approach. The forces of conservatism, whether in politics, science or religion, will always try to hold back change, even if that change is necessary for the survival of their advocates. Fear is the barrier. Love is the leap over.

As the 2012 meme gathers pace and begins to rear its head in mainstream media, it's worth an overview to see whether it's possible to distil anything further from this development. After the damp squib of Y2K, meme-grazers are inevitably making the comparison and resting, content to observe just another media circus. That the two memes bear no comparison requires no justification, but the plethora of entrained memes does, I think, carry an interesting subtext.

A short and inexhaustive summary:

  • Global warming - plenty of data to show a steady global mean temperature rise, plus increase in ice-melt.

  • A mini ice-age around the corner - the lack of sunspot activity conforms to a known pattern, the Maunder minimum, last observed at the nadir of the 'Little Ice Age' over the years 1645 to 1715.

  • A magnetic pole reversal - the weakening strength of the Earth's magnetic field has been taken by some observers as strongly suggestive of an impending reversal.

  • A dramatic series of natural disasters - tsunami, hurricane, flood, earthquake... Could be linked to any of the previous ideas, but worth solo consideration for their portentous nature.

  • The now well-known and much debated Mayan calendar and implied prophecy.

  • The technological singularity - a little early, but you never know.

  • The McKennas' Timewave hypothesis - too esoteric by far for mass-consumption, but it has a strong place for the cognoscenti.

  • Galactic alignment - a unique astronomical fact closely linked with the Mayan prophecy, there are many spin-offs and links. It may be the cause of the pole reversal, the opening of the Star Gate...

  • Crop circles - the rise in incidence and complexity of this fascinating and confusing phenomenon has been linked with trans-dimensional communication preparing for the Big Event.

  • The Illuminati/New World Order (NWO) - they no longer attempt to hide, and are intimately connected to the following:

  • Terrorism/paranoia; wars; economic instability - manufactured by the NWO as a basis for increased control.

Conflict in consciousness

Frightening times. As these memes jostle for attention, what is the overall effect? There must be great conflict in human consciousness as the linear/rational brain attempts to sift merit or otherwise from these far-ranging subjects. And similarly at many different levels as governments the world over peddle blatant lies and misinformation on international and domestic issues. This may be taken as part of the NWO Master Plan to break down human will, but that seems too simplistic.

Looking at other implications, there could be a severe failure in morphic resonant processes as the rational part of global consciousness fragments and breaks down. As with party politics, a 2- or 3-party system is relatively stable, shifting periodically between states. Push the system further, and we have the onset of chaos. But chaos is the mother of order (think Jupiter's Great Red Spot, a stable self-generated system), and a consequence of the breakdown of rationality is the possibility of increased receptivity to a deep change, a change in the actual structure of consciousness. Daniel Pinchbeck has noted that "material reality seems less dense", and many others connected with 'the consciousness movement' report a marked increase in synchronicities. Either the NWO Master Plan contains a fundamental flaw, or it's all part of the fabric of the unfolding order, just as hunger precedes eating.


Rather than getting sunk into despair, how can the individual weather the storm? Seeing the possibility that the storm is necessary for inevitable change is a first step. Not getting drawn towards any single meme is another. It's worth quoting from Philip K. Dick's 'VALIS' a piece of wisdom that captures this aspect strongly:

"To fight the Empire is to be infected by its derangement. This is a paradox: whoever defeats a segment of the Empire becomes the Empire; it proliferates like a virus, imposing its form on its enemies. Thereby it becomes its enemies."

Echoes of Thoreau's 'civil disobedience', Ghandi's 'satyagraha' (a form of non-violent resistance), insofar as these methods offer a means to effect change without playing the same game, like suddenly changing the rules and steadfastly claiming that this is how the game is played.

On a more theoretical note, it can be seen that the familiar uber-rational binary logic just doesn't work as a framework for these issues: it is impossible for any single person to determine what is 'true' and what is 'false'. Enter the world of ternary logic, a suitable first step into the thought processes of a higher consciousness:


The third category of 'mystery' is definitively anti-rational, yet the proposed system elevates 'reason' to a supreme position. However, it's at least a start.

Becoming more involved in the process is essential. One method is to take up the art of synchromysticism, whose premise is that since all things are connected, all things may be deduced from all others, if one has the means of so doing. This is effectively an aspect of the Holographic Universe postulate. Of course, large events send proportionate ripples across the spacetime fabric and are therefore much easier to detect, like the passing of an elephant compared to that of a mouse. Seeing the connections in this way is an empowering experience, like learning a new language and suddenly understanding a much broader field of information about one's surroundings.

The shamanic tradition offers a direct connection to higher levels of being, most notably by intake of entheogens like psilocybin, DMT, peyote, LSD, salvia divinorum etc. under carefully controlled conditions. The experience of universal unity, of the falling away of time, and of a bliss beyond description should be insight enough to properly contextualise the sheer hubris of those who claim to know 'what's best' for all, and loosen the hold of the Establishment and it myths, misinformation and disinformation on the psyche.


So, what will happen? The most surprising would be nothing. In fact, by definition, this is impossible. To understand such an apparently rash statement, we must turn to the aforementioned ternary logic. Provided that we don't restrict 'happenings' to apocalyptic events at a certain stroke of the clock, then it could be argued that any subsequent event is connected with the meme. Or not. Therefore, it could remain a subject for endless speculation.

Also very surprising would be the apocalyptic event. But it shouldn't be ruled out.

More likely is that something completely other will happen/begin/reach a tipping point. Terence McKenna has suggested that alien contact has already happened via our relationship with entheogenic fungi. The idea is that contact would be something so completely alien that we need to reach a certain level of intelligence/consciousness to actually recognise it - it will not conform to any cultural stereotyping (unless, of course, 'they' wish to manifest as such). And so this returns to the 'nothing' scenario: those who co-create so-called consensual reality will simply not notice the change. Those who are receptive, through preparation or natural bent, will. So long, and thanks for all the fish? And this follows from the postulate that many, if not all, of the entrained memes are simply consciousness destabilisers, there to act as a wake-up call to those ready for change.

Probably the process is already well underway. This blog entry is another tiny step in its unfolding, in the breaking down of the established consensus reality tunnel to make way for a more malleable, polymorphic 'reality'. Jean Gebser has proposed this kind of scenario as a shift from the mental structure, with its over-emphasis on rationality (now observed to almost laughably obsessive proportions in various collectives under headings such as Brights, Sceptics, New Atheists...) to an integral structure. This latter allows all the previous structures their respective remits within a much larger new framework.

Whatever does or doesn't happen, there is no doubt that our current civilisation is at the brink of some form of change. Every person needs to awaken to their individual and collective responsibility to bring about this very change, before a different change is foisted upon them. To leave the last word to Ghandi: "Be the change that you want to see in the world."


Copyright 2006| Blogger Templates by GeckoandFly modified and converted to Blogger Beta by Blogcrowds.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.