Click here for PDF format of this essay

IN SEARCH OF REALITY IX




Belief and Truth




A Study in Thought





by





Marius Heuff

@M.Heuff

Chapter 1

Content

The many and varied facets of the truth.
Religious and agnostic points of view.
Circumstances favouring religious attitudes or philosophical opinions.
The problem of good and evil.
The need for leadership.
A review of the logic of a "willed" Universe of natural forces.

1 Why is it, that we believe in the truth of so many different and often contradictory concepts and ideas? It seems, that this question is far more important than the arguments involved in discussing the merits of one belief versus another. Why is it, that some of us believe that the entire observable world can, eventually, be explained in a magnificent web of causes and effects, regulated by predictable laws of necessary happenings, while others cling, tenaciously, to the idea, and the experience, of a supra-human power; an anthropomorphic intelligence that has created all items of existence, including man and the moral guidelines for his behaviour.

2 The concepts and beliefs that consider man as an integral part of a hierarchy of spiritual or anthropomorphic forces, are, by far, the most common and oldest belief structures of mankind. These structures of belief provide an explanation for the flow of events we experience, and, we have to acknowledge, that many of these religious belief structures are logical conclusions from man`s primary sense impressions.

3 Yet, time and again, the inadequacies of a belief structure become apparent, whenever discrepancies between a structure of explanations and a number of experiences become noticeable. Usually, these discrepancies come only to the fore, after a belief has been generally accepted and clearly formulated as an explanation of common experiences. This means, that man`s powers of prediction and manipulation, (using accepted and strongly believed-in religious or secular concepts), fail, from time to time, and, these failures can not always be swept under the critical rug by assuming imperfections in an observed ritual. Man is often tempted to assume responsibility when superior powers seem to be displeased for one obscure reason or another, and, man assumes, then, that he has offended some uncooperative deity.

4 At times, a socially integrated group of people reaches an exuberant peak of success and achievements in their experiments with a new way of life. The vigour of inherited behaviour patterns and beliefs combines with favourable geographical and ethnological circumstances to give a group, a tribe, or a specific social entity, the possibility to dominate. The combination of wealth and vitality leads to numerous existence possibilities for human endeavour and expression, and, these possibilities of endeavour and expression include a variety of diverging attitudes and structures of belief.

5 Freedom from the need to spend long hours providing for the basic necessities of life, a lessening dependence upon a divine providence to arrange matters to the advantage of the individual and his social environment, as well as the frequent experience of a close correlation between man-made decisions and subsequent reality experiences; all these factors, and, probably, many more, lead to a sense of understanding; a "feeling" for the natural relationships between causes and their effects. We see an attitude of confidence emerge. This encourages the belief, that, whatever happens to man, is due to his own actions and decisions, and not, to the whims of an unpredictable and unreliable super-natural force.

6 The increase in manipulative powers that comes with technical dominance is associated with the elaboration of a mechanistic world-view. This interpretation of reality re-enforces, strongly, the validity of rational behaviour and thought patterns, and, it supports the idea, that the human being is uniquely endowed with the capability to choose, consciously, and, often, freely, a certain form of behaviour.

7 It is, indeed, remarkable, that man is able to come to the conclusion that he is nowhere in contact with an intelligent force; a force, which has the same freedom of choice as man himself. In spite of the inevitable demise of the individual human being, and, in spite of the numerous forces he can not control, (together with the myriad of sensations and observations that can not so easily be reconciled into a coherent structure of happenings and events), man comes, occasionally, to the conclusion, that all such phenomena are "natural phenomena", implying, that these events occur in an ordened, regular manner, and, are not dependent upon a chosen or "willed" behavioural act of a god, who functions, then, somewhat, like the freely-willing human being.

8 Such a mechanistic or naturalistic concept of reality becomes most difficult, when the occurrence of misery, the vagaries of fortune, and the feelings of guilt, hope or injustice, are reflected upon. Occasionally, the beauty of such a rational belief structure is sufficient to make it acceptable for a reflective individual, especially, when long hours of thought and a wide variety of experiences have convinced the thinker, that such a belief is closer to the truth than any belief in a divinely ordained world-order. However, this type of belief is very difficult to teach or transmit to those, who are still seeking answers to their personal existential needs, and, who are incapable of seeing in the myriad of emotional experiences, a lonely but sovereign human will.

9 It is logical, that a large majority of people asks for a ready-made belief structure. Most people are not capable, nor, do they have any inclination, to work-out for themselves a system of coherent beliefs, and the intuitive recognition of the need to accept a ready-made belief structure, leads to a willingness to believe the appropriate authorities in all questions of a religious or secular nature. Most people need to be told what to believe, and, even, the thinker needs to know, what other people have believed in the past, or, what they believe, now, before he can come to his own synthesis. Sometimes, even our most famous thinkers never reach the stage that they are able, or willing, to tell us, exactly, what they believe, and, consequently, a remarkable part of their efforts is spent in analysis, as well as a subconscious worship of logical thinking and sophisticated reasoning.

10 In the face of our primary experiences, it is, indeed, extremely audacious, even illogical, to assume, that man is not subjected to the same forces of willed behaviour man can exert in his contacts and interactions with other people and his natural environment.

11 One of the cardinal experiences of man is the fact, that he can choose a deliberate course of action in relation to other people or the items of existence in his natural environment. Man can choose his actions, or manipulate his environment, in such a way, that he creates the most favourable circumstances for himself. Man experiences the fact, that he can fight and kill, and revel in victory, and, that he can increase his might and wealth by taking it away from others. He knows, and experiences, often, that he has to kill to stay alive, and, he realises, at least intuitively, that he may be killed, in turn, by others, who are experiencing the same needs and drives as he does.

12 Man sees, that the animal world around him behaves, essentially, in the same manner, and, there is no alternative for early man, than to explain his experiences in a structure of forces that has a similar biological orientation as his own powers of interaction. Early man had to explain his awarenesses with the help of forces that may help or harm him, since he was able to help or harm, whatever he came in contact with himself.

13 When man`s experiences and conceptualisations became more sophisticated, large areas of the experienced force-fields became predictable, and, as a result, they were brought under the grasp of an intellectual concept, or a manipulative technique. Slowly, the realm of spiritual forces contracted and subsided into the background. The multitude of spiritual forces in the world coalesced, eventually, into a more or less monotheistic concept of an all-powerful God. However, the fusion of all metaphysical realities into the concept of one original Creator, (who was then, necessarily, considered to be responsible for all existence), has always been severely hampered by the experience of good and evil.

14 The polarisation in conceptual thought that came about as a result of the experience of good and evil, became a major spur to elaborate a metaphysical reality accounting for the fundamental division between good and evil. A purely scientific or mechanistic view-point of a natural world-order of predictable force-fields can not easily reconcile the experiences of good and evil, which are so obvious and fundamental to the members of mankind. Therefore, a cold, emotionally neutral, scientific view of our ultimate realities is difficult to understand and accept for most people.

.......

Chapter 2

Content

The relativity of good and evil.
The need for an intellectual foundation for ethical behaviour patterns.
Difficulties with religious and philosophical explanations for an ethical system.
The swing of the pendulum.
Interpreting facts according to the structures of our beliefs.
The fragmentation of public opinion.

1 The relativity of good and evil; the insight, that, so often, good for one is evil for someone else; the observation that victory for one is defeat for someone else, has become a major tool in the artistic experession of dramatic tensions, and, this concept became a vehicle of thought to question whatever explanations were current. Yet, tragedy and misery, but also, humor and laughter remained difficult to reconcile with the emotionally neutral world-order of the agnostic scientist or philosopher, and it became obvious to many people, that the agnostic can not prove his theories with anymore certainty than the metaphysical believer can prove the existence of God.

2 The concept of "ethical behaviour" refers to a number of concepts and guidelines every society has developed in order to regulate the attitudes and actions of its members during social contacts. The need for, as well as the foundation of, ethical behaviour, has, time and again, become the major topic of discussion after the stalemate between religious convictions and philosophical arguments became obvious. Yet, these arguments always flare-up again, because our ethical beliefs have always felt the need for a foundation upon some sort of an acceptable perception of reality.

3 True, important ethical insights and concepts have often been developed and formulated on the basis of "common-sense", or, a feeling of "fair play" and a sense of "natural justice", which neatly side-stepped the exact definition of the nature of man. However, the authority of an ethical principle is severely hampered, if it can not rely on a persuasive, or, even, dogmatic point of view, answering the basic questions about the nature and meaning of human existence.

4 A philosophical system may come to almost identical ethical conclusions as a religious structure of beliefs, but the sophistication and intellectual virtuosity needed to understand a philosophical system makes it, necessarily, a pass-time for the reflective and educated individualist, who is wealthy enough to spend the major part of his time in the leisurely pursuit of knowledge and ideas.

5 A religious system of explanatory beliefs and behavioural guidelines is, or can be, far more direct in its approach to the people, and, it can avoid an enormous amount of intellectual sophistication by presenting a divinely revealed Truth and a simple system of divine commandments. These commandments formulate ethical principles of behaviour, not, on the basis of insight, but, on the basis of obediance. Unfortunately, religious commandments are rarely a happy synthesis of intellect and feeling, but rely, heavily, on authority, fear, and the promise of a reward.

6 Certainly, such a sobering impression has often been blurred by numerous efforts, made throughout history, to give a divine revelation a substantive intellectual basis. However, the religious system remains, in essence, a question of faith. It remains the intuitive or trustful acceptance of a divinely revealed reality, and, the intellectual "foot-work" is then accomplished, mainly, to counter-act rational objections to, or inconsistencies of, such a structure of beliefs.

7 Impressive structures of thought and belief have been erected, often with great skill, beauty and persuasiveness, but, at the same time, we also see the tenacious persistence of an agnostic point of view, where the belief in a divine influence upon man is resolutely rejected as a delusion of wishful thinking, based on the psychological needs of human existence.

8 The balance of power between these two antipodes in belief and attitude is forever changing. In essence, the differences can be summarised by saying, that, in a religious world-view, we accept the existence of an anthropomorphic Force and a measure of influence upon the ways of man, while the agnostic view comes, time and again, to the audacious conclusion, that any concept or experience of such a divine existence and influence are due to psychological mechanisms and adaptations to stress.

9 Psycho-analytic insights can, indeed, provide us with remarkably persuasive concepts about the mechanisms of human behaviour, and, there seems to be convincing evidence to state, that such explanations on the basis of natural mechanisms form a coherent account of man`s behaviour patterns. At the same time, however, we should not lose sight of the fact, that the "naturalistic" concepts of psychological mechanisms are also "belief structures". At least, they are mental structures of explanation that are typically human in nature. The scientific elucidation of psychological mechanisms has shown us, how we perceive reality, and, these mechanisms do not exclude, in any way, the possibility of the existence of willed forces outside the human being. However, so far, we have no convincing evidence that we are in contact with, or subjected to, intelligent, willed, anthropomorphic force-fields comparable to our own.

10 In the final analysis, the debate between the religious believer and the agnostic remains a battle of convictions, where the agnostic has the intuitive feeling, that, eventually, all phenomena scrutable to man, (including his own existence and behaviour), can be "explained" in a network of comprehensive natural laws or predictable regularities.

11 With the acceptance of a belief structure that includes the existence of a Divine Being, as well as the possibility that this divine being helps or influences the believer and others, the religious believer will, eventually, explain or interpret certain experiences as a confirmation of these beliefs.

12 The interesting observation, here, is the fact, that we have to interpret happenings and events within the framework of our beliefs. We classify experiences within a framework of pre-existing notions or convictions, and the experience of a discrepancy must be overwhelmingly strong and irrefutable, before it results in a radical loosening of a belief structure.

13 In most cases, such a loosening of the belief structure is only possible, if the individual has already allowed doubts about the validity of his beliefs to enter his mind. This means, that we open ourselves to the possibility of receiving an experience that will either confirm or discredit our beliefs. Then, we have created, in essence, an additional category for the classification of our experiences.

14 Similarly, the agnostic is besieged, quite literally, with numerous experiences and questions that are difficult to answer without the acceptance of some metaphysical beliefs. It is not surprising, therefore, that the favourite pass-time of the agnostic is to point out possibilities of doubt regarding generally accepted religious beliefs, rather than the construction of a vulnerable and potentially erroneous agnostic belief structure that has been built-up in an audacious worship of the powers of rational thought.

15 The practice of sniping at the institutionalised beliefs of society is often carried-out as a compulsion by the perceptive citizen, who feels, intuitively, that the accepted beliefs and the experienced realities are miles apart, and, that the adherence to the common beliefs of society, is a source of unnecessary strife and blatant hypocrisy. Here, the constructive social function of reform is hinted at in the seemingly negative attitudes of questioning and doubting the officially sanctioned beliefs adhered to by a majority.

16 This intuitive effort to bring-about a change in the perception of our realities, creates tensions and unrest, and, it may, even, weaken a social environment. Not suprisingly, these criticisms are looked upon with suspicion by the establishment. Yet, a renewed intellectual scrutiny of the commonly accepted beliefs and attitudes may become a contributory factor to the processes of social renewal by encouraging the essential element of flexibility in beliefs and attitudes, and, this, in turn, facilitates a process of adaptation to changed circumstances and experiences.

17 It is a refinement in the perception of our realities, which is responsible for the discrepancies between predicted outcome and actual observation of the events we are exposed to. The predicted outcome reflects an experience that is expected in the light of our beliefs, while the actual experience may be quite different, if we have the energy, and the intellectual honesty, to admit to the possibility of such discrepancies. As we have mentioned before, we all have a strong tendency to make our actual experiences conform with our predicted experiences, since a discrepancy is usually felt as a painful failure. We find it, often, difficult to acknowledge a failure, and, we rather explain it away, subconsciously, by minimising the awareness of a discrepancy, before we have to explain it away in a more conscious and deliberate effort; by changing the framework of our reality perceptions.

18 In times of confident prosperity, when we are, so to speak "on top of the world", we tend to relax our dependency on super-natural belief structures. The strength and influence of our decisions, the power to manipulate people and the natural environment, our ability to create wealth, leisure and pleasure, leads, naturally, to the exploration of different ways of thinking and interpreting reality. Receptive and reflective, innovative people, in societies all over the world, will often acknowledge and worship the rational powers of the human mind, in particular, when they notice, that the remnants of the ancestral Faith are hampering rather than helping them to enjoy, fully, their powers and freedoms.

19 The inevitable decline of society by internal strife, the confusion of many divergent opinions, as well as the disappearance of the steadying influence of sacred institutions and revered customs, will always remain a severe challenge to the continued viability of rational thought, and, the philosophically inclined individual often withdraws into a lonely elitism, contemplating the foolishnes of irrational behaviour and the discrepancies between man`s potentials and achievements.

.......

Chapter 3

Content

We do not have to choose between religious and scientific view-points.
An attempt to harmonise the contradictions of these varying views.
A review of various influences on structures of belief.
Discrepancies between expected and actual experiences.
What is "truth"?
The mental nature of our concepts.
The "school" as a selective filter of thought and attitudes.

1 We have alluded to the concluson, that it is essentially impossible to make a choice between these two, fundamentally different points of view. On the one hand, there is the view, that, behind all our realities, there exists a Divine Being, who is responsible, in some way, for the existence of natural laws and the order of the Universe. Perhaps, this Divine Being is even responsible for, and concerned with, the fate of mankind and each individual human being. From this belief flows the hope, or the certainty, of the possibility to receive divine help. This expectation of hope becomes a major factor in man`s ability to resist stress.

2 The other point of view, (much less prevalent, and, of a much more recent origin, tenacious nevertheless, and surfacing, time and again, whenever people are reflective and prosperous), is represented by the view-point, that there is no convincing evidence to believe that man`s experiences and observations are influenced by an intelligent, concerned Being. This view sees in the cycles of birth and death, nature`s recurring re-organisation of matter into living existence, where man is only a part of this natural phenomenon, be it a special, intelligent and creative part. In this view, however, the overwhelming majority of man`s calamities and sufferings are considered to be man-made, resulting from an ill- or non-understood nature of the human being, and, in this view, the prayer to God, or, the belief in Divine Providence, only leads to further strife and polarisation between those, who believe, and those, who do not.

3 These two view-points seem to summarise the crucial differences in attitudes between the religious and agnostic believers, but it is becoming apparent, that no conclusive choice between them is possible. Besides, any choice would be meaningless, since the chances of convincing one party, or the other, of the validity of the opposite point of view, are limited indeed.

4 The apparent justification of either point of view is a problem we should deal with more profitably. On the surface, it seems impossible to reconcile these antipodes into a coherent view, but we should not despair without trying. It may well be, that this antithesis can be shown to be somewhat irrelevant, based as it is, on a common assumption. There is, indeed, a common assumption in both beliefs, in spite of the fact, that many people will have difficulties recognising this common assumption. This common assumption is the belief in the existence of an "absolute truth". The belief in the presence of an absolute truth is the reason, and the cause, for the persistence of this conflict.

5 It may be possible to show, that, seen in a different light, the anti-thesis of these opinions disappears. It may be argued, however, that in such a different point of view, both structures of belief are "dethroned" beyond a useful meaning, and, then, the solution of the antithesis may well be rejected by both parties, who much prefer the duel between two absolutist points of view. However, let us look at the task ahead, and see, whether or not it is possible to outline a concept, able to defuse the conflict between the religious and agnostic believer.

6 I can not think of a better way than to start with the circumstances surrounding my own beliefs. Far from concluding, superficially, that my beliefs are representative for what others believe or do not believe to be true, there is good reason to assume, however, that none of us is entirely exceptional in the way we have formed our structures of belief. Obviously, people vary immensely in the content and form of their beliefs, and, they will verbalise, in may different ways, their doubts and opinions. Many people would be at a loss to express their particular beliefs and doubts accurately, since so many of our staunchest beliefs are somewhat hidden under a crust of customs and routine behaviour patterns.

7 The influences I experienced during my up-bringing, the environment in which I grew-up, the ideas and people I came into contact with, shaped, to a very large extent, what I now believe, and, how I now behave. I am convinced, that this mechanism applies to everyone else as well. My language and my ideas, a good deal of my attitudes towards the world and other people, have been shaped in those formative years, but I would be unable to outline, with any degree of precision, what, exactly, is contained within this culturally inherited complex of attitudes, knowledge and belief structures.

8 However, it is obvious to me, that the fundamental religiosity or agnosticism of each individual is as much a part of this environmental heritage as our ways of dressing, eating or talking to each other. Those of us, who believe in the essentially secular ideas about life, (with an emphasis on, and faith in, the sciences), believe such concepts as much on authority, or, on the basis of cultural influences, as those of us, who believe in the existence of God.

9 This does not mean, however, that we are exempted from the need to make a deliberate choice about our beliefs, later in life, whenever we come to experience great difficulties accepting the realities of a particular social environment. People, who have been brought-up with a religious belief, usually adhere to concepts and ideas that are fairly well delineated. They do not just believe, vaguely, in a deity who may or may not have relevance for them. Most of us, who have been educated in a metaphysical belief structure, have been instructed in a fairly precise system of religious beliefs. The awareness of numerous discrepancies between the various religious beliefs, together with the marked fragmentation of Christianity, were major factors, for me, in the realisation, that, obviously, these various groups could not logically claim to be the sole possessor of the truth, and yet, most of them did just that.

10 My contacts with a variety of scientific disciplines, in particular, the remarkable cohesion of the biological and medical disciplines, (together with the fascinating biochemical and biophysical fringe-areas that lie in between living and non-living matter), as well as the remarkable ideas of natural evolution, all these fields of knowledge and insight evoked in me a great sense of beauty and truthfulness. Slowly, I became aware of the many possibilities of understanding which seemed to open-up with the help of these modern scientific insights. These possibilities of understanding seemed to present themselves on many different levels of examination or observation.

11 If I ask myself to what extent I believe these coherent descriptions of the sciences to be "true", I would say, that I rely very heavily on them. These scientific images helped me to shape my ideas about many different mechanisms that seem to occur in nature. Yet, I am always aware of a feeling of relativity. This is the awareness, that we are only "making use of" mental structures. We are making use of mental images of comprehension, which allow us to select certain behavioural choices with varying degrees of success and accuracy.

12 It has always been obvious to me, that, regardless, how detailed a picture of reality I tried to form in one subject or another, it only represented a shadow of the possible whole of knoweable facts. But, in addition, I always became aware of the fact, that I had no idea at all, whether or not my mental images were, in any way, an accurate reflection of the "objective reality"; the non-human, non-conceptualised and non-focussed reality that is independent of human existence, if such a reality would indeed exist.

13 When considering the peculiarly focussed aspects of human reality perceptions, together with the inevitable classification of events and observations into categories of similarities or cause-effect relationships, I came to the conclusion, that our mental images, (as well as the remarkable similarities of those mental images from one person to the next, in spite of the many discrepancies we can always see), were entirely dependent upon our particular way of functioning. Our reality perceptions are a reflection of our biological structure, and, as a result, any idea about an "absolute" reality could only be another human concept or mental product, whatever such a concept would be.

14 I noticed, that the scientific imagery, tried and purified by extensive debate, argument and experimentation, would be handed-down from the expert to the lay-person with increasing simplification and an increasing reliance on the authority of the scientist or the communicator. The sense of reliability shifted from the degree of thoroughness of the scientific method, to the degree of authority conveyed during a communication. Therefore, almost all the images of the secular reality were handed-down to me, (and to everyone else), in the form of pre-formed mental images that were largely accepted "on authority".

15 Sure, we develop a certain ability to criticise and think for ourselves, and, it is true, that, familiarity with a certain subject shows us, how the fringe-areas of any field of knowledge and expertise become opinions or "suggestive evidence", which we select or reject, accept or disbelieve, mostly intuitively. An important criterium for the selection of these mental images of belief is the common view of reality held by the "school" in which we have been instructed, or, in which we have been scientifically "disciplined". Interestingly, the existence of such a "filter", or, such a selective mechanism based on local structures of belief, becomes only apparent after a period of reflection; when looking back upon one`s formative years in the sciences.

16 The conclusion becomes inescapable, that any sense of reality rests on a belief. This belief may be an imagery of a scientific nature, accepted on authority and corroborated by a sense of internal logic, or, this belief may have been accepted as a set of customs or attitudes that were primarily transferred from the cultural pool and relate to our position in society, or, our destiny in death.

17 All these beliefs are only mental images, and, they have been accepted, because there have been numerous persuasive influences to make us accept the various sets of mental images that were available. Yet, they are only mental images. They are structures of beliefs that are relevant for me and my immediate social surroundings, but there is no absolutely sure way of knowing, whether or not my beliefs are any more valid than those of someone else, even, if I notice a number of important discrepancies. Sure, I can often see flaws of logical cohesion in someone else`s beliefs, but, I am much less aware of the flaws in my own system of beliefs, unless they have been persuasively pointed out by someone I respect.

.......

Chapter 4

Content

The reality of what we believe to be true.
Ethics; approached pragmatically.
The persuasiveness of religious and agnostic attitudes.
Attitudes and beliefs.
The unequal validity of beliefs in a relativistic comparison.
The fanatic belief.

1 In conclusion, we all must have formed, out of necessity, a more or less coherent structure of beliefs, but the reasons, why we have accepted a particular set of beliefs, may not be at all clear to us. The only reality we know is formed by this conglomerate of awarenesses and belief structures, which we accept as "truth-ful".

2 Reality is, therefore, a perception that is centered around each one of us, and, it is equivalent to what we believe to be true, but, we can always be aware of the fact, that, some, or, even, many of our dearest beliefs are not shared by others, and, there is not one particular belief structure that has absolute validity amongst every member of society. Even the most elementary, logically inescapable beliefs may not be shared by some people, especially, when they live in a culture or an environment that is radically different from our own.

3 Rather than concentrating on the observation that none of the belief structures is universally valid throughout the entire human species, it may be more illuminating to look at the remarkable agreement that is possible amongst widely divergent cultures. However, I would like to go back, first, to the conclusion, that all mental images have only a relative value as a perception of reality. They have a relative value, in the sense, that, most reality perceptions are specific to a particular personality and apply, only, to a set of specific circumstances.

4 We have seen, that the choice between what is considered true or not true in the realm of religious or scientific images, seems to be heavily influenced by the chances of encounter and contact an individual has been exposed to. The agnostic, who tenaciously claims not to believe in God, can not prove the non-existence of God anymore than the believer can prove that God does indeed exist. The strongly religious person, who lives a life that has been dedicated to his beliefs, nourishes these beliefs with an emotional investment, and, the religious believer will experience increasingly convincing incidents that confirm his beliefs. These incidents are often professed in an eloquent and convincing testimonial. Occasionally, the strength of the religious personality, as well as the sincere commitment to his beliefs, are deeply convincing, emotionally, and, perhaps, intellectually as well.

5 Quality of thought, a well-tempered disposition, erudition and a vast knowledge and awareness of human expressions and behaviour patterns, may, similarly, be persuasive and convincing, in particular, when philosophical equanimity is coupled with an intuitive wisdom and an attitude of kindness towards other people. In addition, the attitudes of genuine wisdom are reflected in a moderate lifestyle and an honest appraisal of the boundaries between knowledge and belief.

6 The attitudes of emotional commitment and intellectual consistency can, therefore, be greatly persuasive, and yet, they can both be terribly petulant, if either attitude is neurotic or fraudulent. Every belief can be a source of saintly wisdom, as well as arrogant aggression. Every attitude or belief structure can become a tool of beauty and enlightenment, but, may also become an instrument of tyranny and oppression. Attitudes can be based upon any system of beliefs, and every system of beliefs can be perverted to egotistical use, or, it can be transformed into a charmingly persuasively attitude of common-sense and concern.

7 Yet, it would be a shame to close our inquiries now, and say, that "everything is relative", and, perhaps, even, irrelevant. Also, let us not abandon our discussion and examination of these belief structures prematurely, since we will have to deal, quite often, with the tensions and strife that arise from conflicting and diverging ideas.

8 It is not sufficient to blandly suggest, that both systems of thought have an equivalent relevance, since the combatants will ignore such an opinion as irrelevant. It is not easy to make a strong, dedicated believer see, that his beliefs may be wrong, or, even, dangerous. It is not easy to forestall the ever-present tendency towards polarisation and battle, because this is the primordial, primitive way of solving a problem, especially, if one fails to appreciate the full consequences of such an attitude or behavioural choice.

9 How do we convince a crusader, killing in the name of his God, that he is a scourge and satan to the other children of God? How do we teach humility and tolerance to the fanatically committed? How do we reason with those, who will look upon reason as vacillating treachery?

10 Once the mold of a fanatic belief has set, it can only be triumphant, or, it will be destroyed. The strength of a fanatic belief is enormous, and its resistance to change or destruction makes the effort to modify an ardent belief, an arduous and laborious task that has to be met with a similarly dedicated counter-attack.

11 Fortunately, the fanatic attitude and struggle is often limited and localised, since the immense "bundling energy", necessary to harden and sharpen a fanatic point of view, is seldom present for a prolonged period of time, and, eventually, it disappears in the relaxing aftermath of triumph, or the shattering experience of a crushing defeat.

12 While doubting vacillation and seemingly endless philosophical debate can, rightly, be accused of undermining the beliefs and ethical principles upon which moral attitudes and strength of character have been based, the loosening of belief structures also provides an opportunity for renewal and re-adjustment. Loosening a belief structure for its own sake, however, is a pernicious activity that leads to the individualistic worship of sophistry and aggressive intellectual gamesmanship.

13 The question is this; if I see all my belief structures as relative; as determined by my biological and cultural heritage; as determined by the chances of contact and the accidents of my personal history, how, then, can I find any strength in my beliefs; how can I ever cope with the stress of confrontation, if I adopt a totally relativistic attitude? Is this not the same as having no belief at all? Would it not be better, then, to start from scratch and try to fill my mind with a structure of beliefs I can fully believe in and rely upon?

.......

Chapter 5

Content

The need for preference when making up our minds.
The impulse for ethical behaviour.
The need to understand.
The importance of knowing history.

1 It is, probably, impossible to really believe, that all belief structures are completely relative. It is almost unavoidable to elevate the belief in this relativity of the value of various beliefs, into a belief of its own, perhaps, not with absolute validity, but, at least, with a conviction that places a significant value and validity on such a relativistic point of view.

2 Yes, it can easily be acknowledged, that the consequences of a belief structure are important, because a belief influences, to a large extent, our contacts and attitudes towards other people. I may fully believe, that someone else has the perfect right to his beliefs, as I have to mine, but, what is my attitude going to be, if someone else`s beliefs compel the individual to be unpleasant, or, even, harmful to me? What stand do we take, and, what attitudes do we adopt, if a belief is markedly aggressive or expansionistic in nature? Does a believer have the right to act according to his beliefs, regardless of the consequences?

3 Of course not. The real importance, then, is, obviously, the question of inter-human relationships, of ethics, and, it is, therefore, quite reasonable to devote the major part of one`s philosophical efforts to ethical problems.

4 I am convinced, that ethical questions and concerns have always been the major spur to philosophical activities, in addition to problems arising from man`s inevitable mortality, disease and old age. Our endeavours to see nature as a coherent and potentially understandable unit of existence, are based on our deeply felt need and desire to understand, why we have to die, and, why, so often, we have to suffer as well. Man`s desire to believe in forces he can control, either by supplication and magic, or, with the help of scientific manipulations, is, once again, an expression of this need to find a satisfying answer, because, to have satisfying answers, means, to have a measure of control.

5 Understanding is, in essence, a form of control, even, over forces that can not be manipulated, because understanding provides, at least, a measure of predictability in the course of events that are beyond control. The creation of a pantheon of gods, and, the explanations of their interactions in a rationale of legends and stories, are also attempts to understand the inscrutable forces of nature, seen, here, as anthropomorhic force-fields with their irrational decisions and fickle loyalties.

6 The awareness of personal suffering and the ability to identify or sympathise with the suffering of someone else, (in particular, of those we have just defeated or conquered), is one of the most important stimuli to reflect and think. If we are able to see the vagaries of fortune; to see the other side of our actions; to see the suffering induced by our triumphs, then, we begin to wonder, who we are. Why is it, that man is almost always in conflict, then here, then there? Now, we may be victorious, but tomorrow, it may be our turn to be defeated and to suffer, and, perhaps, die.

7 It is our tendency to ask these sort of questions with their ethical implications, which really stimulates us to come to grips with reality, and these considerations encourage us to try to answer the question, why we behave the way we do. It may well be much easier to agree amongst ourselves about the practical aspects of an ethical system of inter-human relationships, than to work-out a conceptual reality with universal validity. Nevertheless, a conceptual structure with universal validity would give us a solid intellectual foundation for a system of ethical behaviour patterns.

8 Ethical refinements in our feelings and awarenesses are, probably, a result of prolonged contacts and conflicts, where an ever increasing heritage of historical tales of victory and defeat, high-light, time and again, the vagaries of fortune and the capriciousness of human behaviour. A familiarity with historical data, be it in the form of stories and legends, the portrayals of the theater, or, in the form of a variety of religious rites, can lead to an increasing awareness of the suffering of defeat and the transience of victory. These awarenesses may lead, in turn, to an ever greater ability to identify with the suffering stranger, whenever we have learned to expand our sphere of concern as a result of increased cultural contacts and the awareness of inequities and injustices.

9 The similarities between human beings, as seen in the emotions of ambition and frustration, or victory and defeat, will become increasingly apparent, and, instinctively, we will try to search for a way of life, as well as a code of conduct, that will limit the senseless wars of domination and destruction.

10 Ethical considerations and our sphere of concern will, eventually, extend to the entire realm of mankind, and, it is on this desire to understand and limit strife, that our progress in ethics has to be based. Ethical behaviour can not be based on the belief in a particular relationship between God and a part or all of mankind, nor, by an emphasis on a mechanistic, emotion-less play of natural forces, because the latter is a concept that may never be wholly acceptable to a large majority of the members of mankind.

.......

Chapter 6

Content

Common-sense and ethical guidelines.
The need for an intellectual foundation for ethical problems and solutions.
The carefully designed rigidity of dogmatic guidelines.

1 The foudation for a system of ethical conduct has to be a common-sense awareness, that, in order to minimise conflict, we have to learn to see the consequences of our desires and aspirations. We have to recognise the consequences of our behaviour for other people, and, we have to learn to identify with other human beings, in the sense, that we find legitimate in them, whatever we consider legitimate hopes and aspirations in ourselves.

2 Do we need rigid belief structures for this? Do we need any form of fanatic commitment to a Cause, be it a religious conviction or a social dogma of rigidly prescribed human relationships? At the present time in the unfolding of our evolutionary potentials, the emphasis has swung from a large-scale commitment to religious beliefs, to an equally large-scale commitment in the absolute validity of a certain social order. We will have an opportunity to examine this shift more in detail, and, we will determine the merits and demerits of such a shift in emphasis.

3 For the time being, let us remind ourselves of the importance of ethical questions. Human relationships are important, because they are a stimulus, not only, for philosophical understanding, but, they are, also, an inspiration to literature, drama, and the arts in general. Let us reflect upon the readiness of man to do battle on account of his conflicting beliefs, and, we will see, that this observation is a powerful reason to consider any belief structure to be of relative value only. However, the impossibility to behave efficiently without a structure of beliefs, (even, if it is only a subconscious belief in the superiority of asking questions, rather than providing answers), makes it clear, that we all select certain ideas to be more reliable and more valuable than others.

4 Our intuitive quest for intellectual precision and absolute reliability in understanding the nature of the Universe, (together with its many manifestations), has to be supplemented with, or, even, transformed into, a careful consideration of the numerous practical problems we face, when trying to regulate human behaviour and contacts. The realisation of the ever-present need to adapt our belief structures, has made most of us flexible enough to see the folly of killing each other for the sake of incompatible view-points about realities we are not even sure of. Yet, even in our more practical considerations about how we ought to live together, we show an irrepressible tendency to enshrine our opinions into dogma, and, to obliterate dissent or disbelief by force.

5 It remains to be seen, whether or not a purely pragmatic approach to ethical behaviour will, in the long run, be sufficient to sustain a useful pattern of ethical guidelines. It may well be, that an empirically formed, organically evolved pattern of ethical conduct has to be "sanctified" for the sake of stability and durability, and, it may well have to be endowed with an aura of sacredness and infallibility.

6 We should not forget, that the process of grasping and groping for new forms of conduct can never be the ultimate goal of any transformation or adjustment. A period of transformation will allow us the freedom and flexibility to find a suitable code, enshrined in a global Constitution, but, we will have to safeguard the perpetuation of this code by reducing flexibility; by "enshrining" such a Constitutional Code, at least, to a certain extent, with the rigidity of a highly valued structure of beliefs and guidelines, but, we will have to allow for a carefully calculated mechanism of change, in order to make it possible for this Constitutional Code to adapt and remain relevant.

7 This is the age-old dilemma or balance between rigidity and flexibility; the strength to endure the stress of the moment, versus the ability to reduce stress by adapting to new and changing circumstances.

.......

Chapter 7

Content

The sense of "de-personalisation".
Mechanisms of reality perceptions.
The fragility of the sense of reality.

1 Once in a while, in a fleeting moment, we may feel a disturbing sense of bewilderment. We see ourselves, sitting somewhere, suddenly void of any meaning, and, we watch ourselves, asking; what is this life? What does it mean to be a human being? How long will it be, before I know who I am, or, why I live? What is this curious ability to think and see ourselves as a strange, incomprehensible object?

2 For a few moments, we are not absorbed by pursuing one objective or another. For a few moments, our attention has not been focussed upon a particular question or an existential problem, but, we see ourselves as "just being"; wondering how useful it all is. How illusory are our goals, and, yet, do we not admire and enjoy the products of other people`s efforts? Do we not continuously refresh our ideas and insights with the clarity of someone else`s thoughts? How often, do we not recognise in other people this feeling of doubt; was it all worthwhile?

3 During such moments, we loosen, for a moment, our most essential and basic reality perception. This is not a verbalisable structure of goals and ideas, but the reality experience of our identity; of ourselves, being engaged in the processes of existence.

4 The very possibility of this experience, means, that we live and experience reality under conditions we are barely aware of. Perhaps, this basic feeling of being in contact with reality is dependent on physiological functions that are constantly at work, primarily, beyond the sphere of our conscious awarenesses. These physiological mechanisms select and classify each moment of our reality experiences. We compare, constantly and subconsciously, incoming impulses against our memory-traces, and the continuous re-assurance of recognition gives us the relaxing feeling of familiarity, not only, with our environment, but also, with the feeling of our own identity.

5 We assume, that, occasionally, for one reason or another, this continuous stream of impulses, thoughts and feelings, fails to be classified with sufficient strength and finality as "familiar and routine", and, for a moment, we feel strange, not ourselves, questioning the unquestionable, not knowing, whether I am I; whether or not I am the same as the me from yester-day or yester-year.

6 Various indications seem to point to physiological or neurologial processes to evoke these sensations. In other words, biological and biochemial processes are at work, here, and this impression is enhanced by the fact, that a variety of drugs, or, a state of exhaustion and fatigue, can greatly increase the duration and severity of a feeling of sudden "unfamiliarity" with our own identity. This is the essence of a feeling of "de-personalisation".

7 We also know, that the absence of sufficient stimuli to keep the classifying activities of our central nervous system busy, may lead to a predominance of feelings and reminiscences, blurring the distinction between what is real and what is imagined. Not only, can this lead to a feeling that we are not certain about what is real, but, we may even become convinced, that certain imagined experiences or feelings are indeed "real". We say, then, that a "break-down of reality functions" has taken place. We may become obsessed by certain recurring feelings or ideas, and, the field of psychopathology is abundantly aware of the existence of a great many delusions, hallucinations, phobias, obsessions, etc.

8 There is often no way to convince the person who is suffering from a delusion, that his experience is "not real", but, with the help of suppressive or tranquillising drugs, the occurrence and severity of these delusions may diminish, and, the individual may, in retrospect, recognise and acknowledge the experience as a delusion, being persuaded to think so by convincing evidence from his subsequent experiences.

9 What we believe to be true, then, may, not only, be determined by our previous experiences and chance-meetings with various people and different circumstances, but, it may also be influenced by our organic constitution. A state of great fatigue, physical exhaustion, emotional tensions, drugs, etc., all these factors may cause a break-down in the reality experience of contemporary sense impressions, and, this break-down may allow evoked mental images to be experienced as "visions" or hallucinations. These sensation may take place with the same degree of reality-experience as any other sense impression that is normally classified as an "actual occurrence".

10 Often, a particular hallucinatory experience is so intense and has such a strong emotional significance, that it has a significant influence upon the reality perceptions and behaviour patterns of an individual for the rest of his or her life.

.......

Chapter 8

Content

The hysterical conversion reaction.
The ease of being deceived.
Critical faculties and the "well-tempered reality experience".
The filtering of sense impressions to fit our concepts of reality.
The fragility of reality experiences.

1 The stress of certain circumstances and excessive demands may, literally, induce a paralysing anxiety, and it is not surprising, therefore, that a strong feeling of inadequacy to cope with a stressful situation is translated into a physical handicap, which is then used as a pretext for the failure to cope.

2 This type of emotional reaction is called a "hysterical conversion reaction", or, rather, it is much better to call it a "psycho-somatic illness". The resulting physical "handicap" is not based on a deliberate distortion of the truth, since these processes take place beyond the level of conscious awareness, and, the person honestly believes, that he or she is handicapped and, therefore, unable to function properly.

3 The boundary with malingering is somewhat blurred, however, as many people will have a vague feeling in the back of their minds, that the handicap could be restored, if they were given, in one way or another, the courage to cope effectively with their problems. At the same time, we should keep in mind that the deliberate distortion of reality, (malingering), and the sub-conscious distortion as a result of the inability to cope, is, yet again, different from the experience of "hallucination", where we honestly believe to have perceived a reality that is not shared by our social surroundings.

4 I have mentioned these two common examples where our reality perceptions have become distorted, (the hallucination and the hysterical conversion reaction), to show, how easy it is to be fooled by our sense of reality. We all are aware of the fact, that we can easily be deceived by our senses, and, we have all experienced an immediate, defensive and suspicious behavioural reaction, whenever we heard a sound in the dark we could not classify or recognise immediately. It is frightening to realise, how easily the important, and, yet, so fragile sense of reality can be disturbed, and, at the same time, we can be so convinced about the reality of a certain experience or sensation!

5 Our ability to evaluate and discriminate, critically, is based on reason, careful consideration and emotional detachment. These techniques are powerful tools to help us establish an "evenly tempered" reality experience. Do I hear the argument, that this critical faculty of reasoned argument can also exclude from a reality experience whatever is considered not to "fit" into a pre-conceived context of order and classification? Certainly, this may happen, and, it is interesting to note the changes that are taking place in our individualised reality experiences, (or, in the commonly shared perspectives of a social environment), as time goes by.

6 Our view-points change and evolve, because we are forced to adjust to the prevailing realities, from time to time, but, we all have a tendency to close our mind to unusual, non-fitting aspects. However, when we think about it, it is, really, unavoidable, that we have a strong impulse to interpret our sense impressions according to the concepts of reality we already have.

7 Therefore, there are two different processes that tend to distort our reality perceptions. First of all, we select for the focus of our conscious awareness, almost exclusively, data we recognise and can classify in our notions about reality, and, it is, indeed, quite an effort to admit data or sense impressions that disturb or do not fit into this perception of reality. We "filter", therefore, the awarenesses from our environment in order to make these sense impressions fit with whatever we know and believe in.

8 Secondly, the classification of the incoming sense impressions can easily be disturbed, or, even completely distorted, by strong emotional experiences, or, by a state of exhaustion, sensory deprivation or hallucinogenic drugs. Then, a very strong reality perception may occur with a great deal of influence on the future behaviour patterns of an individual, but, this reality perception may have to be classified, by outsiders, as a "hallucination" or a "delusion".

.......

Chapter 9

Content

Biological reasons to doubt the existence of an absolute reality.
Reality pictures and existential circumstances.
The limits of teaching wisdom.
A confusing cacaphony.
Polarisations.

1 This brings us to the conclusion, that, besides philosophical considerations, we have strong physiological and biological reasons to doubt the existence of any particular absolute reality. We may, even, be able to outline, in general terms, what circumstances will be conducive to a particular type of reality perception.

2 It may well be, that we can correlate the divergent, philosophically well-reasoned reality images of the reflective and secure individual, (who discerns an absence of any divine influence upon human affairs), with the existence of a leisurely and modestly prosperous state of well-being. This state of well-being is usually found in a comfortable, but somewhat confusing and easy-going society, while the fervent religious reality perceptions are primarily developed and adhered to by people, or communities, who are living under much more stressful conditions, where the outlook for future events is coloured with intense emotions of hope and anxiety.

3 Turbulent times, frequent changes in social circumstances, as well as the influx of primitive vigour, seem to favour the intellectually easier and emotionally more appealing images of religious beliefs. It certainly seems fair to state, that the philosophical imagery has seldom been successful in guiding a society under stress. Philosophical wisdom is notoriously fleeting and elusive, obtainable, only, at a considerable personal effort, and, it is difficult to transmit philosophical wisdom culturally, since the essential attractiveness of the philosophical attitude seems to be a personal discovery of truths in knowledge and attitude. These truths make only sense after a long, personal quest for such a wisdom, and, these discoveries are almost entirely lost in any form of teaching or cultural transfer.

4 Widely contrasting philosophical or religious opinions form a confusing cacaphony for the bewildered spectator in a complex and conglomerate society, and, the possibilities for adaptation arising from widely divergent view-points are often lost, because the confusing and somewhat demoralising conceptual diversity is frequently felt as a threat to security and social stability. Yet, the spectacular successes of the scientific methods of investigation, together with their technical applications, have slowly influenced our modern societies to the point, that a reasoned and critical evaluation of sensory data is becoming widely accepted, and, this habit of intense scrutiny is largely responsible for the agnostic beliefs and opinions, which we see widely adopted, by so many people, in so many social environments.

5 It seems fair to say, that, at the present time, most of us do not really know what to believe. As a result, a process of polarisation is taking place. We see a fairly significant resurgence of fundamentalistic religious beliefs and behaviour patterns, where, once again, the majority of mankind is seen as doomed and destined for damnation. Others are clinging, ever more fervently, to the secular dogmas of Communism and Dogmatic Socialism, and, they find an outlet for their energies in an ever more violent confrontation with those who oppose them.

6 Another section of the population worships the gods of free-enterprise and private profit, and, this represents, indeed, a relatively large segment of affluent or near-affluent people. These are the people, who still think, that ruthless competitiveness and the survival of the fittest will produce the healthiest and most stable societies, and, these free-enterprisers are still surprised to learn, that an ever increasing gap between the rich and the poor is not so pleasing to those who are poor. Many people are surprised to see the intensity of discontent in affluent societies, because the universal gospel of ever increasing consumption, preached by the advertising wizards of Western television, radio and news-papers, seem to be so widely accepted by everyone.

7 Then, we have the law and order advocates. These are the people, who consider it their God-given right to own the Constitution and to employ it to their liking, in order to obtain and maintain their assets and empires of multinational dimensions. Unless we learn to control these giant corporations, the affluent nations have little chance of developing a more equitable and stable social environment.

8 All these groups see reality quite differently. In fact, the reality perceptions are so different, that any communication, any feeling of mutual identification, seems impossible. Yet, most of us still consider our societies to represent one happy family, where we are all steeped in Christian charity and amicable manners. In reality, our Western societies are fragmented along ideological lines, as well as along the dividing lines of wealth and influence on the one hand, and poverty and ignorance on the other.

9 We have seen, however, that the disappearance of a sense of togetherness, leads, inevitably, to confrontation and strife. Mutually induced incidences of injustice become, eventually, the main reason for an irreversible slide into hostilities and mutual alienation, and the process of socialisation has to start, again, from scratch.

10 Our reality perceptions are so different, and yet, we all believe, so ardently, in the righteousness and absolute validity of our own particular truths.

.......

Summary

1. 1 The many and varied facets of the truth.
Religious and agnostic points of view.
Circumstances favouring religious attitudes or philosophical opinions.
The problem of good and evil.
The need for leadership.
A review of the logic of a "willed" Universe of natural forces.

2. The relativity of good and evil.
The need for an intellectual foundation for ethical behaviour patterns.
Difficulties with religious and philosophical explanations for an ethical system.
The swing of the pendulum.
Interpreting facts according to the structures of our beliefs.
The fragmentation of public opinion.

3. We do not have to choose between religious and scientific view- points.
An attempt to harmonise the contradictions of these varying views.
A review of various influences on structures of belief.
Discrepancies between expected and actual experiences.
What is "truth"?
The mental nature of our concepts.
The "school" as a selective filter of thought and attitudes.

4. The reality of what we believe to be true.
Ethics; approached pragmatically.
The persuasiveness of religious and agnostic attitudes.
Attitudes and beliefs.
The unequal validity of beliefs in a relativistic comparison.
The fanatic belief.

5. The need for preference when making up our minds.
The impulse for ethical behaviour.
The need to understand.
The importance of knowing history.

6. Common sense and ethical guidelines.
The need for an intellectual foundation for ethical problems and solutions.
The carefully designed rigidity of dogmatic guidelines.

7. The sense of "de-personalisation".
Mechanisms of reality perceptions.
The fragility of the sense of reality.

8. The hysterical conversion reaction.
The ease of being deceived.
Critical faculties and the "well-tempered reality experience".
The filtering of sense impressions to fit our concepts of reality.
The fragility of reality experiences.

9. Biological reasons to doubt the existence of an absolute reality.
Reality pictures and existential circumstances.
The limits of teaching wisdom.
A confusing cacaphony.
Polarisations.

.......