Last time I wrote about my theory of the colours of consciousness. The idea was that each stage of development of the human soul is defined by what the soul searches for in its life. It was a theory I came to with a bit of experience, a bit of intuition, and a bit of thinking. I’ve also heard somewhat similar theories before, but they didn’t click for me, at least in the way they had been presented.
Now this site is supposedly about finding truth. I use the vagueness of that to take the liberty to write about basically whatever I feel like, but really I DO like to talk about this special subject: how to deal with all the information you consume; how to take some, discard some, and twiddle some about a bit, and make a coherent map out of it all.
So what about the theory I’ve just gone over? What do we do with it? What does it mean? Words, yes, information, yes, but monkeys on a typewriter are good at information. How do we find the nugget of pure, individual meaning in it?
Well, let’s start with looking at yourself.
How did you read the article?
Option 1 – Did you take it very seriously? Do I seem like an authority figure to you? Did you consider what I wrote to be fact just because I wrote it like I knew what I was doing?
Option 2 – Did you doubt everything? Did you stop and think with a sense of caution at the end of a paragraph – and then assimilate the information with a “yes, no, yes, no” mental filter?
The truth is not black and white, though. In fact, I’m going to be extra revolutionary and say the truth is not real.
What do I mean by that? (Not every time I say “the truth is not real” I will necessarily mean the same thing – it’s all about context and the intended information I want to impart).
Well, these words you read, the information structures here, are not real. They’re not true. What’s true is reality itself, but words are not reality. You do know this right? Well, do you act like it?
Truth is not serious. Don’t get too stuck to the words you read. They’re not REAL.
Instead of 1, which is blind faith in the words of a perceived authority figure, or 2, which is filtered blind faith, what we really want is a sort of playful attitude where we don’t really MIND if what we read is true or not. In fact, we’re not thinking in terms of true or not true. We’re thinking in terms of playing with ideas. Now when we take these ideas into the real world we’ll play with them some more. Do they work for us? What sort of actions does believing them result in?
Or you can play with the words in another way. What does reading them stimulate in you? How does it put a mirror up to your ways of viewing the world? What reactions did you have to the words – and what does that say about you? In what way did they show up areas that are lacking in your map? Did they fill the lack better?
Did they stimulate you to new questions perhaps? What will you do now with the ideas fresh in your head?
Whatever you do, don’t just accept a theory. Theories are just that – unproven. (Nothing is proven). So play with them.
YOU WILL NEVER TOTALLY UNDERSTAND REALITY. THEORIES CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR A SENSE OF SECURITY. TRUTH IS NOT IN YOUR HEAD, IT’S OUT THERE IN THE REAL WORLD, AND IT’S NOT ALL THAT STRUCTURED AND TANGIBLE AFTER ALL.
Posts in series:
Colours of consciousness, part I
Colours of consciousness, part II
Related posts:
About
Five myths about indigo children/adults, debunked
