PHILOSOPHY
A Comprehensive Framework

Discussion Po ints:

- Answers the
question:“What is
Philosophy?”
- Discusses Philosophy’s
relationship to Religion
and Science.
- Outlines the spiritual
worldview of ancient
Philosophy.
- Offers a vision for how
Philosophy can be
revitalized in modern
society.

Alex a nde r W. Sa c h on

Fall 2020 - Spring 2021

unfinished, unofficial excerpt (3.19.21)
to be published on my website only
1 of 218
Copyright page.

2 of 218


PHILOSOPHY
A Comprehensive Framework

Tab l e of Co nt ent s

Introduction: “What is Philosophy?” …………………………………………………… 4

Set #1: Philosophy, Religion, & Science .………………………………………….….… 4

Set #2: Philosophy, Esoteric Knowledge, & Exoteric Knowledge …………….…..…. 4

Set #3: Philosophy, Epistemology, & Ontology ………………………..……………….. 4

Case Study: The Philosophy of Qabbalism …………………………..………….…….. 4

Conclusion: Design, System Science, and the Future of Philosophy ….……………

3 of 218
4 of 218
 


In t rodu ct i on
Wh at is Philo soph y?

Sections:

1. Introduction
2. Context: The Confusion of
Tongues
3. Our Task: Build a
Framework
4. The Key: Triangulation
5. The Mathematical
Foundation of the
Triangulation Approach
6. The Mission of Philosophy
7. Next Steps

5 of 218
1 . I n tro d uc t io n : A The purpose of this book is to build out, step-by-step, a framework - an
Frame w or k of interconnected set of concepts, definitions, and theories - that comprehensively
answers the question: “What is Philosophy?”.
P hi lo s o ph y
- The objective here is to create a holistic, multi-dimensional framework of
Philosophy that is simultaneously:

a) historically accurate;

b) reasonable and logical;

c) adaptable to modern scientific knowledge;

d) actionable, meaning that the information it provides is capable of being put to

practical use in real-world situations; and

e) inspiring, meaning that it sets forth an idealistic vision for the future that
people will find exciting and motivating.

This framework is intended to serve as the foundation for a larger project that has
three principle components:

1) My first goal - the one I’ve been pursuing the longest - is to build an original
framework of Systems Science, one that is grounded in the themes, concepts,
and principles of ancient Philosophy.
- In formulating this framework, I seek to offer a method whereby today’s
highly compartmentalized body of scientific knowledge can be reintegrated
and synthesized together.

- Today, Science exists as many separate disciplines which operate in isolation

of each other. Through the mechanism of Systems Science, I believe that
this body of scientific knowledge can be de-compartmentalized and
synthesized together, such that what is now carved up among many
separate fiefdoms can be pieced back together such that one ultimate,
completely-unified, systems-based body of scientific knowledge.
- Part of my effort in this direction into re-establish a link between Science and
Philosophy - a link that is vital but which has become severed for far too

6 of 218
 long. That is where this book comes in: in the course of unfolding the
comprehensive framework of Philosophy that is this book’s main theme, I
discuss the relationship between Philosophy, Science, and System Science
at length. It is my intention that these discussions serve as the foundation for
the effort to chart a new path for our institution of Science.

2) My second long-term goal builds off the first one above: it is to marry the
holistic, Philosophy-based paradigm of Systems Science advocated for in Step
One with the fast-emerging cultural and economic movement of “Design”.

- My second long-term goal involves revising and repurposing “Design”,

moving it away from its current secular orientation and giving it a more
idealistic and spiritual focus.
- My intention here is to build on the potential that is currently exhibited by
the rapid emergence of a worldwide “Design” movement that has grown
dramatically in influence within multiple sectors of global cosmopolitain
society over the past several decades.

My intent is to “ensoul” this already unfolding Design movement by laying

forth an idealistic vision for how it can be re-purposed (alongside the new
paradigm of “Systems Science” outlined above) in order to catalyze the onset
of a new institutional paradigm.
- A new paradigm of “Design” - one backed by a reformed Science - holds
the promise to dramatically impact human civilization in a plethora of ways,
including transforming, on a global level, how political, economic, and
cultural decision-making processes are structured and carried out, how
engineering projects are undertaken and synchronized, how organizations
are managed and integrated into a larger social framework, how nations
govern themselves and interact on a transnational level, etc.

- It is my view that Design can be repurposed to accomplish something much

greater than what it is currently doing: producing commodities and
responsive solutions. Right now, Design is given only small, mediocre tasks:
it is confined essentially to iterating incremental improvements in order to

7 of 218
 bolster and prop up a failing and dying way of life. This is a state of passive
receptivity: Design is handicapped into only being able to respond to
human challenges rather than prevent and overcome them. It has not yet
been empowered to lead.
- I believe that Design can and must lead. It is entirely possible, within our
lifetimes, to transform today’s global conditions. To do this, we will have to
draw from three resources: the first is Philosophy, by which I mean the
“original" Philosophy of those who first birthed it into our social awareness:
Pythagoras, Buddah, Lao Tzu, Plato, etc.; the second: an integrated
paradigm of Systems Science, as described in Part One; and the third: a
reborn vision of Design. With this mighty trident in hand, we can gain the
power to progress and transform our civilization in powerful and
unexpected ways.

3) The third long-term goal I am pursuing builds off the second: it is to bring this
integrated vision of Philosophy, Systems Science, and Design into the world of
organizational management and strategic decision-making.

- My focus here is build a Design-based approach to organizational

management - one that is grounded my custom blend of Systems Science
and ancient Philosophy.

- This final stage of my plan is the one most geared toward catalyzing real-
world change and transformation. By building out a Design-based
framework of how organizations are embedded within a greater social,
psychological, and spiritual context, I hope to transform the way
organizations are strategically managed.
- By adopting a Design-based approach to Management, I believe that
organizations can coordinate and organize themselves together in a way
that is cooperative and sustainable rather than competitive and extractive.

- Organizations are the primary instruments of change in human society:

anything that gets done at scale gets done through the mechanism of an
organizational system. The logic then is simple: by reforming organizations,

8 of 218
 we can reform society; by reforming management, we can reform
organizations; by reforming strategic decision-making processes, we can
reform management. How do we transform strategic decision-making? By
reframing it using a new paradigm of Design.
- Based on this belief, I have made it my personal goal to articulate and
catalyze a Philosophically-inspired Design movement within today’s global
class of management professionals. I truly believe that If we can change the
way that organizations are managed, then we can transform and evolve
human civilization for the better.

2 . Con t ex t : Th e Con f u s i on We live in an age that is well characterized by the “Tower of Babel” allegory in the
Bible: there is a “confusion of tongues”, such that words and symbols have lost their
o f Ton g u e s shared sense of meaning and understanding between people.

- Our age is one in which many of the most important words and concepts in
language - God, faith, ethics, Mind, Soul, Truth, knowledge, etc. - do not have a
shared sense of meaning between different people.
- As a result, society has become fragmented into clusters where each group
misunderstands, misinterprets and misrepresents each other’s viewpoints.

- Instead of society being a shared space of mutual understanding, it is a highly

fragmented space of isolated individuals and groups living in private, walled-off
worlds of their own psychological fabrication. In this situate, people invent and
live in their own personal truths, all the while denying that any higher standard of
Truth exists beyond that which can be tangibly felt and physically touched.

The classic example of this is with “Religion”. The tendency of modern human history
is for different religious groups to wall themselves off into highly dogmatic sects that
compete and fight with each other.

= Each self-isolating sect becomes characterized by extreme levels of groupthink; as

a consequence, antagonisms and animosities develop between groups - ones

9 of 218

A.
The term “Man” (capitalized here for emphasis) is one
that takes on a special meaning in Philosophy. Here, one
is not referring to a “male human organism”. Rather,
with their term “Man”, the Philosopher is referencing
the idea of an “archetypal human”: a basic human
pattern of being. In this way, all human (male, female, or
androgynous, etc.) are encapsulated in the “Man”
concept.
Further, “Man” often takes on a plural tone, as if
referring to Mankind as a general, collective entity. Thus,
“Man” evolves: Mankind evolves as a species in Nature
and at the same time we as persons evolve as individual
representations of this species. Either way, it is “Man”
that evolves. (It’s like how a non-farmer understand
sheep: one sheep; ten sheep; male sheep; female
sheep: it’s all “sheep”.)
rooted in the inevitable misunderstandings that arise when two groups refuse to
communicate and empathize with each other.
- To give an example, consider Christianity and Islam, the two dominant religious
movements of the modern world: there is much antagonism between them, while
even in their own ranks, each marked by high degree of fractionalization and in-
fighting.
- This in-fighting occurs because each group lacks the ability to understand and
empathize with its counterparts. Each side has accepted a strict dogma of beliefs
and therefore is unable to engage with the beliefs and perspectives of others..
Because of this, each lacks the flexibility to understand others’ viewpoints - to
bridge the gap of difference in perspective in order to find the middle ground all
Religion’s ultimately share in common: the pursuit of spiritual growth and
unfoldment as an act of dedicated service to God.
We can find another example of this “confusion of tongues” theme with the way that
Philosophy is approached in modern times.
- As with Religion, Philosophy has become plagued by confusion, uncertainty, and
misunderstanding: it is something that many people understand and define in
different, highly conflicting ways.
- Because there is no shared agreement of Philosophy’s history, meaning, and
purpose between the various individuals and groups who today proclaim
themselves as “Philosophers”, the very concept of “Philosophy" itself has been
made impotent: since no one can agree what it means or how it should
interpreted and applied, people become paralyzed with uncertainty and no one
puts it to use.
Bogged down in this state of confusion and uncertainty, Philosophy’s value as a vital
resource for Man is sadly frustrated and overlooked. (A)
- Rather than being respected and revered as the guiding light behind Man’s
evolution, Philosophy is instead treated as a mere intellectual curiously -
something for stuffy university professors to quibble about but not something for
pragmatists who are trying to solve real world problems to busy themselves with.
10 of 218
 - In this fallen and neglected state, Philosophy’s potential as a resource to elevate
and transform human life remains untapped and unexpressed.

3 . Ou r Tas k: Bui l d a In order to restore Philosophy to its rightful place in the institutional life of Mankind,
we must actively seek to cut through this “confusion of tongues” situation. This we
Frame w or k can do by deliberately building a very precise definition of the concept for
ourselves, one that can be relied on, trusted in, and referenced as a “gold standard”
against which alternative statements and claims about Philosophy made by others
can be compared and evaluated.
- In other words: the only way to cut through a “Tower of Babel” situation is to
actively do the work of building out a comprehensive framework of the topic at
hand for yourself. Otherwise, without putting forth the effort of becoming
informed oneself, one cannot reliably evaluate between competing claims offered
by others.

- Think of it like this: when “experts” disagree with each other, you can’t reliably
make a judgment of who’s position is right without first becoming yourself
informed about the issues at stake in the topic at hand. Otherwise, how are you
going to evaluate between their conflicting arguments?

When it comes to the “confusion of tongues” and Philosophy, or task therefore

becomes clear: to build out a core definition of the concept that is backed by a tight-
knit framework supporting concepts and principles that one can draw from and refer
back to as a primary reference point.

- With this framework in hand, one is then empowered to navigate a situation

marred by “confusion”: using it as a guide, one can branch out and evaluate the
myriad competing definitions and interpretations of Philosophy that are currently
being offered, tossing out the parts that don’t fit and incorporating the ones that
do. In this way, you gain strength through the stimulation of evaluating your state
of understanding against the knowledge frameworks offered by others.
- As part of this framework-creation process, one must commit to becoming widely
read, as it is vital that one takes the time to compare, contrast, and synthesize

11 of 218
 various viewpoints and perspectives together. This means delving into ideas and
concepts that conflict with each other; it also means taking the time to evaluate
arguments and viewpoints that you may not initially agree with. The overall point
is to allow your own personal framework to be stimulated as you attempt to
develop and grow it.
- Just as muscles grow from exercise, frameworks grow in strength from stimulation.
This stimulation can come from sources and perspectives of all types: one should
not restrict oneself to only hearing only those views that align with what they
already believe.

Ultimately, one needs to be able to define and support the positions they advocate
in their framework using reason and logic backed by scientific evidence. If one's
framework “buckles” under this kind of scrutiny, then their framework needs to be
reorganized and rethought.
- In this way, “creative destruction” is a vital part of the framework-making process:
progress can only take place when we toss out the old and stale in order to make
way for what is vibrant and new.

- This process is not to something to be avoided but a necessary part of Nature’s

evolutionary program. As such, this natural process of Nature is something that
should be embraced.

The ultimate task of this book is to take on this challenge: to construct a framework
of Philosophy that will establish the concept within a well-defined semantic context,
where its definition of meaning can be carefully linked, in a network-like fashion, to
the definitions of meaning given to a small, well curated set of other closely
connected words and ideas.

- The focus here is to establish a method where we can compare and contrast the
word “Philosophy” with a set of other closely related words, concepts, and ideas.
- The underlying idea is this: at the root level, “Philosophy” is a word like any other:
to have meaning, it must be defined in relation to other words.

12 of 218
 - Words define words; Philosophy, therefore, must be defined by comparing it to
closely curated set of other key words and concepts.
- Through the exercise of comparing and contrasting our developing definition of
Philosophy with the precise definitions of meaning we are assigning to each of the
other concepts in the set, we gradually build out a network of meaning where
each word is given a place and purpose in relation to each other word in the
framework.

- By gradually building bridges or links between the the concepts or “nodes” in our
network, we gradually build out an interconnected framework of logic that unfolds
a well-reasoned definition of meaning for each of the key concepts it contains.

To give an example of what such a framework looks like, to the left is a simple
visualization of the framework we are going to be constructing in this paper.

- Here we see that our central term, Philosophy, is defined in relation to six other
terms that semantically surround and contextualize it.
- Notice that the diagram takes form as a "word map”, where each word in the set is
linked to each other word. The goal here is to map out a “solar system” of
meaning, where six peripheral concepts “orbit” around a central seventh term.

4 . Th e Key : Tri an g u l at i on In building out our "word map” of Philosophy, we are going to be utilizing a
technique that has long been taught in Philosophical schools: that of “triangulation”.

- The philosophic method of “triangulation” describes a technique for establishing

a fixed pattern of value between three variables bound together within a set.
- Here, each of the three variables in the set is given a specific name, position, and
function in relation to the other two. This designation specifies the distinct role
that each variable in the set will play in relation to its two counterparts.

The three role categories that are contained within the “triangulated set” are: a) the
thesis; b) the antithesis and c) the synthesis.

13 of 218
- Within each set of concepts that one is triangulating, each individual term will be
slotted into one of three archetypal role positions.
- One of the three terms will play the role of “thesis”, one role of “antithesis”, and
one the role of “synthesis”.

The two concepts occupying the positions of “thesis” and “antithesis” from a precise
pattern of relationship with each other that is “dialectical”. This means that the two
terms oppose each other as inverse opposites. Simple examples of this include:
“light” and “dark”; “good” and “bad”, “day” and “night”.
- The point here is to is that you first specify a “thesis” and then you attempt to
locate a dialectically opposite concept - an “antithesis”. So, for example, if “light”
taken as the thesis", then by necessity “dark” must play the role of antithesis.

- In this way, a fixed pattern of semantic value is established between the pair: each
is given a value and purpose in relation to the other; each plays a specific “role” in
relation to its counterpart.

Once this thesis-antithesis pairing has been established, one then moves to specify
the third position in the triad: the “synthesis”.

- Thesis and antithesis, being opposites, do not directly interact. They are like oil
and water: they naturally oppose and separate from one another. One may
imagine them like the positive and negative poles of a battery: they fit together,
but they also oppose each other.
- To overcome this position, a third, integrating factor is introduced: the synthesis.
Through the synthesis, two dialectic opposites of thesis-antithesis are brought into
a state of functional interaction.

- In our battery example, this synthesis represents the concept of the magnetic field
that emerges in space and time in order to direct the flow of energy moving from
the positive pole to the negative pole. Through this magnetic field, two opposites
are brought into a state of mutual, constructive interaction.

The ultimate function of the synthesis within the triangulated set is to bring
equilibrium to the imbalance between thesis and antithesis.

14 of 218

5 . Th e Mat h em at i c a l
Fo un dat io n of t he
Tr ian g ul at i on A pproach
- The mission of the synthesis is to bring the variance between the two extremes
into a state of relative equilibrium with each other.
- Left alone, opposing things tend to come into conflict. But with the aid a third
element that synthesizes, the pair can be brought into a state of productive and
harmonious relationship.
The role of “synthesis” thus performs two roles key roles in relation to the overall
three-part set:
- First, it functions as a catalyst for the interaction of the two opposing roles of
“thesis” and “antithesis".
- Second, it serves as a balancing, mediating, and equilibrating agent whose
purpose is to bring the thesis and antithesis dialectic into a state of integrated and
unified functioning - one where each plays a specific constructive role in relation
to the overall performance of the collective.
Philosophy’s hallmark method of “triangulation” is grounded in its reverence for the
mathematical principle of the “Continuous Geometric Proportion”.
- In a Continuous Geometric Proportion, three numbers of different value or length
are paired together in a precise measure of relationship.
- This pattern can stated according to the following simple equation: (a : b : c)
- Another way to state this is: (a : b :: b : c).
- Putting this into words, this equation states: “a” is to “b” in the same proportion as
“b” is to “c”.
The ideal visual representation of this simple mathematical relationship is with the
well-known “Phi” proportion (also known as the “Golden Section” or “Divine
Proportion”).
- “Phi” describes a measure of proportion that is embedded within the physical
geometry of all forms of life.
15 of 218
- It is often associated with the geometry of “growth” and “evolution”: it is found not
only in the physical geometries of all living forms; it can also be observed in life’s
time signature - evolution - which dictates how the forms of life move, unfold, and
develop through time.

The basis of the Golden Section is very simple: you take a line and cut it in a very
specific way such that, out of the one line, three different lines with three different
values of measurement are produced.

- The catch is, the length of these three lines must fit into the boundaries of the
“continuous geometric proportion”, meaning they must follow the relationship: a :
b : c.
- There is only one way a line can be cut in order meet this criteria: through the
“Golden Section”.

A line that is cut through by the Golden Section results in the line’s division into two
unequal parts: one longer; one shorter.
- These unequal line segments form two of the three values in the three-termed
proportion.

- The initial line, the one that was initially cut to form the two unequal lines, is
brought back in to become the third factor in the equation.

The main idea is this: when a Golden Section cut is made, the initial, uncut line
(which is the longest) will form a ratio with the longer of its two sections which is in
exact proportion to the ratio that longer section has to the shorter one.

- Thus, the full line is in the same ratio to its longer segment as that longer segment
is to the shorter. (For visuals of this, see the sidebar.)
- The exact quantitive value of each line will vary according to the length of the
initial line and the unit of measurement being used. For example’s sake, if we fix
the longer section’s value at 1 unit, then the shorter section’s value becomes “phi”
(ϕ; pronounced “fee”), which has a value of approximately 0.62 units), while the
longer value becomes “Phi” (Φ; pronounced “f-eye”), which has a value of
approximately 1.62 units.

16 of 218
 Note that the value of Phi (the greater; Φ) is the exact inverse of the value of phi (the
lesser; ϕ).
- They form a dialectic: one plays the role of “thesis” (Φ; the value of the initial
uncut line) and the other that of “antithesis” (ϕ; the value of the lesser section).

- One, the value of the intermediary line, then steps in to play the role of “synthesis”.
It has a relationship with each extreme and functions as an intermediary
mechanism through which the greater can communicate with the lesser.

As intermediary, the relationship pattern that 1 holds with Φ is in inverse proportion

to the relationship dynamic it has with ϕ:

- Φ is to 1 as 1 is to ϕ. In other words: (a : b :: b : c). Or better yet: (a : b : c).

- Here we have a clear expression of our “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” pattern: The
thesis is to the synthesis as the synthesis is to the antithesis. In other words: a is to
b as b is to c.

Thus, from this example, we get a simple visual explanation of Philosophy’s hallmark
way of organizing its process of analytical thinking:
- In Philosophy, the value of all ideas are measured using the “Golden Section”
formula - i.e., they are “triangulated” using the logic of the Divine Proportion.

- If you can learn to embrace this method and start re-patterning your thought
patterns according to this method, then you can begin to think like a Philosopher.

6 . Th e Mi ssi o n o f In order for Mankind to ever fully overcome the Tower of Babel crisis that has been
P hi lo s o ph y the plague of our civilization for thousand of years, we must rise to the challenge of
establishing a method whereby a baseline of collective consensus can be
established about what the basic, fundamental elements and dynamics of Reality
actually are.
- I argue that it is the specific institutional mission of Philosophy to perform this
function: to bring Man’s collective state of cognition - its collective worldview -
into a coherent and well-organized state of expression.

17 of 218
- The principle method Philosophy utilizes in order to accomplish this goal is
ground all psychological functioning and mental reasoning patterns is via
triangulation: through triangulation, the Mind is brought into symmetry, balance,
order, and reason.

In short, Philosophy seeks to transform the Mind by bringing it into a disciplined

pattern of operating.

- Philosophy seeks to transform the worldview of the individual. As one's worldview

changes, the brain’s actually physical, chemical, and energetic architecture
changes.
- These changes in brain architecture then recursively shift back into influencing
how one’s thought patterns flow. This then feeds back into furthering the shifts in
worldview that one builds, which then further transform the Mind’s neural
architecture, which then further alters one’s subjective quality of experience, etc.

In order to catalyze the unfoldment of this pattern of internal mental transformation,

Philosophy takes the approach of always staying grounded in triangulation.
- Though triangulation, the Mind’s own reasoning patterns are made simple,
transparent, and orderly. As a result, the Mind is able to understand how and why
it is coming to the conclusions that it is about things. It’s own reasoning patterns
are no longer kept a mystery to itself.

- At all times, Philosophy it attempts to make “the unconscious, conscious”. In this

way, its own internal dynamics of functioning can be made apparent to itself.
Once its own architecture has been revealed to its own awareness, the Mind can
go to work on it: it can actively reconstruct and redesign itself in a focused,
targeted way.

In sum, we can say the principle object of Philosophy’s focus is on the human Mind
itself:

- Through an act of Mind, Mind itself studies Mind. Through Mind, Mind is capable
of scientifically analyzing, diagraming, modeling, re-modeling, and re-designing
Mind. Mind is the object and subject: the thing being transformed and the thing

18 of 218
 doing the transforming. Philosophy brings this whole dynamic together into
reasonable, rational, and peaceful state of unfoldment. Philosophy therefore is the
natural ruler of the Mind: it is the means by which the Mind can take rulership

7 . N ext St e ps The Tower of Babel crisis has resulted in the widespread misinterpretation,
misunderstanding, and abandonment of Philosophy as guide for human life.
- We have become ignorant of Philosophy’s true meaning and purpose and have
taken for granted its availability to use as a problem-solving resource.

- As a result, we have suffered the necessary consequences: a world in chaos is the

inevitable effect of a civilization without Philosophy.

My mission is to help nudge things in a different direction.

- I believe that we can overcome this situation by revitalizing the idealistic vision of
Philosophy that the ancients once held, taught, and practiced.
- This I attempt to do by describing these principles in a simple “framework” format
using modern terminology that the average professional of today can understand,
be inspired by, and gain benefit from.

- I also have attempted to communicate this framework in a way that links with
modern System Science. My reasons for doing so will become apparent as we go
into the framework.

In this book, I am going to be referencing Philosophy’s hallmark triangulation

method heavily. The method in which I utilize it is as follows:

- In this framework, we are going to insert our main topic of consideration,

“Philosophy”, into three separate “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” triangulation
patterns, with it (Philosophy) being the common element contained within each of
the three.
- In each one, “Philosophy” will play the role of “synthesis”, occupying the middle
ground between a thesis-antithesis dialectic. With each set, the thesis-antithesis

19 of 218
 pairing being compared to Philosophy will vary: Philosophy is the sole element
that is shared in common across all three sets .
- Step by step, we are going analyze the logic behind each triangulation, gradually
comparing and contrasting the different sets against each other as we go. This
task is accomplished in chapters Two, Three, and Four.

Overall, we can visualize this seven-termed, Philosophy-focused framework using

the “word map” first shared on page 11 (and reproduced here).
- Here, Philosophy is posited as the central, synthesizing concept, around which six
other interrelated concepts constellate around it.

- These six orbiting concepts are organized into three sets of two. They are: Science
& Religion; Esoteric & Exoteric; and Ontology & Epistemology.
- Note that all six of these orbiting terms, plus Philosophy itself, all describe a
different way in which humans engage with knowledge. As I argue, the six orbiting
categories each pertain to a different way in which knowledge is generated and
categorized. Philosophy, the seventh, synthesizing element, pertains to how
knowledge is put into action: it describes the methodology, resources, and
principles involved in both managing knowledge and converting it into
substantive action.

- As I argue, the institutional purpose of Philosophy is to put knowledge into active

and intelligent use. In so doing, it leverages each of these six specialized
categories of knowledge.
- Each brings a different but necessary element to Philosophy’s quest. Philosophy’s
task is to bringing all six into a state of mutual synergy with each other. In this way,
the purpose of Philosophy - its institutional mission - is to integrate and synthesize
knowledge on a collective, species-wide scale.

By the end of reading this book, it is my goal is that you, the reader, be able to
integrate this seven-part framework of Philosophy into your own worldview.
- The worldview of ancient Philosophy is drastically different from the ones most of
us hold in private today.

20 of 218
- It is my goal to resurrect and modernize the worldview that the Philosophers of
antiquity once taught: I want to share, in modern language, what I’ve learned
about the grand, cosmic vision these great thinkers held and the lofty, idealistic
concepts they espoused regarding the ultimate meaning, purpose, and destiny of
human life.
- The great thinkers of human history all shared an inspiring, idealistic vision for the
future of human life. I believe that we must restore and resurrect this vision if we
are to gain the strength and intelligence to come together and collectively face
and overcome the myriad global challenges that confront our civilization today.

My ultimate goal for this book is to give the reader an idea for how inspiring and
transforming Philosophy can be when it’s correctly understood.
- Philosophy, when understood according the way the term was originally defined
(i.e. as Pythagoras of Samos first defined it and as Gautama Buddha, Lao Tzu,
Plato, and others first taught it), holds the power to inspire a transformation in the
way one looks at and interprets the most important and meaningful aspects of
human life.

- These include: Religion, Science, civilization, evolution, governance, organizations,

economics, culture, art, design, … the list goes on.

In the original conception of the ancients, Philosophy was understood as an

archetypal resource: an innate potential held within the Consciousness of Man, one
that is is always available to us, should we choose to embrace and use it.

- The problem is not that there is no method for Mankind to solve its problems with;
its that we have forgotten that Man has already developed a method. We have
forgotten it and correspondingly fallen into a state of degraded ignorance.
- We have seen for far too long what building a world without the use of Philosophy
is like - the crisis of modern civilization is a testament to what happens when we is
relegate it to the sidelines.

21 of 218
- In this book, I seek to offer a vision that plots an alternate course for how things
could be: a future where Philosophy is given new life and empowered to guide
and direct the strategic outlook of Man.

In this future scenario, Philosophy is allowed to guide the way we conduct and grow
ourselves as a species.

- In this new paradigm, a revitalized Philosophy becomes the foundation for a new,
worldwide movement in management, engineering, finance, and politics - a
Design movement.
- The onset of this new, philosophic paradigm of Design is rooted in a new,
philosophically-reformatted foundation of Systems Science.

- It is also grounded in a dynamic psychological approach to Religion: with Religion

being framed not as a dogma to be accepted or rejected but as a state of spiritual
Consciousness to be devoutly pursued and achieved.
- This is an approach to Religion that does not demand the “worship” of God but
instead seeks to inspire one to become a creative “partner” with God: to aid in the
fulfillment of God’s Plan by dedicating oneself to serve as a capable servant of it.

The great teachers of antiquity all tried to tell us that this was The Way. If we finally
learn the lesson they were trying to teach us, I believe that we can right our wrongs
and plot a new course of direction for our civilization.
- If empowered, Philosophy has the capacity to completely transform our way of
life. Our challenge is to allow it to actually fulfill this purpose by getting out of its
way and letting it do its natural work.

- The teachings have already been set forth. Let us look to them and embrace them;
let us seek to understand what they say and try to discover how to implement
their ideas in a modern context.

Emphasizing universal themes, cooperative incentives, and a highly idealistic yet

disciplined approach to Design, Philosophy has the power to bring human society
back into a state of natural alignment of the larger cycles and flows of the Cosmos.

22 of 218
- If we are able to accomplish this balancing act, a total restoration of society will
emerge as the inevitable consequence and by-product.
- Out of this restoration, a long-promised Golden Age can finally be born: an Age
that is not governed from “on high” but which is maintained bottom-up as the
active, democratic co-creation of each spiritually awakened citizen with it.

- For a world used to hardship and struggle, this may seem like a fantasy. But in
truth, it is a completely realistic possibility. Civilization can be transformed; Man
can be evolved.
- Plato, the Qabbalists, the Buddhists, the Taoists, the alchemists, the Gnostics, and
many others all laid out the blueprint for how to accomplish this great
transformation long ago. Will we finally pay attention and heed their call?

23 of 218
Philosophy, Religion, and Science, united in one magnificent structure: the Great Pyramid of Giza.
A diagram from Gyorgy Doczi’s The Power of Limits

24 of 218
 Tri a ng ul at i on #1
Phi lo soph y, Rel igion, & Sc ienc e

Sections:

1. Introduction: Philosophy,
Religion, and Science
2. Thesis: Religion
3. Antithesis: Science
4. Synthesis: Philosophy
5. Discussion and Analysis

25 of 218
1 . I n tro d uc t io n :
P hi lo s o ph y, Rel i g i o n ,
an d Sc ie n ce
In the first of the three sets of triangulations we are going to be unpacking in this
framework, we will be defining our central term, Philosophy, in relation to two
counterpart terms: Religion and Science.
- In this three-termed set, each term plays a specific role in relation to its two
counterparts.
- Religion and Science, for example, are bound together as a dialectic: they are
thesis and antithesis to each other, meaning they are inverse opposites.
- In relation to Religion and Science, Philosophy, the third term in the set, plays the
role of the synthesis: its function is to bond together and integrate the Religion
and Science dialectic.
- Philosophy accomplishes this by providing a “meeting ground” where the two can
communicate with each other so that, in time, a state of synergistic balance can be
achieved between them.
Two fundamental themes are shared by all three terms in this set:
1. Religion, Science, and Philosophy are institutions: collective patterns of
human life that perpetuate over large periods of time and space.
2. These three institutions all relate in some way to Man’s relationship with
knowledge. Specifically: how humans develop, organize, and utilize
knowledge on a collective scale.
Delving deeper, the institutions of Religion and Science each focus on generating
and cultivating a different form of specialized knowledge:
- Science’s knowledge comes from the intellect’s engagement with the external
world of Nature. Here, the scientist looks outward, gathers data, and brings that
data into the Mind via the body’s physical sense perceptions.
- Religion’s knowledge comes from a different pathway: one that bypasses the
body altogether, entering the Mind instead from a mysterious “inward-facing”
pathway.
26 of 218
 - This latter form of knowledge tends to be more emotional and intuition-oriented,
rather than being intellectually and sense-based, as Science characteristically is.

Philosophy enters the picture as a synthesizing presence: it doesn’t generate

knowledge; it brings knowledge to into a reasonable pattern of organization and
then puts it to use toward the accomplishment of dedicated works.

- Through Philosophy, mankind is given a method to organize, integrate, and utilize

the entire spectrum of human knowledge it is capable of possessing: religious as
well as scientific.
- While Religion and Science differ in their methods, through Philosophy they are
brought into a common orientation of purpose. This purpose is to serve Man: to
function as resources that Mankind can utilize as it attempts to progress itself
along the path of its own evolutionary unfoldment.

- In sum: Philosophy’s end goal is to perfect knowledge for the purpose of

perfecting Mankind itself: evolving its body, its Mind, and its relationship to the
larger natural and cosmic worlds that contain it.

2 . Th e sis: Re l i gi o n When most think of Religion, they think of its outer, institutional forms: the churches,
the robed priests, the rituals, the sacred books and myths.
- While these aspects of Religion do exist and are important, beyond them there is
a concealed and obscure psychological foundation.

- If all there was to Religion is its outward form, then it would be understandable to
view it as merely a primitive institution - the outdated product of an age when
Man was intellectually capable of little better than superstition.
- But if behind these outer forms there instead existed a subtle, inner, experiential
quality to Religion - one that most exponents of the institution’s outer form might
not even be aware of - then the religious skeptic would need to revise their
pessimistic attitude toward the institution.

27 of 218

C.
In his book The Systems View of Life, Fritjof Capra
describes the mystical experiences as the
foundation of all spirituality:
“Spirituality … flows from a certain profound
experience of reality, which is known as ‘mystical’,
‘religious’, or ‘spiritual’ experience. There are
numerous descriptions of this experience in the
literature of the world’s religions, which tend to
agree that it is a direct, nonintellectual experience
of reality.” (p.277)
He continues:
“Spiritual experience - the direct, non-intellectual
experience of reality in moments of heightened
aliveness - is known as the mystical experience
because it is an encounter with mystery. Spiritual
teachers throughout the ages have insisted that
t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f a p ro f o u n d s e n s e o f
C.
“Religion is the organized attempt to understand
spiritual experience, to interpret it with words and
concepts and to use this interpretation as the
source of moral guidelines…
“In theistic religions, theology is the intellectual
interpretation of the spiritual experience, of the
sense of belonging , with God as the ultimate
reference point. Morals or ethics is the rules of
conduct derived from that sense of belonging; and
ritual is the celebration of belonging by the
religious community.” (Capra, p. 280)
As the great mystics, saints, sages, prophets, and philosophers of the world have
taught us, Religion’s true purposes are to be found not in its outer forms but rather
as a series of inner, transcendent experiences that unfold within the innermost
dimensions of one’s Psyche.
- When one begins the process of exploring the inner realms of their own Psyche,
they begin discovering the psychological origins of Religion.
- The knowledge that is generated from such exploration is experienced as a
“revelation from within”. Meaning: the contents of the experience are not “brought
in” from the outside. Rather, they appear to originate and unfold entirely from
within consciousness itself.
There is more to Religion than mere storytelling: in certain mystical states of
Consciousness, one can be confronted with experiences that take on a highly
spiritual and mystical nature. These experiences are the foundation of Religion: the
source from which the great religious scriptures of the world have been compiled.
- The mystical experience is the true source of Religion, with records of the lofty
spiritual experiences attained by certain spiritual leaders being recorded (using
highly symbolic imagery) and passed down as “religious scripture”.
- Some equate the mystical experience as the encounter of self-consciousness with
a mysterious condition of “pure subjective awareness”: a transcendent state of
unified Consciousness in which the world of individualized forms, bodies, minds,
and personalities sink away and a transcendent, highly abstract state of “Pure
Consciousness” emerges that is entirely subjective, formless, and universal in its
scope and quality.
It is a fact of human psychology that this experience is possible for a human being to
attain. Most have not attained it and are not aware they have the potential to. But a
select few have attained it and Religion is the institutional legacy left behind by
those groups who once perpetuated the secret knowledge of how to attain this
experience and what was revealed once one had.
- All great systems of Religion have been compiled through the same essential
pathway: Things begin with a revelation in Consciousness, then expand into the
28 of 218

Does one interpret this image figuratively or
literally?
In literal terms, it appears to represent someone
praying to a power outside of themselves,
something “out there” and “beyond”.
But if we psychologize the image and view it as a
mystical diagram, then the image takes on a
different tone of meaning. Here, the praying man
represents the “lower self” - the bodily self, which is
drive by an untamed ego-identity complex and an
associated set of undisciplined animalistic desires
and urges. The all-seeing Eye that the lower self is
kneeling toward, praying to represents the Universal
Self: the field of Unified Consciousness which exists
as the single creative power behind the existence of
the Universe.
When the Light of the latter shines upon the human,
a transcendent state of “God Consciousness” is
attained. This state of unified consciousness equates
to the Samadhi state of Yogic philosophy. According
to reports, when one attains it, one knows of
Oneness and nothing else.
formation of an organization (like a church or sect) dedicated to preserving the
lessons of that revelation, before finally, after the span of generations, becoming
institutionalized as the religious way of life among an entire culture of people.
- Note that steps two and three arise only after the onset of the first: the initial
revelation of mystical knowledge from within.
- The significance of this is that all other aspects of Religion - all the outer persons,
symbols, and myths, and organizations it flows into - emerge only after the onset
of an initial catalyzing event: a mystic revelation of knowledge.
In this way, Religion’s motion of unfoldment moves from within, outward: it begins as
an experience of Consciousness and Mind before eventually becoming
institutionalized within the body of a civilization through a variety of cultural
mechanisms and forms.
- As an experience of Consciousness, Religion provides the Mind with a rare form
of knowledge that is intuitive, emotional, and transcendental in nature.
- It is a type of knowledge that can only come when one has had the all-
encompassing experience of ego-transcendence: of being alive in a state that
transcends the boundary of one’s normal sense of individualized selfhood.
- Once such a mind-altering state of experience has been released as a mystic
revelation, knowledge of the encounter is retained with the Psyche as a special
form of knowledge - an “Esoteric” form.
Religion begins and ends with the individual undergoing an intimate and abstract
psychological encounter with the transcendent reality Universal Consciousness.
- Religion begins and ends as a personal and private experience of God-
Consciousness.
- In between, it moves through a variety of outward forms, where it moves out into
society, is institutionalized in a variety of forms, where gradually some find it, put
the puzzle together, and find the treasure hidden at the end of the maze.
The typical organizational pattern that the inner aspect of Religion manifests through
29 of 218

“At the cradle of all great religions were visionary
experiences of their founders, prophets, saints, and
even ordinary followers. All major spiritual scriptures
… are based on direct personal revelations. Once
religions become organized, it often completely
loses the connection with its spirit flsoruce and
becomes a secular institution.”
- Stan Grof, The Cosmic Game
is the Guru-disciple-relationship. , it begins with a Guru, moves to disciples, who
then one day work to become Gurus themselves.
- The most immediate institutionalized form that Religion takes is the simple
relationship bond between a Guru and their disciples, where a single master of
the Esoteric arts and sciences gradually instructs and initiates a small group of
disciples to the vital knowledge they need in order to release the Esoteric
experience as a reality within their own Psyches.
- While they work at this, these disciples instruct and manage a a larger, outside
group of students, who, one by one, gradually graduate into the ranks of the inner
group.
- From these simple and humble beginnings, Religion gradually adopts more and
more complex and material outward forms, ones which “clothe” the inner truths of
Religion in more complex and elaborate layers of symbolism and organizational
bureaucracy.
The outer forms of Religion serve the purpose of ensuring that religion remains
institutionalized within the human Psyche as a permanent aspect of consciousness.
- Religious organizations such as churches and mosques serve the function of
cementing religious symbolism and ritual into society as a permanent aspect of
the collective consciousness of the group.
- These organizations do not hold the key to the inner, psychological aspect of
religion, however - the place where the real treasures are found.
The majority of the population engage with Religion primarily through its outer
forms. As of yet, relatively few pursue the path of actually trying to obtain the inner,
mystical dimension to it.
- It is the function of the outer forms of the institution to preserve, within the
collective mind-space of society, religion’s legacy of symbols, myths, rituals, and
ethics so that, in time, the inner, psychological core of the institution can be
rediscovered from these remnants of knowledge which have been perpetuated..
30 of 218
 - None of religion's outer forms can adequately capture or represent its vital, inner,
psychological core. Instead, they can only serve to remind us of its potential
availability as an experience of Consciousness.
- Religion’s outer garments can help remind and inspire us toward pursuing this
inner experience for ourselves. But membership in an organization, participation
in a ritual, or belief in a symbol can never take the place of the experience itself.

Unlike with Religion, the knowledge that Science generates is obtained from its
3 . An ti t he sis : S c i e n c e
study of the world “out there”: the “outward facing” world of material forms, objects,
and forces. In other words: the environment. Nature.

- The experimental data that the scientist analyzes is originally sourced from their
environment and comes to them only by means of their physical senses.
- This is an “outward-in” path of orientation: the source of Science's knowledge,
such as the data it generates in its experiments, doesn’t come from within (except
for in certain realms of psychological research, which is a special case). Rather, its
knowledge base comes from “without” - i.e. from the scientist’s environment.

As an institution, Science is responsible for cultivating, disseminating, and

perpetuating knowledge attained from observation of that natural world: of Nature
and the physical bodies and forces that comprise it.
- Science’s focus is on labeling, categorizing, and describing the structures,
processes, and forces that underly the manifestation of material reality.

- It’s interest is in the form and structure of things: it wants to describe the world in
terms of names, symbols, categories, taxonomies, models, frameworks, etc.
- Its methods are highly intellectual: it analyzes, compares, contrasts, evaluates,
reasons, quantifies, measures, models, hypothesizes.

The mechanism that Science uses to produce its knowledge is one that is well known
(though not necessarily well understood): the “Scientific Method”.

31 of 218
 - The Scientific Method describes a well-defined guideline of practices and rituals
that a community of scientists act out together.
- The purpose of this method is to organize scientific activity such that, out of its
collective processes, a scientific model comprised of evidence-based theories can
be constructed and disseminated at the community level.

- The theoretical models that scientists produce from this method are constantly
evolving: models come into existence, then become overturned, before being
reconstructed into better, more detailed iterations.
- One research program’s findings become the basis upon which further research
studies are devised, where the process is once again reproduced. A recursive
loop is thus established: models inspire research, which produces new theories,
which then transform old models, which then inspire new research programs, etc.

Science’s is grounded the use of the body's physical senses: a data set is held to be
objective to the extent that a group of persons, each with their own sense
mechanisms, can experience the facts of that data set in common.
- The act of conducting an experiment is, for the scientist, a process of using the
physical senses in order to gather and extract certain desired bits of information
from the scientists’ material environment.

- While the intellectual process of analyzing the results of an experiment may take
The above diagram illustrates the various stages place within the internal psychology of the scientist, the data that fuels this
involved when a scientist carries out the Scientific cognitive analysis comes from outside the boundaries of their the scientist’s own
Method. physical being.
Notice that in Science, the dominant orientation of
knowledge production is from the “outside-in”.
- Before the intellect of the scientist can touch a set of experimental data - i.e.
before it can enter their mind-space for processing - the data has to be “brought
into” their Psyche via the mechanism of their physical senses.

- If an instrument has recorded it, they must physically read the data that has been
recorded. If they themselves recorded the data, then they had to directly observe
and catalogue the phenomenon being studied. Either way, the knowledge comes
into their system from a sense-based, “outward-in” orientation.

32 of 218

The peer-review process of Science requires a
collective group working together in order to take
place. Without this group-oriented process, a
scientific theory is incomplete. Science therefore
re q u i re s t h e s o c i a l c o n t e x t o f a n e n t i re
organizational infrastructure in order to be
successfully carried out.
G.
“Spirituality is based on direct experiences of non
ordinary dimensions of reality and does not
necessarily require a special place or an officially
appointed person mediating contact with the
Divine. It involves a special kind of relationship
between the individual and the cosmos and is, in
essence, a personal and private affair.”
- Stan Grof, The Cosmic Game
Science is always pursued as a collective endeavor: the attraction of Science is
based on the fact that the conclusions it reaches can be made objective to the
community at large: anyone can potentially come in and verify the knowledge for
themselves.
- The whole enterprise of Science is grounded in the idea that the knowledge it
generates is “objective” in the sense that other scientists in ones peer group
should be able to observe the methodology of the experiment and reproduce it
independently, of their own accord.
- The Scientific Method is not something that can be completed by an individual
alone: a research experiment is only meaningful if its findings are able to be
reproduced and verified by others.
- “Peer review” is one of the fundamental elements of the scientific process: if a
scientist claims that a research experiment supports their theory, then other
scientists should be able to reproduce that same experiment and verify that
conclusion.
This entire enterprise is notably different than the method of knowledge attainment
we find in Religion.
- Religion, in its roots, is subjective in nature; meaning it is is highly personal,
private, and psychological.
- Its method of revelation begins within and moves outward, meaning it originates
in Consciousness before gradually becoming embodied in various institutional
forms and guises.
Unlike with Science, the essence of Religion can be had without the infrastructure of
a tightly coordinated organization. (G)
- Science is fundamentally a collective endeavor, requiring the willing participation
of numerous scientists working in active coordination with each other in order to
work.
- While Religion does become embodied in organizational forms, at heart it is
fundamentally an individual experience.
33 of 218
 - Participation in and allegiance to a religious organization is not required for the
religious experience to take place with the Psyche of the individual.
- Religious organizations serve an important social function, but the core
psychological element that all religious systems are based on is not something
that is dependent upon any of outward-facing organizational or institutional forms
for its release.

- In Science, an entire organizational apparatus is required, for the reason that the
research process is not complete until the scientist’s research methods and
reasoning process has gone through a formal process of being peer reviewed
and successfully replicated by a community of other scientists working in tandem
with each other.

In sum, Religion and Science are antitheses, representing two integrated yet
opposing forms of knowledge that are innately different, yet are inseparably bound
together within the psychology of the individual.

- While the true focus of Religion is on Man’s inner life, Science’s primary focus is on
understanding and mapping the structures and dynamics of Man’s outer world.
- As we will see, it is the purpose of Philosophy to unite the two: bringing them into
communication with each other so that each can facilitate the development of the
other. In this way, Philosophy’s method is equilibration: attempts always to
balance opposites together such that a synergy of function can be gradually
brought out between them.

4 . Syn t hes i s: Ph i l o s op h y The perfection of the religious experience - the ability to cultivate it at will and to
perfect its release within Consciousness - is the ultimate end-goal that Philosophy
seeks to attain.

- For the philosopher, Science is meant to assist in this process: it is meant to fine-
tune Man’s knowledge of the laws of Nature so that this knowledge of Law may be
applied to the task of bettering Man’s own relationship with Life.

34 of 218
- This includes bettering mankind’s relationship with the other kingdom’s of life that
exist on this planet and out there in the universe - i.e. becoming more sustainable
on a planet that can no longer tolerate our selfish ignorance.
- But it also includes our relationship with the Unity of Consciousness that underlies
our own psychologies. The boundaries of Science are not just limited to the world
of Nature. Through Psychology, we can also study in the internal world of Mind.

- Science is a single institution: a single collective endeavor that all its various sub-
disciplines are a part of. Together, these various disciplines are meant to produce
a body of knowledge that mankind can use to better itself as a life form on this
planet.
- By using science to better Man as a species, Philosophy indirectly leads the
individual who follows its program of self-betterment to unfold, within the
recesses of their own Psyche, the mysteries of the inward religious experience.

- In this way, Science is a means to achieving the ends of Religion. Sicence is not an
end in itself; it is a process. A method that is meant to serve a specific function and
purpose on behalf of a greater master. It is, at root, a “handmaiden”; a servant to
the task of cultivating and releasing “true” religious knowledge.

Science is, at heart, a methodology for organizing knowledge and making it

objective. It is not a single, set system of ideas or beliefs; it is a way of “pruning”
knowledge - of discarding what is incorrect so that “correct” ideas - theories that are
“on the right track" - can be built upon and connected together to form models and
frameworks.

- Scientific knowledge is communicated as theories. As theories, its knowledge is

always understood to exist in a relative state: it is always subject to revision,
refinement, and occasionally overturning.
- Science is more about a method for how to organize knowledge that it is about a
set group of ideas. This is because scientific ideas are always changing.

35 of 218
- In Science, change is encouraged: we always want to be iterating toward better
and better models, frameworks, and theories of how Nature and the Cosmos
work.
- Science’s objective is to facilitate the creative destruction of knowledge by
emphasizing a method whereby knowledge can continually be “pruned” by the
community at large. In this way, Science allows Mankind to standardize and make
objective its knowledge such that it can be reliably trusted and used be a large of
people.

Science alone cannot give us meaning or provide us with vision. It is not meant to! It
is meant to be a methodology.
- It doesn’t tell us what is true of the world; it refines the hypotheses that we
continuously formulate as we are forever trying to find the answer to the question
“what is truth?”.

- At heart, Science describes a methodology for producing an experiment and

having the results of that experiment double checked by others.
- As an institution it standardizes a collective procedure by means of which
knowledge can be made objective to the community at large.

- Science does not produce belief systems in its own right. In fact, its continuously
tearing down belief systems.
- The frameworks of knowledge that schools of scientists come together to create
are constantly be revised, overthrown, and rebuilt. Nothing is safe from potential
revision.

The institution of Science is always embedded alongside other institutions which

also influence and sway the psychology of the individual.
- The influence that scientific thinking has on the Psyche of the individual is in
constant competition with other factors.

36 of 218
C.
Psychologist and scholar of ancient Philosophy
Stanislav Grof confirms the relationship between
mysticism, meditation, and science” to be real:
“The mystical traditions and spiritual philosophies
of the past have often been dismissed and even
ridiculed for being ‘irrational’ and ‘unscientific’.
This is an uninfor med judgment that is
unwarranted and unjustified. Many of the great
spiritual systems are products of centuries of in-
depth exploration of the human psyche and
consciousness that in many ways resembles
scientific research.
“These systems offer detailed instructions
concerning the methods of inducing spiritual
experiences on which they base their philosophical
speculations. They have systematically collected
data drawn from these experiences and subjected
them to collective consensus validation, usually
over a period fo many centuries. These are exactly
the stages necessary for achieving valid and
reliable knowledge in any area of scientific
endeavor.” (The Cosmic Game, p.3-4)
- A scientist is not just a scientist and that’s it. They may also be a father, an activist, a
Christian, a Muslim, a practitioner of martial arts, a musician, etc. These other
identities have an affect on the scientist's mind-state and worldview.
- So when a scientist interprets the results of an experiment, when they are creating
a theory, or when they are forming a model, these other cognitive influences will
inevitably color, sway, and bias how the scientist view and interprets their
experiment.
Scientists are not blank slates or neutral parties. Just like with any human, their
psychological mind-states can be influences and swayed by a variety of factors
besides cool, calculating scientific reason.
- For example, if a scientist has already adopted a position of atheism in respect to
the institution of Religion, then that atheism will color the way they understand
what they are looking at when they observe and analyze an experiment.
- Likewise, if a scientist is a religious person or a mystic, that relation with Religion
will inevitably influence how they understand and view they scientific work they
are doing.
Philosophy enters the picture as a mediating party: it “psychologizes” both Religion
and Science so that they can be intermingled and blended together within the
internal space of one’s own Psyche.
- Philosophy takes the approach of treating Religion as a Science: it sees Religion as
a state of transcendent Conscious experience whose dynamics of operation and
release can be studied and modeled with scientific rigor.
- Once successfully carried out, philosophy’s scientific program of meditation is
revealed as the secret, inner science of religion - meaning, the science of how to
unfold the “true religion”: the inward experience of Universal Consciousness.
When the philosopher-scientist encounters the transcendent experience of
Universal Consciousness, they find the true source of Religion.
37 of 218
- All mystics find that the inner, religious experience culminates in the same
ultimate end state: Unity.
- Unity is the same for all because it is Unity.
- In the end, there is only one thing to experience: Oneness. There is no other end
state possible.

The task of the Philosopher has always been to deliberately catalyze a

transformation of their own state of self-consciousness.

- The fact that this transformation can be accomplished gives Mankind a

psychological basis to its institutions of Religion. And the fact that their is an exact
method to how this transformation can be accomplished is actually the
institutional basis of Science.
- Man exists in order to seek enlightenment. These potentials are granted within us
as God-given attributes so that we can learn to use them intelligently and
responsibly.

Philosophy is ultimately about the accomplishment of works:

- Philosophy seeks to develop a program for enlightened living that is guided by
religious motivations but which, at the same time, is committed to utilizing the full
spectrum of scientific knowledge available to it.

- Religion and Science each generate a specific type of knowledge, while

Philosophy utilizes the knowledge that they generate in order to accomplish its
works.
- Philosophy’s motivation for action is driven by its desire to participate in the
fulfillment of a “Great Work” - a “Divine Master Plan”, which the philosopher
perceives themselves as participating in as an essential component.

- The aims of this “Great Work” are: the perfection of Mind as an instrument of
Consciousness, the perfection of the Body as an instrument of the Mind, and the
perfection of Nature as the living temple of God, the Divine Self.

38 of 218
In order to achieve this “Great Work”, the philosopher must develop an intelligent
relationship with both their physical anatomy as well as their inner psychology.
- Each - the physical and mental - must be cultivated and brought into fulfillment,
while also being balanced and equilibrated with its counterpart.

- To achieve this balancing, the philosopher must remain open and receptive to
religious experience while also staying disciplined to the methods of Science.
Both are required; success cannot be achieved without the full participation of
each.

Simply put, Philosophy is about learning to live according to Law.

- All life forms, human or otherwise, are governed by Law. This Law specifies both:
a) what the ideal form of Man looks like and b) what the path is that each must
cross in order that this archetypal state be manifested as a reality within one's own
life.
- When one lives according to Law, one’s inner and outer lives are brought into
harmony and fulfillment. The achievement of this balanced end-state is the
ultimate mission of Philosophy: it is the single, long-term objective that all of
Philosophy’s many labors are oriented in pursuit of.

- The whole reason Philosophy seeks to develop a self-improvement program for

Man is so that, through it, a reasonable, intelligent, harmonious, and “sustainable”
way of life can be established - one that is fully in line with the dictates of Nature’s
Law and God’s Plan.

In sum, Philosophy’s institutional purpose is to function as the mediator between

Religion and Science: the former the custodian of Man's relationship to the inner
realms of the Psyche and the latter the custodian of Man’s knowledge concerning
the Laws of Nature and Body.

- Philosophy takes religious knowledge about the inner, metaphysical domains of

Mind and blends it with scientific knowledge about the outer, physical
environment of Body.

39 of 218
 - It then integrates the two and applies the new, holistic perspective it has
generated toward the task of formulating and carrying out a strategy for
accomplishing within themselves the Great Work of human self-transformation.
- In this way, Philosophy “synthesizes” Religion and Science: it is a common ground
where knowledge from both pathways is brought together and distilled into a
practical and actionable program for enlightened living.

5 . D is cu ss i on an d 1) Framing Religion, Science, and Philosophy as Institutions

An a l y s is The basis of this chapter’s analysis of Philosophy, Religion, and Science is to frame
them as three overlapping institutions which together are responsible for managing
Mankind’s collective storehouse of knowledge and wisdom.
- The key to understanding this approach is to develop a solid understanding of
what “institutions” are and how they work.

- If you can understand how institutions work, then you can understand how
Religion, Science, and Philosophy each manifests its influence within the collective
mind-space of society.

The institution concept is derived primarily from the social sciences, Sociology in
particular. It is based around the notion that human behavior is organized into large-
scale, intergenerational social patterns called “institutions”.

- Institutions are stable, long-term, large-scale patterns of human activity that

perpetuate inter-generationally within and between human communities on a
wide-spread, collective level.
- They describe collective patterns in thought, emotion, and behavior which
gradually change and evolve over large periods of time and space. They influence
A classic textbook on institutions by sociologist
W. Richard Scott.
all aspect of human psychology and manifest themselves objectively in the
collective behavior that a cultural group exhibits over a long-term and large-scale
timeframe.

40 of 218
Institutions are innately psychological: they are an innate component of the
psychology of our species..
- Institutions are not shared in the psychological patterns of other species in Nature
(just as their psychologies aren’t part of our pattern).

- Other species on earth don’t “see” our institutions. They are only meaningful to us
and they are only available to our cognition.
- They are held exclusively in the mind-space of human beings; no other creature is
capable of cognizing them.

Institutions “over-soul” human life: we never exist outside of a circumstance in which

institutions are present.
- The relationship between the individual and the institution is one of a part to a
whole: Bees are bound together by their hives, birds by their flocks, and humans
by their institutions.

- Institutions quietly govern, organize, and cohere Mankind’s vast, highly complex
system of social organization into place.
- In short, they hold up and support civilization Atlas-like. Because of them, society
is able to maintain itself as a stable, globally-integrated system of tightly
coordinated human activity.

In order for a human’s neurological and mental architecture to be brought into a

state of interconnection necessary for the individual to participate in the
complexities of modern society, institutions have to be present as guiding forces.
- Consider the institution of language: without having access to a dynamic modern
language, an individual cannot hope to participate in the functions of modern
civilized life.

- Because institutions in general (not just language) interface so closely with the
collective life of the species, they can be thought of as the “psychological
backbone” of civilization. They collectively regulate the human “hive mind”,
bringing it into stable yet highly complex patterns of self-organization.

41 of 218

D.
I like this quote from Fritjof Capra, which describes
the information feedback loops that influence how
institutions manifest their influence (slightly
paraphrased):
“(The institutions behind human culture are)
created by a social network involving multiple
feedback loops through which values, beliefs, and
rules of conduct are continually communicated,
modified, and sustained. (These institutions)
emerge from a network of communication among
individuals; as it emerges, it (feeds back on itself)
to (gradually evolve) how it produces constrains on
their actions.” (The Systems View of Life, p.310)
The overarching function of institutions is to organize and shape the psychological
patterns, behaviors, and motivations of large groups of individuals such that their
actions will integrate and align at a large-scale, aggregate level.
- Institutions align the way one person cognizes the world with the way that others
in their community cognize it. Because of them, human cognition is able to be
aligned and coordinated at a wide-spread, potentially even global level.
- In this way, institutions transform humanity from a mass of isolated, self-interested
individuals to a well-organized body of citizens intentionally (or even more often
unintentionally) working together to build the architecture of a collective
civilization.
Institutions bind each of us as parts into the ongoing flow of human civilization as a
collective whole.
- History’s story is the story of the unfoldment, development, and evolution of
institutions. In a way, humans are just the means of carrying out the drama of this
unfolding story institutional evolution.
- When we look back at history, we don't really care that much about the individual
stories; we care more about the overall patterns that are playing out through
those individuals.
- Individual people are only important to the degree that they have participated in
unfolding a greater collective motion of society.
Within the long historical timeframe of Mankind as a whole, innumerable
generations of humans have entered and existed. Societies have risen and fallen,
and social patterns have come and gone. But one great unfolding pattern of
institutions have remained constant throughout.
- All social patterns unfold within the collective social space that institutions uphold.
- They are the pillars that uphold civilization. They together form the backdrop for
the unfolding drama of human life: they form the stage and backdrop upon which
the numerous acts in the evolving drama of human life sequentially come and go.
42 of 218
 - How do institutions maintain this social space? They do so by maintaining the
solidity of a civilization’s collective sense of self-identity and narrative between its
people and across generations.
- Through this means, institutions exert their influence: they govern the large-scale
psychological patterns of the species, dictating how human life cognitively
unfolds itself across the face of the globe and throughout the centuries an of
history. into inter-generational patterns.

2) Institutions as the Focus of Social Science / Sociology

The theory of Institutions has been constructed by modern social scientists for the
principle purpose of explaining what social structures are, how their underlying
dynamics work, how they impact the overall architecture of society, etc.
- Within the realm of the social sciences, the study of social structures is primarily
done under the auspices of Sociology.

- At root, sociologists are interested in how the human species behaves on a

species-wide scale. They study society as a collective phenomenon. To them, it is a
part of Nature - one of Nature’s many branches that is scientists are able to study
using their patented Scientific Method.

When sociologists observe and model the dynamics of human social organization,
they find that social structures called “institutions” organize and govern things on the
largest collective scales.

- The great value of social science's “institution” concept is to emphasize the idea
that the human Mind is not something that exists purely at the individual and
personal level. There is also a collective, interpersonal dimension: the dimension
of institutions.
- Institutions represent a fundamentally collective dimension to human psychology,
one that acts “top-down” over each individual, guiding and shaping the motion of
each’s own personal cognitive development.

43 of 218
 - Through institutions, the human mind demonstrates a collective mode of
functioning which acts “top-down” over the individual and personal levels,
bringing groups of individuals into like-minded psychological states that can be
coordinated and integrated together to produce coherent patterns of large-scale
social organization.

As a theory, the institution concept has been highly successful: in fact, it is perhaps
the centerpiece of the entire discipline, with basically the entire architecture of the
discipline's body of theory being built around it.

The foundation of modern sociology is to frame - The presence of institutions as an operative psychological force behind the social
society as a vast, multi-tiered social network. life of Man can be confirmed in all civilizations, societies, nations, and tribes: when
Individual humans are the nodes of this network,
humans live in collective group patterns, institutions are always present.
while the links that connect them represent
patterns of relationship they share with one - Because of this undeniable fact, sociology has embraced the concept as the
another.
foundation of their discipline. Though sociology has not been unified as a
There are numerous tiers to this vast social completely integrated body of science, the majority of its different schools
network: its complexity is truly staggering. It is
everywhere present: at the largest, global
embrace the theory of “institutions” as one of their core tenets.
scales, at the smallest, local ones, and
everywhere in between.
Individual nodes of this network (people) are 3) An Important Caveat About Studying Institutions
connected together to form a hierarchy of
interconnected structures called organizations. There is a subtle but important challenge to studying institutions that confronts each
Society as a whole is one vast cumulative sociologist as they set out to examine them:
organization comprised of numerous specialized
sub-organizations that are nested together at a - Before any social scientist ever put forward a theory about institutions, institutions
variety of scales. The situation is exactly already existed: they were already bringing society into organization.
analogous to the body and its organ systems.
At the uppermost scale of this pattern are
- The scientists who have emerged to describe and theorize about institutions are
institutions .These describe the major functional already a product of their influence: one theorizes about institutions always from
areas that the social network is divided into. In within the present circumstance of being currently influenced and affected by
the diagram above, institutions are not
them.
illustrated by any one group of nodes but rather
describe how and why the overall pattern of - The point being: one cannot ever step outside institutions in order to study them
clusters are organized in the way that they are.
in a completely detached and objective manner.
They equate to the “chakra” concept of ancient
Indian philosophy, only applied to the collective - This is not a situation we choose; it is one we inherit - part of the way Nature
Psyche of Man rather than the individual.

44 of 218
 designed humans to function.

C.
Capra describes how institutions interface with the 4) Institutionalization: How Institutions Move Into and Influence Individuals
sense-making process of groups and individuals
Institutions direct individuals into adopting ways of thinking, feeling, and “making
alike:
sense of the world” that align with the patterns exhibited by others in their social
“(As a result of institutions, there can emerge) a milieu.
shared body of knowledge - including information,
ideas, and skills - that shapes the culture’s - When a group of people share a pattern of institutions in common, they find
distinctive way of life in addition to its values and themselves bound together, living in a shared social world.
beliefs. … (This shared knowledge base profoundly
shapes) the lens through which we see the world. - When this happens, people assimilate into adopting a common method of
(It) helps us to interpret experiences and to decide
cognizing Reality: they learn to see and respond to the content of life experience
what kind of knowledge is meaningful.
in similar, compatible ways. In this way, institutions allow groups of individuals to
“This meaningful knowledge … is passed on from develop and share a common way of seeing and making sense of the world. (C)
generation to generation together with the
culture’s values, beliefs, and rules of conduct. … The process through which institutions flow into the Psyche of the individual,
(This) system of shared beliefs creates an identity contouring their minds so that they perceive themselves to exist within a shared
among members of the social network baed on
social reality with others around them, is one that sociologist’s term
their (shared) sense of belonging. People in
different cultures have different identities because institutionalization.
they share different sets of values and beliefs (in
common).” (Systems View…, p. 310-11)
- Institutionalization is the subtle psychological mechanism by means of which
institutions “move into” and begin shaping the mind-space and worldview of the
individual.

- Institutionalization innately happens through conformity: one imitates the way

others talk, behave, think, and react. In so doing, ones begins to recreate the same
institutionalized behaviors that one’s parents, ancestors, and neighbors exhibit.

This process of cultural imitation and behavioral assimilation “greases the wheels” of
human social organization.

- Through institutionalization, people are shepherded into adopting common

patterns of thinking, behaving, and acting.
- This is something that often takes place subconsciously: it doesn’t have to happen
by force or conscious intention. Rather, it is primarily instinctual: people voluntarily

45 of 218
 want to “fit in” so they imitate the norms, routines, and methods of others in their
social surroundings. These imitation patterns become in-printed and ingrained in
the mental patterns of the individual, and the effortlessly begin reproducing them
in their daily activities.

Through the method of institutionalization, institutions “oversoul” the process of

human cognitive development. They shape the “developmental matrix” in which
each person’s process of mental growth and development takes place.

- Humans are innately “institutionalized” such that each developing infant and
adolescent is subconsciously tethered to a greater set of psychological patterns
playing out with the collective mind-space of a larger social group.
- In development, as the human child engages with their social environment, it
learns “how to do things” and “the way things are done around here”. This is the
sure-fire sign of institutionalization, where one internalizes and reproduces a set of
psychological and behavioral patterns, which one learns from observing and
imitating the behaviors of others in their social environment.

- By adopting and acting out the same institutionalized routines and behaviors that
others do, the individual participates in also giving life to those institutions; they
embody them as they enact them in the routines, encounters, and events of their
daily life.
- By assimilating oneself to the influence of institutional patterns (something that,
again, happens largely subconsciously), one becomes living ambassador of them,
carrying them forward through time and space.

5) Case Study: Language as an Institution

One of Man’s key institutions is Language.

- Language is an institution: a long-term, large-scale pattern of human
psychological activity that humans “carry forth” through the act of thinking it,
speaking it, writing it, and hearing it.

46 of 218

The Mind is always enmeshed in world of
symbolism and language, starting from the
earliest stages of embryonic development.
- As with all institutions, langue exists and perpetuates not only at the individual
level but also at the level of the collective.
- While individual embodies the institution in their life patterns, it is in collective
mind-space of the group that the institution ultimately resides
The individual human mind is “institutionalized” to language: from the outset of its
development, the Mind of the infant is enmeshed and entangled in a world of
words, grammar, logic, symbols, ideas, values, and narratives.
- Language is imprinted upon the Mind at the earliest stages of human life; the
Mind never has an opportunity to exist without it.
- From the moment it starts growing and developing, language is there to serve as
a top-down organizing influence on our Psyches. It seeps into the Mind and
influences how its neural and symbolic architectures piece themselves together
during our infancy and childhood.
- In time, as the human develops, its Mind becomes completely absorbed in
language. Language becomes a type of scaffolding that the Mind utilizes in order
to build itself out and bring itself into order and organization.
- Through language, Mankind is able to generate advanced systems of cognition,
emotion, and narrative self-identity - all vital attributes of modern human
civilization.
Based on the cognitive resources of Language, the human mind is able to bring
itself into a stable yet highly complex pattern of internal self-organization.
- Without the availability of this vital psychological resource - one that can be
obtained only by exposure to other individuals who are actively manifesting the
institution by speaking it — the nervous system of the developing child would be
unable to construct itself in a way befitting a normal, well-adjusted citizen of
society.
- Without language, the individual is cut off from being able to express themselves
to others and to, in turn, learn from them: to communicate with them and to draw
from the knowledge that they possess.
47 of 218

E.
By coordinating the way humans make sense of
the world, institutions align the way we internalize
the meaning of group experiences:
“Meaning is essential to human beings.
continually need to make sense of our outer
inner worlds, find meaning in our environment
in our relationships with other human beings,
act according to that meaning.” (Capra,
Systems View of Life, p.309)
Language allows for shared sense-making to emerge within a group: it provides a
basis for the development of shared systems of logic, symbolism, narrative, and
myth between people in a community.
- Language, once institutionalized within the Psyche of a collective, provides a
common reservoir of knowledge of sense-making resource (ideas, logics, and
imagery) that anyone within the social group can draw from and adopt.
- These linguistic resources have the effect of conforming and cohering the mind-
states of individuals who internalize them.
- They are the key cognitive feature which makes complex forms of social
organization possible. Without these linguistic mechanisms, humans would not be
able to coordinate themselves into large-scale patterns of “hive activity”.
Civilization is based on cooperative living: this can arise only when individuals
believe they are living in a “shared reality”: a shared social space where one person
can psychologically communicate and engage with other like-minded individuals
around them. (E)
- Language offers the means by which this “shared reality” can be organized and
communicated between the Psyches of large networks of individuals.
- For this above reason - because it tethers the individual to the collective in a
We fundamental way - language is an ideal example of an institution. The
and psychological pattern of language “lives” in the body of the collective, yet its
and existence is entirely dependent upon the ability of humans to adopt its rules and
and
The
“carry it forward” through their own individual thoughts, beliefs, behaviors, and
actions.
- This is not only true of language, it is equally true of all institutions, including
Religion, Philosophy, and Science: each are carried forward and maintained by
the collective, while also having a highly personal and significant impact on the
psychology of each person who internalizes their perspective.
6) The Importance of Institutions to the Fabric of Human Civilization
48 of 218

Institutions subconsciously align the thoughts, behaviors,
and motivations of large groups of people. Through
them, the complex “hive” dynamics of city life is able
emerge at a collective scale.
As overviewed above, institutions are the central coordinating mechanism behind
the collective psychology of Man, binding the personal psychology of the individual
to the collective psychology of the group.
- Global society exists as a vast orchestration of globally interconnected and
synchronized psychological activity. Institutions are the means by which the whole
activity is brought into a coherent pattern of top-down organization.
- Through institutions, the innumerable isolated moments of each individual’s day
are aligned and synchronized with those unfolding moments of other person’s
day in their social environment.
- This coordination takes place primarily largely as a subconscious, instinctual
process, similar to the way that bird subconsciously coordinate their behavior
when they fly as a flock or how ants instinctually self-coordinate their activities in
order to build and operate a colony.
The degree of precision with which institutions are able to guide and shape human
behavior on a mass scale is truly remarkable.
- From the standpoint of the individual, the motions of society may appear random.
But when one zooms out and takes a birds eye view, an entirely different picture
emerges.
- The data-driven models used by modern economic and financial analysts,
corporate strategists, and military planners are all rooted in the incredible stability
that human behavior evidences on an aggregate, global scale.
From the sum of the innumerable private and seemingly random moments that
together comprise the daily life pattern of each individual, an incredibly complex
and highly stable pattern of collective social organization is able to arise at the
aggregate level.
- Mankind produced and reproduces civilization every day as a continual ritual. This
ritual moves gradually in daily cycles to become weeks, which in turn becomes,
months, which in turn becomes years, and so forth.
49 of 218
- Our civilization produces and reproduces itself cyclically out of the seemingly
unorganized and unconnected life patterns of billions of individuals.
- What to each person seems like a trivial day aggregates out in the collective to
form a highly integrated and synchronized pattern of collective behavior and
activity.

There is a clear synchronicity behind the way human life fits together on a collective
scale.
- Everyday, 7 billion humans wake up and unintentionally play their part in order
that, with each rotation of the earth, a daily cycle of “civilization” is once more
repeated anew.

- The vast majority are not self-conscious that they are participating in enacting the
unfoldment of this global “hive mind”. Most are not playing their part willingly, but
they nonetheless play it out. Every day, the deed gets done.

The patterns of global “hive" activity that humans generate can be observed to
operate at multiple of scales of existence:

- The collective psychological patterns of Man reveal themselves in daily, weekly,

seasonal, yearly, decade-long, century-long, and millennia-long patterns.
- These patterns organize human life inter-generationally: they persist, generation
after generation, requiring no pre-meditated effort from the vast majority of
people in order to maintain their reach of influence, as their life patterns play out
within a realm of human psychology that is largely unconscious.

These patterns manifest at varying sizes and scales:

- A basketball team is a form of “hive activity”. So is a local bakery. So is a military
unit, a corporation, a nation state, a transnational banking enterprise, or a global
NGO.

- Organizations exist in all shapes, forms, types, and areas of specialization. Where
ever humans exist in stable, long-term group pattern, organizations are being
formed to carry out the vital activities of the collective.

50 of 218
 - Always, these organizations exist by means of institutions, which corral, organize,
and integrate the psychological worldviews of the organization’s myriad
constituent members.
- Society is one big organization; each organization a mini society. Through
institutions, both are brought into being.

Institutions are clearly much more powerful and influential factors in human
psychology that most currently give them credit for.
- Human civilization is impossible to understand without considering the top-down
influence that institutions have on it.

- Human life is always held in their sway: for a human to be well-adapted to the
social and environmental circumstances that confront them, they must be
“baptized” with the collective heritage of knowledge that institutions permeate
within their structures .

7) Institutions, Organizations, and Individuals: the Three Principle Elements of the

Human Hive Mind

Individuals, organizations, and institutions together form a Trinity: they are the three
primary elements that human civilization is built from.

- The triangular nature of their relationship is as follows:

a) Institutions are maintained at the level of the collective. All individuals interface
with them through organizations, the social “vehicle” of institutions.

b) While institutions are operating at the level of the collective, at the level of the
individual a more personal experience of Mind is taking place. Each individual
expression of Mind interfaces directly with the nervous system of the body, while
also being “epigenetically” or circumstantially influenced by targeted triggers
acting upon it from sources originating in their social environment.

c) Organizations exist in an intermediary zone between the world of the collective

and the world of the individual. They interface with both worlds: they are

51 of 218
 physically comprised of humans on one hand, but they are also over-souled and
directed by institutions on the other.

Simply put: institutions are embodied by organizations, while organizations are

embodied by individuals.

- Institutions organize humans into forming organizations. Organizations harness

individuals and direct them toward the ends dictated by institutions.
- Organizations embody institutions: they serve as instruments through which
institutions can organize and cohere large networks of human beings.

Institutions “reach down” and “touch” humans by means of organizational systems of

various forms, shapes, sizes, and types.
- Organizations exist at various sizes and scales. The are organized in a hierarchical
fashion, with organizations at one scale nested within a larger structure of
organizations existing at a yet greater scale.

- At the largest scale is civilization itself, which exists as one vast organizational
supersystem: a single organizational superstructure which embeds all lesser forms
of organizations within itself just as a body embeds various organs, tissues and
cells within its own internal structure.

Let’s compare the situation more specifically to that which we find in the brain:

- At the bottom or subsystemic level is the cell, which in the case of the brain is
called the neuron. In the case of civilization, it is the individual human organism.
- In the brain, neurons are linked by synapses. In society, individuals are linked by
the process of institutionalization, discussed previously.

- Above the subsystemic level of individual nodal units is the level of systems, each
of which is comprised of a cluster of cells or humans (depending on the scale)
organized into a cell-like pattern, where parts are once again arranged into the
formation of a self-reproducing whole. At this system level, these self-reproducing
wholes exist as organizational systems: stable, self-reproducing clusters of

52 of 218
 subsystems which form and organize in a hierarchal, nesting pattern of interwoven
relationships.
- In the brain, this hierarchy of systems within systems expresses itself as the various
glands, cortexes, lobes, and hemispheres of the brain In society, it manifests as an
intricate network of organizations: of local bakeries held within metropolitan
economies held within national economies held within transnational economic
trade zones held within global economic and geopolitical patterns.

- At the top of each is the level of the supersystem: where all systems at all levels
sum together to form one composite supersystem. In the brain, this is the brain
itself. In civilization, it is civilization: the species-wide pattern of social organization
that humanity as a whole exhibits as the sum of all its activities on the face of the
earth, past and present.

Organizations provide institutions with a body or vehicle in the same way that the
various compartments of the brain provide the brain itself with vehicles through
which it can communicate its holistic activity each of its component branches.

- Within the social space of society, organizations function as instruments that

institutions can harness in order to project their influence into world of individual,
embodied human beings.

Through Mankind’s hierarchy of organizations - its tribes, nations, corporations,

NGOs, etc - its institutions are given different bodily forms that they can use to
manifest their attributes through.

- As institutions evolve, the organizational forms they manifest themselves through

change along with them.
- As organizations, change, our experience of society changes. We begin to
experience its institutions differently - the changed organizations begin
manifesting a different aspect of these institutions.

In this way, as institutors evolve, organizations evolve. And as organizations evolve,

humans evolve.

53 of 218
- Furthermore, as humans evolve, institutions evolve. And as both spiral forward
around each other - the individual shaping and collective and the collective
shaping the individual - the organizational systems that comprise society also
evolve.
- In sum, change happens as a multi-tiered process of synchronization and cause-
and-effect response. When one thin changes, all other things subtly change in
response to it.

In each type of organization, individuals actively and willingly coordinate themselves

as parts so that the organization can arise as a self-reproducing whole.
- In the process of coming together to generate an organization, members of the
organizational in-group develop a tight psychological bond with each other: they
begin to adopt a common way of sensing, perceiving, and evaluating their
environment. This shared perspective is actively sustained and maintained out of
their group interactions.

- As a result of this group institutionalization process, members of the organization

develop the sense that they are living in a shared world and contributing to a
common cause. They see things from a similar perspective and worldview.
- In other words, the organization emerges as a shared reality for all members of
the group. Each individual in the organization brings this shared reality to life by
internalizing and embodying its patterns in their daily life activities.


54 of 218
 INSTITUTIONS
ORGANIZATIONS - 


INSTITUTIONS

ORGANIZATIONS
INSTITUTIONS

INDIVIDUALS

ORGANIZATIONS
INDIVIDUALS

INDIVIDUALS

Everywhere there is human life, we find institutions,

organizations, and individuals interacting together
as an integrated Trinity.

55 of 218
 Each organizational form exists in a larger social environment comprised of other
organizations. In this way, the mini shared-reality of the organization is held within
the greater shared reality of a larger civilization pattern.
- The social world of mankind is comprised bottom-up of individuals and top-down
of institutions, with organizations existing as a middle realm in between.

- Once formed, each organization becomes an autonomous actor on society’s

stage, one that features a dedicated group of individuals behind it who are
committed to working together to realize the greater goals of the organization.

Organizations are vehicles within which human agency can express itself on a big
picture, collective scale.

- Organizations are instruments of political, economic, and cultural influence and

change.
The different sectors of an organization reproduce in
miniature the different sectors of society at large. For - Through organizations, human activity at the local and individual level is able to
example, in society, we have government, while in
be linked up with activity taking place at the global, institutional level.
organizations we have management. The two are
mirror images of each other: one operating in the - Nothing happens at any scale in human society without that thing being done via
macrocosm of society, the other in the microcosm of
the organization.
the mechanism of organizations. Environmental movements; social movements;
economic movements; religious movements; scientific movements: all must
eventually find embodiment as organizational forms.

Social revolutions are really revolutions in organizational form: groups form new
patterns of organizations that try to either take the place of the older pattern or
drastically modify and transform it in fundamental ways.

- When transitions occur in the sphere of institutions, it results in the creative

destruction of the organizational forms that together constitute the cells, tissues,
and organs of a civilization pattern.
- When an institution moves into a new state of expression, all organizational forms
contained within the institution’s sphere of influence are effected.

56 of 218
 INSTITUTIONS - All types and scales of organizational forms are affected when institutions change:
whether they are corporations, nations, or local restaurants - all boats are moved
by a change in the tides.
- Civilization itself is the ultimate organizational form that is affected by institutional
ORGANIZATIONS

transitions. When institutions change, civilization itself is inevitably transformed: its

old organizational form “dying” so that a new, more evolved organizational
expression can emerge - ones capable of harnessing and revealing the powers
and potentials of institutions (and human psychology in general) in new and
unexpected ways.

In sum, when institutions evolve, the organizational forms created out of those
institutions also evolve.

INDIVIDUALS - This evolutionary progression is always marked by periods of what in the business
world is called “creative destruction”: where, as in nature, old forms die so that
new forms may be born to take their place.

- Each era of civilization produces organizational forms appropriate to its

INSTITUTIONS Transforming institutional paradigm. When the patterns underlying that paradigm change,
society’s organizational forms are forced to change and evolve alongside them.
ORGANIZATIONS Evolving

- Thus, when a society’s underlying institutional pattern shifts, the old organizational
pattern that was crystallized around the old institutional form is by necessity also
shifted from its foundations. When this happens, the architecture of the old model
is deconstructed and its elements rearranged and re-patterned into a form that
will better express the new institutional pattern.

- In this way organizations evolve in response to psychological changes that take

place at the institutional level. These institutional changes in turn manifest
themselves within the personal psychologies of the various groups and
individuals held within their sphere of influence. 

INDIVIDUAL lives in conflict and disruption

57 of 218
Transformation is natural; it marks the presence of evolution and that is undeniably
good. But at times we experience these inevitable transition processes as an intense
and often painful - but ultimately liberating - periods of conflict and struggle, one
which always, in the end, finalize in the synthesis of a resolution.
- Social conflict comes in the form of a dialectic - me vs. you, us vs. them, good vs.
bad, rich vs. poor, management vs. labor, liberal vs. conservative, etc.

- The breakthrough solution to social conflict follows in the form of a synthesis, in

which a third element enters the picture, equilibrates the two opposing conflicts,
such that, out of three working together, a new overall state of social organization
is achieved.
- Then, in this new, more advanced state, the process gradually repeats.
The synthesis that leads to the resolution of a conflict always comes through a
process of universalizing the elements involved:
- To synthesize a conflict, one must step out and understand how the two opposing
qualities of the conflict are, in a deeper way, connected together.

- If that common link can be found, it can serve as the foundation upon which a
process of harmonization and equilibration can occur, with the end goal being
“yoga” or “union” - state where the two function as one.

Today, we see widespread social and psychological conflicts erupting everywhere.

This instability is a sign of conflict moving inevitably toward resolution.

- Today, we are experiencing an old institutional paradigm rapidly dying out, with a
new model gradually emerging to replace it.
- The new paradigm that is emerging is one that will come to be defined by a new
worldview: a new way of thinking about the world and the role of human beings in
it - one that differs in drastic ways from the secular and highly materialistic way of
seeing the world we have recently been steeped in.

This new emerging worldview is grounded in a new institutional paradigm: a new

collective psychological mind-state that the species is gradually shifting into.

58 of 218
- But before this new world can fully emerge, there must first be a deconstruction
and “great reset” of the old pattern.
- Once the core components of the previous paradigm have been detached from
their old patterns, a new design pattern can be forged between them.

This transformational process of organizational restructuring is what we see

happening all around us.
- As a global entity, humanity is now on a trajectory of constant transformational
change. This process is irreversible and its timetable is continuously accelerating.

- The effects of this change are being felt everywhere: from geopolitics to finance
to industry to science to religion - all sectors of society are inevitably undergoing
states of dramatic transformation.

In short, global civilization is now actively in the process of being de-constructed and
re-constructed.

- In synch with the outer. institutional, organizational, economic, and geopolitical

aspects of this species-level transition, there is also a profound inner,
psychological, and spiritual transformation taking place within the Psyche of Man,
one that is revealing itself spontaneously within the internal patterns of self-
conscious exhibited by millions if not billions of people all over the globe.
- Our old worldviews are gradually dying out. The world is gradually reshuffling and
re-organizing itself into a new collective pattern, with a new paradigm of thinking -
a new worldview - steadily emerging alongside it.

- This new paradigm will feature a new vision for human life and a new method for
thinking about how to accomplish this vision.
- As we actualize this vision, we move toward building a new social pattern for
ourselves. In this way, humans transform society and society transforms humans .
Each transform each other Phoenix-like into a new and evolved states of
expression — one better fit to represent and unfold the potentials of the
Consciousness held within.

59 of 218



The Architect’s Dream by Thomas Cole (1840)

60 of 218
8) The Archetypal Quality of Philosophy, Religion, and Science

By framing our analysis of Philosophy, Religion, and Science in the language of

institutions, we are seeking to root our perspective in a big picture historical and
global context.

- Taking this approach emphasizes that Religion, Philosophy, and Science have an
archetypal quality to them: they are a fundamental aspect of the way that Nature
has evolved the human species to function.
- Being archetypal, in every age of human history, we should expect to find each of
these three institution existent in some state of expression.

- The specific forms they become embodied in vary and evolve with time, but the
institutions themselves remain constant. They anchor our psyches: our minds
wouldn't work without them.
- In one age, one institution may be dominantly emphasized in the political,
cultural, and economic organization of society, while in another age a different
one may rise to prominence. Either way, each institution is represented
somewhere in the chemistry of society, but the balance of power between them
may shift over time.

Al three institutions always have some representation within the social architecture
of civilization. In some form or another, they can be found.
- Though the outer forms of these institutions may change, there is never an era in
which any of them is ever entirely extinguished or absent.

- For example, there was never an age in which Science was not present
somewhere within the great civilization pattern of Man. If it seems absent in the
dark ages of Europe or in the so-called pagan societies of the pre-Christian era,
that means it merely existed in a form that we do no recognize today.
- It is possible for an institution to manifest in an organizational form that is not
“publicly facing”. Today we enjoy Science as a public institution with wide-spread
support. In early eras, Since was practiced in a different way by much smaller
groups of people and without widespread public support.

61 of 218
 - Just because it does not manifest then in the same way that it does today does
not mean that it was once entirely absent. It just means that we are having
difficulty recognizing it and finding clear, transparent records of its use.

9) Science: Ancient vs. Modern (Part 1)

According to the way we’ve been organizing our thinking, we have seen that, in
different civilizations, institutions cloth themselves in different patterns of
organizational form.

- Institutions have an “archetypal” quality to them, meaning: the institutions

themselves remain relatively constant, but the outer organizational forms that
represent these institutions - that these institutions “clothe” themselves in - vary,
change, and evolve in time.
- In different civilization patterns, institutions will manifest as different patterns of
social organizations. For example, in one civilization, society may take shape as a
feudal theocracy; in another, as a secular democratic nation state; in another, in a
totalitarian fascist regime.

- The outer organizational forms that institutions embody themselves in vary with
time and place, taking on different characteristics on a civilization-by-civilization
basis. The core human institutions involved with each remain broadly the same
(e.g. the state, religion, language, etc.) remain broadly the same, but they take on
a drastically different look in different paradigms of civilization.

As I argue in this framework, Science is one of these archetypal institutions: it is a

fundamental category of human psychology that is always represented in some form
Ancient scientists were philosopher-scientists: they
in the civilization pattern of Man.
saw themselves primarily as philosophers, with
- Science itself is a constant; the specific organizational and cultural forms in which
science being conducted as part of their philosophic
practices. Science becomes expressed within the life of a society will vary, however. It can
take on a different “look” in different social and cultural contexts.
- Today, it looks one way; in the past, it looked another. Science did not look the
same in ancient society as it does in our modern one. It was in fact present in the

62 of 218
 early ages of Man, but it existed in a form that is foreign to us today.
Consequently, we have a hard time recognizing it today and therefore constantly
overlook its hidden presence.

Today, we tend to insist that Science can only have one form: “our” form - the form
that is the creation of modern Europeans.

- This form of Science has emerged alongside the nation state and the economic
paradigm of capitalism.
- Here, Science has taken form in a “secular” body, one that insists on severing its
relationship with Religion and Science.

- As an independent, secular entity, Science today primarily serves the role of

helping preserve and perpetuate the larger economic and political social
paradigm of the age.
- For the most part, the Science of today is dedicated to the task of either
generating commodities, goods, and services - all instruments of capitalism - or
creating weapons, surveillance systems, and other forms of political control - all
instruments of command-and-control style technocratic governance.

The majority of people today know only Science in its modern, secular form. They
insist that this is the only form that Science can possibly take - that it is impossible for
the institution to be embodied in any other way.
- This is absurd. If we simply look at the place where Europeans first got their
Science from - the Philosophic sects of ancient Islam and Persia, who carried the
torch of the institution during the Middle Ages (when European culture was
comparatively in the dumps) - we find immediately an alternative example for how
Science can be institutionally expressed.

- The Science of Islam was a religious, philosophic Science: it was developed in

conjunction with a firm belief in God and was supported by a strong culture of
religious ethics.

63 of 218
 - To these early scientists, the practice of Science was seen as a type of religious
observance. For them, the idea that one would want to separate Science from
God was unthinkable.
- The notion that Science should be used purely for material and temporal reasons
would have been considered disgraceful - something only a culture of barbarians
would ever do.

The early pioneers of Science in the Western world shared the same perspective:
- Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, Spinoza, Copernicus, etc.: all were
profoundly religious men whose interest in Science intermingled with their
interest in Mankind’s heritage of philosophical and mystical knowledge.

- These Men were all highly thoughtful philosophically-Minded thinkers who

understood that by studying the world of Nature, they were really studying the
unfoldment of life according to Divine Law.

Ancient science was considered sacred and was

- To them, Law was something to be humbly revered, not “overcome” in order that
only permitted to be practiced by those Man can do as it pleases on Earth.
consecrated toward the pursuit of wisdom.
Today, our scientists tend to find motivation in - All would have balked at the extremely materialistic, shallow, and short-sighted
more material concerns. way that the institution is being manifested today. All would advocate for us to
drop this current mess and embrace a more intelligent approach to manifesting
Modern science is not practiced in an ethically
disciplined context as ancient science was but the institution.
instead is largely motivated by financial,
industrial, and political concerns, one driven
The point is: Science’s current form is not the only possible form that the institution
more by competitive ambition than the spirit of can manifest through.
general human progress.
- Science is in fact an archetypal institution: it has been part of the psychological
For example, among the social sectors currently heritage of Man from the very beginning.
active in the production of scientific knowledge,
the following are some of the biggest players: - In the course of time, there are many evolutionary stages it must pass through. Its
the pharmaceutical and medical industries; current form is merely one of these stages. It is therefore transient: it is here now,
agribusiness; military weapons research;
but it came from a previous condition and will one day move into a different state
defense intelligence operations; corporate
strategy and product development research. of organizational expression.
Nowhere in the ethos of any of these groups is
there emphasized the notion that science has a
- For Science to progress, it must now evolve into a new pattern. We have to
spiritual component that should be learned,
understood, respected, and emphasized.
64 of 218
 reformat the way we are doing things now and stop insisting that secular,
capitalist-oriented Science is only possible way that it can be done.

10) Science: Ancient vs. Modern (Part 2)

Institutions remain constant, but the forms those institutions embody themselves in
vary civilization-to-civilization.

- Culture is a product - an outer expression - of the relationship dynamic that

emerges between a society’s organizations and its institutions.
- Different civilizations offer different organizational vehicles for their institutions to
manifest themselves through. This is why different nations and civilizations can
look and behave in drastically different ways: each shares the same essential set of
psychological and physical components of common, but each manifests them in a
different way, using a different pattern of organizational chemistry.

Looking back on the history of our own civilization, a general theme sticks out, one
that concisely summarizes the way most people think about the unfolding story of
Western civilization: things begins in a primitive Age of Religion before gradually
evolving into a more advanced and mature stage with onset of the Age of Science.
- When we compare modern civilization to the way of life of ancient Man, many
obvious differences are notable.

- Politically, economically, culturally, demographically, architecturally - ancient

society is different from modern society in many obvious and notable ways.

One notable difference between modern civilization and ancient society is that
ancient Man did not embrace “secularism” as a viable concept.

- Modern society, is almost entirely built off the concept: secular politics; secular
economics; secular Science - modern society seeks to isolate itself from Religion
whenever possible.

65 of 218

A small glimpse at but a few of the profound
geometries embedded in the physical structure of
the Great Pyramid. The geospatial location of the
complex also features unique and unusual
geometric properties.
T.
Consider, for example, this passage from Manly P.
Hall, describing the architectonics of the ancient
temple complexes of the Greeks:
“In the construction of their temples, the Greeks
made use in remarkable ways of their knowledge
of the principle fo vibration. A great part of their
rituals consisted of invocations and intonations.
Special sound chambers were constructed and the
sound waves reverberating through them were so
intensified that a word whispered by the high
priest would cause the entire building to sway and
be filled with a deafening roar.” (The Mysteries of
Light, Sound, and Color)
- In the modern age, Science and Religion are seen as enemies: there’s only room
for one and since Religion is the “opiate of the masses” only a secular approach to
Science is considered viable.
In my view, this state of affairs arises from a misunderstanding of what the true
institutional nature of Science actually is.
- Science is an archetypal institution: it is not just a recent European invention; it is
one of the fundamental psychological resources of Man.
- Civilization cannot exist without the underlying support of Science. Without
knowledge of the structures and forces of Nature, how could mankind have ever
built a life for itself against the harsh realities of the natural world?
- Simply put: the great civilizations of the pre-Christian era could not have exited in
the form they did without some form of Scientific knowledge being developed
and utilized within them.
Ancient society was built by those who possessed worldly “know how”. To develop
this know-how, they practiced and understood Science - not the modern form, but
an earlier, non-secular one.
- Without Science, how else could Man have approached the task of engineering
something like Stonehenge or the Great Pyramid?
- The architectural record of ancient civilization bears witness to the fact that
Science undoubtedly existed in some form and fashion in the ancient world.
Without it, the great monuments and temple complexes of antiquity could not
have been engineered or built.
- It is particularly notable that several of these ancient structures embed
astronomical, geospatial, and geometric motifs in a way that scientists of today are
still trying to comprehend.. (T)
Science is archetypal: civilization requires its use; it is a vital resource that Mankind
depends on for its continuous survival on Earth.
- Just as Man depends on physical resources in order to fuel its Body, it also
66 of 218

Two aspects of ancient Chinese medical
Science, first developed thousands of years
ago: a) Above, an astrologer reading the
horoscope of a patient. This was a standard
component of ancient Chinese medical
practice. b) Below: a diagram from
acupuncture, which incorporates an advanced
science of the body’s internal network of “Chi”
energy.
These ancient fields of knowledge were
produced by early scientists studying and
charting out the body’s inner electromagnetic
dynamics. Based on this knowledge, they
cultivated a highly effective medical practice
based around a combination of needles, cups,
herbs, pulse readings, breath-work and body-
posture exercises, and astrological diagnosis
methods. Notably, these ancient medical
sciences are still being studied and practiced to
the great benefit of many today.
depends on upon certain institutional resources in order to nourish its Mind.
- Science is one of these irreplaceable institutional resources. Without it, advanced
technologies, architectural creations, agricultural methods, patterns of culture,
systems of government, etc. could not emerge.
Today, it relatively obvious to see who the scientists of society are. By contrast, when
we look at ancient civilization, the situation is much less clear. Who carried the
mantle of Science in ancient society?
- In ancient times, there was no “secular science” - a science separated from
religion. Nor was there a science separated from philosophy. Rather, the scientists
of ancient society doubled as the philosophers and priests: all were connected as
one.
- Theirs was a science that was religious: scientific knowledge was integrated with
religion, such that when the early scientists measured the motions of the heavens
or the changing cycles of the seasons, they did so under the belief that they were
studying the workings of Deity upon the face of its creation.
- These early scientists believed that God was everywhere in creation and that by
studying the face of that creation Man could gain invaluable knowledge of the
Law through which Deity governs and rules its world - not only the physical
dimension of that world, but also the temporal and metaphysical dimensions that
underly it.
Ancient philosophers did not pursue their sciences for arbitrary reasons or to service
personal ambitions.
- These early Philosopher-Scientists believed that by performing science they were
studying the outer being of God. Furthermore, they believed that by learning the
ways of God they could hone themselves into becoming more capable servants
of God’s Plan.
- To them, science was tied to service: one which actively sought to develop,
cultivate, and utilize knowledge in order to put it to use in the service of God’s
Will.
67 of 218
 Today, the situation looks different. These three institutions have been broken up
and compartmentalized within different specialized sectors of society: Science is
done by one group, Religion by another, and Philosophy by yet a third.
- If we want to bring global civilization out of is current state of crisis, the solution
should be obvious: we must learn from our ancestors and once again re-integrate
Science with its siblings Philosophy and Religion.

- The three must once more form a united Trinity - a Three-as-One.

We must stop insisting that science is secular and that it is appropriate and desirable
for it to be completely detached from the vision and ethics of religion.

- It is obvious to us that religion cannot be trusted to exist by itself, independently

of science: we seem to have learned from the mistakes of the Dark Ages in this
regard.
- But then, why are we insisting that science should be trusted to exist by itself,
independent of religion? It is the exact same mistake, but in reverse!

- We have to stop with this inconsistent and delusional way of thinking. The two are
not intended to be separated; one is not meant to dominate the other. For
civilization to move into a new phase, this situation has to be addressed. Until
then, we will continue to bungle and make a mess of things.

11) The Primacy of Law

Philosophy, Science, and Religion each demonstrate a reverence for Law: it is the
primary element that all are collectively focused on knowing, understanding, and
serving.

- Creation is governed by the ubiquitous presence of Law.

- Law describes the framework of “rules” that the Universe follows as it builds out its
material form.

68 of 218

A depiction of the hierarchy of an eastern
philosophic sect (probably Taoist), where a sage or
guru is revealing the doctrine of the Law to their
disciples.
- Law is there, governing all aspects of Mind, Matter, Body, and Form. All are
governed in common by one set of ruling principles: by one framework of
Absolute Law. (D)
Law is universal; ubiquitous; everywhere present.
- Science studies and models Law as it variously manifests in the different realms of
Nature.
- Through Religion, Man engages with Law as the gateway to the religious
experience - the state of mystical rapture that is the essence of religious
knowledge.
- Philosophy applies Man’s knowledge of Law to the task of bettering humanity’s
state of existence - of furthering it along down the path archetypally laid out for it
by Nature.
The final mission of Philosophy is to instruct Mankind on how to “keep the Law”: to
align itself perfectly with the ideal image of itself held within the mind of the
Creating Power. Evolution is the gradual motion toward the actualization of this ideal
self-image. The road that one follows toward this state of self-actualization is the
road of discovering Law, comprehending it, applying its lessons, and allowing it to
become the rules and governor of oneself. In this way, Philosophy pursues mastery
of Law as a continuous state of being.
- By keeping the Law of their own being, humans unfold along the natural path of
their own evolutionary pathway.
- It is lawful for human beings to grow and evolve. We do not grow by following any
path we please: evolution is not an open-ended story that we write ourselves.
Rather, its pathway follows a set of archetypal guidelines or blueprings. In otehr
words, it follow s a certain developmental trajectory as it grows.
The only way that Mankind can ever create a truly sustainable civilization is for it to
learn and follow Law - the Law of Nature, the Law of the Heavens, and the Law of its
own Being.
69 of 218

D.
“All Nature is controlled by one series of Laws.
Every product of Nature is an example of these
laws and an accurate analysis of any one structure
will disclose the composition of all structures”
- Manly P. Hall
- By Law, Mankind has a specific place, purpose, and function to fulfill within the
overarching context of Nature: the global ecosystem of life that we participate in
enacting here on Earth.
- We are part of a seamlessly interconnected global ecosystem. Like all other
species, we have a specific and unique role to play in relation to the collective.
- If we do anything at all that is contrary to the Law of the greater ecosystem that
contains us, then we fall out of balance with the larger flows of Nature cycling
around us and our civilization becomes “unsustainable” as a consequence.
- When Mankind falls out of balance, Life falls out of balance. The global ecosystem
of life on Earth can’t be complete without us playing our proper role and serving
our proper function within the context of the greater whole we are a part of.
When Mankind does what we are supposed to do - when humans operate as we are
archetypally intended to operate - then we keep the Law of our own Being and we
thrive along with all the other kingdoms of life we share this Earth with.
- When we don’t, however, we bring suffering to not only ourselves but also to all
the various other forms of life that depend on us.
- Buddhism is exactly right when it says “ignorance is the root of all suffering.” When
we act in ignorance of the knowledge of the laws our own being, we act without
intelligence. Inevitably, the consequence is always suffering.
- To end suffering, the solution is simple: restore the Law. When we keep the Law,
the Law keeps us. This is not a fairy tale: the myriad environmental crises we’re
facing is a direct manifestation of this dynamic.
- Every day, Nature demonstrates the folly of our ways to us in the form of negative
consequences for our ignorant actions.
- When we try to build a world that is contrary to the laws of Nature, then inevitably
the structures of that world are brought back down to earth.
The Evolution of Life proceeds according to Law: it proceeds along a sequence of
stages which unfold along an orderly pattern.(D)
70 of 218
- Law establishes not only the mathematical and geometric principles underlying
physical reality; it also specifies reality’s “time signature”.
- Evolutionary stages are reached in a certain order; they unfold according to a
certain logic. The overall pattern of sequencing is dictated by Law; it follows an
archetypal pattern of sequential unfoldment.

- When we follow the Law, we keep this sequence and we progress along the
evolutionary pathway that Nature intends for us. In so doing, we follow the
“Golden Road” - the “Middle Path” of Philosophy which leads ultimately and
inevitably to the “Promised Land”: a state of human consciousness that has been
actively awakened to a realization of the divine Unity of Self.


71 of 218