Please Note: 
There is an "abridged" version of this subject matter located here.

The aim of this article is to explain why humankind is in a constant state of conflict. It aims to explore, and ultimately explain, the cause of this conflict. To demonstrate that the source of it all lies in our ability to think.

The core of humankind’s problem does not lie in time and thought, therefore the solution does not lie in time and thought. Salvation lies in the “acknowledgment” of what actually “is occurring” in the present. This is the awakening of intelligence and the transformation of humankind.

The main thesis is that humankind, having only relatively recently developed the ability to use thought, doesn’t appear to fully understand it’s nature. This misunderstanding or lack of awareness, in turn, has led to its misapplication resulting in seeming perpetual conflict.

Consider this as the ultimate form of “If you see something, say something”.

As we look over the course of humankind’s history up to the present, outside of scientific & technological progress, it can be argued that there doesn’t appear to be a great deal of change over the last several thousand years. What’s being referred to here is a real, lasting, inward change. We appear to be repeating the same things over, and over, and over, and over, as if we’re caught in a very nasty loop. We are still torturing and killing one another as well as the rest of the planets inhabitants. In fact, it may be argued that in the aggregate, humankind is like a cancer on this planet as its life processes are nothing short of toxic.

We now sit between the two very large and bleak twin edifices of global climate instability and potential nuclear conflagration.

It is the author’s contention that, although scientists are trying their best to predict the effects of this climate destabilization, the truth is, humankind has never gone through anything like this before. It seems like every year they are updating their estimates by reporting that things are occurring faster than they had previously thought. It appears we have succeeded in opening Pandora’s box.

If we were aware of how close and frequently we’ve come to nuclear war were it not for some unknown Russian or American commanding officer NOT carrying out some protocol after some “glitch” or “hiccup” in the weapons systems are encountered, we would most likely have difficulty sleeping at night. How long can we manage to do this given the ever increasing irrationality of humankind?

There appears to be “a quickening” of sorts occurring… a great convergence of many destructive forces and an intensification of polarization as predation, exploitation, and isolation are the apparent laws of the planet.

It is the author’s belief that we stand poised on the precipice of a most crucial moment in all of our human history. One in which the continued existence of any sort of descent life on this planet in the near future is actually seriously questionable. Therefore, there is a most urgent and serious need for the clarity of prescience as mankind does indeed appear to be “painting itself into a corner”.

The nightly news creates an entertainment spectacle out of misery, with a subtext of “look what happened and shouldn’t have” instead of acknowledging the fact that “it IS happening” and so what do we need to do about it to stop it from happening as any sane, rational human being would do.

Or, its other subtext is: “look what happened that was correct to have happened”.

It desensitizes, sensationalizes, and commercializes while playing on our emotions. This desensitization then appears to create a feeling of being “detached” from the horror and robs us of are ability to feel and experience all of what it is like to live in this world we have created as human beings.

No wonder we often encounter an overwhelming sense of “meaningless” in this modern world… we deny its ugly bits every chance we get. So, in effect, we’re denying entire swaths of life, and in so doing, entire swaths of ourselves. We then attempt to fill this void by “buying more stuff”, or “having more experiences”. There appears to be a bottomless appetite for any kind of stimulation.

It just so happens, if one might find themselves in possession of a few certain qualities, they should have an easier time “seeing” or understanding what is being said here.

One quality is “sensitivity”, or to be sensitive…, in any way.

As was just mentioned, a significant effect of the nightly news is that it desensitizes us by rapidly bombarding us with tragedy after tragedy. This format appears to have the effect of short circuiting the normal human process of requiring time to feel, or receive(and therefore comprehend), the full impact of what is being conveyed and experienced.

Another quality is the tendency or propensity for questioning and logical inference.

The author believes all of humankind is capable of possessing these qualities, however, due to the varying degrees of “psychological conditioning” that exist between different individuals, some will inevitably have a more difficult time with all of this than others.

What is meant by psychological conditioning is the accumulation of memories from one’s past in the form of cultural, ethnic, or religious belief’s, preconceived notions, or any form of ideology which have the tendency to shape, alter, and inform our perception of reality as it is used as the basis for comparisons.

Therefore, if one where to seriously stop and attempt to examine the current state-of-affairs in a rational, sane, and logical manner, one would find that there does very much exist the possibility of experiencing clarity.

If we look closely, not only at the external world, but also at ourselves, in our own lives, we might see the actuality that thought is not only behind all of humankind’s greatest achievements, but also at the root of its existential crisis.

Although humankind’s presence on this planet is a relatively recent one, it has established total dominance. This dominance, in turn, made possible by the one characteristic that sets us apart from all other life forms on the planet: our three pound brain. The brain which gives us the ability to form abstract concepts in language using symbols to convey these ideas in sentences and (hopefully) communicate and convey meaning to one another as is happening now.

The essence of thought appears to lie in the ability to form and manipulate abstract concepts, but there also appears to be a danger in this capability.

Let’s then further explore the nature of thought together.

It may be readily observed that thought is a material process which occurs in the brain in the form of the recollection of previously lived experiences, or the “movement” of memory. This movement of memory in the brain as consciousness is then used to perform some sort of action or activity in the present moment.

It must also be noted at this point, that it would follow that each experience by its nature is “entirely unique” as any moment in time can never be “exactingly experienced” again. Therefore, each memory of each experience is also unique, and so therefore, can only ever truly, totally, and “completely apply” to the experience which created it.

As we said, thought is the movement of memory which is the result of experience and we know experience requires time. It may then be seen that memory’s function is to “store slices of time” and the process of “thinking” would be the “act of storing, and retrieving” these time slices for use in the cpu that is “consciousness”.

Now, since thought is the movement of time, let’s further examine the nature of movement where we may, again readily observe a few different aspects.

When something moves it is limited in that it can only move in one direction at a time. It may also be seen that the movement in one direction creates two points and the “potential” for movement in the opposite direction, therefore, by something moving in one direction, “two” directions are always created: the current direction being traveled, and the potential for the opposite direction to also be traveled.

We may also notice that movement itself is defined against non-movement, therefore the potential of something not moving also exists, which then appears to imply that all movement is finite. Therefore, when it moves, it always does so a “fixed distance” having a definite beginning and ending as do the experiences which give rise to thought.

Since there are always more experiences to be had, experiences are never “complete” or “whole”. It would then follow that thought also possesses this limitation of “incompleteness” since it is a derived from experience.

Therefore, it would appear that thought and knowledge are always incomplete and limited as if there is “always more to experience” and therefore is “always more to know”. It can then be seen that knowledge implies ignorance because it’s always incomplete.

As previously discussed, thoughts purpose appears to be the recollection of knowledge of prior experiences brought to bear in some way on the present moment to achieve some desired purpose or outcome in physical reality. In other words, its purpose appears to be to carry out activity, or “function” in our external environment.

Take the example of the experience of riding a bicycle. The very first time one learns to ride a bicycle the experience is recorded. When the occasion to ride a bicycle then arises again, the memory of the first experience is retrieved and used to repeat the same activity in the present, hopefully making the process a bit smoother this time.., e.g., recalling knowledge of how to ride a bike so as not to be caught in an endless loop of learning for the first time. If this didn’t happen nothing would ever get done, in fact, we probably wouldn’t even be able to survive.

It should also be noted that, when the author uses the word “thought” what is being referred to are not only mental images, symbols, and verbal utterances, but also the accompanying “feelings”. If one observes one’s self, one should see that particular thoughts generate particular feelings, and the particular feelings then in turn go on to generate thoughts similar in nature to those that generated the feeling. So the two are not separate but make up one movement, or process.

Thought operates by abstracting, conceptualizing, and “objectifying things”. These “things”, in turn, exist in space, and space implies time, so an object has a history, as does anything that “exists”.

Also, when an object is defined, it is also defined in terms of what it’s not, or its negative.

This is a pretty big point. Let’s state it another way as well.

In order to have an apparent experience of “individuality”, everything else in the Cosmos MUST exist in exactly the same “unique” way. So this again would imply, complete and total “dependence” on “otherness” in order to have “non-otherness”, or “selfness”. This then appears to explain the creation of the two opposing poles out of the one.

Since this seemingly “separate” and “independent” object, is, in actuality TOTALLY and COMPLETELY dependent on it’s opposite to exist(and vice-versa) there is no such thing as “existence in isolation”, but instead only “existence in relation”, therefore, in this way, “all” truly “are one”.

As the author likes to say… “when there’s a ‘you’, there’s automatically ‘two.’”

For some reason, thought appears to have applied this “objectification” to itself in the form of a “self image” associated with the body that “remembers” every day and is perpetually recording experience. It is also recalling prior experiences when it imagines future scenarios.

This daily recording takes the form of the “I” with a “personal” history made up from a collection of experiences, preferences, likes, dislikes, etc.. It may be argued that in so doing, the brain is able to achieve a certain level of psychological security establishing some semblance of order and stability which it requires to function properly.

It is the authors supposition that because the capability of “memory”, “thought”, and “thinking” is still a relatively new one for humankind. It appears as though its nature and proper use have not yet been fully understood. We don’t understand, or are unaware, of its limitations and hence its potential dangers and pitfalls.

This constant recording of life’s experiences as the “I” doing the “experiencing” appears to have led to the use of thought in areas it is not suited for such as in the internal psychological realm of problems. It appears to have taken the process of achieving something outwardly, such as riding a bicycle, and apply it internally in order to make itself feel better mentally. It doesn’t see that this whole process produces the psychological problems its attempting to rid itself of in the first place.

The concept of a “problem” implies that it cannot exist in isolation. For a problem to exist it requires a “something”, or “someone” to exist “for”. So thought creates this assertion that there “is” a problem. This assertion in turn creates an opposite assertion of there “is NOT” a problem. This opposite pole of “there is NOT a problem” then becomes the object of desire.

As a result of this arrangement, the perception is created that some sort of action or activity is required to obtain the desired outcome of removing the problem. Due to the fact that any action or activity requires time to take place, it can then be seen that this setup is responsible for the creation of “psychological time”. The psychological time takes the form of the thought “I will become…”(fill in the blank — “problem-less”) which then creates conflict as one engages in the following activities:

Therefore, desire “creates” duality by creating two opposing “assertion poles” for the lack of a better word, which in turn gives rise to both inner and outer conflict.

A desire is perceived as something “outside” of us, and hence implies we are “separate” from it. Therefore thought/desire creates both, a subject which desires(the self), and an “object” of desire. This in turn manufactures in us a superficial sense, or perception of separation and division.

We are constantly seeking security in creations of thought, but what we get instead is ever-increasing amounts of insecurity… the “polar” opposite of the desired outcome.

This can be observed as follows (At this point it might be helpful to refer to Figure 1 at the top to aid in clarification):

As we (attempt to) move from the undesired assertion pole in the present to the desired assertion pole in some future, the two opposing poles are created. What winds up happening at this point is that the motion in the direction of “fulfilling” a desire actually creates the opposite direction of “un-fulfillment” where we are in the present.

So the act of constantly desiring in the present actually constantly “creates” the undesired in the present.

Hence the original desire can never be totally, completely, and wholly satisfied as if one manages to achieve a desired outcome, the opposing pole still always remains, and as previously mentioned, one must then always be concerned with maintaining the desired thing or state.

This constant “maintaining” of the desired thing equates to a state of perpetual “becoming” and in turn, a state of perpetual struggle which appears to adequately describe the past and present state of human affairs.

The “flaw” that appears to be occurring in the usage of thought is that it limits us by committing us to one side of an assertion or the other at the expense of the whole, or “total” view.

Let’s dive a little further together.

It can also be readily observed that desire and fear are two sides of the same coin. Desire for a thing can be seen to do the following:

Not only can desire be seen to create fear, but it also anger, attachment, jealousy, envy, hatred, and every form of mental illness and malice emanating from humankind.

Both desire and fear are distractions that “constrict” one’s energy.

When there is desire there will ALWAYS be “corruption” due to the “attachment” one has to a thing. This “attachment” then creates all manner and forms of deceit and deception as one will “do anything” to obtain the thing one has an attachment to.

Applying knowledge to any non-functional present experience inevitably leads to conflict in that what is actually occurring is that a very narrow, specific, and therefore limited sliver of recorded time is being applied to the whole of life which is infinite and ever unfolding in the present moment. It’s like we’re constantly trying to shoehorn the whole of reality into a tiny narrow slit by bringing knowledge to bear on our psychological problems in the present and in so doing, grinding ourselves to a pulp in the process.

With his famous proclamation of “I think, therefore I am”, René Descartes’ appeared to be on to something. Since thought and desire are synonymous, it would also seem appropriate to state that “I desire, therefore I am”.

It is the author’s objective to implore others to take the time to examine and explore these matters for oneself to observe the lived actuality and truth of all of this. It is absolutely essential that the reader does not blindly accept the author’s words, but goes through the process of connecting the dots themselves to see if what is being said is true in one’s own presently lived experience. This is an absolute requirement because only this activity will unleash the energy and vitality required for bringing about a radical and fundamental transformation in one’s consciousness.

What is being attempted here is to point something out as one would point out a bird in a bush. There is no more thought involved here in the form of some process to follow to achieve certain results. By now, the author hopes the reader can clearly see this, that the mis-use of thought is what is occurring here, and so in this realization notice our conditioned and reflexive reaction to do something about all this with… still more thought.

Again, in order to avoid this, it is absolutely crucial for one to “see” this for oneself at work in the present, and in so doing, be guided by this “seeing” and NOT “thinking”.

What is meant by “Seeing” is to “capture” and “comprehend” meaning. It is “effortless” and therefore does not occur in time. It occurs suddenly and unexpectedly as a “flash of insight”.

The word “capture” is especially significant here. This word implies that the meaning which is comprehended lies “outside” of oneself and therefore does not originate from the self. What does originate from the self is thought, therefore this seeing is “beyond thought”.

This “seeing” IS the action!

That is, seeing produces its own action as one sees and then acts according to the seeing. One is informed and guided to the correct course of action to be taken in any given moment by acknowledging and remaining with the fact of that moment. The activity of functional thought may then be employed in the service of this “seeing” if it is seen that that is what is required in the moment.

The “seeing” and “acknowledgement” of “what is” and then acting according to, or out of this “seeing” is “true intelligence”. Not the capacity of one’s memory and the ability to regurgitate it as the game show Jeopardy and the world at present in general would have us believe (this is actually quite ironic as it is precisely the thing that’s placed everything in such tremendous “jeopardy”).

Therefore, it is the author’s judgment that this matter be investigated with the utmost importance and urgency… for each of us to go into this and explore it and “see” what is being pointed to here for ourselves in order to bring about a radical and fundamental transformation of consciousness on the planet based on saneness, rationality, and wholeness.

Certain sentiments that the author often encounters when discussing these matters with others usually go something like… “you can’t change anything”, or, “it’s impossible”, or, “this is man’s nature, so nothing can be done”, etc.. One thing is for sure, it’s definite nothing will change if we continue thinking this way.

We have to first be completely, totally, and uncompromisingly open to the possibility that change “can occur”, that there can be a differently way of life on this planet.

As previously mentioned, one must be able to set aside all of their conditioning in order to allow oneself the absolute freedom to inquire into this whole thing. The process is really quite similar to the way a scientist would observe some naturally occurring phenomenon in order to understand how it works.

Another encountered sentiment is “people are not going to understand this or listen”. Perhaps, but what alternative do we have? The author prefers to focus his efforts on those who WILL listen, however, since he never knows who this will be, he is moved to discuss it with anyone and everyone at anytime.

Another popular sentiment is “there’s nothing that we can do about it… it’s too late, we’re too far gone… we’ll just go the way of the dinosaurs.” To which the author replies So what then? We just go on destroying ourselves and all life on the planet?… What are we then to do in the meantime? Just go buy stuff as we’re constantly being told to do? Just sit around as we boil in the ever increasing levels and degrees of suffering? Death is a natural part of life, so it’s not death that is the author’s ultimate concern, but the immense suffering and misery that is, and will continue to occur “as our life” until the moment of death.

Why don’t we ever ask ourselves if it’s possible for humans to live a different way? To live in peace and harmony instead of perpetual war and conflict? For the author, this question is “always” in the forefront of his mind as he sees it is of the utmost and eminent practicality and urgency and birthright of every single human in existence.

We’ve been in conflict for so long we have just come to accept it as a way of life. We’re conditioned to it. The author feels that, as we are presently the life form with the greatest power on this planet, we also have the greatest responsibility. That we should question when we see something that we know in our hearts is not right. To inquire on behalf of “all” the planet’s inhabitants as our position of supremacy mandates us to do so.

It can be seen that each one of us contains the ability to bring forth this seemingly impossible change by coming to the realization that each one of us contains the entire consciousness of all of humankind. What is meant by the word “consciousness” here are the content of our thoughts. The misery, fear, anxiety, suffering, hopes, dreams, joys, sorrows, loneliness, depression, despair, etc.. It may be seen that we each contain our own “unique mixture” of a number of different “group consciousnesses” such as the group consciousnesses of race, ethnicity, religion, profession, sex, nationality, etc. for example.

To sum this point up, in addition to possessing this brain and the ability to think, it can be readily observed that all these things are what unites us all and that all the perceived differences are only superficial.

We are all of the greatness and ugliness that humanity is as we are what constitutes it. The inner and the outer worlds are reflections of one another engaged in constant movement. The outer world experiences the inner world, and the inner world experiences the outer world. It is one, continuous movement, in and out, and out and in.

Therefore, we are the world, and the world is us. by coming to see this, and acting out of this understanding, we will see that our thoughts and deeds are constantly affecting the entire consciousness of all of humankind. Pretty powerful indeed.

If one may be interested in the further exploration, it is highly recommended to look into the lives and works of the following two men:

Both men are quite fascinating even though they have been dead for about thirty years. Fortunately, each has numerous audio and video recordings which are readily available on youtube. There are videos of each man speaking individually as well as in dialogue with one another. To hear them converse may, at times, send shivers down one’s spine as they can be heard speaking, almost prophetically, of how chaotic humankind’s existence will become in the near future(at that time) if it does not undergo this radical inner change.

It is the author’s perception that this prognostication of a chaotic future is indeed becoming our present reality.

The chaos is now washing up on our shores like the garbage in the sea.

Is any of this true?

Please examine this for yourself without any motive, for if you have a motive it will dictate the answer.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store