Dimensions In Consciousness , livre ebook

First Edition Design Publishing - Alan Anderson Christopher

Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement

Je m'inscris

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

62 pages

English

Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

A propos
Informations
Extrait

Description

The purpose of Dimensions in Consciousness is to come to know and experience the furthest reaches of our consciousness--that of an absolute. It is also to come to know and experience the Man and Woman Relationship as immediate love. Can the immediate and the absolute come together as one? Let us see. "Love is not separated from the metaphysic one holds concerning the nature of reality. If that metaphysic is creatively imbalanced, what then does that say about the availability of love? Love springs forth out of creative balance. It is the act of creation itself. Let us now take a little journey and see if we can't see love expressed in the consciousness of the Man and Woman Relationship." Dimensions in Consciousness

Sujets

Philosophie et théologie

Philosophy of mind

Informations

Publié par	First Edition Design Publishing
Date de parution	30 août 2012
Nombre de lectures	0
EAN13	9781622871896
Langue	English

Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,0480€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.

Extrait

Dimensions in Consciousness
Christopher Alan Anderson

First Edition Design Publishing
Dimensions in Consciousness

Christopher Alan Anderson
Dimensions in Consciousness
Copyright 2012 Christopher Alan Anderson

ISBN 978-1622871-89-6

Published and Distributed by
First Edition Design Publishing, Inc.
September 2012
www.firsteditiondesignpublishing.com

ALL R I G H T S R E S E R V E D. No p a r t o f t h i s b oo k pub li ca t i o n m a y b e r e p r o du ce d, s t o r e d i n a r e t r i e v a l s y s t e m , o r t r a n s mit t e d i n a ny f o r m o r by a ny m e a ns ─ e l e c t r o n i c , m e c h a n i c a l , p h o t o - c o p y , r ec o r d i n g, or a ny o t h e r ─ e x ce pt b r i e f qu ot a t i o n i n r e v i e w s , w i t h o ut t h e p r i o r p e r mi ss i on o f t h e a u t h o r or publisher .
Foundation of Man and Woman Balance
www.manandwomanbalance.com
Note to the Reader:

Dimensions in Consciousness was written in 1990. Later it was combined with three other writings into Selected Writings—Volume 2 and published in 1991. The writing is a bit rough in places. I was only in my thirties at the time. But there are some real jewels to be found through out as is often the case in original work. Also, the use of the masculine and feminine could be smoother. Sometimes I use man, mankind, him, his, etc., to mean both the man and woman. In any embodiment of text, that takes time to work out.
The purpose of Dimensions in Consciousness is to come to know and experience the furthest reaches of our consciousness—that of an absolute. It is also to come to know and experience the Man and Woman Relationship as immediate love. Can the immediate and the absolute come together as one? Let us see.

C.A.A.— October 4, 2009
Santa Rosa, California
Table of Contents

Introduction
Truth
Balance
Purpose
Perfection
Beauty
Stillness
Thought
Freedom
Justice
Love
Value
Form
Conclusion
Epilogue: Initiation into Eternal Life
Introduction
The purpose of this work is to chart a number of ideas worthy of our consideration, revealing their absolute natures. I am calling these ideas dimensions because they are all evident in consciousness. When consciousness appears, so do they. In this sense they are absolutes. By absolute I mean that which is real and universal. If I were to say, for example, that truth is an absolute, I would mean that it is real (affecting) at any and every (universal) point of existence. In this case, I would just say, truth exists.
In some schools of philosophy, absolutes are thought to exist independently of the world, meaning they exist with or without the world or our personal consent. There is a metaphysical flavor here to the term absolute. An absolute, by its very nature, reveals what is, i.e., the nature of reality. Reality itself is an absolute, is it not? It is what is, isn’t it? The problem with the idea of reality has primarily been with the difficulty of understanding its nature. For the most part we have accepted its existence.
But today I sense a more serious problem, one that seems to surface from time-to-time. Some, maybe many, are questioning the whole issue of absolutes suggesting that there isn’t any such thing as a sole universal reality. According to this line of thinking, there only exists a personal or subjective reality for each of us. What we have heretofore called objective reality is then, following this thinking, just one’s own subjective reality. At question here is not just the nature of reality but whether or not there is a given reality (truth) to begin with.
This leads me to the secondary, and possibly more important, purpose of this writing, that of re-establishing the basis for an objective reality (absolute truth) on a creative paradigm that inherently reveals its absolute nature to us.
Why might this issue of an objective versus subjective nature of things be so crucial to our existence? Mainly, because we don’t act in the world out of a vacuum. We act given our conception or consciousness of things, about how “things are,’’ regardless of whether we call that conception “absolute” to reality or just “personal” to ourselves. We act from how we have concluded things to be. It is our evaluation of “what is” that determines our thought as to what constitutes life value. We ascertain a given action to be constructive or destructive solely upon our conception of reality. Reality becomes the basis from which we derive the moral, i.e., ethical interaction. Our codes of behavior come directly from our conceptions of reality.
Now, if there isn’t any such thing as reality from which to gauge accordant action or behavior, how are we to act at all, much less develop an ethics of interaction? How are we to determine (evaluate) the value (life constructiveness) of a given action? Can one do anything they want as long as one can claim it is in accordance with his own personal reality? Is any behavior justifiable? Are all actions or deeds equivalent? Given this scenario, we wouldn’t have any grounds to make a moral distinction between productive effort and thievery, between love and rape, or between a Christ and a Hitler. We will already have discredited any standard of reality going in from which to evaluate or discern that which is supportive to life.
But is this what we want, an absolute non-reality? Anyway, isn’t the relativist actually acting from his own conception of reality, a conception in which he has already (and absolutely) concluded is non-absolute. The relativist wants to have his cake and eat it, too. Notice though, there are consequences in acting from any conception of reality, absolute or personal as the case may be. Whatever conception one acts from will reveal itself in the consequences of that action. We all are obligated to act from our conception of reality (metaphysic) that we think represents the way things are. We can do nothing else. Furthermore, in acting in “alignment to reality,” we consider our behavior moral. Of course we do.
Can it be that the relativist, in denying absolute reality, is attempting to evade the consequences of his actions? You see, if there isn’t any standard of evaluation, one really cannot be held accountable. Who is to say some action is positive or negative to life? Based on what criteria? But what now are the consequences in acting from the relativist point of view that there isn’t any absolute reality and, thus, there isn’t to be an accountability of oneself in life? The consequences will be life decay. The standard supportive to life is not being adhered to vigorously.
I do not mean to suggest that our personal or subjective realities are not important. Quite the contrary. What we believe is what we will perceive and act upon. Our beliefs hold the tremendous power to shape our personal realities. Our personal realities are our beliefs. Now, imagine what will happen if we hold a set of beliefs that are not in alignment to the nature of things. We end up trying to imprint our “subjective reality” upon a construct that can only reject it. We are not being universally patterned. We are not real. Our thought construct is fictitious. We are basing out lives on an illusion, and we won’t admit to this as we contend there really isn’t an ultimate way to things to begin with. How long must this denial go on?
To deny the absolute basis of life (of truth and order) is to deny life. There cannot be any evasion here. All of our persuasion is towards an ultimate comprehension of things, if we would just pay attention. As beings of life, the potentiality to know life must lie within us. Of what are we afraid? Jesus himself said: And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. The truth is not our enemy. The nature of reality is supportive, not destructive, to us. What an insult it is to life to deny its absolute basis.
I am sure some will argue that the loss of an absolute is a good thing. They will point out that, heretofore, our absolutist conceptions have resulted in hierarchical systems where one man was held above another, creating the bondage, havoc, thievery, and pain we wish to avoid. How is it, they may add, that one man can judge another? But I ask, does the fault lie in the idea of an absolute nature to reality or in our own misunderstanding of what that nature is? I suggest that we have yet to truly know the nature of reality and, furthermore, that we can know its nature. To throw in the towel by suggesting that there isn’t any ultimate reality to begin with can hardly be the proper response. It leaves us with nothing. Reality isn’t at fault for man’s misdeeds. Man is responsible, mainly his own faulty interpretation of reality. Let’s review our conception of reality so that we can embrace a full comprehension of it and thereby experience the absoluteness of its nature. Then, and only then, will we know the extension and limit of consciousness itself.
Dimensions in Consciousness is about touching the furthest reaches of our consciousness, that of an absolute. In each of the areas listed, we want to note and experience the absolute in play and acknowledge that limit in consciousness. Reality is not an open-ended or infinite play. Rather it is real and finite which is why we can identify with it in relation to ourselves. It is imperative that we acknowledge both the extension of consciousness along with its boundaries or limits. Without both, the absolute crumbles by the wayside taking our hard-earned coherency along with it. Let’s not allow this to happen. Rather, let’s allow the knowledge of truth and the living of love to be our cohorts.
Truth
In the attempt to restore an absolute or objective truth (capital “T” truth), let us look into what our “sense of truth” has been to date. Heretofore, truth has been synonymous with objective reality. Truth has a metaphysical, universal, or absolute connotation. Its limit is d