Perception

Posted on by

How and what we see are interpretations

 

In part, our uniqueness as individuals traces to our capacity to perceive, beyond merely looking. Aldous Huxley famously observed that “The eyes and the nervous system do the sensing, the mind does the perceiving.” The eyes gather information and the nervous system delivers it to the brain where it is sorted, referenced to memory and interpreted. The object of my reflection here is that everything we sense and know comes down to interpretations based on perceptions. In this light, the mystics and physicists who observe that this world is an illusion makes sense, particularly when we consider that our perceptions—and the acts that follow from them—are determined by the lenses through which we view each other and the world.

Even as we use instruments to learn about objective reality, interpretations relating to it are based on these lenses. They include our biological inheritance, family upbringing, peer group, physical and social environments, education, affiliations, status, belief systems and accumulated experience. In a sense, each personality is a culture unto itself,  uniquely formed and constantly under construction. I am not the person I was ten minutes ago, much less ten years ago because my personal and social lenses are dynamic, ever changing.

Recognizing that everyone is seeing through different lenses should urge tolerance and compassion in our interactions, or at least some respect and patience when our perceptions, judgments, preferences and choices differ. Yet across cultures, people are willing to risk everything for the satisfaction of being “right” or being in possession of “the truth” or the “best way” to accomplish something. We will even kill and be killed holding onto a perception or belief that derives from this strong sense of knowing. Is my personal reality fixed, so dependent upon my way of seeing things and being right that my world would crumble if it were proved otherwise?

I can’t imagine. But considering that one of our primary lenses are the stories we’re told—and understanding the power of story, which provides the basis for all religions, cultures and most everything we believe in—I can see how personal realities could become fixed and immutable. A lie or conspiracy theory told often enough and with passion can easily be accepted as true. And we’re seeing how perception can be weaponized, as in radicalization and brain washing.

On the other hand, there’s survival value where there’s the ability to see the manipulators behind the curtain and keep an open mind when exposed to different points of view and change. Writing of the power of story and storytelling, human potential author Jean Houston asserts “Change the story and you change perception; change perception and you change the world.” Given that, the way to win a war or succeed in political office is to tell stories that affect changes in perception.

In many instances, clashes over differences in perception have more to do with strategy than outcome. Americans generally agree on the fundamental rights and privileges articulated in the Constitution and Bill Of Rights, but we differ strongly on how to realize them. Some see political power as an opportunity to strengthen the whole of society by empowering the governing body to act on behalf of all citizens. Others, fearing the possibility that those who govern will overstep or abuse this power, prefer to empower individuals and corporations directly, believing they can and will take responsibility for themselves. We may want the same outcomes, but we see different ways to achieve them.

At the extreme end of the spectrum are dictators and tyrants who hold onto their perceptions so tightly, they feel justified in killing and waging war. Whatever their outer objective, they have to “win” in order to prove to themselves and others that their perception is the correct one. The genesis of their perception can be be simple or complex, but the severity of it is determined by how tightly they hold onto the notion that they know best. Publicly stated or privately held, it’s their signature position.

Differences in perception are often the root cause of conflict. Archaeologist David Freidel defines “culture” as “the shared conception and perception of reality in a society.” Indigenous peoples the world around perceived rocks, mountains and art objects as being alive, while we only attribute life to animated organisms. And now, the environment is paying the price for that perception. Farmers destroy rainforests in order to feed their families, whereas environmentalists view those same forests as the lungs of the planet. A dandelion for one person is an object of beauty; for another it’s a weed.

So what is the truth? Who is right? In one lens better than another? According to the Bible, it’s by our actions—consequences—that we shall be known. Philosophically we can say that, for the most part, each individual’s perception is valid for themselves. It’s their personal reality. But all actions have consequences. If the dandelions in my yard are crowding out the grass, I can run the lawn mower over them with impunity. But when I put down poison to kill them, animals and birds can be affected, and that has consequences for the neighborhood. (A neighbor of ours had a cat that died from eating another neighbor’s grass treated with weed killer).

We say that “Seeing is believing.” Like all good formulas, it works both ways: Believing is seeing. Thus the popular phrases: “We tend to see what we believe,” and “We see what we want to see.” Perceptions are always biased by what we already believe. The “truth” or “rightness” of a belief or perception is and can only be personal, a singular viewpoint. Characteristically, the more powerful one feels the more this is suppressed.

At all levels, perceptions gain credibility by consensus. The more people who agree with our perception on any issue, worldview or experience, the more we—and they—hold onto it. As we’ve seen, the lives of public figures and celebrities can easily become tragic. As egos become inflated, there’s a loss, confusion or misdirection of identity. One’s perception of self comes into question.

We do not see ourselves, others or the world objectively. The balanced position then is to practice tolerance, respect the perceptions of others and become more aware of our perceptions, always on the lookout for refining and aligning them with the truth as we discover more of it. Easier said than done, but we have a model. Arguably the greatest teaching on perception and its consequent behavior was Jesus, the Christ who advised us “Love they neighbor.”

Whenever we encounter a viewpoint or behavior in contrast to our own, we can choose a loving response. Whether in thought, word or deed, rather than attack we can at least allow and respect a person’s right to see things as they do. And keep an open mind. In a constantly changing world, the truth of anything is always bigger than what one individual can see. The eyeglasses in the photograph above, remind me that we all see through unique and constantly changing lenses. 

 

A person has not only perceptions but a will to perceive, not only a capacity to observe the world but a capacity to alter his or her observation of it — which, in the end, is the capacity to alter the world itself. Those people who recognize that imagination is reality’s master we call “sages,” and those who act upon it, we call “artists.”

     Tom Robbins, American novelist

 

Power rests in the conjunction of what the individual perceives of his own internal being. What he perceives in the world about him, and how he relates these perceptions to establish his relations with other human beings.

Richard Adams, English novelist

 

The world you perceive is made of consciousness; what you call matter is consciousness itself.

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, Indian guru

Attention Capital

Posted on by

Staples in Telephone Pole

Our reality is shaped by how we spend it

Fundamentally, the job of the film and television director is “attention management,” capturing and holding the viewer’s attention and moving it from place to place within and between scenes. In ancient cultures, chiefs, rulers and landlords played that role, sending out “criers” who went around shouting the news and information they wanted their subjects to know about or take action on. The rapid evolution and expansion of communication technologies has occurred in part as a consequence of complex societies where producers and advertisers want to attract attention, and where consumers want their attention managed for enjoyment—and for many more reasons.

On October 31, 1517 Martin Luther, a monk, nailed a list of grievances against the Catholic Church onto the door of a chapel in Wittenberg, Germany. A consequence of this was the Protestant Reformation. In June of 1982, I tacked a notice on telephone poles and community bulletin boards around town to invite people to come to a local park to discuss ways to promote Cincinnati as a “City Of Light,” a place where notable thinkers and achievers in the arts, sciences and humanities would come to dialogue and express their views on stage and on television.

More than fifty people showed up. We met once a week for four months, but the financing we needed didn’t materialize and that was the end of it. In July, 2012 I photographed this thoroughly stapled telephone pole near Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. I imagined the consequences of all the notices that were attached to it. For instance, uncountable numbers of people attended a performance, convened at conferences, meetings, lectures and recitals, found lost animals, bought and sold property and goods, offered and secured services and met their significant others. And more. Represented on this pole is a nexus of attention. And while it may still be used to attract attention, we now have an intercommunicating network of technologies performing that function through fibre optic cables and between satellites and land-based towers enabling potentially every person on the planet to capture, hold and direct the attention of everyone else.

Technology pundit Esther Dyson wrote that “The most important finite resource in the late 20th century is people’s attention.” More recently, author David Shenk observed that “As competition heats up, in order to get our messages across, we have to wrap them in ever more provocative and titillating packages; we TALK LOUDER (his emphasis), wear more and brighter colors, show more cleavage and say shocking things.” And do shocking things. It’s the phenomenon of “desensitization.” Repeated attention diminishes our response to dramatic sights and sounds. Filmmakers and television producers feel they have to keep raising the bar on violence, sexuality and special effects in order to gain and hold our attention. It’s why the volume of movies in theaters continues to increase, and as a consequence of hearing loss, many more people have become “loud talkers.”

Executives in the radio, television and film industries say they’re in the business of delivering news, information and entertainment. Increasingly however, it has become apparent they are actually in the business of maximizing attention, arguably with less interest in content and more interest in securing “eyeballs for advertisers.” Having invested many years in the television industry professionally, and after having researched its history, structure and social function, I’ve come to the conclusion that commercial television is stuck in a period of prolonged adolescence.

Television is a social mirror. It reflects the mentality of the people it serves. So as long as viewers are passive consumers rather than active advocates calling for intelligent, inspiring, empowering, enriching, useful and socially responsible programming we will continue to complain that there are “hundreds of channels and nothing’s on.” Nonetheless, as a long term optimist, I believe there will come a time when television will reflect and serve a society that has grown into adulthood.

Actually, where we are right now is not a bad place; we’re just in transition. A multitude of pressures, especially those relating to truth-telling, economics, environment and security are urging us to learn that our communication “toys” can be used for higher purposes. But before these can be realized, we have to learn how to use them securely and responsibly. I believe that, through these pressures, including long term public dissatisfaction and industry experimentation, television professionals will come to appreciate the medium’s higher potentials and discover that delivering substance has survival value.

Currently, power is perceived as residing in the technologies themselves, but these are just the means of message production and delivery. The real and by far greater power for the communication industries resides in the delivery of real value, images and information that contain substance—content that matters, that helps us relate better, construct meaning and build more satisfying and contributing lives. As a nation becomes more complex and realizes its interdependence with other nations, it could even become necessary for the media to turn its attention more toward matters of personal safety, growth, social development and planetary stewardship. Public television has been a leader in this regard.

Because attention is a choice, it’s formative. It shapes us. What we attend to defines us and shapes our reality. A guideline prescribed for novelists is to reveal the truth of a character more through their actions than their words.  Socially, because the mass media, particularly television and the Internet, provides a common “reality” reference for most of us, our collective attention generates “memes”—units of culture, including colloquial language, gestures, fads and trends in fashion, food and music.

Memes largely define what is “cool” and acceptable in the culture, so advertisers keep them in front of us to entice us to “spend” our attention capital—dollars— accordingly. Anthropologist, Edward T. Hall, wrote that “Culture is what we pay attention to.” When we know that our our attention is simultaneously cultivating myself, my reality and society, we can more consciously choose how to direct it.

What we pay attention to is no trivial matter; we are what we attend to. 

                                               Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Psychologist

                                               Author, Flow: The psychology of optimal experience

Particularity

Posted on by

Ribbed Bivalve Shell

A strategy for making the ordinary look special

In the early years, I used to spend a lot of time walking up and down the many rows of vendors at outdoor antique fairs looking for that rare situation where the quality of light illuminating an object peaked my aesthetic sensibility.

Later on, I noticed that there was a pattern to the places where I was more likely to find something to photograph. These were the booths that were less cluttered. The objects on display were separated by some space; the more the better. When the items were all clumped together in one case or on a table, none of them seemed important. Visually, the experience was chaos, and that reflected upon the vendors, how much or little they cared about their offerings.

When one object was singled out for display, isolated, my eye went right to it. If someone doesn’t care enough about their goods, it’s not likely that I will either. Conversely, when I see objects separated out, displayed on a clean surface or cloth where the sunlight enhances its form, color or texture I’m drawn to it.

Our minds are visually impatient. When presented with a rose bush we look from one blossom to another. And when we’ve seen them all we move on. Whether it’s cars, food, furniture, seashells or paintings in a museum we want to see everything. That’s natural and appropriate. But by taking it all in—the wide view—we can miss the deeper experience that comes from focusing on just one thing and staying with it for a time. I’m reminded that the greatest compliment we can pay an artist is to spend time with his or her creation.

Novelists use the word “particularity” to describe a character, setting or situation to make them special. High value. Here’s the description of a scene: “Sam pounded the bar, insulted the bartender and threw his beer bottle on the floor.” We get the idea, but particularity makes it sparkle: “Sam’s eyes lit with rage. He pounded his hairy fist on the bar and grabbed his Budweiser by the throat. Cursing, he hurled it the floor where thick shards of glass, beer and foam scattered the peanut shells.”

In writer-speak, particularity amounts to “showing” rather than “telling” what happened. Since “God is in the details,” whenever there’s a multiple of anything, appreciation is heightened by going in close, examining one detail at a time. We don’t buy a Toyota; we buy a particular Toyota.

Particularity is well known strategy among jewelers. Diamond rings and necklaces surrounded by greater space suggests greater value. It’s why museums and galleries give as much space as possible to their important holdings. Artists use this technique to choose a wide mat within a frame to surround their painting with blank space. Writers know the value of including lots of white space on a page or screen. Likewise, filmmakers hold on a shot, so viewers have time to examine the elements within the frame. The message of space surrounding an item or image is clear: “This is precious, worthy of your undivided and sustained attention.”

Out in nature, our visual strategy is more often deductive, scanning the whole beach before looking for the spot that appeals. The shell in the above image is very common. Ordinary. But when it’s displayed alone with care and lit to enhance its features, it becomes exceptional. With our attention held on a particular shell—the inductive approach—we gracefully ease into appreciation and gratitude for all shells, and nature itself. When photographing, I’ve noticed that a forest can evoke a “Wow” in me, but a single tree can speak more poignantly to me of “treeness,” of essence beyond and including magnitude.

In environments like antique, flower and car shows where there’s a lot to see, the mind wants to move on once we’ve recognized an object for what it is. But the soul is better served by focused attention, beyond recognition. Having learned this, I walk past areas where there’s visual “noise” or chaos and stop where there’s evidence of order and caring in both subject and presentation. That’s where I’m more likely to find something worth photographing. (I mute the sound on television commercials and look away for the same reason).

 

 Always to see the general in the particular is the very foundation of genius.

Arthur Schopenhauer

 

Joy

Posted on by

The soul’s feedback mechanism

When I first printed this image, I thought it was a nice expression of childhood exuberance. Looking deeper now, I see  humanity standing between earth and cosmos expressing joy. Given how our bodies evolved from the earth, it’s like the planet’s rising up here, now conscious, reaching out in a celebration of life and a yearning to connect with the great mystery. 

Images coming from the Hubble and James Webb telescopes are revealing the unimaginable scale, beauty and variety of the cosmos. It’s humbling on the one hand, yet there’s also an immensity within. Noted poet-philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson referenced it when he said, “What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.” Beyond plants and animals, we can   come to know and realize our potentials, and in the process discover what and who we are and why we’re here.

Shakespeare’s despondent Prince Hamlet, contemplating suicide, wonders whether it’s nobler “To be or not to be.” Living may be painful, extremely so at times, physically, mentally and spiritually. At the other end of the spectrum it can also be joyful. It’s been said that every experience is “Grist for the Mill,” an opportunity to realize what we’ve come here to learn. 

Philosophers from Socrates on, regarding happiness as the ultimate good, debated its nature and how to achieve it. Today, formulas and strategies abound in every medium to help us in the pursuit of happiness. I believe they should have been talking about and promoting “joy,” which is not the same as happiness. While joy can deliver happiness, it’s very different, a subtle quality of alignment with one’s reason for being and connection to the greater life—spirit. For me, it comes in moments of gratitude, appreciation and increased focus, brought on by a sense of satisfaction that comes from immersion—being in the right place at the right time, doing the right thing. 

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, author of Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, defines “flow” as “A state of heightened focus and immersion in activities such as art, play and work.” In his talks he says flow is the secret to happiness. Indeed, but in my worldview, happiness stands on the shoulders of joy. As I see it, happiness is a positive emotion that ripples like waves on the surface of the ocean. Joy is more fundamental, an emanation from the depths, a confirmation that says the current thinking or activity is aligned with purpose, in harmony with the soul’s agenda for this lifetime. 

Soul emanations like joy are subtle. They tend to emerge in silence and calm emotions. And they usually surface in reflective moments after an immersive experience. May you have lots of joy, and may it bring happiness along with it!

With an eye made quiet by the power of harmony, and the deep power of joy, we see into the life of things.

William Wordsworth

 

V. Contrast / Social Contrast

Posted on by

Technically speaking, “contrast” in the pictorial realm is the ratio between the darkest dark and the lightest light in an image. “Soft” contrast at one end of the continuum indicates that there’s very little difference between the lights and darks, the extreme being a “muddy” or “flat” image, gray overall—as in the image below.

 

In between the extremes of contrast is “medium” contrast, what we’re accustomed to regarding as “normal.” Contrast is never one thing, it’s the difference between two things. Below, there are bright whites, deep shadows and a full range of grays in between.

 

At the other end of the continuum, “hard” contrast is where the darks are as black as the medium can accommodate and the whites are as bright as possible, with no grays in between. Here, a duplicate of the negative was made on Kodalith film, a process emulsion that only “sees” pure black and white. Of course, a different composition was necessary in this case. Had the boat been in the center, the image would have been too static.

 

When considering a film negative, photographers speak of “Dmax” (maximum density, where no light passes through the film) and “Dmin” (minimum density, or clear film). In the digital world, cameras have a built-in histogram that displays brightness levels that can be adjusted for each of the primary colors. Whatever the medium, Dmax and Dmin are devoid of detail. Being able to control contrast is both technically and aesthetically important because it determines the amount of detail that will be visible in the shadows and highlights. 

Application

Aesthetically speaking, low contrast evokes a calm, flat, or soft sensibility. Such images are not seen very often because they’re not generally appealing. Extremely high contrast images are bold, evoking a sense of starkness and clarity. Commercial and fine art photographers working in black & white used to say the contrast adjustments were “right on” when the photograph exhibited “snap,” the full spectrum of tonalities—pure white and pure blacks with a full range of gray tones in between. Ansel Adams equated the tonal scale of photographic prints with that of a piano octave, and his ability to accomplish the full range of tones on photographic paper earned him a reputation as a master craftsman. For that reason alone, his original prints are far superior to the reproductions in books and posters. Seeing many of them when he spoke to our class at RIT, was a formative experience me.   

Technique

The first determinant of contrast is the light on the subject. The general rule is to not exceed the camera’s extreme brightness capacity—except in a few areas where it may be desirable or can’t be avoided—and then, look to see that there’s enough detail in the shadows where you want it. To get more detail, add more light. Controlling contrast amounts to adjusting the light on the subject or changing the exposure on the camera. Sometimes both. With film and photographic paper, contrast can also be increased by lengthening the development time.

Reflections On “Social” Contrast

There are innumerable social contrasts I could talk about, but the “elephant” in the nation at this time is politics—the contrast between “liberals” and “conservatives,” “Democrats” and “Republicans.” In the first posting of this series on the aesthetic dimensions—abstraction—I observed that one reason for the political polarization in this country and what sustains it, is the lack of agreement on the meaning of abstract words such as “liberty,” “freedom,” “justice,” “welfare,” “prosperity,” “militia.” Even simple words like “great,” and “fake” can have a wide spectrum of meanings. The assumption that everyone understands or agrees on the meaning of such words contributes to social contrast.

From photography, we can observe that low social contrast, where there’s little interest in public affairs and even less political engagement, a nation’s enthusiasm goes flat; the contrast range becomes contracted and dullness sets in. Feeling disenfranchised or helpless, citizens become disengaged and defer to the preferences of their representatives. The first image above represents this situation. The elements are all there, the subject matter can be recognized, but the expression lacks vitality.

On the other hand, when enthusiasm turns to fixated passion to the extent that neither side can abide the perspectives of the other, the contrast becomes so extreme it results in a war between the representatives, relationships become contentious and the system becomes dysfunctional. Extreme political contrast—represented by the last image—identifies citizens as either a black or a white pixel. You can’t be gray. Extreme contrast is militant: “Choose one position or the other and defend it!” There’s no detail, no middle ground, no substantive perspectives or open-mindedness in either of the positions.

Recent episodes of Madam Secretary and Blue Bloods on television provided demonstrations of how extremely high political contrast can be reduced to a functional level. In both instances, the characters representing the extremes fully expressed their perspectives with well-reasoned arguments, making sure their positions were clearly understood. (In formal debate, the first order of business is always for the participants to define their terms). With the point of disagreement clear, the characters came together and negotiated terms—in detail—that would satisfy both. They compromised and reached a workable, win-win arrangement. 

An argument is reasoned when it’s based on sensible thinking and logic that flows from statistical analysis or proven facts rather than an emotional appeal. For instance, an argument that begins, “The American people want… or know…” is the hallmark of an emotional appeal. Nations are constituted of diverse people having too many perspectives and preferences to be lumped into a single philosophical category, despite what surveys or poles might say.   

At the end of the Blue Bloods episode, Frank Reagan, the NYC Police Commissioner played by Tom Selleck, rebuilt a contentious relationship that had developed between him and his daughter, Erin Reagan, the Assistant District Attorney played by Bridget Moynahan, by citing a particularly nasty hockey game where the players on both sides shook hands after the game. Respect was regained in that situation by acknowledging that, although the game was difficult and people got hurt, the higher ideal of sportsmanship was maintained. I represent that situation in the middle image above.

Social contrast, like pictorial contrast, has to be managed. In the first place, that can only happen when both extremes loosen their grip on how to accomplish a common goal. That requires the participants to have open minds. Once the goal is clearly articulated and agreed upon, the means toward achieving it have to be presented in a reasoned argument on both sides, and that requires full concentration, understanding, respectful questioning and listening, again with an open mind. Finally, and critically important, the participants must consider the maintenance of their relationship as more important than winning any single argument. Shaking hands, having a meal together, meeting each other’s families, frequent personal interaction—these ensure that the next game will be played well.

“Thank you” to the writers, producers, and the cast of Madam Secretary and Blue Bloods. They are prime examples of television that’s socially responsible—showing the full range of tones, not just the extremes.

The critical contrast between seeing and looking-at cannot be overestimated. Seeing touches the heart. Looking-at is cold hearted. The difference may be a matter of life and death.

Fredrick Franck (Artist)

I welcome your feedback at <smithdl@fuse.net>

My portfolio site: DavidLSmithPhotography.com

My photo books: <www.blurb.com/search/site_search> Enter “David L. Smith” and “Bookstore” in “Search.”

 

Potential

Posted on by

 

Do you see the beautiful woman bathing at the foot of a waterfall? This isn’t a trick. It’s there. Do you see the elephant? There’s also the Empire State Building, a giant anaconda, the art collection at the Louvrè, my entire photographic collection and that of the Library of Congress. While it’s not a trick, it’s a perceptual challenge because they exist within the frame as potential. In fact, what the interior of this frame carries is potentially a depository of all the visual images ever produced in any form—drawings, paintings, X-rays, photographs, television programs, movies. They’re all there. So also, potentially, are the images that have never been seen, including those not yet imagined or produced. Like outer space which appears to be empty, the content of this frame is not. As with the atom, it’s full of invisible, vibrating fields and forces.

As a blog intended to model how photographs can be used as vehicles for contemplation, this edition is intended as an appreciation of the minds of scholars and researchers who are investigating the “unification” or “nondual” paradigm that’s gaining traction in the sciences. As I consider the areas that peak my sense of wonder and appreciation, I’ll let the professionals speak for themselves.

If you keep zooming in on the image above you’ll eventually see pixels. Each one is a hologram of the whole, pure potential individuated. It can be turned on or off, emit bright light, no light at all or the inconceivable combination of luminance values and colors in between. When a cluster of pixels are black, as above, or a blank television, computer, smart phone or movie screen, they are in the “ground state” of pure potential. Whether real or imagined, an infinite number and variety of images can be projected onto them. Okay, so what’s the big deal?

It’s that this simple insight is changing the way scientists are regarding the universe and the nature of Reality. It’s going to affect everyone and everything dramatically. It already has. The proliferation of electronic technologies in the last half-century was made possible by the conscious application of quantum mechanics, the knowledge of which has, in part, led to this shift in understanding. Up until recently the wildly held assumption among scientists has been that matter is fundamental to the universe and that eons of evolutionary process has resulted in a complex brain that produces consciousness. Without a brain there’s no thought. But that turns out to not be true.

Thousands of well-conducted experiments and case studies insist there is an aspect of consciousness that is not physiologically based, and is not limited by spacetime. More than that they propose consciousness itself is the foundation of all that is. Journals in fields as disparate as physics, biology, and medicine published papers of this research. There are so many that each discipline has its own literature. Everything we talk about, everything we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.

Stephan Schwartz (Science journalist)

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness.

Max Planck (Developer of quantum theory)

I am inclined to the idealistic theory that consciousness is fundamental, and that the material universe is derivative from consciousness, not consciousness from the material universe. The universe seems to me to be nearer to a great thought than a great machine. It may well be that each individual consciousness ought to be compared to a brain-cell in a universal mind.

Sir James Jeans (British mathematician and astronomer)

It is not only possible but fairly probable, that psyche and matter are two different aspects of one and the same thing. 

Carl Jung (Psychiatrist and psychoanalyst)

The universe is not conscious; consciousness is the universe.

Rupert Spira (International teacher of the Advaita Vedanta and an English studio potter)

That consciousness is fundamental is an ancient observation, articulated in most if not all of the ancient religions, East, West and indigenous, spoken of variously as “God,” “The Ground Of All Being,” “Ultimate Reality,” “spirit,” “soul,” “ether,” “akasha” and so on. In the 16th century, the Roman Church affected a separation between the emerging discipline of science and faith. Matter became the domain of science, and consciousness (spirit) was the business of the religion. One of the consequences of this was the separation of the individual self—the body perceived as a container for the soul, the brain a container for mind. Today, high school classes and university departments continue to divide science (objective analysis) and religion (subjective experience). Now, the emerging perception that our bodies, minds and spirits are different vibrations of one Reality—consciousness—has resulted in “integral” studies in science, art and business, and significantly, the blossoming field of “consciousness studies,” where rigorous research is underway.

The fundamental reality is not matter but energy, and the laws of nature are not rules of mechanistic interaction but the ‘instructions’ or ‘algorithms’ coding patterns of energy.

Ervin Laszlo (Hungarian philosopher of science, systems theorist, integral theorist and classical pianist)

Contemplating the above image and how it contains pure potential for every image ever produced—or will be produced—consider the screen you’re looking at right now. What you are seeing is the “collapse” or manifestation of my thoughts, represented in image and words, accessed from the Ground Of All Being. According to my readings, each individuated consciousness, as a derivative, participates in and draws from universal consciousness—that Ground. We experience it as imagination and inspiration, or simply “thought.” And we draw from it according to individual perception, needs and desires. An analogy often used to help us understand The Ground, is a computer or television screen turned off. Relative to the images projected onto them, the screen itself is stable, enduring, unlimited pure potential. It can display—actualize—the totality of visual information that exists in the universe. In this way, from unified nothingness, comes the potential for actualizing everything real or imagined.

Its ground state, the cosmos, is a coherent sea of vibration; pure potential. The waves that emerge in its excited state are the actualization of this potential, and they convey the vibration of the ground state. Consequently the clusters that constitute the manifest entities of the universe are in-formed by the vibration of the cosmic ground state. Object-like patterns and clusters of patterns in the high-frequency band are in-formed by the constraints and degrees of freedom that constitutes the laws of nature; and mind-like patterns in the low-frequency band reflect and resonate with the intelligence that permeates the wave field of the excited state cosmos.

Ervin Laszlo

The reason we all seem to share the same world is not that there is one world ‘out there’ known by innumerable separate minds, but rather that each of our minds is precipitated within, informed by, and a modulation of the same infinite consciousness. There is indeed one world that each of the shares, but that world is not made of matter; it is a vibration of mind, and all there is to mind is infinite, indivisible consciousness.

Rupert Spira

To illustrate the process of actualization, read the following descriptions and fix the image in your mind with your eyes closed. Take your time.

  • A blade of grass—make it green, then brown.
  • A bowl—make it wooden, then ceramic.
  • Put an elephant in the bowl—then a flower.

The words triggered your mind to tune into and download aspects of consciousness from The Ground—akasha, spirit, God—whatever name we want to give it. Instantly. And appreciate: images don’t exist anywhere in the brain. Their component energies—size, shape, softness, hardness, color, etc.—are energy stimulations, vibrations “collapsed” from the Ground, creating a composite “mentation,” a mental image  and a representative experience of an object.

Imagine your senses completely turned off. You can’t see, hear, taste, touch or smell. You have no reference for where you are or what is supporting you, because you can’t sense gravity. This is the Ground state, and the only thing that can be said about it is that it is. It exists. Personally, it’s the state of “I am”—a singularity, an individuated Ground actualized from the One, Ground Of All Being. Again, from my readings, evidence comes from the fact that every human being who ever lived and ever will live claims the same name in referring to him or herself—I.

In religious language, the feeling of love is God’s footprint in the heart. It is the experience of our shared being. Likewise, the thought ‘I am’ is God’s signature in my mind. The knowledge ‘I am’ is the shared light of infinite, indivisible consciousness refracted into an apparent multiplicity and diversity of selves or minds.

Rupert Spira

There’s a lot to contemplate here. As individual “grounds” of the Universal Ground—holograms of a sort—might each of us, and humanity as a whole, have unlimited potentials to create? Already we create our personal, professional and collective realities. And what’s the dynamic here? We can only experience the world in duality, in subject-object relationship, so how do we relate to the deep reality of nonduality?

Consciousness has to divide itself—into a subject that knows and an object that is known—in order to manifest creation. It has to sacrifice the unity of its own infinite, and indivisible being and seem to become a separate-self world, which now appears, as a result, to acquire its own independent existence. Thus, the inside self and the outside world are the inevitable duality that constitutes manifestation. They are two sides of the same coin: the apparent veiling of reality.

Rupert Spira

Everything already is. All we have to do is pull it out and make it be.

Linda Smith (My wife and editor)

Okay, given these perspectives, what would be an appropriate response? Science recommends the study and investigation of the material universe. Faith traditions—spirituality—advise prayer and meditation. Seems to me their integration makes sense. Study activates and focuses the mind; prayer and meditation stills it, takes it to Ground.

Below is an image that came into being when I reached out to The  Ground and “asked”—through wondering, imagining and playing—how I could combine something nature-made with something man-made.

Resources

Laszlo, Ervin. The Connectivity Hypotheses: Foundations of an Integral Science of Quantum, Cosmos, Life, and Consciousness. 2003.

Whole systems orientation.

Laszlo, Ervin. What Is Reality? The New Map of Cosmos and Consciousness. 2016

Scientific orientation.

Spira, Rupert. The Nature of Consciousness: Essays on the Unity of Mind and Matter. 2017.

Spiritual orientation.

Wilber, Ken. The Eye Of Spirit: An Integral Vision for a World Gone Slightly Mad. 2001.

Integral, human development orientation.

 

 

Invitation

Posted on by

 

This week I invite you to visit my portfolio website. I replaced 90% of the images there, dropped some categories and added others. The text elements are the same. The purpose of this site is simply to share my images as widely as possible, so if you like what you see please forward a link to those who appreciate photography.

Here’s the link: My Portfolio Web Site

Grandparents

Posted on by

 

Here are Linda and me at a restaurant with our grandson Ethan. He’s eight in this picture; now he’s nine. We love being grandparents. Among other things, Linda is his confidant and storyteller and I’m a grownup playmate. Recently I read an article by Rachael Caspari entitled The Evolution of Grandparents (Autumn 2016, Scientific American Special Collectors Edition) that provided some new and surprising information about the significance of grandparents in the development of our species.

She says that “living to an older age had profound effects on population sizes, social interactions and genetics of early modern human groups and may explain why they were more successful than archaic humans, such as the Neandertals.” Examining fossils from three million years ago, she and her colleagues found that individuals of this latter group, with few exceptions, didn’t live beyond 30—the age when archaic people lived long enough to become a grandparent.

Dying young was the rule for millions of years, and over that span of time there was a gradual increase in longevity among many of the groups they studied. Still, it wasn’t until around 30,000 years ago, very late in human evolution, that survivorship soared—among the modern humans of the European Upper Paleolithic.

While the researchers haven’t yet discovered the reason why this European group doubled their survivorship ratio compared to other groups—despite their living in much harsher conditions— they found that the increase itself had far-reaching effects. And here’s where the study gets really interesting in terms of our being and having grandparents.

In studying several modern-day hunter-gatherer groups, Kristen Hawkes at the University of Utah, and Hillard Kaplan of the University of New Mexico and others “found that grandparents routinely contribute economic and social resources to their descendants, increasing both the number of offspring their children can have and the survivorship of those children. Grandparents also reinforce complex social connections.”

For example, when grandparents tell their grandchildren stories of deceased relatives, they link them to the family history in a context of what the world was like back then. These and other stories of personal and social challenges successfully met, provide young people a sense of security and continuity. A grandparent can even help a more mature child appreciate that his standing on the shoulders of the past is a privileged position, from which he can reach for his dreams with confidence. Indeed, each new generation stands at the leading edge of human evolution.

Specifically, the author talks about early human elders transmitting information about the environment, teaching grandchildren which plants and snakes were poisonous and where to find water in a drought. While parents were out hunting, gathering or building shelters, the grandparents were educating their children about how to weave a basket or knap a stone blade.

Among her conclusions: “Multigenerational families have more members to hammer home important lessons. Longevity presumably fostered the intergenerational accumulation and transfer of information that encouraged the formation of intricate kinship systems and other social networks… Longevity resulted in increased population size by adding an age group that was not there in the past…Large populations are major drivers of new behaviors…and population density figures importantly in the maintenance of cultural complexity…Larger populations promoted the development of extensive trade networks, complex systems of cooperation, and material expressions of individual and group identity (jewelry, body paint, and so on).” What I take from this is that about 30,000 years ago, the advent of grandparents had a rising and cascading effect, compounding complexity, increasing survival prospects and passing on history, practical information, skills and wisdom in every facet of everyday life, both personal and social.

And significantly, according to Dr. Caspari, “growing population size accelerated the pace of evolution. More people means more mutations and opportunities for advantageous mutations to sweep through populations as their members reproduce. This trend may have had an even more striking effect on recent humans than on Upper Paleolithic ones, compounding the dramatic population growth that accompanied the domestication of plants 10,000 years ago.

The relation between adult survivorship and the emergence of sophisticated new cultural traditions was almost certainly a positive feedback process.. .Longevity became a prerequisite for the complex behaviors that signal modernity.” Indeed, it led to population expansions that had profound cultural and genetic effects ever since.

These findings prompted me to reflect on advances in the many contemporary fields of study and practice that are helping us live longer and healthier lives. On this turn of the evolutionary spiral, where technologies are outpacing our ability to keep pace with them ethically, I wonder if  grandparents might have another role to play.

For instance, might we help the younger generation see that their electronic “toys” and tools can have a higher purpose? And can we help them to see that absorption in tools of any kind can be a distraction from what’s really important in constructing a meaningful, happy and contributing life? Thirty-thousand years after the innovation of grand-parents, both in speech and action, we are still offering the incoming generations the great gifts of stories about their ancestors and the wisdom of our experience.

Although Ethan was just being a kid posing for this picture, in the context of this contemplation I imagine him giving us a double “thumbs up” for having us in his life. Would that I could, I’d return the gesture. What a joy and privilege it is to have him in our lives.

Elders play critical roles in human societies around the globe, conveying wisdom and providing social and economic support for the families of their children and larger kin groups.

Rachael Caspari, anthropologist

May You Have A Joy-Filled Season Of Light!

Posted on by

Light

by Rabindranath Tagore

Light, my light, the world-filling light,

the eye-kissing light,

heart-sweetening light!

Ah, the light dances, my darling, at the center of my life;

the light strikes, my darling, the chords of my love;

the sky opens, the wind runs wild, laughter passes over the earth.

The butterflies spread their sails on the sea of light.

Lilies and jasmines surge up on the crest of the waves of light.

The light is shattered into gold on every cloud, my darling,

and it scatters gems in profusion.

Mirth spreads from leaf to leaf, my darling,

and gladness without measure.

The heaven’s river has drowned its banks

and the flood of joy is abroad.

Walking The Talk

Posted on by

Winners at student-run awards ceremony for best video productions.

             Winners at a Xavier University student-run awards ceremony for best video productions.

Around 4:00 am on Thanksgiving morning I awoke and was thinking about our family tradition of going around the table where everyone said what they were thankful for. My former students came to mind and I realized that they’re all in fine jobs now, most of them with families of their own. Turning back to go to sleep it occurred to me that, for my words of thanksgiving to be authentic they ought to carry through into action. Truly, it’s “by our works that we shall be known.”

So I got up and scribbled a note to that effect. As soon as my head hit the pillow again there came an avalanche of things that I and most of us say we’re grateful for. I offer them here as sort of an after Thanksgiving contemplation. Also it gives me an opportunity to share a few photos of former students so you can see why I give thanks for the privilege of having worked with them.

So for what do we give thanks—and what action would make it genuine?

If plenty — share

If shelter — contribute to those without it

If for a toy or technology — use it harmlessly and to uplift the spirit

If a belief — live it in silence

If health — do what it takes to maintain and improve it

If a relationship — caring, support and empowerment

If love of anyone — expand it to include everyone

If a child — demonstrate love and be a positive role model

If pets or other animals —treat them with respect and provide for their health and well-being

If the work we do — perform it with competence, responsibility, creativity and integrity

If a life of privilege — do something for those less privileged

If for those who serve in the military — let them know they are appreciated

If for a skill or talent — develop it further; use it to uplift and inspire

If position or status — use it wisely and execute it kindly

If simply being together — make the most of it

If a system — care for both the parts and the whole

If freedom — respect the freedom of others

If the use of environmental resources — strive to minimize the footprint and recycle

If power or wealth —make it “power with” rather than “power over”

If peace on earth — make peace where there is conflict and create peace in the home

If silence — be the witness

If simply being alive — do some small thing every day to  experience joy and advance purpose

 

Reviewing my notes I noticed that gratitude and its attendant actions have been nicely summarized in the perennial advice to “walk your talk.” It’s a lot easier to remember on a daily basis.

To be civilized means to live a life that cherishes others and exudes gratitude and joy.

Bo Lozoff (Humanitarian)

If you are really thankful, what do you do? You share.

W. Clement Stone (Philanthropist and author)

 

 

 

 

 

 

HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO ALL MY STUDENTS!