Its been a long time since I have posted in here; but I guess I need a way to get some of my projects out in the open. Behind the scenes, ever since I was a Psy major, I’ve been working on these things. Whether you understand it or not you should know what I’m sticking my nose into. Sorry, I just reexamined the theory over these last few years first; it will get personal next. For friends, family and colleagues.

For the last couple years, after getting an aboriginal book from a friend: “Other Council Fires Were Here Before Ours, ” by Jamie Sams and Twylah Nitsch, I sort of had a “theme” running in the back of my mind. They mentioned how mankind has been going through various stages of development, the current one being “The Era of Separation.” So, for my writings, it got me thinking along the lines of “separate mode,” “interconnected mode,” etc. And it got me interested in setting up the proper skills and orientations to deal with and act in these potential ways.

From my journal . . .

I guess I can start from scratch here again. The basics are: man has “self-awareness,” and has an “image” of himself. This is wonderful! Man isn’t just glued to the environment; but like a bird, can access it from a great height. We are “abstracted.”

The ignorance of our orientation within these abilities and ways, though, leads to problems.

For instance, I’ve mentioned the idea that man gets caught in his headspace. There’s the ignorance of the fact that we have a “view,” and that there are other functions that go beyond it. So, like in those dramas during the early century, there was a ghostly man, sitting in a dusty realm, with nothing to do, and no one else. Then were those therapies at that time that viewed anything else other than this abstraction as nasty, irrational. Other issues were of those who would take on this view and personhood idea and try to aggrandize it. We’d call that Ego now. Be rational; have a strong ego. Of course, I mentioned the issue of learning how to see beyond, or connect; but then had to deal with all those who were wondering what I was doing, and attempting to apply their generic, or colloquial understandings. Externalization. Sorry, I was beyond that: it was a true function.

Steps up . . . I’m seeing the possibility of an interactive orientation of knowledge for this abstraction now. (This is me speaking.) A ”life-world,” using figure/ground as a rule of thumb, within a greater consciousness . . . the ground. There some other orientations and standards here. Intent. Easy to see how there can be other parts, greater parts, the bigger picture and the greater consciousness. Hmmm . . .

Enhanced Self.

Journal again . . .

Passive mode. What comes in, like a camera, light affecting the film. “The Apparent.”

But we are interconnected, active here, involved with it all. The mind, consciousness, reaches out. It has the quality of “Intentionality.”

I used the idea of the figure/ground as a rule of thumb . . . originally thought of this as a “perception,” with shifts possible. Slowly began to see this included more extensive possibilities. “Where one is at,” in face of the universe, and what one can know. When I finally saw how this in interaction with the “Ground,” I started to get somewhere. The bigger picture has its say. Took me past classical psychoanalysis; ie, the nasty ways one seems to be seeing a lot.

Even mainstream psychology, in Learning, and Perception, has attention as one of the steps. You could say, without attention, there is no understanding. But it even turns into something more, within this context. Since I was a psychology major though, I kept it within this context, as far as using ideas goes. Experiences may say and add something else.

So, if we are passive, the figure/ground connection gets forgotten. We move into separate mode, subject/object. We get the externalizing ways here, pulling us somewhere else, away from oneself. Our “intrinsic connection,” ie., one with the universe, gets lost.

Intent reconnects, reactivates, draws both parts into it. A more direct relationship here.

This relationship between part and whole, figure/ground, is what made sense to me, got me going. Got rid of the subconscious. There is a context. “Where one is at” . . . Knowledge, meaning, form. It is also easy to see how there can be other parts, how the picture can be re-drawn, how the greater can be involved. An evolution, growth, learning is possible. Artistic, creative, new ways and forms possible.

This allowed me . . . been through a lot of stages with you on how to interpret things . . . to see these things that one can “simultaneously view, and experience and be.” “Plenums,” not “bits.”

This context . . . in the past, for instance, there was the issue of the conscious and unconscious mind. What that means now is really evolving. Rather than something buried and nasty, there’s the potential for being greater, something greater. Ultimately, its all complimentary, interconnected. Its a matter of stepping up to the plate; intent connects, activates.