The Wild Mind – Part II

Magic and Myth

Scientology 1.0.0 – Part 8

In the last article I made a list of a few of the kinds of experience and thinking that most likely must happen if there is ever to be anything as crazily complex, and impressive, as modern civilisation. Whatever they may actually be, these ideas occur and enfold, like steps on a ladder. Eventually, as the ladder extends and evolves, it gets us to the kind of reality that we exist in today. Pooh poohing things like magic and religion as the ridiculous superstitions of our ignorant ancestors may be de rigueur in the halls of academe and the mass media – dominated as they are today by rational atheists and materialists – but, as I propose, this is much like kicking out all the rungs of a ladder whilst standing on it many stories up (oop!).

Of course there are things not on the list and probable multiple ways to arrange and compile it, not to mention possible problems with sequence and simultaneity. Still, I progress with my comments and descriptions about each thing on the list, not because most readers won’t know about them but because this is my way of laying out a bit of the background, the provenance, of Scientology 1.0.0 in preparation to discussing its inception and history.

So, to continue….


Magic – Invisible forces

Magic is definitely one of those rungs and like all the other rungs, it plays a key role in life, whether one knows it or not.

There are ways it can go dangerously sideways though, in my opinion. How magic works and then becomes confused with superstition, has been getting people and groups into trouble all through history*. Then there’s a middle ground where magic seems to be just weird. However it’s viewed, ideas about magic played an important, possibly accidental, role in the popularisation of Scientology 1.0.0 in the 1960s. Later, magic would play one of the key roles in the development and eventual establishment of Scientology 2.0 (1981).

Before the beginning of Western civilisation (dated to approximately 4,000 – 4,500 B.C.) there were towns (the Urban Revolution, 9,000 – 10,000 B.C.) and before towns there were tribes and those tribes consisted of people working with good and useful ideas. I deduce this was so, that the majority of their wild thoughts were mostly working for them rather than against, because otherwise how did we get here? They were smart people and we are mostly a huge success because of them. (Apparently, in some circles, this idea that we moderns are a feature of Man’s evolution rather than a glitch is a very controversial view: those who advocate for the Noble Savage, or support Rousseau’s view that civilisation makes men méchant [evil, villainous] feel it’s all been downhill since those halcyon days and, if given the chance, will gladly return us all to those innocent times; more on that later.)

There is a big difference in the complexity of a tribe, consisting of maybe fifty to a hundred and fifty related people, and a civilisation, consisting of thousands, and now millions and billions. Small tribal groups don’t need organised religion or philosophy per se, but they do need magic, because that’s how the world mostly seems to be. Acting as a causative agent in this world, magically or otherwise, rather than the effect (victim), is a key factor to success, if you can get it right; this is because chronic fear and apathy kills every time. Recognising and then working with all the myriad invisible forces for one to achieve a positive role in life would appear to go a long way to obtaining basic survival. Magic is also necessary in order to achieve ultimate survival: enlightenment.

It might be that our ancient ancestors set their groups up similarly to the way hunter-gatherer groups are in the world today. In each group there was, of course, a hierarchy of some sort. Then, there was a specialist who works with magic. This professional would intercede between the group and whole other levels of reality and perception to assist the group going forward.

Today, magic plays, and still plays, this vital role at all levels of groups, from the simplest tribal groups to modern civilisations consisting of hundreds of millions. Maybe we don’t see this fact in this way much, here in the West, but anybody who has paid attention to the thousands of different ceremonies and rituals all over the world will see the magic in most of them.

Thinking about invisible forces (as much as “force” plays a role in the mind or outside of temporal reality) makes me think about the world as it was before towns. I mean, I think of this: when you live in a time on the planet where your group is only about a hundred or so people and your contact with other such groups is, probably, rare, you live in a world that’s hard to picture today (unless you visit the Serengeti or some similarly unvisited, unpopulated region… and stay there without Wi-Fi for a thousand years). A world, because there were so few of these groups – relatively speaking – is a world of truly vast spaces (just painting a picture here). A world that is also, mostly, quiet! or rhythmic (seasides), or filled with white noise (rivers and waterfalls). And, at night, dark! Depending on where you are, nights go on forever and if you live where there is often cloud cover, such as the Nordics did (do), very dark, something not experienced much these days if you live in a town or city. Time doesn’t exist at all in the way we know it today and attention to everything in the world is at a level that, by comparison, would most likely make many of us in the present seem less asleep than dead. When there’s a disruption, a thunder storm say, or an earthquake, it gets noticed! This vastness of space, the deafening quiet, and eternities of time and night – plus attention to everything (and so much more) would, I think, have to make certain things seem plain. Such as magic.

Magic: the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces. From late Middle English: from Old French magique, from Latin magicus (adjective), late Latin magica (noun), from Greek magikē (tekhnē) ’(art of) a magus’. (Note: a magus is a member of a priestly caste of ancient Persia, the sort that came to say hello to Jesus of Nazareth when He was born.)

I admit I actually don’t know much about magic, but I do know it’s been a driving force, for good and ill, since the dawn of time. Things like shamanism, divination, various healing practices and so on, all ways and forms of doing magic. So I’m guessing that these complex arrangements with invisible dimensions and forces, the myriad ways of working with them, were a key factor in achieving group success.

“Invisible dimensions?!” screeches the materialist, “there you go, down the rabbit hole and into the weeds!”. Yes, here we go indeed! I’m aware, of course, that it can be argued that success was achieved despite, or regardless, of these practices but how would one know? Personally, I don’t think so.

I suppose, too, some people can think that what was thought of as magic was simply poor observation (the eternal struggle to define causes) but I’d argue, again, how would you know? You can really only make that claim in a world that has developed the Scientific Method (as it came to be known only recently) and it’s odd, sort of creepy, little sister, rational atheism. For a person to so casually dismiss the invisible realm, I guess one must first become thoroughly enthralled – or overwhelmed – or jaded – by the material, visible, one. It seems awfully silly to sometimes have to make this point by indicating that the vast majority of forces in life are immaterial and invisible; things such as viewpoint, opinion, consideration and morality, aesthetics, love, and on and on and on. (Also, and I‘m quite happy to stress this point endlessly, as far as poor observation goes, there is so much more to reality than we will ever know that we will always, always, have a very limited perception of it; discovery runs on an infinite scale, after all.)

Moving along. Our early ancestors most likely didn’t see the world as clearly divided into the subjective and objective, as per the Enlightenment, they seemed to have lived in it in a completely different way; at least from what I can tell from the many accounts I have read of tribal peoples, as encountered by Western scholars during the past five hundred years. (In a number of these studies I couldn’t help noticing how common it was that many of these people described westerners as sad and lonely; they apparently thought that this was a very odd thing, what with their view of us all living in a fundamentally intelligent and welcoming – albeit very strict – universe.)

Magic though, still exists, of course, because most of life is immaterial, invisible and unmeasurable, such as opinion and morality, aesthetics, etc., etc. (not to mention the things that go bump in the night, especially those long dark, dark nights).

A good therapy will treat one of the most invisible things of all: viewpoint. Modern psychologists and neurologists locate and identify all sorts of activities in the brain whereby electro-magnetic forces appear to be activated, excited, in said organ (there’s specific terminology for all of the following phenomena which I’ve left out because I can’t remember it). For example, some fellow, a tennis champ, let’s say, is in a brain scanner and the technician asks him to imagine playing a set and then, magically, on the screen, some part of the guy’s brain lights up: “Aha, there’s the part of the brain where tennis gets played!”. The questions are, is that an indicator of a cause? A correlation? What? And remember, the subject had to be asked to think about playing tennis before the light show, so is the technician the primary cause in this case? Some sort of “mind network” maybe? Or maybe the act of tennis is the key. Lord! where the heck exactly is this point that does all this tennis playing and viewing? Reality and consciousness are the greatest mysteries before such professionals today – as they ever have been. Mysterious stuff when you get right down to it.

So when you’ve got a pretty good therapy going, as per Scientology 1.0.0, you’re apparently going to have the best success by treating the viewpoint of the patient, wherever it’s located, rather than the brain – too many variables there, otherwise. What does the viewpoint – the you – think is going on? What’s your view of your life? The better the patient is guided or helped to discover for themselves whatever the truth of the matter is, for them as well as the actual reality of their situation (confusing the subjective with the objective is what’s wrong with most of us in the first place) the more successful the therapy is going to be.

I remember reading somewhere magic being defined as “the unseen hand” and thinking that that was a pretty good definition, depending on how you define “hand”, that is: as an active role in achieving or influencing something. This could apply to the illusionist’s art but that’s not how to interpret it here. Rather, I imagine an exactly patterned, well ordered, universe (possibly even innately intelligent) acting as the hand, yet that is so vast and so complex that it appears as thoroughly random and chaotic to our extremely limited perceptions.

To illustrate, imagine being on a google x google light year square chessboard where you, and every other person on the planet, could only measure one picometer square of it. This while an army of giant grandmasters are continuously and endlessly playing round after round of blitz chess on it. It would definitely appear not just random and chaotic but, if you believed that what you could measure was all there was to reality, also meaningless. And, if you are particularly insistent upon this “meaninglessness”, you’ll become a determinist (here come the gulags!). Funny thing is, no one can “prove” one or the other, so what’s actually on the table is viewpoint, your consideration and opinion and how that assists you. If your opinion leans toward the materialist/nihilistic, then how does that serve you? Should others be careful of you? Probably.

Little story: Back when I was a callow youth, I had become frustrated and impatient with the kind of talk that had become common place among the newer Scientologists of the 1960s and ‘70s, about their special magical knowledge and supernatural abilities. Maybe nothing wrong with that, I guess, except we are in an era in the West where it seems the subjective is often taken too much out of context and the objective world, as a result, is getting increasingly short shrift. This chatter seemed to my young mind to be developing into a concomitant and unwise decrease in critical thinking. What with rising incompetence, deteriorating constancy and, perhaps most ominously, the enabling of many bad actors (such as the countless louche and disreputable types that commonly pray upon the more credulous – of which we had more than our fair share) it appeared I may have had a point. I mean, I didn’t have a problem with so-called woo-woo † (woo is fun sometimes) but I did if it seemed to displace useful good sense.

So one day during dinner with my dad (just the two of us), I complained about this by blurting out grumpily, “Where’s all this magic everybody keeps on about?!”. He looked astonished and then asked me, “What magic?”. I explained. Then he asked, “You don’t see the magic?” and I said “No!”. “Well, come on now!” he said, “What magic are you talking about?”. I thought for a second and said, “Such as seeing through walls and levitating things, I guess”. He said, looking even more surprised, “You can’t levitate things?!” and I said “No!”. He looked further perplexed and asked, “You can’t levitate those?” indicating the salt and pepper cellars on the table between us. I indignantly and emphatically said, “No!”. “Really?” he said, “You can’t levitate those salt and pepper shakers?!” Harrumphing, I got up out of my chair at the end of the table and made a great show: “Well, not unless I get up like this, go over to them like this and grab them with my hands and do this!” jerking the shakers dramatically up in the air. Dad looked at me smiling then and said, “And that’s not magic?” We had a really good laugh.

Now, he was just having a bit of fun there but the truth was his point, what’s magic after all? What’s the ultimate source, as in cause, of anything? After that exchange I began experimenting a lot with movement and thought: you move your arm up, how did that happen, where did that come from? The idea, thought, to move your arm, where did that come from? Think of a rose… why a rose? It could have been, say, think of a chair or the colour blue… on and on. I was only a teenager, after all, but still. I came to see eventually that it’s a deep, deep mystery where anything comes from, that there is a lot more to attention and reality and its direction than what I had been assuming.

Anyway, those who actually have spent any considerable time consciously alive, really alive and open, will eventually begin to perceive complex connexions in the world and, possibly – potentially – maybe – even ways to influence them, if only subjectively at first (change your mind = change the world). Always remembering, hopefully, not to confuse it too much with that pesky objective realm.

(Another way to look at this may be as Clarke’s third law, which states that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. This is probably because, as mentioned before, most natural phenomena has always been and always will be hidden from us. I mean both the principles and the workings, for there is an infinite amount of things to be discovered. Amusing fact: did you know, for instance, that in the early 1600s natural philosophers (as early scientists were called back then) all thought mice appeared spontaneously in hay? That was only a few years ago! (I can hear some scoffing at this idea of infinite knowledge but I assure you, if you ratio all known things against all of the yet to be known the answer will always be 0, as in nothing – that’s why truly wise people, as they get more information, often claim to know less and less.) This view of Mr. Clarke’s, though interesting, is actually off point but it gets referred to so much I thought I’d mention it.

Also, let us remember the placebo effect: more magic! People get well despite injecting distilled water and taking sugar pills. Sadly that too can get out of hand and become strangely twisted: Millions of people are happily marching around at the very time of this writing wearing masks and swearing that they’re alive today because of them. Maybe so! Maybe so, I believe it. But masks, which have been proven time and again, have no measurable effect at preventing the spread of viruses. What I’m saying is, if you’re the one already infected then definitely wear a mask, although even then it’s not that good, What really works is quarantining – and I should know: I lived and worked in a Petri dish, otherwise known as a ship, for eight years and saw an outbreak of almost every kind of contagious sickness you can think of. I truly believe in the placebo effect though and support it in all its forms. (Codicil: I do think masks over-all are actually extremely dangerous, from a social and psychological standpoint, and not worth the price thusly being paid; especially by infants and little kids).

The really, really, important thing I’d like to say about magic however is in reference to the real deal, that magicians can gesture or wave a hand and something at a distance can appear (without mirrors or invisible strings), or speak to the spirits and have them speak back, or walk through walls or levitate salt cellars and so on. Well, this I’ve personally never experienced nor seen but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t or can’t happen. Where the discussion really needs to be right now, in my view, especially as it concerns Scientology, is the reality – or unreality, the applicability – or inapplicability – of that sort of magic; in other words: responsible magic vis-à-vis irresponsible attempts at magic.

This is where I bring up Goethe’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (played brilliantly by Mr. Micky Mouse in the famous movie Fantasia). Basically, the apprentice loses control of the spell because he is not yet a master sorcerer but my preferred reading of the poem is that he would only have attempted the spell because he was being lazy. This is what I’m referring to when I mention irresponsible attempts at magic; the desire to do what I call an “end run” around nature, often with the purpose to avoid effort (as in work). Life, without work, useful, productive, valuable work, isn’t worth much. What I mean by responsible magic could be exemplified by the imagination, blood and sweat plus skill that goes into art and inventions as just a couple of examples.

There are levels of responsibility in all things and responsible magic is in a whole different league than those who need the physical universe to be different than it is. I mean, we share this universe and even the things you “own” you don’t actually. You have property, sure, and nobody else has a right to use it without your permission or due process (depending where you live), but all this stuff is actually made up of particles that make up the whole physical universe. If someone gets to move these particles around willy-nilly, wouldn’t that be a cheat, even dangerous? Or even a kind of theft, or, at least, a misdemeanour? Sort of like someone sneaking into your home at night while you’re asleep and rearranging your sock drawer whenever they please. (I’ve heard this power expressed by people who “change” or “create” the weather [may my friends who believe these sorts of things forgive me], which always made me wonder about their hubris: that incalculable trillions of vectors get to be switched around because they wanted sunshine on their wedding day. To be fair, there is such a thing as prediction, which is when you just know how something’s going to go, after all – and that, that right there, is magic of a very high order. If more of us paid more attention to what we just know – really know – with no second guessing and whatnot, then we’d be living in a whole different and much improved world, I think.)

Some of my views may be a bit harsh, I suppose. I mean, I don’t exactly get to say what’s magic and what isn’t; outside of my own opinions it’s a hard thing to know. And, besides, to be equitable, this sort of “magical thinking”‡ may be pretty harmless for the most part. On the other hand, the important question in my mind is, where does it stop? This is why I have always preferred a small republic form of government over any kind of democracy because the majority of us just can’t reason as well as we might, especially at that level; not yet anyway. I say this because of the propensity for the majority of voters to support regimes that offer them “free” stuff like food and money and there are few better examples of magical thinking than that. Most of us are pretty good at thinking about the things that are local and intimately perceivable, such as our own homes or neighbourhoods, but getting our wits around bigger systems doesn’t seem to be our forte, nor should it particularly… yet. As far as critical thinking, it’s a complicated skill that needs to be learned and personally I just haven’t met many people who are much good at it without training. (Not that I’m so great at it either, I’m just saying.)

Speaking of magical thinking, its use in place of reason where reason would much better serve. Little children, usually ages three to six, quite naturally default to this way of seeing the world as they have yet to learn how to think. One is born with all the feelings and emotions under the sun but thinking correctly is a matter of education and it’s that training that gets these elemental forces under control. (Watch out for that six month old that you think is just crying, it’s probably actually an expression of a level of rage and frustration that would make a Hitler blush.) Quite a few adults get wrapped up in magical thinking too – as so famously happened with the Boomers and many of their progeny – perhaps because it gets drummed out of them during childhood instead of incorporating it into higher orders of mentation and cognition (more on this in a later article).

It’s possible it may be too late for many adults today, but if we get around to properly restructuring education, we might stop crushing magical thinking (along with their vital imaginations) in our children, with all its attendant wonder and amazement, and try instead incorporating it into all the more sophisticated types of thought that came after the hunter-gatherers. And then, who knows what might be accomplished?

That being said, just one little extra stab at emphasis here. It is no coincidence this relationship between magic and wonder (awe). As I believe I mentioned previously, I think wonder is mostly lost to adults in these modern times and that is a very, very serious problem in my view; I don’t know, could be just me. It takes a lot of courage (another invisible force) to live properly in the world, life is not for the timid, after all. Therefore I think wonder, because of its connexion to faith (yet another invisible force), cannot be experienced much by the faint of heart, for they’re too busy worrying; to lose the wonder is to risk the death of all spirit. I think we miss this point today, possibly because we equate courage with force (military, police, emergency personnel), which can sometimes be the case, sure, but it’s better to equate courage with wisdom and there is no greater invisible force than that.


Myth – Stories of being

Speaking of courage and wisdom, the other thing that we did and still do is tell stories about being in the world. Life’s whats and hows, I guess you could say. This is another rung in that ladder that got kicked out in the 20th century, so badly so that it took a movie, Star Wars, to help put it partially back. It’s still pretty much a dead subject though and it really oughtn’t be.

My thoughts: myth is original pattern recognition, but at a much, much higher resolution than can be accomplished by any algorithm extant today. They are the accumulated wisdom of thousands of years of trial and error and you must have these guides because it’s more information than can be learned in the span of one life. To live properly you’ve got to know where you are – what sort of world you’re living in – and what you should do about it; not knowing these things can make the world more dangerous than it needs to be.

Figuring out what we’d need to know about our world we ought to first have a pretty good idea about the game itself, what sort of board it’s being played on, as well as what the game looks like when you’re winning or losing.

First step: figure out where you are.

In Scientology 1.0.0 not knowing that is called – not surprisingly – a Confusion. Confusion is the bottom of a spectrum consisting of 12 delineated levels, or conditions, as they pertain to existence (more on this in a later article). Confusion, in Scientology 1.0.0, means: un-located in time and space; a total, or near total, failure to recognise any pattern(s). (It is surprising, when you investigate people from this standpoint, how many of us really don’t know where and when we are. For instance, a lot of what is happening politically right now in the U.S. is perpetrated by activists who think it’s Selma in the 1960s.)

Then you need to work out how to be in the world that’s been revealed (every person has to make this discovery for themselves at some point in life and then figure out how to be in it or end up being only half alive all their years, or worse).

Second step: figure out that and who you are.

In Scientology 1.0.0 these are the 11th and 10th levels of the conditions of existence §. Knowing that you are is key to becoming an active and thus necessary player in the world. If you don’t come to realise that you are in fact an effective and essential character on this wild and woolly board, then whatever you do will be as mostly ineffective as the NPCs (non-player characters) in video games; or worse: a cypher. After that you need to figure out who you are, which is to say, your character’s specific role and all that entails. (These steps go far beyond, “my name is Jane Smith” because the next question is always, “well, who’s Jane Smith?”.) Perhaps I’ve made this sound too simple but it’s actually pretty complex stuff and, often, just like not figuring out where one is, goes unfortunately unattended to for the whole of one’s life.

So. Myths are stories about the origins and nature of the world (i.e. the Enūma Eliš or Hesiod’s Theogony) and stories about being in it (i.e. the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Labours of Hercules). These stories were key to relaying that there is a certain order in the world, a world that would otherwise seem too random, and a certain disorder to it too (the capriciousness of the gods) and were crucial at preparing the groundwork for other necessary kinds of investigations of reality yet to come (philosophy, psychology and so on). Because these stories, always multifaceted and symbolically dense, were yet so True in describing the world as it actually is we got through to today. Hooray! (I’m a firm believer that Man is the best invention since life itself.)


Quite a few of the main themes though, seem to be: intrepidness and courage. Courage, courage, courage; the way up is the way forward, no room for mice-people! Apparently a world managed with the right attitude and in the right way is a world worth living in.

Through much telling and retelling (and a lot of living), these ideas would be developed the world over. As for us in the West, our best examples come from Ancient Greece as written down by guys like Homer. The Iliad and the Odyssey are two of the best instruction manuals for being ever produced in the West (besides the Old and New Testaments **); a perfect synthesis of art and historical fact, as it turned out. A fellow named Herr Heinrich Schliemann excavated Troy in the 19th century proving that what experts thought of as pure fiction concocted at the end of the Greek Dark Ages was as much historical record as it was imagination [maybe imagination], proving that there’s a mix. Bottom line here: No Homer = no Western civilisation ††.

Before and since Homer there were of course many myths telling one particular tale: heroes and their adventures. Heroes have to confront all sorts of challenges, the way that, when we do the same, life becomes a damn sight more interesting (I think we’ve all known our fair share of Labyrinths, Hydras, Gorgons and dragons). No matter who you are, what station in life you find yourself in, you will be met by multiple trials; challenges which may be broken down symbolically into various types and categories. Read these hero myths with care, and perhaps some help, and all could be revealed.

Many of these myths could also be metaphors – although metaphor isn’t quite the right word – for the ultimate story too, such as confronting the shadow monsters in our own psyches. Like a hero descending into the underworld, we can attempt to find what Carl Jung called “the treasure hard to attain” – and by slaying the dragons residing therein we might repossess our very own souls. This sort of adventure is the most harrowing and most difficult adventure of all. Because so few of us can do this – and of those who do, so few complete the journey – most of us just learn to manage our demons; or dope them, and ourselves, into, well, I don’t know what.


A really good read: The Hero with a Thousand Faces, by Joseph Campbell. What he goes to show are the similarities the world over of mythic tales and the repeated arcs that they take. These are his observations about the stories told again and again of the basic circumstances of Man in a very definite world, regardless of culture, and what happens when we take it on in such a wise as to obtain the best chances of survival and success. Although many are stories of environment, nature, our interaction with it, and the kinds of spirit that wins or fails, the most important tales are discussions of ideal being, tales of the ideal man such as with the Osiris/Horus composite or the “mega-man” – King of Kings – as discussed in the New Testament (although Jesus was clearly an historical figure he is much more than that). Note: It could be argued very strongly that these descriptions of this ideal led directly to being able to eventually describe, delineate, the Sovereign Individual, which when realised gave us the American Experiment of 1776.

But the discussion of the delineation of this ideal has really dropped out in the past century or so. To such a degree that today too many of us almost invariably use the wrong measurements for being whether it is as an individual or a group. Example: using net worth or gross income or even – shudder – GDP ‡‡.

Anyhow. Myth, as it is commonly understood, doesn’t get discussed a whole lot in Scientology 1.0.0 but the Mythic Ideal Being very much does because the courage and fortitude to stand up straight in the world is foundational to any true journey of the spirit.

So, the Hero idea has been under siege to the point that the word is now pretty meaningless. I mean, today anyone who can put a little mist on a pocket mirror is a “hero”; it’s like the worst kind of suffocating, smothering mommy archetype has taken over the world.

Personally, I experienced this murdering of the Hero while going to school where myth was taught mostly as tales from a very, very distant past – sort of like glancing over some grains of millet without realising your looking at the staff of life. To be fair, this was how it was being taught to 8 year olds and had I stayed in school (this was in England) we probably would have gone on to investigate these stories in greater depth, England still being very connected back then to its Brythonic roots and later Ancient Rome and Greek culture. Looking over the high school curriculum in the United States though, revised (read: sabotaged) in the 1950s, it was clear myth was being taught as the interesting although quaint blather of primitive peoples. (Much later in 2017, talking with a friend’s daughter who had graduated at Oxford University, I discovered, whilst discussing Beowulf, she had been taught to believe fervently that the Western myths are the dangerous delusions and calculated propaganda of an all white patriarchy designed to crush the proletariat, exploit women, persecute non-gender specifics while colonising and enslaving all people of colour – whew!)

These days you could maybe take courses in astrophysics, biology, ethics and Behavioural Psych 101 to try and learn this stuff about correct being, I don’t know, I didn’t have much of a formal education. But, despite being probably futile for that purpose, those subjects seem a bit dry to me – if you didn’t also study mythology because that’s where the music is.

So it’s a bit of a problem that today the term “myth” mostly means “untrue”. Indeed, and to try to be fair to the educators of the past and present, it is very true that after many translations and transliterations, and after multitudinous, ever changing cultural paradigms, many of these tales are somewhat baffling; what possible use could they have today? But here’s an observation: Many persons who are otherwise unaware of, or could care less about, our mythic underpinnings, are yet huge fans of things like The Lord of the Rings and the Harry Potter adventures, proving that these stories remain as active and alive as they ever were and still actually do, even now, play a role. My thought is that this is so because these movies and books are new and modern, and therefore recognisable, retellings of our most ancient observations. Even so, we as a culture should still link it up and make the connexion.

Which is: Man is fundamentally an intrepid species of keen intellect and faculties and it’s these tales that guide and inform him. Luckily for us, Joseph Campbell and many others following him, plus many artists, have gotten onto this problem one way or another and myth is back into the conversation somewhat. This is one of the deep wells I personally hope we will all be drawing from more and more going forward.

To sum up: after art, the divine embodiment of the creative urge, there were early forms of religion, the recognition of the uncompromising forces of existence as itself. Then there came magic, negotiation with invisible forces, then myth, ways to properly take on the world. Next: Mysticism and Psychology.

Things are building up.


* Famous examples: Human sacrifice, flagellantism, witch trials, left/right politics (joke).

† Woo-woo is a term coined by James Randi, a well known skeptic, (1928 – 2020). Basically it means a confusion, or a contrived collapse, between the subjective and the objective realms. By contrived collapse I am referring to the manipulation of this confusion by people like Mr. Randi’s arch-nemesis Uri Geller. (No, he did not psychically bend all those house keys and forks, it’s a version of an old illusionists’ trick – anyone who can actually bend objects with their mind would not be messing around stupidly with flatware, trust me).

‡ The belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them.

§ People familiar with these conditions may wonder why I left off the names of these levels. I left them off because those labels are only applicable to one when falling down the scale, not rising up.

** The Old Testament is a Middle Eastern document, whilst the New Testament anthology was mostly compiled in North Africa. Still, these works are perhaps the most foundational of all in the Western canon.

†† Possibly should make a little note here: Western civilisation is often referred to today as “Anglocentric” or “Eurocentrism” or “Western-centrism”. But watch out, this in an attempt at PC (politically correct) Newspeak. The fact is, without invalidating any of the thousands of other cultures, Western civilisation and its ideas are the dominant ideas in the world today because it developed individualism and the resultant explosion of technologies we wouldn’t recognise the world without.

‡‡ GDP, gross domestic product, doesn’t mean anything good if too much of the country’s product has no intrinsic value: GDP goes up when a nation goes to war or starts printing money like crazy as many are doing now. Then think of all the other businesses that “win” while others lose: healthcare (makes money so long as people are sick), justice and law (makes money so long as there’s crime and insanity), the media (makes money so long as there is confusion and controversy), on and on. I’m no socialist though, absolutely nothing at all wrong with dosh, lovely stuff, wish I was smart enough to have much more of it; but GDP, like GI (gross income) is a really stupid and short sighted way to measure what’s actually valuable.

Published by aconwayhubbard

Painter living in Los Angeles.

One thought on “The Wild Mind – Part II

  1. Magic; intent stylized and protected with a bit of obfuscation.

    Scientology; intent cleaned and drilled?

    Sort of similar to the difference between art and engineering, but still the same fundamentals.

    We fill the gaps in our understanding with comfortable ideas, myth, until we progress.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: