Jan Cox Talk 0188

Contradictions: Life, Too, is a Partnership

Audio = Stream from the bars below in two parts.

Audio Download = DOWNLOAD Jan Cox Talk 0188 from Cassette
AKS/News Items=None
Summary = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below


Summary by TK

Jan Cox Talk # 188, Dec 19, 1985, runtime 1:25

  [The Partner: unique to man and can be seen to mirror Life's own contradictory structure. The "alpha stage" or level (initial level) of The Partnership is where the Partner's speed is absolutely out of control, unchecked, if not attended to. You must find that you are faster than The Partnership so as to preempt its unprofitable speech and actions. Once you can have a continuing awareness of The Partnership's mumbling you simultaneously discover you are faster than it is and can preempt it. Ultimately you can not ever allow The Partnership to say anything you wouldn't say (even internally). Consider a possible "beta stage" or condition of The Partnership: what if you could get The Partnership to work for you --for This Thing? You can't stop or eliminate The Partnership, but what if you could get it to work on your side, to Neuralize on your behalf while you are engaged in the necessary everyday "out there" activities of earning your living etc. Consider how it is possible that anyone involved with This Thing makes any progress. Which voice might The Partnership be in the picturization of consciousness as not only the Yellow Circuit but a simultaneous awareness of the working of all 3 circuits? The circuits themselves or the conscious awareness of their interaction? ]
  [SERMON TOPICS: Consider: Good Cheer and its strain on The Partnership. Above-the-line data and its unnatural stress on The Partnership. The "beta stage" possibility of The Partnership and the historic accounts of "gods-speaking-to-men".]
  [Subcultures--e.g., "Texans" as identifiable, independent ethnic-like group. But how can such boundaries be drawn? And to what purpose are such delineations put by Life? Closer, even ordinary scientific look clearly shows that no such identifiable grouping has any real basis (i.e., 68% of "Texans" have moved to live there in the last 3 years etc.). Neuralize that there is a need to draw external bounds and this mirrors the Yellow Circuit functioning of OAI: I vs. Not-I. The brain's physical working depends on OAI...division of This from That. A corollary example: Life's simultaneous press to guarantee due process under the law while in other areas of its body advancing vigilantism, lynch mob justice. The lesson for the Few: at times you need to be a vigilante internally, i.e., at times you need to slap the partner around--move outside of civilized procedures. BUT you must have a full understanding and remembrance of the 2 camps promoting due process vs. uncivilized procedure. At times, in fact, you really can't get anywhere without resorting to vigilantism.]
  [Special Head Theorems: "not guilty by reason of insanity" an excuse, an explanation for behavior, but there is no such thing. Must see this. SHTs pose no hazard, no stress whatever to The Partnership --in fact reinforce it. Useless for The Few.]
  [Couples/relationships in the Group. The strain of This Thing is not the certain death-knell of relationships." ]
  [Genetic sexual shadow show" --women admire men's strength and assurance while men suffer doubts and insecurities. ]
  [Re: Homosexuality: men's expressed fears of homosexuality. Must see it is in the minority --part of Life's counter-structure--part of Life's own partner. Individually there is the self-condemnation aspect of it always present, but if not homosexuality then something else serves the same purpose: The Partner. Homosexuality is not psychological. It is physical, biochemical, genetic. ]
  [Neuralize two of the voices of Life's Partnership: nature vs. nurture; genetics vs. environment. These are absolutely insoluble at line-level conscious level. ]
  [If you get hurt physically, take care of yourself. Only one sure cure for back problems: HT (horizontal time).


Transcript

CONTRADICTIONS:  LIFE TOO IS A PARTNERSHIP

Document:  188,  December 19, 1985
Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1985                        

     I have described man's internal condition as a partnership.  As opposed to many of Life's current descriptions of the internal workings of the so-called human mind, my description points to a new kind of area.  This partnership situation is unique to man.  It can be seen in a certain way as being Life's own contradictory state.  I want to point your attention toward the way this partnership works specifically in several areas of man's consciousness.

     If you're not attentive, or you're just becoming aware of the partnership, the partner's speed goes absolutely unchecked.  To get out of this situation you have to reach a stage of a kind of continued awareness of the partner's talking and mumblings.  Let's call this stage one.  You will discover that whatever it is in you that is undertaking the observation is faster than the partner.  That is how you can keep him or her from making unseemly comments, overt or not.  If you can't do that, then you are forever locked into a very unprofitable situation.

     In a sense, once you become responsible at all, you can't let the partner say anything that you wouldn't say.  You cannot let it get to the voice level, even if it's just inside your own brain.  You cannot let it get to the picture level, even if it's just inside your own "picturesque" consciousness.

     Almost any average sophisticated, educated person would admit, "Yes, there does seem to be two people in me," or "I have conflicting opinions and desires."  The most widespread explanation today would be the "unconscious mind."  Notice I just started out telling you it was a partnership.  It seems to be you and this other person inside you.  If you try to watch what is going on, you will see that the roles reverse themselves continually -- what you were previously calling "you" is now the partner and what seemed to be the partner is now you.

     Whoever seems to be in charge at any given time is the one who says, "I disapprove of having thoughts like this.  It's just mechanical prejudice coming out when I attack someone else's religion or their nationality.  That's not really me.  I know better.  At least I've reached the point where I wouldn't say it out loud."  That is not good enough, as you should suspect.  Even all the ordinary religions say it isn't good enough.  Just keeping your mouth shut is no big deal.  It just means you're wired up for fear; you're afraid to say what the partner wants to say.  But to do This you cannot even let the partner say it to you.  You can hear the partner about to say something -- the "dark, secret, unseemly thoughts" that people suffer over -- and you can stop him.  You simply cannot allow the partner to say anything you wouldn't say.

     How about this as a possible stage two:  what if you could get the partner continually involved with Neuralizing, instead of his circuitous ramblings?  I've pointed out that it's not a matter of stopping the partner.  It's not that someday it's going to shut up.  In a sense, it's never going to shut up anymore than you're going to stop dreaming -- Yellow Circuit activity must go on.  Energy that must be transformed and transmitted, and much of that process takes place in the area that seems to be "not you":  i.e., the partner. What if you could take what people think of as the uncontrollable, unusable, unconscious part of themselves -- the partner -- and put it to work for you in This pursuit?  Consider this -- how do you think people who ever get anywhere with This do it?

     Assuming there is/can be awareness of consciousness and of the circuits' activities, let me ask you this: which voice might the partner be?  That of the circuits or that of consciousness?  If you choose one, then what is the other?  You might say, "Hey, wait a minute.  I chose the wrong one."  So you go back and try it the other way and you're back in the same predicament.

     All of you have heard or read about so-called "geographic differences" in people.  For example, how people in one state can be characterized as compared to those in other states.  You, some combination of you and the partner, are reading the article or listening to the speaker.  They speak about the singularity of these people, their culture, the way they treat other people and their attitudes toward each other. You're sitting there, you and the partner, and you flow with it, perhaps occasionally nodding your head in agreement.  "Yes, it's quite obvious that the people who live in this state are different from those in bordering states."  Everyone would agree with that.

     But now let me ask you, where is the actual boundary between these people and those of a neighboring tribe or state?  You could have two brothers living a mile apart and there is a borderline that runs between their houses.  How does that border make them different?  Maybe they married sisters, work in the same place, eat the same food.  Realize now, I'm not talking about political boundaries or anything else in the real world.  What differentiates them?  How do you draw a boundary?  What is the purpose of this?

     The involvement with such pursuits is not a new phenomenon.  You could be attempting to describe say, what an Athenian is, as opposed to a Roman.  You look more closely and discover 22% of the people that lived in Athens were captured slaves.  They weren't born there, and they didn't consider themselves to be Athenians at all.  At this, consciousness would shake its head, "Well, wait a minute.  That's not what we're talking about.  We're talking about boundaries, and the dynamics involved in the concept of an 'Athenian'."  There is a need to draw external boundaries:  it is a reflection of the Yellow Circuit's detailing of "this versus that."

     Most of you have voices decrying the injustice cum stupidity in the world.  You see people fighting over a little strip of land for thousands of years or people of the same nationality fighting each other because they're of different religions.  Some part of your partnership says, "Good grief!  When will people wake up? This is dumb, it's insane!"

     You didn't make that up.  It's a reflection of Life.  Part of Life's body is involved.  Simultaneous with your partnership saying, "How dumb," Life is making people draw boundaries and take them very seriously. There is a continuing need for this and it happens in you, too.  For example, there is a feeling in you that there is a boundary, say, to your apartment.  If a stranger walks in, and is not welcome, the feeling is, "Don't do that!  If I wanted you in, I'd ask you in!"  Of course, it's not verbal.  It comes from the lower circuits.  You can see it operate in your dog as he marks out his territory.

     All the circuits need to draw boundaries, from the Red Circuit's delineation of its territory to the Yellow Circuit's delineation of "this versus that."  There is a reflection of the Red Circuit's territoriality in the Yellow Circuit.  To operate in its ordinary, binary fashion the Yellow Circuit has to continually draw boundaries. That is why the Yellow Circuit cannot totally cease condemning people who fight over boundaries, whether they be geographical, religious, or the like, even though it often declares such conflicts "completely insane."

     The Yellow Circuit is the one that condemns fighting and killing over boundaries, not the Red Circuit. Ultimately, the only thing the Red Circuit condemns is the possibility of it getting killed.  Killing, hostility, and the defense of territory are part of the Red Circuit's job.  Condemnation of Red Circuit barbarism comes from higher up in the nervous system.  That doesn't stop the hostility though, because the Yellow Circuit itself is continually dividing things up.  It must.  It cannot function otherwise, and so, the boundaries are continually drawn.

     Sometimes, I hesitate to draw out specific contemporary examples because they may not be relevant to someone getting this years from now.  For those of you reading this at some later time I'm going to be referring to instances wherein the workings of civilized procedures seem to have gone amiss.  For example, people are still attempting, forty years later, to deal with war criminals from World War II.  An alleged war criminal is imprisoned in a European country since he was caught several years ago.  He was condemned in the press and supposedly many eye witnesses saw him commit numerous atrocities during the war.  Now there are cries that he's getting old and hasn't been tried and may die before his trial.

     It's true in all of the civilized world that procedures in the judicial system seem to allow for the delay, if not the miscarriage, of justice.  Say there is someone who has been convicted of a despicable crime. Somewhere a judge suddenly says, "Established procedures were not followed here.  This man has got to be retried."  That is some part of Life's body speaking.  Simultaneously, some other part of Life's body says, "Sometimes there should be a way to bypass continually running around in judicial circles.  It allows people who were involved with heinous crimes to, if not go free, at least not be irrevocably convicted.  Here is someone who killed a whole family in front of 500 witnesses.  It's been 20 years since he was convicted and he's been in and out of court ever since.  He's written a book about it and even goes on television once a year!  Enough is enough!  It's good that we've got a judicial system that seems to give all of us protection, and that we're civilized, but there must be a way to deal with special circumstances."

     Simultaneously other voices say, "Nay, nay.  On the contrary.  It is just under such circumstances that these kinds of civilized procedures must be upheld.  We cannot act otherwise."  This second group says, "We understand many reasonable people believe we should have a way to bypass civilized procedures under special circumstances.  We understand their feelings about this and their passion, but we cannot bypass these procedures, because they are what makes us civilized."

     Let us now jump to what I'm really pointing at.  The Few must often move, at least internally, outside of civilized procedures and approaches.  Need I say, that is not a ticket to ride or an a priori excuse to do something despicable.  Remember the two groups of people.  Can any of you guess that could be you and your partner?  You've got to be aware of both those voices in you and then, internally at least, be able to move outside of civilized approaches.  There are many instances where not doing so means you don't get anywhere with This.

     Alright, don't take this literally, but here's a cheap shot for those of you who feel as though you almost heard something, but you're not sure what it was.  Would you Consider the possibility that there are times when you've got to slap the partner around?  I mean in a way that would be considered husband or wife beating if your partner was of the opposite sex, or would be considered war crimes if your partner was an opposing army.

     You have got to have an awareness that these groups are speaking for Life.  One says, "Under special conditions we ought to be able to be uncivilized and take care of things.  I mean there are some things that must be accounted for immediately.  We can't spend forever worrying about the niceties of the law, religion, or morality."  The other group, with very similar vocal power, says, "No, I know how you feel about it, but it's under those very conditions that it is most imperative we do stay civilized."  You've got to understand both, and you've got to be prepared to slap somebody around.  But you can't get involved with it.  You can't slap a tar baby because suddenly you will become what you're slapping.

     You've got to know how to be uncivilized.  You'll find there are many instances where you cannot be civil, at least internally.  You have to be prepared to go beyond civilized behavior to make any progress in This Activity, unless you plan to live to be two or three thousand years old.

     I want to expand a bit on the topic of "special head theorems," a term I used recently.  You've must realize that Life has spoken through man and produced "special head theorems."  They are normally referred to under the general guise of psychology.  Religion has spoken about them too, but said they came from down in your heart somewhere.  The point is man believes there are special rules, special considerations, special conditions, special excuses that apply to the head, to man's mind.  If you want to look at the law for a second, one of the most glaring examples today is the various forms of "not guilty by reason of insanity or impaired judgement," not guilty by reason of a "special head theorem".  "Yes, there is no doubt that this guy killed his mother, but after we talked to him for a few minutes we realized that this guy was about a roll short of getting his roof finished," the police say.  The defense attorney says, "Psychiatrists have tested this man, and they will testify that there is something wrong with him.  He is incoherent.  He didn't know what he was doing."  That is a "special head theorem."

     It is not only the courts and attorneys who use "special head theorems."  Since you are a part of Life, you use them, too.  A "special head theorem" is an excuse, and I don't mean that in the cruder sense.  It's not limited to that.  It's a continual modus operandi:  "There are 'special head theorems' at work in whatever I do and whatever has happened."

     One "special head theorem" in common usage is:  "Yeah, well I was...I guess I was drunk again this weekend."  Or, "You don't know how all my life I've worried about things."  Or, "I have a very poor sexual self-image of myself."  Or, "I'm not saying it's right to behave like that, but..."special head theorems."

     "Special head theorems" exist only at the ordinary level.  You've go to find out they are to be abandoned.  You can't say from the neck up you are a special case because you are not.  As long as you continue to apply, and allow the partner to apply, "special head theorems" to you, the partnership is never in danger of breaking up.  You're never in any grave danger of undergoing any kind of severe change.

     You can continue to apply "special head theorems" to yourself with the belief from you or the partner that you are engaged in some kind of battle or some kind of secret undertaking.  Simultaneously, you feel as though part of this battle is involved with "working out problems" in the area signified by "special head theorems."  It is widely believed that one way to get a better grasp of what one is, is to come to grips with one's shortcomings and thus hopefully become a better person.  Life, in general, would support you and say that you're right.  But in reality, you are just killing time.

     Being antagonistic toward the opposite sex or having the potential to be an alcoholic has nothing to do with "special head theorems."  You think it has something to do with your so-called mind.  It has nothing to do with anything that could have happened to your mind.  It has got something to do with what happened to you genetically.  Being depressed has nothing to do with "special head theorems;" it has something to do with enzymes.  It has something to do with hormones.  It's got something to do with the biochemical makeup of your brain and other systems.

     You might say, "I'm depressed because my mother was depressed and she made me depressed."  Your mother may have been depressed.  Very likely she was, but it was not living around her that made you depressed.  "My father was a drunk and it upset me so much, I'll be damned if it didn't make me start drinking!"  That is a "special head theorem."  Now it's very likely that you have the same kind of genetic quirk as your father, but it's not to be found in or understood through any "special head theorem."  They are all dreams, partial reflections of reality.

     Life has been dealing with "special head theorems" for a long time.  Centuries ago some of the Greeks and Chinese were playing around with ideas that in the last 50 to 60 years developed into the so-called science of psychology.  The ideas didn't change very much, they just gained wider acceptance.  These concepts have gotten to be so widely accepted they are starting to fall apart.  Life is starting to realize that psychology doesn't explain anything.  It served to support the expansion of Life, but it's becoming passe. Life continues to expand, and it is now moving beyond "special head theorems" as useful explanations for behavior, though the general feeling is that they do exist.

     Psychology and psychiatry are undergoing a major, gradual upheaval.  Alcoholism has gone, in recent years, from being a personality weakness to a disease.  That is progress.  Life is expanding.  Bit by bit psychiatry is beginning to dismiss some of the total acceptance that certain "traumas" cause related phenomena.  Psychiatrists have been confronted with the fact that some people have a shortage of certain chemicals that the body needs.  A person with those particular deficiencies can be given corrective medication and 30 minutes or an hour later they say, "Hey, I'm not depressed!  I forget what I was like! Please write me out a lifetime prescription!"

     There are no "special head theorems" available for someone involved with This.  You cannot embrace or tolerate them.  You must realize that you always have, you and everyone else, and then you must eschew them.  They don't explain anything.  You should find it be a case of fascinating justice that Life has arranged it so the one thing that believes in "special head theorems" is the one thing that excuses itself.  (I am personally thankful that the bowels and stomach can't talk.  If they could we'd all be in a world of trouble.  You can work on that later.)

     I've got a few other areas to talk about that I think you'll find interesting.  Most of the rest of what I plan to say has to do with sex.  Many people who come into This are concerned their involvement here will endanger a relationship they're in.  Your relationship is not necessarily doomed, but generally what I've said is there is a distinct possibility of a relationship breaking up if one partner gets involved in This and the other does not.  I hate to keep stripping every semblance of mysticism away from This, but let me point out relationships break apart in other areas of Life.  For instance, a man and his wife break up and she says it happened because he's become a fanatic fan of the local baseball team.  He goes to the ball park every time they're in town to play.  Or, he starts to go bowling five nights a week and she doesn't have any interest in bowling.  He's never home and his kids think he's the milkman.

     These are, I admit, crude examples.  If you start moving up the scale out of the Red Circuit you get into an area that seems to be getting closer to calling upon the spirit, the soul, the mind of a person.  Suppose now you have a couple and one of them decides to become involved with a religion.  Maybe the person wasn't religious before.  Perhaps he was even an atheist.  From some general viewpoint their interest in the religion could be considered a worthwhile thing.  Then the other partner says, "I haven't got time for that."  You surely see that is the way things work.  There is a distinct possibility the relationship is going to break up.  So it's not just simply This.  There is not some mystical vibration going on.

     Here is something about homosexuality:  anyone who has an interest in This and is concerned about homosexuality must see that it is in the minority.  This has nothing to do with objective right or wrong. We're talking about Life's contrary structures.  We are, in a sense, back to talking about Life and its partner.  How else do you explain that Life has large numbers of people who say, "Here's a sexual activity I'd like to do," and then have at least an equally large number of people say, "No, no!  Have mercy, no!  Don't even think of it!"  I've asked you before in various ways, not referring specifically to homosexuality, to what avail is this?  What use could Life be making of this?  Does no one see any possibility that on another scale Life has its own partner?  Could Life itself be in a partnership?

     First realize, without any judgement, that homosexuality is, to say the least, in the minority.  Now, the questions I get from those that are or suspect themselves to be homosexual are always on the basis of self-condemnation.  Life would have you blame the self-condemnation on the environment.  "Well, I seem to have been born this way.  The majority of people are not homosexual and they condemn sexuality. They make me condemn myself."  Let me remind you that everybody is filled with self-condemnation.  That is part of the partner's job.  If you're not homosexual, then the self-condemnation is going to be about something else.

     There is no such thing as someone picking up homosexuality.  If you are a homosexual, you were born one.  It is genetic and it is not going to be changed.  For those of you who worry about, "Oh my god!  Am I about to become homosexual?"  Or, "You don't know some of the weird daydreams I've had.  I feel like just any minute now I may just break down and become gay.  If circumstances were just right, or if I weakened...," or, "I better not have a drink.  I feel like if I got half drunk I'd become gay."  Let me say this:  if all or any of that were possible you're a homosexual to start with.  There is not some vague imaginary line. You're simply erotically attracted to one sex or the other.  It cannot be changed and I've got nothing to do with changing it.

     The dissatisfaction with being homosexual or whatever it is that you're dissatisfied about in yourself has to do with being in the partnership.  One of you, and it could be either one, pick out something you want and the other resists it.  The moment one says, "This is what I want," the partner says, "That is exactly what we won't do."  Do not feel as though you're going through some personal suffering.  There has always been a minority of people attracted erotically and sexually to the same sex.  There is an equally large number of people who condemn that.  It is condemned on religious, social, and psychological grounds.  There are many people down at the Red Circuit level that just say, "Hell, I don't like it.  Let's beat them up."

     Don't just look in one place or the other.  Don't just look at Life and say, "Well, wait.  Life is arranged in a cockeyed manner."  You still don't understand that Life has a partner.  You don't understand its contradictory nature even though you are surrounded by it.  Being a homosexual does not put you in a special class, that you have some excuse or explanation or that Life is picking on you in some way.  I will grant you this:  it does seem to be more intense because of the great power of sex.  Don't think if you're homosexual and you get involved with This you'll get some special consideration.  Nobody gets that.  But you've got to realize you're in the minority.

     Life continually has people do things and then condemn themselves for it.  Life brings up one group to do something and then brings up another group, at least as large as the first group, to condemn it. They're both coming from Life.  It is not people condemning other people.  It's all part of Life's contradictory structure which is a part of its growth process.

     Through man, Life has continually presented the heredity versus environment question.  You could see that as two voices of Life's own partnership.  If any of you get a glimpse of that, then you'd see why that question has never had a satisfactory answer.  I could stand up here and give a convincing argument that homosexuality is environmentally produced.  If you don't like that example, I could use alcoholism or depression.  Then I could turn around and just as easily argue that all such matters are genetic in nature. Can you see the argument can never be satisfied at Line-level consciousness?  Can you see that as a reflection of the two voices of Life's own partnership?