Tag: home

Why Are We So Divided?

Posted on by adrian

Q. Why are we so divided? How can we bridge the divide? How can we heal the divide?

A. The “divide” is created because the humans have not learned to appreciate and celebrate the difference existing between and amongst people and peoples.

“Why are we so divided?” Implicit in this question is the presumption that division is inherently bad and wrong and that it should be avoided or eradicated in favor of ‘unity’, which in turn is presumed to mean ‘uniformity’ and ‘equalization’.

Paradoxically, this presumption and the implied need for equalization are precisely what lead people to bemoan, “Why are we so divided?!” Why are “we” so divided? It is because the “we” that bemoan and ask do not know the cosmic holiness of differentiation and separation, and thus “we” do not know how to appreciate difference or separation.

“And ye shall be holy, for I am holy” (Lev. 11:44). In the archaic Hebrew language, the root word used for ‘holy’ meant ‘to separate’ or ‘to differentiate’. The main feature of the Cosmic Creation is differentiation and separation. The creational power of the Creator lies in the act of differentiating and separating. The heavens are differentiated and separated from the earth, light from darkness, seas from lands, animals from plants, and the human beings from one another.

The vector of human evolution is in the direction of ever-increasing differentiation. The more evolved the person is, the more unique and singular he/she becomes. Therefore, the work of a great genius is singular and has his/her unique signature. Uniqueness (unicus = one) is the only real unity or oneness the human being can authentically attain.

Modern genetics shows that difference between and amongst individuals are a sign of the health of the species. Prolific individual differentiation is the genetic imperative, for the reproduction of like beings impoverishes life to the point of genetic disease or species extinction.

In fact, the difference is that which binds us together in unity-in-diversity. The difference is what makes us belong to the whole as distinct parts in integration-in-differentiation. Thus, what unites us together is not equality or uniformity but difference. We are all equal only in that we are all different.

Furthermore, every movement of differentiation involves a new movement of integration as a part, and vice versa: every movement of integration involves a new movement of differentiation inside the whole.

Our society is for the most part against individual differentiation and singularity. Our education forces, enforces, and re-enforces homogenization and equalization. Thus, most people only learn to groupthink, which is not real thinking at all.

People become indoctrinated with a certain belief system or ideology enforced by the external authority in order to serve and benefit the system, i.e., the power structure that constitutes the external authority. The few manage to “succeed” to become the members of the power structure—the elites. The majority end up serving the system in their serfdom, subsisting as homogenized, conditioned, and well-adapted people—as ‘nice’ and ‘sincere’ but inauthentic and unfulfilled persons.

Thus, sadly people can only come together if they can groupthink together inside the comfortable echo chamber. When they meet a person or group that does not agree with their group-belief, they do not know how to be with that person or group, peacefully and productively, except engaging in a mutual discord in order to bring about some equalization.

Ideology or belief homogenizes people’s mind into holding the same opinion and into ‘not-thinking’ the same groupthink. They fail in the task of (ontologically) achieving complete individual differentiation, which is what individual sovereignty means, and of (epistemologically) having individual perspective, which is the basis of authentic, original thinking.

“Bridging the divide” does not come through equalization. The attempt at equalization is an attempt at control. People try to ‘equalize’ others according to their homogenized beliefs. “Bridging the divide” and “divide and conquer” are two sides of the same equalization strategy. This equalization strategy is one of the ways through which the system, and thus the power structure, are maintained and perpetuated.

They bemoan “why are we so divided?” If we can appreciate and celebrate the difference, we will not be bemoaning the division—then we will know that in the ‘holiness’ that is separation and differentiation, healing already is.

Human beings are uniquely different, and there should be as many perspectives as there are individuals. This perspectival diversity, which leads to ‘ideodiversity’ (ideational diversity), makes the world so much more abundant and wonderful, even as the biodiversity of the rainforests contributes to the prosperity of the whole and each life form existing therein.

This does not mean that all perspectives or ideas are equal in value or validity. Some perspectives, ideas, or paradigms are greater in value or validity or verity than others with particular situations or contexts.

We should all engage in robust discussions, dialogues, examinations, and experimentations to determine the value, validity, and verity of ideas. Sometimes the other person’s idea or hypothesis may be proven to be better than yours, but through the whole process everyone has the opportunity to learn and benefit.

Therefore, my suggestion for us is to:

(1) Examine and understand our own judgment, belief, and attitude toward people and peoples who hold different beliefs and ideologies from our own:

(2) Learn to understand the different ideas and ideologies other people and peoples hold, and let go of our judgment, belief, and attitude through understanding.

(3) Appreciate and celebrate the difference.

The ability to understand and appreciate different points of view is primarily the function of imagination. Imagination requires the psychological freedom from the past—from the cultural programming and social conditioning to which we have been subjected. Imagination is a ‘holy’ process; it is the process of creating, of distinguishing and differentiating, in thought concomitant with the process of existential distinction and differentiation as an individual.

Disagreement as the Beginning of Thought

Posted on by adrian

“The beginning of thought is in disagreement—not only with others but also with ourselves.” —Eric Hoffer

Before we can truly agree or disagree with a certain argument, we must first understand it. More often than not, however, people express disagreement without understanding the argument with which they profess to disagree.

Such “disagreements” are pseudo-disagreements. Since, as Niklas Luhmann identified, without understanding there is no communication, the pseudo-disagreement is a sign of a breakdown or an absence of communication, despite the surface appearance to the contrary.

In the absence of communication, hence of understanding, the person disagreeing is disagreeing really only with an argument of his own making which is not the original argument made. It is a monologue, a soliloquy, in which one disagrees with oneself.

Such pseudo-disagreements are everywhere. Therefore, by inference, pseudo-agreements must also be everywhere.

What is understanding? Understanding is the successful re-creation of a (complex of) thought.

Agreement is the affirmation that the thought re-created and understood is fundamentally identical with that which one holds with respect to the subject upon which the thought is formulated.

Disagreement is the recognition that the thought re-created and understood is critically different from that which one holds with respect to the subject upon which the thought is formulated.

In disagreement, understanding requires re-creation in the sense different from ‘creating again’ but instead in the sense of ‘creating a-new’. This intellectual act of ‘creating anew’ in thought is what constitutes real thinking.

Thus, real disagreement occasions the generation of real thinking.

In sharing my thoughts and ideas, I seek cogently argued disagreements from people more than agreements.

In developing my thoughts and ideas, I seek creative surprises that may await in the course of thinking which contradict with or differ from my currently held thoughts and ideas.

In reading other thinkers’ intellectual work, I seek ideas and theories that challenge my own thinking which expand at minimum and destroy at maximum my ideas and theories.

What is the question that I am not asking, the asking of which will take me further and higher in the wondrous opening in which and out of which the universe eternally regenerates.

The scientist thinks to know. The philosopher knows to think.

“No one can be a great thinker who does not recognize that as a thinker it is his first duty to follow his intellect to whatever conclusions it may lead. Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study, and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think.” —John Stuart Mill

Belief & The Matrix

Posted on by adrian

BELIEF & THE MATRIX (1)

All beliefs are pretense; they are pretense of knowledge where real original knowledge is absent.

All beliefs are borrowed; they are borrowed from others belonging to the same community of believers who share the same belief.

All believers are collectives, not individuals; their self-identity is defined by the collective to which they belong, while their relative self-worth, their sense of pride and superiority, is determined by the socially agreed-upon esteem of the collective.

There are many different belief systems existing in the world; yet the mechanism of believing is common to all. Genes are replicated; while memes are recreated. This recreation of memes is what believing is.

The mentality of believing is the mental metaprogramming wherein believing, memetic recreation, takes place as mental programming, mental conditioning.

The potential creativity of humanity is 99% entirely and exclusively used for memetic reaction. This is why there are only very few who are truly creative or imaginative. And only the individual, not the collective, can think, create, and imagine.

The mental metaprogramming and programming take place collectively. The awakening, the liberation from the believing and beliefs, takes place individually. Alone you become awakened and free. You are alone in your awakening, but you are not alone in your aloneness.

BELIEF & THE MATRIX (2)

The century-long, systematic, and systemic collectivist, “liberal/progressive” (so-called) education in the West has created a massive Stockholm Syndrome amongst the victims of the indoctrinatory education programs.

Consequentially, not only have the “liberals/progressives” been the victims but they have also become the perpetrators of indoctrination and the propagandists of the collectivist “liberal/progressive” ideologies of their oppressor.

Late Cleve Backster, a good friend, great man, brilliant experimental scientist and the renowned creator of the Backster Method, the standard used for polygraph tests, was also a master hypnotist. He once told me that the higher the IQ of a person, the easier it is to hypnotize that person deeper. This explains in part why so many educated intelligent people are so deeply indoctrinated in irrational ideologies.

The superficial dichotomies such as the Republicans vs. the Democrats or the Conservative vs. the Liberal fail to capture the real dichotomy: Collectivism vs. Individualism, which today politically plays out as the (“New World Order”) Globalism vs. the (Individual National) Sovereignism. It is also the dichotomy of the Crowd Psychology vs. Individual Psychology.

At the heart of tyrannical collectivist ideologies—Marxism, communism, socialism, fascism, “liberalism”, or “progressivism”—there is self-hatred in various forms, expressions, and manifestations, such as envy, jealousy, guilt, shame, rage, inferiority/superiority complex, and so on. This deep self-hatred exists conterminous with the ‘victimhood consciousness’ and also the introjected identification with perceived victims and the projected hatred of perceived perpetrators.

The Matrix (of the movie “The Matrix”) is the world constructed within the language/symbol-mediated secondary reality through the secondary (illusory-delusory) cognition/cogitation/perception, that is ruled and run, with collectivist ideology and crowd psychology, by the “liberal” globalist elite who do not care about their herds (the peoples) but only exploit them to perpetuate their power and control. The Matrix is the collectivist nightmare herds in actuality wherein humanity subsists as herds.

The Matrix is multi-layered. Even those who are cognizant and aware of the first layer, become easily captured by the second layer, a meta-layer. This is the reason that it takes a real intransigent lifetime commitment to and vigilance for liberating ourselves from this world of illusion-delusion-collusion.

We can transcend the Matrix only individually as a free, sovereign individual because only the individual can think and imagine. Collectivism subverts this very ability which is the essence of human dignity. Real thinking starts with the assumption of the ignorance of authority. Therefore, we will trust the person who is seeking truth but doubt the person who (says) finds it.

We each needs to be authentically committed to self-honesty, self-integrity, self-responsibility, and ever-greater truth. We each needs to be free of victimhood consciousness. We each needs to know his/her real self-worth and has genuine self-respect, independent of other people’s opinions. We each needs to let go of the desire to be recognized or successful according to the Matrix value system. We each needs to have the courage, valor, and fortitude to be true to one’s own Self/self in the face of all the temptations as well as the oppositions.

This commitment to the creative, evolutionary movement of freedom toward trans-Matrical freedom and sovereignty involves keenly attending to our own cognitive dissonance. When we hear or read something that goes against our beliefs, we experience a cognitive dissonance. People (are conditioned to) reactively dismiss or deny the verity or validity of it to remain in their psychological comfort zone wherein they will continue to stay metaphysically asleep.

The cognitive freedom from all forms of beliefs and from the mentality or metaprogramming of believing starts with questioning everything, including our own beliefs. This is the primary function of philosophy as a discipline as well as the essential feature of the scientific attitude.

“Question authority. No idea is true just because someone says so. Test ideas by the evidence gained from observation and experiment! If a favorite idea fails a well-designed test, it’s wrong!”—Richard Feynman

When we learn to make political science (and in fact all sciences) move towards a real science, when we can apply the scientific method in politics, when we can bring the scientific attitude to politics, and when we can make politics empirical rather than ideological, we will become far more efficient and effective in the management of political and societal affairs.

FOR DONATION:
BTC > bc1qhtkfj254w4q3uuyhdzd5qy6wupmyc7at9uez80
Copyright ©2026 Yasuhiko Genku Kimura. Web Design by Adrian Gulo