Deus Ex

Richard Dawkins is a man I both like and, to some degree, respect.

Yet, despite this; despite his obvious intellectual capacity, knowledge of the world and tireless crusade against human stupidity, I suspect--based on the authenticity of my metaphysical experiences and the habitually beneficial practices I'm routinely involved in--that he is reaching ridiculously misguided conclusions born from an incomplete and flawed understanding of reality as it actually is.

He operates in a wholly different domain to my own: He of the respected scientist, author and skeptic-thinker domain; I of the practicing-metaphysicist, forum-poster and open-minded domain. And yet, despite the chasm that seemingly separates us, we share a mutual commonality: we both aspire exclusively to the absolute truth of all things.

We just go about it in a different way.

No doubt he would have as much to criticize in my approach as I do in his. His a skeptical bent: a worker bee of current scientific understanding of the world and mankind, intrinsically enslaved within the paradigm, constrained, inflexible thinking resultant from a machine-like education. What has no yet been comprehensively proven is then de-valued and fully-disregarded. Reality itself supersedes the human entity.

I on the other hand, whilst still championing critical, intelligent-thinking and evidence (usually more empirical-based, obviously), have a different approach: The human entity--which, at its greatest extent, is beautiful and dynamic, possessing extraordinary capacities for thought, feeling and creativity--is of primary importance. Why is it like it is? What is the ceiling of its abilities? What is the ceiling for experiences beyond the domain of the known? These are the questions that truly matter, beyond the superficial realm of textbooks, laboratories and cold, rigid reason that so constrain our true potential. For if there is a ghost in the machine, an essence at the wheel of the human creature--hypnotized by this one reality--then internal exploration of self is imperative.

I find there to be something disquieting in the total faith attributed to the brain's assimilation of the external world that Dawkins and people like him so adhere to. Science, supposedly, is the progressive study and comprehensive understanding of reality, or some sorta shit like that (Harry and Paul reference, sorry). However, the fact is, to each and every human being, reality is a window in the dark echelons of the brain. Sensory information is electrical signals derived from the eyes, nose, ears and body. The life we perpetually habitualize--the external world played out inside us--is but an elaborate illusion. Thusly, everything we experience therein, within that framework, is forever--or, should I say, should be--tainted.

But, of course, that is not what occurs: The ghost in the machine--the real "I"; the POV self--is transfixed by the view screen in the brain. This is the way the vast majority of us live. Like a hardcore gamer playing Halo 24 hours straight, it buys into the illusion, forgets itself. Believes itself to be Master Chief.

The skeptic's belief in the view screen is unshakable and total, and therein lies their eternal fallacy. The armchair skeptic, especially, should be pitied.

People like Dawkins continue to wonder why the masses 'delude' themselves with superstitious nonsense and spiritual beliefs, and this is why: on some level, we possess a knowing that we are more than what we appear or think ourselves to be--that we are simply viewing, and perceiving this reality, not truly living it. Regardless of some of the crazy ideas and notions people attach to this knowing, regardless of the belief systems used, the fact remains there is a part of us that transcends the organism. People like Dawkins, while providing a definite usefulness, have fallen for the illusion hook, line and sinker, and they want everyone else to likewise do so. Their imagined utopia is but a dream of soul imprisonment. And we must fight against it.

The Matrix is a film, but nonetheless, there is a great, great truth to it, as there is often found in fiction. I think back to my Astral Projections, those wonderful out of body experiences, and I know now why they felt so real: because I was no longer simply perceiving a reality through a machine, I was directly interconnected and absorbed into it; unrestricted and fully, poetically free. There is an experiential purity to it that I will never be able to describe. All this Projection talk of "sensory confusion" is ridiculous--the fact that projectors' experience of the external world is different to the one habitually experienced through the brain-machine unsurprising. Projection is the real Real.

Ultimately, there is a ghost in the machine: and I would stake my testicles on that being the case.

Fin.