Tag Archives: Tower of Babel

What Unity IS & Isn’t

Interesting, isn’t it.

At a time marked by fragmenting beliefs, polarizing politics, and irrational violence, people across the board increasingly crave what we all seem to most lack: UNITY, both within and without.

Tapping into this deeply felt common need, politicians of every stripe are joining the national call for UNITY.

If only we understood what the word from its deepest, pristine origins really means, and were in agreement in a vision as to how it might play out in our day-to-day lives.

Aye. There’s the rub.

The English language has devolved to such an extent that value words are very often defined both as one thing and its exact opposite. All too often when we speak, we miss each other coming and going, not even recognizing the disconnect. I’ve called this The Tower of Babel Dilemma.

To remedy it, in part, I wrote a series of 64 essays, each focused on a commonly used value word, intending to restore a common understanding regarding its correct use. As an example, Essay 60. Unity is attached to the end of this post.

A recent, uniquely excellent expression of true UNITY was written by Melania Trump immediately after the assassination attempt on her husband’s life. At the Republication convention, he thanked his wife for her “beautiful letter calling for national unity.” It reads in pertinent part:

Melania Trump. July 14, 2024  

We have always been a unique union. America, the fabric of our gentle nation is tattered, but our courage and common sense must ascend and bring us back together as one.  

Let us not forget that differing opinions, policy, and political games are inferior to love.

We all want a world where respect is paramount, family is first, and love transcends. We can realize this world again. Each of us must demand to get it back. We must insist that respect fills the cornerstone of our relationships again.  

Just prior to the Republican convention, because he’d been informed that it would be the subject of Trump’s acceptance speech, in One America film maker Dinesh D’Souza addressed the emerging theme of national unity.

I quote him here at length, edited only for grammar, because the point and its illustrators are so important:

The point I want to make here is, when we talk about unity, what do we actually mean by unity? Does it mean, first of all talking about the Republican Party, that we’re going to find a common denominator of every person who has an R after their name and that’s unity? 

No. Republican unity means, by and large, taking the main coalitions or the main constituents of the Republican Party and  . . inspiring them to want to vote Republican. 

But at the same time, you want to frame your message in such a way that you attract Independents. You also lure some Democrats. 

Unity is never a matter — and I think Trump understands this very well (we’ll find out when we watch his speech when he gives it later this week) that unity doesn’t mean finding the people who want to destroy you and frankly, the people who want to destroy the country, and unifying with them. Because our agenda and their agenda are incompatible. 

. . . even in the Reagan era, the Reagan agenda and the Carter agenda or the Reagan and the Mondale agendas were incompatible. At that point, by and large, debates were not over ends. They were over means. 

Now the left and the right disagree over ends — not just means. That means MAGA has got to be interpreted not as unifying the country per se, but unifying the country against the left [including their globalist agenda].  

This is the key. 

Let’s go back to Abraham Lincoln for a moment. Lincoln understood that bringing the country together doesn’t mean finding a new consensus in which the slave master and the Republicans sit down and “iron out” their differences. Lincoln understood that unifying the country is unifying the country on a consensus that slavery shall not be allowed to spread. That was the Republican platform. Lincoln was willing to compromise up to that point, but no further. He was implacable beyond that. 

This is important to realize in any kind of compromise. This is also true of normal negotiations. You go, “Okay. I’m going to ask for X. I’ll be willing to settle for Y. But I’m not willing to settle for anything below Y.”  You draw the line. 

The meeting of the minds is over that basic starting point: the point that Republicans do seek unity, but not unity at any price. And not a weak unity that finds the lowest common denominator. But to unify over the core principles that will save America. Frame those principles in as broad and charitable way as you can. 

. . . the job of the Republicans here is to reframe that consensus.

Trump’s VP pick, J.D. Vance, demonstrates that he understands these core principles in a deep, profound way. And, perhaps in a more grounded way than most, he appreciates Trump’s style, articulating the middle path of compassionate unity within the party.

For example, at the Faith and Freedom Coalition breakfast in Milwaukee, J.D. Vance gave us a glimpse into his way of thinking:

. . . when I talk about [Donald Trump’s] uniqueness in politics, I think one of the great virtues of his approach to politics — that his critics will slander in every which way. . . but President Trump is uniquely capable and aware of politics being the art of the possible. What can we accomplish in the here and now? How do we advance the ball one yard, before we advance it ten yards, before we advance it to a touchdown. 

So I’d ask my social conservative friends, as you see the administration unfold, as you see the campaign unfold, remember that this is a guy who delivered for social conservatives more than any president in my 39 years of life.

I think he deserves a little bit of grace. He deserves a little bit of trust. And I hope that we will all provide that to him. I certainly know that as his running mate, I will. 

———

For the sake of the nation’s survival, I dearly hope citizens across the board will start to think and choose to act in terms of the unifying core principles that define America, in stark contrast to the drastically incompatible agenda of the leftists and their destructive, globalist ends.

To this point, in various interviews, Jordan Peterson holds forth on Trump’s psychology and why he drives liberal elites crazy. His flamboyant, often unpredictable style is chief among complaints. Many think he acts like a bully.

But Peterson is quick to add, Yes. “Trump has proclivity to bully. He does so effectively and sometimes very usefully.” Yes. In the company of international leaders, each of whom is a bully, he speaks their language, necessarily. . . and fluently. 

But as Piers Morgan insists, Trump is “multifaceted.” This illustrates J.D. Vance’s point. Trump uniquely understands the art of the possible. He speaks the language of business to business leaders. And compassionate love of family to ordinary Americans, for example to the Gold Star parents of children lost in the Afghanistan withdrawal.

He’s more skilled than most in the art of optics. Put in biblical terms, “For everything there is a season. And time for every purpose under heaven.”

Essay 60. UNITY

An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity. — Martin Luther King, Jr.,
The Words of Martin Luther King, Jr.

—–

The scientist or the artist takes two facts or experiences which we separate; he finds in them a likeness which had not been seen before: and he creates a unity by showing the likeness. . . . All science is the search for unity in hidden likenesses. — Jacob Bronowski, quoted by Todd Siler in Think Like a Genius

—–

I have always felt that one of the simplest and most apt metaphors for an organization as complex as the United Nations is the Rorschach inkblot test. What one person sees as the hope of a world free of war, famine, poverty, and disease, another interprets as a global boondoggle comprised of uncaring civil servants threatening the cherished concept of state sovereignty. — James Holtje, Divided It Stands: Can the United Nations Work

————

THE FRONT

The Latin root of unity means oneness.

Webster’s first definition is the state of being one, or united; oneness, singleness.

— It means something complete in itself, single, or separate.

— It can be the quality of being one in spirit, sentiment, purpose; harmony, agreement or concord.

— It can also mean uniformity.

— It can refer to an arrangement of parts or material in a work of art or literature that will produce a single, harmonious effect.

— It can refer to constancy, continuity, or fixity of purpose or action.

The difference amongst these definitions reflects a general cultural confusion as to the optimal relationship of the individual to the levels of the Life Wheel, including society, nature, inner life, and Creator Source. Effective, consistent action depends upon an integrated concept of self and a comfortable relationship of each level and part within the whole.

Therefore, thinking carefully about what unity means — as well as what it doesn’t — is a necessary prelude to ultimate success in life.

Accepting the I Ching view that accomplishments begin with the smallest unit, unity is first to be attained within. It’s common to say, “My mind’s not made up” or “Get it together.” The familiar saying, “The right hand doesn’t know what the left is doing,” could also be phrased, “The left brain doesn’t know what the right brain is doing.”

When Westerns say, “I’m of two minds on this,” it reflects confusion, ambivalence or lack of discipline. However, the martial arts advice to have eight brains and eight hearts refers to the height of attainment. It suggests ability to intentionally shift internal gears to meet any situation. From the totality of unified mind, the ideal I Ching master focuses from above while acting through each of the energy centers according the immediate need at the time.

The motive, the “why” of psychologies and meditative practices is the same: to unify fragmented, antagonistic functions of mind, personality and behavior. The purpose, the “what” they plan to accomplish, ranges from personal self-mastery to inner peace and/or functional relationships. The intent, the “how,” is diverse. Some practices start from the outside with behavior and work in. Others start with the mind, ideas and attitudes, and work outwards. Still others work on both simultaneously, which is possible in communities where work and self-awareness training go hand in glove.

External diversity complements inner unity. The core of life’s concentric circles, like the hub of a wheel, remains still as the outer rim revolves, constantly changing and in motion. Meridians, like spokes of a wheel, link center to surface, connecting and organizing the wheel of life in a dynamic unity.

It hardly matters how the goal of inner unity is attained. Once one is focused and all the facets of inner energy are coordinated by a single-minded purpose, the pieces of life’s mosaic fall into place, forming a coherent picture. Then life becomes a work of art, like a poem or a song.

Albert Einstein –equal parts musician, philosopher, physicist and world citizen — searched lifelong for a unified field theory. The Book of Change embodies the universal code he sought. We’ve failed to recognize the clues hidden for centuries in a venerable text that have the potential to lead us to solutions desperately needed NOW. Restoring this treasure to the general culture would provide a fully functional paradigm from which positive, life-sustaining results can be generated across-the-board.

THE BACK

Regimentation and conformance are perversions of unity. Nature flourishes in diversity. Like snowflakes, each individual is a unique variation of its kind. In contrast, in extreme social contexts, variations are suppressed and punished. While this unnatural state might be appropriate to unnatural situations like war, it’s antithetical to personal well-being.

Technically, because all things are connected, it’s possible to dabble in the dark worlds of demons and departed souls. However, though these realms do exist, it is dangerously unwise to explore them without a specific, positive purpose and a white magician’s protective guidance.

Use the Wheel as a Linguistic Tool

According to AXIOM SIX, “Used as a Linguistic Tool, the Positive Paradigm Wheel Promotes Clear, Accurate and Effective Communication.”

Like humanity itself, the English language is an endangered species. Clear and effective communication can no more be taken for granted than any other aspect of the civilization.

In tracking the meanings of words, their devolution is found to be systematic. In some cases, the same word means not only one thing, but its exact opposite as well. The inherent danger is that people often talk at cross-purposes. They think they understand each other when in fact they’re missing each other coming and going, only vaguely aware of the disconnect.

It’s well worth taking the time to pay attention to what’s meant by specific words in common use. Working with the Positive Paradigm Wheel explains the dynamics of shifting definitions. The same word takes on different meanings at different levels of the Wheel.

Here is one example of how the single word “discrimination” changes meanings depending on where in the Wheel it’s used.

Discrimination.sized

Another example is the word “positive.” Webster’s Dictionary lists seventeen (!) different uses. They span the continuum from center to surface, with many gradations along the route. At the core, “positive” refers to that which is absolute, unqualified, and independent of circumstances; that which has real existence in itself.

At the middle, energy level, the term is used describe an electrical valence. As an attitude, positive can mean either confident or dogmatic. At the surface, positive may mean showing forward progress or increase, making a constructive contribution.

As this one example serves to indicate, it’s extraordinarily difficult to communicate so as to be understood as intended. The “Tower of Babel” factor issue is addressed both in Rethinking Survival and Conscience. This excerpt represents ongoing concerns:

The Tower of Babel Factor

The gift of language sets humans apart from animals. It provides the building blocks of communication. It’s the foundation of civilizations and the necessary glue of cultural continuity.

That being said, humans are the only creatures capable of using language to rationalize greed, lie to others about their actions and deceive themselves. . . .

That’s was quite the opposite of the language I’d learned to love and respect in high school. There, we were taught to regard language as the premier tool of logic. When used with Sherlock-like diligence, applied the powers of keen observation and heightened awareness, it could solve mysteries — not only to detect the crimes of evil-doers and the nefarious plots of national enemies, but to reveal the mysteries of life and the universe.

Turned inwards, used with self-honesty, language becomes an essential means of introspection and cultivating self-awareness. For the truth-seeker, language is the necessary vehicle of information both on the inward quest and on return journey to share its benefits.

“Leadership” and the related concept of “power” are two words whose meanings require careful attention. They shift depending on the level that they’re associated with. “Power” is a word often associated with “lust” and “abuse.” But it’s also a key component of “democracy” defined as “power to the people.”

At the center of the Wheel, all-powerful is an attribute assigned to God the Creator. Omnipotent. At the middle level, power is associated with energy. High-energy people are said to be magnetic. Attractive. Sexually potent. Forceful. Vigorous.

Socially, towards the surface, powerful people are influential. Effective. They tend to dominate others and control material resources, whether formally (institutional authority) or informally (behind the scenes).

Lao Tze’s Tao Te Ching, translated as The Way and Its Power, hints at the possibility of linking the levels of power. Failing to do so results in dangerous either-ors. For example, a leader whose power depends on controlling material resources, but who has neither compassion for others nor a viable connection with the center, is likely to rule as a tyrant, bringing poverty and misery to unwilling subjects.

A leader who holds the power of middle level charisma over followers may dazzle. However, cult leaders whose connection to the center is unstable (claims to the contrary notwithstanding), can seduce, but not truly lead from darkness to light.

Those whose connection to the center is secure, but whose grounding in the practical skills of day-to-day governance is tenuous, are also incomplete and undependable as leaders. Regardless of how inspired or well-intentioned, they may be forced to rely on staff who are less than loyal or honest, and find themselves undone because of misplaced trust.

Ideally, the true leader links the levels, balancing enlightened vision with compassion, charisma and practical administrative abilities. Plato recommended the total leadership of a philosopher-king, and training aspirants to be equally competent on all levels of the Wheel, able to integrate and balance them.

It’s especially important to define another pair of complimentary words. “Virtuous” and “moral” are often used interchangeably, with misleading results. Technically, “virtue” is an energy concept best used in the context of the middle level of the Wheel. In Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), compassion is a composite of complimentary virtues that includes empathy, courage, kindness, calmness, gentleness, and joy.

Each of the virtues is associated with a specific internal organ. When circulation is unobstructed and the internal energies are full and balanced, the mind is clear and virtues are present. When the circulation is blocked or stagnant, in excess or deficient, negative energy expressions present themselves as toxic emotions: anger, fear, cruelty, hate, anxiety, and grief.

Virtues are natural and inherent. They’re common to everyone, everywhere. The potential for positive expression of the virtues is primarily a function of good health, meaning, in Positive Paradigm context, unified wholeness. Conversely, the opposite, negative expressions (vices) are the result of poor health. Appropriate responses for healing them rest with medical interventions, not judgmental social sanctions.

In contrast, morality is a social construct, a relatively superficial layer of cultural conditioning that may or may not be compatible with the expression of deeper, inherent natural energies. Moral codes vary from place to place, and shift over time. Codes of conduct in subcultures, from medical and religious to military and underground gangs, are uniquely context-specific.

Some would say that moral codes are useful, even necessary for maintaining order within a social unit. However, when they’re enforced with harsh sanctions, including an unwholesome admix of self-interest, self-righteousness, and hypocrisy, they’re at best a mixed blessing.

It’s possible to be moral without being virtuous, and vice versa. It’s instructive to ask, How moral are we, and by what standard(s) of conduct? What about our leaders? If there’s a disconnect between virtue and morality, what are the consequences? What’s to be done about it, by whom?

globe

Corollary A. Using the Positive Paradigm model as a standard, the current worldwide leadership deficit and related budget deficits can be explained and (with good will and training) corrected.

Corollary B: In Positive Paradigm context, “good” and “evil” (as well as “friend” and “mortal enemy”) are defined in terms of those who honor versus those who violate or even intentionally tear the universal pattern of life apart. By this standard, those of good will in every land are friends of truth, while evil doers, whether at home or abroad, are the common enemies of humanity.

Corollary C: Politicians who would set nations against each other and who flirt with nuclear holocaust for the sake of petty ego satisfaction and personal power are evil-doers. Even when they cloak evil actions in moral terms, their rationalizations are a danger to us all. The ultimate good requires unmasking their double speak and rescuing the language in the interests of human survival.

Corollary D: Just as the basic genetic structure of all mankind stems from a few original strands of DNA, universal ideas and archetypes are inborn and inherent to our psyches. They’re not restricted by political or national boundaries.

The basic axioms of the archetypal Positive Paradigm pattern and its use as a clarifying linguistic tool offer a foundation upon which to build upon a common sense discourse, reestablishing the universal basics common to everyone, everywhere.

Corollary E: The Wheel gives us a model for redefining love, authority, science, crime, stress, and a host of other key concepts whose meanings are con-fused (lumped together inappropriately), making it difficult to communicate. The 64 Essays on Change in Conscience are a start in this direction.

Corollary F: The chief strategy of the “alien invaders” described in Rethinking Survival is to paralyze the populace by polluting the language and corrupting the paradigms. They prevent people from recognizing the difference between true friends and enemies, between true dangers and boondoggle distractions.

Restoring the Positive Paradigm to general use now is a powerful way to undo this damage, forge better alliances, and prepare to meet whatever dangers are to come.

globe

Am I Still Ahead of My Times? Not Really.

A book reviewer (Lisa says she holds my work in highest regard) reluctantly agreed with a former School Board Association mentor. I am ahead of my times. But that was 1977.

In light of current events, is this snippet from Rethinking Survival: Getting to the Positive Paradigm of Change really ahead of the times? Sadly, methinks the times have caught up with me — and then some.

globe

ALIEN INVADERS

In the 1980s, when the Affirmative Action legislation described in Part One was a subject of hot debate, one commentator made an astute observation. If foreign enemies had wanted to undermine the United States, they would have designed exactly this legislation. Valid goals — the window dressing — were buried in burdensome regulations and punitive economic sanctions. Rather than bringing people together, it was alienating, causing an opposite and equal backlash across the board.

Alien invaders infiltrating Planet Earth, weakening humans to eventually take over and enslave them, is a familiar theme in science fiction. For example, in his various incarnations, Dr. Who — television’s beloved two-hearted time traveler — continuously detects nefarious alien plots and rescues heedless humans from annihilation.

Current events indicate there’s considerable truth cloaked in that science “fiction.” Starting with the premise that hidden alien enemies are covertly scheming to undermine humanity, ask, “How would they set about to destroy us?” Logically, they’d create chaos, setting everyone at each others’ throats. They’d trick humans into mutual self-destruction by stirring up dissension and fragmenting their governments.

As discussed in Part Two, the Old Testament and yogic scriptures both maintain that we’re made in the image of God. Each individual mind is a complete miniature of the Universal Mind. When open, receptive, and aligned, everyone everywhere mirrors the wisdom and potential power of the Creator.

Therefore, it’s an absolute priority for evil aliens to attack the mind. Their agents will do whatever it takes to pollute your mind. They confuse it with false paradigms. They clutter and distract it with the noise of an ongoing media circus. Every doubt planted in your mind causing you to forget who you are, to disbelieve in your ultimate origins and creative potentials, is a victory for the dark side.

To totally undermine humanity, atheism is a must. The unifying beliefs which hold families and nations together and fortify them in times of adversity must be destroyed at all costs. Again, how would this be accomplished?

For one thing, language which makes communication and community-building possible would have to be polluted beyond repair. In Part Two, this ongoing process is described as the Tower of Babel factor. In the English language, for example, every value word has devolved to mean both one thing and its opposite. So people often talk at cross purposes, unaware that they’re missing each other coming and going.

. . . Next, by every means available, alien agents would strive to pollute the idea pool. Make access to the law impossible and simple truth seem complicated. Because ideas have consequences, introduce false beliefs with predictably disastrous results.

Then evil aliens would systematically destroy trust, the cement of human relationships, at every level of organization. How? Make deceit the political norm. Convince people that no one’s motives can be trusted. Demonstrate that no one’s words can be believed. Make it “common knowledge” that no one’s actions, however apparently innocent and well intentioned, can be taken at face value.

Diversions would be a must. Rile the public with non-issues to distract them from very real dangers. Using lame-stream media shills, manipulate the masses with the weapons of psychological warfare. Insult them with the lie that they’re not okay. Sell them on the belief that they’re helpless “victims” of oppressors who must depend on tough guys to rescue them (and pay the heavy price of obligation at the voting polls).

. . . in the first chapter [of Rules for Radicals], Alinsky [chief agent of the evil aliens] stated his exact purpose, namely to coach those who “want to change the world” from what it is “to what they believe it should be.” In I Ching context, this assumption-packed premise is an extraordinary feat of tragedy-fraught hubris. Building on this false premise, Alinsky then fueled the undermining alien arsenal with a full battery of destructive tactics. In essence, political radicals should feel “free” to violate the ten commandments. The ends (getting what you want) justify any means.

His version of social change is engineered by stirring up conflict. Use fabricated information to bear false witness against inconvenient neighbors. (Herman Cain’s character assassination is one of countless examples.) Alinsky advocates scapegoating, not unlike the dynamic which propelled Nazis to power. Create the illusion of an outside enemy as the way to unify your base. (How is that for the ultimate double-speak? Conflict is the opposite of unity.)

Divide and conquer. Pit each group against the others. I can almost see alien puppeteers behind the scenes clapping their hands in glee over Alinsky’s contribution to escalating worldwide conflict. It matters not to them which side wins. Let Sharia law advocates, members of Putin’s Eurasian Union and American exceptionalists squander their precious resources duking it out. If they destroy each other and no one’s left, so much the better.

. . . Alien invaders delight in cheating. They stack the deck, gumming up the works with false information driven by dysfunctional paradigms. If you accept the game and its rules as alien agents define them and proceed to rebel against uncivil authorities, mindlessly hating and resisting, YOU LOSE. (Alien invaders win.)

If you give all your attention to what other guys are doing wrong, playing the role of contrarian, YOU LOSE. (Alien invaders win.)

If you quit on humanity and live only for yourself, leading a life of self-centered indulgence, YOU LOSE. (Alien invaders win.)

If you persist in thinking narrowly in terms of political interests and institutions, not human survival, YOU LOSE. (Alien invaders win big time.)

The only chance of winning — ultimately, surviving — is to demand a new, clean, unmarked deck, one with all the cards. In other words, make a fresh start . . .

globe

[to be continued.]

Do I Understand What You Mean?

I promised this blog to Steven Z. In response to a tweet, he wrote, “I have a possible new article suggestion for you and it’s simply – Rethinking Word Usage.” He continued, “In general, people use ‘words’ that they unfortunately have no clue of their true meaning or origin. I’ll even go so far as to suggest the paradigm of usage has become corrupted on purpose, as a social control mechanism. By whom?”**

After giving examples, Steven Z concluded, “It’s all these subtleties that add up to being where the world is today = lack of awareness.”

On June 17th, I answered back, “Great Message, Steve. I’ve written extensively about this issue. 1) Virtually every key term in the English language has been perverted to the extent that the same word means both one thing and its opposite. 2) Unraveling this “Tower of Babel” factor is essential to communication.

“In fact, I tweeted out today, from The Positive Paradigm Handbook: ‘Axiom Six: Used as a linguistic tool, the Positive Paradigm Wheel promotes clear, accurate and effective communication.’”

Here’s an illustration worth a thousand words, It shows the range of different meanings assigned to the single word, “discrimination.”

062414 Discrim

Here’s a basic explanation of Axiom Six:

Like humanity itself, the English language is also becoming an endangered species. Clear and effective communication can no more be taken for granted than any other aspect of the civilization.

In tracking the meanings of words, their devolution is found to be systematic. In some cases, the same word means not only one thing, but its exact opposite as well. The inherent danger is that people often talk at cross-purposes, thinking they understand each other when in fact they’re missing each other coming and going, only vaguely aware of the disconnect.

It’s worth the time to pay attention to what’s meant by specific words in common use. Working with the Positive Paradigm Wheel explains the dynamics of shifting definitions. The same word takes on different meanings on different levels of the Wheel.

One example is the word “positive.” Webster’s Dictionary lists seventeen (!) different uses. They span the continuum from center to surface, with many gradations along the route. At the core, “positive” refers to that which is absolute, unqualified, and independent of circumstances; that which has real existence in itself.

At the middle, energy level, the term is used describe an electrical valence. As an attitude, positive can mean either confident or dogmatic. At the surface, positive may mean showing forward progress or increase, making a constructive contribution.

As this one example serves to indicate, it’s extraordinarily difficult to communicate so as to be understood as intended. The “Tower of Babel” factor issue is addressed in Rethinking Survival and Conscience:

Tower of Babel Factor

The gift of language sets humans apart from animals. It provides the building blocks of communication. It’s the foundation of civilizations and the necessary glue of cultural continuity.

That being said, humans are the only creatures who rationalize greed, lie to others about their actions and deceive themselves. . . .

That’s quite the opposite of the language I’d learned to love and respect in high school. There, we were taught to regard language as the premier tool of logic. When used with Sherlock-like diligence, applied with the powers of keen observation and heightened awareness, it can solve mysteries — not only detect the crimes of evil-doers and the nefarious plots of national enemies, but reveal the mysteries of life and the universe.

Turned inwards, used with self-honesty, language is an essential tool of introspection used for cultivating self-awareness. For the truth-seeker, language is the necessary vehicle of information both on the inward quest and on the return journey to share its benefits.

** In Rethinking Survival, I’ve also described the intentional perversion of the English language to which Steven Z alludes. However, it’s outside the limits of this particular piece.