Collected Essays of Valerie Lynn Stephens (Part 11)

https://video.wixstatic.com/video/8aef4a_f30a639d0b924c9fa70ea75239518e8b/720p/mp4/file.mp4

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or introduced into a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means (including electronic, photocopying, mechanical, manual or otherwise) without the prior express & written consent of the owner of the copyright of this book.

ISBN: 978-1-365-35197-6

©2021 Valerie Lynn Stephens

SAVOIR VIVRE

Perhaps the first half of our lives are spent figuring out how to best live them, and the rest, putting this wisdom into execution. But what if someone is having a hard time figuring it out? Is it better then to live in mere search of the answers, or should they perhaps live out the questions themselves? Are the answers then, without question, perhaps already known? Yet another a priori vs. a posteriori existential/epistemological age old debate gets put again into play. Furthermore, could the questions be also an answer to the last known address of the Soul where Fear & Doubt resided, compelling us on to examine why we have become so fearful & faithless?

But if only it was all that simple. Thus, if the questions & their answers consume so much, then what is the alternative to accessing this a priori/a posteriori knowledge for those who are incapacitated or indisposed to do so? Perhaps we must then direct our psycho-spiritual reserves into convincing ourselves of what I believe to be our pre-existent state of Wholeness & Wisdom. And I suppose this is where that other "F" word, Faith comes in-believing in not only a higher being, but most of all, believing in ourselves to just step back & let it all be, unfolding naturally to each its own perfection of Design & Providence. For the mortal human mind seems to have absolutely no doubts regarding that of its immanent mortality, yet when it comes to Life? Well, that's the tricky part, isn't it.

Then again, of course we have an easier time coming to terms with our own eventual physiological demise, for we know that our consciousness, too, will have ceased. And as the Judeo-Christian scripture states: "For the dead have neither memory nor knowledge." Thus, will we have become, in the most ultimate sense, indomitable, completely invulnerable. While alive, we are inescapably exposed to Life's vagaries. For the very conscious, willful act of choosing & believing in Life, invites upon us, many deaths-before-dying-indeed ones far more excruciating than any cessation with finality.

In finale, if pain & death are the gravest fears of humanity, and we go to such lengths to lessen if not completely evade it, perhaps the questions should be lived out then?

Perhaps living in & of itself, is the only viable answer, however simple yet profound it might be. Or, as some believe, perhaps Life shouldn't be performed life a soliloquoy of endless inquiry, but like a dance of surrender & grace. Perhaps this is the only way that the most pertinent information can filter through, thereby freeing our energial reserves to allow the Soul to live as it already knows how to live. Yes, perhaps this is the only way we can actualize ourselves with as much efficacy & expedience as possible, given the profound complexities of our human condition & experience, and the nanosecond which we have been granted to actualize it.

And last but certainly not least, perhaps Mystery is sweet, but maybe a cultivation & practice of Simplicity is the most edifying in the end. Perhaps we truly do not need worry ourselves with the legalisms, as there are many lives to live, and many possible paths to take upon each our own human journey. For ultimately, don't we all naturally intuit that they all lead to the same wellspring of Redemption & Salvation? In the end, there is not right or wrong formula when it comes to those calculations Metaphysical, and wholly transcendent. For the Spirit already has its own adept, infallible compass to lead us out of the wilderness. And no matter how trite it might sound at first to us, letting go & letting all just be, is key -of course, to the best of our mortal human fallibility & finitude. To end with the immortally irreverent words of the late Jack Kerouac: "All is well. Practice kindness. Heaven is nigh."

ON MINKOWSKI'S 4-DIMENSIONAL WORLD-THEORY AS A METAPHOR FOR HUMAN PREDESTINATION & ACTUALIZATION

Life, time and space are all continuity of consciousness. Thus one could say this represents the 3-D theory of the world, non-mathematically speaking that is. For there is body, soul and then mind. Or there is the physical, the subjective and the objective, respective to their terms. Throughout this exploration, I will be referencing German 19th century mathematician Hermann Minkowski, who is credited for his work on extra-dimensionality in space-time configurations & concepts. However in postulating Minkowski’s 4-D world, there is one more element we must add to this model-God, the Creator and Sustainer of it all. For here is where the circle of life or world theory is made complete. Supposedly also, from a mathematical/spatial standpoint, this 4th dimension of Minkowski’s is impossible to construct within one’s mind. I say not, and it is quite simple-so simple that may be why some have not thought of it.

Imagine 3 trees in the middle of an otherwise vacant field. Now try to envision if there was a line drawn from tree to tree, connecting them all. There would be formed, simply enough, a triangular shape. The 4th dimension is then all of the area surrounding these trees and the field. Quite simple to me. This of course, correlates to the current postulation of “dark matter” and “dark energy” proposed by physicists & cosmologists and the like. Or, to reference a more antiquitous proposal, the 4th dimension is that old Michelson/Morley “ether.” This 4th dimension is what enwombs, what encompasses, what cradles it all. It could be theorized as being God Himself/Herself/Itself. Thus, perhaps not merely one “God-particle” aka, the “Higgs boson”, but a whole time-space-matter-energial field of them.

This can also be used as a metaphor for solipsism, which states that the only thing that can be truly real to the self is the self, and how each individual thing, person is both equally a singular part of its surroundings or world and also a collective part of it. Furthermore, on the 4th dimension seen as God, it is every being’s breach of revelation, transformation and rebirth into new and complete life and living. For the mind, body and soul would perish but if not for the sustaining presence of their Creator. Hence, the 4th dimension is indeed that “quarkian”, hidden dimension, most elemental yet essential of them all.

Furthermore, & in theory, if Minkowski’s idea, which stated that each person’s past and future meet at one point always converging indefinitely at the point in time which is now or the present, based on his Pythagorean-based model, we can postulate then that perhaps there is such a thing as predestination or Divine Providence. Which means that everything, much like in the mathematical model, is already mapped out for one’s given life. This would all be broadly speaking, of course, for perhaps this model cannot account for each individuated variable.

Moreover, it can allow for any given path to be chosen, which slightly deviates from the predestinational model while also maintaining its ontological tensegrity. That is to say, that God exists within a state of what theologians would call “omniscience” and probably what physicists would call “quantum superposition,” whereby he can predict both what each individual person will choose, as well as what the end game of those choices will be. This, to some degree would allow for both predestination & individual freedom of will & choice to coexist.

Nonetheless, what Minkowski was saying was that there are 3 points in space-time that can be figured as one’s past, present and future. This, generally speaking, is very feasible and makes a lot of sense. But it is important to note that this 3-point diagram does not make a triangle as one’s mind is apt to automatically assume, but rather, a straight or slightly curved line. Now were it just a line and not a metaphorical concept demonstrated with geographical configurations and actualizations, then even Minkowski or Einstein, who was a pupil of the former, truly could not state with scientific certainty beyond the shadow of a doubt that this line would indeed go into infinity or continue on indefinitely. For we do not know yet whether time-space has an ending or a beginning, for we who are currently living have never gone there!

But for the sake of speculation, if this time-space continuum known as past, future and present does continue on indefinitely then we can call “infinity” or substitute the term “indefinitely” with “the afterlife” or even “eternity.” So we could twist it in a theological or philosophical/metaphysical direction. And we could even go back into time and consider the possibility of each person’s pre-destination in their “past.” Indeed, in the realm of quantum mechanics, past, present & future particles have been observed to become “entangled” in many instances. And, if we are composed of the same “stuffs” as quantum particles...well, fodder for a whole other kind of discussion. Even in Judeo-Christian concepts, each person born is known by God to be born in the future and the details of that person are known on the most minute scale. This is not to be confused with the more Eastern ideology of reincarnation, for in Judeo-Christian notions, a person remains the same person and does not switch incarnations throughout his or her life, of which there are two, this one and the afterlife. But nevertheless, Minkowski’s model can echo these sentiments quite nicely when put into that perspective. Basically, if there’s a point at which our future is supposed to meet our present (and not just our past), selves-perhaps we need not worry so much about the details of our life's spacetime trajectory. Perhaps we can rest assured that, as long as we honour past & future within the present, both predestination and the dignity of free will, shall be fulfilled & preserved.

THE VOID OF A VOID: ZERO POINT ENERGY

My well has run dry and I cannot even describe the sheer Terror & Anguish this brings. My whole life is in the balance upon the tip of the pen. I never even imagined that I would lose my desire to create. A part of me that has always been so essential to my well-being is seemingly lost, gone. And I would suffer even the most unimaginable horrors just to get it back-my chi-my life force. Although this horror is, in and of itself very much nigh the mark of unimaginability and Despair.

There is something in the human soul which clamors for elucidation & expression. It is a need next to none. Does this reside only within the soul of the Artiste or in everyone? Everything is at a standstill as long as the heart remains unstirred. It is a nothingness and existential sense of nullity which even Sartre or Nietzsche never touched upon. For between Being & Nothingness lies an even deeper abyss. Perhaps its name is Apathy. Or perhaps it is Mother to Apathy-Ambivalence. We can never escape non-being, but can we ever embrace being? Yet we must, if the Void is ever to have any meaning.

Every force produces its equal and opposite reaction and not strictly in the Newtonian and phenomenological sense. Meaning itself derives from the union of opposites. And perhaps this is a gift, for nothing-not even nihility itself-is ever truly meaningless. Although this does not lessen our pain in the face of it. But the presence of the pain, parthenogenically born from our sense of barrenness, futility and emptiness nevertheless suggests a fullness & abundance of Being which is always there, even but if only as images within the ever-envisaging human psyche.

Hence, even Nothingness is always, quite Something. Zero-point energy. And oftentimes, our pain is, in itself, the salve for our pain. For as long as one is feeling, or as long as one is conscious of something-one is Being, one exists, is alive, has substantiality. This is often why we cling to our pain at the fear of never finding relief, or perhaps we fear that we will? We must have something to hold onto, even if this thing which we cling to is, in actuality, a losing of our grip.

To lose always includes a gain and a gain, an equally commensurate loss. This is why the ability to hold onto Joy should be regarded as nothing less than the miraculous display of an inner fortitude and Virtue of Sisyphean task. For it is indeed, a superhuman feat, belonging to the leagues of all ontological argument, where the Ideal always presupposes the Actuality. For truly, there is no evidence that Joy is a more valid and noteworthy emotion than that of Sorrow, especially in a world of such fleeting felicity.

The doctrines of Nihilism are very seductive, and even more still, when we must inhabit a mind and heart which often cannot choose between Equanimity or Struggle. To choose between one Truth or the other which is just as much of a verity-is at the heart of the human condition and the various configurations of trilemma and seemingly endlessly regressive doctrines and Byzantium ontological architecture we must decipher and navigate. The attendant Fear is often so great, that neither nor is secure. For just as soon as we wholly embrace one Truth, its equal yet antimonous opposite becomes all too manifest. And then we are ravaged and lost once again.

But this truth is exactly what makes all forms of bigotry thrive. Thus must we learn to embrace it all, although no one person can even know or see it all. This is the true act of Faith, where Ambiguity must become the God we worship daily before the indestructible Shrine Of Exigency. And learning how to persist in this cruel task without becoming totally adrift is a lesson that only the blessed can fully assimilate. For not unlike our love, belief and conviction must be spread just thin enough that it can maintain its clarity of purpose and efficacy, without losing its viscosity. For we can become One only when we embrace it all with equal measures of awe and expectancy. Then we are secure and left with the Ultimate and most essential task of all: Becoming all that we are.

Between Being & Nothingness lies a Perfection already operant behind it all. We are complete. We are whole. We are meaning. We are the Universe. Life is in love with us. Will we marry it? Oh, we already have-even in our hours of Despair & Faithlessness. Nihility is an illusion. It is all full beyond measure. The only Void which exists is the Void of a Void.

ON THE BIOLOGICAL MODEL FOR PSYCHIATRY

While there may be individuals who work within the mental health field who would agree that complex interpersonal trauma injury sustained as children and adults needs much more inclusion in the diagnoses of individuals seeking treatment in the mental health field, the fact is, there are too many larger forces at play which keep the system where it is and what it is. I, like so many others, have learned this the hard way. In attempting to point out how things like emotional abuse and abuses as a child and an adult can be invalidated as direct causes of complex trauma, many working within the mental health field do not want to acknowledge this.

Furthermore, the issue gets muddied by focusing too much upon purely physiological factors, intentionally in some cases. Being treated with dignity and respect in the mental health field can be tricky due to this. I think this is mainly because many people don't want to face it, or deal with these dark realities present in themselves and in others. Yet I think it is safe to say that most of the emotional duress which human beings undergo which then may lead to mental health 'diagnoses' is a direct and indirect cause of interpersonal trauma and abuses.

But the truth is, there are a lot of people who are still 'hoodwinked' by the system. I was partly hoodwinked for a time myself. If we fail to dig deep and treat the WHOLE person then people will not be helped. People need consistently genuine and active compassion and understanding, not more labeling, mismanaging, invalidation, pathologization & demonization.

Moreover, the absence of an awareness of having deeper trauma does not mean that one does not have it. If every human being on the face of the planet dug really deep, they'd find it. Some people are just not as self-aware. To be human is, by essence, to have been traumatized or adversely effected/affected by at least something. Furthermore, it doesn't matter how seemingly 'small' or prolonged trauma is, it is all profoundly impacting upon us. And in response to those who make the fallacious and Cartesian claim that we must focus upon the neuro-chemical imbalances present in trauma survivors at the expense of the deeper issues underlying the etiology of such neuro-chemical imbalances, the two are not mutually exclusive, and it is harmful to treat them as such. And besides, the biological model for psychiatry was always just that-a reductionistic postulate. And this is what we mean by treating the WHOLE PERSON.

Things like Depression, Anxiety, etc. do not arise out of a vacuum, and the chemical imbalances, and other health issues that they cause are directly related to psychological and emotional duress of some variation or another. While it is true that not all 'hardships' cause major mental health issues in and of themselves, the nature of emotional and psychological trauma is usually cumulative, not just incidental, and this supports what we are coming to understand and what we know about the interconnectivity and 'web'-like functionality of neuro-anatomical structuring.

Furthermore, it is a gross misconception that complex trauma can only be caused in the minds of children and not adults. I personally find the whole Western approach to medicine reductionistic, and ultimately have seen the harm that it does to the human soul. And an individual being treated for depression is also an individual being treated (hopefully) for some kind of underlying issue. The two are usually not mutually exclusive entities. Yet here ladies and gents is where we enter into the realm of Physiology vs. Metaphysiology. That epic dialectic between the Exoteric and the Esoteric.

Overall, I personally believe that human beings are far too complex to be reduced to merely physiological epiphenomena. This is the problem with using only the Western model of medical science. Too Cartesian for my own personal knowledge and experience base. It is so important that the medical community not dismiss some of what's regarded as the 'soft' sciences as completely complementary to so-called 'hard' science. Realms such as Philosophy, Psychology, Theology, Sociology, etc. are equally necessary to study for healthy and optimal development and treatment of the human person.

In finale, as with all tools, it's about the intentions of those wielding them which determines it's helpfulness or harmfulness. There are good people working in the mental health system as well as not so good folks. It is what it is, but we can all make the best of it. And we must take the reigns on our own health, well-being and growth. But those helping us along the way also need to make sure they are operating within the bounds of that as well. It's a collaborative effort. And from my own experience, some practitioners misuse their knowledge with the intention of exploiting vulnerable people who merely end up being retraumatised. That's what I was referring to about wielding it properly.

An individual's 'existentialia' as Martin Heidegger called it, is very, very pertinent information regarding not only understanding of the presented condition but also treatment. Overall I think that the DSM would benefit from having the etiology of all psychiatric conditions listed, especially as it relates to trauma. After all, why should more credibility be given for, say a strictly 'physical' designation/condition than a 'mental' one regarding its origins/causes. Also, we now know that the holistic model is being proven more and more comprehensive and accurate as far as diagnosis, prognosis, etc. are concerned. Mind and body are most definitely symbiotically ensconced.

Hopefully, as our knowledge and understanding expands, we will begin to grant more robust medical credibility to trauma-related conditions which cannot be strictly classified as having a 'physiological' and/or 'neurophysiological' etiology. This approach, while perhaps not intended by everyone who uses it, is very invalidating and dismissive, thus re-injurious to survivors of horrific childhood and adulthood trauma and abuse, whose diagnosed conditions are a direct consequence of their interpersonal traumas. And as mentioned before, the biochemical model for psychiatry is also understood by most medical professionals and laymen alike, as being postulate.

In a word, the 'hard' sciences approach for psychological diagnostics and treatment arose out of humankind's attempt to explain and then treat what is more philosophically understood as 'the human condition' as it struggles to survive the horrors of evil on this earth. I suppose this more rigorous, honest and inclusive approach depends upon whether or not an individual acknowledges the verity of phenomena which lie beyond the borders of hard 'Science' and whether or not that individual is viewing ultimate reality with eyes wide open or eyes wide shut. If it be the latter, they become merely yet another part of the problem rather than the solution. And these issues of course, beg a whole other discussion.

P.S.

John Mudrow wrote an interesting and quite compelling book which explores this subject entitled: “How To Become A Schizophrenic: The Case Against Biological Psychiatry”.

THE FINAL FRONTIER: A PHYSICS/METAPHYSICS ANALOG

What we discretely refer to as 'Science' vs. 'Spirituality', or 'Physics' vs. 'Metaphysics', are not mutually exclusive systems. In fact, the very same phenomena observed by physicists and the like, are also referred to in the Scriptures. From the Book of Genesis and on, naturalistic phenomena are recorded which we are merely referencing in the annals of humanistic discovery. That is to say, we are merely reiterating in our observations, the verity of pre-existent actualities created and set forth not by humankind, but by God Himself.

In the Book of Revelation, we also find eschatological references which correspond with inferences drawn in the 'hard science' and 'soft science' realms of Cosmology, Astrophysics and Quantum Mechanics (this area of study, while steeped in 'hard science' datum, may be considered by some 'purists' to be a 'soft science' due to the theoretical base imposed upon it by quantifiably observable naturalistic limitations). For example, when our sun exhausts its nuclear energy and begins its transformation into a red giant star, thus baking all of the earth and those who dwell upon it in cosmic radiation, after which it will collapse into a black hole, we find parallels in 2 Peter 3:11-12 “Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!” as well as in Isaiah 34, verse 4 (possible black hole reference) “And the sky will be rolled up like a scroll...”.

Furthermore, the findings in Physics, Quantum Physics, Astrophysics, and just Physics in general concerning what is most commonly know as Albert Einstein's 'Theory of Relativity', also bear Scriptural precedent. For example, in 1 Timothy 6:16 it refers to Jesus Christ as someone "who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see.” This could be a reference to the constants as observed by scientists regarding the limit imposed upon earthly biological entities regarding superluminosity, gravity and quantum mechanical limits such as Pauli's Exclusion Principle which observes how no two electrons (of which no atom can have more than two electrons) can occupy the same space at the same time (or have the same four quantum electronic numbers, hence 'spin' in atoms with half-integer spin such as electrons and fermions). This Principle also more metaphorically parallels the infinite complexity and uniqueness of each and every thing and being which God has created.

Moreover, the verse which refers to “unapproachable light” by many is thought to allude to the speed of light constant, which no human entity since Christ has been able to breach. Furthermore, according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, and what physicists who study black holes have correlated, as one approaches the speed of light, time, to an earth-dweller would appear to come to a complete stand-still. This could be just another way of describing what happens when one has surpassed the light-speed constant for earth, or in essence has breached 'eternity' or timelessness. Of course, to us it would appear to have 'stopped' for the individual who has reached beyond the event horizon of a black hole, because the ability to observe 'time' is limited to our current biological and physical calculations and extrapolations.

Also, when pondering things such 'eternity' and 'infinity' in a theoretical sense, we, upon our glimpse into areas such as physics and quantum physics, more specifically regarding astrophysical bodies named by theoretical physicist John Wheeler as 'black holes' (a term first introduced by him in 1967), (who also introduced the term 'wormhole' in 1957), begin to see striking and fascinating parallelisms. Polish theoretical physicist Nicodem Poplawski has made striking observations related to black hole behaviour. Instead of the postulation that the intense gravitational pull of every black hole inevitably leading to a singularity, he has postulated another viewpoint, with torsional vortexes being instead created which lead to a 'white hole' portal into another universe. This strikingly parallels the Scripture which refers to the Kingdom of Heaven as being "many mansions" being created. (John 14:2)

When Albert Einstein proposed his Theory of Special Relativity in a paper published in the German physics Journal Annalen der Physik in 1905, he posited the existence of an electromagnetic particle which he called a 'photon' which would have be the cornerstone for what would develop into the area of Quantum Theory later. He also posited in this Theory of Special Relativity, that only non-accelerating observers would experience a uniformity of the observed laws of physics regarding the speed of light outside of a vacuum. His theory of General Relativity, which postulated gravity as being not a 'force' per se, but a warping of space-time due to the presence of a massive object, or a gravitational 'field', took him about ten more years to flesh out.

Yet there is an undeniable correlation between Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and Biblical concepts such as the 'eternity' or 'timelessness' of the nature of God, or God's omniscience and the nature of His dwelling or Kingdom:

Isaiah 46:9-10 "Remember the former things long past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, 'My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure.”

2 Peter 3:8: “But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.”

Psalm 90:2: “Before the mountains were born or You gave birth to the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.”

Romans 16:26: “But now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith.”

Isaiah 40:28: “Do you not know? Have you not heard? The Everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth Does not become weary or tired His understanding is inscrutable.”

1 Corinthians 2:7: “But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory.”

Romans 1:20: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.”

Proverbs 15:3 - “The eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good.”

Psalm 33:13 - “From heaven the Lord looks down and sees all mankind; from his dwelling place he watches all who live on earth…”

1 Chronicles 28:9 - “…for the Lord searches every heart, and understands every motive behind the thoughts. If you seek him, we will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever.”

1 Kings 8:27 : "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You, how much less this house which I have built!”

Jeremiah 23:24: “Can a man hide himself in hiding places So I do not see him?" declares the LORD "Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?" declares the LORD.”

And many more...

In finale, one could reasonably surmise not only that Physics are just as legitimate as Metaphysics, that 'Science' is just as legitimate as what we call 'Spirituality', and that religious/spiritual concepts and beliefs in things like 'Eternity', 'Infinity' and 'Everlasting Life' are just as much a part of 'hard science' observed phenomena as 'Special Relativity', Quantum Physics, and the like. We have seen their effects, no matter which language we use to describe it. And what humans are capable of 'seeing' and 'observing' I believe, doesn't even come close to what ultimate reality actually is in its totality. Thus, as physicists and like-minded people all across God's great Earth continue their search for the Holy Grail of Physics and Quantum Physics: Grand Unified Theory, the Creator of it all is the one who ultimately decides what humankind needs to know and will be granted access to. But nevertheless in the end, all will have been given adequate knowledge and insight, and all will be without excuse.

ON AI, THE BURGEONING TECHNOCRACY & ITS PORTENDED ESCHATOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

In 1948, mathematician John Von Neumann theorized the potential existence of a kind of computational machine which would evolve at such a pace as to soon be capable of replicating itself in an exponential mode of systemic upgrade. He postulated that with each new 'replica' of itself, there would be improvements made upon the previous version, and so on, much like we employ in computer science and the creation of hardware and software systems today. This came to be the basis of what we now refer to as “Artificial Intelligence” or more tersely as “AI.” Further, it forms the basis for the portentous idea that there may come a point in human history where the things that we have created, specifically machines, could someday surpass our ability to control them and may thus lead us into a kind of an AI Apocalypse or Armageddon.

While I do not personally follow this line of thought, and do not believe that a created thing could ever surpass the limitations inherent in or programmed by their creator(s), there may be some Scriptural precedent or hinting at this kind of eschatological course of events. In Revelation 14-16 we read: “Because of the signs it was given to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived those who dwell on the earth, telling them to make an image to the beast that had been wounded by the sword and yet had lived. The second beast was permitted to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship it to be killed. And the second beast required all people small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead.”

Therefore, it is not entirely out of the realm of possibility that the 'end times' could in some way involve some type of artificial intelligence or machines. After all, idols all throughout the ignominious evolution (or devolution?) of human endeavours have assumed many forms, and have been crafted from many variants of earthly minerals and materiel, thus, why not an idol fashioned of gold, copper, magnesium, iron, zinc, cobalt, nickel and silicon? Indeed, many individuals believe that we are already living in that age as we speak, due to the increasing prevalence and domination of such technology in our modern lives. Thus the questions which arise are: Can the created ever surpass that of its Creator? As stated before, it seems self-evident to me, from a strictly logistical and, indeed, even from a philosophical/existential standpoint, that Artificial Intelligence ever dominating intellectually or functionally over human beings is perhaps possible but highly unlikely. And as first observed by Ada Lovelace, who is credited by most computer scientists as being the first computer programmer, we humans are the ideologues over such inventions and therefore must also be the immediately assumed lords over them.

Furthermore, much like many believe that humankind was created in the image of a sovereign Deity, computers and the technological accouterments which both encompass and aid them, were fashioned in our human image. However, the ontological antinomy of the latter statement is this: We may have been fashioned in the image of our Creator, or as traducianists believe, merely in the image of our genetic human ancestors, but we cannot, as in the former credo, become such a sovereign Deity ourselves, lest the fulfillment of this verity of ontological equality completely negate the concept of such a Being in and of itself. Nevertheless, AI will continue to be made within the human imago.

However, while I do not believe that machines or AI could ever insidiously or maliciously dominate over humankind, as any invention by natural extension must possess the limitations inherent in that of its Creator(s), certain human beings are exerting their influence over advanced technology to suit their evil agendas even as we speak. Thus, if AI ever does 'take over' humankind, human beings will undoubtedly be at the helm of said 'machinations'. And yet we must expect that the questions will persist and that not every human soul will remain at rest in the face of Reason and sound Theology. Many will continue to inquire: Can a human being manufacture or implant a "soul" into a machine? What is the soul or a soul if it exists at all?

But most of all: What is the essence of that which makes us human, and could an electronic entity ever become incarnate with such an essence? For if a human being could create a cyborg completely in that of its own image, could it ever possess total human status? And if so, wouldn't this then change the very ontological status of this electro-mechanical entity possessing so-called "artificial intelligence" into one possessing authentic human intelligence & sentience and it would be therefore, merely a clone of a pre-existent species? And last but certainly not least, from the epistemological standpoint, is there an inherent demarcation built into the design of our humanity which limits our knowledge, ability & creative, industrial potential? And if there is no such limit inherently imposed upon the human species, and a human being(s) could create a perfect facsimile of itself crafted from metal, minerals and silicon then perhaps this is the “new body” into which we will be changed, "in the twinkling of an eye" into the immaculate imago of our Creator someday?

These are all very valid enquiries, most of which may or may not find their edification in this current epoch. Until then, keeping an open-ended discussion related to all issues pertinent to our species and the human condition is key to each our continued industrious, intellectual and spiritual edification process & actualization.

C-PTSD & THE ‘MIND’FIELDS WE MUST HEED

I often feel disconnected from my feelings & my experiences. Being a deeply creative & intelligence person, I am grieved by this, & unsettled by this. Yet I also know where it comes from, and it comes from a very good place-a self-preservatory place. Sometimes we must suppress a present response to a disturbing event that happens to us in order to staunch the potential floods of other traumatic past memories from engulfing us, & perhaps leading to no good. This is true especially for survivors of systematic childhood abuse who become afflicted with C-PTSD in our adulthood. (And indeed, even as adults we are “victimized” by others in this way, too). And the quality of our lives is profoundly effected by this condition.

Incidentally, this is the main reason why emotional abuse is such an egregious sin to inflict upon another, as the effects are life-lastingly insidious & pernicious. In a word, almost everything that we deign to do must always be regarded as a potential minefield-type situation. Now, mind you, as long as we remain merely “vigilant” rather than paralytically “hyper-vigilant”, we can procure for ourselves some relative measures of peace & fulfillment. Nevertheless, getting back to the subject of emotional constriction & suppression: Whenever we experience a present violation of our person, (& this includes all beings designated as “homo sapiens” & not just those with “C-PTSD” diagnoses) whether that trauma be a physical and/or emotional one, we fear opening up to the full experience of this because we all too keenly recall the dark paths which these same emotions & memories led us onto in our past (even only in a “mindscape” sense). The mind is an amazing & complex organ, but it is also a tricky & potentially dangerous one.

In fact, I believe C-PTSD to be a general symptom of the human condition, in many ways. We humans are very vulnerable & complicated creatures. I believe that everyone suffers from C-PTSD in relation to something, in varying degrees of intensity. This life can be brutal & godless at times. So can our fellow man. So can we ourselves, no matter how much we may attempt to “purify-by-rationalization”, our own sins against others-even if they were in “self-defense”. For the most part, I tend to agree with Jean Paul Sartre's assertion that “Hell is others.” Yet, I also concede that others can also help us to experience more “heavenly” things as well at times.

Hence, the never-ending dilemma: Should I open myself or not to the full range of my human experience & condition? But the thing is, as author & speaker Brene Brown once keenly observed: We can't be selective about which part of our mind we open & which part stays closed without risking either vulnerability & trauma, or, on the other side of things, anhedonia, & a total inability to feel anything worth feeling. I learned this early on. Relative happiness & its pursuit must come to terms with this verity or risk never fulfilling itself. Then again, quite honestly, some of us have just come to terms with another verity: That of our own nature. I personally have had to accept the fact that I will always be damaged in certain ways, & hence, unable to completely immerse myself into the fullness of what we refer to as a “normal life.” My own mental stability depends upon an acceptance of this. We are what we are. No amount of “self-help” projects or even inward immersion into our own psyche in order to come to know & heal ourselves can get at all of the wounds which we carry deep inside of ourselves.

Some things, we must accept, are broken, & cannot be fixed-they can only be worked around to the best of our ability. We cannot undue the damage that was done to us beyond a certain point. But, don't get me wrong, my intention is not fatalism, but realism. What I am saying is that we are who we are for better & for worse, & that we can only try to make the best out of what we have been left with. Because I have witnessed some dark things come out of my wounds, & some miraculous & astoundingly redemptive & beautiful things come out of them.

But, it is true that we are what we are, as the saying goes, in relation to the individual past histories which we carry inside of our psyches. Once I was watching a film, and one of the main characters, who was a survivor of abuse said: “I will never be normal because of what they did to me.” I totally connected with that line of dialogue. I feel this every day at least once when I am faced with yet another way in which my condition limits me from being a fully functional human being. Yet for me, as long as I consistently strive to own my own darkness & “brokenness” without inflicting it upon others, I can have peace with myself.

So, we all have to find a point of compromise with ourselves, 'cause we can't 'be' it all. And at least now, I have at least come far along enough in my own journey of healing that I no longer internalize others' sins & transgressions like my abusers had “programmed” me to do when I was young. Now I know from deep within my whole being, that I did not deserve their mistreatment, or the damage which they left me with that I, in no way, brought upon my own self. But I believe that we all have a story of survival & trauma to tell, including our abusers, past or present. Yet we all must make the choice as to whether we allow our own private pain & darkness to turn us into a victim, & another transgressor, or into a survivor & another purveyor of the Truth & the Light. It is always totally up to us.

Yet unfortunately, our society & culture have a long way to go as far as recognizing psychological acts of violence towards other human beings as equally egregious, & as equally in need of validation on the part of the afflicted. It's funny how whenever you mention “C-PTSD”, most people automatically associate it with military servicemen & women, & the effects of combat in political “physical” wars. And no doubt, this form of it is just as valid, & just as afflictive. Yet survivors of more emotional or psychological kinds of trauma aren't really immediately given clout, when by all rights they absolutely should be. I myself have experienced the way in which some people can view you with either incredulity and/or suspicion when you share with them that you have “C-PTSD”.

I understand the aversion, however, to such things, as many people are just afraid to explore their own minds, & perhaps similar experiences with trauma that is emotionally & psychologically based. But I also find this to be a poor excuse for the disparagement of my (or any other person's) human condition & experience merely because they are too afraid to connect with that of their own.

Moreover, I think this explains a lot of ills in human society, actually. Individuals who, instead of choosing self-awareness & integration, choose self-deception & depravity. M. Scott Peck's book “The People of the Lie” was indispensable to me on my own journey & I still refer to it from time to time as a guide in how to identify those persons who choose projection of their own shadow onto others instead of accountability & proper governance for & of themselves. But it's not just about identification, but the validation as well, that I had every right to protect myself from my abusers, as they, very clearly were in the wrong.

In my own family system, I never had anyone to stand up for me in relation to what was true & right. I played the “role” of the “identified patient”, & in some more emotional ways, the “scapegoat”. If I attempted to assert myself they would quickly put me back into my “place” by either “gaslighting” me or inventing some reason why I “deserved” their mistreatment. Another way they tried to manipulate me back into my “roles” was by taking a personality trait of mine or a character trait & attempting to make me feel ashamed of it, or like I was inferior or inadequate in some way. I believe that one would fall under the category of emotional abuse & “gaslighting”.

In finale, as they used to say back in the heyday of the 1970's & 80's self-help boom: “You can either choose to continue the cycle or to stop the cycle”. The legacies which our family system's have left us with may be totally unfair & unjust, but we must make the choice for the latter & not the former if we are to end this cycle of psychological violence so rampant in Western culture & society. Not that I believe that the problem can be “solved”, but I do believe that it can be “improved upon” to a certain degree, person by person. We are all held accountable for our choices, eventually. And we should deem it in no way acceptable to inflict any kind of intentional distress upon our fellow human beings. Mind you, I stressed the word “intentional.” If we would all utilize our emotional trauma in the name of preventing ourselves from becoming just like our abusers, instead of looking for an easy way out of facing ourselves, what a slightly, but nevertheless, safer society we would all dwell in.

And as many wise thinkers have noted: What we do to another, we, in turn, do to ourselves, as we were all essentially created with the same psychology, at least in a general “humanistic” sense. Also, I would add to that, what we do to ourselves, ends up also affecting others, for better &/or for worse. We must take this life seriously, & how we engage in it, because in the end, that's all we're left with besides our scars. 'Cause there is no such thing as “Fate”, only Choice & Consequence. And C-PTSD!!! (But at least some things are consistent.)

CAVEAT TWITTER-OR

“Meaningless, meaningless, meaningless,” said the Tweeter, “everything is meaningless!” In this day of rampant Social Media, many well-intentioned, sensitive & highly intelligent souls feel a certain kind of both ennui & frustration as it relates to its many venues. Indeed, after a few months of Twitter, one most likely would come to a point of suicidal and/or homicidal ideation-a full blown existential crisis, that is. And one's life needn't even be that “empty” to begin with to reach this point. One can also have a well-rounded existence & life & still feel that way after countless marketing strategies posing as “social interactions”. But the thing is, as we used to say, “Ya gotta learn to take the good with the bad,” right? Or, do we?

First of all, that adage should say instead “take the bad with the good”, after all no one starts out in any endeavour in life hoping to gain something 'bad' out of it no matter how much a masochist or a self-defeatist one might well be. We all, no matter our level of emotional maturity and/or development, need a certain level of depth & meaningfulness-even, dare I say it-intimacy to be exchanged in our social interactions & so-called “connections.” And I don't mean to conjure up stereotypical images of the “basement hermit” who never interacts with the outside world in any meaningful or responsible way. No, those individuals choose the “virtual world” as a substitute for the outer world. I love the outer world! In healthy doses, of course, as with all things. So, without further ado, let's break this down into smaller, more manageable bits & bytes, of course.

(From here on out, I will refer to all Social Media conglomerates as “Twitter” or those who use them regularly (myself included) as “twitterors” under the heading:

TO “TWITTER” OR NOT TO “TWITTER”:

The Pros & Cons

PROS & THEIR SUCCESSIVE CONS

*Provides an alternative way to reconnect with loved ones & friends, etc. that one would not either feel appropriate for other methods or that one would not be able to achieve through other methods.

*Of course, the obvious CON to above PRO being that it opens you up to potential negative and indeed, traumatic experiences, rejection, & in general all of the possible vagaries of the human-to-human dialectic. But, the PRO to this CON, if you will, is that you're already well-versed in those kinds of vagaries, so, it can't get any worse, right? (Although, maybe it can...)

*Provides a convenient forum through which to browse a wondrously eclectic array of art, literature (including “blogs”), & to learn about other cultures, belief systems, etc. Now, you may be thinking that your public library can & does offer these wonders & amenities for the most part already, but not all from the same monitor, a few clicks of a mouse & some strokes on a keyboard.

*The also obvious CON to the aforementioned PRO is that, again, the more we broaden our consciousness, the more vulnerable it is to those “darker principalities” which seek their willing vessels. But, again, the same is true for life before Social Media, right? (Or, is it-at least as prevalently?...)

*Provides a way to purchase services &/or goods with a few clicks of a mouse & strokes on a keyboard, & have them delivered to your personal &/or other preferred residence within a relatively convenient period of time.

*CON: “Spams” you with a whole bunch of crap (& “people”) that you neither need nor want, thereby making you feel a bit like a piece of marketing meat, or a "punching bag" for some mentally unbalanced & malfeasant individual, thus making you question the whole of its usefulness and even desirability in articles just like this one.

*Provides an occasional moment of appreciation &/or connection with another human being that is genuine & deeply meaningful.

*CON: Seems to cancel out the aforementioned PRO by being pathologically too scarce & inconsistent with itself. One begins to feel that they are possibly (& definitely unwittingly) in a relationship with an emotionally abusive entity of Artificial Intelligence. (Oh, by the way, I also mean the “humans.” 'Bots, not unlike 'algorithms', are programmed & manned by real, live, morally culpable individuals.)

*Provides a raison d'etre through the wonderfully autonomous mediums of blogsites, AuthorPages, LiveJournals, business forums, etc. for those of us who thrive best in those independently-minded & artsy-intellectual kinds of environs.

*Caveat Twitter-or. If not balanced with “work” & social connections out in the “concrete” world may turn into the CON of making one feel more disconnected & more existentially null & void than one ever felt before becoming a “twitteror.”

*Can provide a way to feel connected.

*Makes one feel more dis-connected. (Those two just seem to keep coming up, don't they?)

*Gives one a sense of purpose.

*Gives one a sense of insignificance. (Yeah, those two keep popping up, too.)

*Provides a virtual life “supplement” to entertain, enlighten & enliven you when you're not out in the “other” world doing other things.

*CON: If taken as the “main course” (in the intellective-emotive gustatory sense, or course) can render one with a potentially fatal case of impoverishment, malnourishment & mental rickets, which may lead to dementia.

All in all, we can conclude that: Social Media is meant to be taken "supplementally", not as the "main course." As with all things, balance, right?

*Hmmnnnn...what else could possibly be noted about Social Media & its effects/affects. Huh. Yeah, it seems to “affect” us more than it “effects” us, doesn't it-at least in the “eternal”, “metaphysical” sense.

Not much more can be said.

Because it seems to keep boiling down to same two salient PROS & CONS.

It helps us feel connected, but makes us feel even lonelier than we ever did before its advent.

And secondly, it gives us a sense of purpose when we employ ourselves meaningfully within it, but at the same time impoverishes us, existentially, & psycho-spiritually, no matter how “conscientiously” we utilize it.

Hence, in finale, I suppose it all boils down to this: Progress has its limitations. We cannot escape the human predicament.

In a sense, this revelation has its comforts more than its inflictions.

For with this being known, we are free to follow whatever path we choose, knowing now, that it will continue to lead us to the same place, no matter which road we take.

Yet, if we are utilizing it properly & responsibly, we will be gaining inward growth & evolution in a positive direction.

It also serves to relieve our consciences by reminding us that we are often not even the problem, & thus we need not seek to "fix" it, whatever our current sufferings might be.

We must merely accept things as they are.

We must merely continue to make the most out of the human condition that we find ourselves in & do the best with what little this world, in the way of true, everlasting sustenance, has to offer.

Now that, is all well within our purview.

https://www.lulu.com/shop/valerie-stephens/collected-essays-of-valerie-lynn-stephens/paperback/product-6mv86e.html?page=1&pageSize=4