In a overview of all known history of mankind, we see unceasing conflict and war broken only by brief reprieves filled with apprehension and fear of what is yet to come. This common mark, this common effect that stretches through the centuries, must, by the underlying order of the universe, be derived from common cause. There is no denying this truth without denying truth altogether. No matter what labels are put upon it, nor what subjective claims of difference accompany them, the objective fact remains: the cause of war is the cause of war is the cause of war.
It is human individuals that engage in these violent conflicts. Human individuals are creatures of volition and it is by choice that they pursue war. They claim a distaste for it and claim to seek an end to it, but without surcease, they battle on. Are we to think that individuals have no control over it, that it is the "destiny of mankind" to maim and kill? "Destiny" is by choice and choice is made. This is the truth of it.
In human affairs, as surely as effect is preceded by action, action is preceded by belief, and belief is preceded by thought and conclusions. Perpetual war leaves no doubt that conclusions held are manifested in acts of war. Reality is the final arbiter. It yields not at all to desires, hopes, wishes, expectations, or number of believers. War is reality's judgment upon the means employed and the thought that precedes and selects. If peace is the desired end, the thought employed and means selected are obviously not appropriate to the goal sought.
Through the same centuries stagnated in hostility and war, technology, although often encountering zealot resistance, has advanced in leaps and bounds. Advance in technology is an ongoing process of goal sought and goal achieved. It is as much evidence of right thinking as perpetual war is evidence of wrong thinking. It behooves us to know the difference. As primary illustration, one example will suffice: If a medical scientist states that he is seeking or has found an infinite germ or non-dimensional virus, all would conclude that he is mentally unbalanced and out of touch with reality. In the social realm of an "omni god", "national interest", "society's values" and other "infinite entities", if one protests such absurdity, it is the protester that is considered aberrant.
Two modes of thought, exact opposites, are employed in a singular and orderly universe. Can two thinking modes one eighty out of phase with each other both conform to reality? One succeeds, the other fails. Can any answer be more clear? The primary choice each individual must make is not what to think, but how to think. If the circumstance is to be turned from war to peace, thinking must be turned from infinity to one. Herein lies identity, truth, and peace.
Each and every human individual is by nature a volitional, valuing, goal-seeking entity. The achievement of a goal (value sought) results in a state of mind commonly referred to as happiness. Ergo, happiness is a condition that all constantly seek to create and/or sustain. Technically, since happiness is derived from the achievement of any goal (change of a set of circumstances), happiness is a constant of consciousness. This means that, definitively, happiness is actually a matter of more or less. However, instead of dealing with immeasurable degrees, communication may be better served if we regard the terms, happiness and unhappiness, as "either-or" as they are usually used in personal judgment of one's state of mind.
The natural condition described above is accompanied by a potential for both inter- and intra-personal conflicts. Values and goals at odds with each other cannot co-exist as achievements and must necessarily culminate in mental and/or physical conflict. The manifestations of this potential are saturate in our philosophical and physical environment. Understanding the underlying cause is a prerequisite to dealing with it in a manner conducive to happiness.
We are all aware of perpetual war between "countries" derived from the conflict of values and goals of differing individuals. We are no less aware of violent conflicts of every description and scope that are not labeled as war. Nevertheless, the conditions of "street crime", "domestic violence", "racial conflicts", etc., are fundamentally identical in common effect. Is not common cause indicated as well?
National mental health organizations, thousands, if not millions, of psychiatrists, psychologists, and therapists of every description is certainly evidence of awareness of certain types of extensive mental conflicts suffered by millions of individuals. Are the conflicts that are grouped under different labels actually derived from different causes as implied by the labeling? Or is there a connecting thread that ties them together and links them to other conflicts entwined with the eternal quest for happiness? If so, how and why does the natural quest for happiness so often result in horror and misery?
First, an overview: One or several persons could spend hours, days, or even months, just compiling a list of "peace treaties", "accords", and "summit conferences"; all ostensibly for the purpose of establishing a "lasting peace." I dare say that such a list would create a very large book with many thousands of entries. If such a list were made and each item evaluated in respect of the declared purpose, literally every one would receive the same judgment: FAILURE.
Doesn't the 100% failure rate lead you at least suspect that something is wrong at the core, that perhaps there is a common error and common cause at the root of it all? No matter what "reasons" are given, or what excuses are offered, the inescapable fact is that centuries of such efforts at peace by millions of individuals have produced nothing but failure. The wars go on. It may be philosophically and psychologically convenient and emotionally palatable to name a lone dictator here and there as cause, but consciously everyone knows that a lone dictator could not and cannot unilaterally carry out such massive atrocities. Such things require the voluntary psychological support and voluntary physical participation of many. It requires the same general thinking, the same basic ideology, the same fundamental values and goals. The questions are: What is this same general thinking? What is this basic ideology? What are these fundamental values and goals? From what beliefs are they derived? Are the beliefs true or false? These are the questions that must necessarily be accurately answered to understand cause and deal with it in a manner to end the endless violent conflicts. If the present violent circumstance is derived from truth, then we have no hope, for truth cannot be changed. It is only by recognition of the fallacies inherent in the prevailing philosophy and value system, and recognition of their destructive nature, that there is any chance of peace.
On the more directly personal level, what of the mental health organizations, the psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, and therapists of every ilk? What is their success rate? Or failure rate? Are the causes of domestic violence, depression, suicidal behavior, and myriad other intra- and inter-personal conflicts really rooted out and understood? Or is it just a situation of occasionally masking symptoms and claiming success even as the vast majority of cases are openly admitted failures.
There is no lack of very personal awareness of many of these conflicts. Many seek assistance in resolving their problems by turning to licensed therapists, support groups, and counseling of various types. A few decades ago, not many engaged in these activities. Now, self-help books, tapes, lectures, and seminars are a multi-million-dollar commercial industry. Do they work? Check their track record and you will find that they are expensive and dismal failures. That's why more and supposedly different ones pop up frequently. Most openly admit their efforts fail to bring about the state of mind they seek. Not knowing why their efforts fail, they blame themselves and deepen the very problem they sought to resolve. To be sure, here and there are a few individuals singing the praises of their particular experiences, but such successes are rare, superficial, and temporary. The symptoms are masked, but the cause remains. These instances serve only to delude and draw the unsuspecting into the web of deception and disappointment.
Although few are aware of it, the prevailing dominant beliefs held by most of the population of the world consciously and/or unconsciously direct the mind to distrust conscious conclusion in deference to feelings derived from said dominant beliefs. This condition will be directly and indirectly addressed throughout this book. I deceive you not when I say that it will take much mental effort on your part to grasp what I have to say. The difficulty lies not in the complexities of the conclusions and beliefs, for they are the essence of simplicity and elementary logic. The difficulty is derived from a long standing and deeply ingrained resistance to any idea that challenges the status quo of what "everybody knows", the shield of the sacred idea, as it were. Perhaps this barrier will weaken somewhat if you keep in mind that what "everybody knows" and the revered "unquestionable" beliefs underlie perpetual war and other personal misery as described above. We certainly cannot logically blame hostility and war on beliefs not held. To understand these directive beliefs and why they culminate in resentment, hostility, and war, we need to examine them and the underlying psychology independently of their influence. Not necessarily an easy task, but one that is required and quite possible if you so desire.
Copyright at Common Law, Delmar England,
1997
Permission in hereby granted to copy this work for personal
use or for FREE distribution provided that the work is copied or distributed in
its entirety and that this copyright notice accompanies each copy.
