Blog

Contemplative educator, Dr. Parker J. Palmer (1939-  ) internationally famous and award-winning author/teacher/mentor of alternative and authentic education, has never impressed me with his understanding and teaching(s) on fear management/education. If anyone ought to be interested in "fearlessness" and the emancipation of teachers and school systems and parenting, it would be this guide. But, I find his work often brilliant and wise, and then quite dull and ignore-ant or reductionistic when it comes to the topic of "fear." I have long been one to embrace his work (like, "The Courage to Teach" in 1998, when he critically named the "culture of fear" in Education, especially in higher education at that time when no one else had done so from within the education system)--see his Chapter 2 in that book. But, then I tried reaching out to him several times to explore fear more deeply and to analyze what "culture of fear" means to education as a meta-context, and I did also challenge a graduate adult ed. student who loved PJP as well, and I have challenged other educators who idolize this man and his work. Yes, he has a large following of acolytes. But none of them are interested, or they are intimidated by my critiques and offerings. This has been so disappointing and tells me a lot about what kind of consciousness and values these educators have, of which I sense are quite fear-based themselves. But that is another topic for another blog. [note: Some yrs. ago, I have written about Palmer & Wilber in another blogpost here]

In this blog I merely want to point to a recent quote I found from PJ Parker (2004) where again, I am so disappointed in where his discourse goes with fear--it is so incomplete and quite distortive because it has no real theory to it. He wrote,

"I follow the thread of true self faithfully for a while. Then I lose it and find myself back in the dark, where fear drives me to search for the thread once again. That pattern, as far as I can tell, is inherent in the human condition. Yet its grip on my life has weakened as I have explored it in circles of trust. Today, I lose the thread less often" (p. 90). 

Okay, fine, this sounds like basic recovery practice, name it, claim it, deal with it face-to-face, kind of fear management (or just like one does this kind of work when working with an addiction). But you can read his entire 2004 book, for example, and there is no further insights he has into fear. He doesn't explore it but prefers trust, love and courage and soul and concepts like that. He has no notion of the praxis of fearlessness or fear praxis, as I have articulated. And he never cites my work on this all. He is off on his own tangent and is in the above quote telling people (a lot of people) that basically fear is his motivator to get back on trust/faith/love path, etc. He doesn't define fear for us or theorize it in complicated ways, or speak about the "culture of fear" and politics of fear and how getting back on track/trust isn't just an individualized therapia from his circles of (psychological) trust-making and sharing. I find this all too pithy and under-theorized and not up on the latest knowledges or holistic approach to the study of fear (e.g., like critical developmental fearology as I offer). It also is not a good sign that fear is the best motivator either. That's pretty much what he concludes on this page after all his life experience and work. Hmmm... something missing there! 

Of course, PJ Parker has lots of guidance to offer those interested in transformation, but I am merely saying, it lacks in some critical areas--and, thus we have to think carefully about what transformation even means in the meta-context of a culture of fear today. Parker admited that context but I find he never kept up the research into the implications of it--and, it's the latter that has been my speciality. 

Mmabatho Montse (S. Africa)                                       and                   R. Michael Fisher (Canada)  

For a recent discussion of my early thoughts about a new metapsychology (metapsychologia-q) and how to think beyond a needs-based paradigm in human development and evolution, go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aazvlirjup8&t=266s

note: amongst some other alternative routes beyond needs-based paradigms, I have long ago offered a Fearlessness Paradigm (over-coming the reductionism and distortions of fear-based paradigms generally; see note2). There are lots of my publications on this all over the internet, and/or go to Google Scholar search and look up that term.

note1: there are some other people using "metapsychology" (beyond Sigmund Freud's first coining) and I am critical of their (mis-)naming of what they are doing with it (Gerbode et al.)--but that's another topic for another future blog 

note2: this "Fearlessness Paradigm" has roots back to 1989 in my founding the In Search of Fearlessness Project (ISOF Project or Movement)--then, I took this (implicitly) into my graduate education years of gaining an MA in Adult Education and Ph.D. in Curriculum & Pedagogy (1998-2003, Univeristy of British Columbia)--in the doctoral project I refined my work as a "wicked problem" and "meta-problem" (globally) to solve in the world, which has layers and stages (e.g., the DCFV theory intervention) but eventually settled to the problem of what I (loosely) called "Fearless Leadership" (in and out of the 'Fear' Matrix). 

This paper is presented in Tank Prasad Neupane study & research and Fearism Study Centre Dharan, Nepal on 2080/11/01 (February 14, 2024)

Paper Presenter:

Bedprasad Sapkota
Administrative Officer
Dharan Sub-Metropolitan City, Sunsari.

Fearism is profoundly ingrained in our society. It plays both a direct and indirect role in the creation, development, and transformation of the world. In Nepal, public governance has emphasized the importance of development, good administration, and effective service delivery. Good governance serves as the backbone of public administration. Within this context, fearism is a significant concern; it is not merely the cultivation of words but the foundation of every new idea.

Public governance can enhance its quality by maintaining principles of development governance, transparency, the right to information, accountability, reducing corruption, and upholding integrity—supported by fearism. Public governance encompasses policy making, effective implementation, social activities, and management. An effective governance system maximizes limited resources while ensuring access, recognition, and representation for all. By maintaining a diverse range of thoughts and capabilities, fear prevents public governance from becoming careless.

The Role of Fear in Governance
Fear shapes our thoughts and fosters integrity and transparency. According to fearism philosopher Desh Subba, a reduction in fear within governance can lead to negligence and a lack of accountability in enforcing laws and development policies nationwide. When fear is absent, those in authority may misuse power for personal gain, negatively impacting governance and societal structure, ultimately weakening its effectiveness.

In every community—regardless of caste, ethnicity, gender, or social group—social justice must be established to ensure that governance is not merely superficial but genuinely beneficial for the people. Fear plays a crucial role in making service delivery timely, accessible, straightforward, and efficient, thereby upholding transparency, accountability, the rule of law, and the right to information.

Official processes, including registration, dispatch, reporting, job assignments, decision-making, identity verification, correspondence, documentation, record maintenance, purchasing, and staff evaluation, must be conducted with a clear understanding of fear's influence on governance, development, and service delivery. Effective management of fear within public governance enables citizens to feel secure and encourages officials to act responsibly.

Fear is crucial for good administration. In its absence, governance can become arbitrary, opaque, corrupt, and authoritarian. For effective governance, an administration must acknowledge and manage these fears.

1. Political Fear:
In 1887, Woodrow Wilson's article "The Study of Public Administration" began to differentiate between politics and governance. In public governance, officials can be elected, appointed, or selected. Elected representatives make laws, which administrators implement; thus, political interests influence governance. The administration fears representatives, ensuring a balance of fear that allows public governance to function smoothly.

2. Legal Fear:
Legal governance serves as a guiding principle for administration, controlling unlawful affairs. Compliance with laws, policies, regulations, and statutes is essential. The enforcement of laws is monitored by bodies like the Office of the Auditor General and anti-corruption commissions, ensuring accountability. Legal fear acts as an invisible judge. Non-compliance can lead to authoritarian figures engaging in illegal activities. Thus, legal fear is fundamental to effective governance, ensuring adherence to legal frameworks.

3. Social Fear:
Humans are social beings, and our actions are influenced by societal expectations. Factors such as family, community, human rights issues, and social groups contribute to the social fear experienced by governance officials. Consequently, fear helps make public governance systematic, effective, and citizen-centric. The level of public governance is inherently tied to society. Fear can ensure that public governance is maintained. For example, limited mobile network and internet access can hinder effective online service delivery, emphasizing the need for governance to respond to societal demands.

4. Economic Fear:
Qualified officials manage financial resources in public governance. Ineffective financial management can lead to a lack of essential services. The fear of inadequate resources directly impacts governance quality. Financial constraints may prolong procedures, resulting in delayed salaries and service delivery, which can hinder effective governance. If illegal means are employed to acquire financial resources, it can lead to corruption and undermine legal frameworks. Non-compliance can cause financial mismanagement, jeopardizing governance integrity. Thus, economic fear contributes to effective governance.

5. Career Development Fear:
Officials in public governance possess specific skills and knowledge. Good job performance promotes career advancement, including transfers, promotions, training, and rewards. Ineffective financial management can affect essential services, influencing governance quality. Fear of failure motivates officials to maintain high standards, supporting effective governance through careful performance.

6. Ethical Fear:
The saying "Karm nai Dharma" (work is religion) reflects that good conduct leads to happiness, while bad conduct results in disappointment. Some may choose a self-destructive path in retirement. People strive to avoid wrongdoing based on ethical principles, seeking self-satisfaction through ethical means. Unethical behavior does not yield personal satisfaction. Ethical fear encourages individuals to refrain from wrongful activities, supporting effective governance.

7. Fear of Punishment and Penalty:
Actions and behaviors within an office are subject to consequences. Every official is aware of the repercussions of their actions. Fear manifests in various forms throughout governance. Routine processes—such as presenting identification, adhering to dress codes, submitting leave applications, and following procurement procedures—must be executed correctly. Any misconduct may lead to fines and penalties. Without fear of punishment, governance effectiveness and system integrity may decline.

8. Environmental Fear:
Our activities are evolving towards modernization and postmodernism. Service delivery has become more efficient and systematic, with innovations like "building less, paperless, one-touch service" enabling faster and streamlined processes. If these advancements are not contextually adjusted, governance may become ineffective. Public governance must ensure social justice and equality, adapting to prevailing conditions. An unfavorable environment can negatively impact capacity and reliability, hindering effective governance.

Fearism has a pervasive global influence, felt in both physical and non-physical realms. Human behavior, creation, and actions are shaped by fear. Public governance involves collaboration between government and citizens, facilitated by this fear. Luther Gulick's management theory, influenced by John Major’s concept of public governance from the 1990s, along with the World Bank's frameworks, highlights fear as a significant factor in human behavior.

Complaints about public governance being tardy, bureaucratic, and traditional indicate a need for agility, responsiveness, and effectiveness. Governance based on the rule of law, high discipline standards, and efficient administration is essential for democratic governance. Effective governance relies on mechanisms designed for this purpose; fear is often unseen but its presence is inevitable. Fear significantly impacts public governance activities—it is a Philosophy of Fearism.

In managing public governance effectively, involving everyone is crucial. Thus, fearism influences public governance by providing creative and responsive solutions that help maintain effective governance.

In governance, the three branches—executive, judiciary, and legislative—are responsible for ensuring transparency and accountability through their functions and processes. Citizen engagement, empowerment, and inclusive simplification must address disparities between the rich and the poor. Public governance must prioritize social justice, inclusivity, and non-discrimination to create an effective and equitable governance environment.

Globally, we are witnessing permanent solutions to development as a result of future fears, leading to expectations of long-term peace, good governance, development, and progress. Born in the soil of Dharan, Nepal, fearism founder Desh Subba is drawing the world’s attention. His profound philosophy serves as a milestone for implementing fear-based governance (govern-fearism) aimed at making public governance more transparent, efficient, reliable, and citizen-centric.

It is an English translation version.

Many of us, especially in Canada, are used to having a host open a lecture or an event with an Indigenous land-acknowledgement, but I will declare this is the best one I have ever heard and it comes from Dr. Vanessa Andreotti, brand new Dean of Education at University of Victoria, Vancouver Is. (not far from my territories where I live now in Nanaimo, BC). Even if you listen to the first 2 min. and 30 secs. you get a good idea where this Indigenous-based thinker/leader educator is going and the spirit she brings to the field of Education in general. This is a real new experience for me and so timely! The spirit of fearlessness infuses this 2 min. and 30 sec. clip...

"Radical Wholeness" is the term philosopher-mystic Ken Wilber uses to describe a methodology also called "Integral Theory." This has been a favorite way for me to critically analyze just about all forms of knowledge and knowing and place distinctions on the differences in ways of knowing. Radical wholeness is more complicated than it sounds and yet, is well-worth the effort to study and apply as it gives us a reference for good judgments of just about everything.

I started studying Wilber's unique way of organizing knowledge and methodologies back in 1982 before Wilber started to become internationally known as a profound thinker. This particular book review article here by Frank Visser is a good quick summary of the 5 particular methodologies that (in common language) Wilber has been using to keep us all thinking about our own methodologies of growth and development and intuitional insight. Ultimately, these are the 5 most basic to ensure "radical wholeness", is the argument Wilber makes. I suggest you read Visser's article if this interests you, and I will say that these 5 methodological orientations (guide posts) are also great to utilize in the Path of Fearlessness that I've promoted since 1989. What Wilber (2024) calls the "Integral Path" is intricately aligned with Path of Fearlessness (the way of the fearlessness movement in evolution). 

Visser's article goes over to summarize the five: (1) Waking Up, (2) Growing Up, (3) Opening Up, (4) Cleaning Up, (5) Showing up. 

In Wilber (2017) he wrote, "It is time to bring all the Great Traditions up to speed in this world..." (p. 11). Wilber is a grand critical thinker never timid to take on anything, including all the world's Great Traditions, for the purpose of improving them for the evolution of consciousness and a healthier, saner and sustainable planet. 

References:

Visser, F. (n.d.) The search for a 'big wholeness.' https://www.integralworld.net/visser346.html

Wilber, K. (2017). The religion of tomorrow: A vision for the future of the Great Traditions--more inclusive, more comprehensive, more complete. Shambhala. 

Wilber, K. (2024). Finding radical wholeness: The integral path to unity, growth, and delight. Shambhala. 

I created this figure above to show who's who in the really potent theories on anxiety/fear in the late 20th-to-early 21st centuries. These are well known, other than Ettinger. I have studied Ettinger since 2009 and have found really important improvements in her work beyond the big guys theories. For a really good Solstreif-Pirker 2023.pdf on all of their views in summary go to C. Solstreif-Pirker (2023). For one of my dialogues on "biology of fear" and "biology of love" a year or more ago with Dr. Narvaez, go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8xISZRzxLk&t=373s

Solstreif-Pirker opens his Abstract with: "Building on the definition of contemporary modernity as an 'ecology of fear', this article articulates a counter-hegemonic concept of modernity that is not oriented toward a future end [being-towards-death] but toward the intensities of the [relation, being-towards-birthing] present moment...". (p. 561). 

I'm happy to have further detailed study and conversations on this article and its implications to Fear Studies, and to a Fearlessness Paradigm. 

"Professor" - (detail) mixed media on paper, wood panel, 16x20 in. -R. Michael Fisher (c)2024

Art(s) and aesthetics as means of expression and evolutionary development of consciousness are my constant practices and interests and I often blend that with my study of fear/fearlessness. This artshow "A Lot To Do About Nothing" is Aug-29- to Sep. 1/24, @ Denny's Gallery, Nanaimo, BC. I wanted to share my updated CVArt RMF.DOC here for anyone interested in my art career. 

For many years, if not centuries, philosophers, theologians and other critical thinkers have questioned the nature and role of fear. When is fear working for us in a good way and when is it not? This question and others related to it have been of philosophical and ethical interest in how to manage one's life and society, in a good way. I myself have off and on entered into these arguments as a fearologist and fearanalyst. I have had many disagreements with others [1]. That is a vast literature and exploration for the keen learner to explore.

But for purposes of this short posting, let me offer a very interesting clear (albeit, a rather incomplete analysis with flaws) paper published recently that makes an argument for the 'weaponizing of fear' as ethical and pragmatic to bringing about good ends (note: Middle-eastern Abrahamic religious traditions have done this as well). The article by Akande (2024) brings with it an African perspective of traditionalism (e.g., Yoruba, argues Akande) with rational philosophy (i.e., pragmatism) and suggests the better way to go in controlling cruel treatment of people towards animals (and their rights)--is to bring fear into the people rather than attempting to bring love into the people [2]. The latter, so Akande argues, has failed pragmatically. Such love-based approaches fail to stop people abusing animals, so he assumes in his pragmatic ethical philosophy. Taboos work, according to Akande--i.e., weaponizing fear works. 

So "rational fear" is proposed as a solution to human cruelty, which IF the author is correct, is to be generalized to improve peace on the planet in general. 

I have attached Akande on weaponizing fear.pdf published in Aquino: Journal of Philosophy 4(2). 2024, entitled:

 https://poe.com/Assistant

My first recorded FearTalk #1 (2018), with Four Arrows (Wahinkpe Topa, aka Dr. Don T. Jacobs) was the first opportunity to talk with an Indigenous-based scholar and activist-educator about the topic of fear and fearlessness. We got into talking about "aesthetics of fear" as perhaps a better alternative (more Indigenous) way to understand fear. Take a listen to this spontaneous dialogue. 

My second recorded FearTalk #12 (2021) with Four Arrows. In this talk we both again arrive back and remember "Indigenizing & Fearlessnessizing" --independently, and collectively, as a fundamental way to carry forward education for all in the 21st century. There is no other educator who is open and so progressive to want to address this topic with me, and excitingly we are going to do our 3rd FearTalk on this in the next few days, so stay tuned. 

****

Note: for those who want to read up on Indigenizing and Fearlessnessizing by Four Arrows and myself, brought specifically into dialogue and critique with the field of Critical Pedagogy, go to: 

Four Arrows & Fisher, R. M. (2020). Section V Indigenous ways of knowing. In S. R. Steinberg & B. Down (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of critical pedagogies Vol. 2 (pp.547-49). SAGE. 

Fisher, R. M., & Four Arrows (2020). Indigenizing conscientization and critical pedagogy: Integrating Nature, Spirit and Fearlessness as foundational concepts. In S. R. Steinberg & B. Down (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of critical pedagogies Vol. 2 (pp.551-60). SAGE. 

Dr. Arie Kizel, Israel                                       and                      Dr. R. Michael Fisher, Canada 

In this recent dialogue (FearTalk #26), these two educators dive deep into the organizational ideology of "pedagogy of fear" in socialization and schooling, and they offer a way out of this "prison" via critical open thinking as philosophical inquiry for/with children. 

Desh Subba and Jamila Khattak (Ph.D Scholar)

Host: Jamila Khattak (Ph.D Scholar)

Jamila Khattak Ph.D scholar in education at Fatima Jinnah Women University Rawalpindi, Pakistan. I have expertise in research field on different topics and focus on teachers and students collaboration and training. Fear in students is very Fear in students often manifests as anxiety and stress related to academic performance, peer relationships, and future uncertainties. This emotional response can negatively impact their cognitive functions, such as concentration, memory, and problem-solving abilities, hindering their overall learning experience. Understanding and addressing these fears through supportive educational environments, counseling, and stress management strategies is crucial for fostering resilience and promoting academic success.

Guest: Desh Subba
Introduction:
Desh Subba is a renowned philosopher, author, and the founder of the Fearism movement, which explores fear as a driving force in human life and society. Born in Nepal, Subba has significantly contributed to contemporary philosophy by examining the multifaceted nature of fear and its impact on personal and collective behaviors. His seminal work, "Fearism," has garnered international recognition, inspiring discussions on how fear can be transformed from a hindrance into a motivational force. Subba's insights have resonated globally, particularly among youth, encouraging a reevaluation of fear's role in achieving success and personal growth.

Jamila: What is fear, and how does it manifest in our lives?

Desh Subba: In a normal introduction, it is an emotion, sense, feeling, and consciousness. What we understand is similar to other emotions. I call it general fear. It comes from the mind. Another comes from the amygdala part of the brain, which I call special fear. The amygdala is a
primitive part of the four parts of the brain. It only looks at fear. Our senses send a message to this part. It responds, and other senses follow its instructions. In Fearism, I talk about general and special fears.

Understanding Fear
Jamila: How can fear be a barrier to achieving success and personal growth?
Desh Subba: Most people understand fear as a barrier. Many authors and philosophers carry the same meaning. It is a dark part like Yang of Yin Yang Chinese philosophy. Our contribution to contemporary philosophy is looking at it from multiple approaches. In simple words, proper use of fear is a motivation. Higher and lower is evil. Even if we drink more milk, it is harmful. If we have excess fear it is a barrier. For example, a student knows all the answers to the question. He gets nervous and panics, and he fails the exam. Suppose for exam students
don't fear, do careless, they are unsuccessful. Some students fear too much for exams, and they also fail. So, they must have virtue fear (medium fear). It makes them successful in life. This formula is also applicable to teachers. Every professional has to follow it, for instance, doctors, drivers, pilots, heads of government, heads of any institution.

Historical and Contemporary Examples
Jamila: Are there historical or contemporary examples of individuals who have transformed their fear into success?
Desh Subba: There are many examples of it. We can see many speakers, they say, at the beginning, I could not speak because of fear, and hesitation. Slowly I controlled it myself and became a motivational speaker, singers, artists, teachers, and spiritual leaders. It is very useful
for those who are shy, hesitant, nervous, introverted, and have some phobias. Girls can benefit from this idea particularly those who are dominated by culture, religion, and tradition. It is shown in movies and fiction books.

Psychological Mechanisms
Jamila: What psychological mechanisms allow people to convert fear into motivation?

Desh Subba: At present many people are suffering from hypertension, depression, anxiety, and mental health. The doctor gives medicine to them but does not try to reach the depth of the sickness. So, their treatment is not successful. Several suicide cases are increasing day by day. When exam result comes, some students do suicide. Cause of it, they define failure in the exam. It is the general understanding of parents and teachers. It is not the bottom cause. It is factual. Transcendence causes vary. A dark future, prestige, and unsuccessful life are the cause. At the bottom is fear of the dark and failure of life. If we examine the reason for depression, anxiety, and mental problems, in most cases we find fear. During my philosophical tour, I reached northeast India Manipur. I met a chairman of a literary organization. He said he is a depression patient. I asked him, "How did you become a depression patient?" He told me, he misused some amount of organization. He was tense and worried about how to repay that amount. It was his starting point. It means fear of loss of prestige, reputation, arrest, and more crises. When we dig the depths of any crisis, we reach into fear. It was left by psychology and medical science. Lots
of analysis I have done on it.

Practical Strategies
Jamila: What are some practical strategies or techniques for harnessing fear as a positive force?
Desh Subba: Everything can be seen from Fearism's multiple eyes. When we see a beautiful flower, we observe it from different corners. If we think it is poisonous, then, it changes into poisonous though we don't experience it. Fear is the same. For a long time, it has been
understood as poisonous and harmful. First, we need to metamorphose this meaning into beautiful, fragrant, positive, and motivational. It helps us in succeeding in our lives. Suppose a person fears speaking in mass. Day by day his exercise helps him to get success. I was very
shy, dreadful to speak, and nervous. I was invited to give a lecture about Fearism at Hong Kong University. I have only a graduate degree and English is not my language. I am very weak in spoken and written English. The date was 26 March 2015. This university is ranked 18 in the
world this year. It is a very famous university. I must had to speak to promote my idea. What should I do? I didn't want to miss this chance. My sister gifted me an old-model Nokia phone. Everyday 1 minute I record and practice. Around a month later, I became confident that I could speak. It was my first English lecture. I spoke for one and a half hours. If a person can speak for one minute, he can easily speak for three hours. This is a practical strategy. Everyone can experiment with it.

Role of Self-Awareness
Jamila: How does self-awareness play a role in overcoming fear?
Desh Subba: All the fear we don't have to overcome. It cannot be overcome because it is a consciousness that emerges from the brain. American scientists did an experiment taking out the amygdala of a rat. The rat lost consciousness and went to play with the cat because the rat's fear was removed. It staggered on the way, out of control. Self-awareness is important. Suppose a man is going to suicide. He thinks he cannot repay the loan and interest. It is his understanding. After almost jumping from the height, he enlightened that "I was not going to
suicide because of the loan, I was going to kill myself because of fear of it. I can pay it on an installment basis." Before he had a boulder of fear, now he metamorphosed it into pieces- installments. It means a big fear is divided into tiny parts. It is a self-awareness of fear. It saves
his life.

Supportive Environments
Jamila: How can individuals create a supportive environment that encourages overcoming fear?
Desh Subba: Those intellectuals or teachers can create a Supportive Environment that understands Fearism and its school of thought. They need to understand the quotes of it, life is conducted, directed, and controlled by fear, and we are Fear Sísyphus being watched by
Panopticon. Religion, myth, psychology, literature, politics, criticism, and belief systems consist of it. When they look at life, education, society, health care, law, constitution, morality, and ethics from this theory, people encourage themselves.

Fear and Goal Setting
Jamila: How can setting goals help in transforming fear into motivation?
Desh Subba: A cricket team set a goal to win the World Cup. It is their goal. They must keep a fear of defeat. Fear of defeat is not negative, it is a positive because it forwards them. If a team does not keep it, they will be careless and not concentrate on the game. Fear of loss unites the team and focuses on the match. Ultimately, they win and share happiness. Not only do players become happy, but a nation celebrates bliss. That's why I said, Happiness doesn't have self- stand, it stands on fear. I give an example that is fit for a developed and underdeveloped
country. Pakistan and some corrupt, nepotist countries do not fear the law and people. They hold all powers and bureaucrats. They do what they like to do. No fear of law and order for them. It is the reason the country became an unsuccessful state. On the contrary, the developed
country has a fear of law and order and more fear from the public. If we are found guilty, we will be punished, they think. This fear stops them from doing illegal things. I am living in Hong Kong. Once our head of city (Chief Executive) was jailed for 20 months because of a
misconduct case. It is the reason, it has a high rank in the world.

Mindfulness and Meditation
Jamila: How can mindfulness and meditation practices contribute to transforming fear?
Desh Subba: Our knowledge of fear is wrong. It scapegoats us. We hate it. Civilization, politics, language, capital, hospital, insurance, fire brigade, army, detective (CIA, KGB, and RAW), and CCTV (paparazzi, newspaper) are for fear purpose or, fear-care. Fear Meditation, fear enlightens and transforms us positively. R. Michael is a specialist in fear management. It is important.

Mentors and Role Models
Jamila:What role do mentors and role models play in helping individuals overcome their fears?
Desh Subba: Almost all your questions are about overcoming fear. We never overcome it. Overcome is our mirage. That's why I coined the quote "Fear is a Sisyphus". When it is up, we bring it down. From down, we push it up. Again it up we bring it down. It repeats all the time.
It is an endless process. To give an example, I have a fear of blood pressure. For the time being it is controlled and that fear ends but not forever. At the same time comes the fear of sugar. Another example, I have a fear of bank installments, so I paid them. Again comes mortgage.

Terrorism & Counter-Terrorism: Two Sides of the Same Coin. The mass counter-terrorist hypnosis has begun. The latest gun violence is no surprise to me. 

You all may or may not know as of last night that a shooter hit the former U.S. pres. Donald Trump with a bullet in the right ear during a political rally and a day before the Republican Party gathering as they prepare for the last stretch of the campaign with Trump leading that Party into the 2024 election in Nov. of this year. 

Tensions are high and getting higher, political rhetoric and polarization are at a peak. Meaning anxiety and fear are peaking in that country and around the world, for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Right wing fascist like leaders and outright fascists are winning over some governments around the world this year in unprecedented proportions. A terror run through the land, and Trump is situated in that Right conservative extremist agenda overall. No wonder all his incitements of violence against others in his years in politics since 2018 at least, he is finally overtly attacked by a single gun man on a roof with a number of bullets. Of course, the gun man was immediately killed by counter-snipers of the CIA etc. It was a suicide/assassination project by this person whom at this time we don't know any more of their identity or motivations but it is clear that a message of violence was met with a message of violence. Violence begets violence and under that is fear begets fear. This is how "terrorism" of all kinds (and its underbelly of fearism-t) work. 

The times of spectacles of violence and the massive replays by media outlets of Trump being shot in the ear live on camera, will continue, like 9/11... this induces a shock and awe trance in the people, and the rallying of the patriarchal authorities to show they are "strong" and "in charge" and just listen to them and what they tell you--because that is the truth and will bring you safety under their powers of control. This is a most dangerous time in the wake of shock and awe to hypnotize people with messages and mesmerization. Another form of terrorism (fearism). And, its all about "guns" and who gets to wield them. For more on "shock doctrine" (i.e., indoctrination as perpetrated in times of emergency) go to Naomi Klein's book for example, "Shock Doctrine" which looks at this phenomenon and links it to "disaster capitalism" and political manipulation.

I've been thinking about how everyone has to give up their guns at a rally like that to get into the perimeter. Only the law enforcement types are to carry. Yet, it is odd that people at the Pennsylvania event have to give up their constitutional right for the sake of that rally and safety of the political candidate. Why is that? It is because people are terrified that someone will shoot a political leader at any time. The ironic and paradoxical insanity is not that hard to see what is going on. It is even more bizzare when you think about how "law" operates so arbitrary at times, like at a rally. The government tells us you have a right to carry (arms)--and, yet, you have to give them up because we tell you and we only will carry arms. Look, I am no gun lobbyist. I think guns are symbols of fear gone excess and overboard and is toxic to any society--it makes crazy people and they do crazy things. So, I thought to let you know I am most concerned we avoid getting hooked in the shock and awe and turn to the path of fearlessness--read the various blogs over the six years herein this website, and/or other places. Otherwise, it is easy to get caught up in other people's agendas of weaponizing fear for use to control. You can empower yourselves, just by recognizing what is going on. We can talk about this more as a FM ning community as well. 

I looked up to see if Pennsylvania (where the rally and suicide/assassination was carried out) has gun laws of "carry" and they do. Here is an excerpt. 

The opening paragraph states "without a permit" just because you are a citizen of the US, and somehow deemed "law abiding" however that is monitored(?). The 2nd Amendment is clear about guns as part of society. And, that means, violence is part of society. No country with such gun laws is going to be violence free, and in fact gun laws were put in place to manage gun violence. It's like an insanity of trying to manage fear by more fear, manage violence by more violence. And, pretty much that is the definition of "war" as it is known for as long as human history. We live in war torn states and a world where war is constant as a way to manage violence with violence. So, again, I post this up on the FM nign to show you how 'normal' and crazy this has become in logic and reasonable understanding and law. When you step outside of the 'Fear' Matrix of it all for a few moments, or longer, you see much what I am seeing about exactly why the former President would be shot, sooner or later. I won't even go into all the number of statements he has made about using violence against people in his country. Of course, the other President (incumbent) is only not saying these things out loud like a Trump, but the actions of their presidency and violence against people in his country or abroad, are no less gruesome and inhumane. That's my point. Guns are inhumane, and yet, are legalized in the USA constitution. So, what should we expect from that sanctioning (of violence)--that policy on guns(?). 

Go to Alan Watts talk here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTTvr_2_Z1k

Btw., my fav. of his books is "The Wisdom of Insecurity: A Message for an Age of Anxiety" (1951). A classic text that really makes you think about your relationship with fear/anxiety. I began studying that book in 1980, a my ripe age of 28 years old. Wow... how time and anxiety flies by... 

-have a nice day,

-Michael

Dr. Ramala Sarma                                   and                    Dr. R. Michael Fisher 

MY LATEST INTERVIEW(Jun/2024) by Dr. Sarma, has some really good exchanges you may enjoy--especially philosophy buffs. At the end, we talk a little about "fearlessness practices" but that will be more in a Part 2 of this set of interviews by Dr. Sarma. 

As I have since late 1989 been mapping and teaching the Path of Fearlessness, as a universal path awaiting all humans who wish it; however, such an idealist notion has to be brought down to practical boundaries and limitations of real people in the real worlds (and personalities) they inhabit. 

I am talking about the merits of and the limits of "personalities" (so, called "personality types" in psychology). In other words, some genetic, and some personality type patterning (usually pre-set during pre-natal to first 7 years of age) can influence the ease or difficulty of finding oneself able to slide along the path of fearlessness as a life trajectory--as a path of liberation.

Another factor is environmental circumstances, that will make it easy or hard to advance along the path of fearlessness. But all of the above factors are also built-in with the ability of making choices and being responsible for making them. A huge factor is the attachment to "social bonds" --that can be both valuable to growth and devlopment of fearlesnsess and it can be excruciatingly limiting. "Fear of exclusion" terrifies some people more than others--even though, as a social species we are all terrified to be socially excluded. 

What I want to share with you is that the Myers-Brigg's Personality Assessment (with its 16 types of personalities, based on a lot of research), (for a free testing service to see which type you are: go to:Nine Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1GE, United Kingdom
Registered in England and Wales, # 8646330
https://www.16personalities.com

....has some value in each of us finding our personality type general orientation [1]. Again, I am critical of much of the typology discourses, and that they are not critical enough to larger issues of what impacts people and their personality, values, genetic dispositions, motivational templates, environmental and historical and political conditions, etc. However, of late, I have seen that my own personality type is likely a larger factor in my own life and profession and my mission on this planet.

I am an INFJ type (2% of the population) [2] for sure, according to this personality assessment schema. I find this kind of psychological information sometimes helps me personally deal with my ups and downs in the world and explains 'a story' for my dilemmas, my doubts, and also my successses or near-to-come dreams of successes. In many ways, the following video (which I can't stand like the gross stereotypic images at all: you might just want to listen to it and turn the picture off or close your eyes)--in narrative is very good at describing the "enlightened INFJ" --although, it doesn't really define "enlightened" so you can take that with a grain of salt. I would say, it is a close description (i.e., 7 characteristics) of fearlessness personality, in other words. However, the rest of the summary of the INFJ provides a lot of resonance with my notion of walking the path of Fearlessness--and, why I am drawn to it...and, why others may be as well. Fearlessness provides the lens upon which to critique the world and be compassionate and useful at the same time. Yet, the video also explains why there is such resistance and animosity amongst most all people towards the INFJ types. [3]

End Notes

1. Btw, I am not interested in personality types (or any other typology, like Enneagram, like Astrology, or others) if "personality" is all that one is seeking to understand. I am rather interested in the soul path, and spiritual journey of consciousness and my role in that in this life time and/or others. Simply, I believe personality (also temperament) are sold constructs of a lot of gravity in determining how one evolves but there are also larger forces than personalities at work. Most spirituality, tends to diminish the importance of identifying one's personality and temperamental biases. You could say my interest is biopsychospiritual in this regard--that is, more ecological. 

2. Note: this 2%, independently derived by Integral Theory (and Spiral Dynamics Theory) is resonant with % of people at Yellow-vmeme (i.e., Integral Consciousness). I have totally studied these later theories for decades, and knew that I was an "integralist" through and through. Now, to see it correlates with the Jungian model of Myers-Briggs is more than a little interesting and raises lots of questions. "Fearlessness" in its true sense is way beyond behaviors, it is a Paradigm and Consciousness in my own thinking and sure, probably < 2% of the population really 'get it.'  

3. My book with a colleague on "Resistances to Fearlessness"(2021) is a good resource for detailed analysis of this problem; and, why the world remains addicted to Fear as its ruler. 

Our new FM ning member Christina has written a very carefully drafted blog some years ago, and posted it on the FM ning the other day. I appreciate the care that went into that blog and I encourage other members to check it out. Also, Christina said in that blog a few lines that caught my attention, worthy of deeper discussion: 

We live in a challenging time. I fear for my children’s future. I see people striving to be ‘Übermenschen’ and ‘Self-Actualizers’, in need of recognition.

What if it is belongingness that matters foremost?

About 1.5 years ago, I was in a contemplative mood and made this teaching video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWB4QuGrTBM

by V. Duane J. Lacey, Ph.D.

I acknowledge that there is a fear of AI today and that it is mainly concerned with an uncertain future. I have called this a form of Hobbesian diffidence specifically toward our future with AI.

Generally speaking I do not subscribe to the idea that fear can adequately account for everything. However, I do think it is worthwhile to recognize that fear sometimes works in 'mysterious ways', and does so without our realizing it. Desh Subba's Philosophy of Fearism helps us to recognize fear as central to our philosophical tradition, especially the western tradition. As a strategy for approaching philosophical issues both past and present, fearism focuses our attention on how fear operates both when we are aware of it and also when we are not. Here I want to highlight some of these ways in which fear seems to manifest in the ongoing development of our relationship specifically to Artificial Intelligence or AI. In particular, I will focus on a kind of Hobbesian 'diffidence' and its relevance to certain aspects of the world around us today, as well as a sense of "nostalgia‟ for the world that has since become a thing of the past. In both cases the question arises: is it fear that might be at work, though not immediately recognizable as such, in our concerns about AI? Can diffidence actually be useful for us? Can nostalgia?

      AI is itself a kind of question mark. Recently in public interviews Harari has said that every generation thinks it is facing a unique new problem never encountered before, but that this time it is actually true. The reason, he argues, why this might be the case is that AI is a new problem that we have not seen before insofar as it represents a technology that can both create new things, and also make its own decisions, whereas previous new technologies, no matter how
dramatic, impactful or advanced, have not presented this possibility. In other words, humans (even if only a small, entitled, irresponsible and powerful self-interested group of them) have always had a level of control over technological advancements. This is why much of the relevant philosophical literature that addresses issues concerning technology and culture especially in the twentieth century is focused on understanding how to 'use' technology in an ethical and
responsible manner. Thinkers like Benjamin, Heidegger and Jonas, and later Postman, usually help us, in part, to recognize the need to resist a 'technophile' love for further and further advancement, i.e., they have different ways of approaching and critiquing the idea that just because we can do something does not mean that we should. This question of responsibility, however, does not apply in the same way to AI as it does to previous other technologies; or to put it another way, while certainly it is necessary to ask these same questions about AI, by themselves these questions are not sufficient to address the challenges that AI represents.

      In this regard, one new challenge that AI represents is a degree of autonomy from human control. As such, AI is as though another group or category of social actor, which means that we may be able to apply a Hobbesian perspective not merely with respect to fellow humans, but with respect to AI. Here Subba's fearist critique of Hobbes' system as “Fearolotic” ('fear' and 'politics') or a politics grounded in fear, is a helpful perspective that allows us to recognize the risk of misunderstanding fear in the manner that Hobbes might be said to misunderstand it. This perspective also allows us to redirect a Hobbesian notion of fear when he characterizes it as 'diffidence' (for example in Part I, Chapter XIII of the Leviation) in our dealings with others in a state of nature. In other words the diffidence that Hobbes identifies as one of the causes for our quarrelsome nature, i.e., our distrust of one another without a social contract, is likewise now
applicable to AI. We do not know and we are not confident about how this technology will interact with us. Thus, we are distrustful, suspicious, diffident toward, and in this sense fearful of AI.

      For Hobbes, the natural solution to this mutual mistrust, this diffidence, is attained through human reason and our desire for confidence through peace. Hence, the social contract, when enforced, is our agreed upon source of confidence against diffidence. Why should such a solution not work in the case of AI? Perhaps the most obvious factor is that such a social contract would require the acknowledgment of AI as an equal player or participant in the contract. Here the weight of a Hobbesian notion presents itself quite clearly: what if we cannot trust an AI to uphold its side of the bargain? This is the experience of diffidence, and neither was this state of affairs sufficient in the Hobbesian system of for a contract between humans. Instead, a Sovereign was required in order to enforce the contract. Who, or what, then, should act as Sovereign in a social contract between humans and AI? If AI becomes as advanced beyond human capacity as some fear that it will, would it agree to a human Sovereign? Would humans agree to an AI Sovereign?

     When or how, moreover, would any of this agreement or lack thereof take place? Perhaps it is already happening, and this is one of the reasons why it so difficult for us to know exactly what will happen or when; not so much because we are unable to predict the outcome, but because it is already taking place gradually, in disparate and seemingly unconnected ways. If we step back for a moment to consider the extent to which AI is already a well-integrated part of our daily lives, through our Google searches, our online identities, the algorithms to which we either knowingly or unknowingly expose ourselves and by which we are both directly and indirectly influenced, and so on, it is worth considering that our fear of AI is always hypothetical, and that it is precisely by means of a hypothetical fear that we fail to recognize the extent to which we have already entered into, or are entering into, a social contract with AI. In this regard, fear becomes a distraction, like the misdirection in a magic trick. In some ways, fear always operates in this manner. When we are actually experiencing something it is no longer a matter of fear, but rather a matter of fact, sometimes painful, sometimes joyful, and sometimes with indifference or lack of real awareness. If this dynamic is at work in the case of AI, then it would mean that our fear of AI in the future is exactly what allows AI to infiltrate our present without our really being aware of it.

     If this dynamic is currently at work, then our challenge is to redirect our Hobbesian diffidence from our future with AI, and focus it upon our already present contract with AI. But how might we do so? Actually it is not so difficult to redirect our diffidence in this way, albeit impractical (which is itself part of the challenge). In order to redirect our diffidence especially on an individual level, we may simply consider our daily routines. How much of our daily lives involves or requires AI? Which aspects and activities of our day to day lives would remain precisely as that they are if they were completely devoid of AI? Perhaps, when each of us actually does step back to consider our lives in this manner and with this diffidence, we may even come to realize that it is not our lives with AI that we fear, but rather our lives without it. I
do not say that this would be or that it is the case, but it is possible.

     It is with this possibility, then, that nostalgia might actually be a useful experience. One of the challenges we face when redirecting our diffidence in the manner described above is that our lives today seem unimaginable without at least some form of AI. Yet there are those who are still alive today who can, from memory, better imagine such a life. That pang or pain of lament that accompanies nostalgia may seem like a matter of loss. The feeling of nostalgia, that is, may
seem like a useless longing for that which is no longer the case. Is it not pointless, then, to lament and long for that which is gone and can never be attained again? Was that life, which was less inundated with such pervasive amounts of AI as we encounter today, however we might remember it, not itself part of the very conditions that led to AI and our lives as they are now in the first place? Even if we could 'go back', would we not just end up in the same present state of
affairs? That latter question, of course, is quite difficult to answer and requires a good scientific and science-fiction mind with a grasp of the actual possibility of time travel to even begin to answer. However, the pain of nostalgia could be useful, not because we can go back in time, but because it may be a guide post, a warning or an indication of something that we can, in fact, address and fix, at least to some extent and most of all with respect to ourselves individually. Here again, similar to what Subba wants us to recognize about fear, it is not simply something that we must avoid or overcome. Fear, and I think nostalgia as well, are both real experiences that do have value when they are properly integrated into our larger human experience. Instead of a vague longing for the past, we may allow the sadness or pain of nostalgia to be as though an open doorway through which to pass and explore, whereby one may ask oneself: what, exactly, do I long for? Certainly we do not want a return to everything from the past down to the smallest minutiae. So what is it, exactly? With this question, once again, we may apply our diffidence. What role and in what form, if any, did AI play in that past, and specifically that part of the past to which our nostalgia has led us? If it is something that we can rescue from the past and reintegrate into or lives again today, then our relationship to AI is now insightful, informed, more intentional and under our control, at least to some extent and more so than before.

I acknowledge that there is a fear of AI today and that it is mainly concerned with an uncertain future. I have called this a form of Hobbesian diffidence specifically toward our future with AI. When, however, we consider a perspective such as that of Subba's fearism, we are reminded that we can redirect that diffidence of the future toward our present lives. When we use the fear and distrust that characterizes diffidence as a tool through which to analyze our already present social contract with AI, then we are taking control of that fear and putting it to work on what is the case, rather than what might be the case. In so doing, our attention is not misdirected toward an unknown future away from our present, and we may begin to discern the details of our fear and diffidence. Next, what aspects of our lives today, now that we are using diffidence as a tool, cause us to lament what no longer is the case or is missing? What leads to a feeling of nostalgia? We may then put this feeling to use as well, and combine our diffidence of the present (not of the future) with our nostalgia for the past. We may turn that diffidence further toward the past and toward that for which we are nostalgic, and ask what is viable (and desirable), from that which is gone, to bring back into our present lives today? How much of that which we would like to rescue from the past is already imbued with AI, and in what form? These are some suggestions, then, for how we can make use of our capacities for diffidence and nostalgia in addressing our fear of Artificial Intelligence, past, present and future.

Dr. R.Michael Fisher, fearologist. 

I would highly recommend this talk (38 min.) I made 5.5 yrs ago. There is something in the simplicity of how I talk about fear(ism) and its applications that today I am much more complicating and for many listeners more confusing. Sad truth. So, it is good to go back to my earlier articulations. My point implicit is, that if you are only interested in managing fears better (short-term gain), and not interested in the path of fearlessness via an understanding of the philosophy of fearism, then I will not be much help to you as a fearologist. I am critical of the short-term quick-fix solutions to the problems of fear, individually or collectively.