future (9)

8804345501?profile=RESIZE_710x

 

The "DIRECTION" to head in... is all important, if we want to liberate ourselves and truly re-build a healthy, sane and sustainable world (and Education System)... 

When you get to be my age (69), and having thought critically about "Education" as a field and as a "project" overall on this planet (for nearly 50 yrs), and in terms of how to analyze it and improve it, this is what happens at 6 am in the morning when I awoke and had the idea kernel "I DON'T WANT TO..." on my mind as the center piece of this map and then I began to sort territories ("Positive Description") on the Left and sort of a 'middle-ground' then "Negative Description") on the Right. As an educator, designer of curriculum and pedagogy, I tend to near completely side to the Negative philosophical orientation in terms of how to best approach "Education" and deconstruct it and then reconstruct it (moving more to the Positive philosophy eventually.

The direction of going to the Left and then the Right is precisely what I call an "Integral Turn" --and, in no way is that direction of flow only about "politics" (and parties, etc.). I am rather quite non-partisan in that sense, but what really comes through in the mapping is that I am "existentialist" in orientation and "conflict theorist" in orientation primarily, but I also don't see that one-side is all right (Good) and one side is all wrong (Bad)--mostly, I'm concerned as a critic that the left-side of the "Positive" (Virtues) side is a huge cover-up these days for some of the worst 'evil' going on--and, of course, those who are on that "Positive" side want to make us all thing they are virtuous, good, correct, and the only way to go. They tend to loathe the analysis and offerings of the 'other' side (the right-side). 

So, if you look within the map you'll also see LOVE, FEAR, and FEARLESSNESS ... as my own special area of interest in how that trialectic operates [1], although, that's a much more complex 'story' than this 'map' (theory) above can show in nuance. Oh, and the abbreviations that came out in orange circles, they are at the crux of my counter-education theorizing and curricular (r)evolutionizing:  CME - conflict management/education (my invention), TMT - terror management theory (not my own invention), and FME -fear management/education (my invention). Other abbrev. worth noting: COC - culture of conflict and COF - culture of fear. The red ink "Contemplation" is there because of my reading a colleague, an educator, on "meditative inquiry" in research/education and the foregrounding there of contemplation in education--or spirituality in education. And, this spurred me on to think about my view of that initiative and so I woke up in the morning due to this prompting to situate "contemplation" and problematized it as well.  

I am in color highlighter very intrigued with "Fear of Loss" (aka "Death") at the center along with my original idea-kernel of "I DON'T WANT TO..." and I am pretty certain now that strategically this is the focal pivotal point for any real educational transformation that will be emancipatory. If we educators miss this...well, the consequences of our current direction of global crisis/collapse will continue unabated. I have no doubt we are already in the Anthropocene era of collapse of all systems, and much destruction will be inevitable (aka death will be inevitable)--and it will continue for many years if not decades. The world will never be the same. However, in that collapse we have all the real potential of making these shifts that I have indicated in the mapping. I believe the whole process going on is best looked at as "sacred correction" (call it self-system regulation or healing, or whatever)--we can get through this as a collective of living organisms and putting all our intelligences together integrally--but IF humanism tries again to rule, using technologism and scientific arrogance alone--we'll likely do ourselves in and sufficiently destroy the carrying capacity for most Life on this planet for millenium. 

Just some bright and not so bright words from the unconscious to the conscious of the morning air and light... let's breath, create and grow in 'a good way' (a fearlessness way). 

Note

1. Fisher, R. M. (2017). Radical love—is it radical enough? International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 8(1), 261-81.

 

Read more…

THE TRANSHUMAN WORLD AND ITS FEARS:
A FEARLOGICAL GUIDE FOR THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

ABOUT THE BOOK
As technological evolutions continue to gather momentum, there is a strong move by some scientists and philosophers to transform the present human nature that is characterized by the phenomenon of life and death into a superman, where aging and its corresponding end in death would be eliminated, making it possible for humans to live for untold numbers of years. Artificial Intelligence (AI), Robots and other technological machines will take over the basic duties of a natural [hu]man.


This book looks at the features of this envisioned “new world”, and anticipates that the transhuman world will lack ethics of good living and respect for human life, thus, becoming worse than the Hobbesian State of Nature where life was said to be brutish, nasty and short.


Since every step of growth goes with its unique kind of fear, the book adopts fearology (the study of fear and its management) in proposing what developing countries should do to be able to fully integrate into this expected world. For the developing countries to secure a leading place in the future world, they must take the studies of science, technology and philosophy seriously. This is why the author suggests the establishment of The Philosophy Academy and The Technology Intervention Institute to launch in unique perspectives on how the technologically-driven world can be instituted without necessarily negating the ethics of mutual living and respect for human life which ought to be the hallmark of every society.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Michael Bassey Eneyo is a seasoned scholar and a philosopher from Nigeria, who has written many philosophical books and articles on different challenging existential issues. His major books include Philosophy of Fear: A Move to Overcoming Negative Fear (2018), Philosophy of Unity: Love as an Ultimate Unifier (2019) and Ethics: Judging Morality Beyond the Limits of Man (2020). Eneyo has published many academic articles in both National and International Journals.

8658874259?profile=RESIZE_584x
His ultimate goal is to contribute ideas that can help in making the world a better place for all beings, and not just for human beings. At present Eneyo is a staff of the Nigeria Customs Service.

Table of contents
Dedication
Introduction

Chapter One
The Transhuman world
The Historical background of transhumanism philosophy
The transhumanism agenda
Artificial intelligence (AI)
Robotics

Chapter Two
The likely features of the transhuman world
The augmentation of human bodies
The thought process would be more transferable
Gamification and behavioural science will increase human productivity
Human beings will be more emphatic
The emergence of extreme personalization and customization
Significant shift in business practices
There would be a greater deal of attention on our societal values
The leading philosophy in the transhuman world

Chapter Three
Exploring the philosophy of fear
Historical account of fearism/fearology
Fearism/fearology as an emerging transdisciplinary philosophy
The fearist/fearologist

Chapter Four
Fear and its workings in humans
What is fear?
Knowing fear
Where is fear?
What is the nature of fear?
The workings of fear in humans
Thalamus
Sensory cortex
Hippocampus
Amygdala
Hypothalamus
Fear and the human mind
Mind as the most active abbot for fear
Fear comes from life
Can there be fear without human agent?
Fear as a border between success and failure

 Chapter Five
The exposition of fear territory
Is the contemporary world a fear territory?
How fear territory can be expanded

Chapter Six
How the transhuman world will create more objects of fear
Is fear controlling the present world?
The dominant fear in the contemporary world
Fear of terrorism
Fear in politics

Chapter Seven
The ugly side of the transhuman society and the way out
The ugly side of the transhumsnism society
What the developing countries should do to be fully integrated into the transhumanism agenda
Adaption and implementation of the digitalization and automation policies
Digitalization
Automation
The modern war techniques
The need for training diversification
Investing in the power sector
Maintaining the traditional farming and food preservation methods
Vegetable garden culture
Tree planting

Chapter Eight
The need for a change in school curriculums
Introduction of The Philosophy Academy and Technology Intervention Institute

 

8658858490?profile=RESIZE_710xChapter Nine
The importance of fear studies in the transhuman society
9 key steps to overcome negative impacts of fear in the transhuman expected world
Step 1. Understanding fear
Step 2. Know why people fear
Anxiety
Uncertainty
Awareness
Knowledge of our limitations
Step 3. Identify your fear(s)
Step 4. Think positively about your fears
Step 5. Adopt a positive belief about fear
Step 6. Be focused and mindful
Step 7. Practice breath control
Step 8. Take a walk around a natural environment
Step 9. Accept the fact of life
The roles of fearologists and technologists in the fear management campaign against the transhuman fear
The most effective healing to the sickness of fear

 

Read more…

8579144676?profile=RESIZE_710x

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYKeP9renPs    [Marianne Williamson and Cornel West, 2021] new video: 

Bringing spirituality of courage and fearlessness... to politics and leadership and life in a comic-tragedy ... and so much more. 

I highly recommend this dialogue of two 'great' humans, yes celebrities alright, but who don't forget what it means to be raw and truly prophetic, to always keep an eye on the suffering of the vulnerable and the responsibility for all... 

 

 

 

Read more…

Four Arrows' New Book on Sitting Bull's Words

8564715885?profile=RESIZE_710x

8564725292?profile=RESIZE_710x

The above images are from Four Arrows' 2021 book (cover, and p. 15), published by DiO.

I wanted to give you a sample. Four Arrows and I have known each other (mostly online) since 2007. He is a scholar in Indigenous leadership and education and a Lakota initiated member. What is most important in this new little book, I highly recommend, is the simplicity of his presenting a very complicated theory of fearlessness he has been developing for over 35 years. I won't say more, but to encourage you to check out his work from many other publications as well. I have written several FM nings on and around his work and his CAT-FAW/N model. So, you can search on the FM ning (upper right search box) to find those... 

 

Read more…

Transmuting Fear in Conflictual Times

8502679075?profile=RESIZE_584x

Lee Harris - spiritual teacher/artist at "The Portal" (LeeHarrisEnergy)... is someone I just listened to for the first time on Youtube... a talk called "Transmuting Fear in Times of Division" (Jan. 28, 2021). I thought it was a well-grounded and wise presentation. Go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efuqWJkQe3c

Read more…

Who Legitimately Can Call Who Fearful?

I've always been interested in the question: Who legitimately can call who fearful? What I mean is, who is qualified to do so? Who is allowed to by the other person (or by society) that is so being labeled "fearful"? And who of course is actually fearful? Are they admitting they are fearful or are they covering the fear up with bravado (for e.g.,)? Is the one labeling the other fearful, actually the fearful themselves and only projecting fear onto another? Is only a 'transcendent other' the 'one' to truly know the fear in the human soul(s)... and resolve it? The questions grow... like weeds... but I think they have philosophical, sociological, psychological and political merit. As a society we ought to reflect on these questions and others like them.

I'm concerned we don't talk about fear enough for the challenging times we live in. I'm concerned we remain largely unconscious of the great "force" of fear to influence us. And, thus, you can see I am an advocate for feartalking and fear management/education, and fearology and so on. 

I recently was in a conflict with an acquaintance who was insistent I listen to a set of videos on 'end of the world' scenarios via extreme climate change. This is a growing topic in our world, at least in the West. I said, I won't likely get to them because I have interest in other topics rather than the science of climate change. This person became incensed and bullying in response and tried to find ways to intimidate, make me feel guilty, etc. for not doing what he wanted me to do. Now, this was not an adolescent or a three year old child of mine, it was a 45+ yr old man and a very intelligent and sensitive and aware man. What was going on? I snooped out it was his fear (and fearfulness around survival of the end of the world) that was pressing on me to be informed of what he was informed on that he thought was so important to survival. I guess, in the moment I wasn't concerned about survival and the future that much. I'm more interested in other aspects of extreme climate change, like the perceptions and psychology of such events and realities. That greatly interests me. 

So, under pressure of his personal attacks on me for not cooperating with his desires for me to watch these videos, I told him bluntly, but respectfully, I heard his concern, and I wasn't ignoring it but I was more concerned with the way he was approach me and trying to get me to do it. I told him he was using fear tactics to teach, if not convert, me. This raised the level of his anger and he denied he was doing so. 

I suppose it was very hard for him to hear my message of communication, that both he wasn't effective in his communication and he was using fear tactics and that cannot be a way to wisdom. His rage went on and on and many many emails he sent. I stopped reading them. He was unloading a whole lot of distress. I told him so. He again, resented my view because it felt like a judgement upon him. Was I judging him because I said he was using fear tactics? Which, in a way I suppose I was but I wasn't trying to make him into a horrible person necessarily at all. I just was standing up for what I believe is unethical (or just not effective)--that is, to use fear tactics, some call fearmongering to make your point and to try to change people to your view. 

This all was hurtful to me and disappointing this person would treat me so disrespectfully--he treated me suddently from friend to enemy. No doubt many of you know this experience I am talking about. It felt like the 45 year old person became a young angry adolescent quite irrational--that is, fear-based in their relationship with me, rather than connecting and respectful--even if we had our differences. This is a common problem in our world. People disrespecting people with differences and for having a right to be different and to not be coerced or threatened to change. 

Anyways, I'm most intrigued by my calling him out and labeling his approach to communication as a "fear tactic." I was saying he is using fear implicitly because he is fearful. Why else would he be so insistent and stubborn and disrespectful to my free choice to do as I saw fit? Fear has to be ruling that kind of behavior, so I surmised, and I do believe this is the case as well. One could go into the theory behind my thinking, and some evidence perhaps from knowledges available but that is not what I want to do here in this blog. I merely want to have readers think about this in terms of why did this person, knowing I was a fear expert for 30 years, not want me making my observation of his fear tactic? It seems he couldn't stand it that I was discerning something he didn't see or feel? Did he not feel fear in himself when I refused to follow his orders of insistence to watch the videos he sent to me? Perhaps not, perhaps he was quite unconscious of his feelings and only trying to correct my behavior with his behavior of writing all the disrespectful emails. Later, he did apologize for trying to "force" me. 

Point being, what is more important is that he would not trust or respect all my knowledge and experience with fear and thus when I labeled it onto his activity in a particular way he rejected it completely and more or less threw back comments to try to make me fearful of his vengeance and power etc. He tried to say I was fearful to not watch these videos. I did wonder if that was true of myself? I had bits of doubt. Then it took time to get over my hurt and fears of his abusive language toward me and find out that no I was not avoiding anything, I was merely chosing a different priority of where I put my time and energy than he would. 

This person is like so many I have met, and often when in conflict--I will say, if I sense it, "you're coming from fear" or you seem to "be afraid" etc. Most people resent me saying that, no matter how soft I deliver that message or observation. I guess they don't like me interpreting them. I am not saying I am highly skilled in effective communication around this touchy issue. I have lots to learn so I can be more effective. But nonetheless, I keep doing it and will because I think it is so important as part of my teaching to point out fear and its mis-uses on others (and/or on me). I see people hate being called out on it. 

They fear being seen through--seeing their fear when they don't even seem to see or feel it. They are fearful and won't admit it. They attack me or others you label the fear in them and their actions. The attack is meant to transfer the unacknowledged fear in them onto me (or another target who names the fear). They attack the messenger, in that sense. 

Yes, very very common and very destructive this dynamic is. It is like they don't give persmission to me (or others) to so name their fear, except maybe they would do so if the person was someone they trusted a lot or was a clinical psychologist for example. Maybe. 

I wonder about this phenomenon of legitimacy to call out fear when it is there. Of course, maybe I was 'wrong' in my interpretation. That's possible. But I trust my skills in detecting fear. Anyways, it's a problem that won't go away and I have lost good friendships with many people over this issue of my naming fear when I see it in them. 

Another e.g., comes when I am not with someone I know per se in person. They are not a friend or colleague in my close connections, but I may still want to point out and name the fear I see in them, and feel they are not acknowledging, and/or feel they are abusing fear against others--e.g., in fearmongering. This is what I have done with the famous Jordan Peterson. I have done a few youtube videos on his life and work from what I gathered studying him and his work [1]. He tends to come across in his lectures and interviews as very "brave" or "courageous" (some might call "fearless")--and, yet, I don't see him that way when I watch him and listen to him speak on videos. I don't get his fearlessness--he seems quite fearful and anxious.

Now, this is subtle. But recently a psychoanalyst in Holland pronounced that J. Peterson is quite an anxious and fearful person because he mainly is a traditionalist [2] and Peterson cannot stand loss of traditionalism (a lot of it anyways)--and thus, Peterson attacks the postmodern thinkers who are rejecting traditionalism. Long story. I have made a poster below to make my inquiry visible: 

3715227018?profile=RESIZE_710x

So, if you don't know, Peterson is a clinical psychologist himself, he does therapy with people, some 30+ year competent career, etc. So, why is he so fearful? Oh, but first, the question is: Do I have a right to call him a fearful person? Does Dr. Jan Derksen, from Holland, have a right to do so, even if he is a trained psychoanalyst? On and on it goes. Is the fear pathological, neurotic, or near-psychotic (at times)? Is Peterson in need of psychological treatment for his excess fear and use of fearmongering? Lots of questions could be asked. My point is, not to diminish him and his work. My purpose is to ask if I (or anyone, like Dr. Derksen) has a right to call out Peterson on his fear-based ways of approaching things in his communications? This is just like the question of my calling out my friend recently that he was using fear tactics to try to convert me in some manner. I resent such coercion and worst, it is unethical to use fear tactics or fear-based perceptions and thinking to try to change anyone. At least, that would be a working pivot point for further philosophical discussion. This blog is not the place for that. I just wanted to raise all these issues. 

Dr. Derksen, rightly I think, nails it down quite well in talking about how Peterson has become the icon (of one sort) today for defense of Tradition. Sure, I know he doesn't like everything about tradition, but he is one of its remaining advocates, and yes, he's a privilege white old male to boot--which makes many skeptical of his motivations. I say, his motivations are often quite fear-based in his defence of Tradition (and himself). That said, you can see my videos on him and his work for more nuance. But to close here, I'll give the explanation Dr. Derksen gives (interprets) re: Peterson, as Derksen is here discussing the deep roots of fear that are being raised rapidly in a society of "political correctness" around identity politics and how our culture and society and law are all grappling with the new emergence of identity politics and "difference" overall. Dr. Derksen says in the video: 

"... it shakes people, it pulls at their roots... then it gets more emotional than rational, so it's [identity] a topic that will stay with us for many years... the most important intellectual topic will be, are we culturally and politically [able] to manage that anxiety [fear] that rises out of the fact conservative principles [values] are being broken down. Is there enough leadership... to organize their emotions about that in a productive way?" 

The host of the panel came in and said: "I think for many he [Peterson] is seen as a manager of anxiety [himself, for much of the society, especially white young males]." Dr. Derksen said, "yes." At one point Derksen says (paraphrasing), that Peterson's best-selling book "12 Rules for Life" is not science it is religion, it is all about Peterson's preaching his gospel of Tradition in his own unique way as a clinical scientist/psychologist, but it is not justified in the field of clinical psychology itself it is something else Peterson is trying to accomplish. The philosopher on the panel says (paraphrasing) it is Peterson's 'new mythology' guide for especially those who have lost their way, lost their identity and pride in this postmodern world of multiple and complex identities and their conflicts. The question in the panel's mind, seems to me always implicit in its rightful questioning of just how 'healthy' is Peterson himself to be teaching this way to 'health'? I think we should ask that of any teacher, especially one who makes their living in the human services field and who trafficks in authoring self-help advice in videos, talks, books etc. How healthy is Peterson, or how fearful is Peterson? [3] These are important questions, and questions I ought to also have hurled at my own teaching and life.

So, all this comes around to the importance of fear (anxiety) management, individual to collective. Our challenging times require a tremendous up-grade of how we manage and will manage fear. My own estimate, is that Peterson doesnt' do a great job of it. Albeit, I say that knowing he's made millions of dollars on his approach to fear management (unfortunately). The discussions must continue to challenge even Peterson's approach just like my friend's approach-- we have to look at when fear-based means are used for good ends, for good teaching, for morals, etc. I am a great skeptic and will be until I see a fearlessness-based approach invoked. 

 

Notes: 

1. Go to: https://ca.video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=AwrVk.IRk89dvksA3BAXFwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNWU4cGh1BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?p=youtube+r.+michael+fisher+and+jordan+peterson+and+fear&fr=yhs-Lkry-SF01&hspart=Lkry&hsimp=yhs-SF01#id=1&vid=c3e2964bb0e8876f8326dc648887b306&action=view

2. Go to youtube.com/watch?v=Y5LrxSKGW5Y for a great 2019 conversation on Jordan Peterson by a panel of scholars, including Dr. Derksen. Also see just how "fragile" (fearful, anxious, sensitized) Peterson is in recent times with this interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0P6H7cm0E4

3. I suspected from the first moment I watched Peterson in a lecture on video, from several years ago, his approach is very preacherly, he has a tone and style that reminds me of many preachers I have observed and how they are very fearful of many things (like "chaos") and are trying to teach as a way to manage this fear. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but fear used this way can accumulate and multiply and become 'fear' in a cultural discourse which is far beyond Peterson's personal fears. I don't think he truly understands what it is he is doing with his fear, and so my video (note 1) is precisely my challenging of him to be more aware, and likewise with his followers. The fact that it is public knowledge that Peterson has suffered with severe depression in his life off and on and has been taking certain meds to deal with his emotional problems, he has become addicted to the meds (apparently) and in coming off those meds he is struggling even more emotionally and one can see this at times in his recent interviews, it is very obvious he is 'on edge' and highly hurting and anxious and fearful just below his tough and sharp intellectuality (the latter, which so many people admire as his strength). 

 

 

Read more…

3262168346?profile=RESIZE_710x

Greta Thunberg (age 16) the Swedish climate activist, reminds me of Arthur Schopenhauer (age 16)-- as I have been reading AS's biographers and his letters and how he wanted to be a philosopher at that age and spoke his critical mind about human society--and the way "bipeds" operated in this world, which he was not impressed with--that was the early 19th century. AS has been criticized severely for being so blunt and honest with how he saw humans carryinng on--causing so much suffering. 

Today, Greta is at least being recognized as being just as blunt, and tough as she told British parliamentarians the very words in the image I created... she is someone who was diagnosed with a disability early in life along the spectrum of Asperger's disorder--and, it is proving to be a very useful psychic tool for her at least to speak out the way the world is and I ask you to read and sit with and meditate upon her words... spoken with virtually no emotion-- and just plain truth... from a young person's point of view. 

My last blog (see my video) was on asking all of us as adults (and youth) to contemplate our "philosophical disability" in confrontation with the existential crises we have created-- and, what is it like for us to hear a young teen like Greta say what she said to government. I find it a stunning moment of truthing--which is hard to put any reference upon in history--really... it is something awakening in the collective (thank you Greta)--and, I wish it hadn't arisen and Greta (and Arthur) never had to suffer with this facing a future that is not a real future-- but one that has been squandered--and, with the Anthropocene before us-- the terror is of an entirely new species. 

Time for fearologists to really take this on... a most poignant problem of our day. 

SEE my first FM blog on Greta https://fearlessnessmovement.ning.com/blog/youth-leadership-fear-greta-thunberg

Also, see a good critique respectful of the Greta Effect (as backlash):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lieZSkg6WEA

Asperger's (neuroatypicality) is a "gift" according to the world expert (clinical psychologist Tony Attwood) on the syndrome (i.e., autism spectrum): 

"I think many of the heroes in life, and many of the greatest scientists and artists actually have [or had] Aspergers.... I think in the future, some of our major problems will be solved by people with Asperger's, whether it be pollution, electricity [alternatives] or whatever it may be, by somebody who thinks outside the box. In Aspergers they say 'What box?'.... our [sustainable and sane] future is based on such individuals.... is Aspergers the next stage of human evolution?" - Tony Atwood (from)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdQDvLXLqiM

My preliminary study of Arthur Schopenhauer, leads me to think he was on that end of the spectrum of autism, Aspergers... but was undiagnosed, unfortunately, and had to cope with it without understanding what was happening... he made up his own means to understand (and rationalize) why he did not fit in the world. 

 

Read more…

Dr. Don Trent Jacobs (Four Arrows)- Speaking to Dep. of Curriculum & Pedagogy at University of British Columbia Sept. 28/18

I encourage you to have a listen to an Indigenous activist/educator (and hypnotherapist) talk about the "indigenizing" of Education and the conclusion he has come to: that we (humanity) are not going to turn things around in the world--things will get very much worse--and, he talks of "courageous hopelessness" as the only sane and realistic optimism we ought to be accessing... rather than false hopes, illusions, of repair... At the end of the talk he goes into mass hypnosis and how to dehypnotize oneself from the culture of the Dominant worldview... he gives an example of how courage is different than fearlessness (his view). 

Note, Four Arrows is the person I have studied for over 10 years and recently 3 yrs ago began writing his intellectual biography, which is now published "Fearless Engagement of Four Arrows: The True Story of an Indigenous-based Social Transformer" (Peter Lang, 2018). Also, note, I obviously agree with much of what he says about fear, courage and fearlessness, but we also have our significant differences as well. 

Read more…