All Posts (741)

Sort by

Toward an Integral Yoga of Fear

Any of you who have followed my life, research and teachings know that since 1989 I specialized in the study of fear and fearlessness (and their cousins) because indeed everywhere I read and whatever I experienced, it seemed that these two dialectical constructs and phenomena are critical to the foundations of all wisdom, compassion and attainment of peace, individually or collectively. As part of my quest to bring a critical integral theory (a la Ken Wilber) to the knowledge and know how accumulated on the planet regarding these two constructs, my aim is to bring a better sense, and classification, of how all the different speakers and traditions, theories, philosophies, theologies, psychologies are at times saying the same thing (apparently) and very different things (apparently). I won't get into all the methodological issues as my various writings will guide you to that problem of knowing fear and fearlessness [1]. In graduate school for my doctorate degree (2000-03) I specifically began investigating how academic disciplines were beginning in the mid-1980s onward (in the Western hemisphere) to coin sub-disciplines of study regarding the topic of fear, which I found incredibly interesting because they were extending beyond the narrow perspective of the psychospiritual traditions [2] of knowing fear--and, especially they were critical of the psychologization of fear that has dominated for hundreds of years. I saw these new systematic pursuits to knowing fear as very helpful, if not more holistic, and sociopolitical than what we have been dished out from the dominating psychospiritual traditions. Not that I think the psychospiritual traditions are not useful, it is just that they have overly dominated the discourses and ways we then come to learn in societies how to manage and teach about fear. That's where I become very concerned, as is the integral yoga philosophy I follow more or less [3] There are too many of these new subfields re: the new scholarship on fear, as it has been called, to list, but a few are labeled as aesthetics of fear, architecture of fear, sociology of fear, anthropology of fear, ecology of fear, geography of fear, etc.

After attending a talk from a yogic swami (monk for peace) living in St. Louis, MO, it was interesting to reflect on what a yoga of fear might be, and what it seems to be in the teachings of the "classical yoga" tradition which this monk was trained. I used "integral" yoga of fear in the title for this blog because there is another branch of yoga that is not "classical" (I'm sure there are other branches too)--and, so I am interested in integrating the classical teaching with the postmodern teachings of yoga and beyond that into the future-edge of where we are heading in the Western world, which is arguably a post-postmodern era, if we don't destroy ourselves first. But these terms and historical orientations are not the purpose of this blog. I want to share what this particular swami is teaching in his "From Fear to Peace" mission--which, he is encouraging all of us to follow and for it to become our mission. I was invited by Kate, a recent member of the ning, and she was invited by a friend who is a friend of the swami, and well, you know in a small town news travels fast and I showed up with Kate. I'm writing some of the reflections from the swami's teachings on fear because we are faced with another potential sub-field of study, yes, I'm calling it yoga of fear--with an integral twist. 

I will email this swami, as he so invited us there on the evening to communicate with him and assist with the mission, from fear to peace. Which I looked up on his website was also written "from fear to fearlessness" --and "from fear to fearlessness to peace"--so, yeah, I am interested to connect with this work in some way. It is very much my own mission, and the title of courses I have offered in this area with few people attending, like 2 or 3 and then they fade away fast. I think, after hearing the swami last night it is clear that people living in the USA (southern mid-west) are perhaps more attracted to the mission if you add the word "peace"--which, I never do, just like I don't add "love" or "nonviolence"--I typically use "From Fear to Fearlessness"--and, yes, by the end of this blog, I'll make an initial case for why I don't add those 'good-marketing' words in my own work, especially while living here in American culture today. Oh, btw. if you didn't know, I am born and raised Canadian living in the US for 9 years, and have been very critical of most of a very sick American culture and its globalization mission since the 1970s. Not that I will hold that against any American, even this American born and raised, trained in India, now swami teaching peace.

I generally enjoyed being with the group of a dozen people for two hrs listening to the classical yoga teaching on "Positive Thinking" albeit, I have never been a fan of positive thinking (but that's a whole other critique). Swami Sankarananda is a very happy nice guy and wants to be infectious with these qualities and virtues. He started the talk with a prayer that more or less told us not be "fighting" with each other during the 2 hrs. I know it was more subtle and meaningful than that, but nonetheless, I'm not one to ever be happy with that kind of yoke around my neck from the start of being in a human relationship or group--that said, I let that go. Swami's taught several philosophical premises from pre-modern classical traditions of yoga teachings, which yes, they are quite universal in a lot of the psychospiritual teachings I have found, and in his case he mentioned the Vedic teachings as a foundation. At one point he mentioned there are in this teaching the three greatest fears humans have to face and conquer "fear of non-existence/death," "fear of the unknown" and "fear of ?" oops, forgot. It struck me as all pretty basic to what I have read in hundreds of articles and books by diverse authors. So nothing too new for me at this point, and of course, lingering in the back of my mind is to say, "Hey, and why not include the greatest fear of all?" In my own 27 years study of fear and fearlessness, I have come to the conclusion, at least in the modern Western world where I live, the greatest fear of all is that we do not really know as much about fear as we think we do... and, if one really takes that in, then that really shakes the hell out of our confidence--even, our confidence that the ancient gurus, mystics, swamis, saints, also did not know as much about fear as we think they do and that we need to know to live in the 21st century. Thus, all the arising new sub-fields of research on fear I mentioned. There's an intuition, and a reasoning, in some humans willing to face the 21st century uniqueness in regard to living in a "culture of fear"--that, there is a whole new study required that is both psychospiritual and sociopolitical and historical, when it comes to truly understanding fear (or what I call culturally modified 'fear'). It is at this point that swami would not enter in his talk on fear and its management as thought management in the yoga classical tradition. Of course, I forgive the swami for that ignore-ance because he is not trying to be an academic or scholar on the topic of fear and fearlessness, he is being was he was trained to be--a practitioner and teacher. I have no doubt he's doing lots of good work, go see his website: http://www.fromfear2peace.org/

Let me take some quotes from the swami's website that caught my eye, people here on the ning may want to comment on these and have a discussion and support each other as well on the mission...

"You can conquer your fear and come alive?" - note, I have read this slogan in so many secular and spiritual circles it starts to feel rather prosaic to me and definitely psychospiritual speak...

"We never achieve happiness ever after by pursuing our likes or avoiding our aversions." - note, I agree in general, good wisdom there and thus, I teach to study and know fear deeply, holistically, widely, integrally... is essential to the 21st century so that we have the best ongoing theory and practices of fear management/education

"Love is the greatest power on earth, it conquers all things" (he quotes from a mentor The Peace Pilgrim) - note, I make a good deal about this being a highly questionable dictum; but that's a long complex argument; and, it is not that I am against love or anything, nor against happiness... it is just that I never worship them and this kind of statement to me is susceptible to breeding that and creating American-style "addictions" to everything, like peace, happiness, love-- all that good-feeling stuff...

Anyways, there's a sample. The swami does some of his own writing on fear and fearlessness under the "Mission" link on his website, and I really appreciate that. Again, I do take issue with some of it as well, but let me focus only on his quote (which he obviously endorses) of Swami Sivananda:

"Psychologists are of the opinion that there cannot be Absolute fearlessness, and that only determined effort can be made to conquer fear. This is incorrect. Psychologists have no transcendental experience. A perfect sage who has knowledge of the Absolute is completely fearless. The Upanishads declare in a thundering voice, 'The knower of the fearless Absolute Truth himself become absolutely fearless."

Note- this quote is premodern, meaning, generally applies accurately to the times of this quote and the perspective of the speaker. I see partial truth. However, there are far too many modern, and even more integral (post-postmodern) psychologists who have spiritual practices and have even labeled transpersonal psychology as a field and equally integral psychology. Again, I am not going to make a big long argument around this. My other issue is a lack of distinction in this use of the term "fearless," which my research shows is not so simplistic as to be a behavioral characteristic or virtue attained for only an individual. The psychospiritual (individualistic) discourse in this quote is troubling as to where the "fearless" gets situated. From an integral yoga of fear, I would suggest to embrace the partial truth of this claim and to re-constitute its meaning frame in a full holistic-integral (four quadrants) reality. Again, I'm not going to say more here in this first blog on this topic of a complex dialogue that is required, beyond only my thoughts... yet, it ought to be obvious I am not a fan of reducing all reality to "thoughts" as classical teaching of yoga and the swami I listened to for 2 hrs presented with such confidence as if it is the only truth about reality. That's the way it came across. Of course, that's my personal interpretation, but, it also happens to be a highly skilled assessment based on 27 yrs expertise in this area of epistemology of fear and fearlessness--that is, how we know fear, etc. So, all the happiness and positive thinking talk for me is fine, but it can become rather thin and too washy, if not distortive, if the rigor of critical analysis of how one talks about fear is not addressed consciously--and, if we are not allowed to "fight" over our preferences of teachings, theories, philosophies. I forgive the swami in this regard, because he was doing what he wants and what his experience shows is best for him to do. I'm merely pointing to other possibilities of truthing our way in and through fear and fearlessness--and, sure, peace too. My experience is that people want peace but rarely want to do the disciplined study of what gets in its way. Swami offered us lots of those techniques to work with but for me, they are mostly psychospiritual and we also need to study in the sociopolitical quadrants or I am pretty convinced we'll not nearly undermine the current "culture of fear" dynamics going on.

So, because I have seen the addiction of American culture as both outsider and insider, my doubts about the value of peace, happiness, love as the 'way to go' and/or to keep in our attention as the Saintly, and Divine, etc... that we have to be very cautious this is not a (spiritual) by-pass, slipping us around giving equal and conscious attention (at least) that we ought to give to fear and fearlessness. Ultimately, I think the swami, and the Vedas would agree with me--though, I am not at all an expert in yoga nor really any religious or spiritual philosophy. They are not my paths but I highly respect their offerings. Swami is right that a lot of us have trouble being "too happy" (e.g., bliss or ecstasy is terrifying), yet, people in the USA especially are addicted to fun/happy and the American way--it's all part of the sociopolitical and ideological basis of capitalism in this country-- so, I am always cautious when happy and peace of mind, or even mindfulness is sought as the next "pill" or "fix" or marketing strategy. Again, I'm fairly sure that the swami wouldn't disagree with me on the need to be cautious, as I appreciated that he did at least one time say we have to be cautious in come to yoga and the spiritual teachings because our ego (fear-based structuration) can easily distort, use, appropriate anything. Thus, my case, we better well understand fear ('fear') as not merely a psychospiritual ego phenomena, but a historical, ideological, cultural, sociopolitical, economic phenomena--that's, mostly the 'balance' I did not see in swami's presentation nor on his website.

So, beyond any figgly details and critique I may have deposited here... what is really important is a larger project of What would constitute an Integral Yoga for the 21st century? And, for pushing me in that direction, happily, I thank the swami and those who brought him to little ol' Carbondale for a night. The hard and long work of progressing this yoga of fear is however up to us all, or even one or two, to pursue. I'm in... if anyone else is... lets dialogue (and conflict, if need be)... for a greater cause of positive growth and development, yes, from fear to fearlessness, and to fearless! [4]

Notes

1. A good summary of these problematics of knowing fear, via a philosophy of fearlessness and fearism, go to Fisher, R.M., and Subba, D. (2016). Philosophy of fearism: A first East-West dialogue. Australia: Xlibris.

2. The short distinction here is one based on psychospiritual quadrants of reality (upper left) or Kosmos, as Ken Wilber identifies this epistemological quadrant as 25% of the Kosmos knowing itself, in his Integral Theory (see for e.g., Wilber, K. (1995). Sex, ecology and spirituality: The spirit of evolution (Vol. 1). Boston, MA: Shambhala). For the other 75% of co-arising Kosmos, and a truly integral epistemology which I think is about the best one can find, the three other quadrants were barely touched on in the presentation, although I did appreciate the swami giving several good references in the upper right quadrants (re: neurobiology, brain aspects)--yet, he was quick then to say but the Western approach is probably wrong and he would give the Eastern approach as the alternative corrective (his trained teachings). This taking one over the other view, is a sure sign of a non-integral thinker.

3. I don't actually fully like saying I follow "integral yoga" path (which was mentioned in the swami's talk but not pursued), yet, my roots of attraction to Ken Wilber's integral philosophy (although he is a Zen Buddhist), trace back into Hinduist thought, yoga, and especially the work of Sri Aurobindo and "integral yoga" that was brought to the USA, especially, foregrounded in an academic setting as the California Institute for Integral Studies, the latter of which I have followed more or less for a long time.

4. I say all these terms, not in only a restricted psychospiritual (individual behavioral, attitudinal, virtuous) sense, but an integral one. Which, one would have to study my work and dialogue with me to fully understand these distinctions.

Read more…

FM Ning Current Community Members (26)

I'm excited to have 26 wonderful souls join the FM ning in the past couple years since launched. I know most everyone in some way, yet I know you don't all know each other so anytime feel free to post more about you and your interests and why you've come to FM Ning. Note, in the very first FORUM post you can see my Welcome to new members and my suggestions for things you could talk about and share relevant to the FM. Let's begin the dialogues. Also, if you want to contact people on the ning personally just send them a note on their Wall, and/or ask me and I'll 'hook you up' with e-mails as I have everyone's. I apologize for the very brief descriptor I gave of profession for you all, it in no way reflects what is near what you may see as your identity of most importance. So, do share and fill me in too.

Read more…

If you read my historical summary on Wikipedia of the Fearlessness Movement you will get the jist that what is being spoken of is a (r)evolution in which we as individuals, and/or collectively, can begin at any time to consciously resist, subvert, and re-construct a new society based not on the 'Fear' Matrix but a path of fearlessness. I would offer that we use the language from a philosophy of fearism, if you wish, so that we can identify ourselves as Fearist (R)evolutionaries.

Watching the great movie "Clandestine Childhood" last night (directed by Benjamin Avila, 2012) as I wrote and made an image of it in the Photos section today as well--it occurred to me to spend some time writing out a plan for the (r)evolution in steps of praxis (theory and action). This would be designed for students from as early as grade 1 on up to university. And, what is below also can be for anyone in societies anywhere (of course, in their own language and images; I will give English version here).

So, look at the Photo image "Tools for Students of the Fearlessness (R)evolution" (Aug. 31, 2016) on this website. You'll see the film cover I mention as being so inspiring because I watched this true story unfold and this boy of pre-pubescent years learning the good and the bad of revolutonaries work in tough circumstances. There is one scene where the boy is watching his parents smuggle several companeros (fighters of the cause) into their house and giving them the lecture on what work they are about to be involved in to undermine the current regime of Argentina. They pull out a box of guns and ammunition and each gets their "tool" for the revolution. It is not the only tool they use, in fact, all the brochures, magazines, money is being stashed in fake chocolate covered peanuts boxes as if these people were running a legitimate business. The boy watches the guns and takes in the gravity of what these people are up to. He also watches all of them, including his parents be killed by the end of the film.

There are many ways to fight a revolution, and for me, I have always fought as a (r)evolutionary, where the evolution of consciousness is primary to the battle against oppression and repression dynamics that both invade our exterior and interior experience. So, now for the tools I would hand off to my companeros of this battle of the Fearlessness (R)evoltution, return to the Photo image again and you'll see what I have prepared as a plan and set of basic tools. The student of this velvet revolution (some would call non-violent revolution) are a pen (mightier than the sword), index cards of multiple colors and always carried in one's purse, pockets, etc. And quotes from books, articles, anywhere on the Internet or from daily life, that you as a (r)evolutionary find inspiring and that challenge the old ways that we have thought about the world. I have always liked using these Fear Quote Cards since In Search of Fearlessness Project began in 1989.

And what about the paper clips in this Photo image? They are what you use (could also be tape, or staples, or glue) to attached the fear quotes on the index cards to anything and everything in your everyday environment. And, of course, you can merely hand out the cards, or leave them loose, like at a bus stop or in the school lunch room. But here's the idea I had this morning (and there are hundreds you too can think up; and even share them on this FM ning):

Whenever you are at school (yes, grade 1 on up to university) and have to hand in a test, assignment project, or anything like that, you automatically as part of your practice of fearlessness, attach one of your fear quotes from the deck of cards you've made. No explanation. Nothing. You just do it. There's no law against it. Now, the teacher who gets your assignment and/or test has to confront this quote. I love this idea. Perhaps, in its interesting "gifting" gesture [1], the card acts as a catalyst for dialogue with the teacher, and perhaps the teacher will bring it up to the class--yes, even in a math class. There is no place in our society where it ought to be a taboo to talk about fear and going beyond it. That is, these are cards that raise the issue, create space for, fearlessness to unfold. Just think of how many assignments/tests etc. that children have to hand in during their entire schooling, on up to university. Add up all those and over all the years, in every place in the world. Now, just think of one or more students attaching a fear quote card to them. This begins a (r)evolution in the way we educate ourselves about fear and the way we manage fear, and ultimately transform it.

I look forward to hear from anyone who has thoughts on this. Basically, there are "tools" for practical application of all the philosophy, theory, and ideas I have ever written on the topic of fear and fearlessness. One merely has to "act" and put them out into the world. Here is one way to do this. In my experience, there is something quite transformative (acting like a 'fear' vaccine) to putting these fear quotes out into the world. Too bad I never learned this "tool" when I started school!

End Note

1. The "gift of fearlessness" tradition has been studied by scholars, especially as this tradition has emerged in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism in the East for millenia. I first came across this literature in a great article by Hibbets, M. (1999). Saving them from yourself: An inquiry into the South Asian gift of fearlessness. Journal of Religious Ethics, 27, 437-62.

Read more…

Feariatry: A First Conceptual Mapping

Desh Subba (2014), using a "fearist perspective" and a reading of history and human development based on a "philosophy of fearism"-- coined the term "feariatry" and wrote a few pages on its conceptualization (see pp. 156, 160-61).[1] His basic idea was that psychiatry has not fully seen the nature and role of fear in mental illness and well-being. He posited, that in the future there will be feariatrists as well as psychiatrists. The former would use a philosophy of fearism to guide their practice of psychiatry. He also believed that the knowledge from the sub-field of feariatry would help people in the grassroots of communities and other mental health and social workers to better understand that we ought to be diagnosing fear problems in people and offering them appropriate solutions and not allowing ourselves to be ruled by psychiatry. I would add, and not be ruled by psychology either (thus, Subba and I have also been developing fearology, and fearanalysis).

The following concept map is one of my first ways of articulating a vision for a field of study or a topic. This ought to provide the more complex version of conceptualization beyond Subba's initial concept. We both know there is no one and only way to define the sub-field of feariatry but it will take many creative efforts to build a good theory and practice. I have given a wide and deep lens to what I would like to see go into the development of feariatry in the future. The details of course are yet to come.

1995759?profile=original

 

End Note

Subba, D. (2014). Philosophy of fearism: Life is conducted, directed and controlled by the fear. Australia: Xlibris.

 

 Addendum: (Dec. 28/24)-- I have made a video critique of the fear-based (and harmful) weaponization of psychiatry today in politics (especially in the US). Feariatry in principle and when practiced well would never do what these psychiatrists and other collaborating mental health practitioners are doing: Go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp1Rm0k6iz0&t=720s

 

Read more…

Wit(h)nessing The Birth of a New Movement in the Contemporary Arts of the East

 It has been a fascinating role for me, a Westerner to witness the birthing of a new movement of thought and creativity coming out of the far East.

 Philosophy of Fearism, is an underlying meaning frame and philosophical stance on what can be called a literary phenomena or new movement, that of Fearism; they are two expressions, arising out of the literary community of Nepal since the late 1990s and starting to bloom rapidly in some far Eastern countries, especially N. India, in the early 21st century. Desh Subba, a Nepalese poet, fiction novelist, and budding philosopher, is one of the pioneer founders of this new movement, who authored its first major philosophical text. [1]  

 I (RMF) joined this new movement in 2014, as Desh and I were engaged in dialogue on email and were planning a co-authored book together [2]. Indirectly, on my own independent course of research, art, writing, education and philosophy of fearlessness, it seems I was beginning my own new movement of fearism but didn’t give it that name, rather I called it the fearlessness movement, which this ning is named after. This is why you’ll see often references from Desh Subba here, and other places in my work, because “two has become one.” One philosophy of fearism, as part of the fearism movement. At the same time, I have also been crafting my own unique way into this movement under integral philosophy (integralism) but that's another story [3].

 To help readers understand the context of a new movement in contemporary arts in the West, I looked up some information on a website below. At the end, of this list, I give my own version of Fearism, as I understand how it is operating and evolving in the far East; which, to note, no such collective movement is happening in the West (not yet). Desh recently published (August 21, 2016) on the FMning a list of 19 books based on fearism already published and/or coming out soon (most, not in English), as they range from poetry books to children’s stories, to fiction adult stories, and philosophical and literary criticism.   

 http://sparkcharts.sparknotes.com/lit/literaryterms/section5.php

 “Literature constantly evolves as new movements emerge to speak to the concerns of different groups of people and historical periods.” Of 30 or more movements, here are a few listed for the Western world:

 Postmodernism (c. 1945–present): A notoriously ambiguous term, especially as it refers to literature, postmodernism can be seen as a response to the elitism of high modernism as well as to the horrors of World War II. Postmodern literature is characterized by a disjointed, fragmented pastiche of high and low culture that reflects the absence of tradition and structure in a world driven by technology and consumerism. Julian Barnes, Don DeLillo, Toni Morrison, Vladimir Nabokov, Thomas Pynchon, Salman Rushdie, and Kurt Vonnegut are among many who are considered postmodern authors.

 Romanticism (c. 1798–1832): A literary and artistic movement that reacted against the restraint and universalism of the Enlightenment. The Romantics celebrated spontaneity, imagination, subjectivity, and the purity of nature. Notable English Romantic writers include Jane Austen, William Blake, Lord Byron, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, John Keats, Percy Bysshe Shelley, and William Wordsworth. Prominent figures in the American Romantic movement include Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman Melville, Edgar Allan Poe, William Cullen Bryant, and John Greenleaf Whittier.

 Surrealism (1920s–1930s): An avant-garde movement, based primarily in France, that sought to break down the boundaries between rational and irrational, conscious and unconscious, through a variety of literary and artistic experiments. The surrealist poets, such as André Breton and Paul Eluard, were not as successful as their artist counterparts, who included Salvador Dalí, Joan Miró, and René Magritte.

 Transcendentalism (c. 1835–1860): An American philosophical and spiritual movement, based in New England, that focused on the primacy of the individual conscience and rejected materialism in favor of closer communion with nature. Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self-Reliance” and Henry David Thoreau’s Walden are famous transcendentalist works.

 

Fearism (c. 1999-  ): A Nepalese literary and philosophical movement, based in the far East, that focuses on the primacy of fear in shaping human motivation and activities across all spheres of life; this movement has an underlying philosophy of fearism (e.g., Desh Subba’s work) which favors a positive role for fear, as well as a negative one; and, this teaching philosophy ought to be translated to all cultures around the world using all means from populist education to higher education. Desh Subba’s Philosophy of Fearism is one of the many texts that demonstrates the principles of this new movement.

End Notes:

1. Subba, D. (2014). Philosophy of fearism: Life is conducted, directed and controlled by the fear. [Trans. R. Subba and B. K. Rai]. Australia: Xlibris.

2. Fisher, R. M., and Subba, D. (2016). Philosophy of fearism: A first East-West dialogue. Australia: Xlibris.

3. Like the other influential new movements (isms), Integralism is both ancient and new (with Ken Wilber being one of the most important new interpreters and leaders of this movement with his Integral Philosophy). This line of thought has not specifically been influential to Subba et al. in the East. I look forward to developing and sharing this in the future, and I did include it in Fisher and Subba (2016) at various points. Also, the integral perspective has heavily influenced my philosophy of fearlessness (i.e., fear management/education theory) see, Fisher, R. M. (2010). The world's fearlessness teachings: A critical integral approach to fear management/education for the 21st century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Read more…

Three Amazing Movie Characters "Unplugged"

Veronika (a new member) has stirred up my interest in movies, based on her post a few days ago. I found this mash-up poster I put together a few years ago as a kind of celebration of gratitude to the artists/filmmakers who wrote and created these three movies, each of these characters the main protagonist. Can you name them and the movie they were in and why I might put them here on the FM ning?

Read more…

How We Talk About Fear is Everything

I am taking a fearanalysis perspective to challenge the ways we talk (or write and teach) about fear. This is embedded in an underlying context of a philosophy of fearism (Subba, Fisher) and thus is more philosophical than psychological. I'm currently writing a journal article introducing fearanalysis as a critical methodology for cultural studies and education.[1]  A small section of the article lays out a minimum of nine precepts one would have to in whole or part agree with to begin a learning of the basics of fearanalysis. Of course, one may not be so willing to entertain these and argue against them. I would at least like a person to engage them seriously and enter dialogue around them with me and/or others, especially to engage those who claim to be fearanalysts (of which I am, unfortunately, at this time one of a rare few).

Let me give the first two precepts for fearanalysis I wrote down in the article and then enter a discussion, using an example I found recently on the Internet of a coaching practitioner talking about fear. It could be nearly anyone who might say this kind of thing about fear, and so I have no need to name them. I have seen this type of talk a  hundred times in my years of researching "discourses" on fear.[2] Again, I come with a specialized fearanalysis perspective to the topic of fear and how we talk about it, which is a scholarly and theoretical perspective, where understandably not all practitioners have that specialization or scholarly interest. Rightfully so, practitioners are hired for pragmatic tasks by clients and want to be "effective" at what they do. I love to work with practitioners, I too am one as well, and see if I can assist them to expand their practices and become more conscious of how they talk about fear. 

Two Precepts

At a minimum, in order to understand what fearanalysis is based on, the following nine precepts are core (not the only) foundations:

(a) avoid the habitual over-emphasis on discussion of fears (i.e., fear of x, y, z), phobias, etc. and conflating this knowledge with understanding the nature and role of fear itself and the even more complex conceptualization of fearism

(b) ensure multiple perspectives are examined on the topic fear, interdisciplinary, including populist accounts, but preferably transdisciplinary is useful

Two Examples of a discourse on fear that falls (somewhat) short of the criteria above. I quote from an Internet blog by a contemporary practitioner (coach/trainer):

1. "The sub-conscious mind is the home of those fears that are largely unconscious and which are driving up to 95% of our behavior. Trust me when I say that, after coaching hundreds of individuals, the fears are within all of us. I'm not good enough, I'm going to be found out, I don't fit in are just a few that simmer below the surface of our existence.... [and often, due to guilt, a cousin of fear, people would rather not face this truth] "I see it all the time, never more clearly than with 'spiritual' types... those who want to ignore or escape from the deepest shadows of fear by putting on a religious or spiritual facade. I understand. I, too, can adopt the facade. You see, it takes courage, tremendous courage to look at the fear. And then we discover that it truly is illusory." [bold added for emphasis]

[The above quote indicates the topic is circulating around the "sub-conscious mind" which is interrelated, rightfully so, to "the deepest shadows of fear" and yet instead of focusing on fear itself and a more complex conception of fearism, the primary text emphasis is on fears (fear of x, y, z) etc. What is most promising is the interest to explore the sub-conscious, unconscious realms of awareness and unawareness, which is where we will come to have to examine fear itself as the topic and begin to see that all our fears individually and collectively, are still "fears" and thus not all that useful, other than as surface symptoms, for understanding the dynamics of fear itself and fearism dynamics which are less visible and knowable at first but with good fearanalsyis (even psychoanalysis) can be revealed and be seen to be themselves symptoms of even greater unconscious realms of what I call the 'Fear' Project or 'Fear' Matrix, "culture of fear" etc. ]

2. "I 'get' what you mean about two different ways of using fearism [3]... at least I think I do. To use some cliche's, there are always two sides to a coin. Nothing is all good or all bad. No matter how you flip it, a pancake has two sides. (I can digress.) There are some fears that serve us in a healthy way; others are destructive. The most destructive are often buried deep within the subconscious mind, driving our behaviors despite our finest conscious intentions."

[The above quote indicates a reasonable first off-the-cuff interpretation of how Subba and I use fearism, however, it then slides into cliche's and that will in all likelihood lead to misinterpretation somewhat, as is the case above in its brevity of analogies. I am very familiar with the dialectic nature of the philosophies in Taoism and other nondual forms of thinking, yet, the common maneuver of a psychology of fear discourse is to quickly drop the philosophical part of the framing of fearism which is a good start of possibilities, then to reduce it to "fears" in making the analogy the author wishes to validate. This is chronically a problem I see where there is a categorical error enacted philosophically by taking a very complex construct "fearism" (in this case) and reducing it not only to "fear itself" (which would be less of an error) but then goes all the way down to the simplest construct of "fears." As I said before, nearly every book and article (almost) that talks about fear makes this same categorical error continuously. The error as well based on the two precepts above, is the beginning to talk about sub-conscious and unconscious shadows of fear, and yet the discourse stays within the dominating psychology of fear, and historical, cultural, political aspects (e.g., necessary in talking about fear itself and fearism) are left out. I believe all these tend to inhibit the full-potential of a good fearanalysis. Which is not to say the thinking and practice of such a practitioner and their discourse is unvaluable.]

A Take Away

When we talk about "fear" in any way, realize that when we do so in the public sphere (e.g., the Internet, a conversation, etc.), we are public and thus are engaging in what scholars today call a form of "public pedagogy." Typically, if not trained to thinking critically about our pedagogies, then we can spread knowledge very rapidly in the public and digital worlds without always thinking so carefully about what we are actually teaching and what that teaching (and its "discourses") are actually doing. For a fully ethical practice of public pedagogy, especially on the topic of fear, I propose that we begin to examine the problematic of switching categorical differences in knowledge about fear-- and the most basic way is to acknowledge the increasing complexity of holarchical order of constructs from fears to fear itself to fearism.[4]

Notes:

1. The journal article is entitled: "Invoking Fearanalysis: A New Methodology Applied to Wicked Problems and Paradigm Shifts in the Anthropocene."

2. "Discourse" is a particular complex construct used by academics in various ways, but it always more or less refers to the way people, organizations, etc. 'talk about' a topic and it can be thus analyzed as a pattern of communications based on a set of underlying assumptions and values, beliefs, worldviews and what are called historical and ideological discourse formations. Point is, we humans may think we are talking about our experience as if it is ours and we made it up entirely and are communicating it as if there are no influencing historical, political, and philosophical sources to the discourse formation. This has been shown to be a naive view of our selves and how we talk. Philosophers like Michel Foucault have well shown how discourses are knowledge-power entities (formations, patterns) that 'stick' together over time in cultures and are used by people to gain certain privilege and power in their knowledge assertions. Typically, they do not know they are carrying these (like memes), nor are we usually aware of how Discourses (with a capital 'D') actually are using us as their agents to pass on certain knowledge in certain ways. I have studied what is called a method of critical discourse analysis for many years now, and it tends to come into all my critiques.

3. This was a reply to my post on their blog about how Subba and I have two different ways of conceptualizing fearism (one more healthy, one not so because it is a pathology).

4. I would include my own notion of 'fear' in that spectrum of complexity between fear itself and fearism.

Read more…

New Dialogue with Desh Subba (1)

I hope to make a series of these dialogues with Desh Subba (living in Hong Kong), as we email exchange and co-author work on the Philosophy of Fearism. This dialogue I shaped and led as a kind of interview. Enjoy, -M.

Desh Subba and R. Michael Fisher in Conversation on:

 

            FEAROLOGY, FEARIATRY, FEARANALYSIS [1]:

                  Three Pillars[2] of a Philosophy of Fearism

 M (Michael): One of the things you and I have learned in attempting to promote the newest branch of philosophy [3], after existentialism and postmodernism, is how it is not always easy for people to grasp how a philosophy can aid their everyday life. Especially, it is hard for them to imagine that a philosophy called Fearism is going to be valuable to them or their loved ones or society living everyday life. What has been your experience of teaching? You have done much more direct lecturing than I have on introducing a philosophy of fearism, including your recent teaching experiences to many countries in the East and a few in the West.  

 D (Desh): It is human nature that we ignore common things that are habitual around us. Teaching Fearism, as a new type of philosophy, is difficult for people, be they ordinary citizens, professionals or academics. They tend to think what is common in everyday is normal and things have been like this from ancient time.

 M: Yeah, habituating to routines, norms and traditions is a powerful stabilizer in cultures of all kinds. Yet, you and I are nudging for people to attend through a fearist lens at the common things in their world, hoping they will begin to see them differently. 

 D: During my lectures in India, China, Bangaladesh, Nepal and even in the USA and Australia, I sometimes would ask the audience counter-questions by giving examples of their surroundings—e.g., window, door, balance of diet, physical exercise, etc. I say all these things are for making a better quality and longer life. And analogously, I say, we have fears habitually—that is, fear of accidents, diseases, death etc.

 M: I find it intriguing. I mean your teaching style. I sometimes wonder if it is uniquely Eastern and so different than how I approach teaching about fear in the West. That makes for an interesting exchange of the East-West dialogue as we can learn from each other, from very different perspectives. It seems to me you focus on teaching people to understand that fear is so common and habitual, and that has been part of human evolution as a motivator for everything we do, that people, for the most part, don’t realize it—its become a routine to live that way. And you reinforce that mostly that is good fear helping to improve our lives, like windows, doors, balance of diet, physical exercise. However, you and I also say that as tribes move to cities and become nations through time and development they tend to become more educated in knowledge and aware of more dangers. This makes for more things to fear. They tend to be more fear-based in motivations everyday, to the point where it is no longer all good fear that motivates.

 D: Yes. When I’m lecturing I say the scientists invent new technological devices and advance comforts and it mostly serves human life and society. It depends on our use and how to make it valuable to life. Analogously, I teach that Fearism is the same kind of device. We have discovered it now; we teach ways to use it. It’s time for them to learn and practice how to use it to improve their quality of lives.

 M: And, you and I as teachers sure wouldn’t want to force it on anyone. In particular, for this conversation today, I want to focus on practical concerns you and I have in regard to applying a fearist perspective that co-emerges with a philosophy of Fearism. I am thinking that our most practical direction offered to humanity, as outlined in our co-authored book, Philosophy of Fearism: A First East-West Dialogue (2016) has been a pointing to how to end suffering. You wrote, in your opus work Philosophy of Fearism (2014), “... man suffers from fear due to various reasons.... There are lots of problems and diseases [caused] from fear.” And, the situation is getting worse in our Extreme Fear Age, you pronounce—and, I heartily agree.

 Of course, there have been other philosophies and religions that have been offered for this same goal of stopping suffering; but based on our long studies, you and I believe they have all, more or less, fallen short of a proper analysis of suffering because they have minimized systematic critical study of the nature and role of fear in their philosophy or religion. You and I also believe this has been the problem with sciences. For sciences, like medical science especially, has attempted to cure disease (and dis-eases, as in psychiatry) and stop suffering as well. Yet, we argue that religion, philosophy, science, social theory and politics, have all been inadequate in their theorizing on “fear.” This is the premise of a philosophy of Fearism.

 D: I am not arguing that philosophy of Fearism is a complete philosophy for humanity. My point: it is a core philosophy in human life. There are typically not practical daily explanations in other philosophies to assist people from morning to evening and birth to death. Fearism starts from our consciousness. Consciousness starts from birth. Its central point and motivation is fear. On the basis of fear we look at the world. I met Dr. Hariwani, a writer from Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India, in Shillong, Meghalya, India in a recent Hindi literary program. He says not only life is conducted, directed and controlled by fear but the whole universe is conducted, directed and controlled by fear.

 M: As I understand this unique point of view, and it is interesting you have others who agree with you, in the Eastern world anyways, you paint a macro-picture for the good role that fear plays beyond merely in the world of humans or even earth.

 D: There are many universal fears. We cannot find an explanation for this reality and ways of seeing in previous philosophies. In 2012 there was a world warning of a Nebula coming near and/or striking earth and 6 billion people were in high alert with its dangerous course. I put the question on social media saying: Which philosophy can explain it? This type of A, B, C Nebula always emerges in human life and history of our solar system. Or we can say we are in the unique trap of multiple Nebulas that seem to be focused on destroying earth and killing us. Only a Philosophy of Fearism closely monitors, and explains this matter in a wider and more rational way. In the former type of thinking and analysis, without Fearism, people’s victim consciousness creates more suffering due to fear than is necessary. Fearism takes us on a course of consciousness that relieves this victim perspective and thus relieves some suffering.

 M:  So let’s get down to the focused topic for this conversation. As I said, you wrote in your opus work, Philosophy of Fearism (2014), “... man suffers from fear due to various reasons.... There are lots of problems and diseases from fear. This obstruction has occurred, as fear has not been theorised for a long time. Fear has been interpreted a lot. It has been theorised” (p. 159). I realize your text (2014) has been written in Nepalese, and the English translation is not the best here, but I interpret that by “obstruction” you mean a limitation and disturbance has appeared in humanity’s knowledge systems and disciplines that, more or less, has missed seeing and thinking clearly about the role of fear in human problems and diseases. And then you say fear as “not been theorised” very well for a long time in human history but more recently is being theorized (especially in psychology)—and, yet, if I understand you correctly, you are also saying this recent theorizing on fear is still quite inadequate and requires assistance from a philosophy of Fearism—and, more specifically, it requires assistance from developing sub-fields of Fearology, Fearanalysis and Feariatry. Is that correct?

 D: Yes, you are right, it is inadequate. Not only this, but previous philosophies are inadequate too. Humans have done their best and always try to complete their work on these things, but we have left a hole in our knowledge. Philosophy of Fearism was totally left out. You and I are the first persons making Fearism a philosophy and showing it to the world. Even our work at times only touches the macro-level but is not always useful on the micro-level. To patch the holes we need multiple explanations and that requires sub-fields of Fearology, Fearanalysis and Feariatry. To maintain our goal these have to be pillars; and, later as circumstances may change then we may require more pillars according to demand.

 M: I agree; there is never a fixed or static solution. A fearist perspective will continue to evolve as fear evolves. It seems to me one of the most pressing problems is the state of the environment, e.g., global warming (pollution effects). This will cause major planetary changes of mega-proportion, and with that, lots of destructive fear and terror through the disruptions—a time of great pressures, challenges and risks to life survival. We really need to get Fearism in place around the world soon to prepare for this crisis time, which has already started for the past few decades, at least. 

 D: Philosophy of Fearism is a general philosophy but also a flexible one to analyze such crises and helps in fear management and better education about fear. To specialize in particular matters, needs particular pillars. However, our three pillars will assist and sustain the use of Fearism for likely a long lasting time.

 M: What do you think might be the cause (motivation) for this “obstruction” to good theorizing on fear throughout history? Likely, there are multiple causes for this, but what do you think are the most important ones. And why?

 D: In my opinion, the main obstruction is Meaning. Everything is based on it. Meaning means perception, social consciousness and social knowledge. How knowledge is changeable, meaning changes accordingly. The current meaning world, and how individuals and institutions create it is what obstructs change of meaning.

 M: Some researchers call this a “meaning frame” which determines everything one understands about them selves and their relationships to everything. It is hard to change a meaning frame because it is so unconscious for most. But once it is made conscious, which is what education and self-reflection can do, the meaning frame (or “paradigm”) can shift dramatically.

 D: People have to make fearological knowledge, and consciousness and perceptions part of their new meaning frame. Thus, they can develop a new fearological world.

 M: Desh, you also wrote in your 2014 book (p. 159): It will be easier to identify the disease caused by fear when its definition, condition, source, origin, effect, types, etc. are interpreted. The treatment system develops [i.e., improves] when a [medical] doctor declares [i.e., admits] that the disease is a result of fear. Medicine can be discovered for it.” In this last phrase I interpret you mean that Medicine, as a field of curing and aiming to stop suffering, can be reformed and transformed for making this change that a philosophy of Fearism is calling for it to discover. You also wrote, “All hospitals are established and medicines [discovered] due to fear. Yet fear was not identified [as so important] in [the history of] medical science.”

 That is, Medicine, from our fearist perspective, needs to discover more emphatically the importance of the nature and role of fear in general, and in its own evolution as a field of Medicine. Both you and I would go so far as to suggest new sub-fields of study and application need to be invented like Fearology, Fearanalysis and Feariatry to better inform the Medical field and society as a whole. Why do you think Medicine as a whole has not regarded fear as so important all these years of its history? Do you think this “obstruction” to do so is found in all parts of the world, East, West, North, and South? Do you think past cultures had “medicine” practices that were more in-tune with the critical importance of fear? If so, what ones and how so?

 D: Look Michael, every one is suffering some sickness from fear. Nowadays, I am studying the Holy Bible. Whenever I read it, top to bottom, I see many forms of fear: threatening, warning, killing, attack, disaster, hunger, disease, punishment, imprisonment, escaping, hiding etc. I am using a lens of Fearism to evaluate it. So, I can vision clearly this fear-based drama depicted in the Bible stories. Similarly, when we read life, society, economy, and politics with this lens, we can see obviously different forms of fear. Likewise, disease can be studied accordingly, we can find Feariatry world, which is unseen at this time but we can imagine it. Philosophy of Fearism is analyzing and arguing from this lens. Until now, patients in psychiatry and therapy are being treated under various names and diagnoses, but not in the name of “fear patient.” Fear is not seen as the source of the mind pathologies. This is blunder of the Medical world. The same blunder is everywhere for the most part in the wider world too. The world is following foolishly a rather zigzag ineffective road, instead of a straight road to the root of the pathologies of the mind and body. This is the reason we are not approaching good mental health soon. And sometimes we seem as societies to have become lost on the way. Medical science is doing the same, particularly in case of the fear patient who is suffering from fear unrecognized as the root source. I suspect this problem is in the East, West, North, and South. I don’t know if other cultures from the past were all that different.  

 M: Do you know of any medical professionals who are listening to your lectures, reading our books on philosophy of Fearism? Or, is our movement largely being listened to by only writers and literary people (i.e., artist-types) so far? How do we best get our fearist perspective to at least be considered in the Medical field and especially in the medical education programs? A big topic...

 D: No medical professional, that I know of, has listened to my lectures so far. I try my best to reach to them. You are right, mostly I lecture to writers and literary people and scholars in the humanities and arts.

 M: Same with me.

 D: Every one has some kinds of pillars of truth they believe in. It is not simple to remove their views. The major reason behind this is they want to hold onto it—their pillars. They don't want to shake them or have them shaken by others. Without shaking pillar, there is not chance to mix with new thoughts. They tend to believe in a pillar and that is final.

 M: Something this reminds me of, and I have written about it often, is the problem of people being too afraid to change their views on fear, to challenge their knowledge pillars about fear and its management and how we should be educating ourselves and others. It’s a real stumbling block to progress.

 D: Indeed. Yet, this resistance is not happening merely to a philosophy of Fearism. Similar problems we can see historically in each new ideology. Time will come to remove the old and replace with the new. It has happened in the past and will happen again. This is the time for a philosophy of Fearism to be delivered to every ear. I am doing my part of that, and so are you. One day, one ear will get the message and speak and share it with the rest of the world.

 M: Teaching about fear in this way takes a lot of patience. Thanks Desh for your patience to do this interview with me. Good luck with your work. I look forward to doing more of these dialogues.



End Notes:

[1] I am currently finishing a first draft of a book A General Introduction to Fearanalysis, which is my equivalent (analogy) to Freud's A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis. My book, modeled after Freud's format, consists of 13 lectures. This ought to really move the work of fearanalysis out there.

[2] Technically, to be more precise to Fisher and Subba (2016, p. 141), the model we presented suggests the three pillars of our work are (1) Fearist Perspective, (2) Philosophy of Fearism, and (3) Fearology (including Feariatry and Fearanalysis).

[3]. See Subba, D. (2014). Philosophy of fearism: Life is conducted, directed and controlled by the fear. Australia: Xlibris; and, Fisher, R. M., and Subba, D. (2016). Philosophy of fearism: A first East-West dialogue. Australia: Xlibris.

Read more…

I am currently taking inquiries from graduate students (masters and doctoral) and any other serious researcher... who, is interested in the fear and fearlessness literature and would like to work with me. I have a tonne of raw data, across many disciplines, and popular culture-- on fear quotes, specifically, that has never been analyzed. I could use some curious and enthusiastic co-researchers... to thematize and organize this data with all kinds of possibilities for us to co-write journal articles. Let me know.

R. Michael Fisher r.michaelfisher52 [at] gmail.com

I live in Carbondale, IL and thus, it would be most useful for grad students to have travel capability to work at my office in my home. Some can also be done on the Internet, but mostly what I want worked on are hard copy notes/files/folders that need to be handled physically.

I look forward to talking about possibilities. And, sorry, I have no funds whatsoever extra for this work. It would be all volunteer effort but would be a good thing to put on your resumes. Also, you may want to do a thesis or dissertation on this topic, of which I could assist you to organize that and provide a lot of material for it.

-cheeers,

RMF

Read more…

Gospel of Fearlessness: Down to Basics

In my more prophetic and ministerial mode, and damn right angry moments--because, of what is being ignored, denied, dissociated on this planet--that is the Fear Problem, I come back to a concept that is controversial to some, abhorrent to others, and is just right for me. Perhaps the religious followers of my writing (like some of my uncles) may find this a refreshing conception which pulls it out of a secular sounding teaching.

All along, from the start, I knew teaching about fearlessness (and fear) was neither to be restricted to the sacred or secular genres and traditions. The concept of a Gospel of Fearlessness, feels more like a passionate declaration, indictment, and reclamation project than does In Search of Fearlessness which I conceived with Catherine Sannuto back in 1989. In my righteous indignation I prefer the definitive and confident Gospel of Fearlessness to a more tentative In Search of Fearlessness notion.  

This morning I ponder the basics of this Gospel of Fearlessness, which is implicit I believe in the entire Fearlessness Movement that's been going on around the world throughout time. The basics of which I have also put into this more "religious" language as a "Credo of Fearlessness" which I sketched, with a similar purpose, in my book The World's Fearlessness Teachings (2010, p. 39). You can look up those sketches if you wish, but I wanted to put down the most basic basic aspect of what I came up with this morning for a Gospel of Fearlessness.

Before laying that out, I want to reflect for a moment on "gospel." It means to me a sacred story-- a telling of great importance to a culture and civilization, told with diverse tellers, who are also passionate and righteous-- for e.g., in their story of a Messiah, or of, at least, a process of liberation that we all have access to if we so will to access it and follow the regime of deliberative teachings, philosophies, and disciplined practices. I think this hardly should be called "religious" (or even restricted to being called "spiritual") as it is so fundamental to all humans, whether they are conscious of it or not--that is, to have a narrative of redemption from the pain and suffering and oppression of the everyday world they experience. As far as we know, there likely has never been a life for a human being that has not had this combination of weights to bear. The gospel stories, legion around the world and across cultures, offer a 'way out' or what you might call an idealist perspective and thus 'hope' for a better life and way--sometime in the future. They are stories of guidance when we may ourselves want to give up. Yet, they are also 'wake up' stories that prevent us (at least theoretically, or momentarily) from becoming paralyzed and numb as we are bombarded by pain, fear, suffering, distress.

Anyways, I don't want to give a sermon on gospels, as I really don't know much about them but I think I know enough, and the term really resonates with me and my teaching, which is the teaching I was chosen to teach. Remember, In Search of Fearlessness Project, as a gospel story itself, never came from some book, or guru, or anything but real embodied experience that I had with Catherine in 1989, through the veins of blood cursing through our bodies in the excited and trance state of joyous sex in the transpersonal dimension. Call it mystical experience if you like. It was and is real. There was this intuitive voice inside me (and us)... a gospel really all on its own-- that said, there is a Fear Project on this planet that is deadly and limiting of human capacities in most all areas of life. It is destroying our species and quality of life for other species. Humans are the central focus of this Fear in that they seem to produce Fear at a rate and in a way that is unique amongst all other species.

And so the gospel of fearlessness in this informal manifestation began in/with us as a couple, and now has carried on with Barbara Bickel and I as the 'next' couple after Catherine abandoned the ISOF Project in mid-1990. The story goes on and on... but now to the most basic basic of the gospel truth, in the way I best have found to understand it and purvey it to others--with, all due regard for the near impossible task of conveying such truth in words/text on a page.

The Gospel of Fearlessness as best I can articulate it with all my own biases, boils down to a story ("theoria" or theory) which proclaims:

(a) that we humans have a Fear Problem that is as important, if not more important, than any other problem that will act to bring us down toward extinction sooner than later.

(b) historically, and continued today, we humans have, more or less,  largely ignored, denied, dissociated from knowing this truth of the Fear Problem-- this is our "sin" no. 1

(c) we require a redemption to turn us around from only living in this human condition ("sin") and advance toward our true human potential (based in the best of our human nature before human culture took over domination)

(d) the biggest movement (especially in the 20th century on) has been to try to re-frame "fear" as an emotion that can have a positive, normal, and natural side--this "positivist" movement to re-evaluate the nature and role of fear may have some value worth keeping; but its negative side-effects have led to ignoring a whole body of wisdom that teaches a different story about the nature and role of fear--the positivist obsession of our day has lead us astray because of its reductionism (especially, to a biopsychological mode of thinking)-- this is our "sin" no. 2

(e) the Fearlessness Movement initiative and its deconstruction and reconstruction project regarding the very way we perceive and conceive and construct "fear" is likely the best way to go, so that we focus less on fear(s), as in fear of x, y, z and the idea that fear is one of many emotions and not more important or unique (typical of "sin" no. 2) and focus our inquiry on better understanding the nature of the politics of knowledge involved in how "fear" has been and is currently being constructed as 'fear' (i.e., culturally-modified fear)

(f) until we emphasize in our fear management/education the importance of a transdisciplinary (non-reductionistic approach) whole new imaginary and way of thinking about thinking about fear, there will be little progress at all in undermining the Fear Problem, and in fact, we'll only make it worse

(g) any real progress in analyzing the Fear Problem, and undermining its out-of-control growth in the 21st century, will require a unified effort and a systematic source of consistent funding and energy commitments by people and organizations--this latter has not accrued in 27 years since the founding of the In Search of Fearlessness Project-- that is "sin" no. 3

Thus, is the Gospel of Fearlessness in a nutshell. Perhaps, you could summarize the above into an even simpler nutshell so people could remember this gospel, and/or you may suggest things that ought to be added to it. I could think of a lot of things to add but my point here is to keep it as basic as possible, and still get the message across of what my teaching is all about.

Read more…

The Indigenous educator, Four Arrows (aka Dr. Don Trent Jacobs), whom I have been writing a book on, has recently published his own book (his 20th), called "Point of Departure: Returning to a More Authentic Worldview for Education and Survival" (I've attached a color photo of the cover in Photos on this blog, published by IAP, Inc.). Also on Photos you'll see a page of text from the book, Chapt. 2, Courage and Fearlessness (which is always an interesting read).

I won't say more at this point other than to say this is his most controversial book likely... but we'll see. I believe Four Arrows takes a much more radical stand to a Two-eyed Seeing" approach which attempts to bring together Western and Indigenous worldviews (as "two-eyes"). Always willing to risk it all, Four Arrows has never been one to follow the trends...

Below is one of the book reviewers comments:

"How will we get beyond our 'Western' narcissism to explore, listen, and trust non-dominant cultural discourses which open us to sustainability and yes, survival? This book creates a pathway, reasonably and humanely  brings us to a critical consciousness of emancipation and activism. The time is now... to embrace praxis-based ways of knowing and humbly look to Elders of knowledge for nourishment and survival. Four Arrows starts us on the journey."

-Shirley R. Steinberg

Research Professor of Youth Studies

University of Calgary and founder, freireproject.org

Read more…

Here is my latest art-i-fact as a cultural worker. It is some of my best thinking on thinking, on educating ourselves for the 21st century. I invite you to take a read of the Manifest%20Thinking.doc

Here is the Abstract to the Manifesto (for convenience):

Abstract

 Someone asked me, “What do you do?” I replied, “I am an educator.” They said, “So, what do you teach?” I replied, “First, I design curricula based on how best to teach—thinking about thinking. Then, I teach others how to implement that curriculum so they get as excited as I do about the great human potential of thinking integrally across the globe.” The following manifesto is my first articulation of the ideas and rationale for why, after 40+ years of research and teaching, I have chosen to focus on thinking about thinking. I lay out the simple and complex versions of the problem—which, boil down to the problem of how humans self-regulate, self-violate, and typically fail to manage difference, diversity of perspectives and ways of thinking effectively. I offer some premises behind my integral design for Education and the ways it can be implemented. This is a work in progress, never to be left as written-in-stone. It can always be critiqued and improved. I invite anyone into this dialogue to improve learning about thinking itself and all the diverse ways of thinking that we all ought to have free access to. A first example of an Integral Thinking Curriculum is illustrated to begin the Global Thinking Agenda. You might think of this manifesto as a “calling” to gather together as humanity to a universal goal of equity and equality of opportunity for people to think about thinking as the foundation for all else that follows—the latter, which we might call “education.”

Read more…

If there has been any common theme (finding) in my research on fear (and fearlessness) since 1989, it is that people (and their organizations) who 'preach' a good message about helping humanity reverse the negative effects of fear (and/or eliminate all such effects) do not 'walk their talk.' Or, what I can fine-tune this critique down to is that they are characteristically un-cooperative in working with my initiatives that have the same basic intent as theirs--that is, to free us from fear so we reach our human potential and end the cycle of violence, etc. I've called this movement and initiative many things, but basically it constitutes the path of fearlessness toward liberation (i.e., see Fearlessness Movement). 

I know my findings are not a pleasant thought, if you really think about it. Why wouldn't such people and their organizations (including academic researchers) work cooperatively on this plight of the Fear Problem on this planet? It still astounds me the intractable resistance to share information, build coalitions and act to help support and critique each others work so as to find the "best" 'fear' vaccines available. Note, I am not talking here about some grand initiative to make money off fearful people. If you follow with any accuracy and sincerity the beginning (1989) of the In Search of Fearlessness (ISOF) Project (not-for-profit), you'll know that there is no such aim to exploit anyone for economic purposes, or any other purpose where fear and power are used to dominate over others. That is completely unethical by the code of the In Search of Fearlessness Project. 

Repeatedly, since 1989 I have invited anyone into the ISOF Project, and especially invited very systematically most anyone I could find who was teaching and writing about fear and how best to manage it, transform it, and so on. These documents are found in the ISOF archives, which btw, I just opened up this morning after they have been sitting in plastic storage boxes for nearly 20 yrs. There's certainly the possibility (but I doubt it), that my character is so flawed and obnoxious that no one wants to talk to me or answer my letters. Rather, I think something else is amiss, and it has to do with how people and their organizations seem to want to "own" and "protect" their specific ways of understanding the Fear Problem and offering services to improve it. They seem to avoid others who are doing the same, and certainly tend to avoid ISOF Project initiatives. 

In the archives this morning I found a 1992 letter (typical of hundreds, if not thousands,  I have sent over the years), which gives you as sense of the way I communicate professionally with such organizations (in this case)--it's another invitation which produced no results at all. No comment back. Not even an acknowledgement. The following organization is one of the biggest and most well organized in the world and attracts, I'm guessing, hundreds of thousands of people. Anyways, you can judge yourself and perhaps help me to think how to better unite all these disparate people and groups who teach about fear and its management: 

Dear Kay Stephenson, Executive Director, (Freedom from Fear Foundation), P.O. Box 8907, Stn. F., Calgary, AB T2J 5S6)  - Aug. 12, 1992

"Freedom from Fear," what a great name and a most worthwhile cause. The In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute has the same goal really, even though I know your organization specializes as an educational and support group for those who suffer from agoraphobia, anxiety and panic attacks. 

Over the past two years I have made a few attempts to find out more about your organization. For various reasons we have not yet been able to connect. At this point, ass Founder and Co-Director of ISOFCRI, I would like to know more about your group and receive some information packages you have. 

I have enclosed some resource materials and information about my work and goals of ISOFCRI. I am currently looking at providing a resource to all kinds of groups and organizations who are looking at fear and its negative effects on our lives. The research work we have been doing at the Institute is admittedly radical (which really means "roots")... in that it searches for the roots of all fear patterns however they manifest in any particular symptomatology (be it a clinical diagnosis... or be it a limiting factor to healthy development in general). Exciting work recently has come up with a metaphoric concept of FPV+ (fear pattern virus) and a fear vaccine which we are taking out to people, and groups in our educational program (see handout-proposal). I am currently making contacts within the clinical community to share this research with them. 

Our purpose is to provide an alternative and supportive approach to the treatment currently used with phobias. The clinical model is limited in scope and vision about understanding the dynamic and origin of fear. Our model is a healing model that goes beyond merely coping with fear patterns. We also argue that fear is not "bad" or a "disorder" it is a 'phenomenon' (distress pattern) that comes from woundedness (which originated from oppression/violence/hurting). Anyways, we can talk more later. 

I look forward to hearing from you soon. I will follow this letter up with a phone call in a few weeks.  -Sincerely, -Robert M. Fisher

***************

The truth of it is that I rarely did the follow-up phone calls, when they would not take the time of day to just send an acknowledgement at least they had received the letter. Some business consultant/coaches have said this is my short-falling; perhaps, but I am also one who is not going to spend a lot of time in places that I think are going to be not effect use of my time and skills. Sure, ideally, I wish I got paid as a Director for this work at the ISOFCRI in Calgary, and that I had a secretary to do the follow-up and make sure I remembered to follow-up. I was more into moving on and researching and writing and teaching, and looking endlessly for at least someone who had the basic decency to acknowledge my initiatives to connect. 

Read more…

Journaling today, with some impulses stirring (not the first time in my life), to continue the prophetic thread of what seems inevitable. It's a life with purpose triple-dose with vision. It's a 'Calling' as they say. It's an 'Invite' as they say.

July 8/16- [some editing for brevity]

I've been thinking of the military black young 25 yr. old that just gunned down five white cops and injured 7 other cops in Dallas, TX before being gunned down himself. Not that I want to focus on "poor cops" or "poor whites" for I surely do not, as the proportions when compared to what is happening in the USA against blacks and others of color is a much more important story of chronic oppression and fear and "hate" (as they like to call it here). I'm thinking that everything about this latest mass murder incident in the USA (could be anywhere too) is connected to Culture Wars of one kind or another, touched by religionism, racism, classism, sexism, mental healthism... [long list] and... some would blame it on liberalism, progressivism, on and on. But, yes, most here would call it a "Gun Problem" and my echo response has always been, it is a "Fear Problem" (traumatic and historical and part of the growing culture of fear in the land, in the world).

Call it what you will, and my task is to record my research "test" as a good ethnographer would in/with another culture they are living in and studying simultaneously. I record. No one is contacting me--the outspoken, well-published and tireless "Fearologist" on the block. Sitting here in this local, in this nation. No calls. No one wants my help. I'll assist for sure, but of course, I'll assist only through the frame of In Search of Fearlessness Project (my life purpose). That would frame everything I could offer, in analysis and solutions as part of the Fearlessness Movement (my life research). Just too weird all these people-- just too inconvenient--even the radical (so-called young people) I shared my work with for so many years--they, are 'silent'. No calls.

They say they want change and transformation. Supposedly.

Oh, but they also say, I hear and do not hear it so loudly--as a critique: "But Michael, your In Search of Fearlessness Project is so 'heady,' 'intellectual,' and not 'down to earth' for the people to pick-up on." I say, "Oh" ...

Then I say, but usually don't say: "To change and transform the world (even the Gun Problem) is very simple. To live another way completely than we do, so as not to feed the mess we're in is very simple." I could say a lot of things, as I often write about, and end with showing how complex it all is--yet, (r)evolution is inevitable. Stick in there.

It won't cost anyone a penny more than what you are spending in your life right now! I imagine that might be useful as an entry to get their attention on the practical side of the In Search of Fearlessness Project. For 27 years I've searched for other ways of saying this. Today, I say it this way: "It won't cost anything but a decision and once made, everything will follow--for example, your money and capital won't follow Fear's Empire anymore. That will free it up for you to spend on the (r)evolution, on what the spirit of fearlessness is asking of us to make a commitment to. All else, a flood of change will precipitate from there, my friends, I guarantee. Yet, you have to make that decision."

To make a choice to follow the world's Fearlessness Movement can be done now. The $$ and capital and energy will follow, and be re-directed exactly where it needs to be by these choice-makers, I'll call them today, the "architects of fearlessness"-- we will build the alternative society, brick by brick. It won't cost you a penny more than what you are spending today. Oh, but yes, you are right, it may "cost" you a lot of other losses. Look out the window, my friends, at your life. There are questions to ask of why you and I grieve--carrying the blood of so many murdered... on and on... today, in the news, and coming soon, the next day...

I envision this (r)evolution no different in 1989 (with co-founding In Search of Fearlessness Project) than today. The $$ and creativity will flow, and I see it in proportion to those who made the choice to follow fearlessness not fear any longer. I'll be a guide for as much of that as I can, and I know a lot about making that choice. I'll watch you go through withdrawl--your addiction to 'fear.'

This is the Fearlessness Mission.... in its most practical application: a choice. Then all practical things will happen, and I'll witness them with you--and, we'll witness them together as one after another makes this choice and re-directs their entire life ways. You all know the 'words' that go with that kind of change, that kind of transformation. I'll not repeat them and load up with all the 'baggage' those terms have collected and distract you or I from the mission set forth here.

Oh, and, you'll likely have to make the choice more than once (that's a joke)--it's difficult, yet, practical as you going out to find a meal for yourself today. That's exactly how practical the fearlessness path is. I won't listen much to all your critiques. I've heard them all in 27 years. I've heard all the addicts, believe you me I have heard them--they are masters at procrastination and rationales to continue drinking from the poisonous breast that kills their soul. And, that harms the World Soul.

You've been invited. I await.

-----------

More and more I realize the essence of my being, my research, knowledge and wisdom, is that which is colored and wrapped in Idealist philosophy (in contrast to so-called Realist, Pragmatist, and so on). The Idealist says, "Let's make sure the spirit is connected with, as an idea(l) and then a choice is made based on that honest knowing what is 'Right' and the 'Way' and then, $$ and materials will follow, not fear and practical concerns as most important, but spiritual concerns and the radical trust is that that release will explode into the world as idea(l)s and 'make' love with material and practical realities and realms, and then manifestations of the more "visible" kind will occur. Every religious order of some commitment has shown what is possible to build from an Idea(l). This is where I operate from. There's seemingly no other way to create the needed flood of change today, other than this route, although, sure one can do little steps in other ways on other routes. That's what I envision. Always have, since 1989, there would become 'real' and material eventualities, communities and services at every "Fearlessness Center" in every major town and city in the world. It's really that simple, all driven by one joining the Fearlessness Movement (by any other  name).

Read more…

New 7th 'Fear' Vaccine Added

The 'Fear' Vaccines as I have called them going way back to the early 1990s (In Search of Fearlessness Project or ISOF), are intended, just as they say, to counter the oppressive effects of 'fear' (and fear). I have written a good deal about these notions, including the distinction of "fear" and 'fear' (as a culturally modified fear patterning). I won't repeat that here and you may want to check out my other writings.

The 'Fear' Vaccines (which is really a process of "soft technologies") are intended to be practiced and studied. With time, patience and experience, they will counter-act to free you (and organizations) from any fear-based domination. They are essential "tools" in that sense to working one's way out of the 'Fear' Matrix (or 'Fear' Project, or fearism-t). These include 6 in their original configuration that evolved in ISOF (Calgary): (1) quality information on fear and fearlessness, (2) Liberation Peer Counseling, (3) Spontaneous Creation-making, (4) Community-building, (5) Sacred Warriorship, (6) Vision Quest.

The 7th vaccine has just been discovered in its latest form in the last 20 years or so by Dr. Don Trent Jacobs (also known as Four Arrows). I am currently writing a book on his life and work, but most importantly I have followed his work as a researcher and educator because of his discovery of a great model for working with decolonizing the mind, or de-hypnotizing ourselves from the dominant (and largely pathological) Western worldview. His model is defined in a mnemonic form: CAT-FAWN. There is a fascinating story behind the years of discovering this model, with roots of its "teaching" coming from ancient ancestors in remote Mexico and the shamans of the Raramuri there, as well as from the non-human spirit teachers-- and to be clear, it has not yet been put to full use (not even by Four Arrows), and I am just in the early stages of understanding it. I will write more on CAT-FAWN but not in detail here as I merely wanted to officially recognize it in my mind as the 7th 'Fear' Vaccine.

CAT-FAWN = Concentration Activated Transformation (CAT) and FEAR, AUTHORITY, WORDS, NATURE (FAWN). The basic principle behind this CAT-FAWN connection, as Four Arrows calls it, is that in any concentration state (subtle and light, or dramatic and heavy) we are in "trance" and in that state the human (and many animals) are highly susceptible to learning, for good or not so good. The point is to recognize with great critical awareness when one is going into a trance-state (i.e., CAT), it may be as simple as when you are watching TV too long, or driving a car, or working on an art piece or listening to music or when you have been injured and are fearful and/or terrorized... etc. By recognizing and predicting the high learning potential in this trance (CAT) state, you will be able to ensure you are not going to let Fear, Authorities, Words, or Nature be used against you and your current state, but be helpful as guides to move you along (in my words) the path of fearlessness of development.

More on all this as time goes... just also want to let you know that Barbara Bickel (my partner) has initiated with me to co-author a book on the 'Fear' Vaccines and all our years experience with them, and ensure they are documented for history. You can bet a final chapter will be on the latest addition of the 7th to the traditional 6 that we have the most experience with in the ISOF Community especially. Stay tuned...

Read more…

Fearlessness and Indigenizing

[Prelude: the following is an excerpt from my spontaneous journaling and because of that I do not have all the references in here backing up what I am saying, as a scholar might do, and as I often do. Rather, I wanted to keep this less technical and formal and an expression of some of my intimate and philosophical thoughts as they run... feel free to contact me if you want more information and/or references. Note, most terms that have quote marks, especially when more technical terms, are the concepts of others, not my own]

Jun 2- the last full day of this trip to Winnipeg and my embedded relationships in the field space and mental-value epistemic space of what I would call the “Indigenizing Project” (which, in my own language is a part of the Fearlessness Movement and ISOF Project work for me. As you may recall the sixth ‘fear’ vaccine in the ISOF model was/is “Vision Quest.” Now, of course, these days in a postmodern and post-/neo-colonial critique, and hyper-sensitivity (dare I say “fear”) in identity politics land and politics, there is like zero-tolerance policies (nearly) floating in every which way to ensure that I as a “Westerner,” “Settler,” “White” “Eurocentric” "Male" "Heterosexual" person do not step over the line to enter into promoting a “Vision Quest” without "approval" of some Indigenous Elder or 'Indigenous' person (however, difficult and problematic those labels are, when it comes to issues of definition and authentication criteria, in the first place)--as anything other than a 'bad' thing (i.e., an act of violation called appropriation) from the point of view of that critique.

However, I am not going to be suppressed and oppressed by that critique and indictment alone, IF I think it is an oversimplified indictment without good evidence and without consulting me in the negotiation of that indictment, of which I am happy to give my case in equal argumentation, following the basic principles of a "Two-Eye Seeing" and “ethical space” argumentation.

I listen to the “appropriation” indictment, listen to it respectfully and engage it as much as the ‘other-side’ is willing;  but I also do not adopt, necessarily, despite what the pc police would have me adopt and swear to, because I find typically  their stance is still situated (Indigenous-Western) in a fundamentally postmodern response, if not a Romantic reaction (and retro-regression) response of cultural differentiation, protectionism, traditionalism, and an overall conservativism of the worst culturalism kind. I am much more interested in a philosophy of “cultural hybridity” as some scholars have carefully been arguing, along with a "trans(per)formative" approach to identity and pedagogy in general. The former traditionalism, with its odd postmodern garb, over-privileges an ontological and epistemological and axiological culturalism (primacy to the Cultural capital ‘C’ as meta-worldview) above and beyond the Natural and Spiritual domains—or what is intimately most accurately the Integral Standpoint (NCS) based on what I have argued in the Wilberian sense is a Fearless Standpoint Theory (FST). I believe this latter stance is the only way to ensure a freedom from epistemic violence perpetuated in under the flags of ideological reductionism that naturalism, culturalism and spiritualism are embedded in. In this sense, I am taking what Wilber has called a theocentric or kosmocentric perspective—which is something that the postmoderns and poststructuralists cannot stand and “hate” and will do everything in their power to maim and disavow credibility and integrity in the domains of knowledge-making and inquiry itself. Yes, my friends, this goes back to the “enemies of fearlessness” which I have argued all along soon after 1989.

I wish to write more of my own social philosophy of fearism, from FST and NCS, with its practical and theoretical threads, and in which the “Vision Quest” ‘fear’ vaccine is intended in these discussions to be revisited, extended, revised, as I have not given it the attention for some time. And in which I have come to see that my most recent work with Four Arrows (and the U of M Two-Eyed Seeing research team), is leading me to ask how it is that I can bring an Indigenizing lens (at least) to all of my conceptualizing, philosophizing, theorizing and practical work. Right off the top, is my interest to bring this to the ‘fear’ vaccines, and to an Indigenizing of the vision quest and a philosophy of fearism. The big debate that has to be worked through, not only in my own thinking, but so many others in and out of the Indigenous worlds, is how to define “Indigenizing” itself. That is what I think requires a lot of attention from me, at the least, before I proceed with the vision question and ‘fear’ vaccines. So, this is just a little ‘gem’ of my thoughts of late I wanted to share with you here at CSIIE for future inquiry and dialogues.  

Read more…

I have just co-authored and published "Education, Theology and Fear: Two Priests and a Fearologist in Dialogue" (Technical Paper No. 61)... I highly recommend you check this out at Department of Integral and 'Fear' Studies (scroll down for a free pdf). 

HINT(S) FOR THE WISE

You may be wondering what is Michael up to now with this "theology" kick? 

I have been asking this question really sincerely for the past six months, since I have met both Emmett Coyne and Terry Biddington, the two priests (American, British) who have taken up my work on fear and fearlessness like no others in my career so far. And, yes, more or less, the three of us are discussing what a "theology of fear" (healthy-side, and unhealthy-side) might look like in the 21st century. 

Today, while journaling, I came into a long series of rather spontaneous connections, going way back to my interest in "theodicy" (of Good vs. Evil)... now, and since the 1989 founding of the In Search of Fearlessness Project, Love vs. Fear has been one of the core foundations of me working through what a "metaphysics of fear" could look like. 

That's enough hints... for why you may want to read this dialogue in tech. paper no. 61 ... There will be a lot more coming on this, because it seems "pressing" (or "calling") upon my soul to articulate this better-- much better-- than I have to this point. And, to finally, wet your appetite, the ongoing study of fear ('fear') now 27 years in progress is by any other name a code-word for evil ('evil') -- and, this is big stuff ... it has eluded me, and then revealed itself, and then eluded me -- my forensic fearanalysis is getting better at seeing through what it is I am on about here on this planet... ha ha! 

Read more…

Spring 2006

[This is an excellent article, for a lot of reasons, and written by a Muslim leader is even more important, I think: and how appropriate I just found this on the Internet, published by New Perspectives Quarterly, 23(1), in 2006-- it is another way to imagine fearism-t, for one, and another way to imagine evil-- keep attuned with my own new blogs coming out soon around a metaphysics of fear, and theology of fear, of which Tariq Ramadan, and any religious or spiritual leader ought to be taking seriously]

The Global Ideology of Fear

Tariq Ramadan, Europe’s most controversial Muslim leader, is currently a visiting professor at Oxford’s St. Antony’s College and a senior research fellow at the Lokahi Foundation in London.

London — Global terrorism and the global war against terrorism both fuel, in equal and pernicious ways, the global ideology of fear.

When we examine the countries of the West or those of the South, particularly where the population is primarily Muslim, we can only conclude that fear is omnipresent and deeply ingrained. It is having an unmistakable impact on the way human beings perceive the world. We can observe at street level three principal effects:

First, fear, naturally and often unconsciously, breeds mistrust and potential conflict with the “Other.” A binary vision of reality begins to impose the outlines of a protective “us” and of a threatening “them.”

The second effect derives from the absolute domination of emotions in our relationships with the Other and of emotional responses to events. When fear rules, emotions undermine rational analysis. In such a state, we condemn the consequences of some action and reject the individuals who commit it, but we don’t seek to understand what led to such action.

Our “good reasons” and our “just causes” are praised by the general public without critical examination, while at the same time their “bad reasons” and their “evil intentions” are indiscriminately condemned. Fear authorizes us to forgo all explanations, all understanding, all analysis that might allow us to understand the Other, his world, his hopes.

In the new regime of fear and suspicion, to understand the Other is to justify him; to seek out his reasons is to agree with him. A curious—and dangerous—reductionism transforms reality into a series of discreet, disconnected facts, and the Other into a series of acts without cause, without history or historic depth, without reason and rationality. Emotion does not understand but rather appreciates or condemns; one’s “feelings” determine everything.

The third consequence is as paradoxical as it is startling: We may well live in the communication age, but human beings seem to be increasingly less informed. We have witnessed the multiplication of “communication superhighways” that diffuse a dizzying excess of information in real time, saturating the intelligence and making it impossible to place facts in perspective. The communication age is an age of non-information. We are passive receptors of reality and of facts; it is as if we have no grasp on how they come to be. Swept away by our emotions; trapped in binary, reductive logical structures; and lost in the rising tide of “as it happens” events and politics, it has become impossible for us to see, to understand or even to hear the Other.

In short, the ideology of fear has produced a devastating deafness: The Other’s world and the reasons he behaves as he does are inaudible; to attempt to hear them more clearly is to reveal one’s own ill-being, or, at worst, the vilest of treacheries. Between “us” and “them” a virtual wall has been thrown up, marking out the borderlines of our new identities and connections, protected within, threatened from without.

The upkeep and feeding of the “ideology of fear” has become a political weapon, particularly as part of the opportunistic strategies of the great economic powers of the day. Far from true political debate and shielded from objective criticism of the consequences of the world economic order, they perpetuate a state of fear and vulnerability. This in turn grants a license for security policies of the most dangerous and discriminatory kind—exceptional measures that are most inimical to freedom (particularly with regard to human and citizen’s rights) and often include extremist, racist concepts. The ideology of fear confirms the definitive, intrinsic guilt of the Other and the overriding necessity to protect oneself by increased security precautions or by force of arms—a condition made to order for the multinational arms industry.

The Globalization of the Israeli Syndrome | An observer of Israeli society and of its successive governments cannot but be struck by the similarity between the logical premises that inform that society and what is now taking place on a global scale. Since the 1940s, the history of the state of Israel has been shaped by fear, by the imperative of self-protection and by mistrust of the Other.

After the Nazi horrors and the extermination camps, after the painful European experience, Israel appealed to many both as refuge and as possible self-reconciliation in the eyes of history. Years have passed, but the same logic has perpetuated itself in the form of deep feelings of mistrust; the perception of self as victim; the reality of insecurity; the continued inflation of security policy measures; and the perception of the permanent hostility, unavowed or not, of the world around it.

In the end, however, roles and perspectives have been reversed: Israeli society is much richer than those that surround it, incomparably better armed than all the Arab countries combined, at the pinnacle of scientific and military technology, a true regional and international economic power. Yet it still sees itself as a victim of the destructive intentions of its neighbors, or their age-old opposition—of “Palestinian terrorism” or, in broader terms, of Muslim extremism.

The superior regional power has become a “victim,” of the Other’s “horror,” of his “madness,” of his “hatred,” of his “irrationality,” of his “murderous insanity,” of his “nihilism.” These are but a few of the terms utilized to justify a security policy that accepts “of necessity” violations of the principles of international law or of respect for the lives of civilians and of the innocent. They are used to authorize “moderate” recourse to torture and for the adoption of distinctive and openly discriminatory legislation toward certain citizens still considered too “Arab” or too committed as Christians or Muslims. The victim protects and defends himself. Could anything be more normal?

If we broaden our focus, we see a world that reflects these same considerations and postures. The “war” that has been unleashed to destroy terrorism is now founded on the same logical bases, but on a global scale.

Don’t get me wrong. Terror is a fact, not an ideology, and the killing of innocent people must be condemned with no exception. It is the ideological use of its consequences that is problematic.

The American neo-conservatives and their European imitators instigate and nurture a permanent sense of fear, which they wield as though it were an ideology. Their policies are based on a feeling of insecurity and a binary vision of the world. The imperative is one of self-protection, sometimes through draconian security policies that are hostile to freedom and, for some, openly unjust and discriminatory. After all, the West has become the “principal victim of terrorism.”

The world’s most prosperous, heaviest-armed countries are threatened. Citizens have to understand that they must revise the laws that govern them, and their rights, in more restrictive terms...for their own security. To confront the threat, and to calm their fears, citizens must be more closely monitored, intensively video-recorded, kept under constant surveillance. The Israel Syndrome, whose characteristics are the state of siege and of the reversal of the power equation on the level of perception and symbolism, has come fully into play: The Other is no longer criticizing our policies, he is negating our existence; he detests our values, our very civilization. He must no longer be held responsible for his acts alone but for his hatred, his nihilism, his madness and “why not?” his beliefs and his religion.

With Fear We Are All Victims | The first tragic consequence of the ideology of fear is to transform all societies and their members into victims. While in the West the idea of a civilization under threat gains currency, we can observe the same emotional reflexes, shaped by fear and victimhood, in majority Muslim societies, and even in the Muslim communities established in Europe and in the United States: “They” do not like Islam and Muslims; “they” have singled us out, discriminate against us; “they” are openly racist and xenophobic. “Their” war against “Islamic terrorism” is nothing but a “pretext for lashing out at Islam and at all Muslims.”

Everywhere we find the same feelings, everywhere the same attitudes. Before our eyes an ideology is emerging, one that transforms us into “victims” incapable of viewing the Other except as a potential threat. Because we are colonized by fear, it has become impossible for us to enter into the Other’s reasoning, even to hear him or, in the most humane sense, understand his distress and frustration. We are all, each and every one of us, caught up in the same web—a web woven of narrow-mindedness and sectarianism.

We must break the bonds of our fear, master our impulse to see things only in black and white and recapture our critical spirit and our ability to listen. We must once more become thinking “subjects”—that and nothing else. And yet, to do so seems so difficult.

Muslims, whether they live in the West or in primarily Muslim countries, cannot under any circumstances endorse the ideology of fear, nor can they fall into the trap of a polarized, simplistic and caricatured reading of the world. By perpetuating the idea, which has now become an obsession, that they are either dominated (or members of a minority) and unappreciated or singled out and marginalized, they unconsciously accept the premises of those who propagate this emotion-based ideology, of those who seek to build walls and dig trenches, of those who promote prejudices, fuel insecurity and fan the fires of conflict. These propagandists of fear tirelessly spread the idea that Islam and Muslims are threatened by the future; by allowing themselves to be swept into a vicious circle of self-justification and defensiveness, Muslims confirm and lend credence to a debate whose terms have been deliberately skewed.

Our very conception of humanity and life is at stake. Far more than simple politics, this new ideology is the challenge of our times. It raises issues of conviction, faith, understanding, ethics and behavior. If a vision is to emerge as a response to the ideology of fear, it must be one of self-liberation. This “act of self-liberation” is located precisely at the core of spiritual experience, for when the emotions urge us to let ourselves go, spirituality requires of us that we educate ourselves.

The American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., following the Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, understood that it was all too easy to see one’s own community or cause as the universal value. He constantly warned his followers not to use the excuse of injustice done to them to abdicate responsibility for their lives and their obligations to others, calling for “spiritual discipline” against resentment or self-righteousness.

We must make a similar effort to educate ourselves in order to bring together the search for meaning and for God and respect for the principles of justice, freedom and human fraternity. Against the temptation to close ourselves off, to see reality in black and white, we need an “intellectual jihad.” We need to resist (jihad means, literally, effort and resistance), to strive for the universality of a message that transcends the particular and allows us to understand the common universal values that make up our horizon.

This enterprise of critical intelligence and understanding alone will make it possible for us Muslims to return to the Islamic concepts that contextualized or specialized historical definitions have often diminished, restricted or even amputated. Notions such as the Shari’a (Islamic code), “fiqh” (Islamic jurisprudence) and “ulum islamiyya” (Islamic sciences) must be reviewed and redefined in the light of the Islamic principles that call us to the universal, not through the narrow prism of the attitudes of “the dominated,” of “minorities” or of “immigrants to be assimilated.”

This is the reform—and it is a literally revolutionary one—that we must undertake in order to resist the ideology of fear. Some of our readings of the Islamic sources are a godsend for the propagators of the ideology that promotes fear to justify war, policies destructive of freedom and institutionalized discrimination. The reform we need does not negate a single one of the principles of Islam, its fundamentals and its practice, but it reinvigorates self-confidence. In so doing, this reform helps us overcome our fear of the Other, the obsession with adversity and the promotion of closed, reactive, petrified identities.

The original spirit of the message of Islam is an invitation to us; it teaches us to open ourselves to the world, to make ours what is good (whatever its origin). It teaches us to understand that each of us has multiple, fluctuating identities, that diversity is a school for humility and respect, and that humanity is one, just as God is One.

Fears, like fractures, cut crosswise. In Western society, we can observe signs of tension between those who define themselves in relation to others and have no desire whatsoever to acknowledge the fact, and those who understand that there exist values to be held in common, partnerships to be created.

The same fault lines exist in Muslim societies and communities. We must counsel those who lay claim to, and who accept, the principle of common values and are prepared to put fear behind them and not be deceived by the extremism of the “other side.” If they do, then extremism will have prevailed.

Today’s most urgent task is to bring together women and men from all backgrounds, from all convictions and religions, in the name of the common universal principles of the dignity of human beings and of the critical spirit. To overcome the ideology of fear, to loosen the grip of the emotions, requires a demanding critical intelligence and a sense of the ethics of debate, of receptivity. Some will identify these qualities with belief and spirituality, others with their conscience alone. But each one will understand them as the necessary, imperative qualities of his or her humanity.

Read more…

How Hard Is It To Keep Going On the Path?

Now and then it is important, I believe, for anyone, especially leaders of liberation to talk about their struggles. Not to over-indulge or anything, but to share the journey of fearlessness so that others can sense what it is like for others and leaders. If you were to read my boxes-full of my personal journals over the decades you'd get more than a handful of pages about the struggle to keep going. I sometimes just express "distress" and "despair" and "depression" and lots of rage and righteous indignation. Sometimes I get valuable insights. Mostly, a lot of sadness of how it is so hard to get others to 'take up the cause' and join me and/or join the Fearlessness Movement on the planet in their own ways. I certainly don't need to be the leader of it all. I look for fellow companions, comrades, and peers who are also leading this work. It's so hard to find them, and when I do they are so busy with their own worlds of goings on that they don't have time to engage with me usually very in depth. So, I suffer from an intellectual aloneness pretty much daily. 

The following excerpt from my journaling the other day is I think a good example of my struggles and how in journaling (often) I find some resolution to my internal conflict and other negative feelings and heaviness due to exhaustion of carrying out this work of fear and fearlessness with so little positive rewards from society. I certainly don't generally get paid for my primary cultural productions or efforts. I am financially dependent on my life-partner, not a situation that ever feels good to me or her. Yet, it is reality. 

April 22, 2016 - Fearism-t is not to be side-stepped, displaced by some simple elocution or filing away in a locked-up storage vault!!! -- in my mind. 

If I look at the underlying 'cause' of 80% of my mental and soul suffering daily it comes from my own (with others) forgetting that fearism-t, in one way or another is operating and tearing me down. All the triggering manifestations that disgust, sicken and hurt me (an other beings) are based in an ideological formation so hard to define and to keep a finger on. Let me tell ya! I just know intuitively, every few weeks or months, to pick up my own book/writing/teachings, especially the last book Philosophy of Fearism: A First East-West Dialogue (co-written with Desh Subba), and actually hold the book when I am in the midst of my despair and sickness of how the world is, of how I am. To hold that book and actually open it up and read it, is not easy for me to do when no one else around me is showing interest in the book nor asking me questions about it etc. Today, I read some sections and watched my mood change, the suffering disappear, and listened to my own voice articulate the essence of fearism-t, and its toxic impact... and it is as though I am reading into the entire W. society and civilization and its addiction to fear, and no wonder it doesn't want to change, nor engage with my work... or follow the path of fearlessness with any real sincerity never mind real discipline and sharing this journey with me. 

So, that's the jist of the journal entry, that went on and on much longer. I don't think it is necessary to write it all out. Maybe someday, historians will find these journals of mine and publish bits of them. I have shared my struggles with my daughters and with my life-partner, but not often. I have counseled on this material with many co-peer counselors over the decades, but there is really never enough quality attention for me to heal through all this distress and constant bombardment from the fearism-t ideology that is embedded in my own being, and all around me. It is an ideology so well designed to make us forget there is even an ideology of fearism-t that exists... and, I watch how easily I forget this, and I am the one who found this "truth" and labeled it, and have written more on it than anyone on the planet that I know of. That's how toxic and effective it is-- it can make me forget how to free myself from the 'Fear' Matrix, the 'Fear' Project, the Culture of Fear, the fearism-t complex itself. Forget. Forget. Forget. And, I suffer in that forget. I also think everyone does, but they are often not aware of what is causing the suffering. I have no doubt that fearism-t is operating to make people stop reading my work on fear and fearlessness. It is preventing them from coalescing with force, of following my lead... of taking their own lead to develop a radical fear management/education on the planet. Of course, there are rare (but fragile) exceptions to this rule and my observations. Nothing is sustainable right now... I just don't see the "movement" and I don't see the willingness to learn about it that is required. Again, I blame no one because I watch my own slipping 'off' track and forgetting, and suffering and forgetting why I am suffering. That is, forgetting the very deepest roots of that suffering in an imprisonment, that is not being led by fearlessness as it could be. 

I feel so alone on this battle, and yet, rationally I know I am not. The proof I am not alone was something I sought to find for years in my research. That's why I wrote a wikipedia on "Fearlessness Movement" of which is the introduction to this FM ning as well. Which, I encourage everyone who has signed up (or not even) to read that introduction--see the very first FORUM at the bottom of the webpage on this FM ning-- we are part of something much larger, lest we not forget this is so! 

Final note:  Yes, I am reminding, and I have uncovered a great systemic ADDICTION TO FEAR (1) that I live in, with, amongst... and, it would be a similar daily experience to live amongst an alcoholic family in denial, who has not gone to treatment-- I know that experience from my own upbringing, and I have worked as a therapist with so many families where this is so and have tried to support the children (mainly, the male adolescents)... it is a toxic system, and it wears you down, and it feels like it is impossible to change. That's what I am sharing above... what it is like to be an addiction therapist for the entire W. civilization that is addicted to fear and denies that it is. 

End Note

1. If you get the drift of this "Addiction Problem" then if you read more of my work you can re-translate that code-word for "Fear Problem" and if you read the two blogs that were created (after this blog; thanks to my editing flexibility here I can add this end note) you'll see that "fear" (and 'fear') as I have been studying them for 27 years are codes for "evil" ('evil'), that is the 'Evil Problem'. In my recent co-authored book with Desh Subba, "Philosophy of Fearism: A First East-West Dialogue" (2016), you'll see it is not by accident that in the Preface the discussion begins with looking at evil (a la Carl Jung) and linking it with fear and a philosophy of fearism. 

Read more…