working together with automatic Mercy thought. I then suggested that automatic Perceiver and Mercy thought and the internal world of Perceiver and Mercy thinking operate in exactly the same way, and that the only difference between these two aspects of thought lies in the method by which information is allowed to enter. We then compared the advantages and disadvantages of each of these two methods. Finally, we took a detour into neurology.
If automatic thought and the internal world operate in the same way, then we can gain some clues about how one works by looking at the operation of the other. Therefore, I would like to take another look at the topic of object recognition, the simplest form of Mercy-Perceiver interaction.
Normally, when we think of an object, we are reminded of some specific thing which just „sits there‟: a car, a knife, a pair of scissors—in other words, a collection of bits which is spatially related. You can see this type of fact illustrated by the diagram of the „car.‟ Notice how the Perceiver
fact of „car‟ ties together the individual Mercy elements of wheels, motor, steering wheel, doors and seats. All of these Mercy experiences are connected by space: The wheels are at the bottom, the engine is (usually) at the front, the doors are on the outside, and the steering wheel is somewhere in the middle.
When we discussed facts and Perceiver processing, however, we said only that Perceiver thought notices connections between individual Mercy experiences; it looks for events which belong together. We did not say anything about space. We only assumed that these connections involved space—that the various bits were above, below, inside and behind each other.A
It is also possible for Perceiver processing to tie together Mercy experiences which are connected by time. Analyze, for instance, the process of jumping off a cliff. First a person jumps, then his body sails through the air, and finally it goes „splat‟ at the bottom of the slope. Unlike the Mercy
experiences which make up the fact of a „car,‟ these Mercy experiences do not occur at the same time. Rather, one event occurs, and then the next.
A Here is another example of being tripped up by an assumption.
CAR
Jump
Splat!
As far as Perceiver thought is concerned, however, all that matters is connections. Are individual experiences linked? If they are, then Perceiver strategy has discovered a fact. Therefore, if „jumping off the cliff‟ is always connected with „going splat,‟ then Perceiver mode will decide that a fact exists about „falling.‟ We give many names to Perceiver facts which involve time: cause and effect, sowing and reaping, cost/benefit, work and wages. In each case, Perceiver strategy tries to connect Mercy experiences which are separated by intervals of time.
Actually, I suggest that the division between space and time is somewhat artificial. Events which are connected over time are generally related spatially as well. The bottom of the cliff, for example, always lies below the top where the jump occurred. A similar ambiguity occurs with space: The mind seems to be incapable of grasping all of a spatial object at the same time. Rather, the eye scans a scene and focuses upon one aspect after another, building up a mental image over time. Advertising makes a science out of guiding what the eye sees when. Even physicists have given up referring to space and time as separate entities and now speak of a
„space-time continuum.‟
Art and Belief
We have come up with a few principles about Mercy and Perceiver strategies. First, we learned that object recognition is carried out by automatic Mercy and Perceiver thought. Then, we realized that automatic thought and the internal world both operate in similar ways. Finally, we saw that objects actually come in the two flavors of spatial objects and temporal objects. If automatic Perceiver and Mercy strategy work with two types of objects, then we should also find these same two kinds of structures present within the internal world. What are these mental objects? Let us use logic to construct an answer out of our existing pieces of information.
First, we know that Mercy experiences enter the internal Mercy world either because of their innate overwhelming emotion, or else through a willing identification with an experience. Second, we also know that Perceiver facts are ushered in through the step of belief.A Third, we have learned that Perceiver facts build connections between Mercy experiences.
Therefore, we conclude that the interaction between the internal worlds of Perceiver and Mercy thought will involve Perceiver systems of belief tying together individual Mercy experiences related to feelings and to identity.
And, we should also find that these mental structures come in two flavors—one related to space and the other to time.
A Like Mercy identification, Perceiver belief can either be voluntary or else forced upon the internal world. We will examine this topic in detail later on.
Right now we are ignoring the source of Perceiver beliefs.
Now that we have come up with a theoretical idea, let us see if we can find some examples which can lasso this „castle in the air‟ and bring it down to the solid earth of real experience. We will start by expanding upon the idea of a „spatial‟ internal object.A
Think, for instance, of a picture hanging on a wall, or a sculpture sitting in a museum. These definitely are spatial objects—they sit there and do nothing. But, they are usually more than just objects. Rather, the artist or sculptor is attempting to say something: First, he is trying to tell us about his system of belief. If he puts a soup can on top of a pile of garbage, he is making a statement about consumerism. He believes that there is a Perceiver connection between trash, food, and society.
Second, not only is the artist telling us about his beliefs, but his identity and his feelings are usually involved as well. Have you ever tried to criticize a work of art? The average artist takes this as a personal attack.B When you condemn what he has produced, he thinks that you are condemning him. The relationship between art, identity and emotions is so strong that it has become almost taboo to
denigrate the work of an artist. These days, in fact, one can produce just about anything without being condemned as long as it is called art.
I suggest that another example of an object living within the internal world of Mercy and Perceiver thought is religion.
First, every religion is based upon some set of beliefs—a group of Perceiver facts which fill the internal world of Perceiver thought. Second, religion is strongly related to identity. It touches me and tells me what I should think, say, do, and so on. Finally, religion definitely addresses
emotional topics. If some person wants to know facts about issues such as life, sickness, death, morality and God, he turns traditionally to religion for answers.
I suggest that religion and morality are often viewed as something static—like a picture hanging on the wall. We speak of attaining a „state of perfection‟ as if it is some location or place to be reached. We „quiet our hearts‟ and „become still‟ so that we can „meditate on God.‟ We view God
A This section illustrates how I did much of my research. First, I would use the theory to come up with some new ideas. Then I would look at real life to see if my ideas made any sense.
B Art usually involves Teacher emotion as well as Mercy feelings.
as Someone who is „sitting‟ on a throne. Art and religion themselves are related. Many religions use static art as an aid in worshipping a static God.
The Greek Stoic philosophers took this idea of static religion and carried it to its logical extreme. If perfection was a passive state, then God had to be immovable, since any shift would take Him away from His state of perfection. Changing matter became evil, by definition, since anything which moved obviously did not stay within a perfect place.
The problem with static objects is that they are „dead.‟ An object just sits there; it does nothing; it is not alive. When a body does not move or breathe, we conclude that it is a corpse and we bury it. I suggest that the same principle appears to apply to systems of belief. When they become static, they also „die.‟
I suggest that we have stumbled across something which is quite significant. Remember that the goal of this book is not just to understand the mind. Rather, we want to build an understanding which can guide us in programming the mind. Therefore, when we come up with a relationship involving „static lack of motion‟ and „death,‟ we need to examine the topic further. So, let us look at the interaction between time, movement and life.
I suggest that we will discover insights which are not found within the average book or news magazine, even if the name claims a connection with time or life.
Conscience, Time, and Life
A Perceiver object which is static is „dead.‟ In contrast, I suggest that a Perceiver belief can be made „alive‟ by adding a sense of time. We see this principle when we look at the rituals of religion. People may die, places may change, civilizations may even rise and fall, but religious rituals seem to live on. They are transferred endlessly from one person and one generation to the next.
Like most aspects of religion, rituals contain the essential ingredients of an internal world object: They are supported by Perceiver belief and they claim to help a person navigate his way through the emotional stages of living. Rituals, however, also include a sense of time—they connect together experiences which occur one after another—and I suggest that it is the addition of time which gives them life. Think, for example, of the ritual of the Holy Eucharist. There is the breaking and the eating of bread, and the lifting up and the drinking of wine. These experiences do not all occur at once but rather occur one at a time. Perceiver strategy looks at this succession of experiences, sees that they are always connected together and concludes that this set of connections is a fact. Because this fact includes time, it „lives.‟A
A fact must include a sense of time to be compatible with life.
Static facts are, by nature, dead.
I suggest that government provides another example of the presence of time creating „life.‟ First of all, government, like religion, is an internal world structure: Governments establish laws—facts which we are supposed to believe, they meddle constantly in our personal lives, and they give us all sorts of strong emotional reasons either to love or to hate them. Now, let us suppose that a government was only a spatial object. This would mean that I could go to a certain building, point to the structure and the people in it and say: “This is my government.
Here is the palace. And there is our leader, Frederick the Conqueror. May he live forever.” History suggests that these types of
A By including time, I do not mean scheduling events according to the clock. Rather, I am referring to the concept of sequence—one event following another.
governments are rather unstable. If Fred breaks his neck and dies, then the whole system of belief is shaken—it too will die. We see this illustrated in the history of barbarian kingdoms, third world dictatorships, banana republics and inner city gangs. Whenever the leader dies, then there is usually civil unrest until some victor can declare himself to be the new Conqueror.
What happens when we add a sense of time? Let us say for instance that Frederick the Conqueror states that he is Frederick the First and that he will be followed by his son John the Magnificent. We now have a solid Perceiver connection between two experiences which are connected by time as well as space. John is not just beside Fred, he is also after him. Add a few more timely connections and you come up with the process of government. We sometimes call it bureaucracy, and it also develops a life of its own. Of course, maybe we do not like the type of „life‟ which develops—that is another question. But, it is „alive.‟ People and laws may rise and fall, but governments which include time and sequence within their laws are able to continue.
Let me give you a further example. I may step on a few toes with this illustration, but I already know that I will not win an award for „politically correct man of the year.‟
For some time, South Africa was built upon the doctrine of apartheid.
In essence, this system was based upon three fundamental Perceiver affirmations: First, it was believed that all whites belonged together.
Second, it was asserted that all blacks could also be placed into a single group. Finally, there was the Perceiver belief that no connection existed between whites and blacks. Obviously, a system like this was flawed; no one can live under the curse of being racially
inferior—and no one can survive as a human being under the delusion of being racially superior.
So what exactly was the problem with apartheid? Many people condemned the idea of using Perceiver belief to classify human beings: “How dare someone say that one group of people is superior to another.”
However, I suggest that the flaw did not lie here. I think we have learned by now that democracy is one commodity which cannot easily be exported; it only survives when it is
grown domestically. Furthermore, the history of post-colonial Africa has taught us that democratic government is incompatible with tribal society.
When the Western powers left, almost every African country turned into a dictatorship. Therefore, when the Western settlers of South Africa tried to build a modern society in the middle of tribal Africa, some general distinction between groups of people had to be made.
I suggest that the real problem with apartheid was that it did not include any provision for time. It was as if someone took a snapshot of the entire country and marked every occupant either with a check—these people are permanently „in,‟ or with an „x‟—those are forever „out.‟
Suppose that apartheid had included the following provision: “Any black person who meets a certain standard of education will become a full citizen, and every white person who fails to meet this standard of education will be denied the rights of full citizenship.” With this clause, it might have been possible for South Africa to make a somewhat smoother transition to a fully integrated society, avoiding most of the hatred, suffering and bloodshed which has infected that country with crime, today at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
Actually, I suggest that the only reason that South Africa and other African countries will survive their transition into democracy is that the element of time has entered through the back door. It was during the time that blacks were suppressed, either by whites or by their own black dictators, that lessons of democracy were being learned.
Life and Generality
We have seen that a system of belief must include time in order to support life. While this is necessary, I suggest that it is not sufficient. The one other requirement which seems to be needed is generality. This is because life is spontaneous. People are not just robots. When statements of belief are too specific, then there is no room left for individual creativity. It is only when belief is stated in general terms that „breathing room‟ is left for living. For instance, suppose that I could predict the future perfectly and I told you that you would be married to Fred McDoodle, have three children—a boy and two girls, buy a cute bungalow on Pine Crescent, and play bridge with your friends every Tuesday afternoon. Would you want to believe what I am saying? After all, my system of belief definitely includes time: I certainly hope that the events of getting married and having the three children occur one after the other. The problem is that my words are too specific. Imagine knowing exactly what you would be doing for the rest of your life. How boring! What would be the point of getting up in the morning?A
In contrast, suppose that I said, “Some time in the next month you will meet the man of your dreams.” Now we have a statement which would inject life and excitement into your routine. Fortune tellers make big
A Strangely enough, those who believe in a Personal God usually do not apply this logic to Him. Imagine being the Supreme Being and knowing exactly what will happen at every point in history. I would think that God would have to inject some free will into the world simply in order to preserve His own sanity.
money with these types of predictions. Who? When? Where? How? All these questions come tumbling through your mind. Notice that the example which I have given is still a statement of belief. I have asserted that there is a connection between „you‟ and „the man of your dreams.‟ The difference is that while I have told you the Perceiver fact and given you the approximate Mercy label, I have not supplied the specific Mercy experiences.
In mathematics, this is known as working with variables. For instance, I could tell you that a rectangle which is five centimeters long and seven centimeters wide has an area of thirty-five square centimeters. This is a Perceiver fact in which you can believe. But, it is also a specific fact. On the other hand, I could state that a rectangle which is „L‟ centimeters long and „W‟ centimeters wide has an area of „L times W‟ square centimeters.
This also is a Perceiver fact describing a solid connection between a certain set of numbers. However, this type of fact, stated now in terms of variables, will tell you the area of any rectangle: Just multiply the width times the length and you have the answer. Stating a fact in general terms does not make it any less true, nor any less real. A general fact can be believed just as strongly as any specific statement. The only difference is that it is much more useful.
A fact must contain both time and generality to support life.
This allows change to occur—within a system that remains solid.
This permits freedom—within a framework which is stable.
Here is another example. Suppose someone tells you that “God has a specific plan for your life,” or suppose that your boss informs you that your company has a detailed plan of work and promotion laid out for you. It might be that you do not want to step on a conveyor belt and be shunted along for the rest of your life. Maybe, just maybe, you want to choose what you will do. Again, I suggest that we have a problem of being too specific.
Suppose instead that the company tells you of the various options which are open for training and advancement: “Whoever takes a course in this subject will get a pay raise and a promotion.” The Perceiver connection is still there: „Taking the course‟ is connected with „pay raise and promotion.‟ However, who takes the course, what he takes and when he takes it are left undecided; human freedom and spontaneity are still possible. Similarly, I suggest that a religious system of belief can leave room for human will and freedom if it is stated in terms of „cause and effect‟—do a certain action and you experience a specific result.
I suggest that these same two qualities of time and generality are present in democratic government. First, there is the process of government. Laws and leaders are not inscribed in stone forever. Instead, they can both be changed over time. Second, there is the institution of