Your child will pay the price of elective C-section

Fear-based and profit-driven science/medicine with an arrogant disregard for the wisdom of nature led to the 'fashion' of elective C-section by encouraging women to believe that natural birth was something to be feared and beyond their capacity, and that medical intervention would always be safe.

The high levels of intervention in birth, including the tendency to 'induce' for the convenience of the doctor as often as not, also create situations where the outcome is more likely to be C-section delivery.

No-one would ever dispute that the 'crisis' skills of modern medicine have been invaluable in emergency and necessary caesareans, but the trend toward C-section for convenience of mother or doctor and so hospitals and doctors could be 'safe' from litigation was always going to have a price.

Mechanised medicine and the materialism of science which mocks the wisdom of nature more often than not has created poor health in the name of profit and position.

The body is not a machine. Every action has an effect. Scientific research in recent years has 'discovered', goodness me, how astonishing, that natural birth is actually beneficial - there is a reason for it - and C-section means the baby does not get the natural and required kick-start for its immune response and gut function and so it is born with compromised gut function and immune response.

The latest research now shows that it also predisposes to obesity. One wonders if in years to come people will sue doctors for their 'elective C-section' arrival in this world.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/children-born-by-caesarean-section-could-be-more-likely-to-become-obese-as-adults-9155427.html

You and your body are in it together..

Research shows that people who have close relationships and supportive social structures live longer and healthier lives. It is in the connection, which is what I believe Love is in its many forms and it purest form, that we are in tune with the cosmic order.

As Above; So Below. As Within: So Without. The microcosm and the macrocosm. All is one and all is created to function within an organised and harmonic order and that order is sourced in connection at physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual levels. It is sourced in Love, as all that is, which connects all that is.

 There can in fact be no disconnection but we can feel disconnected, we can believe we are disconnected and that sense of separation or disconnection will create confusion, discord and fear at all levels including the cellular, the molecular, the atomic – because all is one.

Understanding how our cells work can provide insight into how everything works. Nobel laureate Christian de Duve has described the ability for cells to communicate with each other and to recognise molecular messages, as molecular complementarity.

He has this to say:

'Biological information transfer is based on chemical complementarity, the relationship that exists between two molecular structures that fit one another closely – a dynamic phenomenon as the two partners are not rigid. When they embrace, they mould themselves to each other to some extent. Embrace leads to binding.’

So, just as we at our mind and body level communicate, embrace, mould and bind in relationship, so do our cells.  When cells are not fully ‘connected’ they become confused about who they are, about who others are, about the messages they receive and about the answers they need to give.  We are no different.

And that is why when we are grounded in connected, read loving and meaningful, relationships, we are protected to some degree when we experience ‘disconnection’ in other relationships. When old, loving, deep and powerful relationships experience ‘disconnection’ for whatever reason we become confused and unable to read signals and messages properly, and unable to connect as we once might have done.

When this happens to a cell the potential for dis-ease increases to varying degrees depending on the ‘stability’ of the organism as a whole.

One wonders if the reason why a cell turns ‘rogue’ and morphs into a cancer cell is because it has become confused and ‘forgotten’ who and what it is and lost the ability to recognise ‘friends’ and the support that ‘friends’ can offer and so, from a place of fear and a desperate urge to ‘survive’ it embarks upon a course of rebellion; a civil war in fact within the body, where it co-opts, often by deception, others to its cause and runs riot at the cellular level.

The cell if you like becomes paranoid and loses the ability to rationally and intuitively 'read' its world and everything in it. That can happen when relationships founder and it often does. The way your cells work is the way you work.

There must be many things which create confusion in our cells, subject as they are to environmental influences, more so today than ever before in cellular history. But what would be more likely than most to ‘create’ confusion in a cell as it goes about its business of recognising ‘self’ and ‘other’; identifying threats; reading messages from its environment and from other cells and molecular entities?

Something which confuses us more than anything and which can have a long-lasting influence because it destroys our trust and makes us doubt ourselves, is when we are tricked! One of the major influences in our lives today, from in utero until death, for some more than others, is pharmaceutical drugs. And many of these drugs, probably most, work on the basis of ‘tricking’ the body into accepting them as ‘self’ when in fact they are ‘other,’; tricking the body into thinking they are ‘safe,’ when often they are not, and in essence functioning in our bodies as ‘imposters,’ which is what they are.

Most drugs are made from synthetic chemicals, compounds, molecules, structures, which are not found in nature but are synthesized by medicinal chemists in pharmaceutical industry labs.  The reason this happens is because a natural ingredient cannot be patented but a synthetic can. It is all about profit, sourced in an arrogant disregard for the wisdom of the body.

Have you ever wondered why drugs have ‘side effects?’  It is because a natural drug will be able to ‘dock’ perfectly with the cell, to ‘fit’ with the cell as nature intended and for the ‘conversation’ to then take place which will lead to the drug having an effect. Synthesized drugs are not natural and therefore cannot ‘dock’ with a cell as nature intended and so the ‘misfit’ or ‘partial fit’ is what leads to side-effects.

One imagines that a natural drug docking perfectly with a cell will be able to have a clearer conversation than the synthetic version, which must, by its nature be less well ‘understood’ by the cell with which it is trying to communicate. With cancer rates now one in two as opposed to one in ten in 1900, and the development of the pharmaceutical industry now just over eighty years old, one can only wonder how much of a part this plays.

We know already with iatrogenic, or doctor or medical induced, as the third biggest killer with the biggest factor being pharmaceutical drugs, that prescribed medication is often dangerous if not deadly.

Adverse reactions to legally-prescribed drugs is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. According to the American Medical Association, legally prescribed pharmaceuticals kill approximately 106,000 hospitalized patients annually, are responsible for an estimated 198,000 related annual deaths and necessitate 23% of all hospitalizations.

If a body subjected to ‘invaders’ in the form of ‘imposters’ as drugs, then depending on sensitivity, would it be surprising if some cells just become so confused that they lose their ability to identify who is friend and who is foe and resort to a paranoid position of ultimate defence, picking up some of the traits of the invaders and resorting to deception, disguise and desperation in order to survive.
Perhaps those people who survive such ‘civil wars’ and rogue rebellions as cancer, are those who, for whatever reason, have a capacity to ‘remember’  and more importantly, to re-member, at the cellular level, who and what they are. Given the power of the mind and its impact on how our body works, one can presume that a similar level of understanding, at the mind level and the heart level, our spiritual source, can play an important part. What you think is what you are at every level, down to the molecular.

 The same applies to us as complete human beings which is why, close and supportive relationships and solid social support systems are so important.

People matter but sometimes some people will matter more than others because they are the ones with whom we are truly connected in a meaningful, loving relationship.

And our cells matter for they are the foundation of all that we are in this material world anyway.

One can also wonder, given the capacity of our cells to receive and process ‘messages’ what effect it has on them when our mind sends out messages to our body that we fear, hate, distrust, reject or dismiss any part of it. We would not do that to someone we love and with whom we have a meaningful relationship, but so many do it to their bodies.

To be fair, materialistic (based on a simple understanding of the body) and mechanistic science/medicine encourages it with a 'war-like' stance toward disease and a battlefield approach to symptoms. It is the system as it stands and systems drive behaviour.

And because most people put a great deal of faith in science/medicine,t he faith they once put in religion, that is  the most common approach and what people instinctively do when faced with a symptom or a disease, both of which are the language the body uses to ‘talk’ to us and the vehicle it uses to express what needs to be expressed – the source of the dis-ease.

We not only need to work on our relationship with others but we need to work on our relationship with ourselves, at all levels, including the cellular, if we are to be fully connected and in harmony with the cosmic process. In fact, one could argue, that connecting with and remaining in harmony with, our cells, will contribute to greater harmony in general – as within, so without.

Things happen, relationships change, circumstances change, we change but in this life it is us and the magical cosmos of our cellular construct and identity which are in it together for the long haul.  We may lose everything but as long as we live we will have our body and that relationship will be the one which ultimately supports us the most, whatever else life may bring.

Look upon your body not just as your best friend, but as your only lasting friend, for in essence, it is. You came into this world as one and your suffering is as one. When you leave this world you will leave your body behind but in this world you and your body will always be one.

Why Homeopathy continues to grow

The core reason why the opposition to Homeopathy will fail is that Homeopathy works. If it had not proven to be effective it would have disappeared long ago.

I believe most people are reasonably intelligent and endowed with common sense, most of the time and never more so than when it comes to their health and particularly the health of their children. No-one would bother doing something which was ineffective, particularly, and this is the important part, when the methodology is controversial. Many people do things which are ineffective or even unhealthy because their doctor tells them to do it but they can accept this because within the social paradigm, they are 'behaving' they are 'doing what they are told,' they are being 'obedient.'

Anyone who looks 'outside the medical box' to explore other methodologies is showing independence of mind, courage, curiosity, determination and for many, desperation because Allopathy has failed.

However, none of them would bother 'disobeying' unless their needs were being met. That is common sense.

The campaign against Homeopathy began in the early 20th century in the US and was driven by the medical/pharmaceutical industry. It was largely successful in having Homeopathy sidelined but not eradicated. Meanwhile Homeopathy continued to grow in use around the world.

The Europeans, such a sensible lot, have never wavered in their use of Homeopathy and it is only in the past decade or so that a crusade against Homeopathy began mainly in the UK but to lesser levels in some other countries like Australia.

None of it equals the fervour some Brits have managed to muster in their campaign although there too it will be largely ineffective, beyond perhaps removing it from the national health service, because Scotland is unlikely to follow suit, those sensible Scots, and neither will Europe or Ireland so the British will be able to consult Homeopaths until their country comes to its senses. The UK has long been a bastion for Homeopathy and will be again.

The American crusade and the current British crusade have done little to damage Homeopathy as a whole. It has, overall, continued to grow in acceptance and use. One of the biggest growth areas today is India and the Chinese are following in fast suit. The Indians have Ayurveda which has held its ground as Allopathic medicine has found a place and the Traditional Chinese Medicine has done the same. In both India and China minds are open enough to seek to weave together the best of Allopathic medicine with their own traditional medicine. Each are doing the same with Homeopathy.

Homeopathy has steadily grown in use in South America and is being recognised in Africa. There are reasons for the success of Homeopathy in such less developed countries and they include beyond the crucial fact - THEY WORK:

1. Homeopathic remedies are cheap.

2. Treatment is, unlike Allopathy, never an expensive course of medication taken for years or life.

3. The Homeopathic remedies are durable in ways pharmaceuticals are not - they don't have a use-by date and remedies more than 100 years old have been used and found effective. There are some minor storage considerations but that is all.

4. Homeopathic Remedies do no harm unlike pharmaceuticals which all have side-effects and potentially dangerous ones, particularly for people who have diets low in nutrition and whose bodies are compromised by things like malaria. This means that someone who is given a remedy will not be in a situation of requiring medical intervention or hospitalisation because of side-effects.

5. Consultations are infrequent and only one may be needed so access to a Homeopath is less of a demand.

6. Homeopathy does not require complicated, expensive and heavy equipment and so Homeopathy is portable to a greater degree than Allopathy.

7. Homeopathy works not just for physical conditions but for emotional and psychological - it treats the whole body and an effective remedy is likely to cure more than one condition, often those of chronic duration which years of Allopathic treatment have failed to cure.

All of which is why Homeopathy is growing in use and it is also seeing a resurgence in the United States where it has been included as part of the Allopathic move to Integrative medicine and in the public move toward non-allopathic medicine in general.

Excerpt: Over the five years to 2012, the Homeopaths industry has grown at a rapid pace, bolstered by increasing consumer acceptance of alternative therapies such as homeopathy. Defined as the practice of alternative medicine that aims to stimulate the body's innate healing processes, an estimated 4.8 million people used homeopathy in 2006, according to a 2007 survey (most recent data available) by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). IBISWorld research indicates that these numbers have only grown, with revenue generated by homeopaths projected to increase at an annualized rate of 7.6% to $339.9 million over the past five years, including anticipated growth of 7.2% in 2012 alone, according to IBISWorld industry analyst Anna Son.

Organizations such as the Council of Homeopathic Certification (CHC) have worked hard to create Homeopaths industry standards and licensing professionals for the practice. This helped spur demand and create an avenue for more homeopathic professionals in the United States, Son says.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/7/prweb9714278.htm

Why is American culture the most fearful and paranoid in the world.

In response to an article by Noam Chomsky on the high levels of fear and paranoia in the United States.

Most people who visit the US are struck by the fear/aggression in the society and in individuals, both hidden to some degree by an affability but scratch the surface and there they are.

Anyone who spends a long time in the US, or who lives there as a foreigner, with any sort of self-awareness cannot but be struck by the paranoia and fear in the culture which you just don't find in other developed nations. You don't even find it in undeveloped nations. Aggression is usually a response to fear and so the tendency of Americans to aggression, and often completely unnecessary aggression, both at individual, social and national levels reflects this underlying fear.

One could perhaps argue that 'leaving home too young' and 'cutting the apron strings' with Mother England, founded a naive, adolescent culture which, because fate handed it wealth and power too soon and too easily, never really 'grew up.'

On this theme, I did ponder the American propensity to 'size' when it came to food and drink, portions, cups, plates of dimensions you just don't see anywhere else. Why does a cupcake need to be enormous? Why does a drink need to be in a bucket? Why are portions on a plate big enough for two and sometimes three normal people? Why such infatuations with sweet food and drinks, fast-food (junkfood) and for things to be bigger, faster, sweeter than they ever need to be?

From a psychological perspective all of it 'creates' the sort of 'world' in which a twelve-year old lives or wants to live.

Another 'adolescent' factor is the pervasive culture of bullying in American schools, a theme repeated ad nauseam in American movies and always running the same sorts of scripts which clearly kids of all ages face not just throughout school but also in university (college), that of the one who is different: smaller, fatter, uglier, poorer, blacker, smarter, dumber - different, and who is persecuted and ridiculed and yet who, through some gift, talent, skill, fate, luck, good fortune etc., succeeds and gains power etc. The troubling thing is that when they gain power they usually take revenge in some way. Revenge being expected in the culture of fear and aggression and its power dynamic.

Little wonder that so many of the young people who take a gun and slaughter teachers, fellow students, unknown students and school staff, as often as not have been the one who was different and who was mocked, ostracised and rejected. Not everyone gets a 'movie ending' and that means the only way one can gain power is with a gun! It is all tragically predictable.

There have been some interesting books written by Americans on this pervasive culture of aggression and rejection in US schools, present in ways and degree which is just not found in other developed nations; plain old-fashioned cruelty actually, and its outcomes but most Americans would never have read them. Then again, with semi-literacy rates so high and wages so poor how could they have that opportunity? This is where ignorance may be bliss but it is potentially deadly bliss.

And this intolerance is also sourced in fear, as is the aggression it breeds.

There is a naivete to many Americans. Of course there are exceptions and some brilliant thinkers and writers, but they are not the norm. The centuries have in fact brought greater insularity and ignorance along with more wealth and power so that even the segment of the American population which could be self-aware and insightful has diminished. The fact that the US has the worst public education system in the developed world plays a part and with the highest levels of semi-literacy in the developed world you combine poor educational skills with ignorance born in religion and insularity and a lack of knowledge of the outside world: 80% of Americans do not possess a passport.

Because of this most Americans do not know they have the poorest quality of life in the developed world - on average and that their nation offers them the worst working conditions; social welfare; education; infrastructure and social cohesion of any developed nation.

Beyond the historical cultural inheritance there are a number of factors which would breed fear:

. a country with a ridiculously armed citizenry, awash with weapons with the highest rate of gun deaths and massacres in the world where the most dangerous places are schools and shopping centres. Why would you not fear for yourself, your children and those you love?

. a country with no universal health care where illness can lead to bankruptcy and the loss of your home. Some 68% of bankruptcies in the US are because of illness and medical costs. Why would you not live in terror of falling ill?

. a country with an ineffective and inadequate social welfare safety net where, if you fall, as people in the Third World do, you fall in the gutter. The lack of the sort of social welfare safety nets that other developed nations have is sourced in the peculiar 19th century belief still held by Americans, that poverty is self-inflicted. That combines with a deluded paranoia that social welfare equals socialism which equals communism and communism still terrifies Americans despite the fact the Soviet Union fell in a heap many years ago and China is now a capitalistic society, albeit, not a democracy. Why would you not fear falling into the gutter?

. a country where universal quality education does not exist. If you are poor and live in a poorer area you get poorer education which makes any sort of progress difficult and a fear of the future natural. Why would you not fear you will be trapped in poverty?

. a country where a university education can be such an economic burden, unless you are wealthy, that it cripples you for life. Why would you not fear what debt might bring?

. a country where worker rights are so poor, and virtually no union representation to help you, where you can be sacked without recourse and future job opportunities limited. Why would you not fear losing your job?

. a country where the rich rule and worker conditions are disgraceful because of it. The lowest minimum wage in the developed world; least holidays, sick leave and forget about paternal and maternal leave and compassionate leave and all of the other considerations which people get in the rest of the developed world as a right. Why would you not fear for your job and your future?

. a country with the most corrupt political system in the developed world where the lobbying system purchases political power, including the presidency, and the rich get paid off for their donations with tax breaks which would be illegal in any other developed nation. Why would you not fear government?

. a country where millions of illegals are allowed to work threatening the working poor.  compared to the rest of the developed world the US has massively high levels of poor and working poor and a very small middle class.  Some 49% of Americans live beneath the poverty level. Why would you not fear poverty?

. a country where the race issue has never been really resolved, but simmers underneath and fuels some of the resistance to adequate social welfare because most blacks are poor. And people tend not to live in mixed suburbs in the way that they do in many other nations and so again, ignorance fuels fear. Why would you not fear the unknown?

. a country with the worst media in the developed world and one of the worst in the world where news is hard to find, let alone real information, and what is presented as news is 'infotainment' of a sensationalist, fear-inspiring, divisive, finger-pointing, bigoted, narrow-minded kind. Anyone who watches American news would live in fear and become paranoid.

. in addition, fear is always greater in the face of the unknown. Americans have been brought up to believe that life in the US is as good as it gets - that they have it the best. How true this may ever have been is irrelevant because it is certainly not true today and has not been for a long time, but, if all you know is the US, and, as an ordinary citizen you experience how poor the quality of life is and yet you believe this is as good as it gets and you have no way of correcting that erroneous belief, life must seem even more threatening. Why would you not fear if what you have fails on so many counts and you believe that outside it is worse?

Beyond the practical sources of fear one could ponder the part that religion plays, and a smoting, smiting, angry, vengeful, fear-driven, hating kind of religion which is evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity.  Why would you not fear eternal damnation and all those deemed other?

Is fear a part of the karmic inheritance of the US; its astrological makeup; something in the energy of the earth; a cultural psychological wound where the genocide against the indigenous people has never been addressed or healed and the guilt inherent in that, albeit unconscious, permeates the society........

Who can say? But the reality is that even on the most basic and practical of levels Americans have far more to fear than citizens of other developed nations and one suspects that the fear/rage/paranoia are often projected out onto 'less threatening' things like zombies and aliens and fuels the Prepper Movement which gives people the illusion that they are in control of their lives and in the doing, diminishes their fear.

What one can say is that this level of fear and paranoia is so great it has the potential to de-stabilise the country in dangerous ways.  Many Americans fear those outside - first the English, then the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, pick an enemy, but the reality is the true enemy is within. In a country with such high levels of fear and paranoia, combined with ignorance and insularity and more than 300million guns, many of them military assault weapons, the potential for civil war is far greater than any other threat. Perhaps the Preppers are more right than we know.

http://www.alternet.org/comments/noam-chomsky-why-americans-are-paranoid-about-everything-including-zombies#disqus_thread

Actions speak louder than words and why everyone needs a dog.

How do you know your dog cares about you? By the way it acts. Humans are no different. They may have recourse to words but the true indicator is how they act towards you.

Relationships change slowly and it is not necessarily anyone's fault, because people change for all sorts of reasons, often without their knowing, or being aware, because of circumstance and experiences, but, the first signs in your relationship with someone else that they are beginning to care less about you, will come from their actions.

It can be hard to recognise the small 'signs' that a relationship is changing and deteriorating, but they will always be there. If there are more and more actions which send a message of 'not really caring' about you, then the relationship will continue to deteriorate.

No matter how many excuses or allowances you make for them or what is going on in their life, or tell yourself it will pass, it will be the actions which indicate the direction the relationship is taking.

The 'death by a thousand cuts' which is so common in relationships is why marriages fail after decades; friendships fall apart after decades and relationships with parents, children or even siblings, suddenly fall in a heap. People stop caring about you for all sorts of reasons and as often as not it may have nothing to do with you, or who you are or what you have done. It just happens.

But as sudden as it may appear, it was not really sudden and when people look back they can often identify when things began to change and the actions did not echo the words nor indicate a relationship of real love and deep caring. But by then it is too late. Years have passed, sometimes decades, where things that should have been said have not been said; where behaviour which should not have been accepted has been accepted; where issues which demanded attention have been swept under the rug, and then they find themselves in the wreckage of a relationship.

That is not to say relationships cannot be rebuilt and when they are they are better, stronger, deeper and more soulful than they have ever been. But many relationships cannot and one can only wonder if awareness had been present earlier and courage found sooner, if more relationships could have been saved before they ended in tears.

Which no doubt is why so many people keep dogs as pets and come to love them in such a deep way, because dogs never fail in showing you they care. Dogs do not change as humans do. They are constant. They will never let you down, find you wanting, change their minds, see another human they love better, judge you, criticise you, condemn you or just fall out of love with you because they are tired, troubled, unwell or sick of this life.

I like the thought that dog backwards is god and since what I call god is absolute love I think we have dogs in our lives to love and support us when others do not. It is not that I am such a dog person although I do like them,  have have loved a few in my time, but I prefer not to have them living inside my house.

Bringing dogs into a pondering of relationship is because I can see the lesson they provide for us. All that unconditional love is a very precious thing given the frailties of human nature and this unpredictable world in which we live.

Why opposites attract

We have all heard the saying: Opposites attract. What most don’t know is that there is a biological and evolutionary impetus for that.

Opposites attract for more reasons you might imagine and for very good reasons in an evolutionary sense and the contraceptive pill might to contributing to an increase in immune disease and compromising immune function.

I am reading Secrets of your Cells, by Sondra Barrett, and she talks about the part that smell plays in bringing men and women together and the part that the contraceptive pill plays in interfering with the bodily and evolutionary wisdom of that process.

It is not that Barrett is making the connections I have, but reading what she says about the part that smell plays in bringing together a man and a woman who will offer their child the ‘best’ immune function in a biological sense, they seem to make a great deal of sense.

Research with mice showed that identical looking mice only mated with mice of a different genetic strain and the way they ‘knew’ the other was different was through smell. ‘Extensive research using an ‘electronic nose’ to discriminate the volatile components in mouse urine indicated that urine from different genetic strains showed different odour types, and this was reflected in mouse mating behaviour.’

A study done in 1995 by Swiss biologist Claus Wedekind, explored the theory that  HLA (cellular identity and markers which indicate the quality of immune responsiveness and also provide a distinguishing characteristic reaching beyond the invisible microscopic ‘self’) differences were connected to sexual attraction between men and women.

The study proved the research to be correct which, as Barrett says, makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint:

‘Remember that HLA ID markers indicate a range of immune abilities and immune responsiveness. If we mate with someone who has very different self markers from ours, our offspring will inherit a more diverse immune capability than if we pair up with someone having similar markers.’

The researchers found that a woman’s ability to discern these differences is lost when she takes birth control pills. When the research was repeated with women who had been on the pill for the initial study, men whose ‘smell’ had been attractive, were now found to be repulsive.

Which raises the question not only of how the contraceptive pill impacts the ability of a woman to choose a man who best ‘suits’ her on many levels, biological as well as psychological, but whether or not men and women are marrying when they are ‘unsuited’ at a biological or evolutionary level and this then plays a part in infertility.

Much of infertility today is unexplained, at least by science/medicine. Perhaps the explanation is as simple as the fact that nature will inhibit unsuitable procreation in ways we do not perceive.

And when children are born to couples who are a ‘poor’ biological and evolutionary match, are they also likely to have compromised immune function which predisposes them to allergies, reactions, diseases and sensitivities that those born to biologically ‘well-matched’ couples simply do not face.

I find it all fascinating and a reminder of how much we do not know and how everything in nature works for a reason.

Walking a mile in life's shoes

The maxim, ‘walk a mile in the others shoes,’ sounds simplistic but it just reflects the reality that the theoretical may be insightful and important but it will never replace the experiential.

So many things happen in life and so many things pull us toward forming some sort of opinion, some more inclined by nature than others, but everyone does it.

There are the opinions sourced in the theoretical, the foundation of many of the greatest advances in human existence, both at the general and the individual, whether it involves raising children, slavery or the movement of the planets, and then there are opinions sourced in the experiential. The latter will always be the most substantive.

Science at its best works on the basis of opinions formed through theory which are then subjected to the experiential. Religion at its best does the same. Life does it automatically.

It becomes clear, well, to me anyway, that the reason life contains so much in the way of experience, more for some than for others, is that true understanding can only ever come from experience. In other words, you can know all there is to know and think for a thousand years about something, but until you experience it at a physical, psychological, emotional, sometimes spiritual and always circumstantial level where all of the senses are in play, you can never really understand it or the person who has had the experience.

It is one thing to think about something and another to experience it, to feel it in your own unique way. I have changed my mind about a couple of things in recent years where I did not understand someone’s situation and felt accountability was equally shared or not enough effort was made, only to find myself in the same sorts of situations and to realise that is not always the case.

Few would argue that a cricket coach who knew every shred of theory and had plenty of his own but had never played the game could be as effective or as knowledgeable as one who had both theory and experience. Few would argue that a doctor who knew all of the theory but who had never practised could be as qualified as one who had done both.

Nothing beats experience and in fact if you had to sacrifice theory for experience you would make a wise choice. But mostly we don’t And the fact is, there are many things we will never experience and many things we would never want to experience. And that should not stop us thinking about them or forming opinions, but it should make us think twice when we share those opinions with someone who has had the experience.

No-one who has not given birth can ever understand the experience of giving birth and that means all men and many women. No-one who has never been divorced can really understand what it is like. No-one who has never faced the decision of an abortion, and that means all men and many women, can ever understand that experience.

 No-one who has never experienced depression, anxiety or the death of someone they love deeply, or the loss of someone they love deeply for other reasons, will ever be able to truly understand what it feels like. It is just not possible. You can read all you want about anything or any place in the world, but until you are physically there, emotionally and psychologically exposed, you will never be able to know what it is like, whether it is India or Anxiety; Poverty or Wealth; Depression or Disability, and therein lies something which needs to be appreciated.

In other words, the lesson which has come to me in recent years is, if you have not had a particular experience then form your opinions cautiously and leave them open, recognising that those who had had the particular experience will always know more than you can, however insightful your opinions and theories may be.

And on the other side, have compassion for those who have not experienced what you have if and when you try to explain to them what you have been through, because without the same or similar experience, they will never be able to truly understand.

That is just the nature of things. The other important lesson is that even when you experience something it does not mean that your experience is exactly the same as someone else. We are all unique.

What it does mean though is that the more we experience in life the more we deepen our capacity to understand ourselves and others. Particularly with experiences which are painful, for they dig deeper than any into the depths of heart and mind.
No experience is wasted. Value them all and weigh them carefully with your theories.

Fear as an evolutionary force

A friend asked me the other day what I had learned from having Fear as something of a nemesis in my life.  I said it had pushed me to keep learning and understanding and prevented me from finding a place to settle.

And then I read today, in a book I have just started, The Basic Code of the Universe, the science of the invisible, in physics, medicine and spirituality, by Massimo Citro, MD, the following:

‘ Knowing comes from the need to survive and from curiosity. Behind both lies fear. Each form is determined by function, the function of need and the necessity of fear, without which there would be no evolution. Knowledge is also a medicine for fear….’

And so, yes, fear is more than a physiological response to danger, it is an evolutionary driving force, present in greater form in some than in others. We are all called to different paths and to learn in different ways. Astrology demonstrates that quite clearly.

Understanding and meaning can assuage fear and both are acquired through knowledge and curiosity is no more than a yearning and search for knowledge, whatever the impetus may be.

We are born fearing the unknown to some degree. When we make  known we come to understand and we lose fear, or we gain a belief that we have a measure of control. We can only manage fear of the unknown by removing the uncertainty and making known that which we fear.

That is why if we are in the dark and fearful, when we turn on the light, in an instant we become less fearful because we can see, identify, know in ways the darkness would not allow.