In metaphysical knowledge, reasoning can play no other role than that of occasional cause of intellection; the latter intervenes in a sudden, not continuous or progressive, way as soon as the mental operation, conditioned in turn by an intellectual intuition, possesses the quality or perfection that makes of it an effective symbol. ~ Frithjof Schuon

In the two days of winter that we had this weekend, the headlines were about cold-blooded iguanas going comatose and falling out of trees. The news stations were telling people how to care for the shivering iguanas.

I say that they are pests and should be killed on sight, humanely, of course, with an air rifle. They are not a native species and they alter the ecosystem in unnatural ways. The state condones and encourages that policy. Intelligence sometimes requires a Machiavellian attitude.

Talk talk

There are three ways to look at the political systems of the world. It is important to grasp the essences of things rather than manifestations.

The traditional view is that evil resides in men’s souls; nothing will improve unless people make efforts to live virtuous lives.

The essence of Liberalism is that talk and rational discussion will lead to social improvement.

The essence of socialism is that people are born good but society makes them bad. The “means of production” standard just misses the point. Many people materially hold this view without realizing it. For example, they may blame social media, or Hollywood, etc., and assume society would improve by eliminating them.

I say: In a traditional society everyone has a place and the social group has cohesion. People are not constantly blaming the “system” for personal problems.

There is no evidence that discussion has converged to a common world view and likewise no expectation that such a situation will ever come to pass. There are many obstacles to rational discussion. At that point, a spiritual authority, who knows the truth, must step in to settle the dispute.

If that fails, then the political power must step in with force, if necessary, only as a last resort.

Choosing and Willing

Thomas Aquinas makes a distinction between choosing and willing. Willing comes from a deep part of ourselves: we will the good, happiness, knowledge, being close to God, protecting one’s family, etc. Those are all legitimate aims and represents our True Will.

Choosing means to select the means to achieve what one wills. The choice may or may not be “free”. This is the gnomic will which deliberates courses of action. Clearly, the best choice is the one that fulfills one’s true Will. A choice is not free when it arises from ignorance, unexamined impulses, social pressures, and so on.

The Moral Burden

The IYIs (Intelligent yet idiot) assert, without any proof or evidence, that religions were invented by the people to give them assurance and peace of mind. Only a peer of a Tolkien can create such a complex world as are the major religions, and they are quite rare. The religions themselves claim to be founded by great spiritual leaders: the rishis of the Vedas, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed. That makes more sense and cannot be so easily dismissed. The greatest religions create lasting civilizations.

The metaphysical teachings, therefore, are very important because they demonstrate that there is a world view contrary to physicalism, consistent with itself, and common to the major religious traditions. That is the essence; the outer differences can be handled in a different way.

Moreover, the threat of Hell is the opposite of the “pie in the sky when you die” attitude. Atheists concede that their conversion to atheism lifts a huge moral burden off them. So that is the essence of atheism; it is an immoral position, not an intelligent system of thought.

Solidified Intelligence

With technology, the intelligence of a very few can be shared by the masses. Obvious examples include cell phones, computers, automobiles, and on and on. Very few know how any of those things work. When Rome fell to the goths, the knowledge of building aqueducts, hot baths, roads, etc., as well as administering a vast empire was lost. We know the results.

Even everyday tasks, that used to require actual intelligence, Sailing, which uses to require difficult navigation skills, now relies on GPS and google maps. Tuning a violin used to rely on a tuning fork and a feel for fifths, now can be done with a device that measures the actual frequency of the string.

Artificial Intelligence

As an alternative to authority and coercion, some believe that Artificial Intelligence can be used to rule society. There are many obstacles. AI does not know essences, only facts. So a human still has to program the AI to achieve a certain goal. Then the algorithm can analyze data to best achieve that goal.

Unfortunately, there are several limiting theorems, including:

• Gödel’s theorem. There may be desirable outcomes that the AI cannot prove.
• No free lunch theorem: There is no single algorithm that will work best in all scenarios
• Kraitchik’s paradox: A situation may arise in which both options appear equally good. Then the algorithm will go into an infinite loop because it cannot decide.

Thinking and Being

No matter how many times, and in how many ways, the distinction between thinking and being seems difficult for some people to make. They get stuck in a thought loop, quoting disparate authors, trying to resolve apparent contradictions in a verbal way. It cannot be done. Understanding arises only when thinking and one’s state of being coincide.

Recently I bought an iguana trap. I put some enticing food in it, better than what they eat in the wild. An iguana approached the trap. He could see and smell the food, so he tried to get at it, from the side. He kept bumping into the cage over and over again. Finally, in frustration, he walked away, leaving the food behind.

He did not realize that his entire approach was wrong. All he had to do was find the front of the cage, walk right in and be fed.

Don’t be that iguana.

The Cloud of Unknowing

I often recommend the Cloud of Unknowing for those getting starting in spiritual life. Its technique is to meditate on a simple world or phrase, like “love” or “God”. Unspiritual men believe that the darkness can be cleared away by thinking, but the author of the Cloud of Unknowing claims otherwise:

For the first time you lift your heart to God with stirrings of love, you will find only a darkness, and as it were, a cloud of unknowing. Whatever you do, this darkness and the cloud are between you and your God, and hold you back from seeing him clearly by the light of understanding in your reason and from experiencing him in the sweetness of love in your feelings. And so prepare to remain in this darkness as long as you can, always begging for him you love; for if you are ever to feel or see him, it must always be in this cloud and this darkness.

---