In each person, our attitude and our perception of everything around us is determined by a certain mechanism: they are variants of a longing to “receive something.” If we “read” inside a person, we can reduce it to very simple principles: “I want”, “you are going to give me…”
There doesn’t seem to be anything more to people than that.
In various degrees and in various categories – from receiving the most basic to survive, through receiving “status”, “power” and “honours”.
Or even, associated with the latter, receiving new knowledge or discoveries-sciences, arts, theology… Each and every action – including thoughts and sensations – under the same principle.
That said, it is simply normal that when we question the meaning of something, our sensation translates into “What am I going to receive?” Ultimately, in asking about the meaning of our existence, we are really asking: What do I “get” for being alive? Food, sex, shelter, cars, clothes, trips, respect, medals, awards, power…?
Another type of “life” as a “reward” when the current experience ends?
Even more so, from whom do I receive it?
The experience of humanity in general, or in other words, all types of “reception” accessible to people, have delivered a “general” conclusion until now: life has no sense or definitive meaning.
Or put in another way, nothing we receive is definitive or satisfactory forever. Once we receive what we want, the sensation is “behind” in a very short time and our desires “change” – or the need arises to “absorb” or “steal” from what we see around us an aspiration that we did not detect before – in a process that leads to a “dead end” of total dissatisfaction.
It is not strange that this development mechanism has created a global civilisation with access to all kinds of satisfiers, but in general, dissatisfied and with a widespread feeling among the population: of decline and decadence.
It is this “receptive” nature, and this process by which it develops, that is at the root of everything that baffles or makes us uncomfortable. It is behind inequality and the fact that “abundance” is in a few hands and there is a large number of the population with barely the basics or even without the basics compared to the majority. Unlike other animals, people’s reception is “exclusive” – to feel that they receive something, they have to feel that others similar to him or her are not receiving it – and the reception of satisfaction does not “satisfy” or ” fills” a person’s longing, it only makes it greater. It makes him feel like he “deserves” more – and is always growing.
We can explain the arms race, industrialisation and the evolution of consumption based on the “growth” of this characteristic of people, therefore, also the ecological “imbalance” is only a consequence of a property in people that does not “match” the functioning of the system that surrounds us.
Ultimately, this “property” of “humans” is behind the uncertainty that future inspires in us.
Or another way to define that uncertainty: in our imagination the possibilities for what we can receive or even “desire” are “exhausted.” Since what keeps us going is not what we have, but what we hope to receive at some future time – that defines our sense of “future.”
This may herald a “collapse” or “darkness” of civilisation – and we have a history of two world wars. However, it is not that we do not know how our property of receiving develops and how it seems to contain hints within itself – like a “seed” – of the “fruit” it will become after the process is “finished”:
Our way of receiving goes through different stages: at first it is unconscious of the fact of reception and where what it receives comes from and it begins to accumulate up to a certain limit in which a second stage emerges that rejects the sensation that it receives from “something” or “someone” and seeks his own “merit” generating the sensation of “rejection” and “imbalance or difference” with what surrounds him. In a third stage, he begins to “experiment” and “emulate”, mixing the previous stages in various forms and combinations. In the end, the developing property resembles the “opposite” property in its actions and can deal with it “directly” without “spoiling” – as “peers” are treated.
This is just one way of expressing the process, which can also explain the epochs of humanity – gatherers and hunters, farmers, industrialisation, globalisation…etc. – and is analogous to the stages of a person’s experiences and perception. In the end, all our pursuits increase in quantity and quality and become simple “pretence” that we replace with another and another… until we reach the “core” of our existence. As the “peel” of a fruit, destined to be “discarded”, but which “protects” it while it reaches its “optimal” state.
Obviously, those who accumulate the most experiences among humanity are destined to guide this process through example and actions. And the stages in which others “force” them to take their “place” follow the same pattern of “reception” but in a negative way – cutting off the reception of positions in academia and the arts, then the right to belong and remuneration in general, to the point of denying the reception of the most basic and even of their “similarity” with other people, in the “final solution”…
Even in its most “horrendous” form, it follows the same “relentless” pattern of development…
And obviously, in the end it is a development to which all people are destined.
It can be expressed as a “Name” that contains the development of the desire reception from the “beginning” to its final stage and that is “unpronounceable” or “ineffable” – there is no way to perceive it from the reception – “in itself” – by Therefore it does not make “sense” to express it.
And it will not make sense until the last person on earth has reached the end of his development and corrected his “property”.
It is because of this “root” that no person stops “growing” in “importance” in the way he perceives himself. It is something inevitable and that does not “stop” even when after “bad” experiences, we want to stop it and “stay where we are”, sooner or later it will cause “disappointments” and we will have to “throw it away” in favour of a pretence of more “quality” – which will later be “discarded”…etc. But if we direct it toward the end goal through examples and actions—education—then the process can be “quick” and “voluntary.”
In principle, if someone grows surrounded by the appropriate examples towards the definitive objective during their first years, then their development will be “accelerated” and each “obstacle” or “pretence” will be simply another “ascension”, almost automatically, until they unfold the final form of all its qualities and inclinations in a “short” time.
No global generation has received this type of education – but in a single generation everything can change.
It is the need towards which we are heading anyway: an education that not only “eliminates” anxiety about the future, but builds it with its actions.
Snakeeskin 