Reality, Stupidity, Hypocrisy And Humanity by Santosh Jha (read any book txt) 📕

short-term gain at the cost of extinction of system itself. The best example is the environmental degradation in contemporary world.

We can understand these aspects by carefully and patiently looking at our own body-mind system. We are wired for a reactionary consciousness that is guided primarily by reward and punishment sentiments. We always wish to feel rewarded and avoid punishment. This is simple demand-supply economics. Our wishes are demands on our body-mind system and if we are supplied with optimal quantity and quality of what we wished, we feel rewarded and happy. If the supplies are not commensurate, we feel punished and irritated. A child is usually happy because his or her demands are simple and few. However, deny a toy demand to a kid and he or she shall be instantly irritated.

This reward-punishment causality or what we can accept as demand-supply relationship is cardinal to our general wellness; we are designed this way. This becomes more complex and varied as we grow and mature. Our demands get diversified and complex and it is only natural that in a physical milieu, where humans have become many many times more than what our dwindling resources can support, there is always huge competitiveness for supply availability. The growing gap in demand and supply is bound to enhance system entropy and hence our growing irritation and conflicts. This situation is worsened beyond control when resource-inequality peaks’ like in contemporary world. When 5 percent people monopolize 95 percent of moneys and wealth, calamity is inevitable. This shall lead to finality of extinction of human system itself.

Scientists have been studying the very disastrous entropic symptoms of depression in global population, irrespective of geography. It is believed that over 75 percent of global population are or have been in and out of either short-term or long-term depression. Science maintains that depression is basic entropic symptom of a stressed system, where the demand side has been putting pressure on disproportionate supplies. This ‘gap’ may be cognitive but it matters as for most practical purpose, ‘Perception Is Reality’ for a subjective self. In researches, it has been found that most lonely and depressed people complained that they loved and cared people but they were not getting back the same. It is a deficit, which may well be real but often, its perception is also disproportionate! This subject has been dealt with in detail in author’s eBook, ‘Be Lonely, Be Your Best’, available for unrestricted download, like all 40 eBooks of the author.

The ancient spiritual system in Oriental world stressed on simple and minimalist living so that there is less pressure on demand side and therefore, less propensity of consciousness for entropic feelings, assuming that supply side is always less than demand. In Yogic philosophy there is detailed explanation of mechanisms to describe how demand-supply gap is the core trouble for human consciousness and therefore, every person and society in general must have demand-moderation. The modern psychological perspective also mentions about the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle to have better poise and sanity in personal and well as societal life and living. The ‘minimalist’ approach to life-living is also a pop trend.

However, we in the new millennium have to be more aware and better endowed to handle this all. We surely do not accept to stand in ‘deniability’ of the cardinal principle of an enterprise – that is maximization-optimization of proceeds of labor and investment. As a conscious person, we surely do not have to accept the classical position that ‘A System Low in Demand is the Best Option’. Why? Because, our proposition is optimization of wellness and there cannot be optimization if we insist on ‘Low Demand’ causality of our life-living enterprise. We would rather work out a holistic model of ‘Conscious-Enterprise’ that weighs up and factors in every possible element and design and devise such a model of communication to our consciousness that shall be all-weather optimization mechanism. We would rather accept ‘Demand-Supply-Sanity’ and discretionary control over all production processes of the system, instead of a perpetual ‘Low-Demand’ system.

We have already talked about how not only our body-mind system, consciousness and milieus but every system out there is a randomized reality. Our body-mind homeostasis is always in different capacities, the milieus we live in may stand sometimes in our favor and sometimes against us and we cannot do much about it. Also, our consciousness may also be in different states. Therefore, what our conscious self shall do is first assess what is the current status of our body-mind system? How much demand pressure it can safely accept? How is the current milieus, suitable or not for a particular demand? Also, how are the elements that affect or shape up supplies? Are they favorable or not?

The simple plan is to have a very aware and consciously logical and objective assessment of all possible elements that form the ‘Causality’ of a systemic process. If things are favorable for system optimality, it shall be stupid of us to opt for ‘Low Demand’. That itself have entropic outcome on our consciousness. Therefore, what we are proposing is that we need to be very aware to assess with high objectivity and logicality the system-readiness and then suitably decide what to communicate to our consciousness so that we could attain the best possible optimum output.

For example, suppose I have a close friend with whom I am having troubles. I am feeling offended and even outraged at times because I feel that he is not understanding and accepting my viewpoint and position. Also, I feel he is being reactionary and unnecessarily critical of my behavior-action for him. There may well be other conflicting issues between me and him. So, what I do? What I communicate to my conscious self so that situation could stop going to worse and amicability and understanding could be restored. This is a very common situation for most of us. We all know, vast majority of literature, be it poetry or prose, has been ascribed to this primary human causality that we often have most conflicts and confusion with those whom we love most and find closest to our lives. So, what we should do, ideally?

This is the situation, where troubles start and deepen because very often, close relationships and their interactions become a routine of our subconscious selves and they get carried out without we seldom consciously assessing them and presiding over their optimality questions. What we need to do is apply the principles we have discussed so far. That we list here step by step.

The first thing to do is to sit back, relax and ensure that consciously, you segregate two layers of your consciousness. You summon your ‘subconscious’ to stand a trial but not before you ensure that your ‘conscious’ self is in the mode of an objective, logical and impartial ‘Judge’. This we ensure by ensuring that we have practiced enough hours of relaxed, calmed and inward reflections. The simple idea is that we realize that there were troubles in relationships because our subconscious brain states went on judging things from a ‘Media’ that probably engendered ‘inappropriate’ communication. So, we consciously change the ‘Media’ to alter and then present a fresh communication.

How we do it. We all know our neural plexus fires (connects to other neuron) in different frequencies and at the root of all our thoughts, emotions and subconscious attitude is this neural communication. Somehow, these neural firings are auto-process ‘Media’ and ‘Communication’ structures. They decide our internal thought-emotion milieu without we ever consciously being aware. The neural electrical pulses have different frequencies depending on the levels of activity the body-brain has to do.

So usually, when relationships issues confront me, my subconscious mind naturally becomes over-active; a precedent of ‘reactionary milieu’ already being there, beta waves take over, deciding my behavior and emotions. So, very consciously, I have to relax and stabilize myself to ensure that I am in conscious mind state where my brain waves are in lower Theta or Delta frequencies. These frequencies are non-reactive, receptive, analytical and amenable to reflective mode. This brain wave change comes through calm and consciously thoughtful process, which we may call meditation but it is just a conscious choice.

Secondly, when I ensure that I am in an ideal internal milieu, where my body-brain ‘Media’ is suitable for a reflective and analytical behavior, I begin with me and use a logical communication with my subconscious self, asking tough questions, whether my own behavior and actions are true, right and appropriate towards the person I have trouble with? This is never easy as always, subconscious self is prompt and prejudiced to present an advocacy and witnesses for ‘Self-Acquittal’. Therefore, ideally, I have to rely on a witness that is another objective person, who has seen me communicating with the person I have troubles with.

Then, after I have got sense of what probably I am doing wrong, I communicate with my subconscious self to suitably alter it next time onwards. I also practice this resolve many times so that new communication to my subconscious state is deep and thick. After that, I begin to assess whether the current physical, psychological and emotional milieu between me and that person I have troubles with is entropic or facilitative. We all know, between two people in relationship, there is an intangible psychological and emotional milieu that keeps changing in time and space. Our subconscious however does not always update these changes and seldom alters the behavior-action suitably. This only our conscious self can do for us. Therefore, I very logically and with high conscious content of compassion in my internal emotional space, assess the current psychological and emotional milieu between me and that person. This is the ‘media’ and if the media is entropic, it is only natural that my communication with him is also embedded with confusion, conflict and chaos.

Apart from this media, there is another dimension to the media, which is the internal psychological and emotional subconscious state of the person I have troubles with. I also have to very objectively and compassionately assess whether that person is settled in his life-living situations or is he going through some troubles – physically, psychologically and emotionally.

After conscious assessments of all possible ‘Causalities’ that stand between me and that person, I accept a situation logically and objectively about how is the current ‘Media’ around and between me and him and then suitably decide on an altered ‘Communication’ that shall help restore amicability and poise with him.

This is simple Homeostasis challenge and requirement of an Allostatic process to restore equilibrium. So, I may decide and suitably communicate to my subconscious mind that the current media between me and him is already entropic and as nothing concrete can be done in immediate time and space, I should consciously lower the ‘Level of Engagement’ with the person I have troubles with and wait compassionately for a time and space when the entropy level comes down and the milieu is right for engagement of fresh communication. This communication I shall repeat to my subconscious mind time and again in different ways of language, emotions and thoughtfulness so that my subconscious is communicated well about my new realism.

This is a broad way we have discussed here. Every person may decide on different modes of this process but the core idea is to have conscious awareness of all possible ‘Causalities’ about the current ‘Media’ and ‘Communication’ so that an altered new communication could be consciously and successfully launched to attain optimal wellness and excellence in our life-living. There is definitely no fixed position about a preferred choice of ‘Media’. There is always ‘suitability’ factor. A reactionary media is equally useful as is a thoughtful and relaxed media. It depends on task at hand. Similarly, it is not that entropy-expansive media is always bad and entropy-suppressive media is always good. If I have to take a decision about a key issue in life that requires definitive action, I have to rely on entropy-suppressive media because my decision must be logical