Guest guest Posted February 29, 2000 Report Share Posted February 29, 2000 Greetings Ram, I'm delighted that you find my posts so congenial. Yet there is a thread running through them which I think may sooner or later cause us to have a public disagreement! I'm referring to statements like > our culture which is > heavily invested in maintaining the > illusion that we are autonomous doers > (we would clearly have problems with the > ideas of criminal and moral > responsibility if it was thrown out) I believe that one consequence of recognizing the ego as illusory is that the whole business of morality --- what it means for us to be accountable to each other --- has to thought out again from the ground up. I don't think its an exaggeration to say that all ethical codes to date are based on the idea that we are autonomous doers; how would ethics work in a society where everybody recognized that we are not? How would ethics work if we all recognized that 'all things follow from the necessity of the divine nature'? In case anyone is interested there is a book which sheds some very interesting historical light on this question, _The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind_ by Julian Jaynes. The `origin of consciousness' here is the emergence of the ego which Jaynes maintains (very convincingly) is something that took place very recently (2500 -- 3000 years ago, depending on the culture) and the `bicameral mind' refers to an extraordinary theory he has developed about how societies were organized before people came to believe that they were autonomous doers. According to Jaynes the emergence of the ego took place after the Vedas were composed but before the Upanishads, after the Illiad but before the Odyssey and the book which records the emergence itself better than any other is, of all things, the Old Testament. In particular the Law of Moses is a fruit of the breakdown of the bicameral mind. That is, ethics emerged with the ego (and I'm inclined to suspect that it will disappear with the ego as well but it's anybody's guess what will replace it). Regards, Patrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 29, 2000 Report Share Posted February 29, 2000 That is, ethics emerged with the ego (and I'm inclined to suspect that it will disappear with the ego as well but it's anybody's guess what will replace it). Regards, Patrick I love what you are saying Patrick! When the ego disappears, no one remains to care what is being replaced with what. Guessing is the favorite past time of the mind to keep itself endlessly occupied. Smile! You are on candid camera. :--). Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.