Free Will, Determinism, and Relational Will The Dark Side of Psychological-Psychiatric Ideologies: “In every regard, it seems, when we embrace determinism, we indulge our dark side!”

Wolfgang Pauli “To me it seems the most important and exceedingly difficult task of our time is to work on the construction of a new idea of reality!”[1]

It would seem “our reality” isn’t working all that well. Albert Einstein “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them!”[2]

Preamble: Cultural perspective on Free Will and Determinism

Long ago in 1968-69 I spent a school year in France. I learned quite a lot. I realized how different cultures can be when one day my French brothers, Pierre and Paul, told me they were going out to “rumble” with the communists. I should add that the image of Dorothy in the Wizard of OZ saying to her dog, toto, “Toto, I do believe we are no longer in Kansas flashed through my mind. A communist party doesn’t even exist in American politics. A well-documented cultural difference is between western individualist countries and collectivist countries such as the Philippines, Malaysia, and Japan. The Philippines has community values which aren’t found in the USA. The English language doesn’t have words equivalent to Bayanihan (helping others in a community context), Kapwa (shared identity), and loob (relational will). Several authors, such as David Hay, Kenneth Gergen, and Virgilion Enriquez, emphasize that “rational (independent) individualism” has morphed into a form of extreme individualism! Even the briefest glance at the photo below reveals that t’nalak is about identity and community – not the supernatural. In western academia “Rational Individualism” holds sway and the idea of free will – as Iain McGilChrist also notes – is a gross oversimplification which distorts the reality of being human by exaggerating the importance of individuality in a very sophisticated and complex society. Kenneth Gergen, David Hay and Virgilio Enriquez agree that “extreme individualism” (a term coined by D Hay) is an unhealthy stereotype-norm.

The Materialist Ideology: Free Will and Rational Individualism

Jeremiah Reyes has, perhaps, the best “description” of the materialist problem. Jeremiah Lasquety-Reyes, author & widely quoted expert on Filipino ethics siad, “Hi Charles, I completely agree with you that this extreme adherence to materialism is too restrictive and limiting, and frankly fails to capture so many richer aspects of human experience and psychology. It leaves the field of psychology all the poorer. I am myself looking for a framework that helps me confront it. Partly, I think an alternative metaphysics is needed, one that respects the reality and meaning of things like love, relationships, and the profound reality of other people as people and not just as a compound of atoms, chemicals, and neurons firing. Glad that we’re on the same page!”

Jeremiah Reyes’ explanation of materialism is more descriptive than Rene Guenon’s depiction, though Gurnon’s observation is uncannily historically accurate: “Rationalism in all its forms is essentially defined by a belief in the supremacy of reason, proclaimed as a veritable ‘dogma’, and implying the denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order, notably of pure intellectual intuition, and this carries with it logically the exclusion of all true metaphysical knowledge. This same denial has also as a consequence, in another field, the rejection of all spiritual authority,” (The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the Times) It is a bit mind-boggling that Gurnon’s emphasis on materialist “denial of everything supra-individual” turned out to be so accurate.

Long before, Nietzsche observed: “Ever since Copernicus man has been rolling down an incline, faster and faster, away from the centre – whither? … All science … is now determined to talk man out of his former respect for himself, as though that respect had been nothing but a bizarre presumption.”5 5 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Genealogy of Morals, Third Essay, XXV, p.291f

Arran Gare rounds out the understanding of materialism when he says: “To begin with, science abstracts from the rich diversity of the world a few abstract properties and takes this ‘columbarium of concepts, the graveyard of perceptions’ to be the true reality, portraying nature, as Whitehead put it, as ‘a dull affair, soundless, scentless, colourless; merely the hurrying of material, endlessly, meaninglessly.’7 It then portrays humans as nothing but machines, the effect of the meaningless motion of matter, and colours, scents, sounds and tastes as subjective sensations not part of the real world.”(p. 415 Arran Gare Review of McGilChrist)

Symbolism, Social Consciousness & Spirituality Sidelined and Marginalized[3]

Rene Guenon states that materialist ideology is the “denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order” (p.90) Guenon’s assessment is correct.

Kenneth Gergen, David Hay and Virgilio Enriquez agree that Rational Individualism (a political ideal) has morphed (from the Age of Reason to the Materialist Age) into a form of extreme individualism. Wikipedia has only three references to social consciousness – the most salient being Karl Marx. In western academia, “Rational Individualism” norm holds sway.

Both Rollo May and Elzbieta both indicate that “symbolism” and myths got sidelined and marginalized – in spite of the fact that Confucious, long ago, stated “Signs and symbols rule the world, not words nor laws,

As Guenon observed: “This same denial [of everything supra-individual] has also as a consequence, in another field, the rejection of all spiritual authority,” Similar to Rollo May’s observation that “Neither term, “symbol” or “myth,” even appeared in the index of the standard psychology textbooks,” spirituality has also been sidelined and marginalized in mainstream psychology! In a 700 plus page comprehensive ‘History of Psychology’ – titled “The Story of psychology” – by Morton Hull, and find there is not have one single reference to meaning, spirit, spirituality, or even religion. the comprehensive “reference handbooks” for Self and Identity, as well as, Social Psychology did not have even a single reference to either spirit, spirituality, or religion.

Another piece of evidence that spirituality was sidelined is the fact that, currently, spirituality is an “emerging field of research” according to most researchers into spirituality. “Psychological research on spirituality and religion has grown exponentially in recent years (Paloutzian & Park, 2013) . In the diversity of new research, “spirituality” has proven to be a complex and dynamic term that is challenging to define.” …

Spiritual Actualities (compassion, grieving, music, art) vs a Meaningless Artificial Abstraction – the “Supernatural” “Proper knowledge maps actualities of the real world!” – K Gergen

Materialist Fallacies and Delusional Thinking

Critique-Definist Fallacy endorsed by four prominent psychologists: My 2018 critique of materialist methods has been endorsed by the well-known researcher Dr Harold Koenig, the world-renowned psychologist Dr Paul Wong, Dr Stephen Farra, and Stefan Schindler. The critique centered on the Materialist Fallacy as explained by William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen: “A philosophical basis for this perspective is materialism, the belief that there is nothing to study because spirituality is intangible and beyond the senses.” That is a fallacy-delusion – specifically the Definist Fallacy. When you consider the concept of “death” – then following the materialist argument that things that are “intangible and beyond the senses” are not real then “Death” becomes a “figment of your imagination” – which is absurd, of course. The “Definist Fallacy-Delusion” occurs when someone unfairly defines a term so that a controversial position is made easier to defend – like defining spirituality as “intangible” – which uses “loaded terms” The Definist Fallacy is the same as the same as the “Persuasive Definition.” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

As Justice Rehnquist states, “It is not true if the major premise is not true!” What many academics apparently fail to comprehend is that the belief that “All spirituality is unreal” or “Spirituality does not exist” is delusional thinking as well as being extremely unhealthy.

The Supernatural as a Gross Oversimplification vs the Complexity of interconnections in the human brain

Besides having no real-world context-evidence, another methodology issue with the concept is that6 it is a gross oversimplification. Neuroscience research consistently demonstrates that the brain is intimately interconnected and phenomena such as morals or music have important interconnections with many regions of the brain and not the product of an isolated region solely responsible for behaviors. As Durkheim observed spiritual and religious beliefs are the genesis of morality in human evolution.

Funk and Gazzanigna: “Morality is a set of complex emotional and cognitive processes that is reflected across many brain domains. Some of them are recurrently found to be indispensable in order to emit a moral judgment, but none of them is uniquely related to morality…………Some of the emotions processed are more central to morality than others, but all emotions contribute to moral judgment given specific contextual situations…..The neural circuits of brain regions implicated in morality overlap with those that regulate other behavioral processes, suggesting that there is probably no undiscovered neural substrate that uniquely supports moral cognition.” Brain Architecture of human morality, Funk and Gazzanigna Current opinion in Neurobiology 2009 19:678-681)

Music is interconnected with singing, language and speech, as well as dancing – overlapping other processes. “Music is a core human experience and generative processes reflect cognitive capabilities. Music is often functional because it is something that can promote human well-being by facilitating human contact, human meaning, and human imagination of possibilities, tying it to our social instincts. Music cuts across diverse cognitive capabilities and resources, including numeracy, language, and space perception. In the same way, music intersects with cultural boundaries, facilitating our “social self” by linking our shared experiences and intentions.” (The evolution of music and human social capability Jay Schulkin, medical researcher, Greta B. Raglan Front Neurosci. 2014; 8: 292.)

“Supernatural” as an Artificial Abstraction-Distraction

When I asked my partner, who is a Filipina Catholic, if “God is supernatural?” She replied, “Yes.” I pointed out that from my research Jesus Christ never once used the word “supernatural” in the gospels and the concept of the holy Spirit in no way matches the materialist concept of the “Supernatural” – for example, Spirit and Truth – John 4:23-24; Spirit is Truth – John 5:6; or guidance – Luke 1:27. Then there are gifts of the Holy Spirit. In Catholic tradition, the seven gifts are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. Lastly, he fruits of the Holy Spirit are nine virtues that are believed to be the result of the Holy Spirit’s presence in a believer’s life, as described in Galatians 5:22-23. These fruits are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

Even worst, the supernatural comes with baggage – such as powers, superstitious nonsense, magic, mental illness. Dr Koenig highlights the fact that historically psychiatry at times views transcendental spiritual experiences as “psychosis!” I felt good that my partner strongly agrees with my point – plus several of my other spiritual and Christian connections definitely agree that is a valid point.

Justice Rehnquist: “It is not true if the major premise is not true!”

The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful power of enabling man to find reasons for continuing to believe whatever it is that he wants to believe. Voltaire[4]
“Concepts create idols; only wonder comprehends anything. People kill one another over idols. Wonder makes us fall to our knees.”[5] St. Gregory of Nyssa
William James: “Pragmatism is rooted in the idea that philosophical topics, such as knowledge, language, meaning, belief, and science, are best understood in terms of their practical use.”[6]

“Psychology is the discipline that attacks the last stronghold of those striving to defend the dignity of humanity.

Nietzsche had seen this proclivity” Iain McGilChrist’s book builds on this anti-nihilist tradition, a tradition which is facing an increasingly hostile environment within universities and is increasingly marginalized! (p.415; 413 Review article: The Divided Brain And The Making Of The Western World, Arran Gare)

The Dark Side of Psychology-Psychiatric Ideologies: “In every regard, it seems, when we embrace determinism, we indulge our dark side!”

Research by Kathleen Vohs and Jonathan Schooler showed that “It seems that when people stop believing they are free agents; they stop seeing themselves as blameworthy for their actions. Consequently, they act less responsibly and give in to their baser instincts. Vohs emphasized that this result is not limited to the contrived conditions of a lab experiment. “You see the same effects with people who naturally believe more or less in free will,”[7] she said.

“Further studies by Baumeister and colleagues have linked a diminished belief in free will to stress, unhappiness, and a lesser commitment to relationships. They found that when subjects were induced to believe that “all human actions follow from prior events and ultimately can be understood in terms of the movement of molecules,”[8] those subjects came away with a lower sense of life’s meaningfulness. Early this year, other researchers published a study showing that a weaker belief in free will correlates with poor academic performance……. The list goes on: Believing that free will is an illusion has been shown to make people less creative, more likely to conform, less willing to learn from their mistakes, and less grateful toward one another.

In every regard, it seems, when we embrace determinism, we indulge our dark side.”[9]

David Hay and Kenneth Gergedn agree that a form of extreme individualism has emerged recently. They agree that the enlightenment gave birth to extreme individualism in the form of “Rational Individualism” which emerged during the Age of Reason so to enable the establishment of democracy so as to overcome aristocracy and clerical authority. But it is a political ideal which historically hasn’t played out as very realistic, though.

Intricate interconnections of brain processes and oversimplification

Iain McGilChrist states: “That is an abstraction. But then it is a simplifying

abstraction to treat individual people as completely autonomous agents with drives.

Their experiencing, thinking and acting are always enmeshed in social, cultural and

physical contexts, and are made possible by and involve physiological processes.” (p. 430 Review McGilChrist by Arran Gare) McGilChrist, Kant and Muzafer Sherif are in agreement that that real-world context is vital for any scientific inquiry. McGilChrist observes, “Thinking is always thinking, but philosophical thinking is, upon the whole, at the extreme end of the scale of distance from the active urgency of concrete situations. It is because of this fact that neglect of context is the besetting fallacy of philosophical thought … I should venture to assert that the most pervasive fallacy of philosophic thinking goes back to neglect of context … neglect of context is the greatest single disaster which philosophic thinking can incur.” (Iain McGilchrist, The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World)

Funk and Gazzanigna observe, “Morality is a set of complex emotional and cognitive processes that is reflected across many brain domains. Some of them are recurrently found to be indispensable in order to emit a moral judgment, but none of them is uniquely related to morality…………Some of the emotions processed are more central to morality than others, but all emotions contribute to moral judgment given specific contextual situations…..The neural circuits of brain regions implicated in morality overlap with those that regulate other behavioral processes.” The intricate interconnections of thought processes is a consistent observation in neuroscience articles. Neuroscience articles on music highlight overlapping processes – for instance with language, singing and dancing.

The western academia concept of free will is a gross oversimplification. I have not come across a distinction between free will and a sense of autonomy – which should have been made. The same problem occurs in spirituality in relation to the concept of the supernatural.

Extreme Individualism: Kenneth Gergen and David Hay

The question of free will vs determinism has been an ongoing question for decades. David Hay coined the term, “extreme individualism”. A number of scholars, David Hay, Kenneth Gergen, Virgilio Enriquez emphasize the problem of “extreme individualism.” In contrast, Filipino scholars, such as Reynaldo Ileto and Jeremiah Reyes emphasize the Filipino values of “Kapwa-loob” (shared identity – relational will)[10]

“The way you look at things is the most powerful force in shaping your life!”[11] – Irish poet theologian John O’Donohue

I. Free Will vs Determinism – Extreme Individualism vs “relational will”: Kenneth Gergen, David Hays, Jeremiah Reyes, Reynaldo Ileto,

Kenneth Gergen – Extreme Individualism vs Relational Being

Kenneth Gergen emphasizes that “My chief target of criticism [for his book Relational Being] was the Enlightenment vision of independent selves. My concern was with the many ways the presumption of individual agents—with gifts of inherent reason, motivation, and passion—generates untold suffering Alienation, loneliness, self-doubt, selfishness, and manipulative relations are among the impairments.[12]

He goes on to say that “To approach human beings exclusively as separate or bounded units—whether individual selves, communities, political parties, nations, or religions—is to threaten our future well-being. To understand the world in which we live as constituted by independent species, forms, types, or entities is to threaten the well-being of the planet….”[13]

Gergen concludes “Whatever value we place upon ourselves or others, and whatever hope we may have for the future, depends on the welfare of relationship. As Martin Buber once wrote, in the beginning is the relationship.”[14]

David Hay

D. Hay observes “That great Scottish philosopher John Macmurray (1961), had already enunciated something similar in his Gifford Lectures in Glasgow University in 1954: ……the unit of personal existence is not the individual, but two persons in personal relation; and that we are persons not by individual right, but in virtue of our relation to one another….. The unit of the personal is not the ‘I’ but the ‘You and I’.”[15]

“Spirituality as a natural human predisposition labelled `relational consciousness’. Evidence drawn from recent research demonstrates that this predisposition is universally identifiable in young children and expresses itself in many forms apart from the religious. Nevertheless, it is this which allows the possibility of religious belief.

As a result of the cultural construction of an extreme individualism which is particularly evident in the Western world, there has been a `forgetting’ of relational consciousness/spirituality resulting in damaging effects to the texture of human community. Some major sources of individualism are identified as having particularly serious effects on relational consciousness. These are reflected upon in the light of empirical research on children as well as contemporary philosophical and political critiques. Spiritual education is seen as a major means of resistance to the damaging effects of possessive individualism.”[16] (Spirituality versus Individualism: why we should nurture relational consciousness DAVID HAY Centre for the Study of Human Relations, School of Education, Jubilee Campus, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK.)

Virgilio Enriquez

According to Professor Enriquez, Kapwa is the “unity of the one-of-us-and-the-other”. After extensively researching the cultural heritage of indigenous Filipino groups and tribes and their IKSP (Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices), he concluded that Pakikipag-kapwa is a core Filipino value underlying the Pagkatao ng Filipino (the Personhood of the Filipino). He maintained that “Kapwa implied moral and normative aspects that obliged a person to treat one another as fellow human being and therefore as equal.” Such a position was “definitely inconsistent with exploitative human interactions,”. But he also foresaw that this Filipino core value was threatened by spreading Western influences. “…once AKO (the I) starts thinking of himself as separate from KAPWA, the Filipino ‘self’ gets to be individuated as in the Western sense and, in effect, denies the status of KAPWA to the other.”[17]

Collectivist countries and Free Will: Relational Will vs Determinism

Enriquez fears are not groundless: “Malaysia is a prototypically collectivist culture. From birth, families encourage children to make ingroups the center of their lives. Families live in intergenerational households, and child-rearing emphasizes warmth and control (Kesharvarez & Baharudin, 2011)….However, in Malaysia, as with the other rapidly developing economies in Asia, such as in China and Japan, levels of collectivism [such as community values] are lower among the young, the wealthy, and the urbanized (Cao, 2009).”[18] A Filipino Connection observed the same process of urbanization is happening in the Philippines (Understanding Collectivist Cultures: Overview & Examples, Simply Psychology)

The English language has no equivalents for the Filipino words: Kapwa; loob or bayanihan (helping others – in a community context)

Commentary

And I should re-emphasize that academic abstractions can have a downside. Research by Kathleen Vohs and Jonathan Schooler showed that “It seems that when people stop believing they are free agents; they stop seeing themselves as blameworthy for their actions. Consequently, they act less responsibly and give in to their baser instincts[19].

Narcissism, taken at face value is a form of extreme individualism

There are different approaches to narcissism. The role of social media has gotten a lot of attention. Anxiety as an underlying cause of narcissism is another approach. A sociological approach is another approach, though little research has been done on sociological factors.

Narcissism is a personality trait characterized by an excessive sense of self-importance, a strong need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. When narcissistic traits are pervasive, inflexible, and cause significant distress or impairment, they can meet the criteria for NPD.

Key Characteristics of Narcissism:

• Grandiose sense of self-importance:

• Need for excessive admiration:

• Lack of empathy:

• Sense of entitlement:

Lisa Firestone observes, “Studies are now showing what many of you may have suspected: We are living in an increasingly narcissistic society.

While Facebook is certainly a platform for narcissists, it is a mistake to assume that Facebook alone has caused this spike in narcissism. As researcher Shawn Bergman pointed out, “There is a significant amount of psychological research that shows that one’s personality is fairly well-established by age ,” given that Facebook’s policy doesn’t allow users to register until age 13 “the personality traits of typical users are fairly well-ingrained by the time they get on a social network.”

The truth is the rise in narcissism among millennials may have less to do with our social networks online and more to do with our social networks at home. Throughout the last few decades, there has been an increase in parental coddling and the so-called “self-esteem” movement. Parents and teachers trying to instill a healthy sense of self-esteem in children by praising them lavishly often do more harm than good. In fact, studies show that children offered compliments for a skill they have not mastered or talents that they do not have are left feeling emptier and more insecure. Only when children are praised for real accomplishments are they able to build actual self-esteem . (Is Social Media to Blame for the Rise in Narcissism? Lisa Firestone, Ph.D. NARCISSISM, SELF DEVELOPMENT By Lisa Firestone, Ph.D.)

“Extreme Individualism and the Narcissism Epidemic: Since roughly 2000 there has been an epidemic of narcissism in western countries. Studies are now showing what many of you may have suspected: We are living in an increasingly narcissistic society. (Is Social Media to Blame for the Rise in Narcissism? Lisa Firestone, PhD

Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic

Jean Twenge and Joshua Foster emphasize the “narcissism epidemic.” Their study is technical and sophisticated. The study states that “A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 76, 875–901.] found that Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) scores increased between 1982 and 2006 among college students nationwide…. Thus the available evidence suggests that college students are endorsing progressively more narcissistic personality traits over the generations . (Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic: Increases in narcissism 2002–2007 within ethnic groups Jean M. Twenge, Joshua D. Foster)

Narcissism collective vs individualistic Vater

Emerging evidence of internalization would be the increase in narcissism. There is widespread agreement among psychologists that narcissism is a growing problem – especially in western society. “Narcissism scores are higher in individualistic cultures compared with more collectivistic cultures.” Aline Vater concludes: “Our results showed that grandiose narcissism was higher and self-esteem was lower in individuals who grew up in former West Germany compared with former East Germany.” (“Does a narcissism epidemic exist in modern western societies? Comparing narcissism and self-esteem in East and West Germany Aline Vater, Steffen Moritz, Stefan Roepke”

Individualistic vs. Collectivist Cultures

That result shouldn’t be that surprising. It is well documented that “Individualist cultures and collectivist cultures place emphasis on different basic values. People who live in individualist cultures tend to believe that independence, competition, and personal achievement are important Individuals in Western nations such as the United States, England, and Australia score high on individualism. People who live in collectivist cultures value social harmony, respectfulness, and group needs over individual needs. Individuals who live in countries in Asia, Africa, and South America score high on collectivism. These values influence personality.” :

“Markus and Kitayama report Americans are more likely to express jealousy, pride, and other ‘ego-focused’ emotions that affirm the self as an autonomous entity, whereas non-westerners are more likely to experience ‘other-focused’ emotions that promote social harmony.” In light of that it would stand to reason that the western form of extreme individualism would likely increase narcissistic tendencies! (Simply Psychology: Understanding Collectivist Cultures: Overview & Examples)

Point of order: Complexity of human consciousness and behavior

The western concept of Free Will is a gross oversimplification. The Filipino concept of Relational Will would seem to offer a more realistic and practical model of will than the western concept of rational individualism. J D Espiritu and M Zosa theory of Filipino meaning argue that A life is meaningful if and only if it exhibits kagandahang-loob. [beauty of will] & relational will – “the importance of the concept of loob in the Filipino value system is undeniable. With its many iterations, loob represents an inner self that is also inherently connected to the other, and as a consequence, to the community as a whole. It is also the very core of every other Filipino value like courage (as in lakas ng loob), gratitude (as in utang-na-loob), and generosity (as in kagandahangloob), among others. Hence, if there were to be a theory of meaning in life that can properly be called Filipino, it needs to base itself on this concept[20].

Kagandahang-loob, as discussed, is translated as “beauty-of-will” where loob is understood as a relational will that can be viewed as a shared humanity. While the notion of “will” is practically absent in Filipino, this is the closest translation possible for loob since it has its volitional character. Hence, kagandahangloob does not only mean an external aesthetic. It ultimately means a holistic aesthetic that encompasses not just the interiority of the self, but also that of the other and the whole community. It therefore implies a certain harmony among these different levels of subjectivity for a life to be considered meaningful.

The concept of the human being as a “completely independent individual in context of the rational individualism ideal and dissociated from a very sophisticated society in which relationships are the rule not the exception generates an oversimplistic, unrealistic, unscientific, and unhealthy model. Take for instance in the situation of free will, “autonomy” would likely be a distinct question or process. Relational Will is a more balanced approach in light of the interconnectivity of the human brain. For instance, one aspect of “will” would indeed be “courage” (lakas ng loob) – particularly in the role as soldier or defender of family. Gratitude and generosity would be two other realistic characteristics of “will”[21]

Relational Will: Reynaldo Ileto. Jeremiah Reyes & Kapwa – Loob

What is Kapwa Loob? Kapwa as shared identity, an inner self and unity of self – shared with others, plus loob as “relational will” or ‘equality between individuals’ are aspects unique to the Filipino culture. As K Lagdameo-Santillan observes “Kapwa is a recognition of a shared identity, an inner self, shared with others. This Filipino linguistic unity of the self and the other is unique and unlike in most modern languages.”[22] (Roots of Filipino Humanism) Technically, the Bantu word concept of Ubuntu is a mirror image of Kapwa. “Loob” as “relational will” I haven’t seen elsewhere.

“In the Filipino social sciences, loob has nonetheless been explored in numerous ways such as being a “cave” of Filipino thought, an emotive state, a true self, a center of personality, a world of being, and a core indigenous value (Pe-Pua, 2017) . However, in recent ethical philosophy, loob is sometimes used in contexts where it can aptly be translated as “relational will” since it is a will directed towards others (Reyes, 2015) . Reynaldo Ileto (1979), viewed loob as an inner self wherein one realizes equality with others . Theologian Jose De Mesa (1984) understood loob as the center of one’s personality but also the world of being itself.[23]

Most prolifically, psychologist Virgilio Enriquez (1992) enumerated many manifestations of loob as central to the Filipino value system. Filipino values are linked by a socio-personal value called kagandahang-loob” (“beauty-of-will”) that may be viewed as a “shared humanity” or “shared inner nobility” with others.” The idea of “many” manifestations of will is consistent with neuroscience studies of morals, music, and so on – which emphasize the interconnectedness of the diverse regions of the brain.[24] (Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life Jairus Diesta Espiritu and Marielle Antoinette Hermoso Zosa)

The Meaning of Meaning and Health

In his article, Stephen Cave goes on to say, “Also, from more general studies of human consciousness, there appears to be a correlation between “meaningless” and difficulties handling stress: “People perceive their life as meaningful when they find coherence in the environment. Given that meaning of life is tied to making sense of life events, people who lack meaning would be more threatened by stressful life events than those with a strong sense of meaning in life. Four studies demonstrated links between perceptions of life’s meaningfulness and perceived levels of stress…… These findings suggest that perceiving life as meaningful functions as a buffer against stressors.”[25] Meaning in life and adjustment to daily stressors (Jina Park and Roy F. Baumeister Department of Psychology, Florida state university, Tallahassee, Fl, USA)”

Michael Steger perhaps provides a good synopsis of the pivotal role and function of meaning in human consciousness when he states that “meaning is, at its heart, an integrating factor for people. Meaning pulls together people’s ideas about who they are, the kind of world they live in, and how they relate to the people and environments around them. Meaning incorporates these elements into people’s aspirations and overarching aims.[26] (Quest p. 169)

As the psychologists, Gary T. Reker and Dr. Paul T. P. Wong, remark, “[G]lobal meaning functions as an effective buffer of life stress (health protecting) and as a generalized enhancer of psychological well-being, and self-esteem (health promoting).[27] (Quest p.443) Reker and Wong go on to say, “individuals develop personal meaning orientations that individually and collectively contribute to positive psychosocial functioning.[28] (p. 444) Peterson and Park observe, “Both an orientation to meaning and the presence of meaning were positively associated with life satisfaction and positive affect and negatively associated with depression and negative affect.”[29]

Carl Jung observed, “Man cannot stand a meaningless life.” Later in the Zarathustra Seminar[30] (p. 1105), Jung observed, “Life that doesn’t overcome itself is really meaningless: it is not life; only inasmuch as life surpasses itself does it make sense.”[31] Similarly, the Nobel Prize winning French biologist, Francois Jacob emphasized that, “What man seeks, to the point of anguish, in his gods, in his art, in his science, is meaning. He cannot bear the void. He pours meaning on events like salt on his food.”[32]

The anthropologist Clifford Geertz stated, “The drive to make sense out of experience, to give it form and order, is evidently as real and pressing as the more familiar biological needs.”[33] (p.140 – my italics) Geertz emphasized that art and religions, are, at the core, essentially expressions of a very powerful Need for Meaning which, as he noted, is a drive as imperative as any other “biological need” such as hunger or sex.

My second illustration is the idea of the Social Contract, which is usually taken to have emerged in Europe during the Seventeenth Century. The major English inaugurator of this perspective was Thomas Hobbes in his masterwork Leviathan. Hobbes’ argument is too well known to require lengthy treatment, but it is important to note that it depends for its cogency on his radical individualism. He believed that human beings must be understood apart from society. Human beings are social because they are human, not human because they are social. His psychological/physiological way of explaining human desires led him to the view that all human beings act exclusively on the basis of self-interest. He assumed that each of us is in a struggle for power against everyone else and that `minds never meet, that ideas are never really shared and that each of us is always and personally isolated from every other individual’ (Hampton, 1986). Potentially this must lead to a war of all against all and it is on the basis of his fear of such an outcome that Hobbes insists on the necessity of the absolute power of the sovereign as a curb against anarchy and civil war.[34]

C.B. MacPherson, one of the most influential modern interpreters of the English Revolution in the Seventeenth Century, charges Hobbes with creating the doctrine on which bourgeois liberal society still operates, or as he calls it `the theory of possessive individualism’ (Macpherson, 1962). Marx clearly identified this possessive individualism in the masters of Nineteenth Century society, depicting the typical capitalist entrepreneur as unencumbered by any social ties: ¼ that is, an individual separated from the community, withdrawn into himself, wholly preoccupied with his private interest and acting in accordance with his private caprice ¼ [for him] the only bond between men is natural necessity, need, and private interest. (quoted in Walzer, 1990) Such a person, I would suggest, is someone who has forgotten or repressed his relational consciousness[35]

B. Mannheim’s Paradigm

Karl Mannheim (1893 – 1947), a founding sociologist is perhaps best known for his book Ideology and Utopia, as well as for articulating the Mannheim Paradox. Mannheim argued that essentially ideologies and the values built into those ideologies underlie social norms and beliefs. Furthermore, that these ideologies have a profound effect on philosophical, artistic, humanitarian expressions and theories. The Mannheim Paradox stated that the ideological views of the political scientist or sociologist will skew the views and understandings of other ideologies to the point that objective analysis would be impossible[36].

Arthur Mullins in his article, Truth and Ideology: Reflections on Mannheim’s Paradox, describes-defines the Mannheim Paradox in saying, “Nevertheless, with these few exceptions, Mannheim holds that historical and political thought is determined by the socio-historical location of the thinker and the political aspirations and material ambitions of the group or groups to which he belongs. Such thought is inherently value-laden, one-sided, distorted, and therefore false. In short, all systems of historical-social-political thought are ideologies. And this leads to Mannheim’s famous paradox: if all such perspectives are ideologies, an objective and valid social science is impossible, and Mannheim’s own reflections on the historical process are “self-refuting” – for his perspective can claim no more objective validity than can other perspectives[37].

It would appear an unspoken assumption underlying Mannheim’s analysis would be that human consciousness is limited in that human consciousness effectively can only analyze human consciousness in terms of human consciousness. That point was made nearly two thousand years ago by the Greek Philosopher Xenophanes who pointed out human beings tend to view God in terms of human characteristics. In light of new evidence about acausal and quantum physics a valid question would be – perhaps, God thinks acausally? In nay case both Human and St Augustine confirmed Xenophanes observation. Modern science has shown that there is – in fact- a neurological basis for that predisposition (well proved “theory of mind” process)

C. The Age of Enlightenment or Age of Reason

The Age of Enlightenment or Age of Reason, which began in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries created a social-ideological consciousness – a Force – an intellectual and philosophical force created by social-political-religious ideas that dominated the world of ideas in Europe and generated changes in the culture of Western Civilization. The ideas varied, though most central premise rested on the ideal and supremacy of reason, and a prominent political theme was self-government and constitutional government, as well as separation of church and state. Idealism and the ideas of freedom, liberty, religious toleration, fraternity, as well as the pursuit of happiness flourished as ideals during these times.

The ideas of the Enlightenment were indeed revolutionary. The ideas clearly undermined the authority of both the monarchy and the Catholic Church. The Age of Enlightenment gave birth to what is actually called the Age of Revolution, when, during the late 18th to the mid-19th centuries, revolutionary movements rocked the world – both in Europe and the Americas. The revolution accomplished a change from absolutist monarchies to constitutional governments as well as the emergence of the independent sovereignty of nation states. The Enlightenment set the stage for the

In retrospect it is crystal clear that to bring about the necessary change form aristocracy to democracy the concept of a “rational & independent individual” was a prerequisite – absolutely necessary – to install democracy as a viable institution. It is also a perfect illustration of Mannheim’s Law[38]

The iconic sociologist Robert Bellah (1970b) confirms Mannheim’s Law in that it applies to academic modes of thought in context of spirituality vs the materialist Doctrine in: “There is no other sphere of human culture which is excluded from sympathetic academic consideration on its own terms on the grounds that such a study endangers science, reason, logic, and the whole heritage of the Enlightenment”[39] (p.133).” (p.36)

Materialist Methods and Approaches to Free Will

The fundamental problem with the western academic view-understanding of “free will” is that western academia – though there is no official definition – for all practical purposes – assumes that the human being is a totally independent entity in a very complex and sophisticated – which is a rather unrealistic assumption – a false premise. That is, the western academia “abstraction” of free will – which is all it is – lacks “real world” context – as Muzafer Sherif explains stand-alone abstractions[40]. It does not follow from the fact that because people have social relationships does not mean that they have no free will or autonomy – which is what western academia assumes.

Filipino (multiple “loob-wills”) Approach: an approach consistent with modern neuroscience research

I have seen no formal definition of free will – yet David Hay’s (Christian theologian) understanding seems most relevant – with “extreme individualism” as emerging from the age of revolution (Hobbes, social contract) in the political concept of a rational-independent-individual – “independent” being the operative aspect[41]. As a psychological or social sciences concept in a sophisticated society in which relationships are the rule – not the exceptions the concept of a person as significantly independent is simply not realistic or scientific. In general, the Filipino psychologist Virgilio Enriquez has the same view of western over-emphasis on individualism as unhealthy[42].

Baumeister points out “There is No Meaning of Life!” – rather what there are – are a lot of diverse meanings – parents, family, religion, education, government, and so on – which people synthesize into a “Meaning of life” As appoint of information, a neuroscience analysis of musical ability highlights that “musical ability” overlaps and is interconnected with other regions of the brain. I would argue that it would be the same for “free will” – which means then that the Filipino approach is a more balanced and scientific approach[43].

If neuroscience were to do an intense investigation of the neuroscience of Will or Free Will, the same conclusions drawn from research into morals would likely be reached. As Funk and Gazzanigna observe: “Moral neuroscience is an intricate and expanding field. This review summarizes the main scientific findings obtained to date. Morality is a set of complex emotional and cognitive processes that is reflected across many brain domains. Some of them are recurrently found to be indispensable in order to emit a moral judgment, but none of them is uniquely related to morality…………Some of the emotions processed are more central to morality than others, but all emotions contribute to moral judgment given specific contextual situations[44]. (Brain Architecture of human morality, Funk and Gazzaniga) ……. The neural circuits of brain regions implicated in morality overlap with those that regulate other behavioral processes,”

I thought it very interesting that Leonardo Mercado (1994), the Filipino theologian “believes that the Filipino mind does not compartmentalize truth, goodness, and beauty as separate metaphysical categories. Rather, loob is a confluence of multitudinous states of inner being not confined by conventional Western divisions in metaphysics.” In discussions with Filipinas, several express a parallel understanding – that Filipinos have a different perspective than Westerners. In my research a couple Filipino authors highlight the fact that the Spanish-Catholic leaders – when they arrived in the Philippines – assimilated and adopted several of the Filipino social and spiritual values-norms and that while academic – materialism is a superficial overlay over Filipino culture, but that spirituality is embedded in Filipino culture[45].

In researching Kapwa-loob – loob, in general, is often viewed as “relational will” (Jeremiah Reyes). The well published Filipino author-historian Reynaldo Ileto believes that “loob-will” conveys a sense of inherent equality between people – when “an inner self wherein one realizes equality with others”[46] (p.2 Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life, J Espiritu & M Zosa) “In sum, loob has so far been regarded by Filipino social scientists and philosophers alike as a rich and multifaceted value and ethico-political.”[47] (p.4)

The main theme of the authors is that (from a Filipino perspective) “A life is only meaningful if and only if it exhibits kagandahung-loob”[48] (p.6) which the authors define as “beauty of will” though that also conveys kindness, generosity and so on. J Espiritu & M Zosa list a number of “loob-wills” – beauty of will, kindness of will, good will, kusang-will, utang-na-loob, lakas-ng-loob, tapat-loob which they argue – fall under the umbrella concept of kagandahung-loob”

Extreme Individualism:

1. False Premise “There is no psychology of groups”

“Psychologists who study groups approach the idea of a group as an entity only very gingerly. The field, or members of the field, apparently still feel the sting of Allport’s (1927) remonstration of those who were attracted to McDougall’s idea of “group mind.”[49]

Floyd Allport, in 1927 stated unequivocally that “Only within the individual can we find the behavior mechanisms and the consciousness which are fundamental in the interactions between people ………There is no psychology of groups which is not essentially and entirely a psychology of individuals.” [50]

A High School Prank? When I look at that picture and consider the statement “There is no psychology of groups” – the question that comes to mind is: Is that statement some kind of high school prank? – “No psychology of groups” – freaking absurd

When asked the scholar and author Brian McVeigh stated that “There is no psychology of groups” is an expression of “extreme individualism. That is an anti-social norm – with no scientific basis whatsoever.

1. Fallacy: “materialist model” of consciousness as being solely and entirely a “byproduct of the neurology and biochemistry of the brain”

The materialist argument that there is no “psychology of groups” – incredibly – according to materialists (and widely accepted) is based on the principle that “neurons fire in the brain and so consciousness is restricted to the human brain” Mossbridge and Baruss, in their book Transcendent Mind, highlight and emphasize the limited and restricted understanding of the “materialist model” of consciousness as being solely and entirely a “byproduct of the neurology and biochemistry of the brain”[51] (p. 24) I frequently encounter a version of that which states that “Because neurons fire in the brain, consciousness is restricted to within the human mind.” I encountered that argument in a Neil de Grasse Tyson science FB group – who used that to justify his argument that social consciousness does not exist. That is an absurd – utterly stupid argument. That perspective, when viewed from a wider viewpoint, is clearly an incredibly narrow and limited perspective – really an extreme tunnel vision view of human consciousness.

Muzafer Sherif: Real-World Context

At times, Muzafer Sherif was rather harsh in his criticisms of academia. Sheriff’s most frequent critique focused on the necessity of “real world context” – all too frequently absent in studies and articles[52]. Parallel to the observations of Viktor Frankl who stated that the various disciplines of science and schools of thought are isolated and disconnected, Sherif emphasized that “self-contained castles” isolate academics from reality and truth, and the need “to create commonly shared paradigms, to remove those from their “castles” and disband “disorderly faction-infested tribes” for the greater good of science.”[53]

Muzafer Sherif observed, “A psychological construct—if it is to prove valid and adequate—must be as valid and adequate in handling the stuff of ordinary human affairs as in handling the controlled variables of the laboratory experiment.”[54] (vol. 52, No. 6 November, 1945 The Psychological Review The Psychology of ‘Attitudes’ Part I by Muzafer Sherif and Hadley Cantril, Princeton University}.

It is precisely that materialist mindset and academic-materialist methodological protocol which resulted in the academic situation in which J. E. Kennedy states that “Very little research has been aimed at investigating the overall effects of paranormal experiences” From my research I would have to agree with that statement 100%. In my research on people who have spiritual-psychic experiences, “people” are conspicuously absent.” The psychiatrist Dt. Stacey Neal (trained at Johns Hopkins) stated that she (and psychiatrists) has had no training or education in people who have spiritual or spiritual-psychic experiences.[55] (An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Paranormal and Spiritual Experiences on Peoples’ Lives and Well-Being J.E. Kennedy and H. Kanthamani)

Lastly, Muzafer Sherif condemns academics for writing textbooks which exclude positions which disagree with their own – rather than educate students of a shared paradigm (such paradigms don’t exist, sheriff argues). Of course, a couple of millennia prior to Muzafer Sherif St Augustine remarked: The words printed here are concepts. You must go through the experiences!

All Four Scholars – Theologians: Alfred Whitehead, Muzafer Sherif, and St Gregory of Nyssa, as well as St Augustine – emphasize that abstractions as absolutes are dangerous ideas– which is precisely what happened – as David Hay points out – in the concept of Extreme Individualism. I can’t help but add the abstraction that “All spirituality is unreal” is an absolute – without real world context.[56]

“We become What we think”[57]– Buddha & Materialist Ideology as Self-fulfilling Prophecy

“An increasingly mechanistic, fragmented, decontextualised world, marked by unwarranted optimism mixed with paranoia and a feeling of emptiness, has come about, reflecting, I believe, the unopposed action of a dysfunctional left hemisphere.”[58] — Iain McGilchrist

Some might think that isn’t reasonable. Yet when you look at materialism as an ideology – then an almost universal materialist mindset is not that unreasonable – especially when you factor in unconsciously absorbed academic maladaptive stereotypes. There are a number of antisocial academic norms – such as “There is no psychology of groups”

Article : “Impression Formation” C.N. Macrae, S. Quadflieg,

The term self-fulfilling prophecies refers to the observation that sometimes our beliefs about others can lead us to treat them in such a way that they subsequently become what we expect them to be. Originally, the effect was demonstrated in the classroom and called the ‘Pygmalion effect.’ In a seminal study, teachers were told at the beginning of a school year that certain of their students were potential late bloomers, who would be expected to excel during the school year under proper guidance. Even though there was nothing in actual fact that set those students apart from their colleagues, several months later their schoolwork had improved considerably. poorly[59] (Impression Formation C.N. Macrae, S. Quadflieg, in Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Second Edition), 2012)

Eastern – Collectivist view of the human being at odds with western academia

Preamble: A founding father of social psychology, Muzafer Sherif “promotes the idea of attitude and attitude change due to its importance in a quickly changing world. He emphasizes that real world contexts are important, even if regarded as “messy” compared to controlled lab experiments.” Eastern views of “Free will” as relational will (Reyes – Ileto on Loob as relational will)[60] I feel I should add the comments of Mylah, a student in criminology who observes that “In Philippine culture, loob or kalooban refers to one’s inner self, or, more specifically, to the internal dimension of a person’s identity. Kapwa also is”, “neighbor”, and “fellow humans.” To live in the spirit of Kapwa means to embrace our shared identity and to care for our fellow beings.” I should add I am reluctant to argue with her – lol!

K.Y. Kawamura, in Encyclopedia of Body Image and Human Appearance, 2012 Collectivism “Most Asian cultures are predominantly collectivistic in nature. In collectivistic cultures, individuals are seen as embedded within their group identity, and the notion of a separate, autonomous self is deemphasized. Even an individual’s physical appearance is often seen as not only a reflection of the individual’s own internal self but also a representation of the family, extended family, and perhaps even the Asian community as a whole.”[61]

Eastern philosophy and spiritual beliefs have a different model of the individual – As David Hay observes, materialism has created an “extreme individualism”![62] The individual as completely independent and the generally absence of relationships can be seen in Geertz’s “universally accepted definition of religion which leaves out “community”, social consciousness and relationships in general. Dawkins Selfish Gene theory also seriously distorts individualism and minimalizes connectivity and relationships[63]. Maslow emphasizes “self-actualization”[64] – in contrast Frankl observes “that we only establish meaning in our lives through a relation to some form of otherness, which may consist of anything from a collection of values to another human being. In the act of transcending the self by establishing its relation to otherness, the self is actualized in the process.”[65] (University of Oregon – Frankl notes)

Free Will Versus Determinism

As Science has “advanced” the view that the explanations of cause and effect can be extended to people and individuals as reflections of influences in society has increasing led scientists to “scientifically” question the concept of “free will” and today, the challenge of proving that there is “free will” would appear insurmountable. That is, today it is practically impossible to prove the concept of “free will. ´

Stephen Cave, in the article, There’s No Such Thing as Free Will -But we’re better off believing in it anyway, observes that “Many scientists say that the American physiologist Benjamin Libet demonstrated in the 1980s that we have no free will. It was already known that electrical activity builds up in a person’s brain before she, for example, moves her hand; Libet showed that this buildup occurs before the person consciously makes a decision to move.”[66]

“This research and its implications are not new. What is new, though, is the spread of free-will skepticism beyond the laboratories and into the mainstream. The number of court cases, for example, that use evidence from neuroscience has more than doubled in the past decade—mostly in the context of defendants arguing that their brain made them do it. And many people are absorbing this message in other contexts, too, at least judging by the number of books and articles purporting to explain “your brain on” everything from music to magic. Determinism, to one degree or another, is gaining popular currency. The skeptics are in ascendance.”[67] (There’s No Such Thing as Free Will – But we’re better off believing in it anyway. Story by Stephen Cave Atlantic, JUNE 2016 ISSUE)

Research by Kathleen Vohs and Jonathan Schooler showed that “It seems that when people stop believing they are free agents, they stop seeing themselves as blameworthy for their actions. Consequently, they act less responsibly and give in to their baser instincts. Vohs emphasized that this result is not limited to the contrived conditions of a lab experiment. “You see the same effects with people who naturally believe more or less in free will,”[68] she said.

Stephen Cave, goes on to say, “Another pioneer of research into the psychology of free will, Roy Baumeister of Florida State University, has extended these findings. For example, he and colleagues found that students with a weaker belief in free will were less likely to volunteer their time to help a classmate than were those whose belief in free will was stronger. Likewise, those primed to hold a deterministic view by reading statements like “Science has demonstrated that free will is an illusion”[69] were less likely to give money to a homeless person or lend someone a cellphone.”[70]

“Further studies by Baumeister and colleagues have linked a diminished belief in free will to stress, unhappiness, and a lesser commitment to relationships. They found that when subjects were induced to believe that “all human actions follow from prior events and ultimately can be understood in terms of the movement of molecules,” those subjects came away with a lower sense of life’s meaningfulness. Early this year, other researchers published a study showing that a weaker belief in free will correlates with poor academic performance……. The list goes on: Believing that free will is an illusion has been shown to make people less creative, more likely to conform, less willing to learn from their mistakes, and less grateful toward one another. In every regard, it seems, when we embrace determinism, we indulge our dark side.”[71]

As Jung, Einstein, as well as Hume observed, right and wrong are beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. So why should “Will be any different. What strikes me is that the academics are taking an abstraction – the concept of “will” totally encapsulated as an arbitrary abstraction and taken it out of context of human consciousness and human life.

Stephen Cave points out that, “Some scholars argue that we should think about freedom of choice in terms of our very real and sophisticated abilities to map out multiple potential responses to a particular situation. One of these is Bruce Waller, a philosophy professor at Youngstown State University. In his new book, Restorative Free Will, he writes that we should focus on our ability, in any given setting, to generate a wide range of options for ourselves, and to decide among them without external constraint.”[72]

“Waller believes his account fits with a scientific understanding of how we evolved: Foraging animals—humans, but also mice, or bears, or crows—need to be able to generate options for themselves and make decisions in a complex and changing environment. Humans, with our massive brains, are much better at thinking up and weighing options than other animals are. Our range of options is much wider, and we are, in a meaningful way, freer as a result.”[73]

“Waller’s definition of free will is in keeping with how a lot of ordinary people see it. One 2010 study found that people mostly thought of free will in terms of following their desires, free of coercion (such as someone holding a gun to your head).”[74]

Of course, when it comes to spirituality, “Spirit or “God” it is similarly impossible and similarly people value spirit while academia does not. But of course, unlike the studies of Will – to my knowledge – subjects were never asked why they thought spirit or spirituality is important. In fact, to my knowledge no one asked what possible function the concept of Spirit – or God – could possibly play in human consciousness – which could possibly have various “real” functions as it were.

The bottom-line argument is that when you take a belief and turn it into an abstraction and then completely disconnect it from the real-world life circumstances of a person, it becomes basically “irrelevant” in many ways. The same is true for spirituality.

Unconscious Influences: Stereotypes

There is a consensus among the research into Unconscious Processes that the Unconscious is the work horse of the human mind and that the conscious processes have limited capacity. The unconscious processing abilities of the human brain are estimated at roughly 11 million pieces of information per second. Compare that to the estimate for conscious processing: about 40 pieces per second. As Bargh observes “these various non-conscious mental systems shoulder the lion’s share of the self-regulatory burden, thereby keeping the individual grounded in their current environment.”[75]

Bargh’s Synopsis of Unconscious Processes:

The Lion’s Share: the authors conclude that these various non-conscious mental systems shoulder the lion’s share of the self-regulatory burden, thereby keeping the individual grounded in their current environment.”[76]

A. “Three main forms of automatic self-regulation are identified:

1] an automatic effect of perception on action,

[2] the automatic pursuit of a goal and

[3] a continuous automatic evaluation of one’s experience.

Three other major influences

4} Mental categories are absolutely essential for simplifying and understanding the information-rich environment,

{5} The express link between perception [of the environment] and action likely exists for a good adaptive reason,

{6} “The idea that social perception is a largely automated psychological phenomenon is now widely accepted. ”Our identities are multifaceted – mother, musician, teacher, yoga enthusiast, NASCAR fan. In each of these [identities] there is stored implicit and ingrained knowledge about appropriate values and behaviors, likes and dislikes, ways of being. {

II. “The idea that social perception is a largely automated psychological phenomenon is now widely accepted.”[77] If you think of how much information of social interactions is available that makes sense. Even in basic exchanges between two people involve a lot of information such as tone of voice, body language, hand gestures, and facial features which studies show convey a lot of information. Then there is social context and circumstances. Plus, there are theory of mind processes which process information about the intentions of another person.

Pervasive Unconscious Influences

Bargh emphasizes the pervasive influence of unconscious influences in various and diverse circumstances. Bargh unequivocally states: “Imagine for a moment that you are a psychology professor who does experiments on conscious awareness. You keep finding that your subtle manipulations of people’s judgments and even behavior are successful –causing your experimental participants to like someone or to dislike that same person, to feel happy or sad, to behave rudely or with infinite patience. However, none of your participants have a clue as to what caused them to feel or behave.”[78] The Unbearable Automaticity of Being, John A Bargh & Tanya L. Chartrand – p. 462 July 1999 American Psychologist)

Peer Reviewed Critique of Materialism Endorsed by Four Very Prominent Psychologists and Medical Researchers –

Preface Prejudice and Persecution: Baruss and Mossbridge state that “As a result of studying anomalous phenomena or challenging materialism, scientists have been ridiculed for doing their work, been prohibited from supervising student theses, been unable to obtain funding from traditional funding sources, been unable to get papers published in mainstream journals, had their teaching censored, been barred from promotions and been threatened with removal from tenured positions. Students have reported being afraid to be associated with research into anomalous phenomena for fear of jeopardizing their careers. Other students have reported explicit reprisals for questioning materialism and so on. (Baruss, 2014b, P.L. Berger, 1970; H. L. Friedman & Krippner, 2010; Hess, 1992; Rossman & Utts, 2014; Sommer, 2014; cf. Chargaff, 1977; Jahn, 2001) Siler, Lee, & Bero, 2015) (Baruss and Mossbridge Transcendent Mind p.25)

Stephen Farra has told me It is not likely that my endorsed critique of materialist methods would ever get published because of materialist prejudices in academia. DR Paul Wong agreed with my statement that “the system is broken!”.- and stated spirituality is widely excluded n academia. So, yes – I agree 200% with the statement by Baruss and Mossbridge.

1, Dr. Paul Wong, Professor Emeritus of Trent University edited two large volumes of The Human Quest for Meaning

2. Dr. Harold Koenig, a medical doctor-psychiatrist, a well published and very well-known author and researcher stated about this article: “Charlie – makes perfect sense to me,

3. Dr. Stephen Farra: Columbia International University Emeritus “Definist Fallacy (leading to a closed Materialism) is spiritual poison, and has hurt us all

4. Stefan Schindler, an award-winning author, and retired psychology-philosophy professor

Assault by Kaiser Permanente staff

Assault: “Reasonable apprehension” in the context of assault, refers to the victim’s reasonable belief that the act will lead to imminent harmful or offensive contact.” (Cornell legal)

Reply from Kaiser Permanente:

Sr Director Evans suspended my rights to KP services for abusive conduct. The top listed abusive message by Director Evans – literally:

“December 8, 2022 I felt that the acceptance of the Definist fallacy and your refusal to acknowledge my rights and beliefs as extremely offensive” I even filed a complaint with the DOJ [which I sent them but they never read apparently] which was accepted. My position is endorsed by Dr. Koenig, Dr Wong, and Dr Farra, and Stefan Schindler”

That is the whole story there – Materialists – which dominate in certain fields like psychiatry and mainstream psychology simply don’t care at all – the hypocrites – when it comes down to it – simply do not have any respect at all for spiritual people.

Psychiatry has no training or education in people who have spiritual or spiritual-psychic experiences

There are some schools of thought – such as Existential – Positive Psychology – logotherapy and pastoral schools of thought as well as Jungian school of thought – which are receptive – but mainstream psychologists – for the larger part – are not objective even though they swear they are. As Viktor Frankl and Muzafer Sherif pointed out schools of thought and disciplines are separate and disconnected.

Psychiatrists – as Dr Stacey Neal (Johns Hopkins) – explained – have no education or training in people who have spiritual experiences. In my forty years of experience, I would say psychiatrists – that I personally have encountered – are Know Nothing Close-Minded Bigots.

I have found this statement to be true in my research and experience: “Very little research has been aimed at investigating the overall effects of paranormal experiences.”[79] – J. E. Kennedy From my research I would have to agree with that statement 100%. In my research – I found that there are a lot of abstractions such as supernatural, powers, “anomalies”, etc. – on people who have spiritual-psychic experiences, “people” are conspicuously absent

I read an article which said new training for psychiatrists was being considered. I wondered – what exactly could they possibly use as a training manual?? I have not come across anything I would remotely consider as decent training manual as yet.

Standard Medical Guidelines

For the record – standard medical guidelines: “Studies have shown that addressing the spiritual needs of the patient may enhance recovery from illness. Discerning, acknowledging, and supporting the spiritual needs of patients can be done in a straightforward and noncontroversial manner. Furthermore, many sources of spiritual care (eg, chaplains) are available to clinicians to address the spiritual needs of patients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76:1225-1235 Basically, “proper” medical guidelines indicate that some minimal respect be allowed where spiritual beliefs are concerned.

An Ironic Jungian Hypocrisy: is Compassion a Matter of Opinion?

Jung’s Mars Prophecy and Extreme Escapism

A journalist’s question to Carl Jung: Do you think that, in twenty years, anyone will care about the spirit of symbols, fully in the era of interplanetary journeys, with the Sputniks, the Gagarins, and the Shephards? Will not the spirit come to appear passé? Dr. Jung smiles cunningly and states: “Sooner or later man will have to return to himself, even if from the stars. All this that is happening now is an extreme form of escapism, because it is easier to reach Mars than to find oneself. If man doesn’t find himself, then he faces the greatest of dangers: his own annihilation.

On February 18, 2021, five days ago, this was a highlight in international news: “The new NASA Mars rover, Perseverance, lands on the Red Planet on February 18, 2021—and we’ll be following every step of the way. Adding to our rich history of working with NASA and covering their planetary exploration missions, join us online for these free events celebrating and following Perseverance’s landing and work on Mars.” (https://www.exploratorium.edu/)

So, here we are – exactly as Jung predicted. As I point out later, “we” have no proper categorization of types of spirituality. As I point out also is that what little research and studies have been done are kept out of the hands of mainstream psychology – which is a main reason why a number of psychologists and neuroscientists have incredibly twisted ideas about spirituality – because they know nothing about people who have spiritual experiences. On a neuroscience FB site one neuroscientist talked about “Giant Cosmic Parrots!” So – “We” have a science of psychology that – for better row rose – has been shaped by a fallacy – literally. And there is no doubt in mind that “we” now face our “greatest of danger” – our “own annihilation.”

When Jungians Undermine Prosocial Values: Is Compassion a matter of opinion

How pervasive is the influence of the maladaptive stereotype? – Very Pervasive in American culture

What happened is I wrote an essay about the spirituality of compassion and my then Jungian analyst Cook-Deegan responded that “All spirituality is a matter of opinion!” – which is derived directly from the Definist fallacy – maladaptive stereotypes – that “All spirituality is unreal – and thus a “matter of opinion. It became a breaking point with my family. I have PTSD and I perceived that as “life threatening” because if something as real world, creative, and fruitful as “compassion” is not real and “OK” – then “spirit” and spirituality does not exist – at all! I have PTSD and I went off the rails – and I yell and cuss. I did cuss, true. That argument broke my family up. My read of what happened is that it was the compassion issue – it was the fact that I “dared” to question materialism. Like Evans at Kaiser Permanente – they are “indoctrinated” via the Unconscious maladaptive stereotype “That all spirituality is unreal – because it can’t be quantified – which is false. Materialism as an ideology is horrifically intolerant.

Actaully my position was correct. Compassion is NOT a matter of opinion – it is a scientifically documented fact.

Spirituality of Compassion: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.”

“Compassion for others and social support have survival value and health benefits…. [80](The Oxford Handbook on Compassion: p. 171)

“Our findings argue that spirituality—above and beyond religiosity—is uniquely associated with greater compassion and enhanced altruism toward strangers.”[81] (The Social Significance of Spirituality Laura R. Saslow et al),

“religiosity and spirituality were associated positively with compassionate love both for close others (friends, family) and for humanity (strangers).”[82] (Compassionate love……, S. Sprecher

“Even bacteria are more reproductively successful in the presence of others of their own species.”[83]

Estimates of volunteer [compassionate] caregivers vary from 30 tom 70 million Americans: “Approximately 43.5 million caregivers have provided unpaid care to an adult or child in the last 12 months.[84] [National Alliance for Caregiving and AARP. (2015). Caregiving in the U.S.] Of course, historically, of course, there is Mother Teresa and Dr Sweitzer

Empathy Studies indicate that empathy is genetically inherited in some circumstances: The genetic and environmental origins of emotional and cognitive empathy: Review and meta-analyses of twin studies Lior Abramsona Florina Uzefovskyb Virgilia Toccacelic Ariel Knafo-Noama[85]

When Jungians aren’t Jungian: I have become increasingly cynical about Jungian objectivity – this essay was rejected by two different FB Jungian groups – most recently, both happened to be French. On Academia.edu, Gordillo threw me out of a discussion when I brought up academic fallacies, false premises and maladaptive stereotypes. Long ago I asked Juliano, a leading Jungian in certain circles for his views on the Definist fallacy – which is pretty straightforward and he refused to answer. Many psychologists today seem to think human consciousness is their personal toy. The question on fallacies is about true or false and right to wrong – or as the 104-page article on Supreme Court rulings observes – about “crooked thinking”

Synopsis of 40 years of personal spiritual-psychic experiences:

“How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup.”

A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master poured the visitor’s cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The professor watched the overflowing cup until he could no longer restrain himself. “It’s full! No more will go in!” the professor blurted. “This is you,” the master replied, “How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup.”

A. I have four documented dreams and two undocumented dreams – all with consistent and reasonable interpretations that I list here: (1) a dream centered on Pakistan and nuclear war. (2) A Hybrid Dream-Perception: Precognitive “Tag” (i.e., a central action with one or two details) of the “incel” terrorist in Canada in late April, 2018. (3) Dream about Libya (2-26-2019), (4) Synchronicity with Strasburg, France attack – dream (9-19-20) + undocumented (5) Dudayev Dream (6) Fredericksburg bomb (civilian)

B. Highlights from forty years of waking experiences waking perceptions (1) my recent 10-30-20 email to FBI agent McElwee warned of a “domestic terrorist” threat referring to a “bomb” as the weapon. which is related – of course – to the Nashville bombing on Christmas day 2020 (2) My very detailed, specific, and notarized warning to the FBI on October 18, 1981 of an impending attack by the then active Weathermen terrorist group. Some [accurate] details are: group, fabricating bombs, money, women, 22 put together, New York, death, as well as the terrorist weathermen’s manifesto. (3) A very brief (phoned in) warning to the FBI before the assassination attempt on president Reagan (4) I called the CIA before 9/11

An important point of order would be that nearly all of my experiences would easily fit into a category parallel to the alarm calls of animals. As Jean MacPhail, a scholar, author of A Spiral Life and a former fellow in neuropathology at Harvard University, observed, ‘My experiences are very unique!’[86] – in part because they relate to events outside myself, as well as being consistent with reasonable interpretations, as well as being – relatively speaking – well documented.

My experiences as “alarm calls” are also consistent with Daryl Bem’s successful repeated experiments on precognition. In 2016, an article about a meta-analysis of Daryl Bem (et al) very successful precognitive experiments states that “When Bem’s own experiments are included, the complete database comprises 90 experiments from 33 different laboratories located in 14 different countries. A total of 12,406 individuals participated in these experiments.” The article goes on to say that the results showed that the experimental design focused on sex [instinctual] was by far outperformed the other designs. [87](A Summary of “Feeling the Future: A Meta-analysis of 90 Experiments on the Anomalous Anticipation of Random Future Events by Bem, Tressoldi, Rabeyron & Dugga)

1981 documented, very detailed warning to the FBI of impending Weathermen terrorist attack

Miracles are a matter of perspective

For perspective: I walked into an FBI office on October 18, 1981 – with no real prior experience and not a stitch of documentation to support my beliefs. For the record I had never heard of the Weathermen. My entire knowledge of the Students for Democracy organization – of which the Weathermen was a splinter group – is the fact that a friend of mine – back in the 1960’s told me his brother was a member of the SDS.

Miracles are a matter of perspective. I walked into the Toledo, Ohio with a wild – and even wacky – stream of consciousness that at first glance [second glance as well] appears like the utter ravings of a madman. It was a stream of consciousness and some of the lines were “monkey screams,” “snake hiss,” “exorcism,” “Fight Hard Die Well!” So, in a sense, the miracle – for me – was that I walked into an FBI office with what appeared to be the utter “ravings of a madman”………… and walked out without the FBI throwing a net over me and hauling me off to the nearest asylum.

Precognitive details, for me are trivial compared to the miracle of being able to walk out of the office after presenting to them what appears to be the ravings of a madman – and walked out in one piece, so to speak. Of course, it does help that – to my knowledge, there are no federal laws actually prohibiting insanity – that being insane is perfectly legal.

I walked into the FBI office, sat down with an agent briefly. I pointed out a couple of lines to the FBI agent in the tiny cubicle in the Toledo, Ohio office – there are only a like three straight forward line in the entire stream of consciousness. When I got to the line of “New York” or “Miami,” I asked the FBI agent who was seated across from me in one of the cubicles at the Toledo, I asked which he thought it would be – instantaneously the FBI agent retorted angrily, “How the Hell would I know! It is your dream!” The FBI agent clearly didn’t believe in psychic – but he played the role of an FBI agent and asked several questions – like about the timing. I told him that my birthday came to mind – October 23 – which turned out to be just a couple days off. Quite a lot – like telephone telepathy seems to work via the process of association (“birthday” was produced by association with my own framework of reference.”

Anyway, even though I consciously did not believe in psychic, spirt, prophecy or anything remotely spiritual at the time, there I was – sitting down and pointing out the only three lines in the “What a nightmare” that made any sense, to the FBI agent. I went over it calmly with the FBI agent – walking out without them throwing a net over you – and then it turns out to be the longest written-documented warning-prediction in history (written documents are like hens’ teeth – Nostradamus only had 4-line quatrains) stream of consciousness, and the only one at the time (prior to 9/11) about terrorism. For the record, in documented history, there are only 7 or 8 documented warnings about assassination.

Analysis

Comparatively speaking – as I mentioned before – the “Mustard Seed-What a nightmare” spiritual-psychic experience, which happened on October 18, 1981 is an exceptionally detailed spiritual precognitive warning. Some of the details in the precognitive stream of consciousness which turned out to be accurate are:

group,
fabricating bombs,
money,
woman,
22 were assembled,
New York,
death, as well as the
weathermen terrorist manifesto.

Two days after I talked to the FBI agent, Katherine Boudin, a former leader of the notorious Weathermen terrorist group (now called Weather Underground), was arrested after a shootout with the Nyack, New York police force which had 22 officers. The shootout resulted after a chase which started with the botched robbery of a Brink’s armored truck. Bomb making materials and plans were found in the terrorists’ apartment. “Fabricating bombs” was an incredibly precise description since none had been made but it looked like they were working on them. The New York Times quoted the Weathermen manifesto: “We are the incubation of your mothers’ worst nightmares.” The “What a nightmare” warning stated “Time is at hand! Time is at hand, and Angels said. “Fight Hard, Die Well! A prophet spoke.” It could be argued that the “Time is at hand” stated twice symbolizes the two policeman who were killed, while the prophet’s statement symbolizes the one Brink’s guard who was killed.

Besides these explicit details, as with much of historical prophecies, there appears to be some symbolic and metaphorical synchronicities in the “Mustard Seed” precognitive stream of consciousness. The statements, “Time is at hand! Time is at hand, Angels said.” – and – “Fight Hard, Die Well! A prophet spoke!” match the deaths of the two policemen (“Time is at hand” – twice by an angel) and the death of one Brink’s guard (“Fight Hard, Die Well” a prophet spoke). Of course, angels could be said to outrank prophets same as policemen outrank Armored car guards. That kind of precise detail of identifying – albeit metaphorically – specific people or types of people who would be prominent in the event is quite literally “unheard of” in the long centuries of documented historical precognitive warnings-predictions.

Besides referring to angels, prophets, nuns, at the end I concluded with a statement about the “Mustard Seed.” In the Gospel of Matthew, the parable of the Mustard Seed says, “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field; which indeed is smaller than all seeds. But when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in its branches.” (Matthew 13:31–32) I must confess, I have never been able to completely grasp and fully comprehend the Mustard Seed Parable. I’m not sure exactly how Christ meant the Mustard Seed Parable and the concept of Kingdom of Heaven – as a state of mind, as a spiritual truth, or as a transcendental reality – or all three.

This passage may be right on target, as it were: Mark 4:26-29 And He was saying, “The kingdom of God is like a man who casts seed upon the soil; and he goes to bed at night and gets up by day, and the seed sprouts and grows–how, he himself does not know. “The soil produces crops by itself; first the blade, then the head, then the mature grain in the head.” Perhaps the Holy spirit because it is transcendental is, by metaphor, out of sight and below ground, but when meaning and creativity flower then the human fruit is produced. In light of the rather exceptional transcendental aspect and spiritual essence of the “What a nightmare” – or Mustard Seed – transcendental spiritual experience, my sense of it would be that the transcendental spiritual aspect might give the Mustard Seed Parable Archetype, a certain collective spiritual Truth or energy.

Mustard Seed

Both Islam and Judaism and Christianity the mustard seed is connected to the kingdom of God and faith

The Prophet Muhammed (Allaaahu ‘alaihi wasaliam) said: “on the Day of Resurrection I will intercede and say, ‘o my Lord! Admit into Paradise (even) those who have faith equal toa mustard seed in their hearts.’” Sahih Al-Buhari Volume 9, Hadith 600

As Salaamu Alaikum!

Mustard seed (2) Khardal (خردل ) means mustard. Its seed has been mentioned twice in the Quran:

1. And We shall set up balances of justice on the Day of Resurrection, then none will be dealt with unjustly in anything. And if there be the weight of a mustard seed, we will bring it. And Sufficient are We as Reckoners. [21:47]

2. O my son! If it be (anything) equal to the weight of a grain of mustard seed, and though it be in a rock, or in the heavens or in the earth, Allah will bring it forth. Verily, Allah is Subtle (in bringing out that grain), Well-Aware (of its place). [31:16]

Mustard Seed Parable in context of the Synthesis Consensus of Viktor Frankl, William James and Carl Jung

Carl Jung: “Spirit gives meaning to his [man’s] life” – Carl Jung, a psychoanalyst and contemporary of Sigmund Freud, couldn’t have been clearer or more succinct when he made that simple but profound statement. (CW8:643) Jung observed, in the Collected Works (CW8: 648 -1968 revised) that “Life and spirit are two powers or necessities between which man is placed. Spirit gives meaning to his life, and the possibility of its greatest development. But life is essential to spirit, since its truth is nothing if it cannot live.”[88] This is consistent with Jung’s strongly expressed belief that experiences are a primary influence on a person’s beliefs. In a remarkably parallel viewpoint William Gould observes that Viktor Frankl, who also believed human beings have “spirit,” argued that “Meaning analysis is based on three essential premises: the freedom of will; the will to meaning, and the meaning of life.”[89] (p.42 Frankl: Life…) Here again “Spirit” appears to be moderated or influenced by both “life” and “will” – so the over simplistic statement that “spirit creates meaning and a sense of reality has several other significant forces influencing it.

Viktor Frankl: Paul Wong elaborates on Viktor Frankl’s views regarding the nature and characteristics of spiritual or noetic (from nous)processes in the mind “in the following quotation: “The noetic (spiritual, specifically human) dimension contains such qualities as our will to meaning [Frankl’s central concept of the human being’s primary drive] our goal orientation, ideas and ideals, creativity, imagination, faith, love that goes beyond the physical, a conscience beyond the superego, self-transcendence, commitments, responsibility, a sense of humor, and the freedom of choice making. The human dimension is the medicine chest of the logotherapist. Patients are made aware that they have these rich resources of health within.” (Fabry 1994 pp.18-19) (p.156) Also, Paul Wong notes that, like many other modern-day existentialist and positive psychologists, “Park (2007) regards religion and spirituality as meaning systems.”[90] (p. 156) One could infer then that like Frankl, Park would agree that spiritual processes would be involved in meaning creation.

William James: “They [abstractions (symbols) and spiritual emotions-experiences] determine our vital attitude as decisively as the vital attitude of lovers is determined by the habitual sense, …… They are convincing to those who have them as any direct sensible experiences can be, and they are, as a rule, much more convincing than results established by mere logic are……if you do have them, and have them at all strongly, the probability is that you cannot help regarding them as genuine perceptions of truth, as revelations of a kind of reality [my underlining] which no adverse argument, however unanswerable by you in words, can expel from your belief” is what William James emphasizes in his classic work, originally published in 1902, The Varieties of Religious Experiences. [91](P.47) William James goes on to say that religious experiences and spiritual experiences create and generate a “sense of reality” [92](p.48)

Reasonable Belief

II. Reasonable Beliefs: Categorizing unusual experiences as unusual.

What many people don’t understand is that consistently studies show that somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of people have experiences – and as Park and Paloutzian observe, there is a “normalcy” to spiritual-psychic experiences. Furthermore people – at times – lose their common sense and often get lost in abstractions. Common sense would dictate that the brain processes unusual experiences as “unusual” – pretty amazing…. huh? When people get into abstractions, they often lose sight of common sense understanding and sound judgment.

Studies and experiments that have established that the “categorization” process is a very important process in the human mind and the categorization process is both well-known and well-proven in psychology. William James goes on to say that religious experiences and spiritual experiences create and generate a “sense of reality”[93] (p.48) Jung said pretty much the exact same thing actually – that an individual’s experiences shape a person’s reality.

The synthesis consensus of Viktor Frankl, Carl Jung, and William James has three characteristics

1. “spirit, spiritual processes, and religious beliefs create meaning, a sense of reality – and ultimately Reality, and Truth.

2. Tolerance: That different experiences create different worldviews and understandings

3. Spiritual symbolism generates emotional energy

In the anthology, Meaning in Positive and Existential Psychology (2014), Paul Wong, observes: “Frankl considers meaning seeking as stemming from one’s spiritual nature. William James emphasizes in his classic work, originally published in 1902, The Varieties of Religious Experiences: “They [spiritual experiences] determine our vital attitude [sense of reality] as decisively as the vital attitude of lovers is determined by the habitual sense,” Jung observed, in the Collected Works (CW8: 648 -1968 revised) that “Life and spirit are two powers or necessities between which man is placed. Spirit gives meaning to his life, and the possibility of its greatest development.[94]

Perspective: The Absolute Truth [God, Transcendental Intelligence] is Beyond Comprehension

St. Gregory of Nyssa states, “According to the true words of the Lord [Mt 5.8, the pure in heart will see God. They will receive as much as their minds can comprehend. However, the unbounded incomprehensible divinity remains beyond all understanding.”[95] (SoS J.246 & M.941, p.161)

The early Christian mystic Dionysius the Areopagite mirrored St Gregory of Nyssa, when he states, “I said in my Theological Representations that one can neither discuss not understand the One, The Super unknowable, the Transcendent, Goodness itself….”!

Lastly, there are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays to the devil. – Alfred North Whitehead

[1] Geisler, Michael E., ed. National symbols, fractured identities: Contesting the national narrative. UPNE, 2005.

[2] Einstein, Albert. The world as I see it. Open Road Media, 2011.

[3] (Spiritual Actualities vs. the Artificial Abstraction – the “Supernatural” w/ “Proper knowledge maps actualities of the real world!” K Gergen = New Approach-Categorization of Spiritual Actualities -Types, p. 13 -18 – https://www.academia.edu/40451557/Spiritual_Actualities_vs_the_Artificial_Abstraction_the_Supernatural_w_Proper_knowledge_maps_actualities_of_the_real_world_K_Gergen_New_Approach_Categorization_of_Spiritual_Actualities_Types)

[4] Voltaire. AZQuotes.com, Wind and Fly LTD, 2025. accessed May 21, 2025.

[5] Gregory, Saint. The Soul and the Resurrection. No. 12. St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993.

[6] James, William. “Pragmatism-A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking by William James: With a Critical Introduction by Eric C. Sheffield.” (2019): 1-200.

[7] Vohs, Kathleen D., and Jonathan W. Schooler. “The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating.” Psychological science 19, no. 1 (2008): 49-54.

[8] Baumeister, Roy F. Meanings of life. Guilford press, 1991.

[9] Cave, Stephen. “There’s no such thing as free will.” The Atlantic 6 (2016): 16.

[10] Hays, Jeremiah Reyes, Reynaldo Ileto, and Mercado-Flawed Materialist. “Free Will vs Determinism:” Ang mga pag-aaral… ay nag-uugnay sa nabawasang paniniwala sa malayang kalooban sa stress, kalungkutan, at mas mababang pangako sa mga relasyon.” at mas mahinang moral Extreme Individualism vs” relational will”: Kenneth Gergen, David.”

[11] O’Donohue, John. “Anam Ċara: A book of Celtic wisdom.” (No Title) (1997).

[12] Gergen, Kenneth J. Relational being: Beyond self and community. Oxford university press, 2009.

[13] Gergen, Kenneth J. Relational being: Beyond self and community. Oxford university press, 2009.

[14] Gergen, Kenneth J. Relational being: Beyond self and community. Oxford university press, 2009.

[15] Macmurray, John. “Persons in relation.” (1961).

[16] Hay, David. “Spirituality versus individualism: Why we should nurture relational consciousness.” International journal of children’s spirituality 5, no. 1 (2000): 37-48.

[17] Enriquez, Virgilio G. Pagbabangong-dangal: Indigenous psychology and cultural empowerment. Akademya ng Kultura at Sikolohiyang Pilipino, 1994.

[18] Enriquez, Virgilio G. Pagbabangong-dangal: Indigenous psychology and cultural empowerment. Akademya ng Kultura at Sikolohiyang Pilipino, 1994.

[19] Vohs, Kathleen D., and Jonathan W. Schooler. “The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating.” Psychological science 19, no. 1 (2008): 49-54.

[20] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.

[21] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.

[22] Lagdameo-Santillan, Karina. 2018. “Roots of Filipino Humanism (1)”Kapwa”” Pressenza. July 24, 2018

[23] Hays, Jeremiah Reyes, Reynaldo Ileto, and Mercado-Flawed Materialist. “Free Will vs Determinism:” Ang mga pag-aaral… ay nag-uugnay sa nabawasang paniniwala sa malayang kalooban sa stress, kalungkutan, at mas mababang pangako sa mga relasyon.” at mas mahinang moral Extreme Individualism vs” relational will”: Kenneth Gergen, David.”

[24] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.

[25] Park, Jina, and Roy F. Baumeister. “Meaning in life and adjustment to daily stressors.” The Journal of Positive Psychology 12, no. 4 (2017): 333-341.

[26] Steger, Michael F., Natalie K. Pickering, Erica Adams, Jennifer Burnett, Joo Yeon Shin, Bryan J. Dik, and Nick Stauner. “The quest for meaning: Religious affiliation differences in the correlates of religious quest and search for meaning in life.” Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 2, no. 4 (2010): 206.p.169

[27] Steger, Michael F., Natalie K. Pickering, Erica Adams, Jennifer Burnett, Joo Yeon Shin, Bryan J. Dik, and Nick Stauner. “The quest for meaning: Religious affiliation differences in the correlates of religious quest and search for meaning in life.” Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 2, no. 4 (2010): 206.p.443

[28] Steger, Michael F., Natalie K. Pickering, Erica Adams, Jennifer Burnett, Joo Yeon Shin, Bryan J. Dik, and Nick Stauner. “The quest for meaning: Religious affiliation differences in the correlates of religious quest and search for meaning in life.” Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 2, no. 4 (2010): 206.p.444

[29] Peterson, Christopher, Nansook Park, and Martin EP Seligman. “Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction: The full life versus the empty life.” Journal of happiness studies 6 (2005): 25-41.

[30] Jung, Carl Gustav. Nietzsche’s Zarathustra: Notes of the Seminar given in 1934-1939 by CG Jung. Routledge, 2014.p.1105

[31] Jung, Carl Gustav. Nietzsche’s Zarathustra: Notes of the Seminar given in 1934-1939 by CG Jung. Routledge, 2014.

[32] Jacob, François. “The statue within: an autobiography.” (1988).

[33] Geertz, Clifford. “Religion as a cultural system.” In Anthropological approaches to the study of religion, pp. 1-46. Routledge, 2013.p.140

[34] Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan Thomas Hobbes. Fili Public, 2024.

[35] Hay, David. “The spirituality of adults in Britain–recent research.” Scottish Journal of Healthcare Chaplaincy 5, no. 1 (2002): 4-9.

[36] Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and utopia. Routledge, 2013.

[37]Mullins, Willard A. “Truth and ideology: Reflections on Mannheim’s paradox.” History and Theory 18, no. 2 (1979): 141-154.p.143

[38] Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and utopia. Routledge, 2013.

[39] Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and utopia. Routledge, 2013.p.133

[40] Sherif, Muzafer, and Hadley Cantril. “The psychology of’attitudes’: Part I.” Psychological Review 52, no. 6 (1945): 295.

[41] Hay, David. “Spirituality versus individualism: Why we should nurture relational consciousness.” International journal of children’s spirituality 5, no. 1 (2000): 37-48.

[42] Enriquez, Virgilio G. Pagbabangong-dangal: Indigenous psychology and cultural empowerment. Akademya ng Kultura at Sikolohiyang Pilipino, 1994.

[43] Baumeister, Roy F. Meanings of life. Guilford press, 1991.

[44] Funk, Chadd M., and Michael S. Gazzaniga. “The functional brain architecture of human morality.” Current opinion in neurobiology 19, no. 6 (2009): 678-681.

[45] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.

[46] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.p.2

[47] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.p.4

[48] Espiritu, Jairus Diesta, and Marielle Zosa. 2022. “Loob and Meaningfulness: A Filipino Theory of Meaning in Life.” ResearchGate, January.p.6

[49] Markus, Hazel Rose, Shinobu Kitayama, and Rachel J. Heiman. “Culture and” basic” psychological principles.” (1996).

[50] Allport, Floyd H. “The group fallacy in relation to social science.” American Journal of Sociology 29, no. 6 (1924): 688-706.

[51] Barušs, Imants, and Julia Mossbridge. “Transcendent mind.” American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (2017).

[52] Sherif, Muzafer, and Hadley Cantril. “The psychology of’attitudes’: Part I.” Psychological Review 52, no. 6 (1945): 295.

[53] Frankl, Viktor E. The will to meaning: Foundations and applications of logotherapy. Penguin, 2014.

[54] Sherif, Muzafer, and Hadley Cantril. “The psychology of’attitudes’: Part I.” Psychological Review 52, no. 6 (1945): 295.

[55] Kennedy, James E., and H. Kanthamani. “An exploratory study of the effects of paranormal and spiritual experiences on peoples’ lives and well-being.” Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 89, no. 3 (1995): 249-264.

[56] Hay, David. “Spirituality versus individualism: Why we should nurture relational consciousness.” International journal of children’s spirituality 5, no. 1 (2000): 37-48.

[57] “Buddha: ‘We Are What We Think. All That We Are Arises With Our Thoughts. With Our Thoughts, We Make the World.’ — the Socratic Method.” 2023. The Socratic Method. November 4, 2023.

[58] McGilchrist, Iain. The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the western world. Yale University Press, 2019.

[59] Macrae, C.N., and S. Quadflieg. 2012. “Impression Formation.” In Elsevier eBooks, 410–17.

[60] Hays, Jeremiah Reyes, Reynaldo Ileto, and Mercado-Flawed Materialist. “Free Will vs Determinism:” Ang mga pag-aaral… ay nag-uugnay sa nabawasang paniniwala sa malayang kalooban sa stress, kalungkutan, at mas mababang pangako sa mga relasyon.” at mas mahinang moral Extreme Individualism vs” relational will”: Kenneth Gergen, David.”

[61] Thompson, Joel Kevin, Lauren M. Schaefer, Jessie E. Menzel, and Thomas F. Cash. “Encyclopedia of body image and human appearance.” (2012): 1175-1185.

[62] Hay, David. “Spirituality versus individualism: Why we should nurture relational consciousness.” International journal of children’s spirituality 5, no. 1 (2000): 37-48.

[63] Dawkins, Richard. The selfish gene. Oxford university press, 2016.

[64] Maslow, Abraham H. Toward a psychology of being. Simon and Schuster, 2013.

[65] Frankl, Viktor E. Man’s search for meaning. Simon and Schuster, 1985.

[66] Cave, Stephen. “There’s no such thing as free will.” The Atlantic 6 (2016): 16.

[67] Cave, Stephen. “There’s no such thing as free will.” The Atlantic 6 (2016): 16.

[68] Vohs, Kathleen D., and Jonathan W. Schooler. “The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating.” Psychological science 19, no. 1 (2008): 49-54.

[69] Baumeister, Roy F. “Free will in scientific psychology.” Perspectives on psychological science 3, no. 1 (2008): 14-19.

[70] Cave, Stephen. 2021. “Free Will Is Back, and Maybe This Time We Can Measure It | Aeon Essays.” Aeon. April 8, 2021.

[71] Baumeister, Roy F. Meanings of life. Guilford press, 1991.

[72] Waller, Bruce N. Restorative free will: Back to the biological base. Lexington Books, 2015.

[73] Waller, Bruce N. Restorative free will: Back to the biological base. Lexington Books, 2015.

[74] Waller, Bruce N. Restorative free will: Back to the biological base. Lexington Books, 2015.

[75] Bargh, John. Before you know it: The unconscious reasons we do what we do. Simon and Schuster, 2017

[76] Bargh, John A., and Tanya L. Chartrand. “The unbearable automaticity of being.” American psychologist 54, no. 7 (1999): 462.

[77] Bargh, John A., and Tanya L. Chartrand. “The unbearable automaticity of being.” American psychologist 54, no. 7 (1999): 462.

[78] Bargh, John A., and Tanya L. Chartrand. “The unbearable automaticity of being.” American psychologist 54, no. 7 (1999): 462.

[79] Kennedy, James E., and H. Kanthamani. “An exploratory study of the effects of paranormal and spiritual experiences on peoples’ lives and well-being.” Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 89, no. 3 (1995): 249-264.

[80] The Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science, Emma M. Seppälä, Emiliana Simon-Thomas, Stephanie L. Brown, Monica C. Worline, C. Daryl Cameron, James R. Doty Oxford University Press, Sep 26, 2017 –p.171

[81] Saslow, Laura Rose. “The Social Significance of Spirituality: New Perspectives on the Compassion-Altruism.” (2011).

[82] Sprecher, Susan, and Beverley Fehr. “Compassionate love for close others and humanity.” Journal of social and personal relationships 22, no. 5 (2005): 629-651

[83] Saif_Ansari, Saif_Ansari, and Manisha Minni. 2023. “Reproduction in Bacteria: Meaning, Diagrams, and Types.” Embibe Exams. January 25, 2023.

[84] National Alliance for Caregiving and AARP Public Policy Institute. 2024. “Caregiving in the United States 2015.” AARP. July 26, 2024.

[85] Abramson, Lior, Florina Uzefovsky, Virgilia Toccaceli, and Ariel Knafo-Noam. 2020. “The Genetic and Environmental Origins of Emotional and Cognitive Empathy: Review and Meta-analyses of Twin Studies.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 114 (April): 113–33.

[86] MacPhail, Jean C A Spiral Life, Xlibris, March 1, 2010

[87] Bem, Daryl, Patrizio Tressoldi, Thomas Rabeyron, and Michael Duggan. “Feeling the future: A meta-analysis of 90 experiments on the anomalous anticipation of random future events.” F1000Research 4 (2016): 1188.

[88] Jung, C. G. (1960). “Spirit and Life”. In Hull, R. F. C. (ed.). The Collected Works of C. G. Jung. XX. Vol. 8. New York: Pantheon Books for Bollinger. pp. 319–320

[89] Frankl, Viktor E. The will to meaning: Foundations and applications of logotherapy. Penguin, 2014.p.42

[90] Park, Crystal L. 2007. “Religiousness/Spirituality and Health: A Meaning Systems Perspective.” Journal of Behavioral Medicine 30 (4): 319–28.p.156

[91] Williams, James. “Varieties of religious experience.” New York: The New American Library (1902).p.47

[92] Williams, James. “Varieties of religious experience.” New York: The New American Library (1902)., p.48

[93] Williams, James. “Varieties of religious experience.” New York: The New American Library (1902)., p.48

[94] Jung, C. G. (1960). “Spirit and Life”. In Hull, R. F. C. (ed.). The Collected Works of C. G. Jung. XX. Vol. 8. New York: Pantheon Books for Bollinger. pp. 319–320

[95] Gregory, Saint. The Soul and the Resurrection. No. 12. St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993.

Written By

Charles Peck Jr.

Independent Scholar-Writer, International Network on Personal Meaning; I publish on academia.edu - I am leading 3 discussions: Critique of Materialist Fallacies-Delusions; Demons of Freud; Spiritual Actualities (Essay Views 539,842 [ton of spam-AI]; 2,115 followers; 4k+ Engaged Readers) link to academia profile https://independentscholar.academia.edu/CharlesPeckJr

Free Will vs Determinism – “In every regard, it seems, when we embrace determinism, we indulge our dark side.” Extreme Individualism vs “relational will” of Kenneth Gergen, David Hay, Jeremiah Reyes, Reynaldo Ileto, + J D Espiritu and M Zosa