Should Nations be held to the same standards of behavior as individuals?

Highlights from our meeting on 04/16/03

1. Since it is the function of nations to serve the interests of its citizens, shouldn't nations be held to a higher standard of behavior?
2. If an individual steals from another individual, it hurts only that one individual.
3. If a nation, or its government, steals from its citizens, it hurts all the citizens.
4. Shouldn't the punishment of those responsible for crimes on such a scale be on the same order of magnitude?
5. But is it true that the function of nations is to serve the interests of its citizens?
6. Isn't the first and primary function of any living entity to protect itself and ensure its own survival?
7. Self-preservation seems to be a fundamental law of nature.
8. But are nations natural, living entities, or are they inventions of man?
9. Isn't man himself a product of nature, and so also everything made by man?
10. Then, is there anything that is not natural?
11. If there is nothing that is not natural, doesn't "natural" lose all meaning?
12. Not necessarily. "Natural" just becomes synonymous with "Universal".
13. Natural Law then becomes Universal Law, applying to man equally as to the rest of nature.
14. Perhaps we should distinguish between "Natural" with a capital "N", meaning all of Nature, including man, and "natural" with a small "n", referring to that part of Nature that is independent of man.
15. In that sense, nations are a product of Nature working through man.
16. So are there Natural Laws that govern the behavior of individuals and the behavior of nations?
17. Where do the standards of behavior for individuals come from?
18. Aren't the standards of behavior for individuals codified in the laws of the nation?
19. But what decides what standards become the law?
20. Isn't the law of a nation simply a reflection of the culturally acceptable standards of behavior, that is, codified customs?
21. So where do customs come from?
22. Where does culture come from?
23. Some standards of behavior are derived from religious customs.
24. A very old and common standard for individual behavior is "the golden rule".
25. Do onto others as you would have them do onto you.
26. If two individuals of unequal power have a dispute, why would the more powerful one submit to such a standard?
27. If the individuals lived in a nation, there would be a higher authority more powerful than either individual.
28. Does that mean standards of behavior for individual needs a higher power to be enforced?
29. Is that why nations are granted special permission to commit or threaten to commit acts of violence and coercion which are not granted to individuals?
30. Does that mean, for nations to adhere to a standard of behavior, a force more powerful than nations needs to wield the threat of violence and annihilation over them?

How can we return to a path toward spiritual wholeness?

Highlights from our meeting on 04/09/03

1. It seems we have moved so far in the direction of material priorities we have lost touch with our spiritual priorities.
2. But aren't we already whole just the way we are?
3. Who's to say we are not already whole?
4. Isn't it judgmental to say we are not already whole?
5. Isn't it equally judgmental to say it is judgmental to say we are not already whole?
6. To say we are all already whole is also a judgement.
7. It would seem that judgement is unavoidable.
8. Without judgement there can be no distinctions.
9. Without judgement one cannot distinguish between being whole and not being whole.
10. Without the distinction between "whole" and "not whole" the word "whole" loses all meaning.
11. Doesn't wholeness refer to a collection of parts that add up to more than the sum of the parts?
12. A set of jigsaw puzzle pieces that have been assembled, collectively posses a quality, an image, not present in a pile of unassembled puzzle pieces.
13. Yeah, and if you feed me through a giant meat grinder, you would still have all my parts, but I would strongly argue that there is something, some quality, that was there before that is not there afterwards.
14. Still, some would argue that the whole by necessity still exists in the collection of the parts, even unassembled.
15. Isn't that mistaking potential for actual?
16. Some potentials might not ever be reached.
17. If the pile of puzzle pieces were burned before they were assembled, their potential would not be realized.
18. But the whole image must have existed before the puzzle was cut up into pieces in the first place.
19. Likewise, the whole organism existed before being ground into parts in the meat grinder example.
20. Are there any examples of unassembled parts existing before the greater whole?
21. Yes, a simple iron bar is composed of many molecules with magnetic polarities oriented in random directions.
22. Such an iron bar exhibits no net magnetic polarity, because the individual polarities cancel each other out.
23. Rubbing the iron bar with a permanent magnetic will cause the molecules to align in such a way that the magnetic polarities line up.
24. The "magnetized" bar now exhibits a overall quality that it previously did not process.
25. Another, simpler example would be a pile of bricks that later become a building.
26. The difference between the pile of bricks and the building is the architectural blueprint.
27. The difference between before and after, then, is information.
28. Similarly, the difference between a clump of embryonic cells and a complex human being is the architectural information coded in our DNA.
29. Perhaps becoming whole, then, is a organic process whereby a pile of parts evolves or develops into a complex of parts in which qualities emerge or manifest that were not there before.
30. Perhaps the pile of parts does represent a kind of whole, but a different whole from the integrated whole that manifests over time.
31. It is the quality emerging which may be incomplete and longing for wholeness, like a partially assembled jigsaw puzzle picture longing for completeness.
32. So how does that relate to our spiritual wholeness?
33. What do we mean when we say we are not spiritually whole?
34. Perhaps it means being split or separated from some parts of ourselves.
35. We tend to disown parts of ourselves we don't like or think are not acceptable.
36. Doesn't Jung call these disowned parts of ourselves, our shadow?
37. So becoming whole might mean reconnecting with our shadow.
38. Some men are working on reconnecting with their feminine side.
39. One can also work on moving from being too much "in the head" to being more "in the heart".
40. But in moving from one part to another, aren't you still maintaining a split?
41. If one moves from valuing the head over the heart to valuing the heart over the head, is that moving to wholeness?
42. If one values one part over another, doesn't that perpetuate the split?
43. Perhaps becoming whole means finding a balance of all your parts so that all parts are equally valued.
44. To find a balance among all your parts, you must first recognize all your parts.
45. How can you see your blind spots?
46. Shifting one's focus away from material priorities might help.
47. We live in a materialistic culture.
48. Our culture has it's own disowned parts, a collective shadow.
49. A large portion of our collective shadow is housed in our prisons.
50. How does living in a schizophrenic culture affect an individuals path toward wholeness?
51. Being part of a greater whole often means specializing and integrating.
52. In our culture the trend is toward more and more specialization and interdependence.
53. This is like the process of early embryonic cells developing into more and more specialized cells which integrate into a complex human organism.
54. Is this pressure to specialize robbing us of our individual wholeness?
55. If we abdicate or disown responsibility outside our area of expertise, such as foreign affairs or tax reform, aren't we allowing a collective power act on our behalf in these areas, for better or for worse?
56. If we harbor negative feelings or intentions in the disowned areas, consciously or unconsciously, won't the collective power act on our behalf in a negative manner?
57. So connecting with and resolving in a positive manner our own individual split with our individual shadows might be the remedy for stopping the destructive behavior of the collective power.

Why is it so hard to be totally honest?

Highlights from our meeting on 04/02/03

1. Someone wrote a book suggesting that if everyone were totally honest all the time, it would solve many of the world's problems.
2. The premise is that not being totally honest causes isolation and alienation in relationships.
3. Does that mean that if you think someone has big ears, you should just say so?
4. Not speaking the truth can perpetuate some problems.
5. What is the relationship between truth and honesty?
6. Isn't honesty just your particular truth as you see it in the moment?
7. If you believe what you are saying in the moment, then you are being honest, even if you later decide that you were mistaken in your belief.
8. Dishonesty then involves the intent to deceive.
9. Is it always wrong to be dishonest?
10. Can one be dishonest for compassionate reasons?
11. A doctor might lie to his patient about the seriousness of her condition out of concern that the truth might cause live-threatening depression.
12. Does honesty require courage?
13. In the story "The Emperor's New Clothes" it was a child that was able to be totally honest.
14. Was that courage or naivete on the part of the child?
15. Is the inclination or ability to not being totally honest something we learn as we grow up?
16. Does this "skill" in hiding our truth serve a useful purpose?
17. Is this ability uniquely human?
18. It has been reported that Koko, the gorilla who was taught sign language, has been caught lying on occasion.
19. Perhaps Koko learned to lie from his human teachers.
20. Is lying something that was introduced to the world with the introduction of language?
21. Why would lying become wide spread unless there were some rewards in lying?
22. What are the rewards of lying?
23. In our culture, it seems that material success is in part tied to the willingness to be dishonest, or at least, to not being totally honest.
24. It is an almost universal practice to price items as "something 99" or "something 95" to make them seems less expensive than they really are.
25. If car dealers and others would disclose their true costs and profit margins, it would be easier for customers to evaluate if they were getting a fair deal.
26. Competition may be a primary motivation for not being totally honest.
27. If I were to practice full disclosure, it would put me at a competitive disadvantage with my competitors.
28. An extreme example of this would be lying to a mortal enemy, as in the time of war.
29. This would support the notion that dishonesty creates and maintains distance and alienation in a relationship.
30. Hiding the truth, then, can be useful in maintaining distance or boundaries in cases where such separation might have survival value.
31. So it seems, honesty can promote and strengthen desired relationships and dishonesty can protect against dangerous relationships.
32. But isn't dishonesty, in part, also the cause of dangerous relationships?
33. Also, don't we sometimes use dishonesty to initiate desired relationships?
34. If we want to be "in with the in-crowd", don't we often pretend to be what we are not?
35. Isn't personality just a false front that hides our true essence?
36. In some social environments, isn't it honesty rather than dishonesty that will cause alienation?
37. Announcing to a dogmatic minister in church full of intolerant believers that you think his concept of God is a bunch of hooey, will cause you to become alienated very quickly.
38. But in this example, aren't you already feeling isolated inside from this group, whether or not you express your truth out loud?
39. Could you ever truly feel accepted in a group unless you could be openly honest about who you are, how you feel, and what you think?
40. We can't always choose our environment.
41. It would seem that in some environments, if you are the only one who is totally honest, you will be eaten alive.
42. Are some environments more conducive to total honesty than others?
43. Environments that are not judgmental seem to be more conducive to total honesty.
44. Growing up in a dysfunctional family can teach a child the value of hiding feelings and thoughts.
45. Being dependent on an environment that is judgmental puts the child in a bind.
46. If love is conditional, then the child must compromise honesty in order to not lose love.
47. Unconditional love, then, might be a prerequisite for total honesty.
48. Some individuals have a kind of mental disorder that renders them incapable of practicing honesty.
49. Are these the individuals we call "pathological liars"?
50. Perhaps there is a certain fraction of the population that has such a medical condition, for whom even the most loving environment could not have made a difference.
51. Perhaps the rest of us can find hope in learning to recognize and adopting more and more loving/healthy environments for ourselves.
52. Don't we have a bit of a "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" problem here?
53. How do these "honesty-ready" environments come into being?
54. In order to have safe, honesty-ready environments, don't some individuals have to practice bold honesty even in the face of adversity?