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

It must be kept in mind that an empowered person shall practice consistently to swiftly and effectively switch over from one media to another. That requires repeated practice of differentiated communication in different suitability. However, in the ultimate analysis, we can say with definitive assurance that ideal it is to have a poise and equilibrium between demand and supply of our consciousness system but, this is tough in contemporary milieus. Therefore, it seems advisable that we consciously remain in a consciousness system that is relatively ‘Low In Demand’ or to say in other words, ‘more on the lower end of demands’, so that our system as well as milieus are not stressed. It is for every individual to consciously assess and decide what it takes to have a ‘Low In Demand’ system. It is discretionary as different persons can have different capacity for systemic stress.

Also, equally crucial aspect of system-sanity, which classical spiritualism has insisted and detailed in length, is the idea of ‘Self-Supply’. Thousands of years back, it was realized by humanity, which modern science confirms, that ‘Nothing Exists Outside Self And Nothing Outside Self Has Any Meaning, Utility And Worth’. This suggests, when this very conscious self, the ‘Aware-I’ has all elements of utility and worth, it is the best supplier of most happiness and wellness cognitions. Therefore, the higher consciousness has the task of not only opting for a conscious system ‘Low In Demand’ but also ‘Be The Supply’. Here comes the role of cognitive changes. Here comes the utility of the artistry of music, dance and artfulness. Here comes the worth of love and compassion in hearts. They all help in ‘Be The Supply’ artistry of consciousness.

Now, there is another idea – an aspect of media and communication, which is tough to explain and tougher to understand. This is what may be termed as Optimality of Specificity. What we mean by optimality of specificity relates to two aspects of media and communication. First, there has to be clarity and exactness (specificity) in conscious selection of right and appropriate media for specific communication. So, if I have to arrive at a conclusion about a decision in my life, which requires logic and reason, I have to ensure that my media or other person’s media, to whom I have to communicate, is equally attuned to logicality and reason. Therefore, if I am emotionally unsettled at any point of life and I am trying to reason out a decision, requiring objectivity, logic and reason, I am bound to fail as there is apparent conflict and contradiction between my media and communication because of missing specificity (exactness).

Secondly, the communication itself needs to have clarity and exactness. Even if my media is in sync with mood and modality of my communication to my consciousness, if I am not inputting exact and pinpointed communication to the media, I shall only get abstracted and confused output. This exactness of communication is tough task. It has got to do with how we have learnt our languages with good depth and command, how from early childhood we have managed our emotions well and how we have managed our thoughtfulness to exact needs.

Globally, there seems a common trend everywhere that communication clarity and exactness has been eroded and there is growing abstractness and waywardness in communication – both internal as well as external. Much of the blame for this muddled up communication exactness goes to emotional instabilities of average person and little practice of self-introspection. Average person in contemporary cultures and milieus has lost touch with the brilliant human ability and artistry of ‘self-dialogue’. In ancient Oriental spiritual traditions, there is great stress on continuous and persevered self-investigation and self-enquiry. These are essentially aimed at honing the skills of communication with self.

To make the idea of optimality of specificity in communication clear and also to emphasize its importance in life-living wellness and success, I share a true story with you. Few months back, a dear friend of mine shared with me an idea and he insisted that I do research on this issue. The issue was that in his long list of acquaintances, friends and relatives, there were large numbers of families that had only single child, be it a girl or boy. There was a growing feeling among them that there single grown up offspring did not seem sensitive enough towards their emotional and other needs and therefore, there is a common overriding wish that these families must work together to evolve and create a support structure in coming years so that they are independent and self-sufficient in their old age. My dear friend wanted me to do a research on what’s going on around the world and how we can go about it.

Not to my amazement, I found a clear global trend and commonality of causality, when I researched over this issue. Almost in most developed country, there is around 10-15 percent families with single offspring and globally, there was a fast emerging complaint among many families, be it with single child or many children that the parents felt a growing gap between them and their offspring. There were common emotional issues and conflicts of assumptions were on both sides. I wish to share my findings that may help us understand how critical the issue of exactness of ‘communication’ is.

First, there was no clarity on both sides about the specificity (exactness) of the trouble between parents and the offspring. Rather, the entire stress factor between the two had very abstracted situation and acceptance. Is there a dignity issue at hand? Are offspring treating parents badly? Are they abusive? The research seems to suggest, there is no definitiveness to it. For example, an old lady living alone complained that she was very upset with her daughter because when she came to her house on a vacation or otherwise, the daughter would check her food packets and confront her mother as why she was eating this and why she was still stacking the spices that were well past expiry date, etc. The old mother felt this as intrusive behavior and though she may not take it as a ‘dignity’ issue, she still was ruffled up by her daughter entering her space and trying to order her. The daughter on the other side felt she was doing the right things as she was concerned about her mother’s wellbeing. Now, there is no data available as which way she was telling her mother about what she was telling. There are innumerable such examples where both parents and offspring would stand to appear as both are right and genuine in their feelings, yet, trouble pervaded their relationships.

So, broadly, what is the specificity-trouble in this issue of parent-offspring communication crisis? It is very clear, if we see the broad picture. The primary issue is that two people are having a crisis in relationship, where the root of trouble is that there is a gap of ‘perceptions’. Only in few rare cases, there is an element of dignity as abusive behavior between two are not the rule. The majority cases have communication collapse or abstraction. The parents are probably not receiving the perception and perspective of offspring and the vice-versa. Both sides have right and wrong in their perceptions and perspectives. Usually, both sides have the problem of gap between ‘Media’ and ‘Communication’, which we have discussed earlier. Like, children are not sensitive to the reality that parents may not be logical about their right and true wellness concerns towards them as they may be emotionally instable. The parents may also be insensitive to the fact that the grown up child has moved away and may have his or her own emotional crisis about how he or she can handle parents’ safety and wellness. May be, both sides have emotional ‘Media’ and they are attempting a ‘Logical’ communication through it and naturally, abstractions creep in and specificity (exactness) is missing by huge margins.

So, what is the trouble? The trouble is; the specificity or exactness of the situation demands that both sides sit together and discuss ways to improve communication and weed out elements of distrust and abstraction about it between them. However, what parents are doing is focusing on how to get rid of this crisis by devising a ‘disconnect’. They are not focusing on root of trouble but the inverse of it by planning to be ‘independent’ of offspring. The offspring are also not focusing on how to alter communication so that their concerns of safety and distant-care perspectives are understood in right spirit by parents. Rather, they are also planning to fill in more vacuum with their parents by ‘providing’ but not ‘intervening’. So, the outcome is growing gap between the two sides.

The same situation happens with internal communication within an individual too. I must share with you a classical example of this conscious-subconscious gap and conflict, which is global in nature and intent. This shall help understand why specificity or exactness is so critical in media and communication optimality. It is widely accepted by most scientific thinking that working actionable structure of brain states is subconscious layer. The conscious states may opt for a decision but it is only intangible. The decision in mind always has to be converted into definitive action and for that only the subconscious has tangible structures. Therefore, there must be very specific linearity between conscious and subconscious about a situation. If not, abstractions shall creep in and hypocrisies shall usurp domain.

This is primary reason that globally, average person shall almost always mouth good and lofty ideals and words. This happens because in almost all cultures, goodness and righteousness is common. Therefore, it is always easy and prompt for anyone to think right and mouth most appropriate words. However, most people shall seldom do the same good and right thing. That is why ‘hypocrisy’ is the greatest malaise of human world. Our conscious self shall usually think great things but as it seldom is made to stand in sync and symmetry with subconscious, which carries the commensurate ‘action’, most of us seldom carry out the same and exact righteousness that we think. Hypocrisy is entropic situation of conscious-subconscious gap.

Globally, we have witnessed that in most nations, there is a gap between what the political leadership ‘thinks’ and what bureaucracy ‘carries’. The visions or righteous ‘intent’ of ‘decision-makers’ or law-makers are usually good and right. The policy-frameworks are usually not wrong and bad as they are guided by constitutions of nations. However, only the bureaucracy can carry this intent into actionable work. There is clear divide between two pillars of governance. It is very rare that decision-makers take into full confidence the bureaucracy and it is equally rare that bureaucracy stand in full cooperation with law-makers. Also, bureaucracy usually has high levels of mediocrity for any good to be delivered in optimal excellence. This is akin to gap between conscious and subconscious – the ‘thinking’ and ‘acting’ layers seldom being on one page.

Naturally, most nations, especially developing nations have low optimality of their governance systems. In contemporary times, it is rather tragic that politicians and bureaucracy has even come to open fights and abuses. The level of distrust and anger against each other is calamitously high. This crisis of governance has been widely documented by intellectuals of society time and again but still, no concrete measures are taken by governments to work on improved symmetry and synergy between two key layers of governance.

Therefore, the primary specificity (exactness) is to have both our subconscious and conscious in singular and present linearity. This ensures that entire consciousness system is in singular media to receive and execute appropriate communication. This requires practice. In contemporary world of fast paced life and multi-tasking demands, often, two domains of consciousness are usually in competing and conflicting platforms.