1) History shows that through the times, there have been people living under pretty harsh conditions by our standards, who have gone on to bring Heaven down to Earth to an extent that is baffling just to look at.
2) Recent history shows that an increase in affluence has not really led to a mass migration up the pyramid to a more refined soul. Rather, people seem to become more active at or near their original level. Those at the basic level eat more (although some throw up afterwards), they have more sex (even if they need to take medication to keep it up) and they do it with more people. The vast majority, though, seem to be stuck at the "belonging" level: They can't ever get enough recognition from others, and their life becomes a desperate and endless fight to show that they are Good Enough and then some. In so far that some people transcend the lower levels and take an interest in spirituality, they will likely as not simply end up as paying consumers of spiritual entertainment, in which any superstition is as good as any other, if the wrapping is pretty.
My conclusion is not that poverty is cool. I am glad people live longer, healthier lives. But I think history shows us that money does not change people for the better, rather they just become more of what they already are.
1 comment:
Well should have read this post before commenting on a later one.
Your critique of modern spiritual poverty, as it relates to Maslow, is well taken. I agree with it across the board.
What then is the desired outcome? A higher mass level of spiritual development in the general culture? That must be it. What else could it be?
The blog author of "One Cosmos" seems to think this should be the goal, but then balks when we broach methods to implement it.
Influence. That is the key word. Not evangelism.
Nobody will discuss the overall goal, and the most efficient way to help it along.
Perhaps you will break the silence?
Post a Comment