Paradigm Aspect Links
What Went Wrong
Site Section Links
If you have raced with running men and they have wearied
Ancient Planetary Catastrophe
The extent of the ramifications of ancient
If you understand and accept in general the theme of planetary astral catastrophism and especially the Saturn myth reconstruction (hereinafter called "the reconstruction") and the concomitant themes of the golden age ending in a major disaster and resulting in a series of lesser Solar system shakeups, the implications and ramifications of the reconstruction become enormous. The range and extent of intellectual knowledge and spiritual belief change becomes almost unmanageable or overwhelming for the modern man immersed, educated, trained and conditioned in the popular world views built around either the "godless" or purposeless evolutionistic gradualism of establishment science, or his "religion" based on some external authority figure (book, tradition, denomination or hierarchal priesthood, leadership or clergy), or some mind and soul numbing combination thereof.
Nothing is so firmly believed as what we least know. - Montaigne
The....tranquilizing philosophy....or religion?...is so delicately contrived that, for the time being, it provides a gentle pillow for the true believer from which he cannot very easily be aroused. So let him lie there. -Einstein
It is so difficult to fathom the extent to which our "knowledge" and concepts in one arena or discipline are conditioned and constrained by our "knowledge", assumptions, and beliefs in the other areas of understanding. When you radically change your view in one domain, the repercussions may be extensive in the others. When the underpinnings of the facets of the modern world view are ripped out by the Saturnian reconstruction, one may as well start all over in examining what one knows and what one believes. In confronting the ramifications of this reconstruction, modern man now faces the challenge of an intellectual, social and spiritual revolution unmatched by those introduced in the last two millennia a la Ptolemy, Copernicus, Galileo, Semmelweiss, et al.
For instance, it is impossible for modern theorists to understand that the enigmatic structures at Stonehenge, Sacsayhuaman, Chaco Canyon, et al. are enormous religious shrines that reflect the ancient triune God; and with an inordinate investment built to honor, and probably induce the return of the Saturnian sun deity that ruled during the Golden Age. Such a concept seems completely unrelated to anything they are aware of and therefore ludicrous. The modern myth of the stable, largely undisturbed solar system going back for millions or billions of years totally precludes its validity.
On the other horn of the dilemma, one of the ultimately meaningful concepts propounded by Velikovsky the psychoanalyst is that mankind is suffering from a catastrophically induced amnesia, a kind of cauterized mental aptitude, an intellectual scotoma rendering him a driven person, controlled by trauma from the past and not even knowing it.
In the course of the last 45 years since Worlds in Collision blazed onto the literary scene, there have been a few (precious few) articles written in the journals dealing with the ramifications−of the necessary reconstructions of myths, paradigms, history and chronology, etc.−on the ultimately important and meaningful issues, that is, on philosophy, religion, theology and the import and destiny of the individual and the human race. One of the best was "The Garden, the Fall, and the Restoration" by Richard Heinberg, which article should be read or reread in conjunction with reading this article.
Is it important or paramount to be concerned about the extent and the ramifications of the reconstruction? One of the least vital reasons is given by physicist Nick Herbert:
The search for the picture of the "way the world really is" is an enterprise that transcends the narrow interests...for better or worse, humans have tended to pattern their domestic, social, and political arrangements according to the dominant vision of physical reality. Inevitably the cosmic view trickles down to the most mundane details of everyday life.
There are probably two contrasting ways, using words, to accomplish the almost impossible task of introducing paradigm breaking or belief shattering ideas to homo sapiens. One way is with parables or analogies (literally "outside of logic") which are designed to engender an insightful sense of the idea or truth of what is being communicated. Since one partial definition/description of a language is: a set of words,
Grammar is the logic of
speech, even as
each of which is definable by other members of the set; the other or "hard" way is with logic and reason, which absolutely requires careful and precise definitions of words. This
"There is no such way to
gain admittance, or give defense to strange and
is a brick by brick building approach which must of necessity be accompanied by a high level of intelligence and education, and a core-deep commitment to being rational, logical and reasonable on the part of the listener. This website obviously is written mostly in the latter mode or style of communication.
Here is another core issue:
Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority. - Huxley
The highest duty is to respect authority. - Pope Leo XIII
Well, which is it?
When out walking with me on one of the first sunny pre-spring days, my friend noted, "Isn't it remarkable that people (strangers) you meet on the sidewalk smile so much more when the weather is nice than they do the rest of the time?" When asked what she thought the cause of this was, she replied. "Why, the balmy conditions make them feel better and more friendly." I remarked that I thought the cause was that the sunny, balmy conditions stirred deep-seated human memories of a much better time,the Golden Age. The point is, why would being out in the sunshine, which is frying your skin, bathing you in ionizing radiation which makes you look older, intrinsically make anyone "feel" good or better, even considering a higher negative ion balance in the air?
This is an example of the kind of broad scale change in thinking that may be necessary. When people say they are uplifted or feel good when they are communing with nature by being out in a lovely natural setting, or even gardening, they may not really be "communing" or "getting back" to nature. Nature (the natural environment) as it is so constituted now is unpredictable and hostile−we do not live in a benevolent "natural" environment. Nature is savage, "red in tooth and tong" Why would anybody rational want to "get closer" to such a thing. This might be like getting closer to a huge, hungry crocodile in his natural domain. Rather these people, instead of communing with nature in a mystical way, may be remembering on a very basic level the benevolent environment that existed in the Golden age. They may be experiencing those aspects of the current "nature" that remind them of the "paradise" that once was in existence. Since the bottom line purpose of anything we do is to make us feel good, any thing that "reminds" us on a gut level of this previous state of humankind would make a person "feel" good.
If you do not define your god or what your god is like you quite literally have the problem of confusing any real God with whatever shows up and differs from your definition. Every intrinsically or ontologically dualistic religion or every religion that has a fallen superior being has this problem intensified by the introduction of a counterfeit from its evil one.
Modern enlightened man has feelings of insecurity, isolation, anxiety, homelessness, frustration, loneliness, restlessness and betrayal by the traditional God and traditional theology.
It is evident, that all the sciences have a relation, greater or less, to human nature; and that, however wide any of them seem to run from it, they still return by one passage or another. [We must] march directly up to the capitol or center of these sciences to human nature itself; which once being masters of, we may everywhere else hope for an easy victory. From this station we may extend our conquest over all those sciences... There is no question of importance, whose decision is not compromised in the science of man; and there is none, which can be decided with any certainty, before we become acquainted with that science. In pretending, therefore, to explain the principles of human nature, we in effect propose a complete system of the sciences, built on a foundation almost entirely new, and the only one upon which they can stand with any security...The science of man is the only solid foundation for the other sciences. - Hume, Treatise of Human Nature, p 12-13.
If to fear God is the beginning of wisdom, then to not fear God is the beginning of freedom. You may be wise and afraid or wise and free, but you cannot be free and afraid.
Science is perfectly capable of marginalizing believers without actually stripping them of their belief. - Bryan Appleyard, Understanding The Present, Anchor Books, 1540 Broadway, New York, NY. 10036, 1992 p. 10.
solution was, in effect, to start again now that the
values and mythologies of the past had been so thoroughly
discredited...His role was simply to see the problem with such
tortured clarity that it could never again be ignored. In his final
years he descended into insanity.
First, it is clear that there is something about the human condition
that demands a dimension we call religious, whatever it might be.
Particular faiths have come and gone, but nothing has ever displaced
the religious presence itself from human life. It has always
accompanied men and their cultures.
The philosophers have only interpreted the world in
[R]eligion, like science, began with the inscrutable and majestic
spectacle of the heavens. This points again to the fact that they
are destined to compete: they are occupying the same territory.
The above cited dates correspond quite nicely with the end of the ancient intersecting orbital, cyclical catastrophes. The point supporting catastrophism and the Saturn myth reconstruction is that when you live in one you don't try to explain a benevolent environment, you are too busy living and enjoying it. And you can't explain things very well when they are being catastrophically disrupted and are significantly changing, when you are mostly just trying to survive. The explanation phase comes when things are peaceful enough to get around to it. Appleyard continues:
The explanations and justifications in each of these systems were,
of course, extraordinarily diverse. Weber characterized each by the
ideally perfect carrier of each faith: "In Confucianism, the
world-organizing bureaucrat; in Hinduism, the world, ordering
magician; in Buddhism, the mendicant monk wandering through the
world; in Islam, the warrior seeking to conquer the world; in
Judaism, the wandering trader; and in Christianity, the itinerant
But they were all explanations and justifications of human life and all tended to fall into the prophet-priest pattern also described by Weber. Prophets provided the system and the ultimate values; priests analyzed and rationalized this system and adapted it to the forms and customs of life. It is an important pattern in human affairs which was to be repeated in the development of science. The prophets were the innovative scientists, the priests were the interpreters, extenders and technologists who followed in their wake.*(p. 82)
Yet from one of these Theories of Everything−only one−sprang the form of knowledge that was to challenge and transform them all. There are any number of theories as to why the scientific imagination should have sprung solely from the Christian.* (p. 82)
Let us not become "priests" of the reconstruction. Rather let us lean more towards being sensitive "prophets" and sensible revolutionaries.
For the secret catastrophe of the modern mind is too terrible to be
acknowledged in polite society. Human beings cannot live with
such a revelation. The only morality left is that of the
consoling lie. In the absence of great old illusions, little
new ones must be our consolation.
Science is a wonderful thing, but it has not succeeded in maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, and that's all we asked of it. - Anon
[The] fragmentation is in essence a confusion around the question of difference and sameness (or one-ness), but the clear perception of these categories is necessary in every phase of life. To be confused about what is different and what is not, is to be confused about everything. David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1980, p. 16.
One of the reasons, I believe, that knowledge is in a state of useless overproduction is that it is strewn all over the place, spoken in a thousand competitive voices. Its insignificant fragments are magnified all out of proportion, while its major and world-historical insights lie around begging for attention. There is no throbbing, vital center. - Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York, NY.: The Free Press 1975 Preface x.
What we today call "inauthentic" men, men who develop their own uniqueness; they follow out the styles of automatic and uncritical living in which they were conditioned as children. They are "inauthentic" in that they do not belong to themselves, they are not "their own" person, do not act from their own center, do not see reality on its own terms; they are the one-dimensional men totally immersed in the fictional games being played in their society, unable to transcend their social conditioning: the corporation men in the west, the bureaucrats in the east, the tribal men locked up in tradition−man everywhere who doesn't understand what it means to think for himself and who, if he did, would shrink back at the idea of such audacity and exposure. - Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York, NY.: The Free Press 1975, p. 73.
All the traditional ideologies that disguised and absorbed it [neurosis] have fallen away and modern ideologies are just too thin to contain it. So we have modern man: increasingly slumping onto analysts couches, making pilgrimages to psychological guru centers and joining therapy groups, and filling larger and larger numbers of mental hospital beds. - Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York, NY.: The Free Press 1975, p. 177.
Even Freud−Enlightenment man that he was, after all−wanted to see a saner world and seemed willing to absorb lived truth into science if only it were possible. He once mused that in order to really change things by therapy one would have to get at the masses of men; and that the only way to do this would be to mix the copper of suggestion into the pure gold of psychoanalysis. In other words, to coerce, by transference, a less evil world. But Freud knew better, as he gradually came to see that the evil in the world is not only in the insides of people but on the outside, in nature−which is why he became more realistic and pessimistic in his later work. - Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York, NY.: The Free Press 1975, p. 283.
Mankind today is still making history today without having any conscious idea of what it wants or under what conditions it would stop being unhappy; in fact what it is doing seems to be making itself more unhappy and calling that unhappiness progress. Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death, Vintage Books, p. 16.