☀️
⛅
🐦🐦🐦
Of the Destination of ManEvery evolution moves from one state toward another. From the moment a living species is said to be evolving, it obeys a progressive development.
When an evolving species reaches an unsurpassable state and maintains itself there, we can consider this state as its destination.
Paroxysm (perfection) and extinction (death) are two kinds of destinations.
Life can be observed at three different levels: the living, the species and the individual.
These three orders of the living thus seek to reach a kind of unsurpassable perfection and to maintain themselves there. This summit can be called: achieved perfection.
For example, the wings of the magpie result from the progressive transformation of a reptile's legs. Today, they seem to have reached ideal proportions for their vocation. We can thus consider these wings as having reached their destination — and we can qualify this destination as: achieved perfection.
We can therefore envisage extinction as a destination, qualifying it as final or intermediate. For the atheist it is a final destination; for the believer, an intermediate destination.
Consequence: achieved perfection as well as extinction can both be considered destinations. Within the living system (with the exception of the living itself, which has so far ignored extinction), two types of destinations are thus observable: perfection and extinction.
To be at the Zenith and to DieWe obviously find these two types of destination at the scale of man. To perfect oneself is the destiny of every human being (even if it involves perfecting oneself in the negative — as in the case of the burglar, for example).
Extinction is another of our destinies.
The subject may know or be ignorant of these two destinations. The baby, for instance, does not know he is destined to become an adult — yet he moves irresistibly in that direction. If the subject is ignorant of his destination yet moves toward it nonetheless, this means that the driving power of this destiny does not belong to human will but to the very nature of the living. When a human being consciously seeks to reach a particular perfection (for example the perfection of the body or artistic perfection), he can imagine this perfection in broad terms without knowing whether he will achieve it, or what that destination will actually be like. Therefore, if the choice of destination appears to belong to the subject, the reality of the destination does not.
Let us now try to see whether the choice of destination truly belongs to the subject.
Take an example. Two people — a bodybuilder and an ascetic — each aims to reach a certain form of perfection. Physical perfection for the bodybuilder and spiritual perfection for the ascetic.
Each of the two people has the impression of having made a life choice — but is this really so? In reality, their decision was motivated above all by the totality of their personal history: childhood, upbringing, geographical location, what impressed them in life, and the values of the moment offered by society (for example, current ultra-liberalism initiates, a priori, few ascetic vocations and many bodybuilders).
To this must be added the psychological and physical dispositions of each person. Both asceticism and the gym require certain dispositions — otherwise failure is inevitable. Which further restricts genuine freedom of choice.
Nothing could ultimately have prevented us from being what we are. Even if an individual were to oppose what everything predestines him toward — in an attempt to prove free will — this spirit of contradiction itself depends on the totality of the person's history. Some possess it, others do not. In either case — whether he accepts or contradicts his choice — man is not master of the success of his project, nor of its conformity with the image he had of it. And finally, we must also take into account the influence of impulses, desires and passions on the accomplished act. And these powers surpass free will. Man is therefore not master of his destination. Yet whatever he does, he is destined for a destination. Whatever choices he makes, man always ends up somewhere.
The difficulty of admitting the theory of predestination seems to me easily illuminated by the following psychological experiment. Imagine a man to whom it has been predicted that he will one day be a great scientist; if that is his wish, he will no doubt say at once: "Yes, and I shall quickly set to studying hard"; or if it is not his wish: "No, I will not open a book." Yet both statements would be equally false. For in either case he will become what he was destined to become. And he will completely forget that everything was predestined — including his statement — and will thus entangle himself in the worst contradictions with himself. Søren Kierkegaard.
Of the FutureWhat choice if I cannot try each alternative?
To make a genuine choice between two alternatives concerning the future, one would need to know with precision all the events composing each of the two alternatives.
I hesitate between going to Vladivostok by car or by train. I know nothing of what each route holds for me.
Man has neither the gift of ubiquity (to experience both itineraries and make a real choice) nor mastery over future contingencies. His choices regarding his future are therefore an illusion. Certainties are at best hopes.
The same applies to choices concerning the immediate (drinking or not drinking a beer, for example). Being entirely conditioned by our past, by the values of the moment, by our organism and our impulses, these pseudo-choices are, likewise, only an illusion.
The only way to be the true master of our choice would be to be influenced neither by the past nor the future, neither by tendencies nor by morals, neither by the values of the moment. This superior state exists. It is passive contemplation. The pure feeling of the present instant. In other words: the state of beatitude. It is the only state in which the being lets himself be entirely guided by his internal energy. By his vital impulse. And therefore there is no longer any illusory choice, nor any genuine choice either.
Humanity having not yet reached its unsurpassable perfection, it must still act — and for that, man needs all his motivations (instincts, tendencies, desires, impulses). He must project himself toward the future and refer to the past. And sometimes it is necessary to have the illusion that he has a choice and is master of his destiny.
If man has no choice, yet is drawn toward destinations*, it is because he is included in a destiny. There is therefore no chance.
What we attribute to chance simply reflects our (momentary) inability to penetrate this determination. Chance merely illuminates our powerlessness to calculate the determinism concealed behind each act unjustly granted to the undetermined. Thus, although today it is still impossible to confirm the irresistible evolution of humanity toward ecstasy, advances in probability calculus will no doubt one day make this possible.
The Master of Human DestinyIn summary. The builder-man has the illusion of having a choice over his acts. He believes he is directing the events of existence when in fact he is their plaything. This illusion is necessary for developing the progress of humanity.
But the living is not the creator of this destiny either. If it were, its power would be superior to that of the universe — and this is impossible, since life is a component of the universe's evolution. The living simply transmits human destiny, whose creator resides beyond it — beyond the universe too. In other words, the creator of human destiny is the creative principle: what we call God.
God is therefore the master of human destiny. And the only way for man to be free would be to become one with the divine. Thus, the only means for humanity to be free would be to accept a kind of enlightened and active fatalism — that is, to understand the purpose of creation and the real purpose of human actions. To understand the perfection for which man is made. To tend toward this perfection and realise it consciously. Man must also place contingencies, obstacles* and difficulties within the plan of execution* — they are a motor of human creativity.
To decipher the prescriptions of the creative principle, man has several means available. The analysis of human evolution and its logic is one of them. The observation of nature (carefully setting aside all the perverse uses of social Darwinism*) is another.
Freedom therefore demands going in the direction of nature — as Stoicism and Epicureanism recommended.
Toward a Conscious EvolutionWe have not yet entered the era of the wise man.
The destiny of humanity is in the hands of a wisdom superior to our own, still undeciphered. Humanity's entry into its wisdom will begin with man's awareness of his destiny. It will flourish with the submission and agreement of the human to this destiny.
The world was organised in such a way that there exists a pre-established harmony between a coming event and the sign that announces it (Stoicism, Jean Brun).
According to our theory, humanity is oriented toward a destiny concretising itself in ecstasy, in nirvana. But this is a future destiny that the builder-man cannot yet access (or only with great difficulty).
Wisdom, for us (the builders of the completion), does not consist in aiming for the final perfection (beatitude, nirvana, ecstasy). It recommends that we build as well as possible the psychological and physical structures of humanity. Being wise for us means going in the direction of this logic. It means offering ideally one's particular potential to this end. It is also very difficult for us to aim for the supreme gratifications. Our vocation being to build, we must aspire to the rewards appropriate to activity (pleasures, rest, competitions, relaxation, small happinesses).
The ascetic pursuit is against nature during the time humanity is under construction. It demands too many sacrifices from our still very impulsive constitutions. This does not mean that it is forbidden to attempt the ascetic adventure — on the contrary. But its success can concern only a minority of us. A minority of pathfinders. The current configuration of our minds is logically directed toward action and its satisfaction (pleasure).
To Each His DueLet us not ask the child to become a sage without passing through the other stages.
There is therefore a difference between the ideals of the builder-man and the ideal lived by the accomplished human.
Take an image. When a man builds his house, he is a builder-man with corresponding ideals. He aims to master perfectly the techniques of construction, to use his tools correctly, etc. When he has finished his house, he becomes an enjoyer-man with different ideals. The point then is to benefit from his construction, to learn to enjoy life, to contemplate his garden and his home…
We then understand the dichotomy between the ideal advocated by certain spiritualities (nirvana, beatitude, purity, non-desire, contemplation, etc.) and the builder-man's real capacity to submit to it*.
The necessity of not putting the cart before the horse seems to have been very well perceived, among others, by Judaism. For this religion, the messianic time will come after having done what we have to do — as Maimonides says — and it is through concrete actions, not through the ascetic ideal, that humanity is built and that the messianic times will come, when enmity, discord, tyranny and evil shall cease. For the Maharal of Prague, the unity of the world emerges gradually and not all at once. Until the coming of the Messiah, the world cannot reach its true unity — for this would contradict the fundamental law of things, namely the gradual development of each thing toward its perfection and realised unity. For this thinker, Redemption is not the result of a miraculous intervention by a superior power. It is explained by a process immanent to the nature of things, a process leading inescapably toward the realisation of perfection.
Universal ecstasy is not for now — but its experimentation is fundamental for humanity. The contemplative and beatific experiences of Christianity, Islam and Buddhism serve as a horizon to be reached. They evoke the purpose of the future mind (those who experience perpetual ecstasy keep alive the flame of this concept).
But this quest must still remain in the minority. If the entire human whole were today to sink into beatitude and contemplation, humanity could not technically* reach its completion.
Ecstasy is therefore still only a pursuit for humanity.
This allows us to measure all the interest of religious diversity. Each religion, each spirituality, carries within it a part of the total answer.
Year 2000
contingency
Ce n'est pas une utopie. C'est une trajectoire déjà visible, inscrite dans l'histoire depuis le premier primate. Lentement. Imparfaitement. Mais dans une direction.
☀️ Découvrir le fondement