Category: Uncategorized Page 1 of 2

I dag har jeg tænkt over staten igen – den der uundgåelige, men dybest set problematiske konstruktion, vi alle er fanget i. Jeg har læst Søren Rud og Søren Ivarssons kritik af James Scott, men jeg er langt fra overbevist. Faktisk er jeg mere overbevist end nogensinde om, at Scott har fat i noget helt centralt.

Scott, i sin bog “Seeing Like a State,” argumenterer for, at stater ofte forsøger at simplificere og standardisere komplekse sociale og naturlige systemer for at gøre dem lettere at styre. Denne simplificering fører ofte til katastrofale resultater, fordi den ignorerer lokal viden og praksis. Staten, i Scotts optik, er ikke en neutral facilitator, men en magtfuld aktør med en iboende tendens til at undertrykke mangfoldighed og lokal autonomi.

Rud og Ivarsson, sammen med andre kritikere, hævder, at Scott er for binær i sin tilgang. De mener, at han overdriver adskillelsen mellem stat og samfund, og at han ikke tager tilstrækkeligt højde for de måder, hvorpå ikke-statslige aktører og lokale samfund kan samarbejde med eller forhandle med staten. De hævder også, at Scott har en romantisk forestilling om “ubesmittet modstand” og at han overser de måder, hvorpå lokal viden kan blive co-opteret af statslige projekter.

Men lad os se nærmere på disse kritikpunkter. Er det virkelig rimeligt at kritisere Scott for at overforenkle? Jeg vil argumentere for det modsatte. Det er netop statens natur, at den skal simplificere. For at kunne styre, beskatte og kontrollere, er staten nødt til at reducere kompleksiteten i den virkelige verden til håndterbare kategorier. Dette er ikke en tilfældig fejl, men en nødvendig konsekvens af statens funktion.

Og hvad med påstanden om, at Scott ignorerer samarbejdet mellem stat og samfund? Ja, selvfølgelig sker der samarbejde. Men dette ændrer ikke ved det grundlæggende magtforhold. Staten har stadig magten til at definere spillereglerne, og selv når den lytter til lokale aktører, gør den det ud fra sine egne interesser. Staten inkorporerer lokal viden, men kun i det omfang det tjener dens egne formål. Dette er ikke en positiv dialog, men en form for internaliseret kolonisering.

Endelig, er Scotts forestilling om “ubesmittet modstand” virkelig romantisk? Måske. Men det er vigtigt at huske, at Scott ikke argumenterer for, at modstand altid er effektiv eller succesfuld. Han påpeger blot, at der findes former for modstand, der er motiveret af et ønske om at undslippe statens kontrol. Og selvom disse former for modstand ofte er vanskelige og usikre, er de også potentielt befriende.

Det centrale er, at Scott giver os et værktøj til at forstå, hvordan stater fungerer og hvordan de påvirker vores liv. Hans argumenter er måske ikke perfekte, men de er langt mere overbevisende end de kritikpunkter, der er blevet rejst mod dem. Staten er stadig en hindring, og kun ved at erkende dette kan vi begynde at finde veje til at omgå den. Jeg er derfor fortsat uenig med præmissen at vi skal være glade for staten.

This exposition aims to elucidate James Scott\’s perspective on the state, predicated on its potential pertinence to academic discourse. What follows is a concise overview of his core tenets:

Scott posits that states frequently attempt to simplify complex societies and environments to facilitate governance. He terms this phenomenon \”state simplifications,\” wherein the state constructs a representational framework that enables taxation, administration, and control over the populace and resources.

However, this simplification is not without consequence. The state often overlooks the local knowledge and practices crucial for comprehending and navigating the inherent complexities of reality. Scott designates this localized, practical knowledge as \”metis.\” Metis is grounded in experiential learning, observation, and contextual understanding, rendering it resistant to formalization or standardization.

Scott argues that states frequently underestimate or disregard metis due to its incongruence with their simplified models. This oversight can precipitate suboptimal decision-making processes and engender adverse outcomes, particularly when states endeavor to implement extensive modernization projects.

Furthermore, Scott\’s research explores the strategies employed by individuals to evade state control. His studies encompass communities that have deliberately chosen to reside in marginalized territories or adopt practices designed to impede state oversight.

In summation, Scott characterizes the state as a potent yet often myopic entity that seeks to impose a simplified order upon a complex world. He underscores the significance of local knowledge and practices, while also examining the mechanisms through which individuals may resist or circumvent state control.

I already handed in a written synopsis with theories, my oral part is ONLY analysis. But here is the first 2 translations that should be analyzed in term of FRAMES (Goffman). My own perception is that both translations are framed loosely as part of NEW AGE framework, using corresponding vocabulary (fit and flow, etc – please name all). I want you also to point how the frame in 2 translations can be different from each other

WRIGLEY, TED (2000)
A path is just a path, a name is just a name
What is, is, without sense or differentiation
And only divides itself into things when we give names
Forget the names of things and you sense fit and flow
Use their names and you see uniqueness, significance
Each perspective is as true as the other
How can something be both fragmentary and complete?
There\’s a mystery here calling for a deeper perception
A perception from which all spirituality springs

HATCHER, BRADFORD (2009)
A path fit to travel
Is not a general path
A name fit for calling
Is not a generic name
\”Nothing\” names the origin of heaven and earth
\”Being\” names the mother of the myriad beings
And so, always be dispassionate
In order to see the mysteries
Always be passionate
In order to see the objectives
These two mean the same (when) emerging
While diverging in significance
The sameness tells of their mystery
Mystery leading to greater mystery
(Is) the gateway to every mystery

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:06]
`
Okay, let me analyze these two translations of what seems to be philosophical or spiritual texts through the lens of Erving Goffman\’s frame analysis. First, I need to identify potential \”New Age\” framing and specific vocabulary used. Then, I’ll compare how the frames differ between the two translations.

Looking at Wrigley\’s translation, I see several elements that align with a New Age frame. The emphasis on \”fit and flow\” evokes a sense of harmony and interconnectedness, common themes in New Age thought. The phrase \”deeper perception\” suggests a need to go beyond ordinary understanding to access a higher spiritual truth, which is another typical New Age concept. The final line, \”a perception from which all spirituality springs,\” reinforces the idea that spirituality is an inherent and accessible quality, rather than something imposed by organized religion. Other keywords in this translation that may suggest a New Age framing are \”sense,\” \”uniqueness,\” \”significance,\” \”perspective,\” and \”mystery.\” These terms encourage a focus on personal experience, individual importance, and the enigmatic nature of existence, all aligning with New Age themes.

Hatcher\’s translation also contains elements that could be interpreted within a New Age framework, although perhaps less directly than Wrigley\’s. The emphasis on \”mystery\” and the idea of a \”gateway to every mystery\” could resonate with New Age seekers interested in uncovering hidden truths. The concepts of \”origin of heaven and earth\” and \”mother of the myriad beings\” hints at some kind of grand cosmic narrative, not explicitly New Age, but often found within New Age spiritual exploration. The instruction to be both \”dispassionate\” and \”passionate\” might be seen as promoting a balanced approach to life, a common theme in New Age teachings.

Now, to compare the frames, Wrigley\’s translation feels more explicitly New Age due to its emphasis on personal experience and inner understanding. The language is more accessible and directly addresses the individual seeking enlightenment. Hatcher\’s translation, on the other hand, appears more academic or philosophical. It deals with abstract concepts and uses language that\’s less directly tied to typical New Age vocabulary, though the \”mystery\” theme still resonates.

Let me rethink if there might be an alternative view. One could argue that both translations are simply trying to convey the essence of the original text, without necessarily intending to frame it within a specific ideology like New Age. The translators may be choosing words and phrases that resonate with a contemporary audience, which might inadvertently overlap with New Age concepts. I need to check if I am missing anything.

Okay, I think I\’ve thoroughly considered the two translations and their potential framing. I am ready to present my final answer.
`
Both translations can be analyzed through the lens of Erving Goffman\’s frame analysis, with potential connections to a New Age framework, although the degree and manner differ.

1. Wrigley\’s Translation: This translation exhibits stronger markers of a New Age frame.
   • Vocabulary: Terms like \”fit and flow,\” \”deeper perception,\” \”uniqueness,\” \”significance,\” and the overall emphasis on \”mystery\” align with common New Age themes. \”Fit and flow\” evokes harmony and interconnectedness. \”Deeper perception\” hints at accessing higher spiritual truths.
   • Focus: There is a clear emphasis on individual experience and personal spirituality, core tenets of the New Age movement. The accessible language directly addresses the individual seeking enlightenment.
2. Hatcher\’s Translation: While also containing elements that could be linked to a New Age perspective, this translation leans more toward a philosophical or academic frame.
   • Vocabulary: The translation uses terms like \”origin of heaven and earth,\” \”myriad beings,\” \”dispassionate,\” and \”passionate.\” While \”mystery\” is still present, the overall tone is more abstract and less directly tied to typical New Age expressions.

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:06]

• Focus: The emphasis is on abstract concepts and a balanced approach to life (\”dispassionate\” and \”passionate\”). The translation implies a grand cosmic narrative, a theme sometimes explored within New Age contexts, but not exclusive to it.

• Comparison: Wrigleys translation is more explicitly New Age in its emphasis on personal experience and inner understanding. Its accessible language directly appeals to those seeking enlightenment. Hatcher\’s translation, while also touching on themes resonant with New Age thought, adopts a more academic or philosophical tone, dealing with abstract concepts and using language less overtly associated with New Age vocabulary. Thus, while both translations engage with themes that can be interpreted through a New Age frame, Wrigley translation does so more directly and accessibly than Hatchers.

[07-06-2025 19:08]
does a piece of information that these are translations of the first verse from Tao Te Ching add something to the analysis?

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:08]
`
Okay, knowing that these are translations of the first verse from the Tao Te Ching adds significant context and depth to the analysis of their frames. It shifts the focus from simply identifying New Age elements to understanding how the translators are interpreting and presenting a classical text within a contemporary context.

First, acknowledging the Tao Te Ching as the source material provides a baseline for comparison. The Tao Te Ching is a foundational text of Taoism, emphasizing concepts like the Tao (the Way), wu wei (non-action), and the interconnectedness of all things. These concepts are inherently philosophical and spiritual but predate and differ in important ways from the New Age movement.

With this context, the \”New Age\” elements previously identified can be re-evaluated. Are the translators deliberately framing the text within a New Age framework, or are they simply using language that resonates with modern spiritual seekers, whose understanding is often influenced by New Age ideas? It becomes more likely that the translators are attempting to make the Tao Te Ching accessible and relevant to a contemporary audience, and in doing so, are drawing upon familiar linguistic and conceptual frameworks.

For Wrigley\’s translation, the emphasis on \”fit and flow,\” \”deeper perception,\” and personal experience can be seen as an attempt to connect the Taoist concept of the Tao with a contemporary understanding of spirituality. \”Fit and flow\” might be a way of conveying the idea of living in harmony with the Tao. \”Deeper perception\” could be a way of explaining the need to go beyond conventional understanding to grasp the essence of the Tao.

For Hatcher\’s translation, the focus on \”mystery,\” \”origin of heaven and earth,\” and the balance between \”dispassionate\” and \”passionate\” can be understood as an effort to capture the philosophical depth and paradoxical nature of the Tao. The language is more formal and abstract, reflecting the classical nature of the text.

The knowledge that these are translations of the Tao Te Ching also allows for a deeper analysis of the translators\’ choices. Are they prioritizing accuracy to the original text, or are they prioritizing accessibility and relevance to a modern audience? This choice would influence their framing and the language they use.

I need to rethink how this added information refines the initial analysis. The presence of New Age terminology is not necessarily an intentional \”framing\” but rather a consequence of attempting to bridge the gap between an ancient text and modern sensibilities. The translations are interpretations, and interpretations are always shaped by the interpreter\’s own context and understanding.

Okay, I\’ve re-evaluated the translations in light of their source material. I\’m now ready to provide a refined analysis.
`
Knowing that the texts are translations of the first verse of the Tao Te Ching enriches the analysis by providing crucial context. Instead of solely identifying New Age frames, the analysis shifts to understanding how the translators interpret and present a classical text to a contemporary audience.

1. Reframing the \”New Age\” Elements: The identified New Age elements can be seen as attempts to make the Tao Te Ching accessible and relevant to modern readers. The translators may be using familiar language and concepts to bridge the gap between the ancient text and contemporary sensibilities, rather than deliberately framing the text within a New Age ideology.
   • Wrigley\’s Translation: Terms like \”fit and flow\” and \”deeper perception\” can be understood as attempts to connect the Taoist concept of the Tao with modern spiritual understanding. \”Fit and flow\” might represent living in harmony with the Tao, while \”deeper perception\” could signify the need to transcend conventional understanding to grasp the Tao\’s essence.

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:08]
Hatcher\’s Translation: The focus on \”mystery,\” \”origin of heaven and earth,\” and the balance between \”dispassionate\” and \”passionate\” reflects an effort to capture the philosophical depth and paradoxical nature of the Tao. The more formal language aligns with the text\’s classical nature.

1. Translator Choices and Priorities: The translations reflect the translators\’ priorities: accuracy to the original text versus accessibility to a modern audience. This choice influences the framing and language used. Accessibility vs. Accuracy: Translators make choices about how closely to adhere to the literal meaning of the original text versus how to make it understandable and engaging for a contemporary audience. This decision affects the overall framing of the translation.
2. Interpretation and Context: The translations are interpretations shaped by the translators\’ contexts and understandings. The presence of New Age terminology isn\’t necessarily an intentional framing but a consequence of bridging an ancient text and modern sensibilities. The analysis now recognizes these elements as potentially unintentional side effects of the translation process.

me

next, we analyze another translation in terms of

Domestication and Foreignization: focusing on Hogan\’s (2004) translation and examining the extent to which it domesticates or foreignizes the source text. Analyze the translator\’s choices in terms of Venuti\’s theory, also considering the intended audience and the overall Skopos of the translation.

What I see, is that the real \”Foreignization\” of the Chinese text would sound simply as

A road as road – not The Road
A name as name – not The Name

to sound equal to \”dao ke dao fei chang dao… etc\”, and to be as grammarless as the original, and to let the reader guess the meaning based on oral tradition.

Instead, the translator aims ONLY AT PHONETIC similarity or, in this case, scarcity of syllables, comparing to other, eloquent, translators

HOGAN, RON (\”Jesse Garon\”) (2004)
If you can talk about it,
it ain\’t Tao.
If it has a name,
it\’s just another thing.
Tao doesn\’t have a name.
Names are for ordinary things.
Stop wanting stuff;
it keeps you from seeing what\’s real.
When you want stuff,
all you see are things.
Those two sentences
mean the same thing.
Figure them out,
and you\’ve got it made.

Hogan\’s translation of the Tao Te Ching strongly leans toward domestication, prioritizing accessibility and readability for a modern audience over cultural fidelity and nuanced interpretation.

1. Domestication vs. Foreignization: Hogan\’s translation domesticates the source text by using simple, direct, and colloquial language. Phrases like \”it ain\’t Tao\” and \”you\’ve got it made\” are far removed from the poetic and philosophical language typically associated with the Tao Te Ching. This contrasts with a hypothetical \”truly domesticated\” version that would be grammarless and rely on the reader\’s prior knowledge of oral tradition.
2. Venuti\’s Theory: Hogan\’s approach aligns with Venuti\’s concept of domestication, adapting the text to the target culture to ensure fluency and naturalness, even at the expense of the source culture\’s nuances. The translation prioritizes readability and comprehension over strict adherence to the original text\’s cultural context.
3. Phonetic Similarity: The translator\’s focus on phonetic similarity or syllable count represents a minor attempt at foreignization, aiming to retain some of the brevity and impact of the original Chinese. However, this is overshadowed by the overall domesticating strategy.
4. Intended Audience and Skopos: The translation targets a general audience unfamiliar with Taoism or classical Chinese philosophy. The Skopos is to provide a quick and easy-to-understand summary of the first verse, rather than a scholarly or deeply nuanced interpretation. The language is simple, the concepts are straightforward, and cultural or historical context is absent.

Pinole, [07-06-2025 19:22]
Now the last one: Metaphors: analyzing the use of metaphor in Waley\’s (1934) translation. Identify key metaphors
– Way, Name, Heaven, Earth, Mother – and analyze the way they are presented in English, how these choices affect the overall meaning and impact of the text, drawing on Conceptual Metaphor Theory

WALEY, ARTHUR (1934)
The Way that can be told of is not an Unvarying Way;
The names that can be named are not unvarying names.
It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang;
The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand
creatures, each after its kind.
Truly, \’Only he that rids himself forever of desire can see
the Secret Essences\’;
he that has never rid himself of desire can see only the
Outcomes.
These two things issued from the same mould,
but nevertheless are different in name.
This \’same mould\’ we can but call the Mystery,
Or rather the \’Darker than any Mystery\’,
The Doorway whence issued all Secret Essences.

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:22]
`
Okay, let\’s analyze Arthur Waley\’s translation of the Tao Te Ching, focusing on its use of key metaphors – Way, Name, Heaven, Earth, Mother – and how these are presented in English. I will also consider how these choices affect the overall meaning and impact of the text, drawing on Conceptual Metaphor Theory.

First, I need to identify the key metaphors and analyze their representation in Waley\’s translation. The \”Way\” (Tao) is the central metaphor. Waley translates it as \”The Way that can be told of is not an Unvarying Way.\” This implies that the true Way is beyond description or definition, a common interpretation of the Tao. The use of \”Unvarying\” suggests a contrast between the unchanging Tao and the ever-changing world of phenomena.

The \”Name\” is presented as something that limits and defines. Waley translates it as \”The names that can be named are not unvarying names.\” This echoes the idea that language and categorization are inadequate for grasping the true nature of reality. Names are seen as constructs that separate and differentiate, whereas the Tao is undifferentiated unity.

\”Heaven and Earth\” are presented as originating from the \”Nameless.\” This suggests that the cosmos arises from a source that is beyond human comprehension and categorization. Waley\’s choice of \”Heaven and Earth\” maintains the traditional Chinese cosmological view, but the phrasing \”sprang\” gives it a sense of dynamism and creation.

The \”Mother\” is described as \”the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures.\” This metaphor portrays the Tao as a nurturing and generative force, responsible for the diversity and complexity of the world. Waley\’s choice of \”rears\” emphasizes the active role of the Mother in shaping and sustaining life.

Now, to analyze how these choices affect the overall meaning and impact of the text, drawing on Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Conceptual Metaphor Theory posits that metaphors are not just linguistic devices but fundamental cognitive structures that shape our understanding of abstract concepts. In this case, the metaphors used in Waley\’s translation influence how readers perceive the Tao, reality, and the relationship between them.

The metaphor of the \”Way\” as something beyond definition suggests that the Tao is not a set of doctrines or beliefs but a way of being or a path to follow. The \”Name\” as a limiting force encourages readers to question the validity of language and categorization as tools for understanding reality. \”Heaven and Earth\” as originating from the \”Nameless\” reinforces the idea that the ultimate source of existence is beyond human grasp. The \”Mother\” as a generative force emphasizes the Tao\’s role in nurturing and sustaining all things.

Waley\’s translation uses elevated and somewhat archaic language (\”unvarying,\” \”rears,\” \”whence\”) which adds to the sense of reverence and mystery surrounding the Tao. This choice likely affects the reader by creating a sense of distance and awe, inviting them to contemplate the profound truths being expressed.

Let me rethink the potential limitations of my analysis. I am focusing on a few key metaphors, but the Tao Te Ching is rich in metaphorical language. Also, Waley\’s translation is just one interpretation, and other translators may use different metaphors to convey the same concepts.

Okay, I\’ve analyzed the use of metaphors in Waley\’s translation and considered their impact on the overall meaning and effect of the text. I\’m now ready to provide my final answer.
`
Waley\’s translation of the Tao Te Ching utilizes key metaphors – Way, Name, Heaven, Earth, Mother – to convey the profound and often paradoxical nature of the Tao, shaping the reader\’s understanding through carefully chosen language.

1. Key Metaphors and Their Representation:
   • Way: Translated as \”The Way that can be told of is not an Unvarying Way,\” the metaphor suggests that the true Tao is beyond definition, contrasting the unchanging Tao with the ever-changing world.

DeepSeek AI | Нейросеть, [07-06-2025 19:22]

• Name: Represented as \”The names that can be named are not unvarying names,\” the \”Name\” is portrayed as a limiting force, suggesting that language and categorization are inadequate for grasping reality. Names are constructs that separate, while the Tao is undifferentiated unity.
  • Heaven and Earth: Depicted as originating from the \”Nameless,\” this metaphor suggests that the cosmos arises from a source beyond human comprehension. The term \”sprang\” imparts dynamism to the creation process.
  • Mother: Described as \”the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures,\” the \”Mother\” metaphor portrays the Tao as a nurturing and generative force responsible for the world\’s diversity. \”Rears\” emphasizes the active role in shaping and sustaining life.

1. Impact on Meaning and Conceptual Metaphor Theory: The chosen metaphors shape the reader\’s understanding of the Tao, reality, and their relationship.
   • The \”Way\” as undefinable suggests a path of being rather than a set of doctrines.
   • The \”Name\” as a limiting force encourages questioning language\’s ability to represent reality.
   • \”Heaven and Earth\” originating from the \”Nameless\” reinforces the idea of an ultimate source beyond human grasp.
   • The \”Mother\” as generative emphasizes the Tao\’s role in nurturing all things.
2. Language and Tone: Waley\’s use of elevated and archaic language (\”unvarying,\” \”rears,\” \”whence\”) adds to the sense of reverence and mystery, inviting contemplation of profound truths. The language creates a sense of distance and awe, encouraging deeper reflection on the text\’s meaning.

Okay, so boom, like, the Tao that you can even NAME, right? That’s, like, NOT the real Tao, ya feel? And names? Total cap, ’cause they ain’t gonna tell you the whole tea. But if you’re just CHILLIN’, no name-dropping, you might just peep the realness. But once you start flexin’ with the names, you only see, like, a tiny piece. Tao and names? Same-same but different, ya know? Both sus, but you gotta play the game to get to the next level. That’s the real-deal mystery, fam!

If you fall in love with a narcissistic woman, and it is reciprocated, you will expose yourself to the following:

When you are not by her side, you will feel that something is missing, and she will make you believe that it is your fault, even though she sent you away herself. She will seek revenge in various ways, primarily verbally and through her behavior towards you.

When you are there for her, you will quickly feel overlooked. You will sense it because she will use you in a condescending manner, for example, by mocking you or making fun of you.

She will often be something extraordinary (otherwise, you wouldn’t have fallen in love with her), but she will lack stable self-esteem, which will lead to fluctuations in her behavior. She will rarely acknowledge that you also have unique qualities. It may seem as if she hides her strong feelings for you; it can all feel like a game where you’re just pretending to be a couple.

Additionally, she may exploit your care and attention to build her own confidence while undermining yours. You might end up feeling insecure and doubting your own worth, while she constantly demands admiration and attention. In the end, it can be a challenging and emotionally draining experience where you have to figure out if the love is truly worth fighting for.

I can’t help but think that thought, words and messages create those same realities which were “accessed” by Steiner in “Akashic records” and thus held truth for him, because he was impressed by the totality of words. He says himself

“If we let the Pauline Epistles work upon us, we have finally something which, through its extraordinary simplicity and through the deeply penetrating quality of the words and sentences, makes a most significant impression. But this is so only because Paul, through his own initiation, had worked his way up to that simplicity which is not the starting-point of what is true, but the consequence, the goal. If we wish to penetrate into what Paul was able finally to express in wonderful, monumental, simple words concerning the Christ-Being, we must come nearer to an understanding of human nature, for whose further development on Earth the Christ-Impulse came. Let us therefore consider what we already know concerning human nature, as shown through occult sight.” (Steiner, 1912)

In spiritual literature, we can encounter the concept of a “multivariant universe” (Zeland, 1999), which posits that reality is composed of numerous valid perspectives shaped by individual experiences. This framework invites us to move beyond the simplistic ideas of right and wrong, acknowledging that truth can be subjective and relative to one’s worldview. Cognitive science explains how our brains construct our perception of reality. Our experiences are filtered through our senses, interpreted by our cognitive schemes, and influenced by our emotions and past experiences (see: Eagleman, D. (2015). The Brain: The Story of You. Pantheon). This highlights the subjective aspect of perception and suggests that multiple valid interpretations of reality are possible.

If we consider the teachings found in both ACIM and Rudolf Steiner, we can see that these approaches represent distinct variants within this type of multivariant universe, each providing its own path toward understanding and transformation. ACIM presents our physical reality as an illusion that can be escaped by pardoning the guilt one imposes on oneself and others, while Steiner’s Anthroposophy encourages individuals to cultivate spiritual awareness through an integration of self-knowledge with cosmic principles. Neither perspective holds absolute correctness, but their value lies within the specific frameworks they offer for those seeking deeper meaning in their own lives.

Each person’s understanding of themselves influences how they relate to these varied paths. When individuals resonate with a particular spiritual practice or teaching, it often reflects their current beliefs and developmental stage.

It can be risky to neglect one’s chosen variant or force alignment with conflicting beliefs. Attempting to adopt a spiritual path that contradicts one’s current values or unconscious preferences can lead to internal conflict and dissonance. Forcing an integration of incompatible approaches can result in superficiality rather than genuine understanding; it is important to recognize that each variant possesses its uniqueness and integrity within its proper sphere. The danger lies not in exploring diverse teachings but in negating one’s authentic intuitions or beliefs in pursuit of a certain pathway. This is not a trivial point. Impressed by Steiner’s legacy in many practical areas of life and his real scientific knowledge in many fields, added to his obvious spiritual abilities, people who resonate with both types of cognition can try to find truth via Steiner. They will find what their current level of knowledge and intuition suggests, and they will find as much truth as is contained in the sciences they studied and morphic fields they connect to (Bartlett, 2012; Sheldrake 2001)—no more, no less.

Coherence emerges as a vital element for personal well-being within the suggested framework of a multivariant universe. An individual must cultivate a sense of inner harmony—a consistency between belief systems and lived experiences—to thrive spiritually. When considering the writings of Steiner versus ACIM through this lens, we should focus on understanding how each reimagines Christ consciousness differently based on distinct spiritual needs and inclinations. While some may find solace in ACIM’s emphasis on love and forgiveness at the expense of physical reality during times of emotional turmoil, others may resonate more with Steiner’s holistic view that integrates physical existence with spiritual evolution.

Cultivating self-awareness and one’s own path towards self-discovery is the real work within this multivariant universe. It requires thoughtful reflection on one’s inner world—considering which beliefs resonate most profoundly—and discerning pathways that align with one’s yearnings for growth and coherence. This conclusion may seem boring and clichéd; however, it is ultimately the one I arrive at after engaging deeply with ACIM as well as many texts by Steiner and reports about his unbelievably great personality. Both ACIM and Anthroposophy—each rich with original concepts—have contributed to humanity’s spiritual-intellectual library from which seekers can draw to lead more fulfilled lives. I have one last comment: a person raised in Zomia doesn’t need these frameworks for integrating themselves; their collective and individual unconscious is not contaminated by notions like original sin or guilt. When we move even beyond ACIM and Steiner, we can encounter an undisturbed primeval landscape where we can begin anew. That will be the real start of something beautiful.

Here are two different views on the same subject presented in two articles with the same title, “Mysticism and Schizophrenia.”

The first article¹ is produced by the Center of Subjectivity Research (CSR), led by Dan Zahavi of Copenhagen University. Professor Josef Parnas, the article’s main contributor, is co-founder and senior researcher at the CSR, as well as a chief physician at Hvidovre Hospital’s psychiatric department.

The second article is written by Kenneth Wapnick, Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, who was a close friend and associate of Helen Schucman and William Thetford—the two individuals whose collaboration was the immediate stimulus for the scribing (their term for transmission or channeling) of A Course in Miracles. Kenneth had been involved with A Course in Miracles since 1973, writing, teaching, and integrating its principles with his practice of psychotherapy.

As demonstrated below, the two articles surprisingly convey the same message, although they use different frameworks and case studies that are not similar. The conclusions reached differ only slightly: mainly in the interpretation of the results.

The first article compares mystical experiences, specifically the feeling of complete oneness with the universe (“unio mystica”⁵), to the experiences of people with schizophrenia. It’s important to understand upfront: the authors aren’t saying that mystics are schizophrenic or vice versa.

They look at how these very different experiences share some surprising similarities in how they affect the mind, even if the content of the experiences is completely different.

They focus on three key areas:

(1) Mental attitudes². Mystics prepare for their experiences through practices like meditation and withdrawing from everyday life to quiet their minds. People who develop schizophrenia sometimes show similar behaviors, like being withdrawn and isolated. The difference is that these behaviors are intended by the mystic, but come of themselves and are distressing for the person with schizophrenia.

(2) The experience³. Both mystical and schizophrenic experiences can feel like sudden, overwhelming revelations—like a light bulb going off in your head, but on a much deeper level. They both involve a shift away from normal ways of thinking about the world and the self. While schizophrenia involves hallucinations and delusions (false beliefs), these often start from a feeling of something being profoundly wrong or different, similar to the feeling of shifting into a different state of consciousness during a mystical experience. Both are very hard to explain in words (ineffable).

(3) A different reality⁴: Both mystics and some people with schizophrenia report feeling connected to something beyond ordinary reality. Mystics think it to be spiritual truth; people with schizophrenia report the experience as hallucinations or delusions. The mystical experience is often seen as positive and transformative, meanwhile the schizophrenic experience is usually frightening and upsetting.

The authors also talk about the “minimal self”—the basic sense of being yourself. They argue that schizophrenia may involve a fundamental problem with this core sense of self, explaining many of the strange experiences people with the illness have. This is different from other mental illnesses where the problem is more about how you think about yourself, rather than this core sense of self.

Phenomenological approach is used by the authors to compare these two very different states of mind, experienced by a mystic, on one hand, and a person on the schizophrenic scale, on the other. It finds structural similarities in how consciousness is altered, even though the content and impact are different.

Kenneth Wapnick’s article, “Mysticism and Schizophrenia”, also considers similarities and differences between mystical experiences and schizophrenic episodes. Wapnick acknowledges the tendency in psychiatric research to link these two phenomena: some suggest that mysticism is a form of psychopathology and others present schizophrenia as a valuable, even desirable experience. Wapnick clarifies both the shared aspects and main distinctions between the two types of inner state.

The article begins by referencing William James’ distinction between “higher” and “lower” mysticism, with the latter bordering on insanity, and then presents the typical mystical experience, outlining stages of development often described in mystical literature (using Underhill’s five stages as a framework, adding a sixth stage of reintegration into society). These stages generally include an (1) awakening, (2) purification, (3) illumination, (4) a “dark night of the soul”, (5) a “unitive” life (oneness with the universe), and finally, (6) a return to the world. St. Teresa of Avila’s mystical experiences are used as a detailed case study, illustrating these stages through her metaphorical descriptions of a “castle” within the soul.

Next, the article turns to schizophrenia, adopting a more recent perspective that views psychotic episodes as purposeful attempts at self-correction, rather than simply symptoms of a disease. Wapnick cites the work of Bateson, Laing, and Kaplan, who emphasize the subjective, intensely personal nature of schizophrenic experiences. An excerpt from Lara Jefferson’s first-person account of a schizophrenic episode is analyzed to demonstrate the phenomenological similarities and differences with mystical experiences. Lara’s experience is characterized by a “death” of her former self, a descent into “total madness,” and a subsequent emergence into a sense of peace and reintegration, though with significant lingering effects.

The core of Wapnick’s argument lies in the comparison of these case studies. Both St. Teresa and Lara experienced a dichotomy between inner and outer worlds, a breakdown of social attachments, periods of intense fear and pain, and eventual peace. However, the process in these two cases is not the same. The mystic, through a long, deliberate, and often self-imposed journey, gradually develops the capacity to withstand and integrate the “inner world” with social life. The schizophrenic, in contrast, experiences a sudden, involuntary breakdown, lacking the preparation and support to navigate the overwhelming inner experiences. The absence of this gradual strengthening process leaves the schizophrenic vulnerable and unable to manage the experience without a significant disruption of social functioning.

The article concludes by highlighting that while both mysticism and schizophrenia involve a journey into the “inner world,” the main distinction lies in the preparation, control, and integration of this experience within a social context. The mystic’s journey is a conscious, purposeful process; the schizophrenic’s is often a traumatic and involuntary one. The article emphasizes the importance of balancing inner and outer experiences for healthy functioning, with the mystic representing a successful integration, and the schizophrenic demonstrating the tragic consequences of separation.

Parnas’ article leans towards a more objectively scientific comparison, while Wapnick’s analysis is more interpretive and arguably more influenced by his spiritual background. Parnas ascribes less direct correlation between mystical states and schizophrenia, focusing on shared phenomenological structures rather than developmental trajectories. He seems to be more interested in the similarities of the experiences without necessarily linking them to a progression or path, while Dr. Wapnick may be more focused on the implications of those experiences for spiritual growth, be it mystical or otherwise.

As a proponent of A Course in Miracles (ACIM), Dr. Wapnick’s perspective is likely influenced by his belief system, which could lead him to interpret both mystical and schizophrenic experiences through the lens of spiritual development, potentially downplaying the pathological aspects of schizophrenia. He might also be more inclined to see a positive outcome in both, even if the paths differ drastically.

On the other hand, Prof. Josef Parnas and his colleagues might be biased towards a purely materialistic understanding of consciousness, overlooking potentiality for non-material extrasensory experiences. Their focus on structural analogies might stem from a desire to explain these experiences through purely neurological or psychological mechanisms, potentially neglecting the spiritual or existential dimensions that Wapnick highlights. This bias could lead them to minimize the transformative aspects of mystical experiences.

Endnotes

1. Josef Parnas and Mads Gram Henriksen, “Mysticism and Schizophrenia: A Phenomenological Exploration of the Structure of Consciousness in the Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders,” Consciousness and Cognition 43, no. 1 (May 1, 2016): 75–88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.05.010.
2. Parnas and Henriksen, “Mysticism and Schizophrenia: A Phenomenological Exploration of the Structure of Consciousness in the Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders.”, p. 76
3. Ibid., p. 78
4. Ibid, p. 81.
5. Ibid., p.79

Let us take a case of George Muller of Bristol, who died in 1898. Muller’s prayers were of the crassest petitionary order. Early in life he resolved on taking certain Bible promises in literal sincerity, and on letting himself be fed, not by his own worldly foresight, but by the Lord’s hand. He had an extraordinarily active and successful career, among the fruits of which were the distribution of over two million copies of the Scripture text, in different languages; the equipment of several hundred missionaries; the circulation of more than a hundred and eleven million of scriptural books, pamphlets, and tracts; the building of five large orphanages, and the keeping and educating of thousands of orphans; finally, the establishment of schools in which over a hundred and twenty-one thousand youthful and adult pupils were taught. In the course of this work Mr. Muller received and administered nearly a million and a half of pounds sterling, and traveled over two hundred thousand miles of sea and land. During the sixty-eight years of his ministry, he never owned any property except his clothes and furniture, and cash in hand; and he left, at the age of eighty-six, an estate worth only a hundred and sixty pounds. His method was to let his general wants be publicly known, but not to acquaint other people with the details of his temporary necessities. For the relief of the latter, he prayed directly to the Lord, believing that sooner or later prayers are always answered if one have trust enough. “When I lose such a thing as a key,” he writes, “I ask the Lord to direct me to it, and I look for an answer to my prayer; when a person with whom I have made an appointment does not come, according to the fixed time, and I begin to be inconvenienced by it, I ask the Lord to be pleased to hasten him to me, and I look for an answer; when I do not understand a passage of the word of God, I lift up my heart to the Lord that he would be pleased by his Holy Spirit to instruct me, and I expect to be taught, though I do not fix the time when, and the manner how it should be; when I am going to minister in the Word, I seek help from the Lord, and … am not cast down, but of good cheer because I look for his assistance.” Muller’s custom was to never run up bills, not even for a week. “As the Lord deals out to us by the day, … the week’s payment might become due and we have no money to meet it; and thus those with whom we deal might be inconvenienced by us, and we be found acting against the commandment of the Lord: ‘Owe no man anything.’ From this day and henceforward whilst the Lord gives to us our supplies by the day, we purpose to pay at once for every article as it is purchased, and never to buy anything except we can pay for it at once, however much it may seem to be needed, and however much those with whom we deal may wish to be paid only by the week.”

The articles needed of which Muller speaks were the food, fuel, etc., of his orphanages. Somehow, near as they often come to going without a meal, they hardly ever seem actually to have done so. “Greater and more manifest nearness of the Lord’s presence I have never had than when after breakfast there were no means for dinner for more than a hundred persons; or when after dinner there were no means for the tea, and yet the Lord provided the tea; and all this without one single human being having been informed about our need…. Through Grace my mind is so fully assured of the faithfulness of the Lord, that in the midst of the greatest need, I am enabled in peace to go about my other work. Indeed, did not the Lord give me this, which is the result of trusting in him, I should scarcely be able to work at all; for it is now comparatively a rare thing that a day comes when I am not in need for one or another part of the work.” In building his orphanages simply by prayer and faith, Muller affirms that his prime motive was “to have something to point to as a visible proof that our God and Father is the same faithful God that he ever was—as willing as ever to prove himself the living God, in our day as formerly, to all that put their trust in him.” For this reason he refused to borrow money for any of his enterprises. “How does it work when we thus anticipate God by going our own way? We certainly weaken faith instead of increasing it; and each time we work thus a deliverance of our own we find it more and more difficult to trust in God, till at last we give way entirely to our natural fallen reason and unbelief prevails. How different if one is enabled to wait God’s own time, and to look alone to him for help and deliverance! When at last help comes, after many seasons of prayer it may be, how sweet it is, and what a present recompense! Dear Christian reader, if you have never walked in this path of obedience before, do so now, and you will then know experimentally the sweetness of the joy which results from it.” When the supplies came in but slowly, Muller always considered that this was for the trial of his faith and patience. When his faith and patience had been sufficiently tried, the Lord would send more means. “And thus it has proved,”—I quote from his diary—“for today was given me the sum of 2050 pounds, of which 2000 are for the building fund [of a certain house], and 50 for present necessities. It is impossible to describe my joy in God when I received this donation. I was neither excited nor surprised; for I LOOK out for answers to my prayers. I BELIEVE THAT GOD HEARS ME. Yet my heart was so full of joy that I could only SIT before God, and admire him, like David in 2 Samuel vii. At last I cast myself flat down upon my face and burst forth in thanksgiving to God and in surrendering my heart afresh to him for his blessed service.”

George Muller’s is a case extreme in every respect, and in no respect more so than in the extraordinary narrowness of the man’s intellectual horizon. His God was, as he often said, his business partner. He seems to have been for Muller little more than a sort of supernatural clergyman interested in the congregation of tradesmen and others in Bristol who were his saints, and in the orphanages and other enterprises, but unpossessed of any of those vaster and wilder and more ideal attributes with which the human imagination elsewhere has invested him. Muller, in short, was absolutely unphilosophical. His intensely private and practical conception of his relations with the Deity continued the traditions of the most primitive human thought. When we compare a mind like his with such a mind as, for example, Emerson’s or Phillips Brooks’s, we see the range which the religious consciousness covers.