Conversations For Transformation:
Essays Inspired By The Ideas Of Werner Erhard
Conversations For Transformation
Essays By Laurence Platt
Inspired By The Ideas Of Werner Erhard
And More
Life Rose Up
Coombsville Appellation,
Napa Valley,
California, USA
April 22, 2013
"The tree leaves, the ocean waves, the universe peoples."
...
Alan Watts,
deploying plural nouns "leaves", "waves", and "peoples" as
third-person verbs
There isn't anything
wrong
with inquiring into how we got here, into how we originated,
into where we came from ie into who or what put us here. This
particular inquiry is the subject of both spirited debates as well
unexamined fervor in religious circles all the way through the domain
of science-fiction. In some conversations the results of these debates
and fervor are asserted as "the Truth", in others as merely
honest conjecture. But "the Truth" is probably closer to
this: outside of our cherished beliefs and favorite explanations, the
answer to the question "How did we get here?" is "We simply don't
know.".
In the
conversation for
transformation,
the inquiry "How did we get here?", while it may be all of thought
provoking, challenging, and
interesting,
is borderline irrelevant. A more pertinent inquiry in this
context
is "We're here. Now what?". Notice there's a
direction to this pointed "Now what?" question: it's
future directed. And it's the
conversation for
transformation
which makes for
a future worth living
into
(or a future worth living from, if you prefer).
So if for the sake of this conversation I pose the question "How did we
get here?", it's really without any significance. It's really devoid of
any fervor - both religious as well as science‑fictional. Listen:
if there is any worthwhile answer as a result of this
inquiry, it would simply be an "A-Ha!" which is complete
in and of itself, and which doesn't detract from (which is to say which
doesn't get in the way of) the future direction of
transformation.
All that said, the answer I propose to the question "How did we get
here?" is this: Life rose up and here we are. Just like that.
That simple. And even before we can open ourselves to the possibility
of if that's what really happened, notice the trap of ie
notice the pull toward getting side-tracked by the classic
false cause proposition of "Well ... what
caused Life to rise up in the first place?".
The tree is the totality of the tree. It's not just its
roots. It's not just its trunk. It's not just its branches, and it's
not just its leaves. It's all of it. You could say (in a
sense) the result of the tree being a tree is the
leaves it produces. You could say "The tree leaves" -
using the plural noun "leaves" in a pointedly unusual yet accurate way
as an active verb. The ocean is the totality of the ocean. It's
not just its water. It's not just its currents. It's not just its
tides, and it's not just its waves. It's all of it. You could say (in a
sense) the result of the ocean being an ocean, is the waves it
produces. You could say "The ocean waves" - using the
plural noun "waves" in a pointedly unusual yet accurate way as an
active verb.
So
this is IT!
... and here we are. Life rose up and here we are. The
universe IS ... and here we are. And as the tree
leaves, and just as the ocean waves, so the universe
peoples (as
Alan Watts,
Werner's
friend
and the world's foremost exponent of
Zen,
may have said).
Be careful! You can't apply this knowledge - and even if
you could apply it, there's no value to be gained from doing so.
Knowing it doesn't change anything ... although it may give you a new
context
in which to hold it all. In and of itself, it isn't even a
useful thing to know (which is to say knowing it may be
interesting
but it's not pragmatic). Rather it's the
work of transformation
which is useful - and it's especially useful when its distinctions are
applied to life as it's lived. Understanding how we got here, as
interesting
as it may be, still and only ever wins the booby prize.