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


Cowboy Cottage, East Napa, California, USA

December 18, 2016

Professor Albert Einstein

Photography by Sophie Delar

Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA

1935 "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
 ... Professor Albert Einstein quoted by  
George Bernard Shaw

Photograph courtesy "This is the true joy of life, the being used up for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one; being a force of nature instead of a feverish, selfish little clod of ailments and grievances, complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.
 ... George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, quoted by  
Margaret Mead "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
 ... Margaret Mead quoted by  
I am indebted to Esther Chandy who inspired this conversation.

One of the most compelling realizations which come with the experience of transformation (indeed, a realization which is essential to its onset) is that our lives and Life itself  are and were, and always will be already whole and complete, and that all our feverish, cloddy attempts to get  complete and / or to get better and / or to make it  better, sooner than later (upon close inspection and unflinching scrutiny) turn out to be well-intentioned yet actually (for the most part) colossal wastes of time, and which, in the final analysis can even get in our way and / or slow us down, even disqualifying us from the experience. If these ideas sound dangerous to you, read on.

Also with transformation, one of the choices (rather than one of the needs or the obligations) which presents itself, is to create a future of our own choosing, and / or to address some or all (or none) of the problems facing our planet and us human beings today: global warming and climate changes, famine / malnutrition / hunger / starvation, animal rights and the imminent threat of widespread extinction of species, our national and international discords etc (though not necessarily in that order).

An essential tenet ie one of many bastions of transformation, is the experiential  "What is is and what isn't isn't" with its codicil "It's perfect the way it is and the way it isn't.". That said, what should our relationship with the problems facing our planet and us human beings today, be? I mean, if it really is (quote unquote) "perfect the way it is and the way it isn't", then why bother?  No kidding! But be careful: the question may sound  flippant. It's not. It actually has real import. It's truly profound.

In point of fact ie as a matter of demonstrable evidence, transformation comes with more freed up action, not less. You're more likely to make a difference by creating your participation (whatever it may be) standing on a platform of "What is is and what isn't isn't" (in other words, standing on "It's perfect the way it is and the way it isn't") then looking at what's possible, rather than by trying to fix or change what's wrong, "what's wrong" being (the bottom line) an axiomatic construct of our mind.

Now watch: two incredulous questions I'm often asked at this juncture, are "Wait! What's wrong  with 'What's wrong?'  Laurence?" and "If we don't distinguish 'what's wrong', won't we lose all shred of our morality?". No. Try this on for size: there's nothing wrong with "What's wrong?". Nothing at all. Really. Rather what's critical is to look and see then 'fess up to how much of our judging wrong, is just the output of an innate automatic reflex which is built-in to the axiomatic construct of our mind.

That may be tough to get at first - and it is. But I'm sorry: this isn't a game for sissies. Listen: you have to have real courage to even begin  entertaining the possibility that most of (if not all) your deepest thoughts (and in particular your thoughts about what's wrong) come to you through a process which is on full automatic. And it's likely it's misconstruing the role of this automaticity, which got us into the "wrong" situations we find ourselves in, in the first place (a proposal in which, by the way, I wedded an Erhard idea with an Einstein idea, with an implication so vast and far-reaching that it's deferred as a subject for another conversation on another occasion).

So in order to plot and start a new course, what's wanted and needed ie what's required is to step outside of that paradigm and, standing on the platform which is the experiential "What is is and what isn't isn't" with its codicil "It's perfect the way it is and the way it isn't", ask yourself what's possible, rather than what's wrong. In the overall scheme of things, standing on this platform while engaging in the inquiry for what's possible, and coming from creativity, not simply going off  automatically (if you will) on what's wrong, is a platform far more certain to have an impact and make a really lasting difference (arguably, it's the only kind of platform that ever has).

Communication Promise E-Mail | Home

© Laurence Platt - 2016 through 2020 Permission