I agree. That's why it would be wonderful if Alex had Patrick Harpur on (or JMG) to give another perspective. People don't realize that one need not be Christian to be highly indoctrinated by the Christian perspective. Much like you don't have to be a neocon or neoliberal to have American Exceptionalism steeped into your political ideology.
Warning - a long post but to get to the gist of that which I wish to point out, I must build to it.
I consider the God and "Good Angels" / Satan and demons dynamic as a paradigm (understanding there are various versions). I consider the "Gnostic mythos" and its dynamic a paradigm (understanding there are various versions). I consider the "good alien / "bad alien" a paradigm (considering all the threads weaved within it). These are just three which are western-centric (thus I am more familiar with them). I point these out as examples to make a point which I will address at the end of this post.
Before I do so, it appears that humans really like entertaining these types of paradigms. They arise within a culture and live a life over time. Some become massively pervasive and live long lives. Some gain a cult following but seem limited in their reach. Some come and then recede yet later, emerge with a new iteration (like the Gnostic myths). Some become religions although I would argue, they all function as religions.
It seems within all of them is the property of "good" / "bad" or "good" / "evil" and if we look at some of the so called "occult" paradigms you sometimes get a reversal of what is seen as good or bad. But also, and what I think attracts folks to some of the so called occult orders is that you generally find subtleties that are missed by most folks which suggest to me that these movements generally attract and are made up of folks who have significant intellectual ability. Understand, exploring these occulted subjects and having a heightened cognitive capacity does not make them "right" (or "wrong" for that matter). It just weeds out the more simple minded (I sorta see myself more at this level by the way... but maybe I am more lazy than IQ limited).
You then have "the mystical" where some end up at non-dualism and many would argue that is the goal, that is the right place to land. Some would argue that to argue that says "you ain't there."
I would like to point out facts. One fact is that one's physical body is finite both in reach (and I mean this literally) and in the time one understands it will remain "animated" (what is called "alive"). And so it is my opinion that most humans (close to all humans) deal with this fact one way or the other which results in their eventual "settling" on incorporating one of the available paradigms into their world view. Some (perhaps many) don't do this consciously. Some chose a framework (such as a specific formal religion or "spiritual practice") that lands within one of these paradigms and sometimes what framework they consciously choose is or becomes conflicted with what their subconscious has settled on and thus heavily influences their life experience emerging when things get tricky... when things go weird. In some cases, (more rare than I would wish), the individual sees this internal conflict and explores at a deeper level. I sometimes like to think that is what I have done. But I always surprise myself (negatively) so who knows.
But what I have come to hold as an assumption which may pan out to be a deeper truth, is that the experience we have as human beings (because most of us are anchored to the body/physicality point of view), are motivated by acknowledging the most certain "end of the road" and thus strive to settle on what that may mean or what might be a solution to the conflict one has where, on the one hand, most humans strive to survive and thrive yet on the other hand, why does it matter when we know it all ends? And soon? - something that is especially clear to older humans like myself who is 62 and sees the acceleration of time and how it just flies by.
And so the human is faced with that "need" to make a choice... not all humans, but certainly a high percentage. Some settle on - "That's it" and become atheists. Some chose "non-dualism" so it doesn't matter as its all an illusion anyway. Some (the vast majority) either settle on an "agnostic" POV (which leaves the door open there may be life after death) and some go for a formal religion and all its rules as to what happens with "them" after death, etc. This latter path seeks life after death. Agnosticism holds out hope there may be something after. The non-dualist settles on it doesn't matter, its all illusion anyways and the atheist settles on the inevitability of their individualized end.
Regardless of where one might fit in the above bigger picture... and I admit I likely missed inclusion of an equally significant "picture" what seems to be missed by everyone is, how little we understand "reality" and yet how so damn many humans, when they begin to reach that point where they are settled on their opinion as to what reality is, in all too many cases, begin to push their view on their fellow human.
With all the above in mind, I now wish to introduce one significant component to the human experience which, because of what I describe above as "the human habit" we may all be dealing with in such a way that "It" is in charge of us instead of each of us being the one ultimately in charge of oneself. And note, I capitalize the words for "It" for two reasons and two reasons only. The first is my respect for "It" and the second is to emphasize "It's" importance. Some are coming to refer to "It" as "The Phenomenon."
It has become my most favored assumption that the problem human beings have with regards to any of their experiences which involve altered consciousness (and which involve what Alex calls "extended consciousness) they far too easily interpret their experiences in ways that lead them into high speculation at the minimum and outright conclusion at the maximum
their experiences fit within an existing paradigm or (and this is how so many religions begin)
advance an existing paradigm or
begin the formation of a new paradigm.
And so what is the result of this behavior? A behavior that is embedded within humanity? One result has been the rise of science which, from this perspective is a very good thing. But the negative of this has been the place science finds itself today (though there are signs of hope this firewall may be cracking) stuck in the primary metaphysical cosmological world view of physicalism and worse, materialism... and there's more to say about that but best deferred to a later post.
But what I believe is the most impactful result of this behavior, is that we are avoiding looking at The Phenomenon because we only allow ourselves to consider "It" within the framework of a religion
or the framework of a greater paradigm and by doing so, we never consider "It" in relation to "It's" dynamic with humanity. It is my firm opinion that until we get rid of this human entrenched habit coupled with science making a clear and universally shared decision to consider there may be a deeper fundamental to "reality" than measurable science can understand (and consider it may
never be measurable - "turtles all the way down") and instead start to consider we, as human conscious agents may very well be so married to our experience of separateness and our deeply embedded individual-centric component that plays such a massive role in what we are willing to allow ourselves to open our mind to, that we miss the following possibility (and this is the point I was driving towards through this entire post):
And sadly this cannot be explored without doing so within a framework as well... that being the assumption of the fundamental of reality being consciousness. So admitting that this must first be assumed, it appears to me that conscious agency, as it interacts with greater consciousness, creates (or at least co-creates) the very forms it experiences that manifest from this region of extended consciousness beyond its own "believable reality." It is my conclusion that humans have hardened the lines between our experiential reality and the greater reality and this is done first and foremost with our deeply embedded affinity to individualization... to conscious agency. And as we do what is natural to do... to experience, even though we have walled ourselves off from greater reality to a great degree, this wall is not imperious. So that when tiny portals are opened... whether in the dream state, in an altered consciousness state or in a state where the subconscious is knocking on the door of the waking state, ordinary conscious state... The Phenomenon has the opportunity to make an appearance. And this is what "It" does and we do what we do (as I described above). And "It" will forever remain unknown as to its true nature as long as we continue to focus upon the forms via which "It" manifests. And unless we recognize what we are dealing with, "It" will control
us.
It is my opinion that an individual human being can obtain (perhaps regain) their own sovereignty once they recognize they are directly interacting with "It" and consider that it may be a fact of the reality that the individual and "It" are both a part of the greater reality and thus simply a product of nature. And that the individual has the primary responsibility as to the form which "It" appears in their sub-reality, the human experience.
I will tie this view back into the specific "thing" being considered... "Good and evil" but this will be done in another post.
Also, I am sure I lost everyone along the way of this post but I am compelled to write and post it anyways... Have a great day!