17.08.2015 Views

THE JOURNAL OF ASTROSOCIOLOGY VOLUME 1

qd9nb3s

qd9nb3s

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

is not a construction or a concept; rather, it is an experience. It is a connection with somethingprofound outside of ourselves. It transforms how we act, think, and feel. Practices in spiritualitytend to become narcissistic when the ego-self, or an egotistical version of self, is at the center ofthe process by assuming it is the object of the narcissistic fulfillment of the self. If selffulfillmentthrough unification with the cosmos becomes the main ambition of space travel, thenthis unity becomes something to be possessed rather than experienced. It transforms itself intosomething to attain, much like wealth or status. This egocentric spirituality combined with“individual competitiveness and consumer capitalism” results in what is called “spiritualnarcissism” (Ferrer, 2002, p. 36). The achieved and then exclaimed unification could now beperceived as a bloated spiritual persona, one that claims to be further established, advanced andevolved.This leads to an important question. Is unification something we seek to possess in orderto promote a grandiose self, or do we seek it to be a part of something? Fromm (1976) addressesthis desire to possess unification (p. 57-70) and this desire to be a part of something (p. 70-87).He refers to this as the two modes of being. He begins by quoting two poems involving therelationship with an individual and a flower. In the first poem, British poet Tennyson (Fromm,1976, p. 14) sees the flower, admires its existence and then picks it so he may take it home forhimself, but in the process, he evidently kills the flower. In contrast, the Japanese haiku writerBasho (Fromm, 1976, p. 14) recognizes not only the flower’s existence but also his unity with it,therefore leaving it as he first found it. This acceptance of being where “one neither has anythingnor craves to have something, but is joyous, employs one’s faculties productively, is made onewith the world” (Fromm, 1976, p. 16), runs parallel to the unification felt through space travel.However, the individual still does not seem to be satisfied with a ‘mere’ experience ofunity, the experience must be exclaimed and is “consumed and brought back into one unifiedbeing with the self” (Dickens & Ormrod, 2007, p. 138). Astronaut Edgar Mitchell exemplifiesthis in his attempts to rationalize his “ecstasy of unity” through scientific, religious, andphilosophical theorization. If unification is possible through space travel, are we truly capable ofexperiencing it due to our rationalized mindset and our incessant need to seek the truth bydissecting life? Or does our egocentrism indicate that the quest for unity is a product of spiritualnarcissism? Johnson (1976, p. 42) would dispute that unification is feasible at all, if “eachindividual is urged to pursue a personal state of ecstasy” separately. Furthermore, if theimportance of unification may be subject to question, one must look at the benefits it would haveto the entirety of the world. Division causes conflict, and conflict causes strife. The division ofthe world is responsible for countless negative ailments upon our planet and its inhabitants (e.g.,war, the degradation of our environment, and religious conflict). Additionally, to consider thebenefits they have attained from this, one can simply look at those who have achieved thisunification, such as Buddhist monks and astronauts who have experienced the ecstasy of unity.To truly experience this unity, the concept of an ego and self must be abandoned as itimplies a distinct dualism between the cosmos and us, and it is possible that this very dualistideology fuelled the process of disenchantment. Thus, when the individual does ‘experience’unification, the search for unity is no longer there, nor is the seeker there in a very fundamentalsense. That is, based on Katz’s (2007) concept of non-dualism, there cannot be any separationbetween the observed and the observer, so when achieved it results in an amalgamation of both,without subject or object, rather than an awareness of a specific achievement.© 2015 Astrosociology Research Institute90

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!