A Philosopher of Change – An interview with Yasuhiko Kimura By Carter Phipps


Yasuhiko Kimura, the Japanese-American author of Think Kosmically Act Globally, is one of those new integral philosophers, whose work embodies many of the traits of this emerging paradigm of transformation.

Passionate about science, he is also deeply grounded in the spiritual dimension of life, having spent several years as a Zen priest in his native Japan. While he is not a spiritual teacher in the traditional sense, he does teach, and in fact has dedicated himself to a wide range of educational activities designed to bring transformational ideas into the mainstream of our culture.

Drawing on a number of fields of study, and open-minded enough to incorporate the ideas of others, Kimura’s work, like that of many of his contemporaries, is, above all, aimed at divining the patterns of evolution at work in the human family and inspiring individual and collective transformation up the evolutionary ladder.

The rising tide of ideas that is driving these new visions-integration, holism, evolution, chaos, complexity, spirituality, choice, emergence, change, and, of course, transformation-seems destined to outstrip the work of any one person.

Kimura himself owes much to others’ trailblazing, but he is also quite dearly intent on making his own mark in this emerging field. And to do so, he has drawn on some rather unlikely inspiration. Born into one of the most collectively oriented societies in the world, Japan, Kimura has, during his nineteen years in America, positioned himself to carry on the traditions of some of this country’s greatest champions of individualism – the transcendentalist philosophers of the nineteenth century; men like Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Walt Whitman.

Today, Kimura runs the University of Science and Philosophy, an organization originally founded by Walter Russell, and he is also the executive director of the modern incarnation of The Twilight Club.

Through conferences, educational courses, writings, and the quarterly journal The Cosmic Light, Kimura is working on many fronts to help create a new cultural ethos in which the higher possibilities of human transformation have become established in the culture as essential to our understanding of life, in much the same way that the once-radical ideas of psychology have now become established as essential to our understanding of the self.

In this effort, he and his philosophical brethren are armed with more knowledge about human evolution and transformation than has ever before been assembled in the history of humanity, and they are bringing a fresh spirit of urgency and optimism to this awesome task.

WIE: What is spiritual transformation?

YASUHIKO KIMURA: Instead of trying to define the term, I would like to first look at some of the facets of what we call transformation. Transformation, to me, is a uniquely significant dance between being and becoming. Being is in becoming and becoming is in being. The term enlightenment, or spiritual awakening, points more to the movement from becoming to being, whereas the term transformation points more to the movement from being to becoming. Enlightenment is a movement that is primarily from becoming to being, a return to being. Transformation is a movement that is primarily from being to becoming, into creating. So transformation is a part of this evolutionary cycle, this dynamic complementarity of being and becoming.

WIE: Can you describe the process that the individual undergoes in this movement from being to becoming? What is actually being transformed?

YK: In the last several years, I have been teaching a particular model of transformation, which I call the Triformational Learning Matrix. Tri means, of course, three, and so the formational element comprises three formations:

information, metaformation, and transformation.

Informational learning is what we normally go through in our educational system and in our own lives. We read books, we listen to people, and we gain knowledge and experience. We develop a more and more comprehensive body of knowledge based on some principle of organization.

Metaformation is sometimes called inspiration or intuition; it is a higher form of knowledge that sort of knocks on your door and you become aware of something that is eternal. So when this higher intuition, or metaformation, gets integrated into your own informational learning, you then start to reconfigure the whole context within which you have held the body of knowledge that you already have. And at the same time, you are able to incorporate the higher metaformational knowledge into your own body of knowledge. In this dance between information and metaformation, a transformation takes place.

Metaformation is returning to the source of your being, the ground of your being from which you intuit a new form of insight. Then, when that insight is successfully married with the body of knowledge that you already have, transformation takes place. That is my way of understanding transformation.

So on the one hand, there is a dynamic binary of being and becoming, and on the other hand, there is a trinity, with transformation emerging from the creative dance between metaformation and information. It’s like alchemy. People used to try to transform lead into gold. And spiritually speaking, gold is the symbol of the transformed state and lead is the raw material.

But what happens when this lead becomes gold is that somehow the lead dissolves itself into the noumenon, the cosmic wholeness, and then from there you create the new dimensionality of being, which we call gold. That is the process of transformation, where the ego structure dematerializes itself and then merges into the whole. From there you actually create a new you, so to speak, on the basis of the knowledge that you gain through your metaformation. So you become your own creation, based on the cosmic knowledge that you have received. And once this process takes place, it is an ongoing evolution. Enlightenment then becomes like a trigger, or the beginning of a continual transformational evolution. That is how I see transformation.

TRANSFORMING TRANSFORMATION

WIE: I’d like to ask you about how the process of transformation is changing to accommodate life in the twenty-first century, especially considering that one primary characteristic of the modern age is an ever-increasing rate of change. As the inventor and futurist Ray Kurzweil recently said:
Centuries ago people didn’t think that the world was changing at all. Their grandparents had the same lives that they did, and they expected their grandchildren would do the same, and that expectation was largely fulfilled . . . . What’s not fully understood is that the pace of change is itself accelerating, and the last 20 years are not a good guide to the next 20 years. We’re doubling the paradigm shift rate, the rate of progress, every decade. This will actually match the amount of progress we made in the whole 20th century, because we’ve been accelerating up to this point. The 20th century was like 25 years of change at today’s rate of change. In the next 25 years we’ll make four times the progress you saw in the 20th century. And we’ll make 20,000 years of progress in the 21st century, which is almost a thousand times more technical change than we saw in the 20th century.
Dee Hock, the founder and former CEO of Visa International and author of Birth of the Chaordic Age, who is also interviewed in this issue, echoed this point recently, saying that change is not going to happen, nor is it likely to happen, but that change is the very nature of what is happening. So in this context, how must our modern understanding of spiritual transformation take into account our rapidly changing world and the complexity it creates?

YK: It’s interesting because what is also happening with all this rapid change is that change itself is changing. The process of evolution itself is evolving. There is a meta-evolution, or a metachange that is taking place. And in that process what you see is actually an increasing contrast between change and the eternal or the unchanging. I become more and more aware of that which does not change in the context of this continual change you’re describing. So the more you tune in to change, the more you become tuned in to that which does not change. In a way, the contrast between the immutable and the mutable becomes much more distinct. To put this in the language I used earlier, not only is the body of information growing but also the accessibility of metaformational insight becomes greater. Compared to hundreds of years ago, people are really becoming much more aware of that which is eternal. So we live at an exciting moment in history, when both metaformation and information are gaining tremendous momentum. We are transforming transformation itself.

WIE: One characteristic of this increasing rate of change and the complexity that it presents seems to be an increasing amount of stress on our systems. It is interesting that some scientists, including the evolutionary biologist Elisabet Sahtouris, feel that this stress may be a critical component in OUT own evolution. In fact, she has said that stress is the only thing that creates evolution in natural systems. Do you agree that stress is an essential part of the transformational process?

YK: It depends on how you define stress. And I have discussed this same issue with Sahtouris. You see, we generally attach negative connotations to the term stress. It can be seen as negative, but it also has a positive impact My definition of stress is that it is the psychophysical response that is triggered by the perception that you are out of control. For example, when you are faced with a problem that you cannot solve by the body of knowledge that you currently have, you are under stress. When you are faced with a challenge or problem that is bigger than anything that you have encountered before, you are naturally under stress. In this sense, it is the most salient element that triggers and compels transformation. That’s why I often tell my students to ask themselves a question for which they have no answer, or read a book that they cannot readily understand. That causes stress. And by the time they become able to answer the question or understand the book, they have evolved. So in that sense I agree with Elisabet completely. You can see that same process in biological evolution.

WIE: What is it, fundamentally, that allows us to transform ourselves at all? What drives this process of human transformation?

YK: What drives transformation and evolution is the very nature of the universe itself. There is an evolutionary thrust for optimization that is inherent in the universe, so the more you are tuned in to that evolutionary thrust for optimization, the more chance you have to utilize that thrust for your own evolution. The universe, to me, is like a drama or a play between zero and infinity.
In between, we have all possible ways of being and this one dynamic flow of evolution. You know, we often use the term guru to indicate an enlightened human being guiding others. But if you look into the meaning of the term guru in Sanskrit, or lama in Tibetan, you’ll find that it means the force of intelligence working inside yourself and the universe as the syntropic (anti-entropic), order-creating, meaning-bestowing evolutionary principle. So the term guru means your own awareness of that principle. The more you tune into this guru, this lama, or this evolutionary principle within yourself and the universe, the more you have the harmonious sense of cosmic evolution, within and without. That is what drives transformation. It is in the nature of the universe. That evolutionary thrust is there within you. You can try to reduce it, ignore it, or be oblivious to it, but it’s like a rocket ship-if you get on it, you’ll be going to the moon.

WIE: So are you saying that to really harness the transformative power of this natural principle, we have to personally decide to join in the evolutionary process?

YK: Yes. Unless you intend to consciously evolve and transform, your spiritual evolution is not going to be able to take place. That’s one of the five salient points, or tenets, of enlightenment that the founder of your magazine, Andrew Cohen, writes about. He calls it Clarity of Intention. You know, it is essential – the volitional participation in the process of evolution is essential.

INTEGRATING ENLIGHTENMENT

WIE: I wanted to ask you some questions about Spiral Dynamics, the system of human development pioneered originally by Clare Graves and more recently by Don Beck. I know you’ve used Spiral Dynamics in your own work, and that you postulated at least two stages of spiritual development beyond Beck’s basic mode which includes eight stages (and some preliminary evidence of a ninth stage). What are these higher stages of spiritual development, and why do you feel they need to be added to his model?

YK: I attended Don Beck’s seminar in 1999, and it was the first time that I had seen a model of evolution that has thirty, forty, fifty years of research behind it. Clare Graves, Don Beck, Beck’s former partner Chris Cowan, and, of course, Ken Wilber have done extensive research. It is no longer just a speculation. It’s really based on actual human beings and their experiences. So to me, the value of Spiral Dynamics is that we can use this model for social transformation as well as for personal transformation.
Before I came across Don Beck, I had my own model of evolution, which was pretty much aligned with what he was speaking about. He talks about a First Tier of development with six stages and a Second Tier with basically two stages. But in my model, there were nine stages, so there was one more. When you carefully read the Spiral Dynamics description of the last stage there are people who have actually gone beyond it. In my own life, I have met people who are actually beyond what I would call Homo Sapiens Holisticus, which is equivalent to the last stage, the TURQUOISE stage in Spiral Dynamics. The next stage I call Homo Sapiens Universalis, and it is the fulfillment of the promise and possibility of self-consciousness, which Dr. Richard Maurice Bucke talked about in his book Cosmic Consciousness, published over a century ago. This is the stage at which the involuntary movement of cosmic consciousness takes place for the first time.
At this stage, one has the experience of spiritual illumination; cosmic epiphany, and cosmic awakening and becomes conscious of the ground of being of the whole. One comes to know the causative realm of existence. There are a few spiritual legends (perhaps like Babaji, whom you wrote about in your last issue) who point to an even further evolutionary possibility, Homo Sapiens Cosmicus, which is, I believe, another stage of evolution – the evolution of cosmic consciousness itself. So, based on my observation and my own thinking, I would say that there are other possibilities beyond the eighth stage of Spiral Dynamics.
The individual examples are so few and far between that obviously Clare Graves wasn’t able to interview those people. But through my own experience and through meetings with people I have known, I can infer these next stages of evolution from the eighth stage that Beck and Graves described.

WIE: Are there more stages beyond those as well?

YK: Yes, I assume so, because there’s no end to the process of transformation, there’s no beginning and no end. I don’t know what kind of form the next stage would take, but the process goes on. I don’t think we can really know the stage that is two stages beyond our own stage at this point. One stage beyond is pretty much all that you can have a sense of.

WIE: How does one move along these higher stages of development? In your book,Think Kosmically Act Globally, you write, “In fact it is only when you attain the stage of Homo Sapiens Integratus [YELLOW meme in Spiral Dynamics] that you start to have the awareness of the identity of the spiritual forces acting in the universe and in your consciousness.” That is the stage of integral development, or Second Tier in Don Beck’s model. You describe this stage as follows, ”One becomes conscious of the interconnectivity of all humanity at all stages of development and starts integrating all humanity within oneself.” So are you saying that spirituality, in a sense, really only begins at that stage?

YK: In my book, I talk about this in terms of peak experiences. At any stage it is possible to have these experiences, but until you reach Homo Sapiens Integratus, I don’t think you can really integrate that spiritual force, that spiritual insight, into your evolutionary stream.

WIE: What makes that so significant?

YK: Well, you may have met people who have had some kind of peak experience but somehow their ego takes hold of it and then it is no longer there. It’s become a fortification of the ego structure.
And oftentimes what happens is that people stop their evolutionary growth right there. Some people live off their one spiritual experience the rest of their lives, writing books and teaching. So this state of being, state of consciousness, state of enlightenment can be achieved by anybody. But unless your informational learning leads to the point of integration, or this integral level of development, you won’t be able to integrate metaformational insight into your being and consciousness, and so you won’t be able to use it as an engine of creation, an engine of transformation. However, if you can, then enlightenment becomes a beginning, an initiation into further evolution and further transformation. Until then enlightenment is like a sporadic, almost accidental event.

WIE: So you’re saying that at this integral level, you’re able to consciously take up the process of your own transformation.

YK: Yes. T hat’s what P.D.Ouspensky and many others mean when they talk about conscious evolution. It begins with the initiation of awareness into the further reaches of human potential. And then you see that so much more is possible for your consciousness, and you begin the process of learning and participating in that syntropic (anti-entropic) spiritual force existing within the universe. Many people may have genuine spiritual experiences) even children. I did. But I was not able to integrate it, and it became an agonizing experience for me. My ego was not mature enough to let go of itself and be able to integrate that experience into my own growth.

WIE: Agonizing because you were aware of a different possibility?

YK: Yes, because I had read so many books by that time about the possibility of enlightenment and about the Buddha and all kinds of spiritual people. So I knew there-was something to my experience, but I didn’t know what to do with it. But when something similar but more profound occurred later in my life, then the learning process, the evolutionary process, was able to begin.

WIE: In your quarterly journal, The Cosmic Light, you have written about authenticity. You say that this is one of the characteristics that is most essential in order to prepare for these higher stages.
You write:

Authenticity is fundamental, more fundamental than spiritual enlightenment. Without authenticity, no genuine spiritual enlightenment is possible.
Authenticity is the state of being committed to truth ….
Truth is simple, utterly so. …And no matter how simply a truth is stated, only those who have walked the path of understanding and evolution on their own can know and understand it authentically. The path of truth is the path least traveled …. Authenticity is the clarity of being in which there is no self-deceit.
Why is authenticity so fundamental, and why is it more important than even spiritual enlightenment?

YK: You see, our mind is extremely clever, and it has a tremendous capacity for delusion and self-deception. Authenticity is a counteraction for that self-deceit and tendency to delude one-self. I often quote P.D. Ouspensky’s simple statement that the most difficult thing in life is to know what one knows and to know what one doesn’t know and to know the difference between the two. It requires a kind of honesty and authenticity to be aware of this difference and to really examine one’s body of knowledge. What is it that one really knows and that one doesn’t know? This is the kind of discipline that one needs to exert in one’s own life. It is essential for taking advantage of the spiritual experience that one has. Otherwise, it can turn into another form of self-delusion utilized by the ego. So a person needs to have humility and authenticity with regard to the truth of the experience that they do have. And this authenticity leads one to higher and higher levels or into a more whole knowledge and understanding of the truth that is revealed to one.
When one is true to oneself, when one is authentic, one becomes true to the evolutionary thrust for self-optimization that exists within oneself and within the universe. And that evolutionary thrust is a continuous unfolding process.

A CULTURE OF TRANSFORMATION

WIE: .Ken Wilber, in his new book Boomeritis, writes, “Psychologists who track adult lifespan development find that most individuals go through a series of major transformations from birth to adolescence,
whereupon transformation tends to taper off. Although many horizontal translations subsequently occur-the ‘seasons of a person’s
life’ -vertical transformations to higher levels tend to completely stop. From age 25 to around 55, very few vertical transformations occur.” He concludes, “It’s almost impossible to get an adult human being to transform.” And Dee Hock, who I mentioned earlier, also says in this issue that there is so much resistance to change in individuals that it will likely take several cataclysms to provide the impetus for us to truly begin to transform our lives in significant ways. Do you agree with these sobering assessments of the capacity of human beings to transform themselves? And, if so; why is human transformation so difficult?

YK: First of all, in the whole educational system and in our culture, transformation is not a major topic of discussion. Of course, today, you and I and many of us are speaking about transformation, enlightenment, and spirituality, but this group is still ‘a small minority of people. In our society, most people don’t even know that the possibility of spiritual transformation exists.
Children learn from the adults, and what is available for them is what Ken Wilber calls horizontal translation, which is more like an expansion of the same kind of experience and information over and over again. Vertical transformation may take place in the Himalayas, in the ashrams) in the monasteries, where people who are a little bit eccentric go, but it is not a part of the common culture in which we live.
So I think Ken Wilber and Don Beck and several others are making a great contribution to humanity through their writings, which are very accessible. They are helping to make evolutionary thinking and transformational ideas part of the human culture, which is essential for our next evolution. Otherwise, it will be merely a local phenomenon, because most people don’t have any model; they just don’t know. I will give you a very mundane example. People are now into eating sushi in this country. And coming from Japan, sometimes I am appalled by the kind of sushi they’re eating. But they think that it is real sushi, because they don’t know the real thing. They haven’t been exposed to it. And most people are not exposed to the transformational possibilities of being human. Even for very intelligent, educated people, transformation is an entirely foreign concept. So that is something that we must change.

WIE: Yet even for people who do know about these models of transformation, too often that knowledge, in and of itself, doesn’t seem to provide the impetus to change. ‘What other factors make transformation difficult for humans?

YK: Well, even though I’m from Japan, I was educated in the Western kind of educational system, where we are so deeply immersed in the kind of thinking that is reductionistic and dualistic. So when we talk about transformation, we divide individual transformation and world transformation. And there is a difference, but they’re complementary. One does not exist without the other. So one of the points that is very important is that there can be no authentic transformation of the world without an effort on our part toward self-transformation. It is essential for those people who are engaged in the transformation of the world to be willing to be transformed in the process of their own engagement. But what happens is that people go out and try to change and transform the world, but individually they are stuck where they are.
Transformation always and necessarily calls for a transformation of oneself and one’s environment. But I don’t see that happening.
People are stuck with their own positions that never change.

So first, we don’t have a culture in which transformation is an essential component of the conversations that comprise humanity. And second, people are not willing to be transformed in the process of transforming the world.

WIE: One of the people we spoke with for this issue was developmental psychologist Robert Kegan. He speaks about a force that he calls “dynamic equilibrium.” As he writes:

Is any effort at personal change – our own or that of others we may seek to lead-likely to be powerful without better understanding of this . . . force in nature, our own immunity to change? Specifically, is change likely without grasping how this . . . force expresses itself in the unique particulars of our own lives? And yet, one of the things that makes gaining this understanding so difficult is that we tend to be held captive by our own immune systems. We live inside them. We do not “have them “; they “have us.”
We cannot see them because we are too caught up in them . . . . How can we secure for ourselves the supports most likely to foster real change, change that actually escapes the immunizing gravity of our own dynamic equilibria and leads to new concentrations of energy, enhanced capacity, greater complexity?
Is this dynamic equilibrium something you’ve come across or seen in yourself or in others?

YK: Well, it is similar to what Andrew Cohen calls ego, or homeostasis, where people get to a certain point and they just want to stay there. It definitely exists.

WIE: How does one deal with that?

YK: You see, all conscious and cognitive beings are meaning – seeking beings. We’ are – somehow trying to find meaning in life. And unless a human being finds meaning in what he or she is doing, he or she is not going to engage in that action for too long.
Now, some people find meaning in the very act of transformation. And if you consider conscious evolution, ongoing growth, and transformation to be the essential meaning of life, then you will engage yourself in the act of transformation. But for most people, transformation does not provide meaning.
“What’s the point in continuously growing and continuously transforming? I’m fine where I am. I have my house and my job, so don’t bother me. Don’t even try to destroy the edifice of meaning that I have built over the years. ” And I respect that. They’re just being human. They have found some measure of meaning in their lives and they don’t want t o change. They don’t want to see that what they thought was meaningful may actually be meaningless. But transformation, ongoing transformation, implies that you need to continuously dissolve the old meaning of your life and create your life anew. You actually need to recognize the central meaning of your life to be the evolutionary process itself. And unless we build a kind of culture in which that is so, people are not going to ongoingly engage themselves in a syntropic (anti-entropic) evolutionary process. They will want to stay in this dynamic, or static, equilibrium.

A WAKE-UP CALL

WIE: So you’re saying that the goal is to get to the point where the meaning you’re making as a human being in the world actually has to do with a continual engagement in the transformational process itself.

YK: That’s right. In my own life, I was crazy enough to shave my head at age eighteen, go to a monastery, and then spend three years in India and five months in the Himalayas all by myself. Why?
Because I found meaning in the transformational process itself.

WIE: Another way of saying that would be that we have to completely embrace the process of change.

YK: Yes, to stay unstuck wherever you are. Ecstasy means being unstuck, ongoingly ex-static. So you must commit yourself to an ecstatic life.

WIE: It seems that in order to live that way, one would not only have to continually transcend any movement in oneself toward rest or stasis, but one would also have to resist the cultural tendency toward inertia. In fact, you’ve spoken about a “conspiracy of mediocrity” in the larger culture, which one must resist. Could you say what you mean by that?

YK:Yes. Mediocrity is not being average; mediocrity is conforming to the average. And if your value system and your meaning in life is to fit into the society successfully and make a good living and so on and so forth) you are conspiring with others to conform to the average. Mediocrity takes place when conforming to the average becomes the highest meaning of life – to fit in and to succeed in the existing society and make a good living and be happy. And unless a person realizes the meaninglessness and emptiness of success in life at that level) he or she is not going to shave his or her head and become a monk or nun or go to see a spiritual teacher. That is the bottom line. But even within the New Age community and in today’s spiritual culture) the conspiracy for mediocrity exists.

What is missing in the New Age community is real intellectual rigor. If you feel good, you’re enlightened. So feeling has taken the place of real awareness. And that permeates the whole culture. It is mediocrity, and a conspiracy toward mediocrity) and those people who conspire very well can become excellent speakers on the conference circuit and make lots of money.

WIE: Have you found yourself becoming the target of this conspiracy?

YK: Yes. Even within The Twilight Club – particularly with the people who were here before I came onto the scene. I’ll tell you one strange anecdote. I came to this country when I was twenty-eight years old nineteen years ago. and I attended one of those New Age group meetings. I went to this meeting and they were talking about the “hundredth monkey.” Everybody was talking about this hundredth monkey, and I said to them in my broken English,
“What about the first monkey? It is more important for us to really struggle to be the first monkey than the one hundredth:’
Nobody liked that. Then one person in the group called me later and asked me about my background, and he said, “If you shave your head again, wear the monk robe, and make me your manager, I’ll make you rich and famous.” I said, “No thank you.” But when you look at the gurus coming from India, and Tibet, and Japan, most of them are, I’m sorry to say, very mediocre. That has been my experience. So in my own way, through my writings, I have been ongoingly talking about that particular aspect of contemporary spirituality.

But the conspiracy for mediocrity exists in any segment of society. And I have many friends in physics, science, who have the same experience.

WIE: Some pundits and scholars are already calling September 11, the World Trade Center disaster last year, the end of the postmodern age-a culture-changing wake-up call that demands new thinking in recognition of the extraordinary complexity of the world we live in. In fact, Don Beck recently described it as an inflection point in history. So I wanted to ask if you see any signals on the horizon indicating that a new transformation in human consciousness may be under way in our culture.

YK: Yes, it really was a wake-up call, and many people globally became aware of the dysfunctionality of existing systems, and of the fact that no amount of effort based on the old paradigm is going to solve the problems that we are facing. It was a great source of positive stress. One doesn’t need to be a scholar •or an enlightened person to realize the dysfunctionality of society.
When September 11 took place, there were basically two kinds of reactions. To use terms from Spiral Dynamics, one was a BLUE, more militaristic reaction, and the other one was a GREEN, more liberal, egalitarian reaction. In the existing White House, we have basically a BLUE organization, and the people who are criticizing the Bush administration are more inclined to be GREEN. The rest of us are seeing that neither of these approaches is going to solve the problem. The military isn’t going to solve the problem, nor is the egalitarian effort to try to understand the Arabs going to solve the problem. There’s something else that we need. And people can see that.
You see, we want to have a new world, based on your and my profound creative vision for ourselves and for humanity. And that kind of thinking can only be understood by integral thinkers, those who have reached the Second Tier on Beck’s model. So the September 11 event can be utilized as another call for Second Tier thinkers to gather together to really make an impact on society. That’s a fundamental purpose of The Twilight Club. What we are trying to do is to get all of these thinkers together and mutually support and empower one another’s work so that we can actually create a Second Tier, or integral, culture in accordance with the evolutionary prime directive and thereby make a difference in the whole culture of humanity. In the last four years, my colleagues and I have been doing exactly this. So yes, September 11 can be a watershed event for a new kind of civilization to emerge. But a lot more needs to be done.

1 Comment (+add yours?)

  1. Trackback: SHOULD WE KNOW EVERYTHING? | ZETETIKOS

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: