Category: The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 8)

November 30, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

We are now realizing the magnitude of the change we set in motion with our recent election. Many now are beginning to understand some of its significance. For those in the Maga camp the glow of victory is still blinding. For a growing number that oppose Maga, it’s becoming clear how radical the shift can/is/will be.

I assumed when the President Elect was determined, I would be moving on to the next phase of the WLL and leave the prophetic side of Henry in the past where it started. Nevertheless, because of the results of the election and the current rhetoric in the wake of Trump’s victory, I realize that Henry’s prophetic insight has much more to teach us.

Post Election Final Frontier Supplement ⁴

Last night I attended a Dionne Warwick concert at the Schermerhorn Symphony Center in Nashville. She performed the concert with her son. Besides all the nostalgia of hearing her again she also touched on the theme of this WLL Final Frontier. It was the two of them singing, “What the world needs now is love sweet love, that’s the only thing there’s just too little of”. It was released in 1967, the same year Wieman was writing his book, Religious Inquiry.

I will begin with Henry’s words from supplement ³;

“The danger which threatens is not only atomic war; there is some reason to think other dangers are more likely. But the greatest danger of all, opening the way to all the other dangers, is traditional religion preventing the development of that form of religion which alone can show the way of salvation.”

Henry made it clear that if we are not to succumb to tyranny, but in the unlikely event that we did, we could not overcome the tyrant by using the same laws that allowed the tyrant to gain power. Which is, of course, exactly what we currently are doing. Instead, we need to be:

“…directing [the] liberated impulses into the creativity of history, whereby the human level of existence is expanded to larger dimensions.”

Good advice, but how to do it? The tyrant is still misusing the law to gain additional power, while Democrats are attempting to use the law to regain some form of “normalcy”. So, lets back up and take one more run at it. Wieman, wrote;

“The continuity of human history will not be assured until [it] finds and accepts its destiny, that way of life which [it] must follow if [it is] to become self-destructive and bring history to an end. I’m arguing that this destiny will be found if and when the control mechanisms are deliberately and effectively designed to avoid anarchy, not by tyranny and NOT… by law AND order…”

So, what have we done? Who did we vote into the presidency AND how are we currently going about reducing the threat of tyranny? Is there hope for Survive and Thrive in 2025? I pray there is, though the probability seems slim.

This is Henry’s deceptively simple solution to our postcivilization dilemma between an extinction event “OR” the emergence toward the new world of globalization. For Wieman, it requires BOTH science AND religion, but not just any religion. He was fully aware that religion as currently practiced was incapable of providing the required commitment to creative interchange. Henry continues;

“Of all the innovations required…we are now…entering, the one most critically important is the development of a form of religion which can join with science and morality to serve this creativity. The part of religion in this development is to direct the commitment of our lives to this creative presence; the part of science is to search out its required conditions; and the part of morality is to use scientific knowledge and technology to provide the conditions and continuously improve them as research learns more about them. …[T]he greatest danger of all is… traditional religion preventing the development of that form of religion which alone can show the way of salvation.”

The level of cooperation and collaboration required for developing a new form of religious commitment is obstructed in the U.S. by our misunderstanding of the separation of church and state both politically AND religiously. We’ve lost our guardrails for moral and ethical behavior in Washington and in states across America. We’ve paralyzed religion’s ability to speak truth to power. Unfortunately, this favors and encourages the tyrant far more than democracy. And, we’re currently caught in the midst of this struggle. Social media is currently making things worse by turning the noise of endless polarizations into entertainment. Turn on your TV or cell phone to your favorite news outlet and join the drama.

Henry continues;

“…creativity means…the emerging of insights which expand AND deepen the knowledge AND value accessible to the human mind…no matter what one believes about ultimate [reality]…one is either a dogmatist claiming that [their] belief is the final truth, complete, omniscient, and infallible, “OR” one admits that [their] judgment is subject to error ‘AND’ correction. If one admits the latter, [they] will keep [their] mind open to correction AND further extension of knowledge ‘AND’ value.”

If I’m reading Wieman correctly, he is saying a simple OR can lead us to dogmatism, while a simple AND can move us in the direction of creativity that can move beyond and transcend polarity. It means dogmatism divides us, while creativity can unify us. How absurd is that? OR, is it? Henry is not talking about some complicated new learning or understanding. In fact, it’s a moving away from complexity toward a “childlike” simplicity. It’s reminiscent of what Jesus and Buddha both suggested. Jesus by saying, “we need to become as a little child” and Buddha said, “we need a beginner’s mind’” So, the problem of polarization may mostly be about being taught a wrong way of thinking and knowing.

Could it be really as simple as that? Can most of our social turmoil be boiled down to those few sentences Henry wrote above? I’m naïve enough to believe it can. It is hidden in two simple words, “either” AND “or”. Nonsense, you may think. I think it’s worth checking out. One of my guiding life messages was written by Oliver Wendell Holmes in a statement he made about simplicity. He wrote, “For the simplicity that lies this side of complexity, I would not give a fig, but for the simplicity that lies on the other side of complexity I would give my life.” Wow! Holmes is making a huge distinction.

The other night my daughter and I joined some friends to attend a performance of Rachmaninoff’s second piano concerto. I might add, my favorite symphony. As usual all the different sections like strings, brasses, percussionists were independently rehearsing and tuning up. Then the concert master entered, a silence fell over the musicians and the audience and from a single note from an oboe we experienced going from a chaos of sound to silence. The conductor entered and a symphony emerged from its prior chaos. All of the complexity was woven into harmony and inspiration.

What if that could happen between Republicans AND Democrats, between individual rights and states’ rights and our divided states of America became a more perfect union?

Wieman continues;

“The only way to do this effectively is by commitment of the total self to the creativity set forth here as the reality calling for religious commitment. It is also the reality giving meaning to history.

Thus, short of incurable dogmatism, the creativity generating depth of insight, clarity of thought, comprehensive understanding, deep communion, and the valuing consciousness, is the reality commanding religious commitment. This is so even if the final truth about it is an interpretation not [being] considered here.

This the religious commitment giving direction AND meaning to history, and guiding our use of magnified power in a way to enable the diverse peoples of the earth to live together in community without tyranny.”

John Lennon put our task in perspective when he sang, “Imagine all the people living life in peace, you may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one, I hope someday you’ll join us and the world will live as one”. Wieman felt that a new religion would be required if we’re to bring unity out of all our current diversity, chaos, confusion, animosity and hostility. The world religions have been around for thousands of years. If they have the answer to our present apocalyptic AND extinction times, why haven’t they joined forces of billions of people and shown us how to avoid postcivilization’s continuing decline and decay?

Let’s dig deeper into why Henry felt traditional religion is the greatest danger because of its tendency to prevent the development of that form of religion which alone can show the way of salvation.”

Wieman felt we needed religious commitment as part of any new religion and we needed ways to overcome any tendency to be dogmatic by insisting on the finality of our creeds, scriptures and liturgies. We needed to address any form of final truth or insisting we were somehow in possession of the only true way to salvation. Even the church in which I was raised had a dogma that “there are no creeds but Christ”. No creeds but Christ was a creed and entailed a liturgy that avoided the creeds, dogmas and liturgies we renounced.

When one is wed to a denominational pattern and practice, it usually ends up with some form of dogmatism. Henry makes a very subtle distinction between the creative process that creates and the actual dogma or creed created. He made a distinction between creative AND created good. Created good was subject to becoming a dogma. Creative good was not. Actual or created dogma is the outcome of the process and is NOT the process itself. This subtle distinction has proven to be difficult to grasp even by some of the most famous and prestigious theologians, philosophers and thinkers.

Because we fail to see this truth, we cannot claim finality in our understanding of the creating process. There is always more to be experienced. Our creeds, dogmas and liturgies never fully grasp all the truth of any given moment. We have only an approximation of the wholeness and fullness of such creative events and experiences. Whatever we think and know at any given time is our current best approximation of it, AND therefore, we must always remain open to what is more than AND different from that current best understanding. This means none of us perceive ultimate reality. Such experience undercuts pride or hubris and is the basis for humility.

Admission of this “predicament” is the basis for authenticity, integrity and wisdom. It doesn’t take away from our worth as a person, it merely opens us to one another so mutual learning, knowing and creating can transform us through creative interchange. In short, none of us ever have the final answer and must with humility remain open to learn with AND from one another what is more than, different from, our current best understanding. Without humility to learn more, we engage in hubris with all its follies. Henry concluded that a two-level commitment was required. It is to act on the best any of us can know, at any given moment AND learn and know what is always different from and more than we currently know.

We’ve finally reached the end of the WLL The Final Frontier Series. As it said in the old song, “Those were the days my friend, we thought they’d never end”, but they have. In the next series, tentatively called The Psychodynamics of Creative Interchange, I will attempt to finish the work Henry, Fitz and I started as Religious Inquiry and which was in its final editing for publication. At that time, we were intending to write another book. The working title was to be The Human Predicament: The Culture Game. In the next series I will attempt to bring some closure to that initial effort. Wish me luck. I’ll need it. Of course, spiritual insight would be useful as well.

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 8)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 7)

November 26, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

We are now realizing the magnitude of the change we set in motion with our recent election. Many now are beginning to understand some of its significance. For those in the MAGA camp the glow of victory is still blinding. For a growing number that oppose MAGA, it’s becoming clear how radical the shift can/is/will be.

I assumed when the President Elect was determined, I would be moving on to the next phase of the WLL and leave the prophetic side of Henry in the past where it started. Nevertheless, because of the results of the election and the current rhetoric in the wake of Trump’s victory, I realize that Henry’s prophetic insight has much more to teach us.

Post Election Final Frontier Supplement ³

I will start by condensing his primary statement about postcivilization.

“When wars were fought with sword and lance in the hands of [an] armored knight, the power of war could be largely monopolized by the wealthy few; but when guns were put into the hands of the common man, a wider distribution of power, wealth and honor was enforced. So also, when industry could not operate without many skilled workers and a large public with enough wealth to buy the goods produced, was the same wider distribution enforced.

Perhaps this brief period of democracy…is coming to an end. …We seem to be moving into a time when wars will no longer be fought by [individuals] with guns but with complicated and technical instruments operated by experts. Industry under automation may become the monopoly of a ruling few.

So far, what Wieman is saying is pretty straight forward and would not require him to be prophetic. So, let’s probe deeper.

“Science is now (1968) being used to devise methods for enforcing a brainwashing ideology by which the great majority are made to think, feel, and act as the privileged few demands, enslaving the minds of the many more completely than the of ancient slaves.”

This key nuance is that ancient slaves knew and were conscious of their status as slaves. They had no delusion about what and who they were. This was discussed in a previous section of The Final Frontier 3. The problem we face today is that most people believe they are not delusional. In fact, most would become enraged at the thought of anyone considering they might be. There is a kind of astigmatism in our culture when it comes to mental illness. Such an attitude was woven into the fabric of our “old normal”. My personal bias is that this helps explain why our culture is reluctant to get involved in conversations regarding mental health. Henry puts it all into perspective;

“All of this may indicate that we are reverting to the ‘ancient system’, prevalent throughout almost the whole of civilization, wherein the privileged few gathers to themselves the benefits of social organization while the masses are controlled in such a way that [their] creativity [sinks] to a minimum.”

Wow, what an astute, if not prophetic observation. Do you see any of that going on in our current post-election time? I’ve observed this problem time and time again over the last several decades. We are looking at the basis for our current dilemmas regarding the polarization of our communication, decision making, problem solving, planning, evaluating and the list goes on. If there was ever a time our nation needed to be creative, it’s now. And, if that weren’t enough, Henry goes on to say;

“I am arguing that this destiny will be found if and when the control mechanisms are deliberately and effectively designed to avoid anarchy, AND NOT [relying] merely [on] law and order….”

Unfortunately, we’ve chosen “law and order”. As I said elsewhere, anarchy involves a tyrant, an autocrat, who wants complete control of the guardrails. Alas, I stray, so back to the election.

So, what are we doing now in response to the choice we made as a nation on election day? It appears to me that our current response is to emphasize better adherence to law in order to save democracy. We are committed to demonstrating a peaceful transition of power intended and required by law as a guardrail to protect us from falling into chaos, anarchy or autocracy.

Many pendants on the left think our democracy can weather the storm over the next four years using law and order. Can we? What was Henry not taking into account? Wieman’s take, as I’ve written before, was a quote from Raymond Aron. “Mankind has a history because it is in search of a destiny” and Henry added, “The continuity of human history will not be assured until humankind finds and accepts its destiny”. And, what is that destiny? Wieman says, “that way of life which [humankind] must follow if [we] are not to become self-destructive and bring [our] history to an end.” The choices we are making currently are determining if and how we fulfill our destiny. Does it continue or end?

How close is the ‘Divided States of America’ to ending its democracy along with its destiny? What mechanisms are required if we are to survive? The majority of Americans voted to give up on democracy. Clearly democracy has to reinvent itself or give up on being one. One hundred forty million Americans cast their ballots in the 2024 election and 87 million Americans eligible to vote chose not to—the greatest number of non-voters in American history.

It would seem our President elect is committed to returning to a better time in the past. He does not want to continue business as usual. The democrats are committed to not going back. Both seem to be advocating for some form of reformation and/or revolution. My personal view is that the Republicans are not willing to go back far enough. This country was born out of a revolution. Why not return all the way back to the actual beginning and rethink our original revolution once again?

The average life expectancy of a civilization is roughly 250 years and that number for the United States of America is July 4, 2026. The Republicans are wrestling with how far we need to go back to make America great again. The Democrats are wed to “not going back” and want to stay on the road we’ve been traveling. What if we approached the need for a revolution as valuable and encouraged all political parties Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, Green, atheists, agnostics, religious types and the list goes on to “rethink” AND “redream” a better way to govern in order to survive AND thrive in 2025?

Could our fragmented, polarized masses regroup, rethink AND recreate a way of life that is planetary friendly, environmentally safe, socially collaborative, scientifically valid and spiritually committed? The answer is yes AND the probability of it happening is low. Our challenge once again would be to create a new nation, indivisible, under GOD that provides life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness AND forming a more perfect union. AND, by taking the enduring wisdom written on our currency, E. pluribus Unum, out of the many ONE. It’s possible, not probable, but well worth making the effort one more time. I’m guessing true Americans would roll up their sleeves and make another run at it. The lives of billions hang in the balance.

The election in the U.S. was to bet the old “postcivilization” way of thinking was the only thinking that was logical and offered any hope of change. The opposite is actually true. Continuing to think the old way means you’ll keep getting what you are currently getting. We’re getting planetary ecosystem decay at dangerous levels, air, water and soil continue to become more contaminated, the rich are getting richer and the poor will get poorer, and the ones in the middle will get more anxious and depressed. Wieman writes;

“…[W]hen the control mechanisms are deliberately and effectively designed to avoid anarchy…by directing liberated impulses into the creativity of history, whereby the human level of existence is expanded to larger dimensions. The mechanisms of control which must do this, if it is to be done at all are government, industry, institutional education, religion and morality, established custom, and the use of language.” [This was elaborated in The Final Frontier 4]

As stated above, “the masses are controlled in such a way that creativity sinks to a minimum.” However, in the situation we are in we need creativity optimized not minimized. The simple question is to what degree do you see Democrats championing creative solutions instead of reverting primarily to the use of law and order. Creativity and law and order don’t have to be polarized and that is where creative interchange becomes critical and essential. But that’s part of the next and final paper in The Final Frontier series.

Henry goes on to say;

“Of all the innovations required to enable [humankind] to live at the high human level in the new age we are now entering, the one most critical important is the development of a form of religion which can join with science AND morality to serve this creativity. The part of religion in this development is to direct the commitment of our lives to this creative presence; the part of science is to search out its required conditions and the part of morality is to use scientific knowledge and technology to provide these conditions and continuously improve them as research learns more about them.”

This type of relationship between science AND religion is hardly the norm of our day. This failure is attributable to both sides. Without such cooperation of science and religion the odds of globalization being achieved before deadly tipping points in environmental ecosystem decay are passed, seem almost inevitable. And, then Henry pushes the envelope one more time, by saying;

“The danger which threatens is not only atomic war; there is some reason to think other dangers are more likely. But the greatest danger of all, opening the way to all the other dangers, is traditional religion preventing the development of that form of religion which alone can show the way of salvation.”
In the next and final paper in The Final Frontier series we’ll look at Wieman’s conclusion as to what such a “new” religion would require if we are to emerge from postcivilization. Will we choose globalization ‘OR’ will we continue our descent toward an apocalypse and extinction event of our history, destiny and ultimately our species.

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 7)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 6)

November 6, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Election Final Frontier Supplement

Imagine Henry, Fitz and I sitting, once again, in Henry’s dining room with a cup of coffee and one of Laura’s fresh baked cookies in front of us. It’s November 3^rd 1968. Now I need you to become imaginative. There is a crystal ball in the center of the table with a scene 56 years in the future. In fact, the scene is November 2, 2024. Our conversation has centered on the coming election, which is like none any of us had ever seen or imagined. Clearly the people in the future seem emotionally distraught and their conversation is not about the coming holidays of Thanksgiving or the frolicking days of Christmas shopping.

It’s clear their rhetoric is intense, angry and extremely polarized. The two candidates in the election are clearly antagonistic. Fitz makes the observation that it seems like the civil war all over again. Much to our mutual dismay, it seems to boil down to a struggle between democracy and autocracy, between individual rights and preferences and a need for national collective collaboration AND unification.

In short, it seems to be about how to protect individual rights for life, liberty and the pursuit happiness, while working together toward a more perfect union as a nation. From Henry’s point of view, in 1968 CI would allow for two critical ways of thinking. It would be about using both “both/and” AND “either/or” thinking. Unfortunately, the public discourse we were seeing in the crystal ball seemed limited to only either/or thinking. You could only choose one side OR the other, Republican OR Democrat.

From our perspective in 1968 we thought there was a better way to formulate the differences. It was a matter of taking the best of each and together inventing a better outcome than either side could provide by itself. And from our vantage point our future friends and relatives seemed incapable of envisioning such an option. I began to wonder how we could bridge the gap to the future. What would we say to them to get them to see that both/and AND either/or could provide more creative solutions to their differences. They didn’t have to be polarized.

We wrestled with how to get their attention of both in a way that respected the best of each, while correcting the narrowness on both sides. The obvious simple answer was to get each side to understand that neither side has the final answer. Both parties were limited to the best they knew at that particular moment.

What if Henry suggested that the two working parties combined with others like Reform, Libertarian, Socialist, Natural Law, Constitution, and Green Parties, would all be included. Even those belonging to no party could be heard as well. In addition, there would be neutral individuals who would act as facilitators of the process to ensure creative interchange was part of the outcome. All of this could be announced on Day One of the new Presidency from the Oval Office.

Today, Henry and Fitz are no longer with us. Nevertheless, I’m still here to speak for them these many years later. I suggest the following approach that could be used by both parties, though I suspicion former President Trump would not be inclined to agree with the sentiment I’m expressing.

MISSION VISON:

To protect the rights of individuals to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness AND evolve a more perfect union through E. pluribus Unum.

Day One of the Presidency

On day one in the Oval Office The President of the United States would bring selected members of the Republican, Democratic, Reform, Libertarian, Socialist, Natural Law, Constitution, and Green Parties, plus certain members of Congress (legislative) and Supreme Court (judiciary) and charge them to review and make recommendations for updating the U.S. Constitution in order to reconcile individual, political and social differences that have surfaced in recent decades.

This would say to the American electorate that we will heal the current Divided States of American and evolve toward a greater United States of American where individual rights are preserved and collective requirements are achieved and sustained. I believe either parties could accept this challenge and make this commitment.

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 6)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 5)

November 6, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Summary of Previous Material

Previously, Wieman suggested our creativity was sinking to a minimum” Our innate, instinctual and intrinsic capacity for engaging in CI was being corrupted. He suggested that the oligarchs, as I now refer to them, would not be immune to the continuing decay of postcivilization. I’ll pick up right where I left off. All of Henry’s quotes are found on page 154 and 155 in RI.

Danger Hanging Over the Privileged

Wieman continues;

“The danger will hang over the privileged few as much as over the enslaved many, because ruling groups come into conflict with one another, and modern instruments of war and industrial production are so excusably powerful that their misuse will bring self-destruction more swiftly and fatally than was possible in the past.”

So, how are our privileged few, I refer to as oligarchs, doing? Are they sitting on their massively expensive yachts, sipping champagne and checking their phones for the latest stock shares available for exchange? How about one of their billion-dollar homes on some exclusive isle in the South Pacific? Or, perhaps plotting strategies for new international alliances? Or more precisely, Putin of Russia, Urban of Hungary, Kim Jong-Il of North Korea, Chi of China, Modi of India, Netanyahu of Israel or Ishiba of Japan? Oh, and let’s not forget any from the U.S., who might aspire to be one too. We know one individual who considers himself to be one of them right now.

You would think people with all that power and wealth would be preoccupied with the buying and selling of their big expensive yachts, multiple properties and houses, exotic perfumes, wines, liquors, fine cuisine, gold bullion collections or bit coin investments. However, these options do not seem to be taking center stage in their thinking or their agenda. Henry suggested they might be more interested in accumulating more power and wealth.

A dear friend and philanthropist friend of mine helped me get a glimpse into the world of wealth. She and her husband turned a small business into millions of dollars in one decade. One day she was pondering a burning question, when is enough, enough? The answer of many billionaires and millionaires was and still is, just a little more. After accumulating millions or billions there remains a lingering feeling of not quite enough. What is missing? Why more of the same? So, what is missing AND when will enough be enough? What is this strange value or which one can’t get enough?

It is important to understand Wieman’s definition of a value. Henry said a value is a “goal-seeking activity”. Values change things or situations from point A to point B. There is an intention, anticipation, motivation to change a particular situation to a different situation, i.e. a certain amount of money into a larger sum of money. In the opening sentence of his doctoral dissertation in 1917, Henry wrote;

“Our problem will be to the discover that organization of human interests which is most conducive to their maximum fulfilment. The object of [a] quest is the greatest good.”

The Organization of Interests page 3

In this case an interest is a form of value, something worth your attention and/or effort on our part. I think if Henry were writing that sentence today, he might well have used the word greater, rather than greatest good; elsewhere he used the highest good. The greater good can simply mean a higher or better form of the current good. That is why I recently said to my co-author, Bill Petrarca, “our book, The Greatest Good needed to be changed to The Greater Good.” Henry always left the door open for increasing value. That’s a two or three pager for another day.

Henry continues;

“The principle of organization, which [I] propose is…creativity. [My] thesis is that all interests should be…organized…to function as one; and that one should be creative interest. Interest which is directed to developing a fuller consciousness of some object…. [I] believe that the organization which causes all the processes constitutive of human life to function in satisfying creative interest is the organization…which yields the most complete and continuous satisfaction.”

The Organization of Interests page 3

In my simplistic way, I researched for over a decade in various parts of the world and multiple cultures to identify some core values of people living in other parts of the world. I found that our deepest values can be boiled down to a handful that include satisfaction, peace, love, kindness, compassion, truth, beauty and goodness. Perhaps this is related to why the wealthy having experienced all of the exotic things of life realized wealth fails to produce lasting satisfaction. There must be some kind of deeper need for a deeper truth, a greater good and more beauty than money can buy.

Henry continues;

“Raymond Aron writes, ‘Mankind has a history because it is in search of a destiny.’ To that comment we can add: The continuity of human history will not be assured until mankind finds and accepts its destiny, that way of life which [humankind] must follow if they are not to become self-destructive and bring history to an end.

I am arguing…this destiny will be found if and when the control mechanisms are deliberately and effectively designed to avoid anarchy…[by] directing liberated impulses into the creativity of history, whereby the human level of existence is expanded to larger dimensions. …The mechanisms of control which must do this…are government, industry, institutional education, religion and morality, established custom, and the use of language.

This of course is no simple request on Henry’s part. When it comes to U.S. culture, there have always been challenges of how to interpret the relationship between the value of Church and State. Henry felt we can’t shove our differences under the rug when it comes to governance and the ethical consequences of our religious, ethical and moral dilemmas. If Henry were here today, I would argue that one more social institution must be added to governance, business, education and institutional religion. It is clear to me that social media and hi-tech with its AI and ChatGPT is a game changer. We know phones, T.V.s and other electronic devices are accelerating social change AND much of it is polarizing.

Rapid acceleration of hi tech has brought everything and everyone into closer proximity and the planet has become progressively a resource to fuel our insatiable appetites for ever more products and services to satisfy our endless quest to consume and be entertained. What we have failed to take into account is the toll postcivilization is having on the natural world and the kind of environment that is required to sustain our endless cravings. We’ve remained blind to how resources are distributed among our neighbors.

The largest impact is the acceleration of how quickly we can destroy the decay of postcivilization. We see this when current science studies climate change, introducing chemical pesticides and herbicides into our decaying ecosystems and the challenges of planetary warming and a host of interconnected contaminates such as microplastics into the food chain. Civilized thinking fails to perceive the interconnectedness of these issues. Instead, it compartmentalizes and systematically attempts to solve problems produced by such an approach. This is folly.

Returning to Wieman we read;

“Of all the innovations required to enable men to live at the high human level in the new age we are now entering, the one most critically important is the development of a form of religion which can join with science AND morality to serve THIS creativity. The part of religion in this development is to direct commitment of our lives to this creative presence; the part of science is to search out its required conditions; and the part of morality is to use scientific knowledge AND technology to provide these conditions and continuously improve them as research learns more about them.

Imagine, if you can, religious, scientific and facilitative types collaborating, cooperating and coordinating while inventing creative solutions to our environmental, economic, social educational and governing problems. Impractical you say? Think about what we are doing with our political, social and economic capital at the moment. What are our oligarchs spending right now and profiting from? Our conflicts of course. Instead of enjoying their boats, houses, vacations, belongings and the like, some of the wealthiest are strategizing and financing war. Putin, Kim, Urban, Netanyahu, Mohammed bin Salman, and Ali Khamenei.

How much CI do you see practiced by the oligarchs? How much more power is needed? When is enough, enough? What would just a little more power do for them? The quest for power, prestige, fame, control, publicity, stocks, seems endless. Perhaps bigger crowds, applause would do it or hands for that matter. As the old saying goes, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. The quest for power is a value. This value generates a lot of energy in the service of control. Is there another value which might fill the hole or vacuum and bring authentic satisfaction?

Wieman believed there was and is. Remember what he said, “This outcome is not inevitable; it can be prevented if [humankind] can be made to see the danger of it.” That is the theme of the next Final Frontier in the WLL. Stay tuned.

Love to all and Co-Creatively,

Dr. Charlie Palmgren

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 5)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 4)

November 6, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Summary of Previous Material

Previously, Wieman suggested our creativity was sinking to a minimum” Our innate, instinctual and intrinsic capacity for engaging in CI was being corrupted. He suggested that the oligarchs, as I now refer to them, would not be immune to the continuing decay of postcivilization. I’ll pick up right where I left off. All of Henry’s quotes are found on page 154 and 155 in RI.

Danger Hanging Over the Privileged

Wieman continues;

“The danger will hang over the privileged few as much as over the enslaved many, because ruling groups come into conflict with one another, and modern instruments of war and industrial production are so excusably powerful that their misuse will bring self-destruction more swiftly and fatally than was possible in the past.”

So, how are our privileged few, I refer to as oligarchs, doing? Are they sitting on their massively expensive yachts, sipping champagne and checking their phones for the latest stock shares available for exchange? How about one of their billion-dollar homes on some exclusive isle in the South Pacific? Or, perhaps plotting strategies for new international alliances? Or more precisely, Putin of Russia, Urban of Hungary, Kim Jong-Il of North Korea, Chi of China, Modi of India, Netanyahu of Israel or Ishiba of Japan? Oh, and let’s not forget any from the U.S., who might aspire to be one too. We know one individual who considers himself to be one of them right now.

You would think people with all that power and wealth would be preoccupied with the buying and selling of their big expensive yachts, multiple properties and houses, exotic perfumes, wines, liquors, fine cuisine, gold bullion collections or bit coin investments. However, these options do not seem to be taking center stage in their thinking or their agenda. Henry suggested they might be more interested in accumulating more power and wealth.

A dear friend and philanthropist friend of mine helped me get a glimpse into the world of wealth. She and her husband turned a small business into millions of dollars in one decade. One day she was pondering a burning question, when is enough, enough? The answer of many billionaires and millionaires was and still is, just a little more. After accumulating millions or billions there remains a lingering feeling of not quite enough. What is missing? Why more of the same? So, what is missing AND when will enough be enough? What is this strange value or which one can’t get enough?

It is important to understand Wieman’s definition of a value. Henry said a value is a “goal-seeking activity”. Values change things or situations from point A to point B. There is an intention, anticipation, motivation to change a particular situation to a different situation, i.e. a certain amount of money into a larger sum of money. In the opening sentence of his doctoral dissertation in 1917, Henry wrote;

“Our problem will be to the discover that organization of human interests which is most conducive to their maximum fulfilment. The object of [a] quest is the greatest good.”

The Organization of Interests page 3

In this case an interest is a form of value, something worth your attention and/or effort on our part. I think if Henry were writing that sentence today, he might well have used the word greater, rather than greatest good; elsewhere he used the highest good. The greater good can simply mean a higher or better form of the current good. That is why I recently said to my co-author, Bill Petrarca, “our book, The Greatest Good needed to be changed to The Greater Good.” Henry always left the door open for increasing value. That’s a two or three pager for another day.

Henry continues;

“The principle of organization, which [I] propose is…creativity. [My] thesis is that all interests should be…organized…to function as one; and that one should be creative interest. Interest which is directed to developing a fuller consciousness of some object…. [I] believe that the organization which causes all the processes constitutive of human life to function in satisfying creative interest is the organization…which yields the most complete and continuous satisfaction.”

The Organization of Interests page 3

In my simplistic way, I researched for over a decade in various parts of the world and multiple cultures to identify some core values of people living in other parts of the world. I found that our deepest values can be boiled down to a handful that include satisfaction, peace, love, kindness, compassion, truth, beauty and goodness. Perhaps this is related to why the wealthy having experienced all of the exotic things of life realized wealth fails to produce lasting satisfaction. There must be some kind of deeper need for a deeper truth, a greater good and more beauty than money can buy.

Henry continues;

“Raymond Aron writes, ‘Mankind has a history because it is in search of a destiny.’ To that comment we can add: The continuity of human history will not be assured until mankind finds and accepts its destiny, that way of life which [humankind] must follow if they are not to become self-destructive and bring history to an end.

I am arguing…this destiny will be found if and when the control mechanisms are deliberately and effectively designed to avoid anarchy…[by] directing liberated impulses into the creativity of history, whereby the human level of existence is expanded to larger dimensions. …The mechanisms of control which must do this…are government, industry, institutional education, religion and morality, established custom, and the use of language.

This of course is no simple request on Henry’s part. When it comes to U.S. culture, there have always been challenges of how to interpret the relationship between the value of Church and State. Henry felt we can’t shove our differences under the rug when it comes to governance and the ethical consequences of our religious, ethical and moral dilemmas. If Henry were here today, I would argue that one more social institution must be added to governance, business, education and institutional religion. It is clear to me that social media and hi-tech with its AI and ChatGPT is a game changer. We know phones, T.V.s and other electronic devices are accelerating social change AND much of it is polarizing.

Rapid acceleration of hi tech has brought everything and everyone into closer proximity and the planet has become progressively a resource to fuel our insatiable appetites for ever more products and services to satisfy our endless quest to consume and be entertained. What we have failed to take into account is the toll postcivilization is having on the natural world and the kind of environment that is required to sustain our endless cravings. We’ve remained blind to how resources are distributed among our neighbors.

The largest impact is the acceleration of how quickly we can destroy the decay of postcivilization. We see this when current science studies climate change, introducing chemical pesticides and herbicides into our decaying ecosystems and the challenges of planetary warming and a host of interconnected contaminates such as microplastics into the food chain. Civilized thinking fails to perceive the interconnectedness of these issues. Instead, it compartmentalizes and systematically attempts to solve problems produced by such an approach. This is folly.

Returning to Wieman we read;

“Of all the innovations required to enable men to live at the high human level in the new age we are now entering, the one most critically important is the development of a form of religion which can join with science AND morality to serve THIS creativity. The part of religion in this development is to direct commitment of our lives to this creative presence; the part of science is to search out its required conditions; and the part of morality is to use scientific knowledge AND technology to provide these conditions and continuously improve them as research learns more about them.

Imagine, if you can, religious, scientific and facilitative types collaborating, cooperating and coordinating while inventing creative solutions to our environmental, economic, social educational and governing problems. Impractical you say? Think about what we are doing with our political, social and economic capital at the moment. What are our oligarchs spending right now and profiting from? Our conflicts of course. Instead of enjoying their boats, houses, vacations, belongings and the like, some of the wealthiest are strategizing and financing war. Putin, Kim, Urban, Netanyahu, Mohammed bin Salman, and Ali Khamenei.

How much CI do you see practiced by the oligarchs? How much more power is needed? When is enough, enough? What would just a little more power do for them? The quest for power, prestige, fame, control, publicity, stocks, seems endless. Perhaps bigger crowds, applause would do it or hands for that matter. As the old saying goes, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. The quest for power is a value. This value generates a lot of energy in the service of control. Is there another value which might fill the hole or vacuum and bring authentic satisfaction?

Wieman believed there was and is. Remember what he said, “This outcome is not inevitable; it can be prevented if [humankind] can be made to see the danger of it.” That is the theme of the next Final Frontier in the WLL. Stay tuned.

Love to all and Co-Creatively,

Dr. Charlie Palmgren

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 4)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 3)

November 6, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Summary of Previous Material

Wieman shared the view point of Kenneth Boulding and Arnold Toynbee. “We are living in postcivilization. The transition from tribal life to civilization was brief in the sense that 8,000 years was brief compared to the preceding million years of a human-like existence and the following million years of postcivilization.”

This is a very different view from those of us living and thinking in centuries and decades, let alone those thinking in years, months or weeks, and those in weeks, days and hours or in the common vernacular, pay check to paycheck. We are living in what was Henry’s, Fitz’s and my future. This reminds me of the 1985 movie Back to the Future. The difference is that I’m in the future attempting to re-experience the past and follow it forward to today.

We now see whether or not we chose CI or whether we opted for another way of life that Henry warned could emerge. Did we, as he suggested, choose “a fuller, more free and extensive form of creative communicating where each individual learns more from others…[that] expands our valuing consciousness?” Or, did we move in the direction of “anarchy and chaos, with an increase of coercive power and control?” You be the judge. You are living in Henry’s future.

Wieman as a prophet:

When President Biden and others suggest our 2024 election is about the survival of democracy, it is not an exaggeration. Even those living from paycheck to paycheck are becoming aware of the importance of our current election process. It is important to remember that the current polarizations in our political world are a product of democracy itself. Wieman wrote in 1968 the following.

“Perhaps this brief period of democracy we have had in a small part of the world during the past two centuries is coming to an end. Even in our democracies the concentration of privilege in the hands of a few has only mitigated, not basically changed. We seem to be moving in a time when wars will no longer be fought by men with guns but with complicated and technical instruments operated by experts.”

Does this statement ring a bell? Throughout these pages remember Henry is writing in the early 1960’s. He is writing about what is in his future, which is now our present. He was describing our drones that were operated by technicians hundreds to thousands of miles away.

However, thanks to AI and supercomputers we need fewer technicians as the machines have become self-learning machines capable of making their own decisions. We’ve been entertained by social media showing us how we take target practice shooting down our enemies’ missiles and drones. Is it war, entertainment, ignorance, stupidity and/or possibly moral and ethical failure on our part? In the current version of democracy, it’s anyone’s and everyone’s personal choice in the midst of moral and ethical relativism. Henry said; “Industry under automation may become the monopoly of a ruling few”

Three Companies Control 88% of The Largest Corporations in the U.S. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are the largest shareholder positions in 40% of all listed U.S. corporations and 88% of S&P 500 firms. They are the largest owners in 438 of the 500 most significant American corporations that include Amazon, and Facebook. These 438 co-owned corporations account for approximately 82 percent of S&P 500. Alphabet Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett), Amazon.com (Jeff Bezos), Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg), Walmart (Walton family), Oracle (Larry Ellison), Comcast (Roberts family) and Kraft-Heinz (Berkshire Hathaway and 3G Capital).

Remember it’s Henry’s future and our current reality. And now let’s get more granular. Wieman continues.

“Science is now being used to devise methods for enforcing a brainwashing ideology by which the great majority are made to think, feel and act as the privileged few demands, enslaving the minds of the many more completely than the minds of ancient slaves.”

The ancient slaves understood they were the victims of slavery. Our modern version of enslavement is couched in a belief that each of us choose our personal form of enslavement without understanding it as a form of slavery. Human manipulation has become an unconscious art of hyper suggestibility, which is similar to hypnosis, to engage in what Vance Packard wrote about in his 1957 book The Hidden Persuaders. He described Madison Avenue as getting people to “buy things they don’t need, at a price they can’t afford, to impress people they don’t like.” I suggest Big Pharma, along with big business, have refined these techniques to an art form and that they are manipulating people into asking their doctors for drugs and therapies they don’t necessarily need.

They got so good at it that drug companies were forced to inform the public of the side effects of their chemicals. In response, Big Pharma became more proficient at distracting and manipulating the attention of the public. Chamath Palihapitiya, former Facebook VP of User Growth stated;

“The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops we’ve created are destroying how society works.”

Sean Parker, founder of Napster and former Facebook president said;

“The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them, … was all about: “How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible? It’s a social validation feedback loop… You’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology … [The inventors] understood this, consciously, and we did it anyway.”

Chamath Palihapitiya, former Facebook VP of User Growth:

“The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops we’ve created are destroying how society works.“

Tristan Harris, former Google Design Ethicist:

“There are a thousand people on the other side of the screen whose job it is to break down the self-regulation you have.”

Reed Hastings, Netflix CEO:

“You know…when you watch a show on Netflix and you get addicted to it, you stay up late at night…we’re competing with [your] sleep…we actually compete with sleep. And we’re winning!”

To me these are good examples of the culture game and the culture wars. Henry anticipated such possibilities with his term “brainwashing”. We are seeing the refinement of these in 2024 real time. It’s worth repeating what Henry said above

“Science is now being used to devise methods for enforcing a brainwashing ideology by which the great majority are made to think, feel and act as the privileged few demands, enslaving the minds of the many more completely than the minds of ancient slaves.

Slaves of ancient times knew they were slaves. Many of us assume we’re making our own decisions. Are we? In your mind, which form of slavery is the more dangerous? Henry continues;

“All this may indicate we are reverting to the ancient system, prevalent throughout almost the whole of civilization, wherein, the privileged few gathers to themselves the benefits of social organization while the masses are controlled in such a way that creativity will sink to a minimum.”

For Wieman, creativity that will sink to a minimum, is our innate, instinctual and intrinsic capacity for engaging in CI. Then Henry says something incredible.

“This outcome is not inevitable [is he kidding me?] It can be prevented if [humankind] can be made to see the danger of it.”

How hard could/can that be? Seems simple enough, right? In my next entry I’ll pick up right where I’m leaving off. All of Henry’s quotes above are found on page 154 in RI.

Love you all,

Dr. Charlie Palmgren

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 3)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 2)

November 6, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet

By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Carl Puccio has reminded us in his paper on active learning what we are about. He writes;

“Creative interchange is a process where individuals engage authentically, value diverse perspectives, and continuously evolve their understanding through collaborative interactions (Wieman, 1953). Creative interchange is rooted in a two-fold commitment: firstly, individuals commit to sharing the best they currently know; and secondly, individuals recognize that some of what they know to be true is in error. The values of integrity and humility in this philosophical approach align seamlessly with the principles of active learning, emphasizing the importance of authentic interaction, reflection integrating and thinking, and continuous improvement for all involved in the learning experience.”

Five Conditions of Creative Interchange

1. Awareness: Learning facilitators and learners must be aware of their own perspectives and those of others, fostering a rich and inclusive learning environment where learning is at the center of the (shared) experience. This can be challenging for experienced and knowledgeable instructors who tend to answer all of the questions raised in the class, instead of first engaging learners to share their understanding.

2. Authentic [Consciousness]: Learning facilitators and learners need to model integrity and humility, demonstrating openness to new ideas and a willingness to learn from peers and facilitators. This requires instructors to ask more questions of their learners (and vice versa) and to practice deep listening and restraint before providing an answer.

3. Appreciative Understanding: Recognizing and valuing diverse viewpoints while critically and creatively evaluating one’s own ideas enhances innovative thinking and problem-solving and helps build shared understanding.

4. Creative Integrating: Integrating varied perspectives leads to enhanced creativity and a deeper understanding of complex concepts. Here, individuals integrate the uniqueness of others into their own thinking and are thereby transformed [themselves].

5. Continual [Transforming]: Commitment and tenacity to ongoing learning–acting on the best one [currently] knows and integrating the unique perspectives of others into one’s own thinking–ensure that emergent thinking [and behaving] occur and that the active learning remains relevant and effective.

Active learning aligns…with the creative interchange process by promoting continuous skill development, adaptability, and creativity among learners, [by] providing energy and flexibility needed for individuals in the learning experience.

As I said Henry Wieman was also a prophet. Two years after his transiting 1975 did I begin to more appreciatively his deeper understanding of our current time in regard for climate science and ecosystem decay. Later today I’ll be forwarding an additional message on the climate science issue.

No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 2)
The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 1)

October 23, 2024

The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet
By Dr. Charlie Palmgren

“The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead.” – Albert Einstein

Wieman as prophetic: The Predicament of Our Time/The Culture Game

Most of the material regarding Henry as a prophet will come from his book entitled Religious Inquiry (RI) published in 1968 and other unpublished material that Henry, Fitz and I were developing that same year. In today’s comments I’ll be reflecting on the massive hurricane moving toward Florida. One of our own, Bill Petrarca, and his wife Jane, live in Ft. Myers where some of the main surge is predicted to move inland.

I will begin where Henry began his writing of RI. All italics and font changes that follow are mine.

“What generates the religious problem in the special form it assumes for our time?
1. What Generates the problem?
…The magnitude of this transformation makes it comparable to the change that brought forth civilization out of the primitive tribal life which had been the form of human existence for over a million years. To indicate the significance of this present transformation, we are adopting the words of Kenneth Bolding, who calls it a ‘transition from civilization to postcivilization’ is not intended to suggest the destruction of civilization but only to indicate the magnitude and significance of the change…occurring in our lives.”

Two years after Henry’s transitas, new information emerged from the Club of Rome in 1977 that could/would modify Henry’s statement that we were not assuming the “destruction of civilization”. It came in the form of the Club’s suggestion there were “limits to growth”. I knew that many nations, ours included, felt that when it came to economics there were really no limits on the growth of profit and wealth. It was ever upward and onward because the “invisible hand” of the marketplace in capitalism was boundless.

For me the notion of unlimited growth of profit and wealth has serious religious implications as well. When you combine the profit motive with competition as your modus operant, you have a very dangerous scenario. You get a materialistic society and workforce ripe for continual consumption. Put all this in a hierarchical structure with the power at the top and you have the perfect storm for disrupting interpersonal cooperation, collaboration and creativity.

Henry continues;

“Boulding recognizes that the great transition may not be consummated. A change so radical and so swift requires adaptive changes in the basic institutions which shape the conduct of human life. If these changes are not made, civilization will destroy itself and possibly all human life along with it.”

I’m of the opinion this is exactly what we are doing.

“Boulding is chiefly concerned with required changes in the military and political institutions, and the control of population. Our study is concerned with the corresponding change required in religion.

The change from tribal life to civilization brought with it in the course of time the change from tribal religions to the religions of civilization. This great transition was much slower than the one of equal magnitude now occurring. …Hence the development of a religion fit to sustain the life of postcivilization.”

It is important to note that what is occurring now is of a different magnitude than many similar prior changes. Time is of the essence. And, for Henry, religion must also radically change.

“…If Kenneth Boulding is correct…then civilization along with all its religions, is a brief, tumultuous, and precarious transition from tribal life with its religions to postcivilization with its religion. The transition called civilization is brief in the sense that 8,000 years, more or less, is brief compared to the preceding million years of a human-like existence and the following million years of postcivilization.”

For Henry religion is about the values that inform and determine our behavior, guide our organizations, such as business, education, governance and social media. Together these form the basis of our civilization and way of life. Think about this view in relationship to how most people organize their thinking in regard to each of these social institutions. For Henry they are all related, interconnected and interdependent. Most people perceive them as separate with differing agenda and outcomes. I’m suggesting this simple distinction is destroying our way of life and participating in the destruction of the required ecosystems sustaining planetary life itself.

This simple distinction has humongous implications. It is particularly true when you attempt to mold these institutions into a single nation that is indivisible, under God, with liberty and justice for all at the personal level while attempting to form them into a more perfect union. This always reminds me of one of my favorite authors, Albert Camus. I included him in my Master’s Thesis on existentialism. Camus died in a tragic car crash in 1960. In the wreckage they found an unfinished manuscript of his latest book. In 1995 his daughter Catherine Camus, decided to publish the unedited manuscript just as it was. A key theme in that book is the story of our time. It raises the issue of human life and its core values of solitude or individuality and solidarity or community. Is it solitary and/or solidary? Solitary is subject to becoming progressively polarized, my way or the highway. Solidary is subject to becoming progressively homogenized, if you’ve seen one you’ve seen them all.

The question becomes are we about either/or and/or both/and? I suggest, and believe Henry would agree, creative interchange allows for both forms of thinking. Observe our nation in the 2024 election cycle. The majority of the time when you see a map of our nation on social media its divided into two of more colors. We are no longer the United States of America. We have become the divided states of America. At the moment singularity is triumphing over solidarity. We are polarizing our differences rather than creatively interchanging with them to move from common ground to higher ground. We are moving toward conflict, rather than greater good for all. (All quotes from RI were pgs.4-6)

In the next paper, I’ll be specific on what Henry predicted could/would happen in 2024 if we failed to start choosing creative interchange as our life style from in the late 60’s and 70’s.
No comments on The Final Frontier: A Living Legacy of Henry Nelson Wieman, A Modern-Day Prophet (Part 1)