"we are all connected"

Do you often hear the idea that "we are all connected." I noticed this year as I binged on Hallmark Christmas movies how often this notion was mentioned. I also have noticed that "self help" bloggers find this theme attractive to their audience. You probably know me well enough by now that frequent use of a phrase gets me to pondering.


The best way to ponder is by what I call "walking the brain." This involves asking and answering four questions that dominate the four quadrants of the brain.

           WHAT?     WHY?     WHO?     HOW? 

WHAT does it mean we are all connected? It certainly is not a reference to our physical condition since we definitely have freedom of movement separate from each other. So, it must be referring to connecting that which makes us who we are absent our physical condition. That leaves the idea that somehow each of us are connected to all others by our soul.

What connects our soul one to another?

Do we all have the same goal or vision for life?
         I don't think so
Do we all have the same personality and needs?
         There's no evidence of this
Do we naturally have empathy with what each other is feeling and experiencing?
          If so, we would not be forever disappointed at how much we are misunderstood
Does social identity connect us with some and divide us with others?
          Finding our self concept in one group works against being connected to all groups
Is there a universal code of justice that binds us together?
          Maybe that is more a moral obligation to justify ourselves than selfless love

Human psychology (the study of the soul) does not support the idea that our soul's are connected. Mankind has not lived throughout history as if "we are all connected." Let's keep searching.

WHY do we think "we are all connected"?

There is a possibility that the message "we are all connected" is more about marketing. It is quite appealing to attach a movie or a blog or a book to the idea of "connectedness." This makes us feel inclusive. It's not a surprise, however, that deep down in the human condition, people are quite lonely. Some cultures emphasize "rugged individualism" and some value the group that we belong to. One culture leads to blame and the other to shame. Neither is hardly evidence of a positive effect of "connectedness." Regardless of the culture, experts who deal with the soul find that in spite of how busy we are or how many people we have in our life, people still find that their soul feels alone.

So, maybe we aren't really connected to each other. Maybe there is some built in deep longing that we want to be. Possibly, we need to think we are "connected" so we can eliminate the feeling we aren't.

There are some WHO questions, too. WHO would be responsible for connecting everyone? WHO has the power? Not me, do you? WHO does this message appeal to?

Everyone, that's what makes it a good marketing tool.

Is this idea of "connectedness to all" only an empty marketing ploy or is it actually real? Let's keep pondering.

HOW do we reach a point where our soul is connected to others? The typical approach to marketing is the "power of positive thinking." "I think, therefore I am" is a prevailing and popular philosophy. You believe this? Certainly, our thoughts have some power over our feelings, but do they have the power to actually connect our soul with all others?

We can seek intimacy with others through personal vulnerability and trust. When we make this connection, we say "we know each other" in a way that is not only in our heads. It's primarily a heart knowledge and does reduce or eliminate loneliness. When we are fortunate to have such deep trusting relationships, we get a glimpse of what it means to be connected to another. This is hard work and risky and occurs for each of us with only a few other people, if ever. Having this idea of "connection" with all of human kind is just not possible. Thus, having one or a few intimate relationships enriches our soul but does not satisfy the claim "we are all connected."

This intimacy that some find in one or a few other people offers a hint at the opportunity for being connected to others. BUT, its not what is advertised. There must be a power beyond ourselves to make this happen.

The only option for this power that I have ever heard of is what the King of this universe does in us and for us. The Apostle Paul uses the body as a metaphor for what God does for all who know Him (this is the intimate heart type of knowledge). Not only does this connect our soul to Him, but in doing so it connects our soul to all souls who are connected to Him.

The really GOOD NEWS is He does all the work. He chooses us. He pursues us. He pays the whole price and provides all the power. It is a lasting connection. It can't be stolen from us and it will never rust out. AND, best of all, this body has many parts, ALL CONNECTED to one another.

So, when you find the world is marketing the idea "we are all connected," make sure the marketing effort is sponsored by the One who has the product. Otherwise, you are relying on illusion, just another advertisement gone astray.

That's what I get when I ponder "WE ARE ALL CONNECTED" ....

"pondered in her heart"

"but Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart"



 After all the commotion around the original Christmas event, Mary "pondered in her heart." I'm sure you have heard this verse many times, but have you stopped to ponder it? Wouldn't Christmas be a great time to ponder Mary's pondering in her heart? What is so profound about this that you and I can learn from Mary's Christmas?

Actually, this verse provides a fantastic lesson in psychology. I know, now you likely think I've really lost it. Stay with me because this moment for Mary stands in stark contrast with all of what human history wants you to know about thinking (pondering) and feeling (heart). 

Each of us are subjected to the tension between philosophy and religion. Likely you are not aware of these influences on you, but they are strong and pervasive. You don't have to study either to be dominated by them. With running the risk of oversimplifying, let me summarize this tension and its power over your personal psychology (thoughts, feelings and choices).

Classical Greek philosophy burst onto the scene around 600 BC. Prior to this time people looked to sages and prophets to tell them how to think and feel. The Greek philosophers are credited with introducing the personal delight and responsibility for rational inquiry and discovery. The contemplative life emerged as the pathway to virtue and the "perfect life." While philosophy enlightened theology, it also threatened institutional control over what people thought and felt. The tension between philosophy and religion was the inherent confrontation between the need for inquiry (freedom of thought) and the need for dogma (controlling thought). Throughout history, this confrontation grew violent as religion became politicized (wars of Islam, Catholics, Protestants, Holocaust, etc.). Orthodoxy ("the right opinion") is necessary for power bases to stop debate and control people's thoughts and feelings.

Here's the basic conflict. Classical Greek philosophy emphasized that inquiry must be applied to sensory perception. The assumption is that we can only rationalize (judge as true) that which we can experience through the senses. However, institutions cannot control subjective conclusions about truth. They introduced absolute truth in doctrines of orthodoxy to remove feelings from thought. In a sense, both approaches intend to reject the notion of sentimentalism and put the power of determining truth solely into the cognitive processes of humans. Philosophy depends on powers of the individual and religion relies on powers of the institution. Both approaches recognize the limitation and futility of being "only human." You've heard this, haven't you, "I'm only human"? Maybe you have even said this yourself. Yet, it is the way of the world in philosophy and religion.

Mary presents an alternative. We could call Mary a picture of Christmas psychology. Mary was not relying on what she observed in the physical world. Her soul was invaded by the eternal presence of God Himself. Her soul (psyche) was dominated by an amazing integration of thought (pondering) and affection (heart). No philosophy based on physical senses informed her judgments. No orthodoxy controlled her thoughts and feelings.

Mary's soul, the seat of her thoughts, feelings and choices, was not subject to philosophy not religion. She was under the influence of eternal conditions. God chose her. God empowered her. God informed her. Her thoughts (pondering) and her emotions (heart) were both subject to Him. May wan't left alone to be "only human." When God gave her Jesus, she became "really human." This is what happened on the first Christmas, "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

This is what Mary pondered in her heart. Her thoughts not constrained by her physical senses nor institutional dogma. Her affections (emotions) were very active and totally integrated with her thoughts. The world does not understand Mary's psychology. Maybe this is why Christmas has become more of a seasonal celebration of the senses than rejoicing over God's invasion of the human soul. Maybe this is why the circumstances of life establish our thoughts and mood.

So, when you trust your physical senses for what is true and are afraid to honor your affections, remember Mary did not do either that first Christmas.

Don't be hesitant to ponder in your heart what God has revealed to you beyond your physical senses this Christmas.

Sounds pretty good until ....

I was recently revisiting some lectures on Aristotle and am always amazed at how good his philosophies sound at first glance. Now, don't stop reading because you think classical Greek is boring, too sophisticated or irrelevant. When you stop and hear what Aristotle says about "the good life," you may find you have a lot in common. You likely will see he simply can say well what a lot of us think. After all, he is likely the most influential thinker of the last 2500 years.

Let me see if I can give a brief, but thorough, recap of Aristotle's view of the human life. Then, I will offer an alternative point of view you may or may not feel as comfortable with. You should find this quite insightful.

1.  What makes something "living" are certain powers. The power of nutrition (feeding oneself), the power of procreation (reproducing one's self), the power of locomotion (relocating one's self), and the power of the senses (perceiving for one's self).
2.  What separates the human from all other animal and plant life is the addition of intellect (the power to reason for one's self).
3.  The end of all intellect is knowledge and to know something is to know its cause.
4.   There are four types of cause
       material (from what does it come)
       model (what form does it take)
       making (the act of creating)
       maker (the purpose of the designer or creator or the "final cause")
     the famous statement about cause, "if the art of ship building were in the wood, we       would have ships by nature"
5.  humans are artistic objects of a self defining, self creating nature
6.  why would anyone wish to live a virtuous life?  the end game of the human life is         the pursuit of happiness. humans can only pursue the goal, they can never attain it.
7.  happiness is only available from a virtuous life
8.  purpose and enjoyment (intrinsic motives only) are the highest form of bliss
9.  man's sense of purpose is not self serving (hedonistic or narcissistic), but directly         connected to his/her "street address" (an identity of residence)
10.  the law, universal principles of justice found in human nature, inclines us to                harmony with our surroundings, not threatens us with punishment.

Of course this is only a snapshot of Aristotle, but it is the foundation of his view of life. It actually sounds pretty good. It has stood the test of time. Some believe it forms the foundation of Islam, Catholicism, and the US Declaration of Independence.

So, why did Jesus take dead aim at Aristotle when He proclaimed the Kingdom of Heaven?
Jesus contrasts key Aristotelian points about the law and attaining the perfect life. Jesus gives a different picture of intrinsic motivation of the Kingdom dweller, and what puts the soul in a blissful state.


But mainly Jesus presents us with the idea of knowing the Creator rather than seeking the cause of outcomes through our own intellect.

Aristotle makes some good points about the notion of power. The bottom line lies in our assumption of who has the power. Is the power that makes us human found in our own sensory perception, or is it in the hands of a Sovereign God, who chose us to be with Him? The Bible claims God gave us the resurrection power of Jesus, which comes only through an unobservable evidence He provides to us called faith.

The question for each of us is, "who do we trust to explain the human life?" Two cases for the source of power. Each sound pretty good. So, whose power should we ultimately rely on?

Aristotle makes a lot of sense, but God makes a lot of sense, too. In the end, its not what we know, or what makes sense, but who we trust. Trust is grounded in the bias we rely on.

There are ONLY TWO, and we cannot trust both.