Jan Cox Talk 0092

Life’s Morality, Nexology, and Daydreams


Video = none
Audio = Stream or Download from the dots

AKS/News Items = none
Summary = See Below
Excursion / Task = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below


Jan Cox Talk 92, Dec 1, 1983, runtime 1:20
Notes by TK

Anything you can satisfactorily explain, you don’t understand.

No form of criticism can ever lead to understanding (D-force manifestation). ][Jig-saw puzzle analogy: criticism of individual piece of the picture is lost when seeing the whole picture. Individual piece is not seen as such.

Life’s morality: change (growth) is good. Stagnation is bad.

Must “grow up” to Life’s level of maturity right now.

Daydreams: yellow circuitry repetition two categories: things yet to be done and things done unsatisfactorily.

Definition of self by how others react to you. Stronger with women than with men, but  this is changing in the horizontal–mechanically.

New word: for division between “psychological” side and physical side of man–nexology. Imaginary division.

Emotions can be thought of as a ditch running between red and yellow circuit. To do This Thing you must wallow thru the ditch–can’t jump!


Optional task, begin to write with a different rhythm.



Document:  92, December 1, 1983
Copyright(c) Jan M. Cox, 1983

I want you to Consider the fact that anything you can explain to your apparent satisfaction, you do not understand.  That sounds as though it couldn’t be true, and indeed it is not true at the ordinary level or things would not continue to operate as they must.  But it is true:  if you can explain something to yourself — or, even worse, if you can tell someone else — you don’t understand it.  Now, would you care to explain that?

No form of criticism, under whatever name, will lead to real understanding.  And again, this is not true at the ordinary level.  Everything at the ordinary level, everything in you from the Line down, is in conflict with this and always will be.  It’s a matter of your Seeing that whatsoever is going on at the ordinary level is of no consequence.  Criticism and hostility are built into the system; all types of attempted analyses, all debate, and everything that passes for enlightened discussion between people out in Life is a form of criticism, whether it be a political debate or two people standing at a bar talking about how the team might improve under another coach.  If there is any kind of vibration going on between people — any sort of connection, even just a momentary exchange — there is criticism going on.  It is always a matter of, “Your ideas are not exactly on the money, but if you’ll listen to me we can come to some mutually beneficial agreement.”  Unless there is criticism on both sides, people have nothing to talk about; and if they do come to an actual agreement, that’s the end of it.  Success breeds death.

This appears to be the way things are accomplished:  “Let’s sit here and reason together.”  And it gives the belief, the sensation that people are getting somewhere.  Even what passes for education is a form of it:  criticizing history, criticizing some book.  At the ordinary level of binary consciousness, criticism keeps everything moving, and apparently leads somewhere.  But as always, that which is natural and necessary at the ordinary level does not lead to understanding.

You cannot really comprehend this until you have moments of being freed from the ordinary energy running through you, until you establish a distance from what you call “I”, because everything within your ordinary system conflicts with it.  If it were possible to extract all hostility from your system — and I’m now calling it “criticism” to point you in a slightly different direction — you would be a blank.  What seems to be your “I”-flow of consciousness would be blank.  It would produce the state many people believe they are pursuing through forms of meditation:  “If I could just turn this thing off up here, I would be close to the gods.”  Yes and no.  All I’d have to do to produce it in you would be to extract the critical factor.  If I could do that and still leave you with a little piece of ordinary consciousness, at least enough to communicate, you’d turn to other people and say, “Yes, this is it; it’s what I’ve been looking for,” but you would be blank. The ordinary flow of energy which, in its movement through your circuitry creates the “I”-level of consciousness, could not exist without that continual flow of criticism being part of it.

Remember, there is no form of criticism — no matter what your system may choose to call it — which will take you anywhere you haven’t already been.  Don’t be misled by words.  Do not think that there are justifiable areas where you may rightly observe that certain aspects of Life don’t fit.  It’s not true.  “You” is in a certain posture — a specific predetermined position in the Grid — and no form of criticism will move you from it.

It is the nature of ordinary, binary consciousness to deal with reality by isolating and observing it, then discussing and criticizing it.  But it amounts to observing and criticizing one piece of a jigsaw puzzle.  Based on the particular energy your system is designed to transfer, you occupy one particular position in Life. Hence, you can see only one piece of the puzzle, and you can criticize that one piece as much as you want.  You can say that it is not beautifully or functionally made.  Maybe it has clashing colors, or no color at all; maybe it is not pleasing to look at, or pleasing to touch, and you feel, “This is ugly, and there is no passion or information in it.”  But it’s only one piece, and if you were to step back, if you could See where that piece lives within the whole puzzle, you would See that each piece is perfectly placed, beautifully made.  You’d simply See that there is nothing to criticize.

Don’t pass this off lightly.  The voices constantly arise in you:  you constantly look at a piece of something — the apparent behavior of others, your own daydreams, historical events — and say, “It’s all out of shape.  I see no way that could be right.”  But when you put that piece into the interlocking life of the puzzle, there is no basis for criticism.  That is the difference between ordinary consciousness and being able to activate the higher areas of the nervous system.  That is the difference between looking and Seeing.  It is to be alive and have no complaints, no criticism.

I want to point out two things regarding the attempt to See man as a condensed reflection of everything, or, conversely, to see Life as a Big Person.  The first is the natural human propensity to react negatively to anything new.  This goes on within you constantly and is tied to what I have been describing as criticism.  You hear about a new kind of music, and the first time you listen to it, something in you goes, “Oh, no.”  Your initial reaction is invariably negative and this is not some personal peccadillo or a psychological weakness on your part.  It’s not caused by the fact that you grew up in a straight-laced middle class family.  It is the Line level system’s resistance to anything new.  What you should observe is how normal, how natural, it is.  It is as if D-Force — the destructive or resisting force — is continually moving through humanity, restating the status quo’s position.

You can see it everywhere, in yourself and in everyone else.  It’s the way the system is designed to operate.  Yet it is impossible to See and understand, if you are ordinary.  If two men are having a drink at the bar of a strip club and a male stripper comes on stage, they will immediately react negatively. Afterwards, they might try to justify their reactions.  One might say, “I’m in favor of sexual liberation, but this has gone too far.  The women don’t really want it.”  It’s simply that ordinary consciousness can always come up with an explanation.  It has no choice.  But any time you hear that critical voice within say, “this has gone too far,” it is not you talking.  It is D-Force restating, reaffirming, the status quo’s position on male strippers or whatever else you have encountered.  It constantly restates that position, which is, “No. It’s foolish!  It’s illegal!  It’s dumb!”  But it’s none of those things.  It’s nothing consciousness can name.  It’s D-Force.

I have told you that the first stage of true nervous system growth is the lateral expansion of your circuitry below the Line.  There is no way to suddenly activate the higher circuitry and still be who you are now.  If that could suddenly happen, you’d be a maniac.  It is not possible to move into the second stage of activating the nervous system vertically when all you are is a Life produced set of mechanical reactions and responses.  You must first expand your own nervous system laterally.  You must grow up in a manner equal to Life’s present state of maturity.  Take as an example what seems to be Life’s current attitude toward anything — sex or race or religion.  You have to grow up to that attitudinal level, whatever it seems to be.  You must expand your own internal connections to encompass all possible attitudes found in Life. You must reach the point that nothing is foreign to you, nothing is automatically either attractive or repulsive.  It has nothing to do with morality; it has nothing to do with current attitudes being either right or wrong.  It is necessary because you cannot have Life being more mature than you are.  There can be no aspect of Life that you can’t See in your own system.

Life does have its own morality, and it is simply this:  growth is good; stagnation is bad.  What cannot be seen from “I”-level is that whatever makes things grow is beneficial.  It’s commonly recognized that the younger generation always attempts to change things, apparently, just for the sake of change — and the older generation continually cries out against that change, no matter what it is.  You must look at it beyond the confines of being a sociological phenomenon.  Everyone in Life knows this, yet no one sees that it’s not the rash foolishness of the young; and it’s not stodgy old figs who have lost the capacity for fun.  It’s Life growing and regulating its own growth.  It’s change and resistance to change.  It’s the dance of C and D.

Whenever you feel critical, whenever you want to say, “This has gone too far,” you know that Life is more mature in that area than you.  You have to be — at the absolute bare minimum — as mature as Life is, right this second.  Do not get caught up in the particular area you are observing.  It is not a matter of whether things are better now than they were ten years ago.  Humanity’s sense of morality is something like toenails criticizing genitals:  “What in the hell are those boys and girls doing up there?  Shame on them!”  It is none of the toenails’ business, because what is happening up there is not operating on their level.  Suppose the genitals found out what the brain cells were doing and thought, “They are going crazy!”  You cannot listen to the voices within you that make subjective statements about morality, but you can remember this:  Life itself — the Big Guy — has a sense of morality which is based simply on growth and change.  There is no such thing as devolution in the long range, though there are periods of apparent stagnation or backward motion.  But these are simply passing phases.

Everything is a balance between growth and stability; Life grows and simultaneously regulates its growth.  A body builder has to tear down muscle in order to build up muscle.  Remember, you are only seeing one piece of the jigsaw puzzle.  For the time being, Consider Life’s morality in this way:   it is evil for things to be the same as they were yesterday.  If Life were “evil” according to that definition, we’d all be done for.

I keep getting questions about daydreams.  Daydreams are just a continual running of what seems to be ordinary consciousness:  you find yourself out working or driving the car and the internal voices take over, commenting on every little thing in the human drama.  It’s the sound of the machine, the noise of energy running through your system.  And it’s you merging with whatever impression hits the screen.

It should take no great investigation to realize that your daydreams are nothing but repetition.  They fall into two categories.  (If I said there were three categories, you wouldn’t be able to Hear it.  In this case, they do fall into two categories, except for the fact that there is an outline around every pair of categories, which nobody can ever see.  Picture the yin-yang symbol.  No one sees the circle itself, holding and controlling the two forms within it.  Whenever I say there are two categories, remember there is also something else.)  Daydreams are either things you have yet to do or things you have done unsatisfactorily.

The first category is the most obvious:  “What if such and such happened to me?”  “What if I did finally win the lottery and buy a new convertible?”  The second category is more captious.  You will be surprised, once you See it for yourself, what a large proportion of your daydreams is about things you have done unsatisfactorily.  Consider the natural energies flowing through people, the continual dance of desire and simultaneous  condemnation of those desires.  Everyone has a little pool of sin that he daydreams about putting his toe in.  Maybe you decide to get a certain thing out of your system; you decide to just do it, and damn the consequences, such as, what your mother would say if she found out.  And you put your toe in that pool.  Let me point out that if you still daydream about it afterward, you didn’t do it right.

I want to specifically point out something about women, since for the first time in history they are involved with This Thing.  It has to do with the rhetorical question:  “How do people define themselves, except by others’ reactions to them?” — how do you know what the outline of “you” is, other than by how people seem to treat you?”  What I am going to discuss is something all women know, whether or not they have ever attempted to put words on it.  At the ordinary level, a woman’s sense of identity is based almost entirely on a man’s reactions to her.  The converse is not true of men, and this difference has been the basis of that unspecified eternal battle between the sexes.  It seems that, even when a man and woman have a great attraction to each other, the woman can never hold the man’s attention enough to suit her; he’s always wandering off to go bowling or have a drink with the guys.  Neither is better; no form of engagement is ever better than another.  I’m telling you something in words, something recognized at the ordinary level but never understood.  It’s changing in our lifetime, but, at the ordinary level, women’s primary self-identification is still based on men’s reactions.  Women are almost blank apart from that.  And it’s very difficult for men to understand.  It’s common for men to say among themselves, “I love my wife and she’s beautiful, but there’s a limit to vanity.  That woman takes two hours to get ready to go anywhere!”  As a rule, a man looks in the mirror and if his hair’s combed, if he doesn’t have spinach between his teeth, he’s ready to walk out the door.  That is also changing now.  But, until the present time, men always had several aspects to the way they seemed to identify themselves, whereas women only had one.  It was almost as if a woman looked in the mirror and wondered, “Who am I?” until some man came along and provided an outline for her.  This has changed drastically, though mechanically, in the last fifteen years. But it must change even more drastically in anyone attempting to do This Thing.  Any woman attracted to This is already freer of this than is the norm, but every woman on this planet is affected by it.  It’s built into the system.  And at the ordinary level it still serves a particular purpose; but you must simply See it for what it is.  You should be aware that it is natural; it is mechanical; it’s part of what keeps everything moving.  The division between the sexes is an assist in the transfer of energy necessary for Life’s growth.  At a certain level you can look upon men and women as representing two forces.  There is between them a continual conflict, a pushing together of those forces.  At the ordinary level, humanity’s favorite song is still “Love is a hurting thing.”  Love is a struggle.  But everything is a struggle at the ordinary level.

Wherever there is growth, there is conflict.  Everyone’s Line level system resists his or her own attempts to grow.  You all initially had, or have, voices of resistance to This Thing:  “What if I’m being took? What if I’m deluding myself?”

Let me point out something parenthetical about the idea of “being took”.  Suppose you became interested in Swami X; he has fifty-two Rolls Royces, a compound in the Himalayas and a bungalow in Beverly Hills and thousands of followers.  Let us say you finally get an opportunity to talk to the good Swami and your immediate reaction is, “All these people are being took.  The man’s crazy; he’s going nowhere.”  What you don’t realize is that there is no such thing as being took.  There is always a barter — a beautiful exchange — going on.  What’s happened is that you’ve picked out one piece of the jigsaw puzzle to criticize.  Once you begin to See the puzzle itself, the type of behavior that ordinary people call insane or useless is not insane or useless.  It is just fine.  It fits right in, though from your ordinary position you cannot see how it fits.  I may not want to rent a room to a murderer, or lend him my car, but he fits right in, and I’d rather have him occupying that position than me.  End of parentheses.

You must be practical about yourself.  If there is any benefit for you in This Thing, you have to See that the kind of resistance which still exists in your Line level system is useless.   You may think, “I’m going to be cautious about this,” but how long are you going to be cautious?  You have been tiptoeing around your whole life, so what better time to abandon resistance?

I’ve asked you the more than rhetorical question, “What if there is no psychological aspect of humanity, as opposed to the physical aspect?”  People are accustomed to believing that there is a vague, ephemeral, invisible world of emotion; there is a soul; there is a nether world of the indefinable.  But I’m asking you to look again, Neuralize again:  what if there are internal physical pressures, very similar to atmospheric pressures?  What if emotion is simply a matter of hydraulics, of internal pressures?

Ever since people began to talk, they have expressed a distinction between an “I” and a “not-I”.  My equation — “I + not-I = Everything” — taken on the ordinary internal level, translates into I, one’s consciousness, and not-I, one’s body.  People feel a division between the psychological and physical aspects of themselves.  If a physician is trying to determine why a certain patient is impotent, he believes the first thing he must establish is whether the problem is psychological or physical.  But whenever you encounter what appears to be a psychological problem, Consider the question of energy versus form, genetics versus environment.  There is no form without energy.  Yet, at the ordinary level of humanity attempting to understand itself and Life, there appears to be a distinct division between the psychological and physical aspects.

I’m about to give you a new word.  I made it up; you can’t define it by any other word in the dictionary, because it refers to something that is not yet understood.  There is simply no need for this word – for this understanding – at the ordinary level.  And , along with everything else, you should Neuralize:  why there is no place and no need for such a word.

Ordinary consciousness perceives a division between mind and body.  Every person on this planet assumes a division, a line, between “I” and “my body,” between that which is psychological and that which is physical.  Everyone assumes such a division, but no one has named the division itself.  Until now.  That is what my word refers to:  it is a name for that which humanity never refers to.

We will call the study of this line “Nexology,” and when you are referring to this aspect of humanity, the word will be “Nexological.”  I’m naming and describing something which humanity has no need to describe. Consider why:  there is not a psychological aspect of humanity as opposed to the physical aspect.  There is no such division; yet a division is necessary for the operation of binary consciousness.  That is how it perceives and names:  by separating an ongoing process into isolated fragments.  It is the internal interpretation of the “I + not-I” equation:  “Yeah, I’m I — but there’s also not-I.  ‘My’ knee hurts.  ‘My’ heart is broken.”  It’s as if there is “I” and then there is “the rest of me.”  That is the ordinary bilateral operation of consciousness.  But I want you to look where no one ever looks.  It is not either this or that; one or the other.  It is right in the middle where everyone thinks a line is drawn.  That line does not, in reality, divide anything.  From now on, “Nexological” refers to the imaginary division which ordinary consciousness tells you exists between the psychological and physical aspects of Man.  So there is no need for this word — “Nexological” — at the ordinary level — yet there is for you.  Because you have to look at what no one else can see.

Consider how curious it is that you can see the usefulness of this concept, once I name it.  But you have never thought of it before.  The purpose of new maps and words is not just to create a new language, but to expand your internal connections; to keep you from falling into the same old neurological ruts.  No matter how many times I said, “There is no such thing as psychological and physical,” whenever you tried to think about something, your thoughts would fall into the rut of wondering, “Is this more psychological or physical?” because you had no other way to think about it.  “Nexological” expands the bilateral view.

One of the greatest shocks you’ll encounter is to actually See the limits of this thing which seems to be you.  All your life you have felt, “My mind is limitless.”  But it’s almost impossible to get outside of words themselves.  They might as well be handcuffs on you brain cells.  It’s a simultaneously frightening and liberating experience to realize that all the times you believed you were thinking profound thoughts you were walking in a circle.  That is why new words and descriptions are necessary; to prevent you from filing away whatever you hear under “something I’ve thought about before” or, if there is no previous file, rejecting it completely.

Since everyone has a great interest in emotion, let me mention one thing which you can use as a very temporary map.  The emotions — the Blue Circuit — could almost be seen as a ditch between the Red and Yellow Circuits.  It seems as if there are people in Life — those you might call first class intellectuals — who have in some way jumped that ditch.  It is as if these people have moved directly from the Red Circuit to the Yellow.  But that kind of apparent person would never be interested in pursuing This Thing.  Because to do This Thing, you have to get down and trudge through that Blue ditch.  And it has to happen through your own efforts; you can’t magically jump across.  You have to walk all the way through the ditch so that you emerge with a continual remembrance of Life’s evolution, it’s movement from a very deep Red passion to the more usable Blue form of emotion.  You must experience what could almost be called emotional death, then come out on the other side.  If you survive that, the ditch will have been navigated.  Many of you feel that you’ve already spent too much time up to your knees in the Blue ditch.  But it was not a willful navigation.  It was simply where Life placed you.  Of course, you cannot stay stuck there.  You cannot spend your life down there wallowing, screaming, laughing and getting used to the mud.  Once you See it, it’s time to move on.