21st Century Spirituality

Spiritual framework that will fill the vacuum of meaning in the Western world should be compatible with psychological diversity of human beings (their brain architecture). Hinduism may provide some insights on bridging the past with pre-singularity world of the future.



Every major socioeconomic transition creates a belief vacuum that is often rapidly filled with grassroots seeking of meaning. Western leaderships are still in the process of formulating a replacement for Christian, communist, nationalist, (and these days neoliberal) belief structures. This means that the following few decades will see a great burst of spiritual experimentation before world's elites successfully overcome their nihilism and agree on something to push from the top down. Until then, ordinary people will have their own parallel struggles with nihilism that go through various conventional attempts of physical escapism, hedonistic escapism, relying on emotional snakeoil salesmen, and escapism through embrace of older fads and norms (imitating the wealthier strugglers by indulging in eastern religions, new age, esoteric traditions, etc).

Something will emerge as dominant due to the sheer necessity of belief for the herd's survival. What complicates the matter is the great cultural and psychological splintering of the world due to mass communication and compartmentalization. Whatever dominant belief structure emerges, it must have both a unifying base for harmonious international/intercultural relations while allowing and enabling for the expression of the great pluralism of the world. Before anybody can say that procedural democratic functioning satisfies all of this, I would say that the belief structure should have a common goal in mind, something to look forward to (the next free and fair election doesn't exactly cut it emotionally). Monetary acquisition also appears rather ineffective against nihilism.

There are a number of grand semi-tangible goals that may step in as the time goes on (singularity, space exploration, world peace, etc). Grand goals are general enough that they don't stifle the seeking of smaller individual goals and don't infringe on the various journeys to get there.

When discussing spirituality and non-organized personal religious world systems, it is important to keep in mind the different emotional needs of various breeds of homo sapiens. (As in previous articles, I will use Myers-Brigg personalities as rough guides to neurologically diverse types of humans.) This automatically hints that although there may be thousands of ways to seek one's own unique spiritual fulfillment, the ways will tend to cluster based on brain architecture among almost 7 billion people. This clustering serves as a general midpoint between infinite ways of seeking and one singular way (which, if it existed, would be expressed spontaneously in a roughly identical organized religious format across the planet).

Working with MBTI typology, we see that the number of spiritual path clusters can range from 4 major vague ones to up to 32 ultra defined ones. Interestingly enough, Maslow's description of self-actualization can provide hints when a certain type of human is on the right spiritual path.

In addition to satisfying a) "what a man can be he must be" 
self-actualizing individuals experience a higher frequency of  

b) "The mystic experience, the oceanic feeling...`peak' experiences or times of intense emotions in which they transcend self. During it, they experience feelings of ecstasy, awe, and wonder with feelings of limitless horizons opening up, feelings of unlimited power and at the same time feelings of being more helpless than ever before. The experience ends with the conviction that something extremely important and valuable has happened so that the person is to some extent transformed and strengthened by the experience that has a carry-over into everyday life."

This definitely sounds like emotional fulfillment typically associated with spiritual experience or awakening. We can conclude that natural abilities of a certain psychological type coming together in a highly pleasurable and empowering way is one of the signs that one is on the right spiritual path. Obviously there may also be an environmental aesthetic triggers such as a certain landscape or a strong sensory overload. The self-actualization trigger however is unique to a specific breed of human and leads to interesting as well as troubling conclusions.

If a naturally aggressive quick reflex human is more likely to get his or her peak/mystic state on the battlefield or the sports arena, then high energy/violent competition becomes a spiritual path. This may strike one as odd considering the popular cultural association of spirituality with calm and gentle INFP/INFJ new agers. But wait there's more. Intuitive thinkers (NTs) may fill the spiritual vacuum from helping along technological progress, intuitive feelers (NFs) from idealism, SFJs from caring for others, and so on. The domineering personality types could thus be on their spiritual emotionally satisfying path when exploiting/commanding fellow human beings.

What emerges is an intuitively common sense yet somewhat unpleasant throwback to the polytheism (or polyspirituality) of the ancients. Certain warlike deities that one wouldn't invite to a dinner party have been a constant throughout every region of the globe. Yet it seems polytheism or polyspirituality are the most compatible with reality of a pluralistic human society. This is in part demonstrated by the great amount of force and time that was necessary to eliminate polytheism in the western world and the remarkable perseverance of polytheism on the Indian subcontinent. Hinduism has survived (although in a very distorted corrupted form) 3 major attacks against it so far:

1) Indian elites becoming Buddhist and pushing it from the top down (a form of psychological therapy for the wealthy who are not fulfilled through hedonistic indulgence).

2) Long term rule by Muslim invaders who otherwise successfully converted large swaths of Eurasian landmass.

3) Long term occupation by Christian Western forces who brought along different materialist economic thought systems as well

click to enlarge

Part of the explanation of this incredible durability is that Hinduism took into account the psychological differences that exist within a population and provided the emotionally satisfying theistic outlets for these differences. Regardless of your personality, you can find a deity right for you. In addition, Hinduism did unify the deities into one harmonious cloth, allowed for addition of new ones, and appears the most compatible with the increasingly popular transhumanist trends in the Western world. Transhumanists and singularitarians are notorious for being excited over the great potential diversity of forms that may be possible in the future.

I am not suggesting that Hinduism should be the cure for the Western world (as it succumbs to nihilism and confusion over the failure of its economic structure). I am saying that it may provide some insights on how to combine the secular goal based singularitarian thinking (a.k.a. rapture for atheists) with an emotionally satisfying framework for physiologically diverse individuals ("we all have an important role to play in bringing about the future by following our own  semi-unique spiritual path"). Even the aggressive and domineering personality types can be made useful on the road to the singularity through compartmentalizing their competitive natures via some socially safe release valve. As people in the West succumb to aimlessness, it is not too late to start thinking about an emotionally fulfilling and innovative bridge from the past to the future (before the rich, spiritual charlatans, or cultural reactionaries provide one for us).

Traditionalist Christian Morality Ruined Comedy Movies

Early comedy film was one of the powerful ways to psychologically energize and briefly escape from the world. Christian moralizing  began to infect Hollywood in the 1930s and totally drained life out of comedy



Comedic movies were some of the first ever created. Arguably, pornographic films are the first considering some of the earliest nude photographs in existence were shared by soldiers on the battlefields of American Civil War. When we think of cinema from the 1920s, the first images that often come to mind involve jittery characters with caked make up who are trying to be amusing.

Comedic effect can be accomplished by a wider range of audio and visual tricks compared to those used to induce sorrow, fear, anger, or sexual excitement. Since there are a multitude of different human personalities (with physiology specific comedic sensibilities), the possibilities to mix and match to combine are endless.

The silent films of early 20th century relied on slap stick and satire of major capitalist and authoritarian powers of the day. The so called greatest generation of Americans and their fathers consumed the greatest amount of sadistic cathartic visuals as well as vicious satire. They laughed it up at people on the screen getting repeatedly smashed, punched, taken advantage of, or otherwise undergo situations that would normally create horrendous bodily injuries, death, and life reversals. This was a healthy release of pent up frustration at the end of a long blue collar day. It was an escape from stifling puritan morality and the seriousness of demands from the boss, government, children, and spouse.

Even cold boring individuals like Thomas Hobbes recognized the power of the comedic effect. Hobbes mentioned, although in marginalizing tone, that "the passion of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others, or with our own formerly." That is very similar to Nietzsche's conception of laughter as sudden involuntary feeling of power.

Seeing a refined gentleman getting a pie in his face on screen brought an involuntary comparative feeling of superiority for the audience. Nobody on screen was spared from being the target of absurd situations which often involved people surviving Tom & Jerry levels of physical damage. The cathartic illusion of one's influence briefly rising in the world had tremendous psychological benefits. Seeing Charlie Chaplin imitate Hitler or poke fun at Fordist assembly lines revealed that behind the masks of purposeful seriousness, the secular powers that be are irrational and as devoid of meaning as the church.

That is not to say that laughter was always slave morality being expressed through seeing someone powerful slip on a banana peal. We saw movies and cartoons poke fun at conquered ethnic groups in distant lands as well as domestically. Weak, old, and incompetent were just as big a target as the rich and the powerful. The iconic characters of Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck were totally amoral and changed personalities like gloves to trick the gullible. Chaos and irrationality won the day. Cartoons like that released the audience from the demands imposed on them by the life draining Christian influenced world. Cartoons back then had more adult nuances and themes that really created an experience for the whole family.

Lets skip forward in time to the last twenty years and look at some trends in modern American comedies. Tiresome moralizing and slave morality has thoroughly penetrated the genre. We see:

1) Endless underdog to success stories

We see unlikely, flawed, lovable, and quirky characters defeat the good looking, privileged, wealthy, and arrogant antagonists. The pattern is endlessly regurgitated to children, teens, and adults from Mighty Ducks to Little Giants to of course, Dodgeball. The latter pokes fun at the genre while thoroughly reaffirming it. The rugged group of kids are eventually led to victory over the black clad aryan nazi-esque sadistic teams. Yes, of course they have the mandatory reversal, moments of doubt, and imperfect team cohesion but they pull through in the end. Work hard and be yourself and all shall be well. How is this marketed as a comedy for the whole family? It's a tiresome lecture and a repackaging of the protestant work ethic.


The underdog plot just transforms in movies marketed to teens and adults. In movies for older audiences, the goal of self esteem is reached with similar acceptance of who one is. Self acceptance is not rewarded by acquisition of friends and a superficial sports victory however but through acquisition of the object of sexual desire. The attractive sadistic nazi does not hold the hockey stick this time around but he does stand in the way of acquiring the girl. The lovable anti-hero is encouraged to not even try to compete in willfulness, strength, and healthy confidence (since it is shown to result in failure) but to specialize in what he is good at. The undersexed underdog of course is good at sentimental quirkiness, endurance, and reliability which saves the day. The hero at first, doesn't understand what 30 years of the same plotlines requires of him to succeed. He tries, with disastrous results, to get help from a more promiscuous friend or guru. All seems lost but then, amusingly, the underdog's friends who are even weaker than him, tirelessly labor to help their stronger friend get laid. All ends well as the girl finally realizes that the cost benefit analysis of having an adoring slave boyfriend outweighs the excitement of interesting sex life. The audience gets what it expected and all go home.

Something feels wrong to them however. That wrongness is complete lack of humor in the movie just seen. Did they just watch something meant to elicit a brief feeling of power or were they just in church? Yes, they saw a few moments of slapstick shown in trailers and some awkwardness to which they can relate. That, on the whole, was completely not the escapist release from reality, rationality, duty, and preaching. Not only did many men get the message that they will always need to bend over backwards for female attention but teenagers received a message of just giving up forceful self transformation. The supposed "comedy" informed them that "being yourself" while still taking a chance at a scrappy project will lead to rewards. The rewards in turn will provide genuine transformation and self esteem. Not even the occasional flashes of nipples and toilet humor can redeem the broken expectation of being amorally uplifted throughout the whole experience. Even if there wasn't a message of psychological stagnation the movie would still fail since the audience is not really encouraged to laugh at something in comparison to themselves. Rooting for somebody to win, pity, and sympathy perhaps should be found in dramas and thrillers but not in supposed "comedies".

One might argue back that Bugs Bunny and Charlie Chaplin were often involved in underdog plotlines. These characters are qualitatively different in that the audience always knew Bugs Bunny was always more powerful and that Chaplin was satirizing the system rather than trying to get sex or some big score.

2) Promotion of marriage and family life for amoral characters

Perhaps the most insidious way that religious morality snuck into being accepted as "comedy" is the story of an amoral character transforming into a neutered moral one. It starts out as an over-bearing, fun loving, liberated, often promiscuous character who eventually sees his/her life as empty and devoid of meaning. That meaning, of course, is found in marriage and having "the one" or even children. These types of movies are the height of adult comedy. Wedding Crashers is a solid example of this. The main two characters start out as amoral fun loving individuals who just use weddings for sexual gratification. However, one of the characters who is more sentimental begins to fall for "the one" against the advise of his comrade. Eventually the meaningless of existence is filled with a soul mate. The soul mate doesn't exactly have to be traditional but the end result has to end in marriage. Comedies oriented to a female audience combine the preaching of the underdog story with getting the right guy to agree to settling down within a marriage. Often, that involves properly making the promiscuous bachelor realize the error of his ways.



The real nauseating taming involves former slapstick comedians who now do better paid marriage/family promoting films. Nothing on screen is less funny and more pathetic to see than a former slapstick actor like Jim Carrey having to show moral discomfort and occasional timid liberation. The oldest possible adult audience are presented with films where main characters are already married but realize that they have to just work through it (after some "humorous" stumbles) instead of getting a divorce. Town and Country is a good example of this as the director even got a formerly hyper promiscuous Warren Beatty to play the main actor. The protagonist sees that outside of marriage there is nothing but unsatisfied life and nihilism. Self sacrifice is the only result and the credits roll. The audience cannot believe they have actually wasted their time for a hope. A hope that the movie they just finished watching would not turn out exactly like the last one. Like gamblers they continue to watch thinking that one day they will see something structurally different instead of just gradually increasing amount of sexual moments and toilet humor.



With time, the unhealthy moralizing filth will be purged from comedy as the youtube generation grows up and produces new directors. It is just unfortunate that American movie studios have grown so large that the pressure of playing it safe and providing something for everyone creates muddy regurgitated disappointments. Hopefully, internet piracy will increasingly make such mediocre product more expensive to make and lead to regional movie studios instead of the Christian McDonalds sitting in Hollywood today. This is not an appeal to something sophisticated, high brow, or meaningful. This is an appeal to re-imagining the roots of what made comedy one of the first genres to be greedily consumed. There must be a re-imagining of comedy's origins for the 21st century so the audience can be provided with a clean healthier product. One wouldn't put transfats into an organic dish. One would find ways to take the unhealthy out and augment the existing healthy ingredients. The moralistic prudishness and self censorship that began to infect Hollywood in the 1930s took a long time to drain the industry and lead to the present state of affairs. The people are thoroughly sick of it and subconsciously crave something else. It just needs to be shown on the big screen.

New Atheism Movement

"New Atheism" movement is redundant since the battle for secularism is already won at the elite level where it counts. Attacks on religion empower the last hold outs by giving them attention/persecution complex that they crave.







Even in late 18th century, many self respecting people who valued knowledge would not be caught dead admitting belief in a very particular form of ghost worship. Anything short of deism/atheism was seen just as absurd as ghost worship of conquered Native Americans or fanciful epic fiction emerging from India. After Darwin, there was no excuse left for the elites of the world (who could read that is). The battle against superstition has long been decisively won on an intellectual level among people who matter so the recent growth of "New Atheism" in America warrants a few words.

Mutilation of a defeated enemy's corpse does not make the victor appear in a better light. It hints at victor's unhealthy resentment at the corpse and all the mistreatment that was done by the corpse when alive (mistreatment only made possible by it having been in a position of strength). Sometimes this can be explained away by the cathartic therapeutic value that overdoing a victory brings. That is especially true if the corpse was a die hard hold out to the end (examples are mass executions of medieval monks in Revolutionary France, Republican Spain, and early Soviet Union). However, we've seen a constant pattern of the ghost worshiping structures relaxing their grip in the Western world for decades. Clergy's power is fading even where their less educated power bases reside (parts of southern Europe and United States). They're declining and will continue to do so since support of elites is long lost.

So why are atheist books now flying off the shelves? Why are people gleefully sharpening their knives against ghosts long after the question has been settled by men such as the ones who conceptualized a structure for United States?

The answer seems obvious in terms of history (more angry atheists in Italy and Alabama since they have to live with the miserable theist idiots) but not in terms of strategy. Using very advanced consistent systematic arguments against grown men who belief in ghosts is like a superpower making a big deal about a threat from small country and attacking it with all its might. Ironically the smartest thing George Bush said was "I'm not going to shoot a two million dollar missile at a ten dollar empty tent and hit a camel in the butt!"

Indeed. We don't spend valuable life energies explaining that Harry Potter or scientology's Xenu are not real so why spend it on equally absurd monotheistic ghosts?

One quote by Ghandi that was used throughout the Ron Paul campaign clarifies strategic aspect of it:  

"first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win". 

Why does it go in that order? If the media talking heads/fellow candidates systematically attacked Ron Paul, it'd mean he gained enough power to be honored with mass attack, that he was considered a threat or an equal. To go from ignoring and ridiculing (those unfortunate enough to believe blatant lies) to sharp philosophical attacks would be to honor, empower, and treat the clergy as equals if not superiors that deserve such sophisticated attack. They don't. Ridicule, exclusion, and gentle pats on the head while calmly explaining that it's time to grow up are more proper. It works to suppress third parties and unpopular kids in grade school and it'll work on them.

Lets not be reactive but live our lives gloriously and in a healthy manner to convert others by example. Lets attack those things that are worth attacking, real threats (capitalism, feudal land lords, statist imperialism) and not crutches of unhealthy powerless people and their cynical organizers. Secular society will come to United States quicker than we think. The battle is already won. Even in the deepest south priests and pastors are seen as geeky lame men who one wouldn't want to chill with at the bar or have them tag along. Let's not give them a way to organize in defense. Like North Korea, these hold outs are already finished even if they don't know it yet (recent national elections should give a clue).