Letters to the Living

1. The evil project of Human 2.0 is due to a misunderstanding of the catalyst, process, and purpose of evolution, i.e. what, how, and why man evolves. THESE 3 FUNCTIONS ARE ADDRESSED DIRECTLY IN MY BOOK ---- AND NOWHERE ELSE AS FAR AS I KNOW.  People assume the world was caused by some kind of Big Bang by accident -- and that evolution is pushed by a dog-eat-dog kill-or-be-killed ethos and has no higher meaning or purpose than competition for survival.   This thinking leads pretty quickly to elite-directed eugenics. You don't have to be that smart to see that. 2. The oneness principle (that is already out there as a meme but has no clear explanation to go with it) is most important if we are to overcome this horrid outlook on the impetus of life.  "The individual soul has to realize with full consciousness its identity with the universal Soul. Man shall reorient life in the light of this ancient Truth and will readjust his attitude toward his neighbors in everyday li...

The notion of ascended masters is not as old as some people assume. Its introduction stems from the  writings of the 19th century Theosophical Society in New York. The same is true of the personal savior concept prevalent in Christian sermons and hymns today. This is the notion that for each Christian Jesus can be his personal savior if he allows him into his life.  This concept did not exist in ancient Christianity before 1700. I think knowing this would be upsetting to some evangelical Christians today, as well as to Baba lovers who have also adopted this concept.  While believing you are communing with an 'ascended master' or a 'personal savior' may at first seem to be a form of closeness to God, it is in fact a form of separation in the imagination. Rather than seeing God as your own true inner Self and the inner Self of your neighbor, you see him as somehow out there watching you. The following gospel songs that convey this notion are all of modern origin. "He...

Here is an objection one might make to EOP (my theory of an Evolution of Perception).  I am taking a ‘law of nature’ (ostensibly governing nature) and saying that is merely a ‘nominal’ cause for what we can only 'describe' but have no real way to explain beyond naming this law.  Aren’t I myself citing an unseen cause for an action, i.e. some law and then simply calling that law ‘a perceptual schema’ that governs perception? Isn’t a perceptual schema itself just another ‘nominal cause’ i.e. a name for some know-not-what?  That is the objection. My answer to such an objection is that it mischaracterizes what I'm doing and not doing. Let me quote Isaac Newton.  I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not feign hypotheses [meaning he does not pretend to guess]. For whatever is not deduced from the phenomena must be called a hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult ...

The elite have a false idea of what is entailed in what we call "thought," and this misconception leads them to falsely conclude that they can duplicate it with machines. They assume that the meanings of words are reducible to a binary code of 1s and 0s that correlates with electrical brain states, and so they can 'read & write' human thoughts with a computer.  And they believe they can reproduce in computers what we call "consciousness," because their theories of mind assume that consciousness is none other than such computer-like functions in the human brain. This theory is called 'Functionalism' and is the dominant theory of mind in our time. Meher Baba says that while a person with ordinary consciousness does not directly experience what he calls the mental sphere, he "uses" his mental faculty. Thought is not reducible to 1s and 0s or even to language, logic, and syntax.  Thought isn't so simple that you can reduce it down to la...

My name is Chris Ott. This is my most recent blog. The short address is  letters-to-the-living.blogspot.com . For all other sites of mine, go here: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home