A Tale of Thought
“ Intelligence is knowing what the other person is thinking. Wisdom is knowing what you are thinking. Enlightenment is questioning who is really doing the thinking.” — by this author.
Observation is a leading agency of education. I have been a subscriber of this philosophy for a very long time. Not to be confused with analysis, observation — at its most fundamental level — is impartial. It is an un-screened window overlooking a world of infinite substance.
I find that the value embedded in an objective observation is of the highest order. I am equally an audience to the fact that this is not an easy affair. Throughout our lives, our experiences dictate our mental narratives and create subjectivity of thought. For the most part, this proves to be beneficial in many instances: As our previous experiences get coded into our minds, they form a foundation upon which we can structure future predictions, assessments and scenario-projections. This is essentially the mechanism that unlocks the value of experience. As we go about our lives, this operating system runs on autopilot, helping us navigate the subjective world we live in.
Unfortunately, every coin has two sides. On the flip-side, experience can create predisposition to bias and thought distortion. We see the world through the lens of our own experiences, rather than seeing it in its raw state. Subtly, an observable fact is weighted with the inertia of our own perception. These facts get molded into versions that gel seamlessly into our mental fabric, inheriting its virtues and vices indiscriminately. There is comfort in compliance: our mental motivations are more welcoming of “compatible truths” rather than “absolute facts”. A perception is simply a secondhand observation.
The problematic nature of this arises when we fail to recognize that the observations are no longer facts, but perceptions that we still mistake for being untainted. We fail to do this because our focus is seldom on our own mental process, but rather, on the rest. The societies and cultures we live in promote competition and pit people against one another. This is most observable in the realm of business and politics. We are taught to observe what the other participants are thinking, rather than focusing on our own cognition. We then reverse-engineer their communication and behavior into their motives and thoughts. Once “successful”, we treat this so-called acquisition as we would a commodity. Its value, being a means to structure actionable plans that can result in self gain, frequently, at the expense of the other. People who are proficient in this practice are referred to as “intelligent”, and their attributes of competence and shrewdness are celebrated.
But the celebration for the wise is short-lived. They are quick to take stock on the moral absurdity of a practice that concludes in a zero-sum game. It is not that the wise do not seek gain, it is simply that they barter in different commodities, but that is the subject of another writing, for another day. It is the fact that the wise are genuinely aware of how the existing narrative of mind may be incompatible with future situations. The mental skew crafted by previous experiences may hinder the ability of perceiving novel experiences accurately. When managed incorrectly, experience can quickly devolve from an asset into a liability. Its merits are replaced with habits that hold us captive to the confines of our existing knowledge. Naturally, this inhibits our ability to change in a world where adaptability is the ultimate asset. This is detrimental to cognitive development, and to learning in general. Simply put, this can highjack the entire notion of personal growth. Consequently, the wise undertake a superior form of mental training. Their observational practice is focused on the self. They have learned to diffuse the reflexive nature of the mind that is always eager to paint an observation with an internal bias. They have acquired the capability of isolating an objective observation before it is tainted. The observation is assessed before it is internalized. Any matter-building based on a purer foundation will yield a truer outcome. The ability to access factual input is key in the etymology of wisdom.
When sought after mechanically, enlightenment is elusive. It is a proverbial light that can be seen, but never felt. It is discussed among the wise academically, but never viscerally. Enlightenment does not seek to construct upon answers, but to deconstruct based on questions. It mediates the dissolution of an adopted mental framework, in favor of blank-template construction. It views the brain as innately biased, and pre-configured with the aggregate load of cumulative evolutionary psychology — a weight too heavy to be re-framed, therefore must be replaced. And its replacement is possible, only because of a distinction made: The brain is not the mind. The true path to enlightenment is pathology. Enlightenment is the result of a wisdom subjugated to adversity, that has triumphed.
