What is freedom today?

The quality vs quantity is a fundamental problem of the current society. As Dane Rudhyar was stressing in his 1970 book: «Our entire Western society today has become pervaded by the doctrine that quantitative measurement can solve practically all problems — not only social and personal problems but also the problem of knowledge.» There he talks about the dry statistics our society uses to base key decisions upon. As well as the education becoming an undifferentiated «mass-instruction, which but too often means the gobbling up of mental foodstuff which most minds are not able to, or even do not particularly care to, digest.» How we stepped into «a society controlled by greed (disguised under the "profit motive") and by the craze for productivity and expansion at any cost, especially the cost of human-ness, spontaneity, integrity and love.»

Giving an example: «a modern technologist would achieve a more impressive success in terms of a greater quantity of products. But what then happens? The consciousness of the technologist ceases to operate within a community which has an organic rhythm of growth, and within the ecology of a natural environment to which this consciousness is no longer attuned. The technologist has ab-stracted (i.e., taken away) from this environment and as well from the real organic needs of the community certain procedures which he has analyzed and reduced to what, to his intellect, seems to be the essential chemical factors. But essential in relation to what? Is it essential that the tribe should have more food than it can healthfully assimilate?»

I guess there were many people in history who have noticed something strange going on. It’s pretty hard to say for sure when we started to be obsessed with the quantity at the expense of quality. But it seems to be closely related to the analytical thinking in realms of the human brain. As one can observe easily the human brain is concerned mainly with the logics. Which fails to explain some quality of things we have around. Just like the brain is not able to give a definite explanation to a paradox. It prefers to eliminate the unexplainable nature of the human being. In any logical theory we can find paradoxes. Which essentially go against the theory. As we progress in science we prefer to develop things that fit, giving as less value to the unexplainable as possible. We put paradoxes into small boxes in the corner of our square rooms as something fun to play with time to time.

Analytical thinking liberated many people from the very basic struggles of life. Illnesses, hunger, harsh planet conditions, uncontrollable chaos. It gave us science as we have it today. A definite way to move forward. Building things that are feasible. And it trapped this unexplainable nature at the same time. I grew up in a decline of a small scientific town. There were many institutions heavily sponsored by the Soviet government. Nuclear physics, genetics, materials sciences and many areas so demanded today by highly developed nations. it was an outlet for a lot of bright human minds. But as the government ceased, financing was cut and most of the scientists started to struggle. Only a small elite circles of academics became stronger. As they essentially gained material power over the rest. I could see how much the science depends on money. How those who never pursued the higher position in the field, but dedicated themselves to the research above all became unnecessary.

There is a definite line of power in the scientific community. As you acquire a status such as professor you essentially get a reputation. So many people can entrust you to move them forward. It is about accepting a certain science as the one to use. While you can notice there are many less popular alternative scientists, which may have a low status in the community. It might be a disaster to give someone alternative enough a power to make decisions. As it could shake the very foundation of the community. At the same time people still prefer to delegate in this fashion, as the stable life in current society promotes. So you can see that science as the driver of technological progress is stuck in the same money loop.

One side of our beings we’ve grabbed in control, but another one became repressed. So called personal freedom. It went so far that today we make a definition of freedom as something completely alien to the society. As Dane wrote: «The freedom asked is the freedom of doing something in any way one wishes. Because this "doing" always involves other persons — and thus society as a whole and social patterns of behaviour — the tendency for the powers that rule society is to interfere with this free activity by making it subservient to overall regulations and compulsions». Many people today may want to escape into the forest from the pressures of life, as things feel unbearable. Although in the forest one remains connected to the people in some way. At the very least in memories. And there starts another relationship with the nature. With all its beauty and harshness. In essence we remain in some kind of a relationship to the whole all the time. Not necessarily an easy one. It is a question then what is the actual freedom we seek?

Freedom becomes meaningless if considered something absolute and unrelated to our sense of participation in a greater whole. Like a group, a community, or bears, trees and stones. «It is the capacity for selecting, as an individual ego or an individual nation, the character, level and scope of the binding relationship one has to society, humanity or the universe». As Dane concludes «to be free is to be able, without external pressures or unjustifiable inner compulsions, to change one's type of allegiance…It means the character of one's binding relationship to some person, group, or concrete ideal that incorporates or defines the purpose for which one claims individual freedom.» So at the very basis we have a connection to everything around. Based on that one may find a sense of participation. While another one may not believe in any kind of a universal order, or a possibility to happily coexist and create with others. One may be happy or pessimistic about life depending on the core beliefs.

We can see the quantity and quality only in economic terms. But we can also think of it on all levels including a «spiritual» one. There is an abstract spirit to move forward as a majority, produce more stuff and get isolated into a «definite thing». Compromising on the individual health and the health of the nature around us. There might be an individual spirit in each one of us, gravitating towards unconventional. It does not mean that it leads necessarily to a self isolation in order to live a healthy life. But rather there is a need to balance things between personal and a collective. Cause everything is interrelated. The society may be fails to recognise this need as the important thing to solve in order to evolve. But there are many people today who explore an alternative ways. Such as hippies and different communes. There are communes living in the forests, in the cities and in-between. Experimenting with unconventional ways of life. Exploring values different than the money.

There are all kinds of extremes we reach considering freedom as the ultimate happiness. Some people commit suicides. Very common today is the belief in the freedom as one wishes to do, and at the same time realising that the world does not act in a way. Such a contradiction gets suppressed. We continue to function by inertia, going to the same job, acting as if we have no power to change anything. But the very transformation can start from each person. Otherwise we continue to act as a grey suppressed mass heading to self extinction. As there are experiments still going on in communes I think it is possible to be an individual and contribute to the group at the same time. Just like all kinds of plants and animals live together in the forest. And it continues to grow until a meteorite falls from the sky. The difference is the human has the capacity to avoid such a thing. This analytical capacity is a power and a curse at the same time. So the human has to learn a lot in order to reach some balance. Any kind of belief gives an energy to do something.

The way out of the rat race appears to be the exploration of an individual freedom. And connecting with like minded individuals. At the very base this freedom doesn’t have to be a singular loneliness, but can very well be a part of a greater whole. One truly desires things that are possible in some way. In fact we can not desire anything more. So there is always a way to change. It is a matter of people restructuring and rearranging themselves as a whole. But we can also connect this human world with the world around. There are birds and microbes and stones, all kinds of matters which act in some way. If we also consider this as part of the integrated whole then the loneliness simply cease to exist. Cause there is always something around a single person. If one tends to feel something is not right with the life, transformation can start at the very place and time where one is.