Transformation, or simply “change” is impossible for mankind to avoid. There is an evolution in this world, not only on a genetic level or cultural level, but of what I refer to as the “psychobiotic self”. Psycho referring to the psychology and symbolism which man uses to better cope with the overwhelming reality of his immergence and place and position in this world, and how it relates to his body, or “biotic” self and it’s eventual demise.
Man is constructed of two things. The first, and most simple is that of his body. A body which changes both because of the very biology and animalistic, inherent, traits that are programmed within it’s genome; but also changes because of necessity to delay the death process (IE, surgery, medicine, treatments, anything that extends the biology of the organism and idea of “health”) This is to further establish the second element of his being, the symbolic representation of man. To most of mankind, the biology and illusion of health is only a tool to which the man can master and control so that he has an extended period to develop the symbolic self. The symbolic self whom we try to immortalize after our biological entity has turned to worm meat or crematorium ash.
People go about doing this in different ways, this psychobiotic evolution as I put it. But each does so in a very individual way, which may or may not transform the world around him in yet another symbolic representation. And “peace” as you put it, is just another symbol or term that we use to represent a far greater idea. One that mankind has yet to agree upon as a worthwhile cause, in relation to the evolution of their psychobiotic self.
“Peace”, is really just a collective delaying of the end of the psychobiotic self. It is a theoretical state, in which all individuals accept and agree not to interfere with the evolution of all other individual attempts at mastery of the body, and the symbolic self. It is a group agreement to “Not inflict my own attempts at mastering my body and expanding my symbolic self, if you in turn do not thwart any of my efforts to achieve some sense of symbolic immortality before this biotic self of mine is returned to the earth. I will not interfere with your evolution, if you will not interfere with mine.”
I use the term “evolution”, as a synonym for change or metamorphosis. Any alteration or progression OR deterioration of both the body, and the symbol which man creates for himself. This is inclusive of “faith”, or the belief that your symbolic self will somehow transcend this observation or perception of reality. It will change, or evolve individually through understanding of the world around you, which again is unavoidable. Again, because of the biotic self and the finite nature of biology and how long our animal forms inhabit this existence. Our subtle realization of death, as proven by the likes of Otto Rank, Ernest Becker, and Norman O Brown among others, motivates us in ways which many are not entirely observant of, yet are there even without us consciously or truthfully admitting to or acknowledging clearly.
So the question to me is not the role of individual transformation in manifesting world peace; but can mankind agree upon what the symbol of peace represents and if so, how might this further or progress all mankind’s evolution of the psychobiotic self.
Will agreeing not to interfere with the development of individual attempts at making sense of cultural or personal symbolism, help man evolve or only divert it to another path of symbolic and biological consciousness? In other words, if everyone agrees to help delay the demise of our physical self or biotic self, how will this in itself change how man interprets his own existence and leaves symbols of his immortality?
If we are to remove the constant threat of physical destruction, will we have greater or less understanding of the symbols and psychology behind why we were so animate about destroying others symbols and biological form in the first place?
I suppose first we have to recognize and relate to what our own symbolic self is trying to represent currently. Which is where conflict is often initiated, both individually and world wide on the cultural, artistic, and religious stage. For example, if one were to say that “Deepak Chopra symbolizes the marriage between financial success and theological success”, some would wonder why I say this. Some would agree with me immediately, based on their own symbolic understanding of things. When one sees a man confidently smiling, wearing a pink (which some equate to homosexuality, others to confidence… i.e. the confidence of wearing a traditionally feminine color despite cultural taboo or beliefs) Ralph Lauren Polo shirt, with a golf club over one shoulder; they might think to themselves “Here is a man who has succeeded. He has money, which is represented by the logo on his shirt, known to be expensive. He has confidence, as one can interpret from body posture. But also, he has mastered his physical self. He is playing golf, a game known to be difficult because of the concentration of both mental and physical abilities.” One might think, or perhaps only myself “Here is a man aware of his psychobiotic evolution, and who seems to be mastering both his symbolism and biotic or physical self”.
Others interpretations of that image or symbol may differ based on culture, religion, exposure to your readings. Some just see a man. Some may see your race. Some may assume things based on your wardrobe. The interpretation of your symbol, varies on each individual’s understanding of symbols and what context or placement they have been given during the evolution of that person’s psychobiotic self.
Now with such a varying or “conflicting” interpretation of even one man, think how much larger and more widespread the interpretation of something as grand as “Peace” may be. Especially when you factor in the wide-spectrum understanding of symbolism that will differentiate from country to country, culture to culture, neighborhood to neighborhood, household to household, and person to person. With such a massive variation of understanding, and in many cases unwillingness to understand others, it will make it incredibly difficult to find a universal Symbol of any sort for individuals to agree upon.
Even my own interpretation of “Peace” may change, as I change throughout my own evolution. With constant change and metamorphosis and alteration of self , both symbolic and biological; to anchor oneself to any singular definition of things seems both alluring and impossible at the same time. Universal symbolism, cross cultural understanding, peace consciousness of a critical mass… these are overwhelming, and currently only hypothetical situations to which man is only touching upon in understanding. Both the ramifications of, and how they will directly change or evolve man himself in his individual evolution.
I believe, man must first deconstruct symbolism. We must be aware of what everything represents, before we can hope to ever gain any universal understanding of each other. Only if all symbols equal the same thing, can all of man truly see each other with some degree of truth and ultimate awakening or understanding of each other’s psychobiotic self. Then perhaps, with understanding of each other’s symbols, and the finite timeline we all have biologically to work on our own attempt at symbolizing something truthful and aware, we MIGHT be able to work on constructing a general definition of “Peace”.
And have reason both individually, and collectively, to maintain it for the sake of each other, and the greater definition of what that symbol of PEACE might represent.