Artificiality is not natural ? (asked Alan Watts)

Alan Watts talked about artificiality   
as heard from another lecture recorded and replayed - then with time/effort was typed to share here - as heard on KPFK radio: Thurs 12 M July 12, 2018 .


Again, there may be words not heard or typed correctly or an edit inserted to clarify what seems to be the topic and content, done for clarify. There is NEVER ANY PLAGIARISM OR INTENTION TO STEAL WHAT IS APPARENTLY
"OWNED" or inherited by Alan Watt's son[s] to use for their benefit/profits.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%



" the word “ARTIFICIAL”  is in one sense, comes from word “ficial” – means 
“to make” from Latin,  & “ars” –is like  “artist,“  or artifact made by art, skillfully made …

museums are full of artifacts, made by artists left from long ago

"artificial in 2ndary sense – looks too much as if it were a work of art – when it is studied, strained, what LOOKS LIKE  :   plastic vs. glass to drink from.
                                    [google supplies pix here too]

something is looking like what it is not…has no substance to it …or someone acts in an artificial way, contrived way, and a pretense…

so, are there artificial ways of travel ? is it un-natural to ride a horse, take a jet plane or is that an extension of human capacity ?   like when we are going to another coast, as no one bothers to walk, or drive or ride bicycle ,for who can see the transitions along the way?  

and you cant swim to Tokyo because you, too,  need artificiality of a ship or plane. In older times, as when people had to take a boat, when no planes were available, it is so faster ....like an elevator that goes too fast… traveling by jet feel like your psyche has not caught up with you.   

Then you feel disarranged. So does that mean you should not go by jet ? when you can afford it ? So it is an artificial debate, of ONE UPS-MAN-SHIP  of what is natural vs. artificial ? 


what do you do if you do go to Japan ?– go to fancy hotel and watch their TV or eat their food ? is that natural or artificial travel-acting ?  or do you just stay home and find it more comfortable at USA home vs. the discomforts of
Japanese toilets or their homes compared [to what you are accustomed to have in USA ] ...

that depends on  having 'original' or 'adaptable 'personalities – some people  have same breakfast every day or don’t feel they are themselves.    They become creatures of habit and feel good for being same daily. 


                        [google image traditional japanese home]


So: would you travel to different states of consciousness same as you might travel to Japan ?

What about chemistry of the matter ? as in changes of consciousness… people claim all that has to do with chemistry is “artificial” and not real,  but synthetic like a plastic glass vs. real glass, like synthetic Vitamin C vs. rose hips or Wonder bread vs. ‘real ‘ bread.   

the word “drug’ is  assumed to act like a warning, except when using “drug store” vs. a "pharmacy" . But someone who takes  drugs, that is scary & dreadful –  using as drug=dope, like a dope-fiend -  who lies around doing nothing all day and doesn’t do much but have sexual fantasies and becomes
increasingly dependent on drugs, which is terrible. 

But alcoholics are not bad – tho they may do same –nothing but drink for hrs and keep drinking more to feel good and can’t stop. But that is not called ‘bad’ in same way.

People  like to boast how much they drank last night and had so much fun and there is no taboo to that. but drugs are different.  Japanese men walk down street at night holding on to each other, swaying, and people don’t worry.  It is assuming they are ‘happy’ – or  like the ancient Greeks or monks getting drunk = and that was OK too. It was  the stories to tell about them and how smart they were even when drunk, or how funny the story was [to tell too] .  

Teachers used to get drunk, Zen teachers, and they had permission to use alcohol excessively, frequently, but it is a DRUG and a narcotic, to create torpor, to sleep. But word drug is not used for alcohol.


Doctor asks if you "take any drugs", so you can think of prescriptions and don’t even think of mentioning alcohol. The word “drug” is loaded so to keep conversations clean, we don’t use that bad word.  There are states of consciousness  dependent on use of chemistry. 

A prejudice on the use of chemistry – as if it is a put-down to use chemicals vs. being ‘ natural’ [as if no chemicals were involved in life, living, itself  ?] so you are taught to “keep you thoughts pure and clean & strong and all will take care of itself, mind over matter “– as we say in America.  

Tho it is impossible to practice, because mind over matter would also  mean not eating instead of murdering  animals, plants as we do to stay alive  - or use aspirin, coffee, tea or wine …. or even to list the cost of these items we
use… by not calling them  chemicals, then to not be considered ‘un-natural’. 

All is cultural -relative to how we classify things. ...

But chemistry of things is way of describing what happens  - you can describe anything from a chemical pt of view. like a painting – describe chemistry used and what makes up the painting. 

It becomes clumsy in trying to describe art thru it’s chemistry. Same difficulty to describe sounds or spiritual insights. but even every fotograph, whatever the content, the same grid is needed  to print that foto [small black dots on white/light color background …or  the chemicals that are used to ‘develop’ films for fotos.]  like water...

... the grace  superior and body  subordinate to mind, but that is impossible. putting your head on the ground and looking thru your legs is hanging down upside down  is an interesting pt of view, vs. usual one. 

People who are too spiritual are like wine that is too alcoholic tasting and not tasting good. We have to follow a more MIDDLE WAY.


                             [google images]

there are chemicals that bring about changes of consciousness, that can be,   [in Watts’ opinion,] aids to spiritual ways.   A Chinese meditation master said to meditate, have a few drinks first, to save time to be able to meditate deeply. that may be a Chinese way, vs. Japanese ways.

It is difficult to find which chemicals are helpful – most are 3 types – cannabis, mescaline & psilocybin, and LSD [In his day, he said are the principal ones as he discusses in this time of his lecture in 1960's - 1970's].  

There are 3 variables to be considered: the chemical itself, the setting it is used [circumstances &  social ] and the set [the character, his background he brings to the experience].


Everyone has to do it their own way and then speaks to their own set & setting they use chemicals.   So each person’s descriptions of their experiences have to be taken with ‘a grain of salt’ because of their individual differences. not the chemicals being always different but the set & setting parts.





                                
                   [google chemistry contained ]   


We don’t know if any of these chemicals are therapeutic…in  thepast they have used Indian hemp = cannabis for therapeutic uses, as in 1918 it was prescribed. 

But no specific chemicals are prescribed for specific ailments. When a medical doctor puts chemicals in a system is to heal a specific disease  - except vitamins are health builders as supplements, used for ‘diet’ vs. medicine. 

Medicine is for a specific occasion and important to not be hooked on any medicine. To be cured and sent away so patient doesn’t return to doctor.

But clergyman does opposite, wants to hook so person returns every week and is not ‘cured’ or changed. Physicians became more empirical vs. clergy became scholastic – knowing what is in books to repeat and quote vs. studying in experiments and evidence. Physicians began to shift from being clergy to be empirical – but both are helpful to the ailing patient. Most clergy now [not as they did before ] do not believe they have any true power to cure so they send people to psychiatrist instead.  

While the patient who talks about religion is considered ‘crazy’ by a psychiatrist.   it was the fashion for psychiatrists  before to consider all religious beliefs as superstitions and they denied all religious talk – while clergy cant talk about sex or sexual obsessions because clergy wants that aspect of life fully controlled or regimented. 

A physician must prescribe medicine for a disease or he is not allowed to perform some other ritual like clergy might do [exorcism, baptisms, ‘healings’ by the spirit ] .   So, the dying pt is the most difficult, as the doctor cant do anything except want patient to deny death and not face death as an important event – while clergy is quickly called in then. Physician is out of role in those kind of emergencies because his role is to prescribe chemicals for disease and that is his specialty. 

But chemicals are really only research tools. Like a phone you can talk & hear 1000’s of miles, or telescope to see 1000’s of miles, or microscopes – all these are Artificial means …. so is it ok to use artificial things outside your skin  to enhance, learn, but if you use it ‘inside your skin’ then it is dangerous and assumed to be harmful and that you cant handle it carefully, intelligently, or well. 

But [Watts] regards these substances as "INVESTIGATIONS", with careful use, as all things that take you to unfamiliar realms, it can be dangerous  - as anything out of the usual can be dangerous – as going West where you find wild animals or tribes ..chemicals can cause psychosis.

But dangerous does not  mean we never do it or try it  - carefully. As riding on freeway is dangerous too. but taking LSD may be less dangerous than that traffic on freeway ? it is RESPONSIBLE USE of some substances that good things can be done thru them.  ///


                                                [end to typed lecture as heard on KPFK radio ]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%



[there was more discussion in lecture describing the 3 types of chemicals he mentioned above, but was not typed on here ] 


While Watts was experimental, adventurous and courageous in so many variety of ways in his living and then studying, lecturing on not just personal stories but mostly his wonderings about what he was dis-covering, thinking, sharing his thoughts to make us, listeners, also THINK differently than was conventional then and now too, it was a different era than now.

Chemicals, drugs, pharmaceuticals and addictions, are similar but not the same as it was 40-50 yrs ago today. The concerns change with public and government policies and 'crisis' declared as "epidemics" when convenient or urgent. 

The DEFINITIONS  we all use ARE CREATED MORE BY MASS MEDIA - 

including radio   [as is also heard on KPFK too]  and on
 TV,    newspapers,    on-line postings    and all -any  ways of publicly TELLING STORIES --all the while claiming that version to be the ONLY 1 that must be "True, Real, Only...." / allowed.


                                [google-'can stock' image]

 
The communicating a certain version of a possible reality or actuality 'that happened or was differently interpreted later... or by others....with their own SELECTIVE emphases - and that is then imaged in pictures, or quotes and repeated incessantly - as if ...


                      
   [ google image]

as if.... then the repetition is done - to insure that this 'truth'/story becomes  BELIVABLE and remembered as if  "TRUE,"  as if The Factual.                              


vs. being known as as another  anecdote.
vs. as just  another  opinion.
vs. as a bias /  prejudice /  others' personal views et al.

Just as: being socially, culturally, politically POWERFUL =
as in  to have wealth, influence and ACCESS to broadcasting media- 
to be able to present, publish, platform, distribute & proliferate those
certain versions of what may be 'a' reality - maybe, or in part...

 but that story told :  about that photo 
or a story 
or another  made-up-slant-spinning that a then sold-as 'truth' ....

with the Insistence that there is "ONLY 1 TRUTH "  & we own it. 


and, of course,  only those IN POWER THEN are definers of it.  

the "Authority" to  then control, own, define, decide and claim what is what 
and what is not
 or 'fake' 
or 'other' 
comes with wealth & status,  
[even with many-humans-together-stand-outside-on-streets -to "protest"
do too.-- as that is another form of mass-group intimidation and add threats of violence are included, even when words are emphasized as "peaceful" ...but often many in these mobs are not nor intend to be either]

of course! 



                            

                      [google chemistry for the masses, us ]


which is the "real" chemical and which is merely colored water in a fancy bottle intended to impress and attract attention ?  or sell a story, maybe a lie or falsehood ?


 
So all "the rest of us" are feeling, believing, agreeing-with and obeying, 
and also then enforcing and coercing everyone else to AGREE with only us is a SET-UP. 
                           

                       
                          [google image of truth, too ]

can this too be = "artificial" while still claiming to be "natural" and "true" and "real"  and acepted, approved of, allowed, to dominate ?

and to  not to be defined, labed, identified as if  the "bad" enemy and labeled with old WWII words mostly or 1700-1800's wars & cultures ? 

: can there be any OTHER story ? that is   different/ argued/ questioned/ nor doubted ! from the prevailing dominant 1 ? or else...?

(c) mjj 2018