The Second Age of Enlightenment
The basis is basically unchanged
The Age of Enlightenment was the result of years of oppression that led to cultural movements, encouraging new philosophies and ideas. This century-long revolution was an inevitable transition old regnancy faced when awareness led to neoteric intellectualism. This gave as a result an unstoppable outburst of technological achievements later known as the Industrial Revolution.
In hopes of giving humanity an evolution from rule new forms of governments were created, but from the shadows, forces based on pious dogma (which always survived the aeons of empires), tried to relate after failing to sustain that outburst. This designed yet another path for the perpetuation of their dominion. Something revolutionary in its own way was used against the growingly receptive community.
This new seed had just like before a chance at dominion through belief. A new form of faith. One intertwined with these new powerful intellectual thoughts, which unavoidably spread like wildfire. Something so simple and suppressive cloaked its true colours once again, drawing humanity onto yet another illusion.
"Inexistent expectations of someone's goals or comprehensive visions on a social scale" – the definition of faith according to Peter Joseph, founder of the Zeitgeist Movement and Culture in Decline.
How ironic that the exact explanation of faith is unequivocally applicable to ideologic belief.
The basis can be changed
We have grown an outstanding amount of awareness since those times, but as we have learned to recognise some from others –amongst the dust of cognitive manipulation– so have those who originally imposed them on us. The reality is that the exact same traits that has suppressed mankind have evolved into something that is, to this day, blindly believed to be necessary and effective. They have decoupled us more into a delirium of societal evolution, creating an even larger span between human nature and human behaviour. To understand such an epic recognition we must first undergo an exposure of their discrepancy.
Human nature is something easily confused with what is considered human behaviour. Believing we are a competitive species, driven by conflict, indifferent to others and individualistic until our last breath, when in fact the proof of this decoupling is the inconsistency with our persona. The best answer is the question itself:
Why are we such a contradictory species?
Because we are living and acting the wrong way, because we are not depicting who we really are. We are naturally born to care, learn, embrace knowledge and use it to help others. Human nature is the sacrifice we make to help others without thinking in ourselves, true embracement of nature and its surroundings, without forgetting one of the most fascinating uniquenesses we have, the power to show our emotions, the power to fall in love. Human behaviour is what has decoupled ourselves from our true colours, making us into something, instead of defining the "someone" inside.
When humanity decided to compete, declare war and kill, it was a path to civilisation we chose based on primitive thinking, a form of thinking that led to vain (false) hopes and ideas, theologies and ideologies. This was not an entirely wrong decision but the fact that we simply perpetuated it to this day without the interest of making one deemed of our time (something new) proves how little we have truly evolved, and how distant we actually are from becoming a true civilisation.
The only way to even reach the possibility of changing the course of history is by beginning with ones self. When you show interest, when you actually care of learning by yourself, you begin a chain reaction nobody can stop. Mark Twain once said:
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education".
Because the best way to raise awareness is not by following the status quo, but by learning yourself through this helter-skelter society of ours.
Once you become personally interested then awareness is born which not only will lead to knowledge and collective cohesion but immediate action.
New generations are clearly taking over the world at fascinating speed and the dawn for a new age of enlightenment is not something vague anymore. In fact it is something that could embark us to one of the most fascinating transitions in history. Just like Johannes Gutenberg introduced the printing press, freedom of thought became so much easier giving rise to people who had stayed in the shadows for too long. Today we have the Internet which has helped many people to enter the light from the shadows of silence, many of them secularists amongst intellectuals.
But why are secularists a key element in all of this?
Secularism bases one's persona on belief through facts and proof and thanks to the internet secularists have gained vast support never seen before, trying to base our entire species amongst the framework of respected morality (i.e. equality rights, freedom of religion, ethnical respect, etc.) and religious institutions cannot suppress them, less litigate it their own way like they were able to do so before (i.e the Inquisition).
The best way to describe secularism would be something like this:
Secularism empowers humanity with the gift of interest since everything becomes unknown, encouraging us to pursue the most compounds mysteries of life by giving a more powerful purpose than any theological alternative. By trying to understand the infinite axiom of the universe we are left with a culminating bestowment that is simply our collective opportunity to flourish. If there is something we truly cannot comprehend out there it is up to us to prove or disprove it because that is how we evolve intellectually. By becoming independent from this "theological cognitive perception" we enter a world of bona fide reality, the understanding of how we should truly see life. Ever since the rise of secularism we have improved in solidarity, friendship no matter your cultural background or personal beliefs, equality and last but not least, compassion - it has brought us more peace than ever before. Religion, which stands under the banner of good, has perpetuated the biggest atrocities in all of history, and until this day wars and conflicts are encouraged by ideologic dogma, which is in fact a result from centuries of theologic dosing. Now we have come to a point in which awareness has become key for our next big leap in evolutionary history. Secularists are the first people whose personal thoughts are not tied to these beliefs, rather than the necessity to better understand that which stands around us, what we conform. When it truly comes to hope in the darkest of times we end up believing in ourselves and our capabilities. Self-motivation is the doorway towards success and no one can change your life other than yourself.
Many other reasons exist that would be necessary for a Second Age of Enlightenment, but primarily the basis of secularist thought and credence will be the engine to propel the entire approach of future human intellectualism.
An incredible result
When we talk about an alternative the term "impossible" emerges, but think that that definition is only possible because our current system discourages altruistic behaviours through individual and competitive incentives, preventing any idea from ever becoming reliable in the first place. By ignoring our current system’s unreliability instead of broadening our perception for alternatives (what it is constantly applied in the fields of science and physics) we neglect our duty to our posterity and their future. It is our duty to maintain an equilibrium with nature, incentivating innovation as well as solidarity and participation with each other. Every single human is unique, and we must acknowledge the fact that our current society is preventing us to master our true capabilities. To call something "impossible" is to ignore innovation, to ignore innovation is to ignore progress and to ignore progress (well you get the picture).
Certain aspects of the failure of our society can be easily represented with adolescence:
The first thing one thinks after we are born is to question ourselves about everything and everyone, because of that natural thirst for knowledge we learn how to survive since those questions are answered. We become survivors, moulding who we will become. Sadly after certain age we hit a wall, our questions seize to be answered and we are told to sit down and shut up. We are forced to abruptly stop caring for survival, lose the interest to our surroundings and follow a predetermined status quo. Therefore the rebel behaviour of adolescence is not a natural one, but a reaction of elders to suppress any neoteric ideas. This rebel behaviour is a result of fear from elders of recognising that new generations surpass their cognitive perception and interpretations. This is why we always see fights for change, some people don't want to let go of old beliefs and that is self-destructive. We must remember that knowledge is and always will be the best tool humans should ever have. Until we learn to embrace innovation instead of suppressing it we will never be a true civilisation.
For that reason there is a thin line between empirical thought and ideological thought. We could go as far as to say that if you linger too much within a theory and you won't let go of it, you will inevitably create an ideology which will succumb all those who follow it into a paradox of progress, pretty much as faith does.
The whole purpose of society is not to follow a belief created centuries or even decades ago, but to innovate, change and perfect, pretty much as science does. After all there is no better way to depict how a society should be than this greek proverb:
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in".
A Second Age of Enlightenment could embark us to have such society, one which truly cares for our posterity's future, other than just ourselves. Sadly the result needed for such society is the demise of two important elements that basically stir our entire Planet today.
The fall of Religion would mark the beginning of true Spiritualism. Many confuse the terms and their utter distinction. Religion is the institution created by man to propagate its presence on all aspects of life, many times utilising fear as the tool for control. There are countless religions, whilst spirituality there is just one. At the same time religion forces you to be guided and how to live your life, whilst spirituality frees you, expands your inner consciousness without the need to defend it since it is yours and yours alone, automatically making you a friendlier, happier and more awake person towards how you believe life is. This leaves an incredible space for self-teaching and allows us to question ourselves that which is left unknown. Instead of fearing it and putting it away in a box somewhere in your mind, we investigate and try to find answers, this directly translates into intellectual growth.
For this reason spirituality is a necessity for some people giving them the incentive to see life how they want to see it, within their framework of realism. This allows them to have a vast space to explore. For others it is self-motivation, whereas you simply believe in yourself and your capabilities, whilst at the same time embracing new cooperation and respect.
When you don't enforce belief onto others, and you let them be original within themselves, the only thing left is exchange of intellectual thoughts (amongst love, compassion and cooperation that comes attached with it).
Spiritualism is the exact amount of hope needed for progress but religion is the unregulated result enforced by human behaviour. Therefore its demise will mark the beginning of real intellectual expansion.
In all honesty there is no necessity to linger too much into this subject since most of us know all about it and how it simply corrupts and destroys human nature into this feared behaviour we have been talking about. Some believe on applicable changes that would conclude on the utter independence from currency, while others believe it to be of utopian values and beliefs. Then you have those who consider it a conclusion after a series of small plausible changes, acting as a bridge between today and that utopian future. Many people such as Jack Fresco or even Peter Joseph who depict the reality behind the facts and plausible solutions to our problems are more adequate to explain you this problem, in here it is more on how it is simply a key element in the perpetuation of separation between our nature and behaviour.
Humanity has all it needs to survive at hands reach, but when we took the first step towards Globalisation, then a form of centralised power implicated all those involved, this was known as trade. Necessary during that period, today Globalisation instead of Localisation has proven how ineffective, excess of consumption and costly it actually is. Overproduction and waste are the primary results of this overextended system, a system that is propelled by currency.
Currency not only allowed to civilised society when it was first applied, but just like every single other idea that has not been updated to our times, has proven ineffective and actually dangerous today. We are clearly over consuming this Planet. We can easily give as an example the Rainforest of Indonesia, that has less than 16% left of its habitat.
Money has become the fuel for competitive behaviour, aggression and war. It is the cancer of our species, making us the cancer of this planet.
The demise of theologic thought, ideologic supremacy – the rise of scientific methods together with true spirituality and secularists – will conclude on the slow but visible demise of currency marking an incredible new beginning.
The story is just beginning
And so, knowing the infinity of life through reproduction, reflecting our immortality through our posterity, we are well known to find a problem and solve it, evolving from this current poisoned system we inhabit and changing once again the course of history, maybe getting us one step closer of becoming a true civilisation.
This entire Hub might sound far-fetched and impossible to some but it is a theory of what could happen if key elements are drastically changed. Elements that have become extremely contradictory during this past decade. A Second Age of Enlightenment might or might not happen in our lifetimes but whenever it does, it will most definitely mark the rise of a new kind of human, a human based on its true nature making us look back and wonder, how did we allow this to extend for so long?