Why This Egodeath Theory Is the Only Possible Religious System Modernity Can Take Seriously
Egodeath Theory Is the Truly Modern Version of Religion
Draft 2, Oct. 5, 2006
Disclaimer: The author accepts
no responsibility for readers.
To test the Egodeath theory (the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence), read the Main article multiple times, interspersed with multiple altered-state sessions (dissociative cognitive state sessions), and then judge whether the article is the right, relevant, and excellent explanation for what's experienced and for how self, time, personal control power, and the world is experienced across the normal (tight-binding) and loose cognitive binding states, or whether instead the article is arbitrary, mediocre, and only incidentally true, only culturally constructed (per the post-modern intellectuals). Is the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence a functionally perfect description of the resulting experiential insights?
To test this Theory, in the dissociative cognitive state, having studied the Main article, consider for yourself:
In this sense, if investigators who have read the Theory and experienced these dynamics agree that the Theory is unavoidable and has the claimed merits, this Theory is functionally "proven" in practice. (Such a kind of proof is regardless of the obsession about epistemological certainty that's characteristic of modern-era philosophy.)
The Egodeath theory is the only possible truly natively modern-rooted theory; it's here to stay, because it is unavoidable.
The Egodeath theory incorporates the maximal entheogen theory of religion, and the theory of ahistoricity of Jesus and Paul, and a focus on personal control agency across time. I am late-modern consciousness and sensibility, the way I do religious theory is the truly modern way, using only native local materials, not a modern perversion of an alien, imported, pre-modern religion.
The one true religion, the truly relevant perennial philosophy, is kubernetes kai heimarmene -- self-government power in the light of timeless determinism. What sort of system is this Transcendent Knowledge?
Does the Egodeath theory compete against other systems? It's a comprehensive phenomenology-driven approach to the dissociative cognitive state - not driven by "what is enlightenment such as to provide a better state", but rather, "control dynamics and issues arise, and potent ideas -- what do you have to about them: nothing! Or alot?" Not primarily traditional "enlightenment" driven or epistemological-truth driven, but rather, driven by coherence of control-agency phenomenology and mental-model, centered around all of the phenomenology arising around Egodeath experiences. So, the scope, center, and focus, and concern are distinctive -- part of what makes it a wholly different paradigm, different framework of concerns, which is why Benny Shanon's approach is so seminal, in the book (Antipodes of the Mind). It's the start of a new thread, a new pursuit. I've defined a new pursuit, a new field of concern.
The Egodeath Theory is not driven by concern with epistemology, how to prove that the world is such and so way. Totally concerned with mental-model integrity, on the premise "Transcendent knowledge is clear and easy, simple". The frozen-future block-universe model has the greatest mental-model integrity -- that's why it's simple, clear, straightforward, easy to grasp and leverage toward triggering destabilizing, transformative ramifications.
The Egodeath theory is the only theory that even tries to make sense out of, and fully acknowledge, the phenomenological reports from acid-rock lyrics, schizophrenia, and the dissociative cognitive state, and Western religion, of being controlled, time frozen, Heimarmene, the frozenness of the future, and non-control (the non-autonomy of personal control power). The block-time model came from studying Zen and relativity. Originated as a control-focused phenomenology theory and improved-coherence model.
Driven by phenomenological coherence and mental-model coherence rather than by epistemological truth. Practical mental-model coherence is the measure of worth, for dynamic transformative results – giving a dynamically, functionally interesting alteration of perspective regarding personal control agency operating across time, as well as moving through space.
The block-time model provides far more than just the single point (concept), of nonduality -- and nonduality is a risky metaphysical basis hypothesis to found enlightenment on. If we grant that spatial nonduality is "proven by" altered-state experience (not just a metaphysical speculation), then we can also grant that the block-time model is "proven by" altered-state experience (not just a metaphysical speculation). If we reject the block time as too metaphysical, then we need to reject (spatial) nonduality as well. The entity is nondual – and the entity, a person, is a time-voyaging continuant controller-agent. Spatial separation of the self from the world is largely illusory, and temporal separation is illusory in a concomitant way. No separate-self exists to change the future.
The Egodeath Theory isn't about "enlightenment" as commonly conceived. This Theory is about mental-model transformation to gain systemic coherence, to move from self-contradiction and incoherence, to neat modelling of personal agency control over time. This Theory has different values, goals, and concerns than nondual religious "tradition" – that is, this Theory subsumes the central metaphysical hypothesis of "nonduality". This Theory extends the nonduality metaphysics hypothesis, adding a time-related hypothesis too, on justified basis of phenomenology and thinking about our existing manners of thinking, existing ideas about personal power of control over time.
When say "all religions are about this", disagreement comes in. All religions are very largely about this -- and they'd be better if they were more about it. Their flaw is they aren't about this, thus aren't exploring this important subject; insofar as they aren't about it, they suffer from reduced relevance and scope of concern about the most profoundly interesting mystic-state revelation phenomenology. Such Buddhism fails to address and account for what it ought, which is, personal control dynamics in the mystic altered state. It defines a better definition of what religion ought to be, needs to be, about.
The basis and origin of the Egodeath theory is personal control over time, personal management, dissociative state. A discovery of the potential to transform the mind's mental model of personal control agency over time, using block-time as a "mythic device" – does that make enlightenment be based on a conjecture about the metaphysics of time? Are we to make it be based on space metaphysics instead?
Any "nonduality" must be regarding the agent as an existent immersed in both time and space. If you have no model of time, you have only half a model of nonduality. Any adequate religious transformation system must be concerned with people as agents moving in time and space, and sensing nonduality in its time and space manifestations/aspects. The Egodeath theory is the system by which others must be measured. The Egodeath theory sets the standards for what a scientific religion needs to be.
The issue isn't "enlightenment" as envisioned in non-modern, non-systematic, or current ordinary-state-based (OSC-based) cultures; it isn't "epistemological certainty" as envisioned in modern OSC-based philosophy; it's a matter of mental model coherence. Lacking a defined time aspect, such "Buddhism nonduality in Buddhism" provides no mental-model coherence regarding control-over-time -- just muteness and silence. The Egodeath theory or model isn't what specific religions all have been; it's what all authentic, relevant religions need to be. It's a theory of what Real Religion is really about -- not what historical Buddhism has been about, but the roots of religion, the roots of Buddhism; Buddhism is a distorted shadow of this implicit, waiting-to-be-discovered uber-religion.
The Egodeath theory is the uber-religion, which was only partially, non-systemically found before. This Theory changes the standards, the criteria of what's relevant for religion. If Buddhism is not equal to the Egodeath theory or model, then which one is at fault? which one has irrelevant basis/motives/goals/concerns? The ultimate ideal perfect religion. The Egodeath theory is the perfect religion; Buddhism (in its historical manifestation) falls short. Previous religions are mis-based shadows of this Theory, which is the one true uber-religion. That's been "imperfect Buddhism", half-formed, half-appropriate Buddhism.
Nonduality "versus" block-time is covered in my blog posts - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath/message/4535. All religions have been more or less successful gropings toward this ultimate version of religion. Take the Egodeath theory as far as possible, into a kind of absolutism as an independent paradigm; the Egodeath theory is the paradigm by which all religions need to be measured; insofar as they contradict it, wrong; match it, right.
The basis of the Theory isn't epistemological certainty. Epistemological certainty is the only reason to limit oneself to space-oriented (space-axis) nonduality rather than going on to assert time-axis nonduality as well. Are we certain about space-axis nonduality, but not time-axis nonduality? My theory is symmetric for metaphysics of space and time. If nonduality in space, then by the same token, nonduality in time.
Forget any aspects of religion that are not fitting, forget epistemological certainty concerns. Go with the Egodeath model as the standard reference point, the perfect ultimate ideal model of religious transformation.
The Egodeath theory is not concerned with being sure how things really are, in themselves -- except cybernetically here's how things really are, re: personal control over space/time. Religion is ultimately (irreducibly) about control through space/time, levels, puppet, 1st-3rd person perspectives per Ken Wilber, ...
My "church" of "followers" is all hardcore skeptics who are doubters unless they feel the spear wound in the side themselves (John 20:24-29) – experiencing self-control instability seizure and calling "Uncle" to the higher control-level themselves, to save their viable life as a controller. (See "wound" and "seizure" in my Main article.)
Bows its head and prays to the mother of all machines
-- from the song "The Body Electric")
If nondualist Buddhism is conceived of as not having this self-to-Self, control-levels relationship, then such Buddhism is woefully inadequate for dealing with intense mystic altered-state phenomenology, and it is ripping-off people, short-changing them from the most profoundly interesting mental dynamics. Such Buddhism is a rip-off because it delivers only a portion of what it should be delivering, regarding mind-transforming experiential insights.
Just as I cracked the Western religion puzzle by assuming that all previous systems were a messy overgrown distorted growth on a clean, pure, ideal religion trellis that I was to find -- same with Eastern religion. The predominant version of nondual Buddhism is an inefficient, messy, overgrown, defocused, blurred growth on a mostly hidden trellis – the Egodeath model is the trellis, the true shape of religion, regardless of history and epistemological certainty re: metaphysics, such as the metaphysics of time.
The Egodeath model is the true, ideal, ultimate shape of religion. You can discard all religion all you want, but can never get rid of this framework/model; try to go up against it, cannot; it is the irreducible (after de-metaphorized) remainder, the true skeleton of all religions, uncovered. Other aspects are irrelevant (strictly speaking); this is the skeleton of what aspects are truly religious-transformationally relevant.
Keywords driving the basis of the Egodeath model: (as new paradigm, defines its own basis afresh):
I began developing the theory by working-up notebooks 1985-2005 based on my own personal grappling with my own intense personal struggle with personal-control ideas, my own homebrewed mental construct theory, my own domain-dynamics system. I assumed tradition doesn't have a decent model of these concerns; I was essentially dissatisfied with what I did read such as Watts and Wilber, and set out to create my own contemporary logical rational modern system from the ground up, myself, drawing upon all resources (scholarship and theories) but rooted in my own fundamental Theory (like the spirit of Descartes' approach, in retrospect).
Buddhism is only partly a standard, reference, or criteria to measure the Egodeath theory. This theory of Transcendent Knowledge is fiercely independent, trusting that all previous religions and theories are useless, confused, garbled, and irrelevant; I always intended this Theory to provide a new, standalone basis of judgment, a new standard - a new independent standard, a new basis for defining a standard -- by which to measure all religions. Here, some biographical material would be justified, to paint a vivid picture of my personality and cultural trajectory.
Religion ultimately and most purely is about agency transformation regarding control agency power in space and time. This Theory amounts to a modern, scientific basis by which to measure religion. This Theory doesn't hate science; the theory is a bit "integral", certainly including a model of "domain dynamics", and considers science to include this style of approach - dissociation, cybernetics, spacetime block from physics, ... not to say that the Egodeath theory is a physics-based religion, but rather, a religion based on phenomenology, cognitive dynamics, and control-power, including how control-power is affected dramatically, in unintended, profound, amazing ways, by the mental model of control-agency and spacetime one holds in mind.
Ken Wilber defines a basis on which to judge all religions (mapping to all states/stages). Instead, the Egodeath theory's basis for judgment of all religions is more specific. Ken Wilber's weakness is he's diffuse, lost in the all of knowledge. The Egodeath theory or model, or religious system, or religion, is infinitely more targeted, more "best of" oriented -- focus should be amplified in proportion, not evenly spread over all topics.
Sure there's the "domain dynamics" area of the Egodeath theory, but it's kept in proportion.
Mormonism is ancient-styled, and is based on Western Esotericism. The Egodeath theory is late-modern styled, and based on late-modern version of the altered state and reflection about the self – the modern, daily-living self, the control-agent in the late-modern workaday world.
The Egodeath theory is not a theory of "enlightenment" nor "truth". It's a theory of the irreducible, most-relevant essence of religious experiential insight and cognitive transformation regarding personal control-agency. The Egodeath theory doesn't make block-time metaphysics the foundation on which enlightenment regarding nonduality stands or falls; the spirit of the Theory is a wholly different arrangement and configuration than that, with a wholly different basis, purpose, motivation, and concerns. The Theory is vastly more driven by practical mental dynamics regarding controllership experiencing.
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is a new framework and basis from which to view all other religions or systems of religious explanation. This Theory is a new point-of-reference and a new standard by which to assess religions and theories of religion. If this Theory "insists" on certain points such as the nature of the New Testament as an altered-state-based alternative State, a frozen-future block universe and Heimarmene, these points are held within the theory in a certain distinctive way that's not a kind of epistemological foundationalism, or some simplistic notion of theories such as "conclusions built on axioms".
Forget preconceptions about how theories are built and what standards they adhere to, and ask afresh: "What's the role of the 'frozen future' concept in this Theory? Is it a principle, a hypothesis, a conclusion, an epistemological assertion, a subjective phenomenology experience?" The 'frozen future' concept is a non-eliminable inherent part of the Egodeath theory in some way, but we shouldn't hasten to conceptualize it as an epistemological axiomatic hypothesis. The 'frozen future' concept in this distinctive sort of Theory functions as an active mental model that reliably produces certain remarkable dynamics about personal control-power experiences.
This theory, system, or set of concerns about mental control-dynamics with respect to time, will stand forever; it's the simplest and most coherent , most elementary model, totally relevant, which everyone must know -- it is unavoidable; we must clean it up because it is here to stay. Move aside and make way for this permanent theory that inherently includes the 'frozen future' concept, whether considered as an idea, an experience, an active hypothesis, an impulse trigger function, or a basis.
Any "apologetics" must be done firmly within the framework, using its native, genuinely local character re: values, goals, methods, and origin. Each term is re-conceptualized per the local framework. The Egodeath theory is complete and distinct, standalone, independent, ultimate, unavoidable, innate, and discovered. Then it was progressively systematized (at this website since the mid-1990s, and in the WELL forums since around 1990).
The Theory doesn't at all buy into conventional assumptions and manners of reasoning in popular, American Buddhism. The Theory is not concerned with how Buddhism sees it; the opposite; from the point of view of this Theory, American Buddhism ought to be concerned about how this Theory sees it.
My recent blog posts about nonduality were too much framed within a foreign framework/paradigm. This Theory, being a distinct interpretive framework and paradigm, keeps solidly grounded in its own local perspective (informed by many other perspectives). It's an inherent, discovered point of view, a naturally discovered formation and naturally occurring system of thoughts, superbly and supremely self-coherent -- it's the best example of self-coherence in a theory.
Take altered-state-revealed experiential insight, remove cultural constructions or what Wilber calls "metaphysics", along with garbled and confusing mythological descriptions that are placed too much at the core of religions, and the resulting streamlined structure or form is exactly the Egodeath theory – the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
The resulting modern streamlined Theory can then be applied back to the traditional religions to determine the needed higher version of each religion, as when the lens of "politics of empire" is used to understand the New Testament and then, by analogy, determine what the political philosophy in the New Testament would say about the politics of empire today. The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence, however, recognizes that the New Testament was a communal altered-state-based counter-ideological social-political system.
by Wes Howard-Brook, Anthony Gwyther, 1999
by Steven Friesen, 2001
The Lamb's Supper, by Hahn, 1999
Relate to "Buddhism" more like way I stand in judgment of pop "Christianity". These are merely predominant versions of what were already flawed limited forms of religion. If I thought there was more than a shadow of relevant substance in Buddhism/Christianity as we know them, I wouldn't have set out to construct my own fresh, independent system/framework/basis/perspective, system of concerns/goals/techniques/concepts. I always meant the Egodeath theory as a superior, independent system/framework/basis/perspective, system of concerns/goals/techniques/concepts/standards. Because no system came anywhere near addressing these relevant practical concerns.
A truly "modern" theory must be original down to its basics -- its motivations, whole conceptualization of what the Egodeath theory is about; a new foundation/basis (like Descartes' approach of starting with a new, modern foundation, but altered-state-based and not epistemology-driven). A truly modern religion, based afresh on purely modern-era concerns/basis, not a retooled pre-modern scheme just updated, but rather, placed on its own independently modern foundation, discarding all authority. Wilber is pre-modern, non-modern theory in modern drag; mine is built from the ground up on modern foundations, cares, techniques. Modern, and scientific - but not ..... modernity rejects all religion that's alien; finally it'll recognize truly modern -originated, modernity-based model of ultimate religion, stripped of metaphysics at its core (as Wilber demands).
The Egodeath theory is the only possible natively modern religion.
Ken Wilber has the idea "modern religion needs to meet this list of criteria". Actually, modern religion needs to be my theory, and its concerns and methods. Ken Wilber's assertion is correct insofar as it fits with or describes mine, my theory and its relationship to all other fields. Obtaining knowledge about neuroscience is hardly a revelation experience; you can have lots of neuroscience, or little, but subjective dissociative cognition isn't affected. Psychoactive chemistry is more relevant for experiential transformation than neuroscience. Wilber has no great sense of the degree of relevance, relative relevance.
Wilber is only partly right in saying we must extend pre-modern religions – that's a strategy that would slow down some people. Against Wilber, once the collective society has advanced-stage versions of Christianity, providing highly developed, higher-stage versions of Christianity will have a "catastrophic" global collective effect – naive misinterpretation of Christianity will mostly fizzle out; we won't have groups of people at all developmental stages. We'll have more like two groups: non-initiates and initiates; but most of all, the entire culture will change, bringing in the collective post-modern era. This new self-awareness is discussed in the book Reality Isn't What It Used to Be.
Whether or not we give a better version of Christianity, the present Theory of religion is independently and purely modern, and yet also helps formulate what an ultimate post-modern version of New Testament Christianity, rightly understood, would amount to. The Egodeath theory is like a new religion that is composed of modern-era foundation, composed entirely of modern-era building blocks; a modernity-founded/-rooted/-based (but not OSC-based) religion.
I've thought of the theory as "the Stanford model", meaning, a late 20th Century, West coast, engineering-based theory. Better than "science" based, the Egodeath theory and system is technology and engineering based, at least in sensibility – and not just by using the directionless Cybernetics field or pop 'cyber' prefix. The Egodeath theory drew from non-modern systems but always stood on its own feet, in the engineering world.
All during its development, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence was conceived of as a system based purely in modern era, rooted there, native -- as Lenson's book On Drugs calls for. Not a pre-modern religion pretending to be modern updated, but rather, a truly modernity-rooted, modernity-originated religious system. The Egodeath theory is what Dianetics should've been (and is true to its altered-state-based origination unlike Hubbard's Dianetics religion, Alcoholics Anonymous, and the Eannagram religion), and to some extent is what Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) should've been.
Egodeath theory is the truly modernity-based model of religion, the truly modern version of religion, modernity-originated religion (like Dianetics is, but properly altered-state based, including late 20th Century lyrics from regular but edge culture, purely contemporary trip reports). The Egodeath model only referred to other systems in order to complete the self-consistency of this modern/engineering-based system or model.
The Egodeath theory is, specifically, late-modernity based, in all ways. The Egodeath theory is effectively LSD-based and Salvia Divinorum-based; it's designed to be fully compatible with these ergonomic cognitive alteration chemical keys. That's one of many ways in which the theory is truly a child of, completely a product of, late modern, U.S., engineering, and Acid Rock lyrics). I'm the quintessentially late-modern type thinker: practical, grounded, skeptical, show-me, independent, individualist, rational, problem solver, practical (per U.S.), can-do, applied.
The Egodeath theory doesn't cut the pre-modern religions any slack at all; only pay attention to them insofar as they enable growing this independent, strictly modernity-based system. The Egodeath theory is truly a "different religion", in a way opposed to previous ones, standing firmly on its own feet to judge how much the previous cruder versions measured up or fell short of what religion is, potentially, most ideally/naturally. And this is more natural, discovered afresh, into or from within purely modern perspective. Involved looking at old technologies and explaining them, but not at all adhering/being based on those old approaches and concept expressions. I've always been standing firmly here in late modernity, drawing from the old, garbled systems, while correcting them and freely revising their garbled elements to make sense within this brand new construction, this late-modern explanatory framework.
Engineer a backwards-compatible religious system, but the code base for the Egodeath theory is written from the ground up, fresh, from scratch -- not warmed-over pre-modern religion like Ken Wilber's system. Like the cry during early reformation era "Back to the texts" -- but in the case of the Egodeath theory, back to the personal, my own, approach and experience, informed by my peers' reports and the fumbling attempts of Watts/Wilber to explain pre-modern religious revelation. Similar to Descartes' approach/mentality, a fresh start in modern foundation of thinking about and experiencing transcendent aspects.
Discard all authority, then -- not "introspect" per Ken Wilber's fear of "monological" naivety, but rather, build a fresh foundation, ground up, composed entirely of late-modern, Stanford- culture components, while including bridge to the previous, inferior, distorted systems (botched, half-baked, fuzzy, messy, lost, dirtied, confused). My authority is more Hofstadter than Aurobindo (used excessively by Ken Wilber as his roots/foundation). Ken Wilber's theory of religion/spirituality is rooted / based in pre-modern. Yes his Integral framework/scheme is modernity-based, but the spirituality component is merely early-modern, and pre-modern eastern import. replace his religion/spirituality by my paradigm, in Integral framework. "Keep your existing path, put into Integral framework"; ok, will do, with the Egodeath theory.
Buddhism is compatible with the Egodeath theory. But they have different roots or basis, as systems. What use is the Egodeath theory?" That's a modern question, reflected in the Egodeath theory: the Egodeath theory is the perfect modern theory that fits with such modern, practical, skepticism about the utility.
Utility is highly important, in the Egodeath theory – utility regarding practical dynamics of personal control, and providing tangible value as a functional, active theory. Having multiple distinct mental worldmodels regarding self, time, world, mind, and control is valuable and practical. For example, having both of these models present in the mind allows reconceptualizing the intent of the New Testament.
The Egodeath theory:
The Egodeath theory is proudly modern, proudly native (per Lenson's call) -- not merely in sense of Western, Christianity, and ancient Mediterranean, but, roots in Stanford, Electrical Engineering, Human Potential, Relativity, Cybernetics per Watts' book The Way of Zen, Douglas Hofstadter, Acid Rock as the authentic late modern era authentic initiatory mystery-religion, the Matrix series of movies. Ramesh Balsekar, tenseless time (Oaklander), modern metaphysics, and 1943 LSD discovery and Salvia Divinorum.
The Egodeath theory is not outdated-rooted warmed- over pre-modern religion in Copenhagenist drag, but rather, truly pragmatic, hardheaded, late 20th Century Silicon Valley culture, Mondo 2000 magazine (cybercult), Wired magazine, 'net/web, Erik Davis' book TechGnosis, ... borrows from alien sources, but reworks those per modern engineering mentality. The Egodeath theory is truly modern (late-modern) in its spirit, sensibility, and roots.
I've recognized, pulled together, and started a new religion, rooted in modernity as much as Dianetics (other examples?) but is what it should be -- the first great, valid, legit, correct, successful modernity-rooted religion.
What matters isn't truth about epistemology, but rather, practical dynamics of personal control agency power over space and time; cognitive phenomenology. this focus does end-run around Ken Wilber's entire concern about culture/society "myth of given" etc.
Ken Wilber's book Integral Spirituality defines a solid sense of how to position and conceptualize the Egodeath theory, as a new theory in the modern era, in relation to exactly what he's calling for. The social-political aspect is, for one thing, drug policy Reform (decriminalization, legalization, amnesty for the drug-war prisoners), based on true history of use of entheogens in religious history.
Reading Integral Spirituality puts forth a strategy. The Egodeath theory discarded (never added) metaphysics, unless you count block-time as metaphysics, but that's not actually used as metaphysics; rather, block-time in this Theory serves as a practical because simple, coherent, and effective for Egodeath cognitive phenomenological experience -- not a metaphysical construct; it's a cog dynamic phenomenology construct. So the Egodeath theory doesn't base enlightenment on a metaphysical hypothesis, but rather, on a provable repeatable cognitive phenomenological dynamic.
List Ken Wilber/s requirements for an acceptable modern religion and show how my system is better than Ken Wilber's own religion/spiritual portion of his system; my system of religion/spiritual transformation (proper) fits Wilber's criteria better than his own does.
Acceptable modern religion must:
Additionally, the Theory has completely tight wording: it is specific, tangible, simple, and fully comprehensible unlike freewill/open future.
Ken Wilber is inconsistent and self-contradictory here: after all his call for modern religion, he says we have to use a religion that is rooted in pre-modern/mythic, though a new, higher version of that. He says modernity cannot produce its own religion -- he's wrong; of course the only religion that modernity will accept is a religion that is genuinely, bonafidely, actually, authentically a child and progeny of modernity, native, local-originated (not a foreign virus, but local body's cell, smells as such, only the Egodeath theory has the DNA of modernity.
The Egodeath theory is the first correct, successful modernity-engendered religion. I never bought into mythic religion -- only used it as checkpoint, and quickly eliminated historical Jesus and Paul assumption and recognized unlike Ken Wilber, the Integral nature of New Testament Christianity.
Ken Wilber's own religion/spiritual system (proper - distinct from Integral Theory) will never be accepted/respected by late modernity, because it's clearly alien, not native product of modernity with modern DNA. rooted in warmed-over pre-modern religion. The Egodeath theory will be slightly attacked by modernity, but in essentially minor ways, only; it's a natively modern product, offspring, outcome.
It's the only possible religion that my self-respecting programming colleagues could ever take seriously, and, seeing as they are totally unbelieving of authority such as Ken Wilber/Aurobindo, and are all children of Descartes -- believing only what they personally confirm -- only the Egodeath theory gives programmers a specific test that can be proven in a matter of hours, or few weekends at most. take the Eucharist, consider inability to steer away from future thoughts, keep the block-time model in mind b/c it's the only simple, coherent, definite model (non-hazy), consider the source of your thoughts and how you control that source as a power-wielding control-agent moving thru time, and while doing so, try to retain personal control power over your own thoughts.
This is what makes it the only modern theory: I say don't believe me at all, don't believe Neil Peart, Cliff Burton, Bob Daisley, or the Electric Prunes' female professional lyrist, or the lyricist of "Nothing Can Change the Shape of Things to Come": just steal my suggestion, disbelieving it, and now, this hour, check it yourself. See, yourself, now, given the flight from authority, immediately, no delays /no excuses, and esp. no authorities -- do your own check.
See what you find, when you monitor your control-power and keep these ideas in mind. Disprove me. Try it your own damn self. Show me I'm wrong. Show us we're wrong. Test yourself, prove yourself. If you are to believe us, this is the only possible way you'll believe us me and N. Peart, Bob Daisley, Cliff Burton, other lyricists, and aspects of Heimarmene from Western antiquity. The spiritual, mystical part of Wilber's Integral Theory (such as the technique or "practice injunction" of 20 years of meditation) isn't practically testable, but the Egodeath theory is. The strictly religious portion of Integral Theory, as Wilber defines that portion, isn't practically testable – while the Egodeath theory is practically testable, straightaway, without arm-waving, excuses, delays, and vagueness.
Modernity will never believe Ken Wilber because will never be practical to test Ken Wilber; will always be skeptical at best. In contrast, modernity will believe the Egodeath theory because it is eminently, uniquely, extremely practical to test it and confirm its soundness, relevance, and merit. This is a complete advantage of the Egodeath theory over Wilberism, Aurobindoism, Dianetics, and so on: this Theory is supremely, readily testable; only the Egodeath theory is; there is no other possible theory so readily testable as the Egodeath theory.
The Egodeath theory is totally clear and specific and finitely defined in what it asserts, and what it asserts is 100%, immediately testable: "if you hold x ideas in mind, y dynamics will result, including forcing a transformation of mental-model regarding control, time, self, and world. And you'll be able recognize the mystic-state meaning and soc-political in New Testament Christianity in its empire context.
Other religions proferred now as "modern" are not in fact modern, but obviously reek of authoritarian based, pre-modern in origin/roots, not easily enough testable or sharable confirmation, not repeatable, not testable by a brief 2-month or 2-hour preparation, have foreign alien ideas, are hazy, indistinct, not summarizable, not confirmed in pop reports from the street, broad/hazy promises, hazy in scope. The Egodeath theory is 100% specific, bounded, explicit, testable immediately, and fully definable in summary form.
The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is the only existing theory meeting these criteria/qualities/qualifications. It's the only theory that even has a chance of being accepted or taken at all seriously by late modernity.
Everyone must say of this Theory, "Given that you say there was no historical Jesus or Paul; the proposed theory is drug-based; there's no free will; the future is frozen and pre-set and already exists; Christianity and other religions were drug-based; all past religions and famous pre-modern mystics were entheogen based -- with so many completely radical components, how can one say the Egodeath theory has even a slight chance of being accepted?" It's not so unlikely that such a multiply radical theory has some chance of being accepted – it is consistently radical, crossing all the lines together, so as to be clearly viable. Any other proposed candidates have no chance, because they aren't immediately, readily confirmable.
Ken Wilber's call for belief in spirituality as a real and serious topic for late-modern intellectuals is doomed to fail for all systems except mine - why? because the Egodeath theory is the only possible system possible to test immediately, by the world's most hardheaded, hardcore, skeptical, atheist, anti-authoritarian, independent thinkers - it's destined to become the house religion of Skeptic magazine and internet-infidels site.
The Egodeath theory is the only religion you have chance of seeing in action at Burning Man, rock concerts, Hell's Angels (bikers), raves, Acid Test Happenings, or on the street. Only the Egodeath theory is and can be a true "religion being tested out in the world". Not some authoritarian's construct taken on their word. The Egodeath mental model induces control-instability/seizure in others. Disbelieve me, and test what I say; this is my general call for skeptical testing of my claims (my systematization of claims of, for example, the acid-rock lyricists).
Song: Dooley vs. the Ferris Wheel
Compilation: An Overdose of Heavy Psych
Dooley and I went out the other night, to the county fair
We took a ride upon a Ferris wheel, he didn't like it up there
Hang on, oh Dooley Dooley Dooley (repeat)
Dooley's the kind of guy you don't mess with
Dooley can put you down without no sweat
Unless you're a Ferris wheel
Lyrics written by: Bob Daisley
Artist: The Ozzy Osbourne Band (Daisley on bass)
Album: Diary of a Madman
Now I find peace of mind
Finally found a way of thinking
Tried the rest found the best
Stormy day won't find me sinking
Dare to look, face the test
On the eve when you've set sailing
What you've learned what you've earned
Ship of joy will stop you failing
Wind is high so am I
A raging sea below – is this voyage coming to an end?