Caustic Ramblings

It goes without saying that intelligence is very prized and valued in our culture. What I mean by intelligence is a grab bag of “big brain” traits like mental sharpness, cleverness, mathematical proclivity, and good verbal skills. In so many of our culture’s high-paying, high-status occupations, intelligence is key. Intelligence is very useful; especially when it comes to manipulating the physical environment and coming up with ever-more efficient ways of extracting goodies from it. Having an advanced degree from a prestigious academic institution is supposedly a good proxy (err...a very expensive one!!) for being gifted in the area of measurable intelligence, or so the story goes.

Wisdom is much harder to measure, if it can even be measured at all. It’s why grading papers (beyond the technical aspects of writing) is mostly a subjective art, as opposed to the completely-objective process of scoring a math test. If Intelligence corresponds with the so-called “left brain,” then Wisdom is the domain of the “right brain.” Wisdom contains the intangible and unquantifiable aspects of what actually make us “smart.” Wisdom is creative, artistic, and intuitive, whereas Intelligence is technical, nimble, and quantifiable. If Intelligence is STEM, then Wisdom is the Humanities side of academia.

Those familiar with Dungeons & Dragons, and similar Fantasy Role Playing Games (RPGs), will immediately recognize these two terms as being attributes found on the player’s character sheet. Intelligence is what makes a powerful Wizard, and Wisdom is what makes a good Cleric. Of course, the human physical and psycho-spiritual makeup is magnitudes more complex than a simple list of eight attribute scores. But to make a quick point, a small dose of nerdy category-reductionism can be sometimes helpful. In D&D, Wisdom is a shorthand way of saying “psycho-spiritual acumen.” It’s much better marketing to use a commonly-understood word than to explain the game mechanics using clinical-sounding psychobabble. But I do digress.

Incarnation as a levelling-up process

Our finest spiritual teachings might suggest that both Wisdom and Intelligence are things that increase in the individual soul as it accumulates more and more human incarnations under its belt. One very key thing to take into account is that Intelligence all by itself has nothing to do with a person’s morality; intelligence is a gift that can be used for good, evil, and neutral purposes. A soul that develops intelligence at a fast past over a limited number of human incarnations may experience several lifetimes where they misuse their intelligence in service of various self-serving and short-sighted goals; this would be the “clever fool.” To understand the sometimes-amoral nature of intelligence, it’s interesting to recall that Mercury is the god of thieves and fraudsters. Mercury is the celestial intelligence that rules over flexibility and nimbleness of all kinds, including mental nimbleness. Mercury is raw intelligence. Mercury is the god of Tricknology. (Sorry D&D purists, but Intelligence is really just Cognitive Dexterity)

There is a connection though between Wisdom and moral agency; a wise person may “know” what’s right in a situation, even if they fail to act on that realization. In isolation, Wisdom is a passive state consisting of a cross-contextualization of accumulated experiences and abstract impressions. Without right action, Wisdom is wasted potential. A soul with a lot of Wisdom (been there, done that, many times over) will cultivate a native sense of right and wrong; such a person will have much less dependence on whatever set of concrete rules and moral commandments their culture imposes on them. As a result, a “wise” person can become quite resentful if they happen to live in a society that’s way too conformist and restrictive. In excess, this resentment can result in a state of perma-rebelliousness and a tendency toward reactive anitnomianism. Another downside of Wisdom is the tendency to get lost in lofty abstractions and lose touch with the banal reality on the ground. Adults without families (or businesses) to take care of are especially prone to this sort of psychological waywardness. No, “fur babies” don’t count. Au contraire, our spiritual “lessers” still know how to touch grass.

Ugh, more categories

In the Myers-Briggs personality typology (a commercial bastardization of Carl Jung’s psychological type theory), the trait “Intuition” is a fairly close proxy for the sort of Wisdom I’m getting at here. The so-called “Intuition type” has become an identity for adoring fans of this system to latch onto as a crude means of differentiating themselves from the hordes of those pitiful, simple souls with less Wisdom (i.e. “Sensing” types) than thou, or so the story goes. “INTJ” and “INTP” types are those who fancy themselves as being gifted in the areas of both Intelligence and Wisdom. “NF” types like INFJ are more specialized in the area of Wisdom, though typically with an artistic, creative, or romantic bent (maybe this is where that other attribute, Charisma, starts to creep in).

There are of course other systems of accounting for the varying levels of soul maturity found throughout humanity. The Gnostics of late antiquity uses a tripartite scheme. They categorized all people into three categories, from least to most wise, (1) Hylics, (2) Psychics, and (3) Pneumatics. Hylics have very little Wisdom. They are are those young, immature souls who are the most drawn toward the ordinary sensory experiences the material world has to offer; they are sensual, possess rudimentary intellect, and are mostly driven by their base appetites. Pneumatics have Wisdom out the wazoo are seen as being spiritually gifted; these are the rare souls known to us as sages, mystics, philosophers, and saints; that is, when they do decide to come out of their hidey-holes and show themselves to the unwashed masses. Psychics are the broad mass of humanity that makes up the middle ground between these two extremes. Really, there are many different levels and gradations that might fall within this expansive umbrella. Most people reading this post are likely going to be in the mid-to-upper tiers of the Psychic category.

The Gnostics borrowed this scheme from Plato’s conception of the soul having thee parts (and infused it with their obsession with spirit/matter dualism): Nous (Higher Mind), Thumos (Spiritedness, Passion), and Epithumia (Appetite, Survival Instincts). This is somewhat similar to the three “gunas” of Hindu Yoga philosophy: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. In Taoist internal alchemy theory there are: Shen, Qi, and Jing. So on, so forth, you get the picture.

Diversity is our strength

These overlapping theories might lead one into the uncomfortable territory of entertaining the notion that “humanity” is in fact an intractable hodgepodge of differing levels of soul-development and maturity; some individual souls are closer to the animal realm they recently emerged out of, whereas others are closer to graduating out of humanity and eventually becoming something akin to a demigod or angelic being.

The next logical step within this theory is the idea that these differing qualities manifest quite differently in different cultures and ethnic groups, when we speak of group-average traits and behaviors. After 2000 years of mono-ideologies ruling the roost, the notion of Difference has become somewhat of a scare-concept; after all, the American constitution says we were all created “equal” or something. Today, the discussion of innate difference is quite taboo in some circles. Among the educated literati of the West, the tendency of outright bunk theorizing is either to deny human group difference outright (Blank-slate Egalitarianism) or to embrace it in a gross, vulgar, materialist-reductionist manner (Race Realism); when the lowly plebes latch onto the latter theory, it tends to get even more gross and vulgar. I think the taboo fixation associated with the former comes from the sort of cognitive dissonance that is a product of the West’s obsession with Practical Intelligence; we love it and we hold the entirety of humanity to a weird standard that’s defined by almost solely by ideals associated with Intelligence-related aptitudes. When the facts on the ground report back to us that an imbalanced development of Intelligence isn’t the global norm, nor is it the be-all, end-all of human existence, Western brains start to go haywire and respond erratically (what’s known as “Reeeeeeeeeee!” in today’s memeology). Few “smart” people these days can talk about this sensitive topic without an emotional meltdown quickly ensuing.

Closing thoughts

I think this is one of those areas where Intelligence and Wisdom should certainly be harmonized. But, no, a balanced approach to discoursing on hot topics is apparently something the ancients were able to do, not us (I’m being a bit facetious here; surely, the ancients of various locales each had their own assortment of no-no topics).

Whatever one’s perspective may be on this subject matter, it’s quite apparent that there is no shortage of sup-topics to explore on the wonderfully-varied landscape of human psycho-spiritual qualities. With Intelligence and Wisdom gracefully-applied in tandem, such exploration will be something more nuanced and interesting than an IQ score, a D&D character sheet, a crude racial stereotype, or a silly Myers-Briggs personality type profile.

Some recent thoughts of mine on why occultism (psychism) is can be such a dangerous path for the type of people who exist in this age and culture:

1. The practice of Psychism devoid of Spirituality always leads to disaster, in my estimation. Many people have enough trouble navigating the material plane without any solid principles to live by; taking the same condition to the astral is going to be even worse by many degrees. It's simply too easy and common for the ignorant and egocentric to get seduced and tricked by the various classes of baddies who dwell on the subtle planes.

2. Spirituality devoid of religion (which doesn't necessarily have to be a big, organized one) offers very little in the way of an intelligible means for the average seeker to distill spiritual principles into concrete rules, precepts, guidelines, advice, ect. Yes, more mature seekers, ones who are at least somewhat self-directed, and philosophically-minded, can do this on their own (granted they are practicing an established system or method) but this doesn't really work for the untrained and clueless, which is the vast majority. I would consider myself a lower-level seeker and I've come to terms with the idea that I'm struggling quite a bit with trying to practice spirituality in a self-directed manner; even using established methods has proven to be quite the challenge. But on that last part; this is why reputable teachers and written sources are so crucial. I almost hate to admit that I find myself religion-shopping (A cringe term, I know...) once again. For most, I don't think the esoteric can be practiced safely in lieu of an exoteric doctrine or set of precepts; and if two are combined then they cannot be too symbolically dissimilar, lest the unfortunate combination might amplify the pre-existing elemental imbalances of the immature seeker.

3. The degenerative culture we now live in is one of hyper-atomized individualism; people by and large reject competence hierarchies when it comes to the qualitative sciences. Ever since the late 60s, we've been mentally programmed to think it's "cool" to see the Critical Parent archetype (which in Spirituality, is the Hierophant or Guru) as something to constantly mock, deride, and act in defiance of. And since then, any formal type of social organization (except the state or one's big corporate employer, funnily enough) scaled higher than the nuclear family is something that's to be seen as suspect. And now the family itself is under this same type of attack. So, by all of this, the notion that one must defer authority and experience in spirituality to a reputable grand master or high priest or even a humble teacher with a lot of sweat equity under his or her belt, is something to be harshly rejected; because after all, it's an affront to modern sensibilities! There's no question why the vast majority of those butting their nose into occultism these days have no clue what they are doing. In fact, they probably pride themselves on this, though likely that part takes place subconsciously. In our Brave New (Woke) World, Truth is subjective and everyone is their own pope. The legions of astral critters chomping at the bit out there in the shadowy mists must absolutely adore this arrangement.

4. With this arrangement of inverted and broken-down social hierarchies being the norm now, most attempts to organize a group of seekers along sane principles and a proper baseline respect of knowledge and skill, is bound to devolve into chorus of shrieks, howls, and general psychodrama. The so-called "alt spirituality" scene, the place where those interested in occultism tend to flock, are the kind of people who were raised by the TV, online social media, and the sort of mind-rotting garbage that passes for "education" in today's government indoctrination centers. In other words, the kids sure weren't raised by knowledgeable and caring elders, much less ones they've personally met face-to-face. As a result, when the misguided moderns and postmoderns dive head-first into things like occultism and the attempt to venerate the Old Gods, they're bound to see things like deities, spirits, spiritual powers/attainments, psychic abilities, ect. like they are pokemons or power-ups they easily grab in their favorite video game. No one is around to teach them otherwise, and even if they were, their knowledge would surely be spat upon with puerile defiance.

5. I think the relative anomaly this is JMG's Ecosophia group/commentariat , helps illustrate some of my above points. Through years of JMG's diligent comment-weeding and troll-banning, we have a nice little group of respectful and open-minded people who can respect expertise and knowledge without falling into the opposing extreme of blind guru worship or devotional madness (typical Piscean pitfalls). This I think might be good template of how spiritual order gets reestablished in the Aquarian Age. But most seekers today aren't fortunate to have found a group like this. Or they lack the character and maturity to behave courteously in such a group.

6. No matter how much I rant about how occultism today is too dangerous for most people, those curious people are going to do it anyway. And may the universe have mercy on their souls when they screw up big or just do something really stupid. I've been taught that the Gods don't really have a plan for this, or really any sort of systematic mitigation process in place. The notion that most of the Gods are uncaring is another factor that's brought on my new round of religion shopping. The Eastern religions in particular all tend to be anchored around transcendent principles that aren't dependent on mythological particulars and peculiarities from 3000 years ago.

A post from Reddit I found to be quite interesting:

Can a person who has gained their full nature and happiness through stoic philosophy exist in modern western culture that has beliefs in unregulated catharsis, constant hedonistic forms of media and a strong belief in that external values dictate happiness?

The ideal stoic would most likely if they are a honest person be problematic to their social circles. When a group is angry or sad it is often seen as apathy or even hostility when a person within that group is calm and collected.

Let’s say person gets sick and they ask a ideal stoic “Why me?” and the ideal stoic responses with “Why not you, you haven’t been born special or superior to others who had just as much chance at getting sick as you, nothing wrong or out of the ordinary happened here.” In my opinion two reactions will happen, they will thank the ideal stoic for the logical and calming advice or they will see this as apathy and be offended that they aren’t illogically taking their minor and inconsequential problems as major ones.

“A good man is not prostrated at the loss of children nor fortune. Neither is death terrible to him; and therefore lamentations over the dead should not be practised.” - Plato’s Republic

Not a work of a stoic, however, better yet a message coming one of three of the most valuable philosophers (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle) this message is not anti caring about children or to be suicidal much rather a virtuous person would want life for everyone to choose, however, this simply shows that there is a different level of reality and reason with a person who is a ideal stoic, because of this misunderstanding of the ideal stoic I argue that he/she would most likely be seen as apathetic or psychopathic.

I would like to see any problems with my reasoning.

My response:

A person who enacts Stoicism into their daily conduct and rhythms is a walking refutation of people who very easily give in to an emotion-driven mob mentality. Without even uttering a single word, such a person is a reminder of what the emotionally-incontinent person is not. And thus, projection onto the former from the latter person is a very likely reaction to occur. Especially in this current mini-era of hyper-partisanship, shrill ideological tribalism and crazy moral panics, the mere refusal to join in whatever chorus of howls is taking place at the moment immediately elicits suspicions of the stoic non-participant being "the enemy" or whatever other out-group designation the mob might assign to the person refusing to get with their program. Human herd behavior is quite primal and dangerous, and getting caught in the stampede can be deadly.

To answer your question: I do believe YES, they can certainly exist in today's culture, but they must tread carefully and be very selective about whom they interact with. Though this is true really of any era or cultural environment.

A very rough sketch of the kinds of personality types and temperaments we can render using the number 4; some of these are build upon existing models from various points in time and from places around the world.

Greek Humors:

Choleric - Hot-headed, driven, active, action-oriented, results-focused, disciplined, impatient

Sanguine - Affable, gregarious, active, action-oriented, pleasure-seeking, optimistic

Melancholic - Reserved, deliberate, pessimistic, results-focused, disciplined, withdrawn, irritable, ascetic, gratification-delaying

Phlegmatic - Laid-back, reserved, unflappable, humble, self-conscious, non-disclosing


Hindu Varna (not to be confused with hereditary classes):

Brahmin - Knowledge/wisdom-seeking, scholarly, truth-seeking, creative, gratification-delaying, risk-averse, spiritual, idealistic

Kshatriya - Honor-seeking, driven, ambitious, active, action-oriented, hot-headed self-sacrificing, risk-taking, spiritual, idealistic

Vaishya - Acquisitive, driven, ambitious, goal-oriented, shrewd business sense, results-focused, disciplined, gratification-delaying, pragmatic, risk-averse, materialistic, comfort-seeking

Shudra - Laid-back, risk-averse, unambitious, goes with the flow, humble, down to earth, habitual, materialistic, comfort-seeking, hedonistic


Classical Elements:

Fire - Hot-headed, driven, active, creative, action-oriented, aggressive, quick to anger, natural leader, impatient, expansive, sets the pace, pushy

Water - Affable, expressive, people-oriented, sentimental, diplomatic, agreeable, emotional, smooth, collaborative, consensus-oriented, charismatic, irrational, faithful

Air - Cerebral, deliberative, knowledge/wisdom-seeking, cold, calculating, scholarly, curious, arrogant, limber, impersonal, nimble, mercurial, clandestine, hubristic, presumptuous

Earth - Grounded, solid, habitual, down-to-earth, reliable, stubborn, risk-averse, change-averse, boring, conventional, lacking in creativity or novelty, repetitive


Jungian Types:

Intuition - Creative, mystical, novelty-oriented, big-picture-seeking, holistic-minded, visionary, idealistic, unconventional, idiosyncratic, qualitative, weird, crankish, neurotic

Sensing - Conventional, experiential, quantitative, grounded, solid, habitual, here-and-now, pragmatic, reliable, stubborn, change-averse, boring, lacking in creativity or novelty

Thinking - Cerebral, deliberative, experimental, cold, calculating, impersonal, challenging, scholarly, mercurial, results-oriented

Feeling - Expressive, people-oriented, sentimental, diplomatic, agreeable, emotional, collaborative, consensus-oriented, charismatic, irrational, faithful, wellbeing-oriented


Keirsey Temperaments:

Idealist - Idealistic, creative, mystical, novelty-oriented, big-picture-seeking, holistic-minded, people-oriented, sentimental, diplomatic, agreeable, unconventional, idiosyncratic, qualitative, consensus-oriented, wellbeing-oriented

Guardian - Honorable, law and order-seeking, ambitious, conventional, experiential, quantitative, grounded, solid, habitual, stubborn, change-averse, goal-oriented, disciplined, gratification-delaying, pragmatic

Rationalist - Cerebral, creative, novelty-oriented, big-picture-seeking, deliberative, cold, calculating, impersonal, challenging, scholarly, experimental

Artisan - Affable, active, action-oriented, pleasure-seeking, goes with the flow, down to earth, habitual, materialistic, novelty-seeking, hedonistic