© 1999 Travis Binion
© 1999 Association Internationale Urantia (IUA)
Travis Binion
Tennessee, USA
The purpose of this study is to make you think: to think about yourself and how you think, perhaps in a new way; to think about what it is inside you that governs your decisions. The purpose is also to provide you with a framework that you can use in thinking about your life, the acquisition of knowledge and wisdom that you have; and how that knowledge, coupled with the feeling self, and using the tools that you have been given, has led you to where you are today; and perhaps, if appropriate, to motivate you to modify the process for the future. The theory already proposed cannot be tested by scientific methodology because science no longer possesses the knowledge or the tools to correctly evaluate the effects of each of the proposed independent variables. It is only something testable by individuals through self-analysis of their own decision-making processes. A warning: while the information presented in this study represents my current beliefs on this subject, some or all of this discussion may be incorrect. On page LU 39:4.14 of The Urantia Book, you can read:
The keys of the kingdom of heaven are: sincerity, more sincerity, and more sincerity. All men have these keys. Men use them—advance in spirit status—by decisions, by more decisions, and by more decisions. The highest moral choice is the choice of the highest possible value, and always—in any sphere, in all of them—this is to choose to do the will of God.
This paragraph indicates that the most important activity we engage in on our journey to Paradise is making decisions. And not only is it the most important activity, it is also imperative that we learn to make decisions that are consistent with God’s will. We make scores of decisions every day: some trivial, seemingly insignificant; some big and life-changing; some almost automatically reactive with little thought or insight; others carefully analyzed, seriously discussed, and agonizedly argued. All are important.
What is a decision? Simply put, a decision is the result of the process of deciding. The process of deciding is either a mental action or a series of mental actions leading to a conclusion or a solution to a question, controversy or issue. Decisions range from deciding to scratch one’s back, to invest money for retirement, to have pizza for dinner, to propose marriage, to walk instead of taking a taxi, to help a stranger, to buy a book, to attend a conference, to refuse a job offer, etc., etc.
It is often not possible to predict the significance of our decisions. I would guess that each of us has stories where seemingly small and trivial decisions at the time had significant and unforeseen consequences many years later. I am alive today as a direct result of a seemingly trivial decision made over fifty years ago, that of learning to type. Should such decisions have been more deeply considered at the time they were made? Would the outcome have been different? This talk is based on the premise that it is worthwhile to understand the process of making decisions. By understanding how we decide things, we have a better chance of making decisions that are consistent with our Father’s will. It is not about analyzing decisions from the past. If you look back, you can sometimes guess why things happened the way they did. If you look forward, you simply cannot know.
I propose for your consideration the following theory: Human reactions to stimuli (decisions) are governed by a complex interplay of five factors: (1) our personality as given by God the Father, (2) our mind as given by the Infinite Spirit, (3) the current manifestation of genetic potential derived from our parents, (4) the integration of all of our life experiences, and (5) the chemical mix in our brains at the time of any decision. Furthermore, outside of the decision process (i.e., how the five factors interact), outside of whether a person is right-brained or left-brained, and outside of how long it takes to make a specific decision, all decisions are ultimately based on emotion.
First, let’s examine each of the five factors.
It should not be a shock to learn that scientists on this planet have almost no idea what personality is, from a unifying cosmological point of view. Since I certainly do not pretend to understand more than that, for the purpose of this discourse, personality is defined as “the organized pattern of an individual’s behavioral characteristics.” I think that bestowed personality is more. While admitting that “personality confuses me,” Dr. Sadler (1941) observed that “personality functions on six levels—the physical, the intellectual, the emotional, the social, the moral, and the spiritual, but when I add them together, I find in the resulting totality of personality so much that was not observably pre-existent in those component factors that I am inclined to become a Gestaltist and conclude that the parts derive their meaning from the whole—that the whole is something more than the sum of the parts.”
We can only discern aspects of personality today by observing behavior. We observe that our behavior changes as we learn from our mistakes. So how can personality be “the only unchanging reality” of our experience? Is that attribute of personality wrong? The answer lies in the perspective of the individual. If we analyze personality as a Divine Counselor does, we see a potential — an organized pattern originating in Paradise — that has been uniquely bestowed by the Father on each individual. As the individual experiences, the personality potential becomes manifest in a slowly changing symphony of personality realization. In the process of making decisions, personality as manifest often “unifies the other associated factors of individuality.” We observe the unification of our unique characteristics as behavior and, probably incorrectly, call it personality.
There is a statement in The Urantia Book: When [personality] bestowed upon evolutionary material creatures, it causes spirit to strive for the mastery of energy-matter through the mediation of mind. [LU 112:0.6]. I would say that “energy-matter mastery” in this context refers to our genetic inheritance — all those traits we acquire as a product of the blending of the genetic code we received from our ancestors. Mastery — change in behavior — is achieved by voluntary decisions inspired by the fragment of our Father indwelling the human mind.
2. THE MIND: The thinking, perceiving, and feeling mechanism of the human organism [LU 0:5.8] [The mind] … is a bestowal of the Daughters of the Conjoint Actor, the Divine Ministers of the evolving universes [LU 3:1.8]
It should also not be a surprise that human scientists have almost no idea what mind is. The Urantia Book reveals mind as a mechanism, a tool. A tool that in conjunction with the brain enables us to think (analyze), perceive (understand), and sense (evaluate) the universe we experience. The mind bestowed upon us by the Mother Spirit of Nebadon is not unique. The human organisms of Nebadon all have the same mind, the same tool. Scientists also have no idea how thoughts emerge from the mind/brain system. Perhaps the reason for this lack of understanding is that mind is not a manifestation of material energy. Rather, mind is a phenomenon connoting the activity and presence of the living ministry [of the Mother Spirit], in addition to varied energy systems; and this is true on all levels of intelligence. In personality, mind ever intervenes between spirit and matte… [LU 0:6.8] So on all levels of intelligence, the omnipresent ministry of the Infinite Spirit is required for intelligence to function. The thing that makes our thoughts unique to ourselves is our mind/brain system interacting with the other factors we consider, not mind itself.
3. THE GENETIC CONTRIBUTION: «We can discuss all causes, whether proper or fortuitous, whether potential or actual; for example, the cause of a house being built is either ‘the builder himself’ or ‘the fact that the builder builds’» (Aristotle, 350 BC)
The science of genetics emerged in the 1900s with the rediscovery of Gregor Mendel’s work on hereditary traits as if each were a separate and independent unit. Geneticists have accepted for nearly a century that our physical characteristics are built into the genetic code we receive as a result of the union of egg and sperm that creates our body. Recent evidence has linked several diseases to genetic causes, such as schizophrenia, tuberculosis, malaria, various forms of cancer, migraine, etc. Many rare diseases are caused by recessive genes, and a few by dominant genes.
Philosophically, it seems correct to argue that no matter how it is acquired — from sperm, or egg, or a mutation of both — our individual genetic code contains the potential for everything we can become as humans, the potential for all our human capabilities. How could we acquire them otherwise? There is no other mechanism, either known or postulated, for acquiring them. As we live our lives, we manifest and hone the potential by doing things, by learning, by practicing, and by experimenting. If we work hard enough and practice enough, anyone with normal physical abilities can learn to play the piano — maybe not very well, but play nonetheless. But no matter how much we flap our arms and legs, we cannot fly by our own efforts without some mechanical apparatus, simply because we do not have the genetic potential to use the divine physical laws of aerodynamics to fly.
Today behaviorists believe that they have found evidence that certain behavioral characteristics have a genetic cause. Studies of the behavior of twins who were separated at a very young age have led scientists to speculate that more than 50 percent, perhaps as much as 80 percent, of the aspects of our behavior that arise from nonconscious processes may be genetically based. Whatever the percentage, it becomes clear that, unless we exercise our prerogative of free will, many of our decisions are genetically influenced. As an example, I have several behavioral tendencies that I inherited from my father. As I learned about them, I began to dislike them in him, and abhor them in myself. As a result, I have to consciously suppress those tendencies to prevent them from being active in myself.
For the purpose of this study, experience is defined as a particular occurrence of personally encountering, observing, or experiencing something that is registered in the mind/brain system. There are three types of experiences: (1) those that are the direct result of decisions, e.g., the pain we have from eating the last piece of pizza; (2) those that happen to us in passing, through no fault of our own, e.g., the death of a friend, or communication from our Thought Adjuster; and (3) those that are a combination of the first two, e.g., the unintended consequences of our decisions. No matter which type we encounter, our reactions to those experiences are always a result of the decisions we make. Our reactions to experiences literally shape our lives. By decisions we move from one experience to another, some of them deliberate, and some of them not. None of us has ever had an experience that was not permitted by one or more of our decisions - even the death of a friend is the death of a friend, because we had decided to be friends with him. It is almost an ordered cycle. We decide in some way what we experience, and the result of those experiences, through analysis and learning, influences subsequent decisions in a continuous process of reaction. Experience allows us to manifest our potentials. Experience allows the soul to grow in a particular way.
Something curious happens inside the brain when we experience something. Research over the past 30 years indicates that the two sides of the brain are different in their ability to elaborate experiences (Gazzaniga, 1998). Typically, the left brain is the analytical, cognitive side. The right side is responsible for the emotional and intuitive aspects of thinking. The left brain’s output is expressed in language. The right brain’s output is expressed in drawings and feelings. Although in a normal brain information is passed between the two sides, they are often not in concert. Most people seem to remember much of what they experience. However, when questioned, they often report things that were not truly a part of their experience. There have been several studies of eyewitnesses that indicate how such distortions occur. The evidence suggests that the left brain is responsible for these false reports. Research suggests that the left brain is always searching for meaning in events, creating order and reason, often when there is none - thus arriving at the wrong memory. The right-hand side provides a much more accurate report, but since it has no language capability, we have difficulty obtaining it. This is a very important aspect of the decision-making process. I will return to this point below.
5. BRAIN CHEMISTRY: There are three groups of mind design as regards contact with spiritual matters. This classification…refers primarily to glandular chemistry, more particularly to the organization of certain glands comparable to the pituitary bodies. Races on some worlds have one gland, on others two, such as the Urantians… This differential chemical endowment clearly influences inberent imagination and spiritual receptivity [LU 48:7.7]
While Revelation indicates that gland secretions affect imagination and spiritual receptivity, more and more scientists are isolating chemicals in the brain that seem to be responsible for specific feelings or moods. A class of amino acids called neuropeptides appears capable of causing specific moods, memories, emotional states, behaviors—including the ability to concentrate—and feelings such as restlessness, depression, schizophrenia, even fear of the dark. Perhaps the most famous of these are endorphins, opiates produced by the body, which cause a whole host of euphoric feelings. Many among us have observed and even experienced how alcohol, perhaps by modifying neuropeptides, can affect judgment. Many have observed and experienced the effects that the menstrual cycle has on women. Recently, so-called “male menopause” has been identified as the cause of behavioral changes in men. In both cases, variations in the hormonal components of the body’s chemistry influence perceptions of experience, and therefore, our ability to make decisions.
6. EMOTIONS: “It is not because the truth is too hard to see that we make mistakes. Yes, it may lie on the surface, but we make mistakes because the easiest and most comfortable course for us is to seek insight where it agrees with our emotions — especially the egoistic emotions.” (Solzhenitsyn, 1973)
There is no doubt that we are emotional beings—even those who suppress the expression of emotions. We have all experienced situations in which strong emotions seem to have triggered or influenced behavior. It is not my purpose to review the various theories about the sources and influences of emotions. It is enough to recognize that emotions seem to have a genetic and chemical component and are triggered (either internally or externally) by experiential situations. Most of the time we have a pretty good idea of the emotions we experience, if we care to find out.
A Course in Miracles states that there are only two basic emotions: love and fear. It follows that all positive emotions are based on love; all negative emotions on fear. Since we are free-willed beings, we have the ability, if we choose to use it, not only to control the expression of emotions but also to switch from one to the other. We have all done this; for example, in deciding not to be angry (the fear-based decision) and in deciding to forgive (the love-based decision) the source of our anger. I think it is relatively easy to decide which basic emotional state we are experiencing at any moment. If you accept the definition of love as “the desire to do good to others” and examine your attitude to determine whether it is outwardly focused on doing good, you are in a loving emotion. On the contrary, you are experiencing a fear-based emotion. There is a trap in that assessment. We often view giving a person what they want (based on the fear that they won’t love me back) as a loving act, when in reality, giving them what they need is the loving thing to do.
I offer the view that people do not deliberately make a decision that they perceive to not be in their best interest. Even those altruistic decisions to help others at our expense are perceived to be in our best interest, i.e., they satisfy a psychological lack. We evaluate our own “truth” as an emotional reaction—it “feels” right. No matter how much information has been integrated into a logical evaluation to arrive at the true conclusion, if it does not “feel” right, we are uneasy with the conclusion. It must be remembered that feelings are a right brain function that lacks verbal expression (a left brain function). We always act on the basis of our own perception of truth (as close to the truth as we can discern). We determine what truth is at any given moment. When we understand God’s truth, we can automatically act according to His will. Since for the most part we have an incomplete understanding of His truth, we act imperfectly. To the extent that our truth comes closer to His, our actions (decisions) become more in harmony with His will. So how you feel emotionally about things is extremely important. By keeping logically deduced evaluations consistent with emotional evaluation based on love, we have a better chance of making decisions that will be in harmony with the will of God. Action is the only channel through which feeling, purpose, is allowed to be expressed, to be experienced. Fortunately, Jesus has told us, “For entrance into the kingdom of heaven, motive is what counts. My Father looks into the hearts of men and judges by their inner desires and sincere intentions.” [LU 140:3.19]
ABSTRACT: «It is clear that all meaningful verbal structures are verbal imitations of that elusive psychological and physiological process known as thought, a process stumbling through emotional entanglements, sudden irrational convictions, involuntary flashes of insight, rationalized prejudices, and barriers of panic and inertia, to finally reach a completely incommunicable insight.» (Frye, 1957)
I would say that our entire potential as humans is embodied in our bestowed personality and genetic makeup. These potentials are manifested in us as persons by the knowledge gained through experience. Our manifested potential and experiential knowledge are brought together by the personality using our mind/brain system which, with the influence of the God fragment within us, creates our true self: the morontia soul. The only variables in this process are our experiences and chemistry; the influence of the two we can assess by self-analysis. Each of these factors combines in a complex way with the “emotional” self and causes the decisions we make. For our decisions to have the highest value, they must be in concert with the will of our Father — a will that is always based on Love.
Always will actuals be opening up new avenues of the realization of hitherto impossible potentials—every human decision not only actualizes a new reality in human experience but also opens up a new capacity for human growth. [LU 115:3.16]
Aristóteles. (350 a.d. J.C.). Physics (R.P. Hardie y R.K. Gaye, Traductores) Redwood City, CA: Great Minds Library
The Foundation for Inner Peace. (1975) A Course in Miracles. Farmingdale, NY: Foundation for Inner Peace.
Frye, N. (1957) Formal Phase: symbol as image Anatomy of Criticism, Second Essay. En Microsoft Office Professional & Bookshelf [CD-ROM]: Microsoft Corporation (1994).
Gazzaniga, M. (1998, July). Scientific American.
Sadler, W. (1941). The Evolution of the Soul, Chicago: William F. Ayres Foundation Lecture series, Vol. 2, No. 5.
Solzhenitsyn, A. (1972). Peace and Violence. En L. Labedz (Redactor), Soľbenityyn: A Documentary Record. Londres.