THE SPIRIT DIMENSION OF META

PART I

Meta-Land is the land of spirit. That’s why the four meta-dimensions of Neuro-Semantics are also the “spirit” dimension. And while this involves what we call philosophy and religion— Neuro-Semantics is not religion or philosophy. Neuro-Semantics is a model of human functioning, it is a model that models how we operate and experience our life with an eye on developing the processes and tools for mobilizing resources to facilitate full self-actualization so that we can perform our highest meanings.

If that’s what Neuro-Semantics is about, how does it relate to “spirit?” What does it mean that there is a “spirit” dimension in the higher levels of our mind-body system? Over the years, I have received a great many questions about Neuro-Semantics and the “spiritual” dimension of life. In this and the next Reflections, I’ll attempt to address some of these questions.

Modeling “Spirit” The experience that we call “spirit” and “spiritual” is obviously part of subjective experience.

Yet, what does this mean? How should we think about “spirit” and “spiritual?” If we were to model “spirit” as in the human spirit or the qualities and experience of being “spiritual,” how would we go about it? What is the Neuro-Semantic take on this dimension of life?

Since “spirit” and “spiritual” are nominalizations, noun-like terms that falsely imply some kind of thing, then what are the actual processes (verbs) that we are referring to? Similar to the nominalizations, “mind” and “thoughts,” when we de-nominalize these terms we come back to the non-specific process of “thinking” which we can then specify as representing, editing an image, creating a context by setting a frame-of-reference, etc.

In a general way, the idea of spirit refers to that which is higher in us— the meta-levels of our mind-body experiences. This is one of its meanings, something that is “above and beyond.” And where does this come from? The simplest explanation is that we have a sense of spirit based upon our ability to transcend to higher levels of awareness. We call this higher sense of ourselves spirit. Neuro-Semantically, we are of course describing the experience of reflexivity— reflecting back onto ourselves with additional thoughts-and-feelings. So it is in the process of reflecting back, stepping back, meta-stating, rising up and applying our mental-and-emotional responses to — that creates our sense of transcendence and spirit.

If we are biologically wired with levels in our brain anatomy (which we have) which, in turn, allows us to experience reflexivity so that we can step back from ourselves (in our mind- emotions) and transcend our current experience and move to higher levels of awareness—then “spirituality” is part and parcel of the human experience. This makes it a legacy for all of us, which probably explains why all humans are “spiritual” and have to invent some “religion” to explain this transcendence. Most literally “spirit” means “breath” hence, in-spirited, hence energy.

It is in this sense that all of Meta-Land, all of the meta-dimensions, is what we might call “the spiritual dimension” of life. Here we experience the higher life above and beyond mere survival. Here we move into concepts, meanings, and understandings of things “not seen, not heard, not felt, not smelt, not tasted.” We are at a conceptual level that defines and qualifies our “spirit.”

And these higher frames generate our attitude, which, of course, is another use of “spirit.” Sometimes, when we talk about someone, we say things like, “What kind of a spirit does he have?” “What’s her spirit today? Is she still down?” Spirit in this sense works as a synonym for attitude, for a person’s disposition of mind or of emotion. We even use this language to describe a group attitude, a cultural attitude. We speak about a victimhood spirit, a depressed spirit (disspirited), an inspired spirit (full of spirit, inspirited), a joyful spirit, a playful spirit, etc. We even talk about the “atmosphere” of a business, home, group in terms of spirit. “I like the spirit of that restaurant.” “They have a good spirit there.”

As we use our reflexivity to transcend our current state and include it within a higher attitude, belief, perception, understanding, value, etc., the “spirit” dimension of Meta enables us to ask the “spiritual” or existential (existing) questions: Who am I? Where did I come from? Where am I going? What is this all about? What’s the meaning of life? Asking such existential questions has been the domain of religion, philosophy, and psychology. Here we enter into the semantic states of “time,” “meaning,” “purpose,” “destiny,” and a hundred other abstractions. And it is regarding these abstractions that we develop various beliefs and belief systems.

Spirit and “Time” “Time” as another nominalization does not exist except in meta-land. We create “time” as we represent things that have happened, things that are happening, and that will happen. This gives us a flow of events “through time” and so a time line or time channel. Then, as we step back, reflexively contemplate “time” itself, we ask additional temporal questions, the big questions. When did it all start? How? By whom? These are also spiritual questions. Only we human beings are able to enter “time” as thoroughly as a “spiritual” dimension.

Maslow used another facet of time to define spiritual. He said “spiritual” means seeing life “under the aspect of eternity.” It involves being able to take a long-term perspective of life and actions. Animals, who do not live in “time,” do not do this. Nor do children. Nor do people who only live in the concrete world. It is an unique experience for us as we rise above the immediate, here-and-now and think in terms of what shall be.

The Sacred We also use of the words “spirit” and “spiritual” to convey the conceptual idea of the special, the sacred, the holy, the sense of awe, the feeling of being touched by something that’s more than the human, what we create. This takes us back to the original meaning of the world holy, it literally refers to what is whole, integrated, all-of-one-piece, not dichtomized. Holy refers to what is whole, well, and healthy. Psychologically, it is operating fully, being a“fully functioning” person (Carl Rogers).

So what is the spiritual life is the life of love, compassion, empathy, and care. It is the life of self-awareness, self-control, and self-discipline (emotional intelligence). It is the life of proactivity, responsibility, and accountability. It is the life of openness, honesty, and truth. It is the life of vulnerability, forgiveness, and healing. It is the life of abundance, giving, and extending oneself for the benefit of others. It is the life of goodness, altruism, and virtue. In all of this, are we in the realm of psychology or theology? Or, could it be both?

In Neuro-Semantics, the “spiritual” life is the higher or meta-life. It is the life of the grown-up or mature person who thinks in an integrated, holistic, and systemic way about things. The spiritual life is one of transcendence, peak experiences, and higher values. It is about being able to embrace the unknown and mystery. It is to feel appreciation and gratitude, to embrace the creaturely feeling of being limited, ignorant about so much, humble, to stand in awe before the mysterium tremendum.

To be spiritual is to be god-like in accepting life and reality as it is. It is the sense that life matters, that it is ultimately meaningful, that the universe is friendly (Albert Einstein), that there is good and evil; healthy and unhealthy, that we are ultimate responsible for our choices and actions, to experience self-transcendence in a peak experience. Theologian Paul Tillich defined spiritual and religion as “one’s ultimate concerns,” and “concern with ultimate concerns.”

In all of this, “spiritual” is part and parcel of being human. So, the question is not whether we are “spiritual” beings in search of meaning, purpose, identity, and love. The question is rather the quality of our spirit and of our spirituality. Is our spirit healthy, beautiful and clean? Or is it unhealthy, ugly, and distorted?

In all of this, I have not spoken about “religion” at all— about the specific beliefs and belief systems that characterize the historical religions which have emerged to address our spirit and spiritual quest. So here is the Neuro-Semantic distinction— “spirit” and “spiritual” is built into our biology and nature. We are spiritual to the extent that we can “go meta,” use our self- reflexive consciousness to enter into the higher life. “Religion” inevitably follows as our beliefs and belief systems about our spirituality. It is how we form and construct our understandings and maps about what we experience.

The next Meta Reflections will explore beliefs, ethics, values, and meaning as part and parcel of the “spirit” dimension.