New Age, Human Thriving, and the Good Inner Self

Will love conquer all? Well, it depends on how you define “love.” One anonymous New Ager, reflecting the thoughts of many others, stated:

• Since this inner nature is good or neutral rather than bad, it is best to bring it out and to encourage it rather than to suppress it. If it is permitted to guide our life, we grow healthy, fruitful, and happy.

The way we regard human nature determines how we address human problems. If we regard human nature as basically good and loving, we will gently try to help humans bring forth and accept their natural and good impulses.

David Spangler adds:

• “The New Age approach is to look at the object, people and the events of our lives and to say ‘you are sacred. In you and with you I can find the sacramental passages that reconnect me to the wholeness of creation.’ It is then to ask ourselves what kind of culture, what kind of institutions – be they political, economic, artistic, educational, or scientific – we need that can honor that universal sacredness.”

For Spangler, “sacredness” doesn’t mean that we are created in the image of God but that we remain fundamentally good at the core. And we bring forth humanity’s good nature by affirming their “sacredness.” If we are told we are sacred, perhaps we will begin to act that way.

But if we are basically good and sacred, why is it that we can’t treat others in a loving manner? Why wars, jealousy, hatred, and ethnic cleaning? A common answer is that suffer from a lack of self-esteem. According to New Age guru, Shakti Gawain, we have failed to learn how to trust in ourselves:

• “When we consistently suppress and distrust our intuitive knowingness, looking instead for external authority, validation, and the approval of others, we give our personal power away…Every time you don’t trust yourself and don’t follow your inner truth, you decreased your aliveness and your body will reflect this with a loss of vitality, numbness, pain, and eventually physical disease.”

However, it often seems that those with the highest levels of self-trust or self-confidence can be the most inhumane of people. It is also possible that the attempt to trust in ourselves comes at the expense of understanding ourselves. Perhaps we shouldn’t be affirming ourselves but examining ourselves. Perhaps we do not measure up to the self-trust that Gawain wants us to adopt. Perhaps instead, we need to learn how to be scrupulously honest with ourselves.

Instead, according to another branch of the New Age, our problems derive from our inhumane institutions. In Understanding the Times, David Noebel explains:

• Every humanist psychologist believes the secret to better mental health lies in getting in touch with the unspoiled, inner self.  When man strips himself of all the evil forced on him by society, he will become a positive agent with virtually unlimited potential…The three major assumptions of Humanist psychology are: man is good by nature and therefore perfectible; society and its social institutions are responsible for man’s evil acts; and mental health can be restored to everyone who gets in touch with his inner ‘good’ self.

How then do we get in touch with our “inner ‘good’ self? The outer layers of social conditioning and acculturation have to be peeled back. How? Humanist psychologists use a number of techniques to affirm and love the client through empathy, reflective listening, and unconditional positive regard for each individual, whatever their conduct.

However, while these affirmative techniques often bring about positive and immediate responses, it is questionable whether they succeed in bringing out the good inner self. Perhaps instead they are temporarily effective in manipulating the desired response from the client.

There is also another problem when we believe in the good inner self. We tend to dismiss all other ways of treating others, especially treating others punitively or critically.

Several humanistic women have confidently informed me that any form of punishment is barbaric. After all, if the tender, gentle, and loving response is all that is necessary to bring out the optimal response, then prison and censure become entirely unnecessary, even inhumane.

I asked one of these very lovely and personable women if she thought that if the Allies had just been more empathetic with Hitler, using more reflective listening, they would have been able to tap into his “good inner self,” and WWII would have been averted.

She answered, “Yes.” I was troubled by her revealing response. I was hoping that she would admit that other responses might have proved more fruitful with Hitler, namely a speedy military response.

Wisdom requires discernment. It recognizes that one size does not fit all. It sees that different responses are needful with different people in different situations.

Life is multi-textured, and it requires wisdom to recognize the complexities. Sometimes empathy will not work with a rebellious child. Sometimes firmness and punishment are required. As a probation officer, I often noticed that my younger probationers would respond positively and respectfully to my firmness, as if they recognized that they needed it, and that I was someone who cared about them enough to set firm limits.

The New Age blames institutions and even organized religion. However, our institutions are made up of individuals, each having a “good inner self.” How then is it that our institutions have become so utterly corrupt? We can’t blame other institutions. After all, humanity pre-dated the institutions we created. The answer must be sought at a deeper level.

Perhaps instead, the problem resides in all of us, in our adversity to the truth. Jesus put it this way:

• And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.” (John 3:19-21)

If the problem resides in each one of us, changing institutions will do little to correct it. Instead, we need an answer that goes to the very core of the problem. Perhaps we must be born again. The Prophet Ezekiel prophesied that God would do this very thing:

• And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God. And I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses. And I will summon the grain and make it abundant and lay no famine upon you. (Ezekiel 36:26-29)

Proof of God’s Existence Based on Human Exceptionalism

If we want to affirm the human values, rights, dignity, and equality that we in the West so esteem, we must also affirm the existence of God. Consequently, if we reject God, we also reject these values. Here’s why:

1. Each human has dignity, equality, and unalienable value.

2. Without God, there can be no human dignity, equality, or unalienable value.

3. God exists. 

Premise #1:  This is a premise almost universally accepted in the West. We believe that all should have equal protections under the law, despite the surpassing wealth and influence of some. The Bill of Rights had been based upon this assumption of equality. Our Declaration of Independence provided this assumption - that all are created equal and endowed with unalienable rights.  We also intuitively believe that humans deserve to be treated with respect and accorded rights consistent with our humanity. The denial of these truths leads to regarding and treating our fellow humans as animals.

Premise #2:  This Declaration emphasized the fact that these unalienable rights find their basis in a God who had created humanity to be like Him. Therefore, are value is somewhat commensurate with God’s, and we must treat each other accordingly!  Instead, if government granted our unalienable rights, government could easily terminate them.

Our human dignity is based upon the fact that we are god-like even if we have corrupted ourselves. We therefore have an obligation to treat our fellow humans with dignity, even if they have acted in undignified ways. Consistent with this, psychotherapeutic practice requires that we treat the clients with unconditional-positive-regard, as if they possess an unalienable dignity. If they don't, they will lose their client, since they too have an intuition that they must be treated with dignity.

Pragmatic concerns alone cannot suffice to retain these concepts of dignity and equality:

• When we regard our fellow humans materially (rather than god-like), we cannot perceive any equality or even dignity. Instead, we observe differences - that some are better, nicer, more educated, and contribute to our welfare. Meanwhile, others present society with a high cost. Therefore, from a materialistic point of view, there can be no equality. Instead, some deserve respect and others do not.

• It is not enough to treat others with respect and equality for merely pragmatic reasons. It will make us schizoid. Imagine the therapist who knows he must treat his client with dignity, while he doesn’t believe that client has any dignity. It would therefore be nothing less than manipulative and hypocritical to treat him with respect.

• Human history provides overwhelming testimony that pragmatism alone will not create the better society. Instead, self-interest will reign.

Besides, if we are just another member of the animal kingdom, albeit advanced, any belief in human exceptionalism will eventually erode. Can we raid our neighbors frig at will as we pluck an apple from a tree or extract milk from a cow? Of course not! Should eating other life forms – lettuce and radishes - be criminalized? If so, it would lead to the death of humanity. Must we maintain human exceptionalism? If not, we cannot maintain humanity.

There is only one way to preserve the dignity, equality and unalienable value of all humanity - by recognizing that we are the special creation and the children of God! If human exceptionalism exists, so too must God!

P.Z. Myers, Human Life, and Bodily Fluids

Where our thinking goes – especially our thinking about who we are as humans - so too will go society.

• Last week the Telegraph reported that the remains of over 15,000 aborted babies have been incinerated as clinical waste over the past two years in the UK, with some of them having been used in “waste-to-energy” plants that produce power for heat:

In response to this news, evolutionist P.Z. Myers wrote:

• I’m not in the least disturbed by the fact that patients were not consulted on how their dead fetus was disposed. When you go in for an operation, are you concerned about what is done with the bloody towels afterwards, or how your appendix or tonsils or excised cyst are treated? Did you think there was some special room deep in the bowels of the institution where they were reverently interred, attended by a weeping chaplain who said a few kind words over your precious bodily fluids? Nope. They’re sealed up in a bag, dealt with according to appropriate protocols for medical waste, and incinerated. Get over it.

Myers refuses to acknowledge that there is a profound distinction between human life and body tissue, and this confusion will inevitably lead to profound moral and legal changes. It already has.

If there is nothing sacred about the pre-born, then there is nothing sacred about the post-born. As a result, certain lives are now considered expendable – the elderly, the mentally or physically impaired, and other social undesirables, mere “bodily fluids.” After all, if the pre-born are mere “bodily fluids,” why should these others be anything more than that!

And do not think that this slow erosion of human dignity will stop at voluntary euthanasia. If the elderly are nothing more than a sack of bodily fluids, how long will this society justify designating valuable resources for their care? Not long!

We are entering into a fearful new world in which our value is socially – not divinely – constructed, resting upon the whim or good favor of the social moment to determine our value. This value might rest upon some consideration of our intelligence, productivity, sexual vitality or even our party affiliation.

However, value can no longer rest upon the notion that we are all created in the image of God and consequently possess certain unalienable rights. Instead, secular materialism will find that it cannot sustain such a notion of equality. Why not? Materialism cannot provide a basis for equality. From a physical point of view, we are not equal. Some are educated and productive; others are not. Some are healthy and strong; others are not. Some are regarded as a credit to society; others are seen as an unwanted cost. What then becomes of our notion of “equal rights” if there is no true equality? Why should they remain equal? Perhaps those deemed with greater value should have more rights?

We may superficially affirm equality or something akin to “unconditional positive regard” (UPR), but it will become no more than a manipulative and disingenuous tool without the necessary rational and divine underpinning. The psychologist might continue to treat her client with UPR, but as a product of her society, she will increasingly see UPR as an insincere attempt at psychological manipulation. Eventually, cynicism will eat away at its core.

If human life is no more than bodily tissue, then it is just a matter of time until our morals and laws reflect this belief. Our hospital incinerators are just the beginning.

Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR) and what it should Look Like

The following is a presentation I will be making at a non-Christian discussion group on the subject of the "unconditional positive regard." The psychotherapist Carl Rogers had popularized this terminology, insisting that our relationships required that we regard the other with a positive regard that transcended their performance or any other material consideration: 

UPR provides a vital component for meaningful relationships. However, it is not the only component.

I had worked for the New York City Department of Probation for 15 years and enjoyed  relationships with many of my probationers. I tried to show them that they were important and valued. To demonstrate this, I’d offer to make them a coffee or hot chocolate when they’d enter my office. I also made it clear that I was willing to take the time to listen and provide feedback.

I hope that they were able to see that my regard for them wasn’t merely a manipulation to get them to comply and reform so that I could feel that I was doing a good job. I genuinely regarded them as precious human beings despite their poor moral and vocational performances and the pain that they had caused others. As God’s highest creation, humanity bears a moral and intellectual resemblance to our Maker, and I feel that God had enabled me to see this resemblance in them, despite the destructiveness of their lives.

However, there was also another reason that I could see a different side of them – a side that transcended their dismal performance. I knew what God had done for me to lift me out of shame, self-contempt and dysfunctionality, and I knew that He could do the same for them. He might not make them all into Harvard grads, but He could convert their lives into something beautiful.

My God had enabled me to accept myself despite my many failings, and this enabled me to also accept others, even to be drawn to them. Consequently, instead of running from them in disgust and contempt, I found I was drawn to them, wanting to bring out the best in them, despite my own long list of inadequacies.

I began to see them through the eyes of my God, who pleads with broken people in this manner:

• "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” (Matthew 11:28-29)

As a counseling student, I had learned about the therapeutic necessity of UPR. However, for a long time, it was no more for me than a useful technique to elicit positive responses from the client. I acted out the UPR but didn’t really believe that someone who looked so negative and pathetic to me could actually be an unconditional positive. Therefore, I didn’t believe that all of my clients were worthy of my positive regard.

I also observed psychotherapists as they used this technique in a counseling setting. However, they were not sincere about it. I knew what they really thought because we would have professional processing sessions during which we’d discuss the cases.

Consistent with their materialistic assumptions, they considered the counselee a basket case. Therefore, for them, UPR was no more than a necessary manipulation, which they cynically used as one of many tools. Meanwhile, there were other therapists who were genuinely compassionate. For them, UPR complemented their natural empathetic inclinations, although they might have had difficulty philosophically justifying UPR.

However, UPR should never become an excuse to enable or indulge immoral behavior. Instead, it was because I regarded my probationers with UPR, that I also regarded them as responsible moral beings, culpable before the law. Consequently, I also confronted and even threatened them. From the start, I laid out the law for them – their conditions of probation – explaining to them that I would not hesitate to send them back to court if they failed to fulfill their conditions. I feel that I dignified them by taking the stance that they were responsible for their conduct, and this was something about which I never received an argument! However, I assured them that, if they were trying to go in the right direction that I’d be there for them, and if they weren’t, I’d be posed against them.

UPR doesn’t mean that relationships should only be about soft-fuzzies. There are objective behavioral standards to which we must conform. This is because there is an objective moral reality supported by a righteous creator God. Without such a God, we cannot have coherent moral or legal standards. Otherwise, these standards would then be no more than socially created, mutable, moral conventions – relative standards to which, in good conscience, I wouldn’t be able to require anyone to follow.

However, this raises an important philosophical question – “How can we regard someone positively and negatively at the same time?” In order to reconcile this paradox, there has to be two different perspectives – a material, performance-based perspective and a transcendent perspective. With only the material perspective, we can only judge someone based upon performance. With only the transcendent perspective, we cannot engage their behaviors as we must.

Occasionally, I’d receive a report that my probationer was harassing his girlfriend. I would have to take action in a way that wouldn’t compromise my principles - UPR, justice and the need to protect the innocent. Happily, there is no essential conflict between these principles. If I regard the probationer with UPR, this doesn’t mean that I can’t criticize or punish their behavior. If I regard them positively, I will speak the truth to them and hold them accountable. We should not give into the temptation to regard them as a mere product of their environment. This is to demean them.

If they’ve done wrong, they require a punitive response, not only for the good of society but also for their own good. I found that once they understood that I was trying to be fair, I rarely experienced any hostility from them. In fact, the younger ones would welcome a firm disciplinary hand.

I had derived a deep joy in doing this work. There was partly because I believed in what I was doing. I believed in justice, and I also believed in the value of the people who had been committed to my oversight.

True UPR requires humility – accurately seeing our inadequate selves apart from our denials and self-promotion. If I regard myself as a superior human being, it becomes almost impossible to not look down on others. But the Lord had painfully revealed to me that if it wasn’t for His protection, I could have easily ended up either behind bars or as a suicide statistic. This self-realization changes the way we regard others.