Nick
So what you’re saying is that anything that is positive in nature, or what is sometimes called a “higher vibration” comes internally and projects outward, where anything that is negative, or of lower vibration is actually projecting inward, because it originates as an external force?

Jake
Exactly, though one has to be very cautious in how one interprets the idea of external and internal. When we use these terms we must always remember that everything is actually internal, that there is nothing out there but some form of a projection of ourselves. That is not to say as that one should not be careful crossing the street.

Nick
Yes, (laughs) I’m always getting entangled in this. The idea that the outside world is just a shadow, a sort of combination of an ethereal collection that we create and is inside us but ungraspable as trying to hold onto a particular drop of rain in a tempest. And yet if we do not stay aware that shadow has such force it can consume the very mind that created it.

Jake
Actually you don’t sound that entangled. You’ve got it exactly right that the world out there is a force, one that plays on us. And maybe the better way to see it is as not a negative force, a lower vibration, but as a neutral one. You might then ask, why we experience this as negative. This is becuase any force acting on us becomes, as in the physical nature of the universe, a force moving in the opposite direction. Because we are moving on our own path, the higher vibration forces internally feel the external forces as oposed to it. And here we start to see answers to philosophical questions that have been bantered about since the beginning of human history.

Nick
So we can define now the basic nature of humanity? I think you've had a few too many Jake. Though if you are saying that we can definitively define the nature which people are born with, I'd like to hear what you have to say. Can you make a concluding argument of philosophers like John Locke’s and his idea that we are born as “Tabula Rasa” or clean slate, and Rousseau’s treatise that we are naturally good?

Jake
Yes I think seeing how we define the difference between internal and external forces does help us define the nature of human existence, how we come into the world and then what becomes of our nature. But both Locke and Rousseau are trying to interpret the internal and the external as one. They created these interpretations in relationship to the physical world as they had learned to see it through the teachings of the schools they built their houses in. This schooling is at its base rooted in the ideas of mathematics as the Greeks and before them as the Sumerians taught them. Within that format, one can interpret the self as fitting into a world that is real and logical. But since then Western thinkers have been making great discoveries about the “real” world both externally and internally.

Nick
Are you talking about the ideas of celestial mechanics? Concepts like internal space, anti matter, black holes?

Jake
Well yes, those are external discoveries. We now know that what we thought was tangible, a constant, is actually much more fluid then we ever imagined. But I’m also talking about the internal discoveries. That our mind is many minds is a new discovery too.

Nick
You mean the conscious and the sub-conscious? But I don’t think earlier thinkers were unaware of the two sides of the mind, they just called them the real world and the dream world.

Jake
That’s absolutely true, and it’s in that truth that we see the nature of how these new definitions help lead us to that greater understanding of our nature. What was seen as dream, some sort of fantasy or fear being played out in the ehteral world of sleep, now becomes the battle between the internal self with the external world.