by Diane Brandon


Page 2 of 11

We find ourselves perched on the "cusp" of a new era, or so we're told -- a "new age."  A whole new era will be ushered in -- with the emphasis on newness.


Part of that newness, I believe, will be new thinking, a breaking of the old, the creation of the new.  New thinking, new forms.  But are we still caught up in the old thinking?  Are we marching into the "New Age" dragging our old thinking along?


We talk a lot about wholism -- "wholistic health," "wholistic living."  And I feel that wholism is a form that we are inexorably moving towards, an integral part of the "New Age."  But what does "wholism" really mean and what are the implications of wholistic being?


Well, obviously the term wholistic comes from the word "whole."  And a whole is the combination or total of its parts.  "Wholeness" is considered to be desirable:  we strive "to be whole."


Unfortunately the age and culture we live in has heavily swayed us against wholeness.  We separate and compartmentalize, rather than uniting.  We live in an age of specialization, splitting off parts of ourselves and earning a living doing one thing, thereby neglecting our other talents and interests.


We separate and reject, rather than unite and accept.  We compete, rather than cooperate.  We fear and push away that which is feared, rather than accept and understand.  We judge, rather than forgive and accept.  We talk about dualities of good vs. evil, light vs. dark, rather than look at the whole, which is composed of both, and combinations and gradations thereof.  We engage in simplistic labeling and thinking, rather than deal with totalities and nuances -- the polar opposites, rather than mixtures or shades of gray.


All of these engrained habits of thinking have been salient characteristics of the Piscean Age, and we have all been under their spell.


So, how do we move toward wholeness, given all the influences on us to the contrary?

Next Page

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape