After decades of pondering human nature, my only real conclusion is that broadly speaking there are three types of humans, regardless of where the person may be on planet Earth: those who tend to look inward, those who look outward, and the ones who just look “locally.” The title of this piece, and some of the words I am using to express my view of this matter, may appear confusing and “misused” to some readers. For that I apologize, but here is a stab at clarifying the topic, full well realizing it is a highly complex subject cutting across all dimensions of the human mind and experience.
As I see we human beings, we each have a world view – allow me to use the term, “Weltanschauung” – that could fit into one of three “buckets.” Accepting the acute risk of overgeneralization, I am expressing that there are three distillations of how we each, or as some group, see the world. One view, which I refer to as “inner,” may be characterized by philosophy, spirituality, components of major Eastern and some Western religions, and may have an aspect we can call “mystical.” The “outer” view is typified by tradition, convention, certain sectors of major Western religions, and established norms in one’s group. The third “bucket” would hold those who are not overly concerned with exploring their inner mind, nor would they be very “religious” (although such persons may, for example, attend their chosen place of worship and otherwise “practice”). Since it is almost impossible in this short article to address all the sub-groups of humans and their local societies, customs, values and religions, I will just say that in my view any of these persons would also fit into one of these three classifications, at least to some extent. The “three worlds” has to apply to every human, in my way of thinking.
The inner person may also be politically more “liberal.” The outer person may be more conservative politically, whereas the more mundane, “horizontally” thinking person may have an affinity driven by values and insights that, in their minds, are sufficiently real to negate the need for “over thinking” or “over ritualizing.”
So the title of this piece I hope may be less confusing at this point. The “three worlds” I have attempted to loosely define. Obviously we are all on one planet, but what do I mean by “many universes”? Simply put, this acknowledges that complexity of humans and that each and every person creates their own “universe” of perception, through their own senses and mental processing.
Depending on where we are born, to whom we are born (family and society), we may find ourselves in a state of “cognitive dysphoria”: children born to strict, conservative parents, discovering that they cannot find happiness at home, leading to their running away. Another example would be people born into societies where there is little or no religious freedom, who may feel some inner yearning to know and experience more beyond their conventional domains, creating extreme tensions.
My own world view perceives humanity not just within these three oversimplified “buckets”, but as a true matrix of infinite dimensions. The “three worlds” view just makes it a little easier to process my personal relationships and transactions, and provides a backdrop for my personal growth in understanding our global humanity.
Thank you reader for allowing my indulgence in this mental exercise. Perhaps you will find motive for critically analyzing your own world view. I would also ask whether to be even concerned about “world view” means one is more “inner”?