39 Comments
User's avatar
Question Everything's avatar

This is great, George. I appreciate your way with words to speak to a broad spectrum of people while respecting everyone’s beliefs and personal ideologies. Thank you 🙏

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Thank you, sir. The present state of things has many people agreeing with the ideas but thinking that is enough. If we don’t internalize the knowledge step by step, we are not capable of contributing to the solution and may be part of the problem unknowingly.

Expand full comment
Dr. Bronce Rice's avatar

George Allen - Thank you for sharing this and your mind with the community who needs it. I appreciate what you are laying down herewithin.

I hope you share your mind with me again.

All my best ~ Bronce

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

Thank you for your thoughtful post. On conscience I would

offer the you read the writings of Gurdjieff and or PD Ouspensky. Then let’s discuss conscience. Basically, a mechanical man or woman doesn’t experience conscience because empathy is not an emotion for them.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Well, I am not convinced he is in my field. Give me your best quote from him. But Dan, you need to read “An Empathic Spirit of Kindness”.

https://open.substack.com/pub/georgeallenbooks/p/an-empathic-spirit-verses-a-corrupted?r=4pmgma&utm_medium=ios

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

I did George and I don’t mean any disrespect to you or your path but it’s too Theological for me.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

And your field is too scientific for me. Conscientiousness, life, is not about science. If you take away your theological lense, the article is about the depths of empathic feelings a person can have and how they use it to help others. Maybe you don’t deal with symbolism much but it’s a necessary part of spirituality. The language of the heart cannot be understood without it. Like a poem stirs the heart in ways science cannot. That doesn’t require theology but it’s there for some.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Gurdjieff said, "Our aim is to have constantly a sensation of oneself, of one's individuality: this sensation cannot be expressed intellectually, because it is organic. It is something which makes you independent, when you are with other people." This is individual realization, certainly a momentous step out of individual chaos. Consider a shared sensation of us in a singularity of light with simultaneous sensation of our individuality. Empathy is an attribute of our singularity with which we can lose touch in our individuality but never be without its essence. I hope you’ll find out for yourself what the difference really is. On the other hand, you probably already know but are using different words to express it.

Agape IS our singularity, our co-conscientious awareness (suneidesis) that sees and sees with our singularity through each other by making each other’s light more important, more important in the world when wise.

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

True George. My question is before discussing group consciousness do you recognize the difference between functions and consciousness? Empathy is a function not a state!

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

I believe we are coming from

two different fields, Dan. May I use your first name? Science cannot recognize the state only the function when its expression is noticeable. But in spirituality, God is love and He loves, or Name is love and it loves!! Empathy is an attribute of both.

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

George that depends on what kind of science being employed. The science of consciousness I’m referring to is not empirical

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

But you’re still working from a model that cannot differentiate between absolute states of being and their expression.

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

Really? How did you come to that conclusion George?

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Please give me an example of an absolute in your model of constructs?

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Bottom line spirit, soul even the essence of love are not in the domain of the science of consciousness. But I highly respect the work you do, so I would not try to lessen it on any grounds. I consider it the manifestation of spiritual causes in matter and thus biology. Very powerful work.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

I study the guy in front of the laptop directly, the spirit. You study him indirectly by what he does on his laptop, the brain.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

When you use the word consciousness, it is a label for a process originating from DNA, molecules, not sure, but it’s not the essence of spirit. But viewing it from both sides is essential.

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

George you need to take a deeper look as Gurdjieff’s ‘Ray of Creation’. Then let’s have a conversation about Absolute!

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

And your field is too scientific for me. Conscientiousness, life, is not about science. If you take away your theological lense, the article is about the depths of empathic feelings a person can have and how they use it to help others. Maybe you don’t deal with symbolism much but it’s a necessary part of spirituality. The language of the heart cannot be understood without it. Like a poem stirs the heart in ways science cannot. That doesn’t require theology but it’s there for some.

Expand full comment
Dr Dan Haldeman's avatar

I don’t have a Theological lense George. I’m a philosopher. George you are mixing consciousness and functions. Empathy is a function that has attending consciousness markers.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Hello again, Dan. I respect your right to label life with your chosen terminology and hope you respect mine. If we were debating the right terminology to build a physical bridge, it would be math hands down. But I am discussing the well-being of love in our heart, how to love those who hate you, how to save our democracy from itself. So let’s put aside our terminology and work toward saving our democracy.

Expand full comment
Sandy Shaller's avatar

George, I agree that simply hating Trump for what he does is no solution. I'm reading Thomas Paine's brilliant book "Common Sense." It isn't a guide for handling our present situation, but it is a reminder of what it takes to continue American's faltering effort to create a genuine democracy where everyone has representation and there is no one attempting to be a King.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

There are many profound patriots with wisdom on democracy as we perceive it. But they all work from a common state of conscience incapable of loving its enemies. I hope you’ll find out for yourself what the difference really is.

Expand full comment
T Drift's avatar

This is one of the most grounded and mature takes I’ve seen on the paradox of conscience. The idea of “loving as enemies of conscience” opens a space beyond agreement, where we resist without dehumanizing. It doesn’t ask us to abandon discernment, only to transcend hatred as a default setting. Powerful, needed. Thank you.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

We are all waking up.

Expand full comment
Rone Del's avatar

I'm intrigued by the thought and discipline involved in this piece of work.

For my peace, I have to detach from the news and goings-on. Here's why, and- it's always been this way regarding politics for me, I could read about it, I could think about it, I could watch about Trump, tariffs, the other country combacks. But when I do , I feel powerless and scared and sad AF. Better if I turn my attention to helping where I can help, people, horses, painting, writing.

It's nice to know others are thinking about it. Thanks

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

There is really no goings-on in the any of the articles. I feel like you do when I watch the news so this is how to focus on what we can change. Hope you’ll get beyond the initial mentioning of it..

Expand full comment
Kert Lenseigne 🌱's avatar

I’m really going to dig into this work of yours. Thank you!

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

I’m really looking forward to hearing your insights. It’s a growing collective effort.

Expand full comment
Karma Infinity's avatar

There’s a worn honesty to this piece—like a coat that’s been through too many winters, but still keeps you warm.

George Allen doesn’t write from the mountaintop. He writes from the middle of the road, boots muddy, heart still in it. The question isn’t rhetorical: Can we save our democracy? And the answer isn’t clear, but it’s not resigned either.

What’s moving is the tone—not heroic, but human. Tired, but not numb. Focused on the ordinary stuff: trust, voting, talking across lines, rebuilding civic muscle one small act at a time. Less about systems, more about relationships.

In a time of hot takes and algorithmic panic, this kind of steady reckoning feels rare. Like someone lighting a candle, not a fire. Maybe that’s the first step back: something slow, something seen.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

You didn’t mention the fact that I’m anonymous. That stops 90% from making the first click.

We’re stuck in a rut of great personalities over ideas, admirable style over revelatory content. But you are among the 10% that sees a candle in the night.

This is not going to be a soft sell. I’m talking about calling on hardened hearts from atheists to followers of every religion—to love the enemies of good conscience.

And who am I to claim to have such love and how can that save our democracy? It is not I alone but all Americans who should ask the question: “Who are we to think that we can have such love for the least to save the entire country?”

You said, “The answer isn’t clear, but it’s not resigned either.” Many are rushing to get a measles shot for their children because they thought it was a bad idea before. If they get it in time, a simple shot solves everything. Time is of the essence, but a simple shot will not solve our problems.

This approach is an opportunity to answer what we have been called on to do by all past and future generations—with the goal of not firing a shot.

Expand full comment
Prince the VIIth's avatar

Ok got it.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Great, now take a look at the next one, “Argument 1: The Democracy of our Conscience”.

Expand full comment
Prince the VIIth's avatar

Btw Democracy was a beautiful woman, now mummified in the Museum. Forget the saving part. Take a deep puff and write a melancholic Poem for her.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Be careful not to let the hatred of others make you hateful. Our dignity requires that we show compassion, even to the hateful. Even when defending ourselves.

Expand full comment
Prince the VIIth's avatar

Btw Democracy was a beautiful woman, now mummified in the Museum. Forget the saving part. Take a deep puff and write a melancholic Poem for her.

Expand full comment
Prince the VIIth's avatar

Democracy of our conscience? Yes it happens within but not allowed to come out. We are living in a fucked up world and we weeders (writers & critics) are laughing at their faces, and the best part is they don't know it. Instead they join our laugh thinking it OK for us. Ha ha ha bustardus collegium.

Yeah America was sick too sick and it's getting worsened.

Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

The part of America and every other nation struggling with corruption should be considered blind, some full of hatred, some just lost. When we shed light into both of them, we have the best hope of reaching the lost.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Feb 27
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
George Allen's avatar

Agree and we need a better understanding of what unites people who are diverse, otherwise, we never see our deeper worth. Loving the enemies of our conscience solves this, without or without religion. I encourage you to read the next few posts after this one.

Expand full comment