Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 4)

⟵ Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 3)

In the previous parts, I wrote about some cultural traits appearing in some Asian cultures, as a result of feminine mindset seeping in men’s understanding of the world. The Jewish worldview happened to really take this seriously and see the world in the terms from Yuh Yuh (translation) of Cemali and Yuh Yuh of Koray Avcı and also in the terms of a partly theoretical masculinity that can make sense of all that complexity like the woman’s father in Minem zakonlı hatınım of the Tatar singer Danir Sabirov. This partly theoretical masculinity can make sense of the complexity exposed in Yuh Yuh, like God being much more profound than the humans who are messed up when they try to build the Babel Tower. He works with a psychology like in Habeit Ya Leil of the Lebanese singer Nawal El Zoghbi.

The Jewish ethos is so aware of the mental abyss beyond the classical human type of knowledge, thus the latter appears as an isolated ecosystem of meaning that has to relate somehow with that huge complexity beyond. Some of them feel like God speaks through them or that they understand the righteous way of God for the entire complexity. Initially, they were rather innocent about what this supposes, but the experience accumulated in time and the increasing geopolitical difficulties from the Hellenistic and Roman period started to open their mind about how much more they need to chart and make sense of the world in the pursuit of God’s ultimate truth.

If you start with the idea that there must be there a truth (in classical human terms of truth) and you immerse in that complexity chasing the feeling of a truth that keeps vaguely dangling in front of you, your classical mental organization keeps melting away until you remain only with the driving wheel as your masculine orientation through that complexity, like in Oşko of the Kyrgyz singers Totomidin and Surma.

And, if at this point you continue thinking in classical human terms of truth, you are very likely to end up very fragile about anything in your bubble of knowledge, like the two men in Toñnuñ daa of the Sakha/Yakut singer Künney. Every tiny speck of diachronic divergence invalidates the simplistic notion of truth in that personal ecosystem of meaning. You sense very well how flimsy is any concept in your mind in relation with that fluid complexity that you are using yourself and you got so much mentally into.

The specific approach of Künney from Toñnuñ daa, while valuable in opening the minds of the men to deeper perceptions, has some structural issues. The women in such situations are under impression that they are doing what is necessary as long as they don’t succumb to the classical masculine narrow-minded worldview, thus they respect the gist of the diachronic fluidity and they can express it vividly for the men to sense it. The men don’t realize the gist, the women express it clearly for the men to sense it.

In the video, the men are straightforwardly considered childish, “çeeke” means good, “kaaka” means bad, as baby-talk words used by Sakha adults talking to children. They need to sense deeper psychological nuances about good and bad, beyond the concept of knowledge as control of the situation. This is quashing lots of such masculine impulses to uphold their simplistic sense of good and bad, but it does not offer further ideas about what to do, how to organize life (while such female approach is under impression it offers).

It feels like there is a feminine impression that men have some sort of magic in making sense of the world while they can also sense directly the coherence of that mental fluidity in the way a woman senses. Hence the childish behavior is seen as a failure of working with the diachronic fluidity, as though the men have already the capabilities to do so, only that they apply them poorly. These women do not assume themselves organizational responsibilities to realize how complex it gets when you really are in this position while also aware of and opened to the diachronic psychology. A more realistic approach would be to realize that there are no such capabilities yet, they need to be honed and discovered.

A woman like in Mini-mini of the Uzbek singer Farruh Komilov ended up herself thinking with fast-track patternizing classical masculine knowledge as control of the situation. This is how you are likely to end up if you think you are the master of your destiny within the classical type of human organization (without further realizing how much wisdom you need beyond this perception of the world as knowledge as control of the situation). A wiser side of her as the older woman intervening in the quarrel realizes the immature behavior the same as Künney in Toñnuñ daa, but in this case it realizes her own sliding into this situation. She is doing about the same level of opening the mind as in Toñnuñ daa. As a result, the sense of adulthood of the protagonists’ quarreling sides crumbles down, they realize how childish they are.

This does not turn into a quick triumph as in Toñnuñ daa, as the woman is herself invested in classical masculine types of organizational responsibilities (Künney did not end up herself childish because she did not step into the “master of your own destiny” fast-track patternizing thinking). In Mini-mini, the woman has herself the practical realization that there are no organizational tools to work with the more profound diachronic psychology. The psychologically older side of her still assumes responsibilities and appears as that second older woman baby-sitting the two of them, this is the most it can do. This feels so stale and the child-like side of her further realizes that they need themselves to seek a new sense of adulthood. This is the more realistic approach when discovering that there are no capabilities in the traditional human psychological organization to work with the diachronic psychology, they need to be honed.

Someone like Künney did not become herself too invested in the classical masculine organization, in that fast-track patternizing thinking in which an ecosystem of knowledge is based on feeling in control of the situation. She has some sense that there is a larger fluid kind of thinking and a feeling when its gist is respected and taken in consideration (since, in the current human style of social life and organization, this gist is constantly under pressure from being obliterated by simplistic fast-track patternizing thinking).

She stays away from being invested in the classical masculine kind of thinking and wants to open the man’s mind to the greatness of the gist of the larger fluid kind of thinking. The man is first fluidized to think from the diachronic perspective as in Taatta and then he provides coherence (something magic for such a woman who is not invested herself in human organization) while exploring together the diachronicity as in Çeeke. If the woman enters herself with the mind in the human social organization, like in Mini-mini, she encounters the same problems as the man.

Someone like Künney when presented with this argumentation may have then the impression that there is something wrong in her approach while it still continues to be coupled with such a feeling of plenitude of meaning in that diachronic perspective. What can be wrong? It is not that it is something wrong, but it is necessary to realize the part where the woman is only orienting her mind around the masculine organization as in Habeit Ya Leil of the Lebanese singer Nawal El Zoghbi and does not think of anything else. A quick reactive decision to be independent may also be misleading, as it still practically remains in this position of revolving around the man by being against the man, practically with the same approach like in Habeit Ya Leil, as currently there is not much work with other organizational alternatives. Much of the more strident side of the contemporary feminism is like this.

It should be more realization around how that diachronic perspective is a world in itself, with realizations like the vibe from Eğer Adem İsen of Nilüfer Sarıtaş. This removes however the reliance on the fast-track patternizing masculine organization, it is about lots of psychological work and honing. From my observations, I notice that new approaches can be discovered after some initial hard work, it is not difficult all the time. It is necessary to realize utterly unexpected perspectives around how to think in this fluid environment, the (initial) hard work has to be done, there is no other way. Probably newer generations do not even need to do all the work again where it feels like having an authentic approach.

(P.S. I realize that the concept of the initial hard work that has to be done applies to those who are in the situation to do this, but they don’t. As there are also lots of people who struggle with life difficulties in poor organizational contexts, while seeking themselves some simple linear clarity in their minds dangled in front of them by those contexts. It is not that they do not struggle already, but they would rather need first to realize how the existing chased simplistic organization is not necessarily the organization by default and how complex is the concept of organization revealed through the much more realistic diachronic perspective.)

To give some examples, something like İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir (“Consistent fantasy is reality”, translation in the description of the video) of the Turkish singer Gaye Su Akyol is like the Ottoman organization from the past, really being in an organizational position while immersed in the diachronic fluidity. This can allow you to think with a plurality of thought threads and manage a plurality of perspectives, like the variety of people from all kinds of social backgrounds and ideological orientations picked by the singer along the way in the bus. It is expected for the bus to break down from time to time, as there are lots of things to learn.

The Ottoman organization proper did not have the feminine option to mend the situation and expect masculine appreciation when the “bus breaks down” like in the video, they were about mending the engine. Also their approach was rather simple, just shepherding these identities, which is not feasible anymore in the modern world. I use myself this kind of thinking in my psychological quest, but it is about really immersing in these perspective, it is not just shepherding. It is not just managing the situation, but lots of move back and forth between the “cinema seat” and the “reality”, as I wrote about Uyansın of the Turkish singer Neslihan Demirtaş in Part 11 of Perceiving complexity.

In Part 4 of Perceiving complexity I used the example of the Hungarian folktale The Horse Egg to exemplify the limitations of the linear classical masculine thinking that ends up taking its own ecosystem of meaning as “the reality” and the Hungarian folktale The Mayor’s Clever Daughter for the feminine diachronic perceptions around the classical masculine thinking. The latter may give the impression of having a deeper understanding of the world in general. It should be paid attention to what extent they just revolve around the existing masculine organization, they are not themselves in organizational positions to wonder how to move things forward. The woman from Mini-mini ended up herself in a mindset of straightforward organization of her life. Nilüfer Sarıtaş in Eğer Adem İsen is realizing how it is like to be in this organizational position facing the unknown of real life, while the mind is immersed in the diachronic thinking.

See also Szerelem of the Hungarian singer Rúzsa Magdolna for a clarity of the mind around the difference between these two psychological environments as a difference between the world of nature and the world of city, the same as in Taatta (it is a culturally Altaic trope). She is immersed in that meaningful psychological perception and then she infuses the masculine organization with it. In this case, she senses that it is necessary to see what to do with the concept of organization, the city is not a full-fledged city, but basic building structures, the same as in Bugün Yasta Gördüm of the Turkish Tanbura Trio.

The attention to the basic building structures may miss what is valuable in Taatta, where the woman really immerses the man and fluidizes his mind progressively to really sense the gist of the diachronic psychology. In Taatta there is some psychological depth to develop some human nuances of organization immersed in the gist of a huge fluid diachronic complexity like in nature (something like Mini-mini may not pay so much attention to that). It would be good something like in Taatta, but also with the realization around what is like to be in position to organize things, like in Eğer Adem İsen or Bugün Yasta Gördüm.

When the woman ends up herself thinking from the point of view of the classical masculine organization and seeks back that meaningful psychological perception, it is like in Erdő, erdő of the Hungarian band Holdviola. The singer Barta Zsófia thinks from the point of view of the classical masculine organization and, when she finds back the larger diachronic psychology (as finding the path to nature even when in the city), a small girl appears, as the classical human sense of adulthood is not relevant there. She is doing to herself what Künney is doing to the man in Taatta.

In this situation, she keeps the organizational framework of “the city”, which “in nature” is child-like, because this psychological environment of “the nature” has a huge range of expressivity for which the classical human sense of adulthood has no adequate organizational tools. In the opposite direction of Szerelem, the singer thinks from the point of view of “nature”, not from that of the organizational framework of “the city”, thus there is no child-like side of her.

It is like the previously mentioned difference between Künney who does not develop a child-like side (because she does not get so involved in classical masculine organization) and the woman from Mini-mini of Farruh Komilov, where a psychologically older side of her realizes how child-like she became (because of thinking with classical masculine patternizing thinking processes).

Erdő, erdő is a case where the woman is psychologically within the classical masculine organization, but she does not assume it so much. She does not end up so much in fast-track patternizing problematic perceptions and thus the discovery of the child-like side is much more relaxed. There is also something about cultural differences that I wrote about in The mindset of the populations of Siberian origin, Erdő, erdő with what I call “suminagashi” nuances, Mini-mini with “ebru” nuances.

What is important in Erdő, erdő is that the singer realizes the child-like side. If you don’t realize it, you are under impression you continue the classical adulthood, which can turn into serious problems. If you realize the child-like side, it means that you still have an adult side of you seeking to make some sense of the situation. And, also if you realize the child-like side, it means that the adult side is not like in the classical human sense of organization, it realized some more profound nuances, while not knowing what to do with them, hence the existence of the child-like side. And not that this child-like state is a given, as something permanent. In time, it can grow a new sense of adulthood that takes in consideration the diachronic gist.

See also something like Yaşlegem çişmelere of the Tatar singer Leysen Gıymaeva. It starts with her on that motorbike, in the idea that she is a “master of her own destiny”, like the men do in the world of the “city” (the “ebru” thinking offers much more direct opportunities for a woman to be a “master of her own destiny”, hence this nuance tends to appear much more frequently among Turkic women). Like Barta Zsófia in Erdő, erdő, she did not end up too much caught in fast-track patternizing thinking and now she is heading towards the world of “nature” in order to develop a relation with a man. Here the angle is seen from that psychological side that thinks from the perspective of the accumulated culture and of the experience of the previous generations, that older woman watching them.

In both Yaşlegem çişmelere and Erdő, erdő, the women have an older wise side and a child-like side like the woman from Apa 2 of the Kazakh singer Ruslan Satenov. Only that in Erdő, erdő it is visible only the child-like side, while the older wise side is undifferentiated in the expressivity of the singer, while in Yaşlegem çişmelere it is visible only the older wise side, as that older woman watching them, while the child-like side is undifferentiated in the expressivity of the singer.

She has something child-like, but there is a wiser side of her keeping an eye on the situation. It applies a long-term accumulated expertise like that from Yuh Yuh of Cemali, while having some openness that things can go well. There is also a bit of (a potential for) tension like in Mini-mini, between the desire for self-expression of the child-like side and the more contemplative, organizational nuances of the older side. The woman from Apa and Apa 2 does not have such potential for tension, the older side and the child-like side have much more expertise around how to make sense of each other. On the other hand, she may not be so organized and a “master of her destiny” on a bike like Leysen Gıymaeva. Not that it is not possible while having an inner collaboration like in Apa 2, but it requires some further work.

Leysen Gıymaeva has that kind of nuance in which, to the extent the “city” type of organization is hindering her fluid expressivity, to that extent she feels the need to accentuate that she stands by that fluid expressivity (even the title Yaşlegem çişmelere means “My youth is a spring/river”). If there is too much reliance on that (which Leysen Gıymaeva does not show in this video too much, it is more as a potential), it can turn in a blockage of that angle of the older wise side that has some understanding of what is the child-like side about, like the first older woman from Mini-mini and then the situation can turn into a never-ending inner misdirected battle with the second older woman from that video (because the initial psychological framework of the first older woman to seek a new adulthood is absent). The best thing is to find how the older side and the child-like side make sense of each other like in Apa 2 or to some extent also like the first older woman in Mini-mini and then also see how to relate to the complexity of real life.

Another important aspect for someone who ended up in classical masculine organization while aware of the gist of the larger diachronic fluid thinking (an aspect important for both genders, as the whole psychology is relevant for men too, at least for those from these cultures) is that you need to pay attention to how you want to approach the diachronic psychology. Someone in the initial situation from Erdő, erdő can find back directly the situation from Szerelem (with utter immersion in the nature, with no continuation of the “city” framework in “nature” that determines the child-like side from Erdő, erdő), but they should pay attention to the difference between that and the second part of Erdő, erdő.

And it is not necessary that Szerelem is preferable all the time, since sometimes you still need to think about the existing organizational structures, for the lack of adequate organizational alternatives. Both of these approaches are valuable when necessary, as they both show relevant angles. The initial organizational structure in Erdő, erdő is not even seen so negatively, only that you need to pay attention that the diachronic gist is taken in consideration.

So, regarding the puzzlement of someone like Künney around what can be wrong, I see the basic feeling of a deep immersion in a meaningful perception of the world as very real and serious, as well as the way the classical masculine organization appears as such a poor quality glossing over. Among all these previous musical examples revolving around these issues, personally I feel that those of Künney have the most depth and psychological value (also those of the woman from Apa and Apa 2, where it is more of an inadvertent background psychological process), as a result of some increased capabilities to not rely so much on classical masculine organization (while all the other music videos have too valuable angles, after all I would not have been able to have such a richness of perceptions if I were exposed only to something like that of Künney). But these women need to pay attention where they are under impression that the men have some sort of organizational magic and that they already have the organizational capabilities for the diachronic psychology, only that they are too childish in applying them.

The revealed childish nuance may be very real, but the answer may rather be about growing new adulthood nuances than presuming that the man already has an organizational core that can work with that complexity. The vibe from Toñnuñ daa has too much of this presumption. And this was also a serious issue in the initial Jewish outlook that determined the Abrahamic religions, only that I am not aware of similar Jewish cultural products able to explain the situation as I attempted to do here with Altaic ones (while I notice that the basics of this issue are mostly the same in Jewish and Altaic outlooks).

I am aware of Jewish cultural products realizing this situation as an accumulation of (dreadful, painful) historical experience, as the abyss at the end of Jean qui rit, Jean qui pleure of Riff Cohen, a music video that feels like a Jewish woman immersing empathetically in a Jewish masculine mind. And, if that’s the case, the woman herself may realize she needs too to grow some new adulthood nuances, as up to that moment she was leaning on the presumption that there is already an organizational core that can work with such complexity.

That impression about existing masculine capabilities and its consequential dumping of huge organizational responsibilities on men can come back with a vengeance, as there is lots of psychological work for a man to have some coherence in that fluidity. It does not have a total role, since the men themselves in the first place grow up from the start in a cultural environment that already works for many generations with the diachronic psychology and with the experience accumulated. That initial feminine psychological input took a life of its own many generations ago in the men’s mind, they already worked a lot with it along many generations in continuous interactions with the women of each generation.

The men of the current generation at the time of the specific situations that are under study are themselves involved in issues related to the diachronic psychology and they already have their own responsibilities and lots of accumulated relevant experience to some extent. It is not that the women of the respective generation at its present tense have the total role. There is already lots of history of to and fro exchange of experience between genders that is part of the culture. But there still is also some role of the women of the respective generation at its present tense.

In the Altaic case, that impression and the dumping of huge responsibilities can turn into recurring situations with slow accumulation of learning and experience in time, coming back again and again in the shape of men who struggle to keep some coherence by clinging to a driving wheel like in Oşko, after the rest of their psychological machinery melted down. It can come back with a vengeance in the shape of crazy Altaic dictators who have a very clear idea that they have to impose the specific linear monotheistic-like details of social organization emanating from them in order to keep some sense of meaning and order in their own minds. And, if you want to stay alive, you need to be regimented to the sense of order of such a man who is so aware of how fluid and complex is the world beyond his bubble of knowledge.

But, as I mentioned in the previous part, there is also Altaic masculinity like the policeman in Şudıñ boyında of the Kazakh singer Ahan Otınşiev, having the psychological resources and patience to analyze a situation without so much need to rely on existing psychological constructs. It feels like having its source in feminine development of a new masculinity in the man’s mind, like in Minem zakonlı hatınım of Danir Sabirov, which further on can slide into having an observational role to keep some order in the situation, like the side-line observational-interventionist older sides with some more relevant expertise in Yaşlegem çişmelere, Apa 2 or Mini-mini. The thing is that a dictator can have himself some of these abilities (but still, probably not able to be too profound, due to the dictatorial self-limitations). The question is how can social life be organized to really take in consideration that larger complexity.

I don’t see at all as a bad thing an opening of the mind like in Toñnuñ daa, I would feel like a serious loss if I didn’t have such an opening. But it should be more awareness about how much more psychological work and insight is necessary to organize a social life with such an opening. It is not about keeping it low or unchallenging, but doing it while sensing the abyss it creates in the classical human sense of organization and the need for further abyssal work and insight.

The Jewish historical take on this opening of the mind was something like in Toñnuñ daa, but it felt like being thrown out of the Paradise of the classical masculinity after eating from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. It was not specifically about the reorganization of the mind of the man as in Taatta and Çeeke (which is about an Altaic course of action, more details about the role of nature in the Altaic mindset at Part 12 and Part 13 of The mindset of the populations of Siberian origin).

In the Jewish case, something like in Taatta has some nuances that I wrote about in Part 12 of Perceiving complexity (it is more about the woman’s immersion in the man’s ego than in nature as in the Altaic case) and in Part 1 of How I see the Abrahamic religions. This creates a deeply refreshed masculine perspective immersed in diachronicity like in Shalom Aleichem by Idan Yaniv. As for the relation between the old man and the old woman from Taatta, it was more like in Habib Galbi of the Jewish band A-WA. The old man is too despotic, the women can’t stand it anymore, they go to the old woman who knows how to make the men dance to her tune.

The problem is that, in both Altaic and Jewish cases, with such a mental fluidity, in time the classical masculine organization of the men melts down until they remain only with “a driving wheel” out of that organization and they become very fragile about any concept in their bubble of knowledge. It is good to see both these Altaic and Jewish perspectives, as each of them has some insightful angles around this experience.

The initial expressivity of the Jewish God had lots of nuances similar to a crazy Altaic dictator obsessed with an increasingly monotheistic sense of order (while seeking to uphold a morality able to answer issues like those revealed in Yuh Yuh of Cemali, which is not necessarily the case for many Altaic dictators). But that initial Jewish expressivity had also glimpses of a deeper wisdom like at the end of the Story of Job, when God asks Job what he really understands of the world. It depends on how each man feels this sense of God inside him in the context of processing what is going on in real life.

The people from all Abrahamic religions need to pay attention to the fact that they slide into being God when they (easily) speak in God’s name. To give an idea, many people who support in public the existence of God tend to give arguments like “look at the intricate complexity of everything discovered by science, like DNA, laws of nature etc. How do you think it was possible to appear without the existence of a central organizational authority?” My reply is that this shows the specific cognitive limitations of the respective person, who can’t make sense of anything complex beyond his self-centered centralized sense of organization, while he easily puts himself in God’s shoes and is under impression that he feels what that universal central authority thinks (it sounds nuts, isn’t it?).

This person is too haughty to have some room in his mind for some utterly unexpected sense of complexity beyond a classical human self-centered sense of organization. This while his specific in-depth wonderment about everything in the world results from the fact that his mind really is opened to a complex psychology beyond it and the masculine psychological structure created by the woman like in Minem zakonlı hatınım of Danir Sabirov comes with the impression that men already have an organizational core capable of working with that. Hence it must be a God there organizing everything in all that fluid complexity, but this is understood in a very narrow-minded way mirroring classical masculine simplistic organization, mirroring the limitations of the person who easily speaks in God’s name.

That concept of God easily in control of the situation like a classical man is simply about the psychological structure of the person who speaks in God’s name. When that person brags about the impossibility of anything making sense beyond the belief in a specific God creating and organizing everything (usually correlated with easily “knowing” what God wants), that is about his own psychological limitations to conceive anything more complex than a self-centered simplistic sense of organization while being aware of a huge complexity beyond it.

To give an example for each Abrahamic religion, in the past there may have been some level of innocence when the Jewish prophets were interpreting anything bad happening to the Jewish people as God’s punishment for their religious transgressions. But to say this nowadays, it sounds hollow, there is accumulated historical experience that makes the situation feel much more complex than that, with Talmudic nuances of psychological depth. There are still here and there contemporary Jewish religious figures that venture into such simplistic “understanding” of what God thinks, like interpreting anything bad happening as a punishment for Jewish sins.

To give a Christian example, it comes to my mind the way George Bush was saying very nonchalantly how he was speaking to God in order to reach far-fetching (and not particularly bright) political decisions. For a Muslim example, initially, many clerics were rejoicing at the news of the Covid outbreak in China, “this is God’s punishment for how they treat the Muslims in Xinjiang”. Fast forward a few weeks later, when Covid reached Muslim-majority countries, “wait a minute, this is Devil’s work through its minions the US and Israel”. Such people are obviously a joke of themselves.

These people are very nonchalantly (many times really shamelessly and lazily when the initial innocence is gone) in a God-like position and create and re-create the understanding of world in their minds as they see it fit, in order to preserve the coherence of their particular ecosystem of meaning. Their mind is fluid like in Habeit Ya Leil of Nawal El Zoghbi and Ana meen of Najwa Karam while they seek to preserve a simplistic, thus fragile, classical human ecosystem of meaning, like the men from Toñnuñ daa, fragile about any tiny speck of multidirectional diachronic organizational divergence. The problem is that they mistake their own narrow-minded ecosystem of meaning (immersed in a psychology like in Habeit Ya Leil) for a God making sense of everything.

I find much more in touch with real life a view like that at the end of the Story of Job, when God asks Job what he really understands of the world. Superficially, this is the same as the approach of those entitled people who easily speak in God’s name, telling you how can you explain this, how can you explain that? Isn’t it the work of some superior being suspiciously mirroring their own narrow-minded classical masculine sense of organization? This kind of perception quickly turns into a peace of mind of being in control of the situation even when immersed in a psychology like that from Habeit Ya Leil.

But in practice everything is changed when the man himself, as in the Story of Job, realizes a complexity of psychological orientation in life like in Yuh Yuh of Cemali. The mind really is opened to an abyssal psychology and then you don’t easily speak in God’s name as a projection of a simplistic self-centralizing ego. It is not so much an easily self-assured impression that you obviously see what God thinks. You start to wonder yourself, why this, why that? And it is a kind of wonderment that does not follow simplistic classical masculine self-centered organization, it is immersed in a psychologically profound gist. That God-like position may also turn into a more in-depth investigation, like that from Şudıñ boyında of Ahan Otınşiev.

It is not anymore that simple assured view of a God in control of everything, which can make all kinds of narrow-minded people to be under impression they speak in God’s name and that their narrow-minded views are God’s views. And there still may be there an abyssal psychology, but maybe you get the idea that it has no connection with the superficial Christian concept of God that is currently taken for granted as the basic default concept of God through the worldwide success of the Western worldview.

The initial informal intention of the Altaic and Jewish women appears to have been to develop a masculinity that can work with that larger psychology, given the impression that the men already have an organizational core able to work with that. That core does not exist, the existing classical masculine sense of organization becomes very fragile, with the consequences described before. In time, men can still sense glimpses of what that abyssal psychology is about, with the better nuances in the Altaic and Jewish cultures I also described before.

Specifically in the Jewish case, the Story of Job harbingers the later nuances from the Talmud, while in the Christian case, it harbingers the post-Christian concepts of scientific quest, civil society, modern democracy, which I find valuable and taking in consideration what is important in the original Jewish gist, unlike Christianity, which is a haughty and fragile exacerbation of the ego. The passage from Christianity to post-Christianity occurred when people could not ignore accumulated glimpses in the abyssal psychology supposed by this worldview. There is still a problem that post-Christianity originally defined itself too much in contrast with Christianity and thus it still continues a narrow-minded flat Christian sense of control of the situation. Thus it does not get some abyssal psychological nuances like in the Story of Job, when you really face a huge complexity. I will get later on into more detail about I mean.

The thing is that men themselves experienced degrees of suffering and powerlessness for hundred of thousands of years, it is not like they were utterly clueless about such situations. But they always had a focus on the classical masculine sense of organization, they did not have an opening of the mind like that of an abyssal masculinity developed by the woman like in Minem zakonlı hatınım of Danir Sabirov and later on to realize by themselves abyssal psychological nuances like in Yuh Yuh of Cemali.

In the original Jewish case, there is a strong presence of a masculinity developed by the woman that feels like being in control of the situation and making sense of the entire world, like the woman’s father in Minem zakonlı hatınım of Danir Sabirov. The man feels a disconnection, a gap between his own abilities and those of such masculinity, but still such a masculinity keeps unfolding in his mind and he has to relate to it somehow like with a God in charge of everything in the world.

See how this religious man presents the basics when asked by an outsider about his worldview. Initially with that good feeling about God’s presence and then he shows him the straps for tefillin, how they are wrapped around his arms and forehead, in the idea that God is the one who really makes sense of the world and is in control of the situation.

That initial effusion of good feelings is not something gay, it is about the good feeling a woman creates in a man about his own masculinity (sometimes with some further description of the feeling as God’s feminine presence). But the ambiguous situation probably has a role in the religious Jewish rejection of homosexuality. And it has some specific Middle Eastern nuances visible far back in the gender relations from the Epic of Gilgamesh (I wrote more about it in the Part 12 of Perceiving complexity).

This disconnection between the man and that tremendous fluid psychology developed the situation away from the man seeking straightforward organization in simplistic dictatorial terms and towards the man having to deal himself in his own mind with such tremendous masculinity developed by the woman. The psychological disconnection and gap is too big for the man to become himself like that as a classical masculine sense of ego/self. He has to deal with that in his mind and see how to make sense of the world and act (some people still act themselves easily as in the name of God).

The man has both the perspective from Yuh Yuh of Koray Avcı of realizing how complex is the world beyond his bubble of classical human thinking and the perspective of that partly theoretical tremendous masculinity that makes sense of everything, like the woman’s father from Minem zakonlı hatınım. It looks like this mixture took a life of its own beyond the initial female input. In practical Jewish cases, it is not even necessary for the woman to provide that specific psychological input, it is part of the culture with lots of experience accumulated along generations, you simply grow up with it.

And the mixture of Yuh Yuh of Koray Avcı with Minem zakonlı hatınım is rather about contemporary Jewish men. In the pre-Hellenistic innocent times, the men were like in this interpretation of Yuh Yuh by Haluk Özkan, in the idea of “I can do it, I can face that complexity and keep a sense of morality and organization” (this specific musical interpretation lacks the nuance of that partly theoretical masculinity that makes sense of everything like the woman’s father from Minem zakonlı hatınım, the Jewish expressivity is a mixture of both in the same time). It is important to face that complexity, because otherwise your whole organizational edifice crumbles down.

The innocence was about how complex things are if you see the world in this manner as a complexity beyond the bubble, it was not about realizing that there is much more beyond the bubble. They sensed the complexity beyond, but not how much utter unknown you need to face and how much your concepts of self and of truth need to melt down into abyssal psychology facing real life and to reorganize to make sense of it. They were feeling an “I can do it” immersion in that fluid complexity.

Then, the accumulation of glimpses in that abyssal psychology melted down the classical masculine organizational structure until they remained only with the “driving wheel”, like in Oşko of Totomidin and Surma. The Hellenistic and Roman periods saw all kinds of ideological directions growing out of this mental fluidity, a plurality of fluid diachronic perspectives and directions like in Habeit Ya Leil, most of them with a uncompromising conviction that they have the right access to the truth (in “driving wheel only” terms, like in Oşko).

Ultimately, the Jews paid a heavy price for this psychological mess, and the subsequent rabbinical Judaism was something along the lines of the quest for a new adulthood from Mini-mini of the Uzbek singer Farruh Komilov, with a growing new sense of adulthood about the complexity around the concept of truth. It is something like in Toñnuñ daa, but with further insights around human social organization. The woman herself realizes immature aspects when immersing in social life. The old woman character from Taatta and Habib Galbi realizes herself these aspects as the first older woman intervening in Mini-mini.

Christianity and Islam appeared out of that period of conviction that it must be there a truth understood in classical human terms, a “driving wheel only” conviction as a result of the loss of innocence regarding what this complexity supposes. They would not have appeared in the previous innocent times or in the subsequent rabbinical times with a new sense about what the human mature responsibilities are about. They are a product of that intermediary period.

Both Christianity and Islam do not sense the mental abyss that caused that period in the Jewish history and they do not pay attention to that, while they continue with a “driving wheel only” mindset like in Oşko. They are about the loss of the sense of an obvious and primeval human organization by default, but not about the depths of the mental abyss that determined that. This while they still grow from this abyssal perception and they never wean off from the Jewish roots. I see the modern post-Christianity as a more serious assumption of responsibilities around this abyssal perception.

→ Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 5)