Of course I suggested every frame of mind depends on its assumptions, just as mathematics depends on its axioms, and science depends on its basic assumptions. But nowhere did I marry the two aspects of my theory; and I must try to do so now.
My opinion is that the next step in man’s evolution lies in the ability of two minds to interpenetrate, not simply in the world of military command but in the civilian world as well. But we all do confide in our friends to some extent; and we only stop when delicacy suggests it is not safe or wise to go further. In the Army it is different, because military discipline makes it safe; whereas there is no corresponding discipline in civilian life. Hence the apparent incongruity that what is possible in the Army, is not normally possible outside it. And the attraction of having the companionship of the risen Christ is that here was a man, who not only forgave rejection, but who after unspeakable humiliation was still willing to forgive those driving the nails into his hands and feet. So with him, it is safe to confide. But if a man has a vocation in the secular world, it is not legitimate for him to abandon that career in order to show forgiveness. If you are rejected, you have to accept it, and yes forgive; but there is no question of intimacy thereafter, unless it is in the unspoken world of the spirit. So maybe if two people asserted they dwelt in each other, it might be possible for them to emulate the forgiveness of Jesus, at any rate in the unspoken world of thought transference; but as long as one has to put on a brazen face and practise professional discipline in front of colleagues, it is not possible to go further in the everyday world of affairs.
So to go further, if one insists on taking part in the secular world, it seems to be necessary to re-create with fellow man or woman, the same kind of relationship that is supposed to exist between God and the soul. For unless people are willing to dwell in each other, and internalise the disappointment and even agony of rejection, there is going to be no progress that it is possible to make. They will be stuck in a world in which it is not possible to communicate forgiveness fully, even if it is possible to forgive. Yet the number of people you meet in a lifetime whom it would be wise to admit to this degree of intimacy is incredibly small. Nevertheless with such a willingness, I see the fabric of society becoming woven more tightly; and without it, I see the fabric of society becoming unravelled.
So how are the two facets of my Theory of Consciousness integrated? They represent the pattern of thought that stems from two different types of indwelling. Clearly the philosophical and the practical aspects of my theory represent my view of it when viewed through two attitudes of mind; and I regard it as elementary that you cannot ever reconcile two different attitudes of mind, even when they occur in the same rational being.