‘The next level of human evolution’ by Dr. Khalid Sohail

Review by Ziauddin Ahmed May 2010

THE MAKINGS OF A CONSCIOUS HUMANIST  

Dr. Khalid Sohail has the distinct advantage of exposure to both  the Eastern and the Western way of thought. Being a humanist along with being  a Psychiatrist, gives him a dual advantage of unbiased and neutral observation of human thought and emotions from a detached angle. His humanist beliefs clear him of unwanted religious leanings and his scientific knowledge of the functioning of the human mind make his interpretation of human thought processes and emotions both authentic and credible. His detached views on various contentious issues and debates make them more readily acceptable and understood. 

Dr. Sohail is one of those voracious writers who are admirable for both the quantity and quality of their work. His deep thoughts and feelings are not marred by the simplicity of his style and narration. In fact the very simplicity is the reason for their profundity.   

          A closer study of his book, ‘ The Next Stage Of Human Evolution’, reveals it to be  some form of an autobiographic biographies of various humans that play a role in shaping one’s own personality.  Dr. Khalid Sohail clearly narrates and reveals his own learning and educative process and the emergence of his own personality from the often conflicting circumstance of his childhood.  His maternal side of the family shows the traditional culture and religious atmosphere of his Muslim background; whereas his paternal lineage definitely reveals a different approach to life. The passage of any youth through these divergent traits in the two factions of a house hold would affect the buildup of an individual. The shaping of a personality in such an environment can take two divergent directions. A person can either develop a reactionary facet in life or perhaps a defeatist attitude. That Dr. Sohail shows neither of these facets, can only be the outcome of his conscious desire to understand the situation  and then make the best of it. The family situation, however, must surely have played an important role in the formation of his rather noticeable personality of a Muslim Sufistic nature. He may not agree or like this statement, yet the mellow and soft demeanor he projects can, in my opinion, ooze out of a contented, balanced, and conscious evolution of the self. 

In his book, the buildup in chapters two to six reflect his study and observation of various scholars of his own field of expertise.  This then leads, in chapter ten, to his own journey -- ‘ From Fundamentalism to Humanism’. In the closing chapters of the book Dr. Sohail makes a critical study of the various phenomena which affect the human condition and suggests his recipe of -- ‘ Creating a Peaceful World Together’.  To my mind the core of the book rests on a new concept of the 3Cs he developed i.e. Creative Imagination, Critical Thinking and a Compassionate Heart. The three personalities he covers in chapters eleven, twelve and thirteen are perhaps human examples of these.  

Now since, as said earlier, I feel the book to be a sort of an autobiographical narration, I will endeavor to mainly  detail the various passages from his book that caught my attention and which to me seemed to have played the major role in the development of the author’s own scholarly approach to life and perhaps his personality.  I hope my own subjective thoughts and analysis will not discolor the review and dissuade you from it.   

          On page 1 of the first chapter, -- ‘The next stage of human evolution’, he says:  

“ As human beings have evolved, they have become increasingly aware of their personal and collective unconscious”.   

                    I wonder why  he did not go on to include the awareness of ‘collective consciousness’ of  human beings also as being an equally vital part in their process of evolution, and looked at human evolution from a conscious effort to understand both the hidden and exposed sides of their nature. It may be said that to say ‘a glass is half empty or half full’ both describe the same fact. But to say ‘that the glass is both half full and half empty is a more accurate and complete acceptance of the situation. For the first statement somehow does not cover the total situation and leaves one fact to the imagination of the receptor. Now my own understanding of consciousness may vary from the Psychological or scientific definition; as I use it more to mean an ‘educated rational awareness’ of things. For, has not man advanced or evolved in the understanding of both the unconscious and the conscious part of his Self in a rationally conscious manner? Has he not become conscious of his own unconscious Self through the advancement of consciously accepted knowledge and the accumulation of data over the entire period of human civilization? That, perhaps this ability of man is the most distinguishing and defining characteristic of the human over the animal.  And he has progressed only after a clear and conscious analysis of the distinction of his own dark traits in a balanced and conscious manner. 

         Now on page 3 he writes, and I quote,  

“It is fascinating to see how human embryos pass through millions of years of evolutionary stages during the nine months in their mothers’ wombs.”   

          This may  be an unconscious process, but then once out of the mother’s womb a human takes on a phase of development whereby his consciousness and awareness is on the increase. Science is presently studying and debating the consciousness of the fetus itself and, in my opinion, it  may well turn out to be some form of a hitherto  unknown conscious developmental phase of human existence. May be as of the present we do not have enough data or have not analyzed it as yet to come to that conclusion. Dr. Sohail further goes to substantiate human conscious effort towards evolution  on page 4, when he says,  

“Animals have changed through natural selection but humanity will evolve because of human selection and the choices human beings will make individually and collectively.”           

          He talks of Darwin’s  convictions on page 11, and quotes him as saying,  

          ‘Man is no different to any other animal; perhaps there is no such thing as soul and the Old Testament tales of Creation are mere fiction.’ And that on page 13 he says that Darwin contends that, ‘..nature practiced natural selection by “preservation of favourable variations and the rejection of injurious variations”.   

Dr. Sohail closes the chapter by saying on page 16 that:    

    “ Darwin strove to prove that human beings are created in the image of the chimpanzee rather than the image of God, and that they are risen apes than fallen angels”. 

 This may be true in  Darwin’s case and may have been well understood by Dr. Sohail; but his own case suggests, as mentioned above, that he believes in some form of motivated human evolution. 

          In the next chapter Dr. Sohail hits the nail on the head when he  contends that:,   

“Darwin highlighted in his writings that for human development to continue, human beings must develp those characteristics that will be beneficial not only to individual persons but also for the whole species.  In animals, changes and adaptations happened by natural selection and mutation, and are controlled by instinctual and unconscious factors. However, in haumans those changes will depend upon individual and collective choices that are more conscious, rational and logical, since humans have the choice to follow or not to follow their instincts and we are free to make wise choices.” 

          In chapter four on Freud he notes:  

“With the help of free association and psychoanalysis, Freud helped his patients bring unconscious unresolved conflicts to the conscious mind and then deal with them realistically to free themselves of symptoms’. And this is now the established method to deal with unknown and dormant crises in many cases.” 

          He seems to have applied this in his own case too.   

          Dealing with Victor Frankl, a Nazi holocaust survier, Dr. Khalid Sohail brings out the meaning of suffering when he points out that Frankl:  

“helped patients learn to cope with their emotional sufferings and existential dilemmas by discovering meaning in their suffering and in their lives.”  He continues further to say that:, “Frankl believed that other psychiatrists and psychotherapists were focusing only on the biological and psychological aspects of the human psyche and ignoring the spiritual dimension of the human personality….. he offered a three dimensional model as he believed that human beings are bio-psycho-spiritual beings.”   

He quotes Frankl as saying:  

‘No one will be able to make us believe that man is a sublimated animal once we can show that within him there is a repressed angel.’  Note the contrast with earlier comments on Darwin, as, “ Darwin strove to prove…….”   

Dr. Khalid sums up Frankl philosophy in these words:  

“He saw unity in diversity. He saw God-like qualities in all human beings, even in agnostics and atheists.”   

I feel that he reflects this in his own personality too. 

         In chapter six Dr. Khalid Sohail presents the philosophy and approach of Joseph Campbell. He portrays him as a Philosopher of Mythology. He says: 

  “ Campbell believed that mythology deals with the mysteries of human condition, especially focusing on the relationship between human beings and the universe…… Human mythology has two parts, a personal and a collective.”` 

 And continues further to say:      

 “ As human beings evolved they created human civilizations. … As civilizations became more sophisticated, human beings created languages, art and religions. They also became aware of cycles in nature around them and relationship of those cycles with human life. One such example was, in the words of Campbell: “recognition of the equivalence of the menstrual and lunar cycles. This would be the first inkling we have of recognition of counterparts between the celestial and earthly rhythms of life” 

          To elaborate Campbell’s philosophy he quotes him as saying:          

          ‘The mystical dimension is beyond good and evil. The ethical dimension is in the field of good and evil.’  

         In chapter seven he deals with ‘ The Psychology of spiritual encounters, and elaborates on the main difference between Psychosis and  mysticism, by saying:,  

        “Psychotic experiences cause regression while mystic encounters lead to progression of the personality”.         

         In this chapter Dr. Sohail makes a very scholarly comparison of the traditions of the Eastern mystic’s approach and Western scientific analysis of the human mental conditions.  He writes”,  

“ While Western psychiatrists belonging to the secular tradition see psychosis and mystic encounters as distinct entities , the followers of Eastern mystic tradition believe that if psychotic experiences are supported, guided and helped they can lead to spiritual enlightenment.”   

          He examines John White’s idea, and says that:, 

 “ He states that ordinary people with normal level of consciousness, whom he calls ‘arthonia’, have to pass through ‘paranoia’ before they reach ‘metanoia’, a stage of enlightenment. White believes that paranoia, a breakdown can be the first step towards a breakthrough.”  

John White noted that:. ‘Because metanoia , by large, has not been experienced by the founders of Western psychology and psychotherapy, paranoia has not been fully understood in our culture.’   

One notices that both in his practice of Psychiatry and his own life Dr. Sohail has shown a blending  and a merger  of the beneficial aspects of the two traditions, somehow creating a positivity from the apparent conflicting ideas of the two fields of knowledge. He reaffirms this when he says: 

        “Those who study literature of both traditions realize that these two different disciplines sometimes use the same words and terms but mean different things, reflecting different cultural traditions…. One it the major problems of communication between western psychotherapists and eastern mystics is the use of the term ego. In western psychotherapy and psychoanalysis, Ego is the healthy part of the Self, which needs to be strengthened and developed. It reflects a mature part of the personality that can deal effectively with the instinctual pressures of the Id and the social conditions of the Super-ego. On the other hand, Ego for eastern mystics is the unhealthy selfish, self-centered and arrogant part that needs to be kept under control.”  

          Dr. Khalid Sohail then begins to show his true colours when he tries to understand the spiritual and creative encounters from a scientific and neurological point of view. He gives forward Jullian Jaynes explanation when he says:  

“ He believes that the temporal lobe of the left brain deals with language while the temporal lobe of the right brain deals with sensory, perceptual and aesthetic experiences. He explains that creative and mystic experiences originate in the right brain and when those messages are sent to the left brain, the left brain rather than owning them perceives them as originating from outside; and depending upon the individual’s personality and culture, is interpreted as coming angels, spirits or God, rather than their unconscious mind.” 

          Dr. Sohail logically concludes that:  

“ I believe that it is important for us to separate the experiences from their interpretations. As we evolve as human beings and the disciplines of science, psychology, neurology and philosophy grow, we will have a better understanding of such extra-ordinary experiences and we will be able to decrease human suffering and enhance the quality of our lives so that we can grow and evolve to the next stage of human evolution.” 

          He reckons that:  

“ There are a number of neurologists and geneticist who are testing the hypothesis that insanity and creativity share the same gene, and depending upon the support or opposition they receive from their families and communities, individuals with this gene either have nervous breakdowns or creative breakthroughs or both.”  

          My own feeling in this regard is, that coupled with the above conclusion by Dr. Sohail, an individual’s own understanding and accepting, rather than denying and challenging one’s own thoughts and predispositions to them, seems to play a vital role in one’s creativity or imbecility. For a creative person does things consciously but an imbecile is perhaps unconscious of the effects his actions may produce. The mystic seems to remedy his agonizing mental agitations and confusions by meditation and/ or prayer. The scientist and philosopher handle it through reasoning and logic.