Life is not static, but ever changing. Are we evolving past a healthy need for acquiring proven, conclusive knowledge for direction in life? Is it time to let some other kind of knowing rule, and let the proven kind be a tool?
The first chapter of Just Is challenges the accepted idea of what "knowing right from wrong" is, with detailed questions and comments about the "forbidden fruit." This return to the Bible is one result of the intent to take a fresh and persistently innocent look at various schools of thought.
It becomes apparent that what we often refer to as knowledge is not actually something we really know, but something we've learned; it has authoritative approval, proof. Another thing about knowledge, is that for it to be of any value in finding absolute truth, it must be total and absolute itself, otherwise it's outdated, nothing but perception and opinion based on what happened in the past.
Total and absolute knowing is, of course, current and it functions in us when we "let it be free," when we give up the demand for proof we're right about what's right - when we are current - rather than being all about what happened in the past. We can't trap it in a box of conclusive evidence, or tangible reassurance, and just take some out when we want it. Rather, it comes home and functions in us automatically, naturally, inexorably.
An experiment with time is also included; one observes that time is interdependent with a need for the security of proof, which naturally leads to wondering if time is "real" and if the security of proof is "real." Do they each exist only as fuel for the other?
Just Is, boiled down to six words: Does love need a safety net?