{"id":536,"date":"2011-11-30T23:48:26","date_gmt":"2011-12-01T06:48:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/?p=536"},"modified":"2011-12-09T20:05:02","modified_gmt":"2011-12-10T03:05:02","slug":"spiritual-consciousness-violent-fundamentalism-stages-of-faith","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/?p=536","title":{"rendered":"Spiritual Consciousness, Violent Fundamentalism, Stages of Faith"},"content":{"rendered":"

Developing an Understanding of Spiritual Consciousness<\/em>
\n<\/strong>by Erik Weaver<\/a> (one of our frequent Gnostic Seminary<\/a> contributors)<\/p>\n

The subject of how we formulate our personal views of the world has\u00c2\u00a0been on my mind of late. The lens through which we see the world\u00c2\u00a0greatly effects how we choose to interact with others. And they with\u00c2\u00a0us, as colored by their own lenses. To the degree we better understand\u00c2\u00a0our own lens, and are able to imagine the world as seen through\u00c2\u00a0through the lenses of others, we should be better able to understand\u00c2\u00a0and communicate with others even when there seem to be great gulfs\u00c2\u00a0separating our respective world views.<\/p>\n

My premise is that the forthcoming models provide a relatively simple\u00c2\u00a0yet useful means of categorizing and comparing different types of\u00c2\u00a0human interaction. The question of Fundamentalism prompted this\u00c2\u00a0exploration, but I believe the approach should lend itself to any\u00c2\u00a0number of “-isms.” While this line of thought rather naturally flows\u00c2\u00a0into ideas surrounding esoteric (inner) spirituality and\u00c2\u00a0introspection, I will restrict the subject matter of this post to\u00c2\u00a0exoteric topics which we may use as analytic tools.<\/p>\n

Recognizing Levels of Spiritual Consciousness<\/strong><\/p>\n

I find Prof. Ron Miller offers me a useful way of thinking about\u00c2\u00a0spiritual perspectives in describing a four story building as\u00c2\u00a0representing our levels of consciousness. I think this model offers a\u00c2\u00a0good starting point for a lot of conversations, including trying to\u00c2\u00a0understand Fundamentalism. It is simple enough to easily keep in mind,\u00c2\u00a0its thresholds are well defined, yet despite its simplicity, I find it\u00c2\u00a0useful in organizing my thoughts. His four levels of consciousness\u00c2\u00a0are: basement, first floor, second floor, and roof top garden.<\/p>\n

The lowest state of consciousness is the basement. Prof. Miller often\u00c2\u00a0refers to this as “tribal” thinking. Everything is 100% Right or 100%\u00c2\u00a0Wrong. When viewing the world in this way it is exceedingly easy to\u00c2\u00a0dehumanize others, and in extreme cases to even see them as Satan or\u00c2\u00a0some other embodiment of Evil Incarnate. From there it is quite a\u00c2\u00a0small step to embrace murdering them in the name of God. (Intolerance\u00c2\u00a0of others is maximized.)<\/p>\n

Raising our consciousness to the first floor affords us greater\u00c2\u00a0perspective. This is largely a rational\/intellectual lens through\u00c2\u00a0which we view the world. We begin to understand there are many ways of\u00c2\u00a0looking at the world and instead of a world of Black and White we\u00c2\u00a0begin to observe shades of gray between these extremes. The world\u00c2\u00a0becomes larger, inter-related, and increasingly complex. (Tolerance of\u00c2\u00a0others begins to replace intolerance.)<\/p>\n

In raising our consciousness to the second floor we gain emotional\u00c2\u00a0empathy. The ability to feel in our heart as we imagine others might\u00c2\u00a0feel. We begin to walk in their shoes. This has an obvious effect upon\u00c2\u00a0us, because we now see each person as an individual, who like us, has\u00c2\u00a0feelings, and we begin to appreciate how our behaviors and actions\u00c2\u00a0effect others emotionally. One might say we begin to live in our\u00c2\u00a0heart, as well as in our head. (We begin to move from merely\u00c2\u00a0tolerating others, toward accepting them. A subtle yet important\u00c2\u00a0distinction.)<\/p>\n

Finally, we come to the roof top garden. Few people spend much time\u00c2\u00a0here. This is said to be where we really see the world and all those\u00c2\u00a0in it as One. We no longer see enemies… how could we when all are\u00c2\u00a0One? This is the view offered to us by all great spiritual traditions.<\/p>\n

Spiritual masters and “mystics” help us look within our own hearts to\u00c2\u00a0find an in-dwelling spark of the Divine (although there are\u00c2\u00a0differences of understanding as to what one should do with this\u00c2\u00a0insight). Perhaps most importantly, they teach this is equally true of\u00c2\u00a0everyone and everything around us. (Sincere appreciation of others\u00c2\u00a0increases, and ultimately is maximized.)<\/p>\n

One may have noticed that I ended each “floor” of consciousness with a\u00c2\u00a0parenthetical statement. These comments outline another very simple\u00c2\u00a0way of seeing others. I use it to remind myself to be more\u00c2\u00a0open-hearted. In adapting it to a four-fold model I began with\u00c2\u00a0intolerance, but normally I only consider the three later stages:\u00c2\u00a0tolerance, acceptance, and appreciation.<\/p>\n

First and foremost, I must \u00e2\u20ac\u0153tolerate\u00e2\u20ac\u009d others and their ways. I wish\u00c2\u00a0others to give me the privilege of thinking as I do, therefore I must\u00c2\u00a0pay others the same respect. To my mind, peacefully living with one\u00c2\u00a0another begins with (optimally, mutual) tolerance.<\/p>\n

Over time, I find that I move from simply tolerating others to\u00c2\u00a0accepting their ways, even when they differ from my own, and even when\u00c2\u00a0I have no intention of adopting them. This may seem like a subtle\u00c2\u00a0distinction, but I think it is very important. In addition to opening\u00c2\u00a0my mind to others, I now open my heart to them, and I believe this is\u00c2\u00a0why shifting into this state of awareness is so powerful. I feel this\u00c2\u00a0offers better healing, both for myself and the other party, regardless\u00c2\u00a0of whether the feeling is reciprocated. Besides, we are all connected\u00c2\u00a0at a very deep level, anyway, right?<\/p>\n

And finally, I may come to appreciate some aspects of previously alien\u00c2\u00a0views. Sometimes I feel that I discover another piece of the “Divine\u00c2\u00a0puzzle” allowing me deeper spiritual insight to my own search for the\u00c2\u00a0Divine. When this happens I have begun to learn from what I, at first,\u00c2\u00a0merely \u00e2\u20ac\u0153tolerated.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d I have to think this is healthy as it offers a\u00c2\u00a0grander view of both the physical world and my inner spiritual life.\u00c2\u00a0(Such is my goal at any rate.)<\/p>\n


\nFramework for Understanding Discussions<\/strong><\/p>\n

By blending these two sets of “lenses” upon consciousness, I like to\u00c2\u00a0think I have a tool for achieving a better understanding of how others\u00c2\u00a0appear to be interacting with one another. And to the degree one\u00c2\u00a0better understands another person’s perspective, one should be better\u00c2\u00a0able to communicate\/interact with them. The first three lines are\u00c2\u00a0arranged in a four column display. The last two lines are arranged as\u00c2\u00a0continuums of Communication and Violence, each of which is very\u00c2\u00a0important with regard to informing me of how effectively I may expect\u00c2\u00a0to interact with the person or group under investigation:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Basement….. First Floor…… Second Floor… Roof Garden
\n———————————————————–<\/p>\n

Tribal……. Rational\/Mental.. Empathy\/Heart.. All as One
\nIntolerance.. Tolerance…….. Acceptance….. Appreciation
\n———————————————————–<\/p>\n

None <————> Communication <———–> Oneness\/Love
\nMaximum <————> Violence <————-> Minimum<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The continuum of degrees of communication ranges from no communication\u00c2\u00a0taking place at the basement\/tribal\/intolerant end of the spectrum, to\u00c2\u00a0finding an increasing ability to communicate across the central areas,\u00c2\u00a0to moving toward sincere concern for others at the opposite end of\u00c2\u00a0this continuum; one might name this end of the spectrum Love.<\/p>\n

Returning to Prof. Miller’s metaphor, we find that as one raises their\u00c2\u00a0consciousness higher, one has a wider, more understanding perspective\u00c2\u00a0of our interconnectedness with one another. From the roof top garden\u00c2\u00a0we see we are all One. So the “more evolved” views of the world\u00c2\u00a0inherently have greater flexibility and provide greater understanding\u00c2\u00a0than those restrained to lower floors. Whereas, from the basement,\u00c2\u00a0there is no outside view at all. For those in the basement there is no\u00c2\u00a0communication with the wider world… their eyes, and worse, their\u00c2\u00a0minds are closed.<\/p>\n

This allows us to understand that violent persons trapped in tribal\u00c2\u00a0thinking are not Evil. They simply have a very limited scope of vision\u00c2\u00a0and are operating from a very limited level of consciousness. And it\u00c2\u00a0seems to be much more difficult to raise one’s actions above one’s\u00c2\u00a0level of consciousness, than to reach out to a less evolved level of\u00c2\u00a0consciousness from a higher one. However, if they are open to\u00c2\u00a0meaningful communication we may mitigate these negatives. But if they\u00c2\u00a0have no interest in communicating with us and in fact wish to harm or\u00c2\u00a0kill us, mitigation becomes increasingly difficult to impossible. Seen\u00c2\u00a0in this light, the continuums of violence and communication mutually\u00c2\u00a0limit and expand one another. Both are highly dynamic and I think we\u00c2\u00a0are amply rewarded by paying them due attention.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Stages of Faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

A more complex model for understanding our developmental stages of\u00c2\u00a0faith is presented by James W. Fowler in his book “Stages of Faith:<\/p>\n

The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning.” I have\u00c2\u00a0been working with his ideas too, in the hope they may allow me to\u00c2\u00a0better understand how I have come to view the world, and my place in\u00c2\u00a0it. To the degree I am successful in this, I believe I will be better\u00c2\u00a0able to understand others, thus enabling more effective communication\u00c2\u00a0with them. (This remains a work in progress.) Fowler presents six or\u00c2\u00a0seven stages of faith, depending upon whether one counts our earliest\u00c2\u00a0days of infancy, which I do, but I label it as zero, so as to keep to\u00c2\u00a0Fowler’s stage designations:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

0. Infancy & Undifferentiated Faith<\/p>\n

1. Intuitive-Projective Faith<\/p>\n

2. Mythic-Literal Faith<\/p>\n

3. Synthetic-Conventional Faith<\/p>\n

4. Individuative-Reflective Faith<\/p>\n

5. Conjunctive Faith<\/p>\n

6. Universalizing Faith<\/p>\n

Fowler argues that all normally healthy adults will progress to at\u00c2\u00a0least stage three. At this point one may adequately function in\u00c2\u00a0society so one may or may not mature beyond this. And as one might\u00c2\u00a0expect, a person generally matures to the average stage of faith of\u00c2\u00a0those who make up one’s world with relative ease.<\/p>\n

I should also point out that in using the word faith Fowler is not\u00c2\u00a0limiting it’s meaning to faith in the Divine. He uses it in a broader\u00c2\u00a0sense. Faith is that which provides us meaning in life, be it God,\u00c2\u00a0baseball, or a larger bank account. This brings to mind Viktor\u00c2\u00a0Frankl’s work in developing logostherapy. Frankl emphasizes faith is\u00c2\u00a0not just something we believe in, but is that which provides deep\u00c2\u00a0meaning to our life… it is the very reason we exist.<\/p>\n

The main difference I see between these two authors is that Fowler\u00c2\u00a0does include such seemingly trivial ideas as baseball and bank\u00c2\u00a0accounts as constituting one’s faith provided one organizes one’s life\u00c2\u00a0around it. Whereas, I believe Frankl would argue that this is a\u00c2\u00a0delusionary perspective; that when truly pressed for a reason to live\u00c2\u00a0another day, baseball and bank accounts pale. They lack sufficient\u00c2\u00a0depth to keep a person alive against all odds and reason. Frankl is a\u00c2\u00a0holocaust survivor. He has personal experiences none of us would wish\u00c2\u00a0to share, which profoundly inform his insights.<\/p>\n

So the the way Fowler uses the word faith, it is not as weak as mere\u00c2\u00a0belief, nor does it require that it includes a depth of purpose and\u00c2\u00a0spiritual meaning that keeps one alive against all odds (although it\u00c2\u00a0does not preclude this, while it does preclude the weak form of\u00c2\u00a0belief).<\/p>\n

I am not going to try to summarize Fowlers book in a few paragraphs.\u00c2\u00a0Instead, I will point out that the early stages appear to be rather\u00c2\u00a0simplistic and two dimensional. For example, God is an old guy with a\u00c2\u00a0beard living up in heaven. God’s behavior and rewards and punishments\u00c2\u00a0are seen as simple extensions of one’s own world view. One may pray to\u00c2\u00a0store up favors to be paid back during times of need, much like a\u00c2\u00a0spiritual savings account. Thinking is rigid: God is good; man is\u00c2\u00a0evil. (Which we may recognize as the black and white thinking of those\u00c2\u00a0living in Ron Miller’s basement.)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As one begins to develop more refined stages of faith, the literal God\u00c2\u00a0in the sky kind of thinking falls away. Spiritual concepts become less\u00c2\u00a0anthropomorphic, and more abstract. This makes it easier to work with\u00c2\u00a0the underlying ideas and symbols which form the building blocks of the\u00c2\u00a0simpler ideas surrounding one’s faith. One might say one begins to\u00c2\u00a0work with archetypal images. And as one continues their developmental\u00c2\u00a0progression, this allows one to compare and contrast an increasing\u00c2\u00a0number of archetypal images, from one’s own faith and those outside\u00c2\u00a0one’s faith. Eventually, one may even begin to incorporate archetypal\u00c2\u00a0images from other paradigms. And ultimately, one begins to correlate\u00c2\u00a0disparate paradigms and to appreciate the ocean of images shared\u00c2\u00a0within and across the entire human community\/condition. (Which we\u00c2\u00a0might recognize as the roof top garden view, in which we are all\u00c2\u00a0really One.)<\/p>\n

The reason I find these ideas useful, is there is little point in\u00c2\u00a0speaking to a stage three\/basement dweller in terms of a universal\u00c2\u00a0Divine plan affording everyone equal access to spiritual Oneness. They\u00c2\u00a0cannot see that view from their perspective. This is not the same\u00c2\u00a0thing as saying they will never be able to share that perspective, but\u00c2\u00a0it is to say if one wishes to communicate meaningfully with them right\u00c2\u00a0now, one’s symbols and language will have to be modified accordingly.<\/p>\n

In this way, I see what we frequently label Religious Fundamentalism\u00c2\u00a0as an early, undeveloped, and unrefined stage of\u00c2\u00a0consciousness\/spirituality. They are living in the basement, with\u00c2\u00a0little to no view of the outside world. They may or may not have any\u00c2\u00a0interest in communicating with others, and they may or may not resort\u00c2\u00a0to violence to retain their (basement) view of the world, and\/or\u00c2\u00a0attempt to force it upon others. Of these two continuums,\u00c2\u00a0communication is fairly harmless to others, because others have the\u00c2\u00a0option to largely ignore those who are vocally adamant and close\u00c2\u00a0minded. But should they resort to violence, this must be properly\u00c2\u00a0addressed by others. After all, it is pretty difficult to ignore\u00c2\u00a0someone who is trying to split your skull, and certainly dangerous to\u00c2\u00a0ignore them. The trick, of course, is in identifying what constitutes\u00c2\u00a0a proper response. Optimally, there will be more spiritually evolved\u00c2\u00a0members of their own group who take this upon themselves.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0X-Y-Z Plot of Violence, Communication, Consciousness\u00c2\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

I feel it is important we consider the Continuum of Violence more\u00c2\u00a0closely. Violence could alternately be labeled as intolerance. However\u00c2\u00a0I feel intolerance is already a form of violence; to my mind it is\u00c2\u00a0merely a subset within the category of violence. If we plot “Violence”\u00c2\u00a0along the vertical axis, “Communication” along the horizontal axis,\u00c2\u00a0and start each at zero we have something like the following graph (I\u00c2\u00a0think negative values make understanding this more difficult; so all\u00c2\u00a0values are positive, and rated as a percentage from 0% to 100%):<\/p>\n

Violence
\n100%
\n|B———————-C
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|————————
\n|A———————-D
\n0,0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 Communication\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0 100%<\/p>\n

With the continuums of Violence and Communication set up as opposing\u00c2\u00a0axes, we may begin plotting the “relative danger” of a given\u00c2\u00a0Fundamentalist position\/group. I have plotted four points: A, B, C,\u00c2\u00a0and D.<\/p>\n

Point A: This is at the extreme bottom-left of the graph. It\u00c2\u00a0represents zero communication, and zero violence. Because there is no\u00c2\u00a0violence it is mostly harmless. However, since it is totally lacking\u00c2\u00a0in communication, it is also of no practical value. To provoke growth\u00c2\u00a0it would seem we need some combination of friction to stir things up,\u00c2\u00a0combined with effective communication to discover a new equilibrium.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Point B: Moving vertically to the extreme upper-left corner of the\u00c2\u00a0graph, we find maximum violence with minimum communication. I would\u00c2\u00a0argue this represents the most dangerous extreme we face. Here the\u00c2\u00a0violence has reached murderous levels and there is no communication to\u00c2\u00a0mitigate this violence. This is the region of Holy Wars, Crusades, and\u00c2\u00a0the Salem Witch Trials. It is the worse world humans have to offer.<\/p>\n

Point C: Moving along the upper limit of the graph to the far right,\u00c2\u00a0we come to the most dynamic region of the graph. Here we still find\u00c2\u00a0maximum violence, so it is terribly violent and murderous by nature,\u00c2\u00a0but we have some ability , or hope, to mitigate this because we also\u00c2\u00a0have maximum levels of communication. There is however no guarantee\u00c2\u00a0one will be able to effect positive communications sufficient to\u00c2\u00a0overcome the violent nature of this region. Therefore, this remains an\u00c2\u00a0incredibly dangerous and murderous region in which to find oneself.<\/p>\n

Point D: Dropping now to the extreme bottom-right corner of the graph\u00c2\u00a0we find the most stable and I would imagine the most desirable region\u00c2\u00a0in which to live. Communication is maximized while violence is\u00c2\u00a0minimized. Here we find the greatest ability to communicate with one\u00c2\u00a0another, and with no fear of violent retribution for holding a\u00c2\u00a0difference in opinion. This is the peaceful, pluralistic region in\u00c2\u00a0which I would wish to live. It is my opinion the long term safety and\u00c2\u00a0continued growth of the human race requires our taking up residence in\u00c2\u00a0this region.<\/p>\n

I should perhaps point out that when I use the term communication I\u00c2\u00a0imply dialog. Simply broadcasting one-way without listening to the\u00c2\u00a0other party does NOT constitute effective communication. Shouting down\u00c2\u00a0another person is merely another form of violence, and broadcasting in\u00c2\u00a0place of communication is a simply more mild form of this violence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

A logical extension of this two-dimensional graph, would be to create\u00c2\u00a0a three-dimensional graph with consciousness plotted along the new\u00c2\u00a0Z-axis. The levels of consciousness are Prof. Ron Miller’s four story\u00c2\u00a0building: basement (0%), first floor, second floor, and roof top\u00c2\u00a0garden (100%). I imagine this dimension as helping us to define the\u00c2\u00a0spiritual quality of the communication shown above. And as I am using\u00c2\u00a0the terms, I feel one may consider consciousness as being roughly\u00c2\u00a0equivalent with spirituality, and I believe it offers great healing\u00c2\u00a0vitality. My hope is that it trumps violence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

I believe we should find this to be a very useful tool for diagnosing\u00c2\u00a0a given situation, as it allows us to compare and contrast the mixture\u00c2\u00a0of violence, communication, and consciousness. Much like using X-Y-Z\u00c2\u00a0coordinates to describe our physical location in space (North-South;\u00c2\u00a0East-West; Up-Down), we can now describe some important qualities\u00c2\u00a0found in human interactions (using Violence; Communication;\u00c2\u00a0Consciousness as our value coordinates).<\/p>\n

For example, if plot 90,0,20 describes a given person or group\u00c2\u00a0(meaning either the average value of the group as a whole, or that of\u00c2\u00a0the group’s leaders), I know they are 90% violent; 0% communicative;\u00c2\u00a0and 20% conscious (still using triable, 100%-right\/100%-wrong\u00c2\u00a0thinking). This tells me they are incredibly dangerous, and\u00c2\u00a0effectively impossible to speak with because they have zero interest\u00c2\u00a0in communicating with others. In such cases, my options in dealing\u00c2\u00a0with a person\/group of this kind will be severely limited. On the\u00c2\u00a0other hand, an 80,70,10 group will be much easier to deal with because\u00c2\u00a0we now have a fair ability to communicate with one another. They are\u00c2\u00a0still very violent, and their thinking is not very consciously\u00c2\u00a0evolved, but where there is meaningful two-way dialog there is hope of\u00c2\u00a0improving relations.<\/p>\n

I can mentally refer to this X-Y-Z graph when dealing with others. As\u00c2\u00a0I better understand “where they are coming from” I can better modify\u00c2\u00a0my behavior and communication techniques to effect more productive\u00c2\u00a0communications. I should also be able to use this model to understand\u00c2\u00a0why I experience difficulty in working with another person or group,\u00c2\u00a0and modify my approach accordingly, or perhaps realize our ability to\u00c2\u00a0dialog is nearly zero.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Perhaps most importantly, I can use this to self-evaluate my own\u00c2\u00a0spiritual progress. I suspect as we mature in our first and second\u00c2\u00a0floor stages of development we begin to appreciate how we may cause a\u00c2\u00a0number of our own problems, which we previously only saw as something\u00c2\u00a0others did to us. As as we become co-conspirators in our life as\u00c2\u00a0opposed to innocent\/powerless victims, we embrace the ability and\u00c2\u00a0responsibility to effect change in our own lives. This is a critical\u00c2\u00a0component in our development, social as well as spiritual. I feel\u00c2\u00a0certain if I honestly evaluated and plotted my own value coordinates\u00c2\u00a0throughout my life, I could plot my trajectory along this graph and\u00c2\u00a0gain insight to past (and hopefully future) experiences contributing\u00c2\u00a0to my spiritual development.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

I think this pretty well sets the table for a discussion of\u00c2\u00a0Fundamentalism, at least as I see it. I do not think we have a chance\u00c2\u00a0of understanding Fundamentalism until we develop a useful model of\u00c2\u00a0various and sometimes competing ways of seeing the world. And we must\u00c2\u00a0remember we can only see that which lies at our own line-of-sight and\u00c2\u00a0below. My perspective is also limited by my elevation (degree of\u00c2\u00a0Spiritual\/Consciousness development). Sometimes I think I can catch\u00c2\u00a0the scent of the flowers growing in the roof top garden, but I\u00c2\u00a0certainly do not share that vista. On the other hand, at least I know\u00c2\u00a0the garden is up there! \ud83d\ude09 heheh….<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

With blessings for peace and harmony,<\/p>\n

Erik Weaver<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Developing an Understanding of Spiritual Consciousness by Erik Weaver (one of our frequent Gnostic Seminary contributors) The subject of how we formulate our personal views of the world has\u00c2\u00a0been on my mind of late. The lens through which we see the world\u00c2\u00a0greatly effects how we choose to interact with others. And they with\u00c2\u00a0us, as colored … Continue reading Spiritual Consciousness, Violent Fundamentalism, Stages of Faith<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-536","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-misc"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/536","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=536"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/536\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":837,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/536\/revisions\/837"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=536"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=536"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.northernway.org\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=536"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}