Representations of the Universe are NOT the Universe.
Pre-enlightenment Europe saw ‘the centre’ as ‘the centre of comings and goings’, and entrances and departures from walled cities had symbolic significance as in birth and death. In the enlightenment, the ‘centre’ became ‘the centre of control’ with visual information flowing inward and controls [and projectiles] radiating outwards. Read the rest of this entry »
Modern physics wants to make ‘relations first’ and ‘things last’, … inverting the importance established by classical physics, radically changing the world view, and thus the individual and collective social behaviours that are orchestrated and shaped by world view.
One might say, as F. David Peat does in ‘Blackfoot Physics’, that the ‘relations first, things last’ view is foundational to the ‘yin/yang’ culture of indigenous aboriginals while the ‘things first, relations last’ view is foundational to the ‘all-yang-no-yin’ Western culture. Read the rest of this entry »
1. Vision [visual sensing] blinds us to physical reality.
2. Purpose oriented behaviour is aberrant behaviour.
Understanding what Bohm refers to as widespread ‘incoherence’ in modern society; i.e. in the globally dominant Enlightenment European society, benefits from inquiry into how far we can trust our ‘visual sensing’ and our impression of ‘purposeful behaviour’. Read the rest of this entry »
This overview is a companion piece to the following essay, ‘There is Neither Past Nor Future: The Tao is Now’ which summarizes in non-technical language, the gist of that essay, which brings into connective confluence, a diverse multiplicity of understandings which, when brought together, [are designed to] deliver a holonic understanding that transcends ‘the component understandings’. Read the rest of this entry »
Having come to the conclusion that there is neither past nor future, it seems right to me to share this finding, and an explanation of it, with others, who I am guessing, are not likely to be offended by it. Read the rest of this entry »
This following is an update on research into what I previously have called ‘inclusionality’ and ‘complex community dynamics’, our ‘take’ or pyscho-physical experiencing of the world understood as a world of ‘flow’, also known as ‘the Tao that cannot be named’ [is beyond language-based description] also known as ‘Brahman’, ‘Logos’. This update is a review of the different ways that different people [or the same people in different situations] are currently interpreting it. Read the rest of this entry »
(Can be read in conjunction with ‘How Science is Displacing Spirituality’)
RST = Relational-Spatial Transformation
Mach, Nietzsche, Bohm, Schroedinger contended that the world is a continually transforming relational spatial Plenum, … ‘the All’, and that material bodies are ‘schaumkommen’ (‘appearances’). Berkeley had argued the same, and had pointed out errors in the foundations of Newton’s ‘Principles of Natural Philosophy’, which have become part of our everyday scientific viewing of ‘how the world works’.
This is a brief summary of the ‘errors’ in the foundations of Newtonian scientific constructions of understanding, … ‘errors’ which force the abandonment of the RST view and the single-minded opting for the MCD view. Read the rest of this entry »
This is one of those stories like Copernicus told; a simple suggestion as to how we are missing something that is with us everyday; another way of seeing the same things we are seeing; another way that ‘makes more sense’ than our current established way of seeing it.
I would call this story; ‘How spirituality is displaced by science’, and increasingly so, as scientific thinking infuses ever deeper into the fabric of everday life. Read the rest of this entry »
‘Nutshell’ Introduction to ‘What is going wrong with [Western] society’?
Nutshell: – Psychologists [the discipline] don’t understand physics to the point of being able to challenge it and physicists [the discipline] don’t understand psychology to the point of being able to challenge it, so each domain settles for treating the other domain as a ‘separate’ domain. But the point of departure for physicists is ‘psychology’ (sensation) and the point of departure for psychologists is ‘physics’ (physiology). Mach argues for the psychophysical (one domain). If Mach is right, and I have at least 20 years of investigative work that, for me, point to him being right, then space is ‘relational’ and there are no ‘things-in-themselves’ [they are relational sensa], so the ‘mind’ and ‘body’ do not split into two. But because we treat them as if they were split and we treat things as ‘things-in-themselves’ rather than relational nexa or ‘sensa’ [centres of perception/experience], our modern western society mistakenly [mis]takes for ‘reality’, an intellectual scientific concept based [linguistic idealization based] world of ‘things-in-themselves’ and ‘what things do’. What remains hidden beneath it is the world of sensation, the basic world of sensory experience, which we have ‘paved over’ with purified scientific concepts. Society’s ‘disconnect’ is that we are using our intellect to engage with this non-real world of purified scientific concepts, which is not the world of our sensory experience. This is a major source of ‘incoherence’ in our societal dynamic. Currently, we are ‘stuck’ and prevented from communally discovering [acknowledging] ‘our disconnect’ because of our continuing treatment of the realm of the psychological and the realm of the physical as two different realms, rather than as one psychophysical phenomenal realm. Read the rest of this entry »
The one is made up of all things, and all things issue from the one. -Heraclitus
καὶ ἐκ πάντων ἓν καὶ ἐξ ἑνὸς πάντα
The problem of the ‘one and the many’ has been around since the earliest records of humans reflecting on their ‘human condition’. The strife that goes on within us fuels our quest to reconcile the strife within us. Every ‘coincidentia oppositorum’; one and many, love and hate, evil and goodness, creative-urge and destructive-urge, the outer and the inner, objectivity and subjectivity, … cry out for some, … ‘mediation?’ Read the rest of this entry »