Prose; Spiralling Paradox


Image

The gravity of each individual Mind pulls us and keeps us in the body, giving off a specific gift, look, flavor, color, and feel.

Individual cells dance with electromagnetic charge set in motion by our feelings and thoughts.

Complete…we can co-create just as we are right now.

Yet gravity still makes us spiral as One toward The Center, all touching and affecting each other.

It’s a paradox.

We are individuals yet we are One.

 

Re-Program; The Ten Dogmas of Materialism


 

The Science Delusion Cover

The 10 Assumptions of Materialism

  1. Nature is mechanical. All of life is a machine and we are mechanical (Artificial Intelligence is trying to make the machine transcendent).
  2. Matter is unconscious.
  3. The laws of nature are fixed.
  4. The total amount of energy and matter is always the same.
  5. Nature is purposeless.
  6. Biological inheritance is material. Reality is material.
  7. Memories are stored as material traces inside your brain.
  8. The Mind is inside the head. It’s the same as your brain.
  9. Psychic phenomena are illusory. Telepathy is impossible.
  10. Mechanistic medicine is the only kind of medicine that works.

Of course, these are all wrong and not just a little wrong, completely wrong. This entire book is a well-thought-out disputation and refutation of these ten dogmas. My own life and career refute them empirically as well. Rupert Sheldrake is a heavyweight Ph.D. scientist and was banned from TED talks because he’s right and it upsets the entire apple cart. He is a scientist and supports the advancement of real science. Not only that but anyone who cares about the survival of sentient life on earth right now better speak up forcefully or we’re toast. He rocks out big time and I am in his court having experienced the movement of QI in patient’s bodies for 20 years.

I’m so sorry QI cannot be measured yet for people who are scared of actually feeling Life Force IN THE BODY but it’s real. The Chinese have understood and worked with QI for 10,000 years. It is the foundation of Chinese Medicine which I also endorse and use to the extent that I’m trained in it. QI is not unlike sunlight or a cell phone tower signal but it’s much more advanced and complex than that. It’s the seat of our consciousness.

In the last part of the book he says,

“The materialist agenda was once liberating but is now depressing. Those who believe in it are alienated from their own experience; they are cut off from all spiritual traditions, and they are prone to suffer from a sense of disconnection and isolation. Meanwhile, the power unleashed by scientific knowledge is causing the mass extinction of other species and endangering our own. The realization that the sciences do not know the fundamental answers leads to humility rather than arrogance, and openness rather than dogmatism. Much remains to be discovered and rediscovered, including wisdom.”

I highly recommend this book.

Re-Program; Star Consciousness: An Alternative to Dark Matter


 

 

double_helix_nebula1-217x300

Article on an Alternative to Dark Matter

Dr. Matlof has a theory that stars may have their own version of consciousness.

“In the summer of 2011, Dr. Matloff delivered a paper in London at the British Interplanetary Society’s conference on the works of philosopher and writer Olaf Stapledon, the author of Star Maker (1937). One of Stapledon’s startling ideas was that stars themselves might have a form of consciousness. Greg’s presentation went to work on the notion in light of anomalous stellar velocities and asked what might make such an idea possible. His paper on the seemingly incredible notion follows.” –Paul Gilster, 2012

The Dark Matter hypothesis has been invoked as an explanation for the fact that stars revolve around the centers of their galaxies faster than can be accounted for by observable matter. After decades of failed experimental searches, dark matter has remained elusive.”

Dr. Matlof’s hypothesis that stars are conscious is nothing new and hails from panpsychism or animism. Greek philosophers from 600B.C. dabbled in this idea, particularly Plato.

This world is indeed a living being endowed with a soul and intelligence … a single visible living entity containing all other living entities, which by their nature are all related.-Plato

In our modern, mechanistic, detached Christian worldview, I would venture to say most of the world’s people don’t believe that the Earth and the cosmos have actual consciousness.  The media and religions have done a good job of dulling our minds to the real connectedness to the web of life. Consequently, we find ourselves with our finger on the button, a toxic political climate, and a toxic planet.

But why do we believe we are more conscious than a star? Because it’s different; it doesn’t have a body, it’s celestial, not terrestrial, it doesn’t walk, eat, or have blood so it must not be conscious. Why can’t there be different kinds of consciousness in different forms?  Does a brain always have to be gray matter inside a skull?

You see how ethnocentric our thinking and believing can be as humans.  For some evolutionary reason, we really emotionally need everything to look like us and agree with us or we get scared.  That makes us so vulnerable in a world where the only sure thing is change.

It hasn’t been proven that Dark Matter exists, so what can account for the stars holding in place?

Does Dark Matter Exist?

In 1978, astrophysicist Vera Rubin concluded that the observable motions of galaxies couldn’t be explained by the laws of Newtonian physics alone. Due to the speed of the galaxies’ rotation, the stars on their edges would fly away if the only thing holding them in place were the visible matter.”

We’re not sure about the stars, but my intuition tells me that what holds me here, in my body, is my intention, my mind, my will which says, “I like my body and the planet and I want to be here.” If that force can hold me in place, maybe it can hold a star in place as well.” We’ll have to see if we can prove otherwise.

 

 

Body Truth; Science: A Masculine Disorder?


fb_img_1490447974802.jpg

“Science is based on the professional creation and certification of knowledge which is tied to powerful interest groups, notably the state, corporations and the scientific profession itself. Patriarchy is based on male control of dominant social structures and the exclusion of women from positions of power through means such as direct discrimination, socialization and the gender division of labor.

Patriarchy within the scientific community is manifested through male control of elite positions and various exclusionary devices. The scientific method incorporates masculine features such as the objectification of nature. Scientific knowledge is masculine in its neglect of women’s experience and its adoption of paradigms built on assumptions of competition and hierarchy.”-Jill Bowling and Brian Martin, Ph.D.

Here is another article from an expert! It’s longer but VERY interesting.

Science: a masculine disorder

I woke up this morning, after being hijacked by “a friend” on a thread yesterday and then territorially denigrated in the patriarchal tradition, pondering the question; “Is the scientific method itself horse-and-buggy, materialist, patriarchal B.S.?  Is this possible? Before today, I pretty much supported it, although its methodology seemed very simplistic to me and not at all holistic. Was I the only one wondering if this might be true?

I wonder this because as a fifty-four-year-old female who is trained in science as far as needed in licensed health care, my intuition is as consistent and rational as anything I see or feel in this material world.  I also listen to it.  This phenomenon is mostly ignored, cynically scoffed at, and at best, not understood by most people including my ex-friend who has patently disrespected my intuitive read of the Mayan Harmonic for months now.  He just now told me how much better he is than me which kind of says it all.

My patients have confirmed my hands-on intuition with their bodies for fifteen years so it’s like breathing to me now.  I put my hands on someone and I can feel everything that’s going on. Then they confirm it verbally after I tell them what I sense.  Then I treat on the manifested body and they feel it again. I don’t feel it physically initially; I sense the energetic cause of the physical manifestation which is the cause of all illness; thoughts and feelings or vibrations then I assess and treat tactilely.

My ex-friend, who fancies himself a scientist, knows nothing to very little about the body and doesn’t even work in the sciences. I’ve made my living in healthcare for seventeen years. There are lessons to be learned by all.  For instance, in the last week I’ve learned two lessons:

  1.  It is unwise to only see the good in people when their shadow is blasting you in the face. They operate from cynicism and usage; not love, and you can feel it.
  2.  Many men do not have intuition on their radar and if they do, they subjugate it for the purposes of patriarchal power (money and control) or addiction. They view intuition as feminized or sub-cultural which would weaken their position in society. Other cultures can follow their intuition but patriarchal men from all cultures do not. They only use and objectify women sexually and poor people economically, no matter how nice they may seem and politically correct with their rhetoric. It’s fake. It takes an experienced and trained eye and ear to see it.  The first tip-off is, they never ask you how you are, and if they do, it’s not genuine.  You can feel it.

“Long-term structural change in science must be predicated on changing the relations between men and women.”

This applies across cultures, all over the world.  The real issue of disparity on the planet is between women and men all over the world and the rest of the issues follow.  Women are still treated in a barbaric manner, especially the child bride phenomenon.

“Complementing this approach is that taken by those specifically focusing on the reasons why there are not more women involved in the sciences. Several writers have examined science education, particularly looking at the reasons why girls leave science in their school years. Following the observations that boys get more teacher attention and girls have less confidence in their ability, in Australia, there have been some experiments with all-girls science and mathematics classes.

There has also been an analysis of the way in which science is constructed to reflect male values and suggestions about how to create a different sort of science. Arditti, for instance, argues for a feminist perspective which “would re-introduce and re-legitimize the intuitive approach”.

To be continued…

 

Re-Program; “The Science Delusion” by Rupert Sheldrake


The Science Delusion Cover

Rupert Sheldrake relentlessly asks mainstream so-called objective science to balance itself with its nemesis; the relational feminine principle; the dragon lady. He does not say this in the book but he alludes to it in every chapter.

I’m not sure he realizes it, but when he refers to the subjective, open inquiry, the dark cave, and the humanization of scientists as opposed to demi-gods, he seems to invoke the mythical goddesses Athena, Artemis or even Demeter in her nurturing, fecund ways. He wants scientists and the public to sit around the kitchen table and bake science bread together. It’s really rather charming, personally speaking, although I can see how traditional scientists would rather put their pants back on reading this book. He does hit below the belt as he reminds us that each scientist was born of his mother whether he liked her or not. You wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for her. Scientific fact #1; she made you in her body. That is the purpose of patriarchy and science right?; to forget that fact, or to erase the predominance of the way nature works. Yes, well, we all need reminding of that lest hubris utterly annihilates the planet through militaristic science funded technology in the name of progress and the virility of men.

I can’t get enough of Rupert’s support of balance between the earth, shamanism, intuition, psychism, natural healing, and good old-fashioned fun. I bet he had a cool Mom. Yes, Mr. Sheldrake assaults all of that in this book with a lucidity full of probing questions and facts that would make Harvey Weinstein blush.

Just because you’re a man, doesn’t mean you get to ram your billions of dollars through every last science program you can get your hands on, declare yourself God, mistreat the intelligent women, hog the awards and call Science The Truth!  Again, he doesn’t say that.  Those are my words, but he is British so he says it all nicely.

I just finished this book. The title is misleading because he is a scientist and has worked in science his whole life. He supports and has taught science; he is just seeking to have clearer and more honest communication with scientists themselves. In fact, the book is set up in a format to enhance a three-person discussion about materialistic science. As he says in the book, scientists are just people like you and me; no more correct or objective than any normal human being. Some of the time they are correct and some of the time they are not. We should no more put scientists on a pedestal than pastors, priests, or presidents!

In the book, he poses ten questions to the materialist scientist, explains his position and then challenges the scientist to examine his own thinking;

  1. Is Nature mechanical?
  2. Is the total amount of matter and energy always the same?
  3. Are the laws of nature fixed?
  4. Is matter unconscious?
  5. Is Nature purposeless?
  6. Is all biological inheritance material?
  7. Are memories stored as material traces?
  8. Are minds confined to brains?
  9. Are psychic phenomena illusory?
  10. Is mechanistic medicine the only kind that really works?

I enjoyed the last question because I’ve worked as a holistic practitioner for twenty years and have seen the answer first hand. I’m not going to be a spoiler on this one; I encourage you to read the book and comb through his logic. In each chapter, he poses historical fact and scientific evidence to challenge the materialist dogma. He’s clearly trying to have a conversation with his peers if anyone will respond!

He ends the book talking about scientists illusions about objectivity and the future of science. I read it and posted it as an audio clip. Happy Reading.

 

 

 

 

 

Re-Program; The Role of Intuition in the Scientific Method


The Role of Intuition in the Scientific Method

I’ve published an interesting booklet that you can buy on my website by clicking on the far right tab. It’s not very long and I’ve included a nice glossary of physics terms for the novice (like me). I read a lot of physics and love it but I am not a physicist. I wish I was but I came to it kind of late. Dr. Smith is an advocate for acknowledging intuition after working on the Manhattan Project. That would kick believing in rationality alone right out of anyone. Nothing like two atomic bombs killing millions to ruin your ideals about humanity.

 

 

The major branches of philosophy

 

This is a “tree” that shows where intuition fits, historically, into the sciences and how the sciences are actually offspring or children of philosophy.

All intellectual disciplines start with Philosophy.  Ph.D. behind a person’s name means Doctor of Philosophy no matter what field their major is.  Its namesake is Philo of Alexandria who was a Hellenistic Jew who wanted to create harmony, maybe in a contrived fashion?, between Judaism and Greek Philosophy.

  1. Logic-the attempt to codify the rules of rational thought.  Here is where formal, informal, symbolic, and mathematical logic fits.
  2. Epistemology-the study of knowledge itself, which to me sounds like gazing at your navel.  Religionists, agnostics, and atheists exist on this spectrum. Here is where all the branches of religion fit.
  3. Metaphysics-the study of the nature of things. This one is my favorite, of course, being holistic. Branches are cosmology and ontology. Here is where all of the natural sciences fit under cosmology. The life sciences, physical science, physics, astronomy, chemistry, earth.  If these are subdivided, they are fields.
  4. Axiology is the philosophical study of value. It is either the collective term for ethics and aesthetics, philosophical fields that depend crucially on notions of worth, or the foundation for these fields and thus similar to value theory and meta-ethics. Ethics and Aesthetics are it’s two main branches.  On the chart, the box that says Ethics could say Axiology.  Here is where all law science, art, and aesthetics fit. 

Intuition comes under ontology and metaphysics, then down to the philosophy of mind, then down to the philosophy of psychology.  You’ll see it sits right on the shelf with the philosophy of science equally. It then goes down that track and merges under the philosophy of science track with the science of psychology.  Psychology is a SCIENCE that comes from the philosophy of mind.  So, let’s have some respect here.  It’s not in a mushy bog.  It has to get through the rigors of the scientific method as well.

You’ll notice the five categories under the philosophy of science. There is a biased preponderance on this category, I believe due to Newtonian materialism. That is shifting now. The field of quantum physics is impressing on all the science categories now and shaking them up. In addition, that one field is also impacting the philosophy of mind, philosophy of religion, AND the parent field of Metaphysics. So give the quantum physicists all the ribbing you want. Those folks are on the leading edge. More power to them.