The scientific method does not give the scientist license to ignore evidence or even worse, to denigrate the observer. Yet that is exactly what we see happening over and over again. The whole foeld of esoteric insight represents a mass of completely repeatable phenomena made now by thousands of observers who all strive to establish confirmation. They should be coached by scientists in the art of creating bullet proof experiments.
At least then the scientists might learn something too.
Even the example here of definition shows fraying at the edges. My own efforts put the observer squarely back in the center of the equation , but as an observer space rather than a single individual. This blog is about my investigations of interesting topics through multiple observers. It becomes a pretty good bet that the Bigfoot is alive and well when you can establish a population of 10,000 individual reporters, all cross checked by a skilled reporter. Even better, more and more data trickles in that conform to the developing conjecture.
Science is meant to be dynamic and this example could not have been better chosen.
Christina Sarich, Staff Writer
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/09/30/measuring-scientific-method-wisdom-esoteric-insight/
Pseudoscience is defined as a belief or idea, accepted as true, that
has not been proven by the scientific method. While science has been
invaluable in helping to promote our ever-expanding knowledge of the
Universe, it cannot be held as a hard-and-fast rule to determining
Truth. In many instances the scientific method,
and peer reviewed articles have acted as a sieve to bring only the
highest learning to the forefront of humankind’s imagination, but in
some instances, science, in it’s strictest sense, turns out to be
nothing more than an arbitrary, and limited view of a Universe who’s
laws are far too vast for our Newtonian, materialistic measurements to
define.
Frank Wolfs,
Professor of Physics at the University of Rochester, provides his
undergraduate physics students with a good working definition of the
scientific method: “the process by which scientists, collectively and
over time, endeavor to construct an accurate (that is, reliable,
consistent and non-arbitrary) representation of the world.”
“I don’t know, so maybe I’m not.” ~ Bumper Sticker
In fact, we are only now learning just how much our current level of
consciousness affects even the outcome of scientific experimentation. We
already know that stereotypes and the current ‘accepted’ paradigms sway
the outcome of scientific experimentation, even without scientists’
conscious awareness. Our subconscious beliefs are like the vast ocean
shaping our reality, and the conscious experience only a sea foam
floating atop a great depth of larger understanding.
[ This is the ultimate chuckle that the universe brings to us - arclein]
In Joseph E. LeDoux’s book, Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are,
he states, “your ‘self,’ the essence of who you are, reflects patterns
of interconnectivity between neurons in your brain. Most of what brain
does is accomplished by synaptic transmission between neurons, and by
calling upon the information encoded by past transmissions across
synapses.”
This brings up an interesting question, then, in the discussion of
science vs. pseudo-science. If our brains are largely projecting a
reality based primarily on past neuronal pathways, then it would easily
follow that future understanding of the world would be based on the most
frequent pathways developed in our minds. In other words, a totally,
radically, new idea is probably going to be rejected, much like imaginal
cells are in the body of caterpillar becoming a butterfly.
New ideas are like a foreign invader to our current, accepted
paradigms. There is a reason why the collective powers in control of the
world in the time of Copernicus refused to believe the world was round.
In a sense, anything or anyone that challenges our current world view,
even today can be seen as part of the ‘Flat World Society.’
Altering our world view can be a radical shift, one that is unsettling
and confusing, so it is no wonder that it takes a heroic individual,
willing to put his or her life and reputation on the line to promote new
paradigms which will radically shift our views.
No wonder it is hard to accept that wisdom could be downloaded
straight from the larger consciousness which we are all a part of. It is
difficult to accept that a T’ai Chi Chuan master,
for example, could understand complex laws of physics just by
meditating in the Wu Dang mountains, or that an Indian sage could
understand fractal geometry without having ever studied math, simply by
achieving non-dualistic consciousness via the attainment of Samadhi. These are not levels of awareness which our current scientific ‘laws’ permit.
There is in fact, an intelligence that far super-cedes our limited
‘scientific methods.’ It doesn’t care if we understand its laws or not.
Just because we call it pseudo-science, does not make it untrue.
Visionary, Terence McKenna has said:
“The planet is some kind of organized intelligence. It’s very different from us. It’s had 5- or 6-billion years to create a slow moving mind which is made of oceans and rivers and rain forests and glaciers. It’s becoming aware of us, as we are becoming aware of it, strangely enough. Two less likely members of a relationship can hardly be imagined – the technological apes and the dreaming planet. And yet, because the life of each depends on the other, there’s a feeling towards this immense, strange, wise, old, neutral, weird thing, and it is trying to figure out why its dreams are so tormented and why everything is out of balance.”
How does one explain this with conventional scientific tools?
It doesn’t mean that science is not important. It allowed us to
understand that the body was made up of quarks and then neutrinos and
then even waves and particles, instead of just skin and bones. It
brought us to many of the paradigm-shifting ideas which will now serve
us as we shift into an even greater understanding of our world, and even
greater understanding of the consciousness behind it. However, science
alone cannot give us the whole Truth.
Quantum theory, which many consider the highest current science, has proven that there is a basic oneness which joins all things. Over 20 years ago, Fritjof Capra said, in the Tao of Physics,
“. . . It shows that we cannot decompose the world into independently existing smallest units. As we penetrate into matter, nature does not show us any isolated “building blocks,” but rather appears as a complicated web of relations between the various parts of the whole. These relations always include the observer in an essential way. The human observer constitutes the final link in the chain of observational processes, and the properties of any atomic object can be understood only in terms of the object’s interaction with the observer.”
[ Yet i have shown that i can create the universe from independently existing smallest units - sorry about that children - arclein ]
You can call it psuedo-science when a Shaman sees other realities, or
a Kung Fu artist learns how to defy gravity and jumps onto a second
story roof after learning how to make his body ‘lighter,’ but this is
simply a different acceptance of what is, and if anything, science is
proving that we are only limited by whatever we think limits us.
As we observe, so we are. Stick that in your scientific method, and see what comes out the other end.
About the Author
Christina Sarich is a musician, yogi, humanitarian and freelance writer who channels many hours of studying Lao Tzu, Paramahansa Yogananda, Rob Brezny, Miles Davis, and Tom Robbins into interesting tidbits to help you Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.
This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay
to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all
links remain intact.
No comments:
Post a Comment