“Indigenous Cultures and the Implications of the New Physics: A Paradigm Shift into Panpsychism?”
By Melanie Purcell Department of Philosophy University of Newcastle, 1999
*What are the philosophical problems associated with the new paradigm and how does a paradigm shift ground that is aligned with panpsychic belief systems and at opposition with the philosophical imperatives of a materialistic and dominant culture?
*What does this new paradigm suggest to a global culture on the cusp of a new millennium?
*What are the implications of such a paradigm?
The nature of transdisciplinary investigations leads theorists into broad panoramas of multiple disciplinary areas. Here the study is focused on connections, similarities and differences of subject areas where specialist knowledge is drawn upon and compared with the work of other theoretical environments. Such an approach is often accused as being superficial as it may have a propensity to gloss over the subject matter as it relies on an overview of a broad perspective. Whilst this criticism is often true, it is unsympathetic to the fact that much of this work is grappling with vast arenas such as the nature of reality as a whole and the ontological relationship that humans have with such a reality.
The complexities of attempts to realise a grand view of reality are born of a need to assess the multiplicity of theoretical perspectives orchestrated in bounded environments of specialisation, which are products of Western epistemologies. It is also necessary to be inclusive of the multiple cultural cosmologies that are generated by the various ontology’s from which they are construed.
*How do we reconcile our multiple views of reality and how do we assess the nature of different cosmological constructs without assuming that the Western perspective is central to the truth of reality?
This question is considered as primary because it corresponds not only to the essential philosophical implications of the new paradigm, as well as the problems of the relativity of cultural perspectives of reality and the need to decentralises all “truths”. A structural geometry is suggested as a tool for viewing these problems, which is a higher dimensional topological structure. This is discussed under the heading “The Shape of Cultural Studies”.
An appreciation of transdiciplinary terrains that cross disciplinary boundaries and faculty boundaries, has necessitated trandisciplinary epistemologies that build theoretical overviews through selective work of many theorists. Their voices speak from a multiplicity of disciplinary environments and cultural perspectives and through them the potential for understanding the way that we collectively perceive reality may be studied. With this in mind I present a holistic view of various interconnections of subject matter which draws on the work of many theorists.
The relevance that such a work has to cultural studies may seem obscure as this subject is often specialising in the details of a contemporary and popular culture, in our case the Australian Culture. Many have questioned whether there is such a thing as it is a conglomeration of many cultural perspectives and belief systems that are umbrellaed by the dominant colonialist history that has defined its lineage to a British control. In this sense Australia presents the most fascinating cauldron of difference and extremes that one can imagine. The British and the Aboriginal are philosophically diametrically opposed cultures, and through the recent history of this country many other cultures have become synonymous with the Australian identity, all bringing with them various ways of perceiving reality.
This situation provides us with a brilliant example of the problems that are faced when considering perceptions of reality and in turn ways of being in that reality.
There is undeniably an assumption that the Western Culture’s perception of reality is correct, even though there are many non physical aspects of reality that are not able to be addressed through this materialist framework. For many materialists the assumption that these phenomenons exist at all is often considered as delusions of psychotic, superstitious or primitive minds. This supremacist position is a legacy from the domination of the Western culture and its influence upon all other cultures that it has come in contact with.
This paper provides an overview of the predominant problems that are raised by the New Physics. Comparisons are made between the main cultural extremes described as the dominator model and the partnership model that draws on the work of Riane Eisler , and particularly from her book the Chalice and the Blade (Raisner
1987, 1995). The former model pertains to the perception of reality that is held as central and considered the “norm” by the dominant culture which is primarily atomistic, hierarchical and materialist in philosophical construct. The latter describes the model most like the perception of reality expressed by indigenous and pre-patriarchal cultures that are non- hierarchical and holistic in orientation, that perceive everyone’s perspective to be eccentric.
The “New Physics” is shown to be aligned with the panpsychic perception of indigenous cultures which assumes that everything has and energetic body or spirit, all particles, all things. A tradition of theories can be traced that has emerged as process philosophy through the theories outlined in “Creative Evolution” by Henri Bergson (Bergson, 1911) and “Process and Reality”, the later work of Alfred North Whitehead (Whitehead, 1979) which has influenced many theorists who have since developed ideas on formative causation (Davidson, 1991), morphogenic fields (Sheldrake, 1981) and the previously mentioned Holgraphic paradigm (Wilber, 1982; Talbot, 1996).
It is from this line of inquiry that there has developed a deep interest in ancient religious and spiritual texts and comparisons with indigenous cosmology. The implications of such a paradigm shift concern the way humans perceive reality and could potentially change the fabric not only of our entire perception of reality now, our past and more importantly our future.
With issues such as cultural reconciliation, deep and growing ecological concerns, ongoing gender and equity issues and religious conflict being so poignant today, it is imperative that questions concerning our perception of reality be explored.
The nature of the universe was seen by Bohm to be a complicated interconnectedness where everything is somehow interconnected with everything else as it evolved from the primordial origin of the singularity from which it sprung.
This leads us to one of the most important and fundamental discoveries of modern Physics, and that is to do with the phenomenon of light. It was found in early experiments that light had a strange paradoxical nature. Depending on how you set up the experiment, you would see light as a wave or as a series of particles. As a wave, the information would extend to the outer reaches of the universe with its trajectory and speed apparent, and as a particle it could be viewed as static, a coherence of energy in particle form, without seeing its trajectory or speed. One could not see both states simultaneously and yet neither state was more primary than the other was.
The formulations of Niels Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity, and Werner Heisenbergs’ Indeterminacy Principle, (Rozental, 1967) led many theorists to refer to light as wavicles. It also led to a number of experiments that revealed the effect of the observer upon what was being observed which in turn inferred the inseparability of the subject and object. Menas Kafatos and Robert Nadeau describe this paradoxical situation in their book “The Conscious Universe: Part And Whole in Modern Physical Theory” (Kafatos,1990) and also continue to describe how this central paradox effects our understanding of meaning and interpretation in a reality that is indeterminate and ambiguous, problems that Neils Bohr considered with his extensive application of his principle of complementarity beyond the science of physics and into systems of language and interpretation. (Rozental, 1967)
“The central problem in quantum physics is that the classical distinction between observer and observed system does not hold, and this results in the lack of a one-to-one correspondence between every element of the physical theory and the observed physical reality. What troubled physicists about the prospect was not that the reality disclosed by quantum physics could not be visualised based on experience in everyday visualisable reality- the unvisualisable character of physical reality in modern physical theory had already been convincingly demonstrated by relativity theory. What was troubling here was the suggestion that we can no longer “see” the pre-existent truths of physical reality through the lenses of physical theory in the classical sense.
The essential paradox of wave-particle dualism is visualisable phenomena is easily demonstrated. View the particle as a point like something …and the wave as continuous and spread out. The obvious logical problem is how can a particular something localized in space and time, the particle, also be the spread out and continuous something, the wave?” (Kafatos, 1990)
The nature of this paradox suggested that the mystical writings of esoteric traditions that spoke of the illusion of reality and its unity have since been associated to these findings heralding a renaissance of spirituality. David Bohm was overwhelmed by the implications of his work and found great pleasure conversing with Krishnamurti on the nature of reality. The New Physics was being grounded through sacred traditions. In an interview in Omni in 1987 (Kafatos,1990), he comments that “Consciousness is unfolded in each individual” and meaning “is the bridge between consciousness and matter.” Other assertions in the same interview, like “meaning is being”, “all moments are one”, and “now is eternity” would be familiar to anyone who has studied eastern metaphysics.
David Bohm also poetically suggests that matter is revealed as an ocean of energy and light.
“Matter, as it were, is condensed or frozen light.... all matter is a condensation of light into patterns moving back and forth at average speeds which are less than the speed of light...it’s energy and also it’s information- content, form and structure. It’s the potential for everything.” (Williams E. Williams 1992.)
In contemplative traditions there are many descriptions of higher vibrational realities that are apparently available to those who wish to devote their lives to the deep study of the subtleties of human energy fields. In a higher dimensional reality or in a state of higher vibrational frequency, the matter of the body would cease to be visible, a state which is commonly referred to in Buddhist, Sufi and many other sacred texts.
In a passage written by one of the foremost interpreters of Tibetan Buddhism, Sogyal Rinpoche, a Dzogchen master, describes the first of the four phases of the bardo of dharmata, “Luminosity- the Landscape of Light.”
“In the bardo of dharmata, you take on a body of light. The first phase of this bardo is when “space dissolves into luminosity”: Suddenly you become aware of a flowing vibrant world of sound, light, and colour. All the ordinary features of our familiar environment have melted into an all-pervasive landscape of light. This is brilliantly clear and radiant, transparent and multicoloured, unlimited by any kind of dimension or direction, shimmering and constantly in motion.” (Rimpoche 1992)
The study of comparative cosmology shows how different cultures have used different metaphors to describe the same reality. Books like George Johnsons ‘Fire in the Mind’, David Suzuki and Knudson’s ‘Wisdom of the Elders’, David Peat’s Blackfoot Physics; Smith and Kwoks, “Cosmology, Ontology and Human Efficacy” “The Spirit of Science”edited by David Lorimer, “The Main Stalk: A Synthesis of Navajo Philosophy” by John Farella, and “An Inroduction to Islamic cosmological Doctrines” by Nasr, are examples of studies of the various metaphorical visualisations and mathematical systems used to describe perceptions of reality that are uncannily similar to the complex cosmologies derived from contemporary quantum physicists. Not surprising as they are all intuitions of the one reality, what does surprise people however, is that we have continuously assumed that Western conceptions of reality are superior and that those marginalised by this perspective are fictitious or mythic. We have never considered the possibility that our perspectives of reality are determined by our relative cosmological constructs, and that the western mechanistic view could be flawed.
The overwhelming number of books that have focused upon the paradoxical nature of light as the ground that they have worked upon is staggering. “The Tao of Physics”, by Fitrov Capra and “The Dancing Wu Li Masters”, by Gary Zukov are examples of early forerunners in this field. What is curious, is that many of the titles are inferring that the universe is conscious, and in most cases that consciousness precedes matter. “The Conscious Universe”, by Kafatos and Nadeu, “The Self- Aware Universe”, by Amit Gotswami, “The Creative Cosmos”, by Ewin Laslo, “The Universe and The Light”, by Nicholas Hagger, “The Mind of God”, and “God and the New Physics”, by Paul Davies, “The Anthropic Cosmological Principle”, by John Barrow and Frank Tipler, “A cosmic Book”, by Itzhik Bentov, “The End of Certainty”, by Illya Prigigine, “The Mysteries of Life and the Universe”, edited by William Shore, and “The Universe is a Green Dragon”, by Brian Swimme are but a few of such a rapidly growing list.
Creativity and the process of manifestation have been the primary concern of other theorists evident in such works as “Beyond the Big Bang” by Paul Laviolette where Laviolette looks at the process of universe from the perspective of a dynamic systems analysis and compares it to the mythic process of Ancient Egyptian cosmological systems. Also the work of physicist Nicolescu Basarab, titled “Science Meaning and Evolution, The Cosmology of Jacob Boehme”, is of particular interested as he looks deeply at the process of alchemy as a dynamic system concerning the coming into existence of the Universe. What is most interesting about alchemy is that it stemmed from Egypt and is essential to Sufi, Hindu, Buddhist and Taoist philosophy. As it is also an esoteric Western spiritual tradition that was fundamental to the study of philosophy, its significance is even more pertinent as an environment for the new physics to dock.
Similarly there has been an explosion of books concerning complementary medicine which often goes by the name of intuitive healing, faith healing, indigenous health or holistic medicine. The primary premises of this type of healing is that the nature of illness is psychosomatic, that thought precedes matter and therefore the treatment is in the dialogue with the mind concerning the location of the “cellular memory” which contains the event of the trauma from a past experience in this life or in any other. Again many of the theorists are using the New Physics as a ground and are inferring a panpsychic reality.
Besides such groups as the “Metaphysical Masters” headed by of Deepak Chopra, author of “Quantum Healing” (Chopra 1989), Louise Hay and others, such titles as “Magic, Faith and Healing”, edited by Ari Kiev (, provide explorations into indigenous medicine from an empathic as opposed to phenomenological persepective and investigations into the implications of quantum physics. Ari Kiev was trained as a Western alopathic doctor as many of the writers of this genre are. “The Quantum Self” , “The Quantum Society” and “The Quantum Spirit” written by Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall (1991, 1993, 1996) take quantum physics into the realm of culture and consciousness furthering work undertaken in the ninteen eighties by Fred Alan Wolf with such titiles as “The Body Quantum; The New Physics of Body, Mind, and Health” (1986). and Dr Gerber for example, who wrote “Vibrational Medicine” provides an extensive account of experiments that have been undertaken in the past few years concerning energetic healing as does Barbara Brennen author of “Hands of Light” and “Light Emerging”. Brennen was a research physicist prior to discovering human energy fields. Extensive experimental work has been carried out concerning “Qi” or the human electromagnetic energy field, by a number of Scientists who also are practitioners of acupunture and Qi Gong. An example of this work is “Qi Healing: The Way to a New Mind and Body”, by Toshihiko Yayama, M.D.
The nature of intuitive medicine was developed by Dr Caroline Myss through her works “The Anatomy of the Spirit”(1996), where she overlayed a multiplicity of traditional and esoteric practices with the new science of nature, and “The Creation Of Health” (1998) where she explored the emotional ,psychological and spiritual responses that promote healing.
Dr Mona Lisa Schultz who is a Neuroscientist and author of “Awakening Intuition” (1998) looks at the interesting phenomenon of right brain /left brain functions and theorises the importance of reawakening what has been ignored due to the predominance of the dominant cultures exclusive centrality of their perceptions of reality. As an inspiring extension of this rightbrain leftbrain exploration, Leonard Shlain, a neuro- vascular surgeon, and has written an extraordinary account of the dichotomy of these dualities. In his book “The goddess and the Alphabet” his thesis suggests that due to the rise of analytical processes with the advent of writing schemes there was a coincidence of negation of intuitive inspiration in favour of analytical consolidation of “Truth”. This was also he suggests an occurrence that was synonymous with the death of goddess worship and the sacred homage paid to the earth, its natural systems and the universe that it is embedded within.
The paradigm that has grounded in these works suggests an entirely different reality than the reality concieved by Western constructions. The lagging weight of the old paradigm drags us deeply into the future and the implications for all of us deeply profound particularly as there is such a entrenched and almost unspoken supremacy that lurks behinds the words of many Western theorists.
* What are the philosophical problems associated with the new paradigm and how does a paradigm shift ground that is aligned with panpsychic belief systems and at opposition with the philosophical imperatives of a materialistic and dominant culture?
Whilst there is an explosion of ideas focusing of the New Physics, there are many confusing territories involved with the philosophical implications and interpretations. What becomes apparent is that there are sometimes quite subtle interpretational differences that may appear to be empirically the same but differ ontologically. As an example, the subtle differences perceived by the Copenhagen interpretation which considers light to be either wave or particle via complementarity, and the Bohmian interpretation which sees light to be both wave and particle. One of the most thorough books concerning these issues is “Philosophical Concepts in Physics” written by James Cushing. An example of a subtle confusion is as follows and is from an essay titled “A Dilemma For the Realist”.
“Although this Bohm interpretation is consonant with and even conducive to a realist position, it is empirically indistinguishable from the ontologically incompatible Copenhagen interpretation. (which poses a serious challenge to the realist).
What follows from this particular dilemma is that each reconstruction could be equally rational but there would not necessarily be any rational means to choose between them.”
Whilst there seems to be a theoretical impasse it is the highly paradoxical nature of these problems that lead us to necessitate a broader examination of reality that will question the centrality of dominant perspectives and marginalised views.
“The new epistemology of quantum theory reveals that fundamental oppositions disclosing the profound truths of nature are complementary, and those constructs have consistently brought us closer to a vision of nature which belies both classical ontological dualism and the bias that ultimate truths are transcendent and pre-existing. But the new vision of nature which discloses that the collection of processes we call “self” is not isolated from the whole also disclosed the prospect that there are no truths in the old terms. It is as if the price we paid for dispelling the notion that we are not skin-encapsulated egos was the terrifying realisation that there is no empirically valid connection between our formalism for describing physical reality and physical reality-in-itself.
The paradox is that we are evidently one with a cosmos in which we feel existentially alone because the foundation of our being, although quite obviously a “given”, cannot be completely known or revealed in the scientific description. If we demand the prospect at least of complete scientific knowledge as a prerequisite to affirming a necessary connection between our existence as intelligent beings and the life of the cosmos, then the sense of alienation so arduously and painfully communicated by the French atheistic existentialists is not merely the stuff of fiction or philosophy. There does appear to be, to borrow a phrase from Sartre’s famous play, “No Exit” in epistemological terms.
It is our view that in arriving at this conclusion we are making in terms of the new epistemology of science a large, and certainly a very grave mistake. The ultimate extension of complementarity is that between the whole and the part, or the contingent and the particular. Each of these complementary constructs is necessary for the complete description. What is finally different about the whole, as the results of the Aspect experiments atest, is that is has by definition no definable parts in its ultimate nature. When we consider that the validity of physical theory is dependent entirely upon measurement of the part, this conclusion is not as trite as one might initially suppose.”(Kafatos and Nadeau 1990)
The dominant perspective of reality that is derived by Western empirical science and mathematics no longer transcends any other known understanding of reality but has realigned what is perhaps a peculiar diversion into the egoistic and alienating selfpossessed power base of the Western ‘descent into matter’ with others by decentering itself and allowing all perspectives to be considered as eccentric views. What is curious is that the new physics, by virtue of its paradoxes and uncertainties is opening a doorway into understanding what it is to be human in a reality that unifies structural realtionships of the microcosm with the macrocosm- as above so below- and unifying concepts of the organisation of the brain and the nature of consciousness with the organisation of the cosmos and its consciousness.
It is this coming to terms with a new/old ontology that embraces all humans as equal that is also potentially that most disruptive, deconstructive element as it also forces people to accept personal responsibility and the empowerment that comes with the notion of thought being powerful. The implications of this dilemma are that we are collectively creating our future and that all of our transmissions are energetic impulses that effect and pervade the universe in its entirety. To continue within the constraints of the old paradigm that perpetuates a dominant belief system, which is an illusion upheld by constructions of hierarchical judgments and normalisations that have led to gross destruction of natural environments and indigenous cultures, is to perpetuate a suicidal passage of self-destruction.
While this is in keeping with the Baudrillardian psychological profile of the neurotic and obsessive “Western” enigma, what is frustrating and deeply disturbing is that this potential transformation of our perception of reality has Western theoretical lineage that recede into the far distant past, and scientific confirmations that have been argued since the 1930’s if not earlier.
There is much invested in the mechanistic and material paradigm which still serves us very well if we are satisfied to work purely within the confines a three/four dimensional reality. As the materialist perspective is embraced and expanded by the new paradigm it is not an either or scenario but an “and” “both” one which relies on subjective experiential phenomena to be realised as well as that which is considered to be objective. Newton’s mechanistic model of science is embedded within Einstein’s theory of Relativity, which is in turn extended through Quantum Physics.
The paradigm is grounding regardless of whether there is consensus or not, and this in itself has become a contentious area central to the philosophical concerns of this paradigm and indicative of a negative reflex against the notion of there being a spiritual reality in which thought is eminent and truth is eminent and pre-existing.
The deconstruction of deterministic epistemologies have led to extensive lists of texts which deal with the “masculinisation of thought” to use one of Susan Bordo’s phrases, or “Feminist Standpoint Epistemologies” to cite a text by Sandra Harding, who has been consistant in her questionings of the validity of science as a construct of truth as have the collections of essays that are edited by Richard Elvee in “The End of Science? Attack and Defense; proceedings of the 15th Nobel Conference.
Certainly the whole dilemma of the nature of truth itself is well known to those interested in the postmodern dilemmas. What is curious however is that many of the Postmodernists are Eurocentric in their perspectives suffering from a postcolonial supremacy that still seems to pervade the entirety of western knowledge. However there are some who overtly question this stance and a couple of examples follow.
David Hall, an American comparative philosopher, sees the “philosophy of presence” and “difference” particularly Derrida’s “logocentrism” to be central concepts to both Taoism and Confucianism. He argues that premodern Chinese thought is actually Postmodern and contains resources that answer some of the problems represented by the debate over modernity and postmodernity.[1] (Hall, 1991)
“The presence of transcendent beings and principles in the formation of the Western culture is uncontroversial. The dualism entailed by this transcendence, though often discomforting to the theologically doctrinaire, is also a well-accepted characteristic of the rational interests of Anglo-European societies. Neither dualism nor transcendence is present in the original Confucian or Taoist sensibilities.
For a proposition to have a univocal sense, terms must be strictly delimitable. A polar sensibility precludes such delimitation in any but the grossest terms. Thus, the classical Chinese understanding of yin and yang as complementary concepts cannot coherently lead to dualistic translations or interpretations. Yin is becoming yang; yang is becoming yin. The locution “as different as day and night” would then have to mean “as different as night- becoming-day from day-becoming-night.”
The same sentiments are spoken by Michael Christie in a paper titled “Grounded and eccentric Knowledges: Exploring Aboriginal Alternatives to Western Thinking”. He speaks at length about the difference between an atomistic view of reality and an animistic or pansychic view which sees the world as a constantly changing indeterminate reality that is alive with spirit in all things, and where everyone is considered a part of the whole.
“Roland Barthes said that the healthy sign is one which draws attention to its own arbitrariness- which does not palm itself off as ‘natural’, but which in the very moment of conveying a meaning, communicates something of its own relative, artificial status as well. This, it occurs to me is precisely what Aboriginal science is constantly vigilant to maintain. Everyone is agreed to have an ex-centric view of reality, so every time a Yolngu speaks the community will ask: Whose interests are being served by positing this shape for reality at this particular time and what other possible claims are rendered absent or forced to the margin by this claim?”
Similarly in the “Reenchantment of Science”, David Ray Griffin proposes
“a positive, revisionary postmodernism. Inspired both by various developments in twentieth century science (e.g. general relativity, quantum theory, the Gaia hypothesis, recognition of mind-body interactions in immunology), and by Alfred North Whitehead’s philosophy of “organism”,..[he] seeks to develop a Postmodern cosmology...[which] denies certain characteristically modern philosophical and scientific notions, especially mechanism, atomism, determinism, and the Cartesian dualism of mind and body. Griffin argues that contemporary science itself, in discarding these modern notions for holistic and indeterminist alternatives, is becoming Postmodern.” [2]
*What does this new paradigm suggest to a global culture on the cusp of a new millennium?
The New millennium is as much a point of departure from the old as it is a reawakening of even older knowledges. We are poised to fall or fly and the implications of this paradigm would suggest that if we believe we will fall we will fall, and conversely if we believe we will fly we will fly.
We have the choice of free will, and with that choice we can choose a positive perspective or a negative. If thought precedes matter and consciousness is primary, which assumes that this reality is an illusion of third dimensional reality as noted so frequently and in so much depth by the many ancient traditions, the Hindu’s, Sufis Taoists and others, then our thoughts are our future and if we continually call a half full glass half empty, then so it will be.
*What does such a paradigm shift mean?
The implications are overwhelming. Decentering knowledge so that the center is everywhere and the circumference nowhere, a saying that is resonant not only with esoteric literature but with postmodern thought as well, will provide us with the possibility of feeling the relativity of each of our differences and the paradox that we are all both different and the same. We are moving into a territory where we are realizing that paradox is central and primary, and the wave-particle nature of light is being likened to the consciousness and physical aspect of our perceptions that sit presently within this four-dimensional spacetime continuum that we call all call home.
The implications are phenomenal and if we are really going to comprehend such things as equity, gender, race and so on we will be far better equip if we rise out above our pigeonholes and realize that there are whole environments of research territories that have been marginalized to the point of nonexistence, which were once central to our perception of holistic knowledge. One subject is the study of alchemy, that has not only provided the groundwork for dialectics, but as Basarab Nicolsescu suggests, it is a study of transformational process, and it unifies our perceptions of the universe with our perceptions of our minds and through such an alignment maybe a future will be possible beyond 2000.
*The Shape Of Cultural Studies.
Cultural Studies is a subject that is self reflexive. It creates epistemologies that are recursive. It maintains a position within academia whilst standing in the domain of external relationships as it examines the cultural phenomena that is expressed in our everyday reality outside of the domain of academia. Having said this however, it is from within a language of academia that it speaks. It represents a critical dialogue of an interiorisation of the externalities that pervade our everyday lives and simultaneously reflect the nature of our collective realities. It is a subject that is difficult to define as such due to its lack of boundaries concerning subject matter. It can become a focus upon the details of a microscopic view of social phenomenon as much as it may become an overarching study of such a universal phenomenon as spirituality. It is a fluid and indeterminate critical environment that should remain open to the intensities that are attracted to it as a repository of freedom to explore the idiosyncrasies of reality today.
It is paradoxically both inside and outside of the domains that traditional academic environments have created. In its inherent potential honesty, there is recognition of the dialectics of ideas, that perspectives are fluid and relative, and that there is no place for a central repository of truth held in dogma, no exclusive domain of objectivity, no ideals of supremacy.
In Gaston Bachelard’s essay the “Dialectics of Inside and Outside” he eloquently describes the inability to determine the domains of inside and outside which are considered to be relative to the perspective of reality held by the subject.
As we can appreciate the need for such twisted relationships, it is appropriate that we acknowledge the existence of a number of topological modalities that can illustrate such phenomena. The Klein Bottle and the Möebius Strip, are such shapes. Their twist unifies the interior with the exterior and therefore is a shape whose inside is continuously and simultaneously the outside. They are single surfaced, yet locally there is the ability to differentiate the opposed attributes of two discrete sides.
With such a geometry as one that twists into a higher dimension, we can illustrate the relationships of differences and similarities in a structure that describes the relativity of positions and in turn perspectives.
We are awakening to a reconciliation of opposites and a transcendence of paradox through an understanding of relativity, and must be wary of theorists who succumb to supremacist attitudes that assume a materialist reality to be central to the nature of ultimate reality. Boundaries and definite deterministic and non ambiguous interpretations pertain to a lack of complexity and critical rigor. The result is often a fear mongering that through grand generalizations points to an opposed cultural phenomena that is considered to harbor evil. The identification of the enemy is a tragic necessity of an alienated egoist and fearful cult of individualization and state sovereignty.
Fear is an archetypal doorkeeper which disables us from embarking upon unknown territories that we are perhaps unprepared for. In this sense it is a self protecting mechanism that inhibits exploration and growth, until the appropriate experiences have occurred that prepare the individual for their forward movement. In this epoch of millennium intensity, we find ourselves living in a retrogressive world. The vision of the future is uncertain. If one has a mechanistic view, it is as bleak and purposeless as the suicidal path that it is on. If on the other hand one considers reality to be alive with the consciousness of all that is interconnected and entwined, then the reality or the future is literally what we collectively make of it. The past has been determined by our actions and our memories are very kind to us in a self-protective manner. It seems far safer and more stable since the “war to end all wars” was waged and the survivors claimed rights of passage to do as they willed against nature and anything else that stood in its progressive way. As for the present, it is an explosive arena with the potential for anything to occur. We are held in a stasis of fear as our reality is transforming around us. The most positive potential is our creative intent and our skill to manifest it, as it transcends the constraints of that which is already existent.
It is our focus that is the most important consideration for the future as “fear leads to anger, anger leads to hatred, and hatred leads to the dark side”.
References:
Barrow, John; Tipler, Frank; “The Anthropic Cosmological Principle”,
Basarab, Nicolescu; “Science Meaning and Evolution, The Cosmology of Jacob
Boehme”, Parabola Books, 1991.
Bentov, Itzhik; “A cosmic Book”
Bergson, Henri: “Creative Evolution”, Henry Holt and Company, 1911.
Bohm, David: “Wholeness and the Implicate Order”, Routeledge and Kegan Paul,
1980).
Brenan, Barbara; “Light Emerging, The Journey of Personal Healing” Bantum
Books, 1993.
Brenan, Barbara; “Hands of Light” A Guide To Healing Through the Human Energy
Field”.Bantum 1988.
Capra, Fitrov; “The Tao of Physics” Bantum 1976.
Chopra, Deepak; “Quantum Healing: Exploring the Frontiers of Mind/ Body Medicine”, Bantum, 1989.
Cushing , James; “Philosophical Concepts in Physics”
Davidson, John: “Natural Creation and the Formative Mind”, Element 1991.
Davies, Paul; “The Mind of God: Science and the Search for Ultimate Meaning,” Penguin, 1992.
Davies, Paul. “God and the New Physics”
Eisler, Riane: “The Chalice And The Blade; Our History , Our Future”, Harper and
Row, 1987.
Eisler, Riane: “Sacred Pleasure, Sex, Myth and the Politics of the Body- New Paths
To Power and Love”, Harper Collins, 1995.
Farella, John R. “The Maine Stalk: A Synthesis of Navajo Philosophy,” University of
Arizona Press, 1993.
Gerber, Richard; “Vibrational Medicine” Bantum Books 1997.
Griffins; A description of Griffins essay the “Reenchantment of Science” found in
“From Modernism to Postmodernism, An Anthology”, Edited by Lawence
Cahoone, Blackwell Publishers, 1996.
Hagger, Nicholas; “The Universe and The Light”, Element, 1993.
Hall, David; “Modern China and the Postmodern West,” in Culture and Modernity:
East-West Philosophic Perspectives, ed Eliot Deutsch (Honolulu: University
of Hawaii Press, 1991)
Johnsons, George; “Fire in the Mind; Science, Faith and the Search for Order”,
Viking, 1996
Kafatos, Menos; and Nadeau Robert: “The Conscious Universe: Part and Whole in
Modern Physical Theory.” Springer, 1990.
Kiev, Ari editor; “Magic, Faith and Healing” Free Press 1984.
Laviolette, Paul; “Beyond the Big Bang”.
Lorimer, David; “The Spirit of Science”, Floris Books 1998.
Myss, Caroline; “The Anatomy of the Spirit” Bantum 1996.
Myss, Caroline; “The Creation Of Health” Bantum 1998
Nasr ;“An Inroduction to Islamic cosmological Doctrines” by,
Peat, David; “Blackfoot Physics, A Journey into the Natuve American Universe”;
Fourth Estate, 1994.
Pribram, Carl: “Languages of the Brain”. Wadsworth publishing ,1977.)
Prigigine, Illya; “The end of Certainty: Time Chaos, and the New Laws of Nature”, The Free Press, 1996.
Rinpoche, Sogyal; “The Tibetan Book Of Living and Dying” Rider 1992.
Rozental, S; editor: “Neils Bohr: His Life And Work As Seen By His Friends And
Colleagues.” North Holland publishing co. 1967.
Schulz, Mona Lisa; “Awakening Intuition” Bantum 1998.
Sheldrake, Rupert: “The New Science of Life”, Penguin 1981.
Shore, William; edited by; “The Mysteries of Life and the Universe”, Smith and
Kwoks; “Cosmology, Ontology and Human Efficacy”,
Shlain, Leonard; “The Alphabet and The Godess, The Conflict Between Word and
Image.” Viking 1998.
Suzuki, David; and Knudson ‘Wisdom of the Elders’,
Swimme, Brian; “The Universe is a Green Dragon”,
Talbot, Micheal: “The Holographic Universe”, Harper and Coliins, 1996.
Wilber, Ken; editor: “ The Holographic Paradigm”,New Science Library, 1982)
William E. Williams ; editor “Unbounded Light, The Inward Journey.” Nicholas-
Haye Inc, York Beach, Maine 1992.
Whitehead, Alfred North: “Process and Reality”, The Free Press 1979.
Wolf, Fred Alan; “The Body Quantum, The New Physics of Body, Mind, and Health”, Macmillan 1986.
Zukov, Gary; “The Dancnig Wu Li Masters, an Overview of the New Physics”, Flamingo, 1979.
Yayama, Toshihiko; “Qi Healing: The Way to a New Mind and Body”, Kodansha
International, 1999.
Zohah, Danah; and Ian Marshall: “The Quantum Self” Flamingo, 1991.
Zohah, Danah; and Ian Marshall; “The Quantum Society” Bloomsbury, 1993.
Zohah, Danah; and Ian Marshall; “The Quantum Spirit” Bloomsbury, 1996.
[1] David Hall, “Modern China and the Postmodern West,” in Culture and Modernity: East-West Philosophic Perspectives, ed Eliot Deutsch (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1991)
[2] A description of Griffins essay the “Reenchantment of Science” found in “From Modernism to Postmodernism, An Anthology”, Edited by Lawence Cahoone, Blackwell Publishers, 1996.