Home

Science

The scientific method has furnished humanity with exceptional benefits. This section includes articles which examine the underlying assumptions of science, particularly in the area of cause-effect relationships.

By using simple analysis we can recognise that the fundamental cause for all physical phenomena must be "meta" physical, and that all systems are in effect, self-organising systems.

Can Science and Religion be Integrated?

by Prof. Amit Goswami (August 10, 2008)

Can science and religion be integrated? What comes to mind immediately is that religions themselves cannot agree with one another whereas science is basically monolithic. How can there even be trade between the two, let alone integration?

First, it is only a perception that religions are pluralistic and science is not. Science is monolithic only so far as science of matter–physics and chemistry–is concerned. Psychology, the science of the psyche, has three different paradigms–behavioral-cognitive consisting of hard science orientation, depth psychology consisting of Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian analytical psychology and their derivatives with psychotherapy orientation, and humanistic-transpersonal-yoga psychology with positive mental health orientation. Both the later paradigms of psychology acknowledge downward causation and subtle bodies in some form or other. Medicine has the conventional allopathic medicine and also alternative medicine practices that complement it. A prominent part of alternative medicine is Eastern medicine that emphasizes subtle energies called variously as prana, chi, and ki. And biology is in transition right now. The materialist biology is highly developed but with some unsolved (maybe unsolvable) problems. Alternative biology is biology that sees life as the handiwork of a purposive designer with the power of downward causation; but at present it is so poorly developed that hardly anyone can call it a genuine alternative biology.

Belief-System Tune-Ups

Many people easily forget how muich they rely on mental-maps (belief-systems) to navigate through life.

What we believe defines, shapes and creates us. What we believe possible will reveal itself by what we attempt to achieve.

Belief-system tuneups are designed to reveal the deeper, more congruent frameworks of life -- those that you can rely on, irrespective of time and circumstance.

Belief-System Tune-Ups can be tailored for the industry, circumstances and needs of clients.

A Clearer Light (reprint)

There is absolutely no reason we cannot switch humanity to a correct perception of the world—and there are profound benefits in doing so. The first benefit does not affect physicists (as physicists), and that is the spreading of the philosophical joy of discovering the mental nature of the universe. We have no idea what this means; and we seem to have no hope of ever learning what it means; but—the great thing is—it is true. Physics cannot help anyone from this point onwards. You may, if you wish, descend into solipsism (but do be careful not to blush); or, you can expand to the Deism of George Washington and Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Adams and Thomas Jefferson and the other non-Christian founders of America; or … something else, if you can justify it—just don’t ask physics for help!

3rd Proof of the Impossiliby of Physical Movement

Submitted by Steaphen Pirie on Wed, 12/08/2009 - 3:39pm

This proof shows that, based on standard scientific assumptions, physical movement is impossible. Since everday physical movement is not only possible, but routinely lived and experienced, we can confidently conclude that modern scientific world-views are wrong.

The objective of these proofs is to reveal how our modern scientific views are surface-layer perceptions that do not reveal or account for deeper, nonlocal (meta-physical) rhythms and processes.

2nd Proof of the Impossibility of Physical Movement

Submitted by Steaphen Pirie on Mon, 27/07/2009 - 11:42pm

Proving the impossibility of physical movement, based on the Assumptions of modern science. This proof, based on the assumptions of modern science and medicine, reveals how we are unable to move our bodies even for the simplest of tasks, such as blinking an eye, or lifting a finger.

This proof focuses on the 'silliness of science' in regards to first-cause. What enables or makes us think, e.g. about thinking? The brain-as-computer metaphor has serious shortcomings, chief of which is the inability to explain the impetus to think: before we think, what must we do? Less well known, but even more telling is the inability of brain-as-computer metaphors to accommodate and explain how the brain-as-machine model operates in the quantum realm involving fields of potentials and possibilities; realms within which all brain 'stuff' is bathed.

As Freeman Dyson explained:

Quantum mechanics makes matter even in the smallest pieces into an active agent, and I think that is something very fundamental. Every particle in the universe is an active agent making choices between random processes.

What enables particles of our brain-stuff to make choices between random processes that can't be physically predicted or modelled?

Proof of the impossibility of physical movement

Submitted by Steaphen Pirie on Thu, 23/07/2009 - 8:19am

Proving the impossibility of physical movement, based on the assumptions of modern science

This proof, based on the assumptions of modern science and medicine, reveals how we are unable to move our bodies even for the simplest of tasks, such as blinking an eye, or lifting a finger. In view of our easy ability to blink, or move a finger, we may confidently conclude that standard scientific theories -- reliant on the assumption of 'perfectly continguous and continuous' movement  -- are inappropriate and incorrect at the micro-scaled dimensions of space-time, but approximately correct in the macro-scaled events of everyday life.

The Primacy of Consciousness

[copyright Peter Russell, 2008]

This essay presents the argument as to why the ultimate nature of reality is mental not material.

(Chapter contributed to The Re-Enchantment of the Cosmos by Ervin Laszlo)

See also video stream of presentation given at Physics of Consciousness conference. 

Ervin Laszlo has proposed that the virtual energy field known as the quantum vacuum, or zero-point field, corresponds to what Indian teachings have called Akasha. the source of everything that exists, and in which the memory of the cosmos is encoded. I would like to take his reasoning a step further and suggest that the nature of this ultimate source is consciousness itself, nothing more and nothing less.

Again we find this idea is not new. In the Upanishads, Brahman, the source of the cosmos (literally, "that from which everything grows"), is held to be to Atman ("that which shines"), the essence of consciousness. And in the opening lines of The Dhammapada, the Buddha declares that "All phenomena are preceded by mind, made by mind, and ruled by mind".

Such a view, though widespread in many metaphysical systems, is completely foreign to the current scientific worldview. The world we see is so obviously material in nature; any suggestion that it might have more in common with mind is quickly rejected as having "no basis in reality". However, when we consider this alternative worldview more closely, it turns out that it is not in conflict with any of the findings of modern science—only with its presuppositions.

Congruent Solutions to Zeno's Paradoxes

[Copyright Steaphen Pirie 2009]

Overview:

This article (and the "Zeno's Paradoxes" section of this website)  details the fundamental and irrevocable failure of standard scientific solutions to the paradox of movement. A new world-view is needed to account for the facts. The old Newtonian, Darwinian models of biological development are no longer tenable in the face of this new evidence.

Background:

Around 2,400 years ago a Greek philosopher (Zeno of Elea) questioned how anything or anyone moves around. Theoretically, for anyone to lift a finger, bat an eyelid, or even to fall down requires we move through a seamless but endless (never-ending) progression of ever-so-small little movements. He highlighted how there appeared to be a mismatch between our theories about life and our simple, everyday practical experiences.
The content in the following two sections was originally posted on the Wikipedia website under "Zeno's Paradoxes" in the Proposed Solutions section. However, after many objections from various Wikipedia commentators, the material was removed.
A great chasm has developed in the understanding and thinking of the great majority. Other articles in this section at this website go into greater detail as to the nature and cause of that blindspot in the pysche of people. Ironically1 it is scientists who are now failing to apply the scientific method in response to the evidence of quantum physics.
The resistance to asking questions and constructing new theories that explain experimental evidence, particularly anomalous phenomena, is a common human experience, and can be understood to be, in part, the practical expediency of "getting on with life" – in practical terms, if we had to question every move, or belief we held, most would get very little done.
As will be covered in other articles at this site, (e.g. "The Evolution of the Human Psyche") ignoring or avoiding gaps in our belief-systems is one means by which we form limits and frameworks for effective living.
[ Note, the following paragraph beginning "Another solution to some of the paradoxes ..." was existing content prior to the additional material by Steaphen Pirie]
  1. 1. It is ironic that modern scientists are failing to include the evidence of quantum physics in their world-views, as scientists generally view the Galilean era as having epitomised that failure to observe evidence, and accomodate those observations within a new world-view.

First Update on Consciousness Studies

[ By Dr Johanna de Groot, SMN Meeting 2nd December 2007 at Killarney Heights, Sydney ]

Key Principle of Life, for Life No. 2

Key Principle of Life, for Life No. 2 affirms that due to the inherent limitations of reasoning and the scientific method, there will remain a fullness (wholeness) to life that will not be entirely comprehended through rational thinking or be fully revealed by scientific inquiry.

The world around us exists with us, at-once. No science* or system of thought or philosophy can fully reveal or account for this "at-once" (nonlocal) nature of life.

In view of the inability to fully reveal this at-once nature, KPLL No. 2 requires that there will remain aspects of, and potentials within, everyday experience that cannot be entirely reduced to any knowable order (science, equation, academic discipline, physiology, profession, body of experience etc).

Recognising the at-once nature of parts and wholes (of individuals and communities) produces our second Key Principle of Life, for Life (KPLL No. 2):

Key Principle of Life, For Life No. 2:
All occurs at once1

Individuals and communities exist at-once.
‘Parts’ and ‘wholes’ have validity, reality and purpose
through an at-once interdependence of each other.2

Key Principle No. 2 affirms the interdependence of parts and wholes – a paradoxical independence within dependence.

For example, we may operate or live independently of our family or local community (say, as a hermit in the forest), but we remain dependent on the local ecosystem (an interdependent community of flora, fauna and materials). This key principle (No. 2) will apply in all circumstances, but its expression or outward manifestation will take differing forms.

KPLL No.2 affirms the inability to meaningfully analyse parts independent of their relationship to the whole. However, our sciences and the process of rational thinking have inherent limitations when analysing the at-once nature of wholes and relationships.

Generally speaking, thinking is a serial, sequential process; a process of having one thought after another.3 In other words, our usual thinking process does not furnish us with a full view of life, but merely step-by-step views and experiences, which in turn leads us to take either-or snapshots of life4.

We see evidence of this either-or process in everyday life, such as in politics, religion, science and personal relationships.

Either-or thinking in politics

Political parties reflect an either-or bias in the form of socialist, left-wing or capitalist, right-wing policies and laws. Right-wing views and ideologies are biased towards individualism (parts)5. Left-wing politics is biased towards community (the whole). This either-or thinking usually results in right-wing policies favouring individual rights at the expense of community cohesion and cooperation, while left-wing policies generally favour the community at the expense of individual freedoms and opportunities.6,7

As is more fully explained in our seminars8, left-wing and right-wing biases are not sustainable – favouring one side at the expense of the other ends up being at the expense of both, as required by KPLL 1 and 2.

Syndicate content

© Copyright Belief Institute 2010