Science

Typically refers to Physical science, the study of the material universe.Here it is used in an expanded sense to include the study of the entire universe, including  the non-physical, using the methodology of science.

Metaphysical

Meta means “beyond”, therefore the literal meaning is that which is beyond the physical, and Metaphysics is that which is beyond material world physics.  Most dictionary definitions relate these two words to philosophy, but for me it is the field of Physics as it relates to the entire universe, including that which is beyond the material realm (Newtonian and sub-atomic physics)

Occult

As a term used in science, it means to hide, or block from view, as in occulted. When used in Metaphysics it refers to hidden teachings, or the teachings that are not typically made available to the masses, esoteric as opposed to exoteric teachings.  In this case it refers to “Oriental Occultism”, a School and a Life Path that came into prominence with the first two generations of Theosophists, and then faded from popular view by the mid twentieth century.

Philosophy

(From Dictionary.com):
1.  The rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.
2.  Any of the three branches, namely natural philosophy, moral philosophy, and metaphysical philosophy, that are accepted as composing this study.

Words are important, they have meaning, and when their meanings change, awareness of the change is important too.  Words that have been in use in the Metaphysical and Spiritual Communities for centuries are being applied today in ways never anticipated or intended.  Some, such as “occult”, have been so bastardized in modern practice as to render them unwise to use.  Others, capitalized on for their acceptance within the community as part of the Spirituality lexicon, are being used in subtly altered ways to promote a philosophy significantly different from that originally associated with the word

Two words undergoing such a change in meaning are Consciousness and Spirituality.  These words play an essential role in any discussion relating to the Western Spiritual Movement generally referred to as New Age, endowing with a veneer of Spiritual authenticity concepts developed within the paradigms of Psychology and Sociology.  As a result, a rapidly expanding segment of Western Spiritualism, known under such labels as a “Global Consciousness Movement”, display all of the characteristics of a sociopolitical activism organization, rather than a search for the mystical.  If you doubt for a moment that this is becoming a significant faction, consider that when I did a search today on the Internet using the phrase “global consciousness movement” it produced 5,870,000 results, and the phrase “global consciousness” produced 22,000,000.  A search for “Spiritualism” produced 5,980,000 results and the word “Metaphysics” 17,400,000.  That would indicate that there is at least as much interest in the concept of a global consciousness as there is in the broad categories of spiritualism and metaphysics.

The word “Spiritual” had a very clear definition as it was initially used in the mid-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  Everything in the world, and the universe as a whole, was divided into one of two classifications, either “material” or “spiritual”. Material pertained to that which was of the physical world, the realm of conventional science. Spiritual was the classification for all things not of the physical, everything outside of the realm of the material.  Spiritualism was therefore simply the study of the non-material.

Consciousness was viewed as the spiritual progenitor of material life.  That is, consciousness was a form of energy that existed primarily within the spiritual world and was the animating force for material life, the soul in conventional religion.  Material life did not exist without the presence of consciousness.

The study of Metaphysics became focused primarily on human consciousness and its role in both the Spiritual and the Material worlds.  That meant attempting to determine the source, energy properties and make up of human consciousness, and its form of existence when not associated with a physical body.  It also involved the study of the possibility of the existence of non-physical (spiritual) planes possessing other evolutionary realms of life besides that of the physical realm, and most of all, the study and practice of how the individual could learn to actively participate in these other, non-material, planes of existence. The early Metaphysical study of the emotional/mind component of human consciousness later became the field of psychology.

Before I go further let me state that I am not questioning the usefulness of the field of Psychology when applied as a healing modality.  I may question the wisdom of some of the aspects of the discipline as they are applied, but not the benefit that many people can obtain from working with a qualified practitioner of this profession.

But what happens when Psychology and Sociology becomes the dominant force in Western Spiritualism?  The common thread I see running through the Global Consciousness groups is a focus on the belief that a world changed for the better can be brought about through the development of a group consensus on what constitutes an appropriate world view.   The group consensus is presented as a Group Consciousness, but here we see the reassigning of the meaning of the word consciousness to a very different one than that given above.  I discussed this shift of focus and meaning in an earlier article, Towards a Consciousness of Oneness, or Not which was in turn a response to the article “Toward a Consciousness of Oneness” by Robert Atkinson, PhD which asserted that “the ultimate outcome of human evolution would be the development of a Consciousness of Oneness”.

The substitution of the Psychology Community’s definition of consciousness for the one originally applied in the field of Spiritualism profoundly alters the modern approach to Spirituality.  In studying peer review papers being published in these disciplines today, the fields of Psychology, Parapsychology and Cognitive Science limit any discussion of the source of consciousness to the confines of the biological brain mass.  Consciousness then by definition can only exist so long as the organism, the human brain, is fully functional, in other words, alive.  I also discussed some of the ways that this has affected research in these areas in an earlier article, A Personal Opinion of the Present State of Popular Paranormal Research.

By limiting consciousness to the realm of the living brain, the Spirit portion of the Body, Mind, Spirit model is by default removed from consideration, and the research done by the Metaphysical and Spiritual Communities over the last 150 years relating to the question “is there life after death?” is summarily dismissed.  The barrier that is being artificially erected by limiting research to the biological brain mass prevents even the consideration of any possibility that consciousness may possess a form of existence outside of the physical boundaries of the human brain, and will, in my opinion, prevent these fields from ever fully understanding human consciousness.

Before this barrier was erected though, early pioneers in the study of human consciousness became aware of the mind’s ability to access information that was “unexplainable wholly in terms of physical principles”, what Freud called “archaic remnants” and Jung called the “collective unconscious”, that part of the unconscious that possesses the shared experiences of the entire human race. Jung also put forward that there was a “personal unconscious”, which possessed only those experiences that had been accumulated by the individual.  That there exists the ability to access and share a collective consciousness continues to be the subject of much study and is the cornerstone of the Global Consciousness Movement today.

So, are there any fine distinctions between the meaning of the word consciousness  as used by the early Metaphysicians and in the way Freud and Jung viewed it, and it’s meaning when used in conjunction with the Global Consciousness Movement, and why should we care?  Studies conducted by both the Spiritual and Science communities show that (1) there is a great deal of evidence that a group consciousness does exist, and (2) that shifts in the group consciousness result in effects that are global in nature (see Dr. Rupert Sheldrake’s work). The concerns that I have with the differences between the “Spiritualist” and the “Global Consciousness” movement’s models relating to a “group consciousness” lies not in the end result, but in how it is arrived at. 

In the study of Metaphysics, the focus is on consciousness in the form of an individual’s discreet consciousness, the “personal consciousness” of Jung. It is believed that positive change in the human race is brought about as the result of a community of people working on themselves individually to accomplish commonly shared Spirituality based goals.  Those working on personal development have to first deal with their own issues, attitudes, strengths and weaknesses, and then, and only then can they, through the example of a life well lived and an improved personal energy, help others, the “doctor heal thyself” principle.  The emphasis is on a life lived by doing what is perceived as “spiritually” right, not on what is considered as either socially acceptable or desirable, as is the case in the development of a group consciousness.

On the other hand, following a spiritual path within the Global Consciousness Movement works with Jung’s “collective unconscious”, calling for each individual’s efforts to be focused on doing everything they can to encourage others to adopt a mindset identical to theirs, one based on “we” in place of “I” placing a priority on a “world view” rather than viewing things through a local perspective.  In this system of belief, the individual’s prime reason for existence is to help bring to the world “harmony through conformity”.  It is a movement predicated upon the shared conviction that a point in human social evolution can be reached where universal peace is the norm, once enough people have been conditioned to develop the same “We in place of I” mindset.  Then, through some ability of the human mind that they do not completely understand (ESP?), all other minds will be triggered to unconsciously reprogram for similarly acceptable world view mindsets. 

The key to understanding the Global Consciousness Movement is to understand that the whole process works not with developing a better understanding of the overall human consciousness of Metaphysics, but with the human mind of the fields of Psychology and Sociology. This shift away from studying the development of consciousness as an aspect of the spiritual, meaning the nonphysical, to a shift towards identifying group consciousness in terms of a group consensus of human minds is, I believe, a result of the heavy preponderance of people in leadership positions of the movement who earned their degrees, and pursue careers, within the field of psychology and or medicine.   I can see where there would be a tendency on their part to shape a course in the pursuit of spirituality that would follow a path of least resistance by remaining within the province of the study of the Mind.  To hold as a belief that independent minds can be programmed for commonality of thought does not require any consideration of the existence of thought or consciousness outside of the boundaries of the human brain, allowing them to remain within the comfort zone of the definition of consciousness as a byproduct of the organic based mind that they were taught as students of psychology.

This is obviously not the same thing as believing in the existence of the group soul consciousness of Metaphysics, one whose existence is of a realm not of the physical, and that exists outside of the boundaries of the brain cavity, sharing information and experiences through non-physical means. It is this difference in beliefs that make me feel that a Global Consciousness developed through the programming of a group consensus of minds creates several issues of concern:

• Who determines the definition of the correct world view, what form does proper group thinking take on, and how is what is the acceptable form of morality, personal actions, means of livelihood, etc., determined?
• In a consensus consciousness the individual is relieved of all personal responsibility for their actions, so long as they are complying with the group consciousness’s outline of proper modes of conduct.  Any deed is defined as proper so long as the group consensus dictates that it is a right action.  In the extreme, this could even include such actions as the extermination of an entire segment of the population, if the group consciousness said it was the right thing to do, then so be it.
• Critical thinking cannot be allowed because it would tend to disrupt the group consensus by interjecting a discordant note in the group energy.

When any consideration of consciousness is limited to its being a biological function of the human brain, and group consciousness refers to the individual “minds” of a group being in consensus with respect to social and political issues, then the form of Spirituality that is associated with such a movement also falls within the realm of the mind, becoming just a form of “right thinking”, as defined by the leadership of the Global Consciousness Movement.  This type of group or collective consciousness falls under the definition of a hive mind, a form of slave mentality.

I do not think that this is something that we should aspire to.

One’s Spirituality, whether it takes the form of a religion, a moral code, a belief system, even atheism, must consist of absolutes. Something is true or it is untrue, it is right or it is wrong, something exists or it doesn’t exist, etc. The absolutes may change over time as a person learns and grows, but there has to be a foundation to work from, based on our best understanding at the moment, or there is no system of Spirituality present and the person drifts through life rudderless.

Politics, on the other hand, is based upon a process of negotiation rooted in the practice of compromise. There are no absolutes, only the “what do I have to give up to get what I think I want or need?”

In their pure form these two are polar opposites. The present fashion, purportedly derived from an interpretation of the First Amendment, of declaring that a person’s personal Spiritual belief system has no place in politics is a perversion of both what the First Amendment states, and of what was intended by the framers of the Constitution. The First Amendment starts out: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or PROHIBITING the free exercise thereof:” (emphasis mine). The amendment was intended to ensure that we would have the ability to practice whatever form of Spirituality we choose, without interference from the government. It grants freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion, and nowhere is anyone granted the right to not be offended. For those who enthusiastically support the efforts of those in our culture today who have targeted several specific religions using all means at their disposal to block their free practice, it would behoove them to remember that restrictions imposed on others today, once put in place,can be used to restrict the practice of their own spiritual belief systems in the future.

The system laid out in the Constitution was designed with the understanding that when new laws were up for debate a person was expected to fight in congress for a final version of the law that would reflect their personal belief systems, or, if they disagreed with the law, to fight for not passing it at all. The compromise that was required of members of congress was not a compromise of their belief systems, their personal Spirituality, but an acceptance of the need to comply with the final version of any law that was passed by majority vote. Similarly, the population of each state agreed to abide by the majority vote that put a law into force. If a individual citizen did not like or agree with a law, they were required to comply with it regardless, but they also had the right to fight for the repeal or re-writing of any law they opposed, so long as it was done through the legislative process, working for change through persuasion, not through judicial coercion.

The actions of the court system over the last 60 years has changed our system of government from one of majority rule, to one of a tyranny of the minority. When judges, as in the recent case in Texas where a suit was filed by one student who is offended by expressions relating to religious belief, in the name of enforcing the First Amendment has forbidden the participants of an entire graduation class to make any reference to God or religion in their speeches at the graduation or else face arrest, the courts are doing precisely what the First Amendment forbids, i.e. “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

So, when a person is forced to be politic in how they practice their personal form of Spirituality, they are forced to compromise the basics of their belief system. As a result, if they acquiesce, their old form of Spirituality eventually morphs into a new politically correct version. In this case, you could say that Spirituality is Politics made manifest. But, since it is their new model of Spirituality Lite (their original Spirituality with some portions removed) that is now the driving force in their politics, it becomes “Politics is Spirituality made manifest” once again.

To demand that a person deny their personal belief system in order to run for office demands that they either must lie to get elected, or else abandon that personal belief system entirely in order to serve. Why then are we surprised, when once they have assumed the office, that they no longer display a well defined personal code of conduct, working from a sense of expediency rather than from any form of Spirituality?

For a couple of examples where politics seems to have overridden an individual’s previous fundamental form of Spirituality, resulting in a “new and improved version” you might want to check out the following links.

1. When I read Deepak Chopra’s latest blog I was shocked and dismayed to see so much hatred and acrimony displayed from someone who has been positioned as a Spiritual Leader of the New Age Community for the last 30 years:
   
   http://deepakchopra.com/2011/06/sarah-palin-my-president/
   Compare the sentiments expressed in the blog above to those he expressed in a recent interview by the President of Institute Of Noetic Science in which Chopra, along with numerous other things relating to consciousness expansion, is promoting a transformation of self that “would automatically transform us into more loving and compassionate human beings”.
   http://www.noetic.org/noetic/issue-eleven-june/a-transcendent-worldview/ 
2. “In speaking to a group of students in Minnesota last week, the Dalai Lama cleared up any uncertainty regarding his political views. “…As far as socio-political beliefs are concerned, I consider myself a Marxist,” he told the audience.”
   
   http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dalai-lama-to-chinese-students-im-a-marxist/
   
   It takes a lot of compromise to accept a belief system that has been the source of the destruction of the very people that the Dalai Lama is the Spiritual Leader of.

In the early years of this new facet of the culture, I saw a potential for those who were fully engaged to accrue the same benefits as those commonly attained by followers of the teachings of the early Oriental Occultism Schools of the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. For example, in the face of the many vicissitudes that life can throw at one, individuals who faithfully adhered to these early practices and exercises often displayed a level of serenity not typically displayed by the general population. It became apparent to me within just a few years though, that the potential was, for the most part, to remain unrealized.

While beneficial practices such as meditation became so widespread as part of the movement as to become mainstream, I was surprised to observe in many of the individuals who frequented our shoppe, an increase in intensity rather than serenity. Tolerance for alternative spiritual paths, other than the one chosen by that specific individual seemed to decrease, often to the point of expressed hostility (what I came to refer to as the “my guru can whip your guru” attitude). And, aggression justified as “activism” became the norm for many. It got to the point that all one had to do to disrupt “my sense of serenity” was to utter two words, “SAVE THE”. It didn’t matter what was to be saved, if you were not in complete agreement with the call to action (activism) then you must be at the very least unspiritual, and most likely, even evil.

How and why did a movement based on spiritual practices, many of which have been around for millennia, come to create such a shift in attitude, in such a large segment of our population, in so short a time?

In the study and practice of Metaphysics, or Oriental Occultism, as it was identified during the turn of the last century (19^th to 20^th), it was thought that the advancement of mankind as a whole, socially and spiritually, could be hastened through the efforts of individuals who worked first and foremost on their own personal advancement. Or, to put it another way, the overall culture would advance if there were enough individuals who became accomplished at the use of tools and skills acquired through personal study and meditative practices that changed for the better the way the individual lived their lives, the way they interfaced with their fellow-man, etc.

A major component of this path was the acceptance of personal responsibility. Even when outside forces resulted in a negative impact on the individual, they were held to be totally responsible, not for the event, but for how they responded to it. The emphasis was on a life lived by doing what was perceived as spiritually right, not on what was considered as either socially acceptable or desirable. It was believed that by providing a real world example to follow, the practitioner of Oriental Occultism would surely inspire others to engage in similar work, plus they would incrementally help raise the level of consciousness of the entire race.

There were shared spiritual objectives to aspire to, to be sure, but the act of reaching them was strictly a personal quest. There were advantages to working within groups that shared common goals, but the attainment of personal advancement was held to be only possible as the result of individual effort. The raising of consciousness of the human race was not expected to be a short-term process, but rather required a lifetime commitment, and any significant influence on the culture might require generations to take effect. The study of Metaphysics, or Oriental Occultism, took a tremendous amount of personal commitment and was viewed as anything but a part-time occupation.

During the Twentieth Century both the stated goals and the means of reaching those goals evolved, producing a significantly different approach. The overall emphasis of the current Twenty First Century form of the New Age Movement focuses on pretty much the same goals of cultural, social, and spiritual advancement, and share the same concerns for the welfare of our fellow-man as did the earlier Oriental Occultism Movements, but the goals are now most often presented in the context of humanity as a whole. The individual’s personal growth and development of Occult abilities, (as they were defined in the late 1800’s) receives less emphasis than the goal of bringing about global change for the “greater good” through group effort and group thought.

People are still expected to work on themselves, but the methods employed are frequently not intended to develop people as individuals, but seem designed instead to bring about a diminishing of their individuality in such as way as to bring them into alignment with the overall philosophy of the movement. In other words, to de-emphasize the individual aspects of the personality, molding the person in such a way that they become a synergistic component of a “Consciousness of Oneness” [1].

A recurring theme, the Consciousness of Oneness is usually portrayed in terms indicating that we are all interrelated, that what affects one affects all. Personal responsibility no longer refers to responsibility for one’s own actions and choices, but to a responsibility for the events and conditions that affect the welfare of others, producing a shared responsibility for all that happens in the world at large and placing upon the individual an obligation to help those who are perceived to be in need of economic and social assistance.

The justification for advancing the development of a Consciousness of Oneness is that if enough individuals hold the same view (think the same way) with respect to “spirituality”, and now “social systems”, a critical mass will eventually be reached and suddenly, the whole world will experience a significant positive shift in consciousness that will solve many of the world’s problems. There are several assumptions that go with using this approach that, in my opinion, are not based in reality and can result in negative consequences for the race as a whole.

A big one is the assumption that all humans are the same. That human consciousness differs only because of the influence of the cultural environment the person grew up in. There is both a certain arrogance and a level of naivety involved in believing that everyone else’s view of what constitutes spirituality would be the same as that embraced by the Consciousness of Oneness Movement, if only they could be brought to understand just how much they are really loved. This hypothesis assumes that the only stumbling block to the development of a worldwide Consciousness of Oneness is that less spiritual beings and organizations in the world are resisting it for their own greedy purposes.

The reality is that there are people in the world today that, no matter how much you express your love for them, still will want to terminate your existence just because you don’t fit the mold for what they consider to be the correct form of spirituality, or the correct social system to live within. It is their understanding of reality and their chosen path, and they believe it just as strongly as those who seek to bring about a Consciousness of Oneness. Not a criticism or an endorsement, just an observed fact.

Within the parameters of the Science of Metaphysical and Occult Philosophy, what is happening here and what are the possible effects and projected ultimate outcome of a movement towards a Consciousness of Oneness? In some branches of Oriental Occultism there is a tradition of a sharing of consciousness between members of a species, a Group Soul as it is sometimes called. That does not mean for example, that all dogs of the same species share one consciousness or soul, rather that there is a continuous connection between these consciousness’s (souls), that allows the sharing of experiences. That is how a fawn, just minutes out of the womb, knows to freeze and remain hidden if the mother indicates danger is near.

Group consciousness is what I believe Rupert Sheldrake, the English biochemist and plant physiologist is describing in his theory of morphogenesis as the morphogenic field. This sharing of experiences and information is similar in many respects to a modern computer network in which all data acquired by any one computer on the net is instantaneously and continuously available to all of the computers on the network in real-time.

The human body too is that of an animal, and displays many of the traits associated with having a group soul, or to use Sheldrake’s terminology, possessing access to the human morphogenic field. For instance, research has found that a newborn baby knows to hold its breath and attempt to swim to the surface when they find themselves in water, a reflex reaction that is equivalent to the pre-programmed at birth response of the newborn fawn in the example above.

But with humans, there is a difference. In addition to the group soul, there is what I call the Discrete Human Consciousness, discrete because it is separate from other Human consciousness; there is no sharing of information other than through direct communication utilizing both physical and non-physical means (e.g. esp). In Eastern traditions it is the Discrete Consciousness that reincarnates, that carries the memories of its past lives, but not of the lives of other Discrete Consciousness’s, past or present, as occurs in the Group Soul. In Western traditions, it is referred to simply as the Soul. How we came to be different is the subject of much ancient mythology and is too extensive a topic to go into here.

It is this Human Triad, consisting of an Organic Body, a Group Soul, and a Discrete Human Consciousness (Soul) that creates many of the personal challenges we face in life.

The Group Soul is the computer program for what we generally refer to as our “animal nature”, and has a great deal, but not all, of its processing capacity taken up by the maintenance and operation of the organic body. It’s how a person can be in a coma with no hint of the personality present, yet the body can continue to function, so long as it has liquids and nourishment artificially supplied. But it does much more that just provide operational control for the organic body. Keep in mind that in all other animals the Group Souls not only share information and experiences, but is the source for each animal in the species’ cognitive abilities as well. The Human Group Soul retains, and will continue to attempt to exercise its cognitive function, if not restrained or regulated by the Discreet Human Consciousness.

It is the Human Group Soul that Jung called the “Collective Unconscious”, that part of the unconscious that possesses the shared experiences of the entire human race. He also put forward that there was a “Personal Unconscious”, which possessed only those experiences that had been accumulated by the individual. In the language of the Human Triad Model the Personal Unconscious would be called the Discrete Human Consciousness.

The challenge we face is in ensuring that the dominant force in our lives is the Discrete Human Consciousness, not the Group Soul. The Human Group Soul, in addition to acting as the equivalent of a computer’s operating system, enhances our survival prospects by being able to make use of the accumulated experience of the race, but by its very nature its decisions are going to be shaped by its perception of what’s best for the survival of the organic body and of the species as a whole. At least some of its commonly shared data comes not from direct experience, but from beliefs that a significant portion of the Group Soul has come to accept with respect to social systems. The basis for some of these beliefs may not necessarily be founded on anything other than “everyone else is doing it”.

The Discrete Human Consciousness on the other hand, is the part of us that is intended to be the one engaged in intellectual pursuits; social, scientific and spiritual. It is an independent process riding on top of the Group Soul process. It is in the Discrete Consciousness where we theoretically make those decisions that help us rise above our animal nature, that allows us to engage in cooperative efforts that would appear to not be of an immediate direct benefit to ourselves, such as providing disaster relief to a country and a population thousands of miles from us, rather than restricting all of our efforts to just that which would enhance the survival of those in our immediate circle. It is here too that we should be intellectually analyzing the issues that we encounter on a daily basis relating to the social, political and spiritual aspects of our lives.

But what happens if we allow the Group Soul to dominate our Discrete Consciousness? In my research I have found that many people who hold passionate positions, especially with respect to social issues, when pressed for the justification for their position, can only repeat the buzzwords and the popularly expressed statements consistent with the commonly held beliefs of the movement they are passionate about. They are unable to come up with a personal justification, or examples of cause and effect, that could account for the strong emotions they experience. I want to make clear that these are people who, in all other respects, are kind, caring, intelligent individuals, sincerely working on following a spiritual path, which makes a statement delivered on their part with great passion, such as “I hate _____” really stand out as seeming to be out of character.

After a time, I came to realize that many people hold opinions based on one of two very different sources, The Human Group Soul aspect of their being, or their Discrete Human Consciousness. For the individuals referenced above, what became apparent was that some of their strongest opinions were based on a “well known truth” in the overall Group Soul Consciousness of a specific social, spiritual, or political movement, not from their own Discrete Human Consciousness.

What I often recommend to people when (1) they find themselves possessing a really strong opinion about an area of which they have very little personal experience, or (2) are not sure as to why it is that they hold a particular opinion, is that they stop and ask themselves the question:

Do I think what I think,
Because I think it?
Or, do I think what I think,
Just because I think,
That I think it?

A rather silly little limerick I know, but a good reminder that we should always be prepared to question, not the beliefs of others, but the beliefs and truths that we ourselves hold to be self-evident. Some things that we know or hold to be true may not be based on personal experience or knowledge, but are simply articles of faith. Nothing wrong with that, so long as we recognize the things we know by personal experience, and the things that we know on faith, and remember that there is a difference. If, on the other hand, you cannot find in your own mind a basis for an opinion, or a truth, not even as an article of faith, it may well be that it is an opinion, or a truth, that is not your own.

And this is the concern that I have for the development of a Consciousness of Oneness, if it is accomplished through the conditioning of its adherents to accept the group consensus without having done any critical analysis of issues at hand. If individuals begin to surrender the use of their intellect (Discreet Consciousness) to the rule of the Consciousness of Oneness as propagated through the Human Group Soul, one would expect to see just what I have observed in much of both the New Age Movement, and in the social/political arena today. The dominant driving force appears to be emotion, rather than intellect.

[1] A Consciousness of Oneness was described as the projected ultimate outcome of human evolution in the article; “Toward a Consciousness of Oneness” by Robert Atkinson, PhD in the Institute of Noetic Sciences’ April Issue of their “Noetic Now” Ezine at: http://www.noetic.org/noetic/issue-nine-april/toward-oneness/, an excellent article that presents a somewhat different view of this topic.

Over the years in the course of conversations with people I respect from the Teacher/Author/Elder segment of our community, I have often found the subject of our discussion turning to the shift they are witnessing in the mindset of the general student population. The first time was with my own Teacher some 30+ years ago, the most recent was in a conversation with an old friend just a few months past. These discussions are not of the “students were different back in the good old days” genre, but rather focus on observed changes in the average student’s expectations regarding the learning process.

The Public’s interest has varied greatly over the last few centuries with respect to studying subjects typically labeled as Metaphysical, Arcane, or the Occult (not the Hollywood version).  More recent additions to this area of interest have been labeled as Paganism, Wiccan, Goddess Religion, or New Age. 

Up until the mid-nineteenth century, for an individual to be open at all about having an interest in any of these areas would be hazardous to them socially, and could put them personally at risk with the local authorities and/or religious organizations. Under these circumstances an individual persistent enough to seek out a teacher or an organization where learning was available was a personage who took the entire process seriously, one who was willing to perform whatever level of exertion was required in order to acquire access to these teachings.

In the United States the Spiritualist Movement, which began with the Fox sisters in 1848, launched the general public’s more tolerant acceptance of people’s interests in these subjects.  By the Civil War, just a decade and a half later, Mary Todd Lincoln was hosting séances in the White House. Organizations began to appear that were open to the public, albeit with some membership restrictions, whose purpose was to promote the study and practice of Eastern and Occult Philosophies.  Progenies of two such organizations of the period are still in operation today, The Theosophical Society, which was founded in 1875 in New York City, and The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, which was founded in 1888 in London.

From this point on, and lasting through the first half of the 20^th Century, there was a steady growth of organizations throughout the Western World that provided access to learning within a wide range of subjects related to the Mystery Traditions.  The focus of these organizations varied widely, but they all had a common approach to learning, the student was expected to do all the work.  What I mean by that is the Teachers and Elders in the organizations were there to assist the student as much as possible, directing them to the texts they needed to study, helping them to learn exercises that would aid them in their personal development, and teaching them the traditions of their particular belief system, etc., but the student was expected to do the reading of the texts, to learn and to practice the exercises and the traditions, and to process the information personally and internally. Although there were initiations for the student at various levels of attainments that would provide an occasional boost for the novice, all accomplishment came as the result of personal participation and accomplishments. 

The novice started with access to the exoteric form of the tradition, learning what was available to pretty much anyone who was willing to search for books and writings on the subjects.  But in order to gain access to the esoteric portion of the teachings, those held from the general public to prevent their misuse, the student had to show that they had acquired a sufficient level of the basics in knowledge and principles. They also had to demonstrate that they possessed a work ethic that would make it possible for them to stick with a learning process that could at times be daunting.

The section that follows is not meant to be an evaluation of the merits or failings of the changes that will be discussed, nor an endorsement or a criticism of them; rather in order to understand how we got to where we are today, and to speculate upon where we are going in the future, the time period considered will be discussed in terms of “cause and effect”.

With roots that started in the 1950’s, and clearly visible in the 1960’s, we saw a major paradigm shift in the West whose influence was most predominant among the younger members of society.  In every culture you looked at, the existing values of the “Elders” were suddenly being brought into question.  As many of the traditional values were rejected, new ways of viewing the world and interacting with others were sought out.  At the time, these changes were viewed as a positive thing for our community.  Interest in numerous Magickal, Pagan and Wiccan Traditions increased, as well as in the traditions of the East, particularly those originating in India.  The upsurge in attraction for studying these areas saw a measured but consistent rate of growth from the mid-sixties up through the mid-eighties.

Then, in February of 1987, a mini-series appeared on TV based on Shirley MacLaine’s book Out On A Limb and the New Age Movement took off.

Overnight the demand for classes in crystals, healing, meditation, and yoga snowballed.  Additionally, during the decade following there was an upsurge in interest in all things Pagan, Wiccan, Magick and Goddess oriented, followed very quickly by Angels and Fairies.  The demand was so great that it almost immediately exceeded the supply of experienced teachers and Elders. 

Where demand exceeds supply there will always be some who will step forward to fill the gap.  Soon we had new teachers teaching the classes that they had just taken themselves.  The new scholars did not see any problem with this lack of breadth in their teacher’s range of knowledge, because most of them only had an interest in the one subject being covered in the particular class that they were enrolled in.

Some of these new teachers from two plus decades ago went on to expand their breadth of knowledge, found Elders to study under, become successful authors, and are now becoming Elders themselves.  Others went on to become “personalities” and became a Westernized version of the Eastern Guru.

For most of the new members of the community the paradigm shift in the culture alluded to earlier, coupled with the new student’s realization that much of the time they found themselves taking instruction from individuals less knowledgeable about the subject at hand than they were, produced an attitude that experience in a teacher was not to be valued all that much, and Traditions that outlined a specific way of living or of practicing ritual were not all that necessary either. 

The word Eclectic entered the community and became a code for one who preferred to not limit themselves to a single Tradition or belief system.  The Eclectic chose their Gods, Goddesses, meditation practices, rituals and tools from whatever Tradition they came across, making their selections like choosing from a menu in a restaurant.  An Eclectic did not need an Elder, nor saw any need to follow an established Tradition.  Instead, groups of Eclectics that had made similar choices from the menu began to form their own, new, Traditions.  Most of these groups had very short life spans, soon breaking up with the former members gravitating to other new Traditions, until those too dissolved.

In any culture when the need for a position in that culture fades, the position itself also vanishes.  I grew up on the Northern edge of the Missouri Ozarks which had a rich tradition of folk healers and herbalists up through the first half of the twentieth century.  When conventional medical care became more widely available in the rural areas of the state in the 1950’s, the use of the services of the folk healers and herbalists disappeared, as did with time, the folk healers and herbalists themselves.

Our community has become part of the cultural mainstream.  You can now buy your books, tools and jewelry at any large department store.  There is no longer a perceived need for a specialty shop or learning center.  Nor is there a perceived need in the majority of the community for an Elder to pass on a Tradition, and because of that, soon the younger members of the community may not be able to find an Elder to study under, even if they decide they want to.

Interest in the extensive range of topics that fall under the headings of New Age, Paganism and Wicca continues to expand, at least on the surface.  And I think that that is a good thing.  My observation and concern though, is that most of the interest seems to be more social oriented, than spiritual.  I’m certainly not opposed to a teacher doing whatever they can to maximize attendance, teachers have bills to pay just like everyone else, but when I see group rituals being scheduled for the nearest weekend preceding an occasion such as a solstice, rather than for the actual date of the event to maximize attendance, I can’t help but wonder if anyone involved really understands why the ancients performed their rites on specific days?

The “purpose” for the ritual celebration on a specific date originally was so that the ritual would have access to the maximum amount of natural energy possible, which could then be tapped into to facilitate the bringing about of a desired result for the individual and/or the community.  In the case of a Solstice Celebration, the “purpose” of the ritual was to bring about the most favorable conditions possible for the survival of the tribal group for the next six months. 

The “purpose” today for many for the enactment of a ritual celebration is simply a social gathering and becomes an end unto itself.  The timing becomes inconsequential. To choose convenience over substance contributes to the growing superficial approach to these subjects, an approach that also contributes to the perceived lack of need for experienced teachers and Elders. It is not so much a case of the students not trusting in the wisdom of the Elders as much as it is that the average student today does not know what an Elder is, or the function or value of having an Elder within a cultural system. 

The title of this piece is the opening line from the book of Ecclesiastes in the King James Version of the Old Testament, Chapter III: “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven”.  It may be that the surge in interest in all things mystical by mainstream culture has resulted in the mystical becoming mundane.  The study of the Metaphysical and Occult has been a core element of human growth for as long as there have been humans.  Occult means hidden, and so too was its study up to 150 years ago.  Perhaps the “season” for its in-depth study being readily available to all is coming to a close, and the cycle is returning once more to where the knowledgeable teachers and Elders are not so easily accessible to the general public.  To use terms from the period of the previous cycle, the public will still have open access to the “exoteric”, but only a few will have access to the “esoteric”, the real heart of the teachings.  

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant,
                       and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
                       a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
                                                                                Ecclesiastes III

Reality in Parapsychical Laboratory Research is unavoidably limited to the physical world of Newtonian Physics (classical mechanics, basically, the field of physics related to all material the size of an atom or larger) and an as yet indeterminate phenomenon, the human mind. 

Most research done in the lab seems to fall under one of two classifications, Mind to Mind communication through means not readily discernable (ESP), or Mind/Matter Interaction, Psychokinesis (PK).  The research is carried out utilizing the accepted standards of mainstream scientific research, and, as far as it goes, provides a valuable body of data with respect to the abilities of the human mind in the area of Extrasensory Perception (ESP).  But what if reality is, not different from Newtonian Physics, but encompasses a far more extensive area than that which we can perceive with our physical senses and present laboratory equipment?

First, let us set a working definition for reality as being simply “that which is”.   For something to be part of reality it must just exist, no matter in what form or whether or not we are aware of its existence.  It is not required that we can sense it in any way for it to exist.  Before the invention of Radio Telescopes the stars and other objects in space were generating signals that were undetected by conventional optical telescopes.  Up until the last century their signals weren’t even suspected by science.  Now we know that these radio transmissions have existed all along and despite our being unable to detect them, were always a part of reality.

Let us further stipulate that there is only one common reality, that there is not a Spiritual World, and a Material World, both real but to some extent incompatible with the other.  That there is only one common reality, even if the means we use to work with specific individual areas of reality appear to be in conflict with each other.  The first time I ran into this situation was in my studies of the physics of light.  I found that I was required to sometimes treat light as a waveform, and at other times I must treat it as a photon, a particle possessing mass, and all the other properties that one would expect of a solid.  The two sets of mathematical equations could never be mixed when working out a problem because they were incompatible, but light obeyed the rules set down in each of the two systems, as long as only one of the systems were used at a time.  It is not light that existed in two different realities, but our perception of the nature of light that seemed to show that there were two incompatible realities for light.

In discussions of the nature of reality the concept of reality as illusion frequently appears.  Proponents of reality as illusion are to be found in the fields of science, spirituality/philosophy, and quantum mechanics.  By this view reality becomes not, “that which is” but becomes “only that which is perceived”.  A recurrent source referenced in these discussions is the body of data generated by the “Double Slit Experiments” a field of study which has recently been embraced on the Science Channels on TV, and featured in the movie “What the Bleep do we know?”

The double slit experiments, the first of which were carried out by the English Physicist and Physician Thomas Young around 1801 to 1805, were done using light and focused on the interference patterns that result from two seemingly independent beams passing through parallel slits.  The result of his experiments shifted scientific thought on light for a while from Newton’s idea that light was made up of particles (photons), to the opinion that light was actually a waveform (energy oscillating from a max to a min, just like waves in a tank of water).

The initial experiments were all done with beams of light, but starting in 1961 double slit experiments began to be conducted using electrons, and later with other types of particle beams.  The results of the electron double slit experiments produced wave interference patterns exactly the same as the light based experiments.  All types of beams exhibit characteristics that would be expected of beams made up of waveform energy, regardless of whether the beams are visible light or “solid” particles such as electrons.  The conclusion has been therefore that electrons and other particles are not solids, but are waveforms, just like light. 

For the purposes of this article I won’t go into any details on how the double slit experiments are done, or how they have posed as many questions for physicists as answers.  To do so would produce an article by itself that would be even longer that this one already is.  There is considerable amount of material available on The Double Slit Experiment and the process itself is not as relevant to our discussion as much as the resulting conclusions that were based on the experiments, that is, that sub-atomic particles act like waveforms when passing through the double slits, therefore sub-atomic particles are considered to be, at least part of the time, waveform energies.

As an undergraduate (some 40+ years ago), when I was introduced to sub-atomic physics (quantum mechanics) I found that I was working with dual models of the material world.  One model was where everything in reality existed as either a solid, gas, liquid or energy plasma, that the basic building block of the Universe was the atom.  The other was a model of reality where everything sub-atomic consisted of particles constructed of basic building blocks called quarks.  Quarks have been found to be photon-like packets of energy.  Therefore, in this model, all solid, liquid or gaseous matter is not solid, liquid or gaseous in the generally accepted sense, but all are in reality simply different configurations or compilations of quarks (packets of waveform energy).

The solid material world, the chair you are sitting on, the body you inhabit, the entire world around you is real in every sense of the word, but the realness is derived not from a physical form, but from our perceptions of the ability of the composite energy fields of each of the atoms (which remember, are in turn constructed of packets of waveform energy, quarks) to resist the intrusion into their physical space of each of the other atom’s force fields.  It is the resulting composite force fields that we perceive as solids. 

To restate the previous, since the material world is made up of atoms, and the atoms are in turn made up of these sub-atomic particles, and since these sub-atomic particles are in reality not like little marbles, but are packets of waveform energy, it can only be concluded that physicality is based on the effects of force fields, and that it is our interactions with these force fields that result in what we understand as interacting with solids. 

To illustrate what is meant by the term “force field” or more properly, the field of force that surrounds each atom, you can do a simple experiment using two bar magnets.  Place the bar magnets in a line with the north pole of each magnet facing each other.  Then try to move the two ends together.  You will find that as the ends get closer together it takes greater and greater force on your part to make them touch.  In fact, if the magnets are strong enough, you may find that you lack the strength to force them to physically touch.  The resistance encountered is the result of the magnets “magnetic field” an invisible force that surrounds each of the magnets, the same as the composite field of force that is inherent in that which we call atoms. 

In Parapsychical Research in Psychokinesis (PK) there are two components involved.  A material object, which is perceived as a solid, but as we just covered, is solid only in the sense that we perceive the interaction of force fields as solid.  The other component in PK experiments is a Human Mind, generally considered in the lab as a byproduct of the living human organism. 

Mainstream science has literally scores of definitions for what constitutes mind, breaking the mind down into numerous categories, assigning classifications for various functions of the mind and associating those functions with different parts of the organic human brain.  None of which, as far as I can tell, actually provide a prototype for understanding the energy configuration of the mind. 

Instrumentation can certainly indicate if there is brain activity or not, anyone who has watched a medical drama on TV is familiar with the machine readout that shows sine waves and  blips scrolling across the screen, and then showing no waveforms and no blips when the brain and other parts of the body are supposed to have ceased to function in the story.  But the wave patterns are not the mind itself, only a sensing of energy activity associated with a functioning mind.  We can apply electrical stimulation to the memory areas of the brain to generate a specific memory in that persons mind.  Every time the same cells are stimulated, the same memory is recalled.  But recording the brain activity generated by the stimulated memory cannot in turn be used to convey the memory itself in any way.  Nor, as far as I can tell, can there be shown any physical change in the memory cell of a brain between before and after the storage of a memory on the cell.  Where is the program for the consciousness of the brain recorded?  If it is a field of energy generated by the brain, where is this field stored?  Taking a look at nature, how does the single cell amoeba, which as its name indicates is composed of but a single cell, know what nutrients to ingest and which ones to reject?  And where is the programming stored that tells it when and how to divide into two, single cell organisms? 

The programming, consciousness, in both cases exists not as a component of the material cells, but as a complementary energy field, an energy field associated with, but not generated by, the organic material.  Consciousness is conjoined with the brain, but is not a component of the brain.  It is an independent coherent energy pattern, a composite energy waveform with a detectable, measureable associated energy field, in conventional religious terms, the soul. The key thing to understand here is that it is an independent composite energy waveform with a detectable, measureable associated energy field.  The force field of the consciousness, the mind, is not generated by the organic tissue of the brain, and is unlike the type of field that is generated by iron in the magnets in the earlier example.

In the iron magnet, each of the atoms in the iron has its own force field and each of these fields have a north and south pole.  In un-magnetized iron the orientation of the individual atom’s north/south poles are random, each atom’s north/south pole axis pointing in a different direction.  If a coil of wire is wrapped around the iron bar and a continuous single direction of current flow (DC current) is ran through the wire of the coil, an electrical field is generated that forces each of the north/south axis’s of the atoms to line up in the direction of the field generated.  Take the coil off the bar, and the atom’s axis’s remain lined up.  The force field of each individual atom adds to the overall field creating a force field that extends beyond the boundaries of the iron bar, the magnetic field.  Take away the iron in the iron bar and the field ceases to exist.  Much of Paranormal field research revolves around the apparent ability of the human field of consciousness to remain after the removal of the organism that it was a part of.

It is my belief that if Parapsychical Research in all of these areas could be conducted using not the conventional view, where reality consists solely of the material world, as the point of reference for all observations, but instead, used a point of reference in which all of reality is composed of varying forms of waveform energy, then the nature of reality will be found to be quite a bit different then it is now perceived to be.  As Einstein’s Theory of Relativity demonstrates, the point from which you view reality changes the view significantly. 

So what is the nature of reality?  Is reality then a solid material world with some as yet undiscovered accompanying energy fields hanging around, or is reality something significantly different?  Is the material world real, but only in the sense that we perceive it to be material in order to simplify our ability to interact with it? 

Lab experiments in Psychokinesis test whether or not the human mind is capable of somehow remotely causing movement of a solid object.  If the experiments were approached from the standpoint that reality is energy, that the human mind is a composite energy form that is not limited to existing as a result of, or limited to the physical dimensions of, the organic brain.  If the experiments were approached from the standpoint that all of reality is composed of energy fields, some making up the atoms of the “physical” world, some energy fields making up the numerous forms of consciousness, then the experiment would be one involving not two independent models, one involving the physical world and one involving the non-physical world, but becomes an experiment using one model based on differing forms of similar waveform energy.

Psychokinesis could then be tested as being actually a matter of wave theory.  The movement of the material object becomes a result similar in many ways to the interference patterns that are generated between two waveforms, just as in the Double Slit Experiments, the driving waveform energy field of the human consciousness acting upon the waveforms of the energy fields of the sub-atomic particles of the elements making up the material object.  The results of this and other similar experiments could go a long way towards demonstrating that the nature of reality can be defined simply as “energy”. 

Then we can begin the discussion on what is the source of this energy?

Who am I? cannot be answered through the mind, it can only be experienced.  To come to an awareness of Who I Am through personal experience, the student must become proficient in the use of a number of tools, each designed to open a level of awareness of the world that exists beyond that of the physical.  The different forms these tools come in make up the body of the Eastern Yogic disciplines.

The Eastern Yogic traditions are not to be confused with the form currently popular in the West which focuses primarily on only one school of Yoga, Hatha Yoga. Hatha Yoga, as it is practiced in America, has become little more than a form of physical fitness with little emphasis on the development of the spiritual self.

One tool used in the Eastern traditions to facilitate experiencing the answer to Who Am I? is through the expansion of one’s knowledge of self during meditation (another one of those answers that until you have experienced it yourself, seem to be leading you in a circle).  The student is taught that to expand one’s knowledge of self it is important to clear away all things that are “not you” during the meditation.  A key aspect of this practice is the development of Detachment.  There are numerous reasons why Detachment is a key to much more than just a meditation practice, but for the sake of this discussion we will only address the process, not the justification for its importance.

Detachment can be reached in two ways:
           (1) Detachment through Denial (will)
           (2) Detachment through Perspective (experience)

Detachment through Denial is generally the first form of Detachment that a student can find some success in mastering.  I should make it clear at this point that Detachment through Denial is in no way related to the psychological coping mechanism of being “in denial”.  Detachment through Denial simply means that once the student has recognized the existence of a personal desire or craving for an object or a situation, they consciously decide to exercise their will to “deny” the desire or craving any power over them. Obviously a lot easier to say than to accomplish, but change can come about through conscious effort with time.

The value of developing a state of Detachment in one’s personal development is described by Patanjali in his Kriya Yoga Sutras:

“Detachment allows one to remain in the presence of our true Self.  It is characterized by the feeling of calmness, despite the presence of many objects of attention or potential distractions.  This calmness is the emblem of detachment and includes not only an outward passivity, but an inner equilibrium.”
                                       Kriya Yoga Sutras of Patanjali and the Siddhas [1]

In the Sutras, the distractions referred to are “cravings” for objects and/or situations.  Detachment reached through Denial through exercising the Will over cravings for objects – things – emotions, as described by Patanjali, will not eliminate the cravings, but through Denial they will be under a reasonable level of control.  The goal of the continuous exercise of Denial of a specific craving is to get to the point where the mind “forgets” the form of the craving, and the amount of energy that must be expended in exerting control over that specific craving will become minimal, and thus less of a distraction.

The intent of developing this sense of Detachment during meditation is that as it becomes a permanent part of your “inner self” it will spill over into the remainder of your life resulting in your eventual development of a complete sense of Detachment from the daily affairs of the manifest, mundane world. Development of a complete sense of detachment means you experience the experience, but you have no reaction to it.  Someone gives you a raise for a job well done, you have no emotional reaction; someone fires you for a job not well done, you have no emotional reaction to it either.  But here is where a problem can arise from our efforts to become a more spiritually developed individual.

If one is living in a Monastery with walls to protect you from the outside world, and a rigid social structure to function within that provides protection from the individuals that you interface with, this level of detachment can be safely practiced. 

For the rest of us, Detachment through Denial, when used in balance and in its proper place can be beneficial, but the use of this method in the mundane world, as opposed to the artificial environment of a monastery, can result in unintended consequences.

The fact that we must be aware of is that the overwhelming majority of our fellow inhabitants of this planet neither understand, nor are much interested in understanding, our interest in developing a sense of detachment.  As a result, they can misinterpret one of the aspects that manifests in an individual as they develop a sense of Detachment through Denial.

“This calmness is the emblem of detachment and includes not only an outward passivity, but an inner equilibrium.” (Emphasis mine.)

The appearance of “outward passivity” has become a prominent goal in many of the Westernized Yogic and New Age Philosophies.  It has been promoted as a character trait to be prized and developed on its own, rather than recognized as an outer manifestation of an inner development. 

The snag is that Passivity developed as a personality trait alone, can actually draw conflict.

Ok, that is a pretty strong statement and one that seems to be counter to most of the Spiritual Development movements popular today.  To be able to put this statement into context and to understand the social process involved, Passivity must be viewed in terms of one of the many personality related energy signals that we unconsciously radiate.

As a Human Consciousness (Soul) made up of a complex compilation of pure energy patterns, we constantly radiate information in the form of signal patterns (waveforms) that our fellow beings are aware of on a “sub-conscious” level.  Someone instinctively knows when we a feeling down, or ill, or angry.  They get this knowledge from the signals that we transmit just as a part of being an active consciousness, and then they interpret the pattern received in terms that they are familiar with as a result of their own energy patterns.  In other words, they recognize the signal pattern of the emotion of say, happiness, in themselves, so when they receive a similar signal pattern from another individual, they interpret the signal to mean that the other individual is “happy”.  In a Parapsychology Laboratory this process is studied under the classification of ESP, but it is a process that goes far beyond the limits that mainstream science has placed on the laboratory definition of ESP.

One segment of these patterns, the Active Personality, is associated with the type of person or personality type that we exhibit under normal social conditions.  This personality type can be portrayed as a signal pattern located within a frequency spectrum where one end of the spectrum is labeled as Totally Passive, and the other end of the spectrum is labeled as Totally Aggressive.  It is doubtful that anyone remains long at either end of the spectrum, except possibly for a brief moment in time, or that anyone is at any given position in between the two extremes for all situations in their life.

[Totally Passive    -    Assertive    -    Totally Aggressive ]
(lower frequency)  -  Active Personality Spectrum  -  (higher frequency)

The flow of energy between individuals whose personality types are normally located at different positions on the spectrum between Passive and Aggressive is similar to that experienced in Thermodynamics, the science of heat.  In Thermo, the direction of flow of heat is always from the material of greater temperature to that of lesser temperature.  Since heat is simply an expression of the rate of vibration of the material, the direction of flow is from the material that is vibrating at a higher rate, or frequency, to that which is vibrating at a lower rate, or frequency.

If you equate Aggression with the higher frequency of the warmer material, and Passivity with the lower frequency of the cooler material, you find that Aggression automatically flows towards Passivity.  This flow occurs as a natural process without thought in most individuals and its sudden appearance can frequently be a surprise to them.  It is an unconscious reaction, although some people do find that allowing their aggressive side to come out results in their getting their way, and then come to consciously use it.

The goal in our personal development is to strike a balance between the two extremes of being either totally passive or totally aggressive.  This balance point can be described as Assertive.

Assertiveness does not refer to a specific point or frequency on the spectrum.  Rather it refers to the process of conscious decision making involved in the individual’s attempt to maintain a balance in their interactions with other Human Consciousness’s.  Balance refers to being able to maintain whatever position we have chosen to occupy between the two extremes in the Active Personality energy spectrum.  

For example, if we are interacting with an individual who is further toward the Passive end of the spectrum than we occupy, we can consciously decide to control (consciously reduce) our own level of aggression, thus preventing the flow of our more aggressive energy to that individual.  In this way we prevent the imposition of our Will over theirs. 

Likewise, if we find ourselves in a situation where someone else is attempting to exercise their Will in an aggressive manner with the intention of exerting control over us, we can respond by increasing our own level of aggression by a sufficient amount to first block, and then push back their aggression. 

To maintain balance, to be Assertive, one must be capable of both reduction and amplification of their personal position on the passive – aggressive spectrum.  The point at which an Assertive person resides between the two extremes of Passive and Aggressive is not some magical mid-point on the scale.  The Assertive person adjusts their position to reflect the situation that they find themselves in.  Focusing on remaining as close as possible to the Passive end of the scale actually stimulates aggression in others.  It is the same principle as the flow of heat in thermodynamics discussed earlier.

Our culture has promoted a passive approach to both personal and international interactions for the last 50 to 60 years.  One of the unfortunate outcomes of this shift in the approved method of response to aggression towards the passive end of the scale can be seen in the rise in the number of cases of “bullying” of children and young adults in this culture. 

In the world of international affairs, our passive response to attacks on our embassies, the USS Cole, the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, and other passive actions such as our withdrawal from Somalia after the Battle of Mogadishu, directly led to influencing the level of aggression openly exhibited by individuals like Osama bin Laden. 

Our lack of “appropriate” response to these events influenced the decision making process that resulted in the attack on the World Trade Center.  We know this from bin Laden’s own words. After our withdrawal from Somalia bin Laden described the US as a paper tiger who no longer had the will (had become passive) to stand up to those who were prepared to attack it, and as such it was now possible that the United States could be defeated in matters of armed conflict.

These types of situations can, unintentionally, arise when Detachment through Denial and its accompanying outward passivity is practiced without taking into account the outer world we function in.  If we are successful in becoming completely detached from the outcome of events in our lives, we not only give the appearance of being Passive, but in fact we do become Passive, accepting of any form of Aggression, without limits, that we may be subjected to.

The second way of reaching Detachment, Detachment through Perspective, comes to the individual almost as a side effect, as they develop an understanding of Who Am I?  As the individual, through practice, experiences the expansion of one’s knowledge of self, the location of items on their lists of things that are “important in their lives”, and of things that are “nice to have but that are not all that important”, and of things that are “no longer important” in their lives at all, began to shift, with more and more items moving to the “no longer important” list. 

It is at this point in the individual’s development that a different kind of detachment process begins to occur.  At this point the person becomes detached from cravings and desires, not as a result of a conscious decision, but as the result of the process of putting things into perspective. 

Because the individual who is practicing Detachment through Perspective will typically appear to be calmer, more centered, outwardly they will present much the same appearance of passivity as occurs in the person who is practicing Detachment through Denial.  But there is a significant difference.  Because the outer appearance is as a result of an inner change, it is not fixed in one place on the Active Personality Spectrum as it is when the outer appearance is as the result of a decision to not allow events to trigger any emotional response, regardless of the provocations involved.

Detachment as a result of perspective allows the individual to evaluate each situation and apply the appropriate response (be assertive) without that response being based on emotion. Remember, this was the original goal of developing a sense of detachment, the ability to control ourselves through conscious choice, with the choices being grounded in our personal values, in place of being driven to act (being distracted) by our emotional response to stimuli.

So, since it can take a lifetime to develop Detachment through Perspective, and working on our program of personal spiritual development utilizing the process of Detachment through Denial can result in inviting aggression by projecting passivity, what are we to do? 

I would suggest that the individual who is working on a program of personal development, in addition to the kinds of meditative processes used to acquire a sense of detachment that are outlined in works such as Patanjali’s Kriya Yoga Sutras, spend some time meditating on just what constitutes a reasonable response to the various kinds of situations that an individual is likely to encounter in their daily life.   By using the concept of Assertiveness detached from emotional response as a guide in determining what constitutes a reasonable response during their meditations, if or when one of the situations meditated on arises, the individual will be better prepared to react to the situation appropriately.

 [1] Kriya Yoga Sutras of Patanjali and the Siddhas, Translation, Commentary and Practice by Marshall Govindan

My guess is that by doing so they are attempting to create the perception that they are approaching the subject from a real world “scientific” point of view, and therefore should be accorded the appropriate level of respect customary for one who is involved in “scientific research”.  It has always had just the opposite effect on me, leading me to wonder just how qualified the researcher is, and do they even understand what it is that they are attempting to do research on? 

To do “serious” research one is expected to use the scientific method. By definition, when using the scientific method, one is not supposed to allow oneself to be influenced by preconceived biases, in this case, a bias against data collected through the human psychic.  The research is, ideally, to be based upon a starting theoretical model that is modified over time as data is collected and analyzed.  The parts of the model that can be verified, or at least not discredited, are kept in the model.  The parts of the model that are demonstrated to not be accurate are discarded or modified.

To develop the initial model and then to be able to do data analysis requires at least some knowledge of the field being investigated.  For example, I would not expect to find a Mechanical Engineer doing research in the field of Molecular Biology.  The individual might have an excellent education and be a very good Mechanical Engineer, but their ability to develop models, devise experiment protocols and then do data collection and analysis in the area of Molecular Biology, would not be consistent with their education or life experience.

It has been my observation that most of those who I have come in contact with who are interested in Paranormal Research are sincere, enthusiastic individuals with, at best, some background in either the popular culture’s fascination with meters, recorders and other Paranormal Research Equipment, or some background or belief in Psychic phenomena.   It is rare that I find anyone who has much of a background in the physical sciences.

As far as I can tell with only limited knowledge of their organizations and methods, of the various Paranormal groups that I am at least somewhat familiar with today, including the ones with the most popular shows on TV, none of them have, or at least do not state that they have, a working model to start with or use in their investigations, have no experimental protocols, and focus their entire efforts on the setting up of people and equipment for the collection of data.  The data analysis seems to consist of no more than reviewing the tapes/recordings afterwards to see if any anomalies show up, and then they stop at the point where they recognize that they “got something”.

I have no wish to discourage anyone from joining any of these groups.  I do understand the interest many people have in participating in events that might allow them to have a personal experience with a paranormal event, therefore gaining some assurance that there is “Life After Death”.  Many of the organizations I have looked at in my research have a common mission statement that recognizes this as their specific main function, “To find proof that there is life after death”.  At the same time, to let my sarcastic side out for the moment, the requirements for being a qualified Paranormal Investigator today seem to revolve around not much more than having a catchy name and logo for the group, and it helps if everyone has matching tee-shirts and or jackets with the logo printed on them. 

But to be fair about it though, where can the sincere individual find a means of obtaining a solid background education in this discipline?  Although there are many individuals who I respect in this field from whom one could learn much within the specific area of their expertise, I am not aware of any school or group that has a program that could provide the basics in the all of the following areas: (1) basic scientific methods, (2) basic material world
science/physics, (3) a beginning model for the non-physical portion of the universe that is supposed to be the area of origin of Paranormal phenomena, and (4) the development in the individual of any of the many forms of psychic
abilities such as Clairvoyance, Clairaudience, Clairsentience, Empathic Abilities, Medium, Trance Medium, Psychometry, etc., any or all of which would be useful in Paranormal Research.  To understand why this split exists between the study of the non-physical realm (paranormal) and the working with this same realm (psychics) some history would be helpful.

When using phrases like Researchers of the Paranormal, Paranormal Investigator or Parapsychologist (or Ghost Hunter or Ghost Buster) it should be clearly understood that the root source for all of these phrases, “Parapsychology” has two very different meanings in Western Culture.  Professional Psychologists and Therapists have one definition for the word, and popular culture, thanks mainly to the entertainment industry, has a very different understanding of what the word suggests.  I believe that the divergence in meaning between these two areas came about to a large extent as a result of something as basic as how one obtains funding for their research.  Is the researcher working within classical academia where they must “publish or perish”, or within the entertainment industry, where one must both entertain, and if possible, thrill their audience, if one is to be able to obtain funding from the sale of books and/or from having their own TV show?

University Psychology Departments in the 1950’s recognized that an unexplored area existed within their field which they could no longer ignore.  Although still not willing to officially investigate any phenomena that fell outside of preset fixed boundaries that discounted any suggestion of the possibility of life in any form other than physical, or of an intelligence that resided somewhere other than the human brain, still, colleges and universities began adding courses in Parapsychology to their curriculums.  By the late 1970’s, for a short period of time, there were even a number of US Universities that were offering degrees in Parapsychology. 

In what was probably an attempt to present an aura of scientific respectability about the subject, the fathers of modern parapsychology rejected the study of any area that could not be first demonstrated as valid using the “scientific method” in a laboratory setting.  By doing so, Parapsychology research in the University environment became restricted to only that which could be documented using statistical analysis.  Observational Data, no matter how ground breaking in the field, which could not be reproduced over and over again in the lab (the classic ESP Zener Card experiments) was rejected out of hand.  Field work to investigate such anomalies as hauntings were completely out of the question.  Funding for research in an academic environment is dependent upon the kind of physical results that can be produced as a result of the research, mainly in the form of statistical data reports and scholarly papers submitted for peer review.  One’s funding was likely to dry up if all you had to show for your research was some audio tapes of a onetime event where a haunting was being investigated.

A college text of that period by two professors at Duke University, titled PARAPSYCHOLOGY, FRONTIER SCIENCE OF THE MIND, A Survey of the Field, the Methods, and the Facts of ESP and PK Research, by J. B. Rhine and J. G. Pratt[1], pretty well summed up the attitude of mainstream science in the title.  The boundaries set by science at that time placed parapsychology exclusively within the realm of the “mind,” and dealt almost singularly with ESP (Extrasensory Perception, non-physical communications between individuals) and PK (Psychokinesis, the ability to move objects with the mind).  Some excerpts from this textbook follow:

“It should from the very beginning be made clear that the phenomena with which parapsychology deals are all, without exception, events of nature. In other words, the field of problems belongs entirely to natural science. As the next chapter will indicate, the observations and experiments are dealt with strictly in the established manner of scientific inquiry. Accordingly, whatever comes out of the investigations of this field belongs, just as in any other branch of science, to the body of organized knowledge known as natural law.

What, then, identifies a psychical phenomenon as parapsychical? It is an occurrence that has been shown by experimental investigation to be unexplainable wholly in terms of physical principles. It is, in fact, the manifestly nonphysical character of parapsychical phenomena that for the present constitutes their only general identifying feature and marks them off from the rest of general psychology. This does not, of course, alter the fact that the data of parapsychology are natural. As a matter of fact, our concept of what is “natural” is built up out of just such discoveries of science as they are made; accordingly it goes on growing, and will continue to do so, with each added bit of knowledge. It is now clear that, contrary to some of the limiting philosophies that currently prevail, nature extends beyond the domain of purely physical law.

The distinction of these parapsychical occurrences from physics is not, however, an absolute one. Rather, they usually involve physical events or objects, either as stimuli or as effects. But there is always some distinct point at which a completely physical interpretation is manifestly inadequate. To illustrate, the direct influence of human volition on a moving object without the use of any kind of physical energy to achieve the effect would constitute a phenomenon for parapsychological study. Or again, an individual may obtain knowledge of an event occurring beyond the range of his senses and his reasoning abilities. If there should be no transfer of physical energy from the event to the individual, no sensory function could convey the knowledge and the experience would be parapsychical.”

The last paragraph would seem to provide justification for the categorizing as Paranormal Researchers those groups that go under the modern label of “Ghost Hunters”.  A common thread for these groups is the collection of data in the form of video and/or audio recordings of images/sounds that cannot be traced to a mundane physical source.

The naysayers claim that the study of Parapsychology using the Scientific Method has never produced a result indicative of any actual phenomena, and the enthusiasts tend to ignore the collection of hard data using the Scientific Method in favor of experiential data that by its’ nature cannot be replicated, thereby invalidating it to the mainstream scientific community (a Sensitive is used to experience discarnate entities).  It is my belief that the study of Parapsychology and Paranormal Phenomena can and should be undertaken within the standards of the Scientific Method, but absolutely also requires the inclusion of those areas of experience generally labeled as psychic or spiritualist.

Using the Scientific Method to prove a theory in Parapsychology, or to demonstrate that someone has actual ability to cause Parapsychological Phenomena such as PK to occur, would require that all variables be maintained at a consistent value for each test, and that by doing so identical results can be obtained each time the test is run.  For example, placing an individual in an identical environment for each test, and using the same deck of Zener cards each time for an ESP experiment, would theoretically result in obtaining identical test scores each time, something that researchers have not been able to accomplish.  The challenge that the researcher runs up against in using the scientific method is determining what constitutes an identical environment, and then being able to replicate it.

The disadvantage placed on the researcher in doing this type of research, compared to standard physical sciences research, are the restrictions placed upon the tester’s ability to identify the variables involved.  To be able to know what the variables are to such a degree that there is a high probability of their being either controlled in order to prevent variability between tests, or where their variability can at least be monitored and recorded for each test is an absolute must.

For most researchers though, if the testing is of a phenomenon that is tied to non-physical world events, such as a haunting, it may be not only impossible for them to identify the variables, but in mainstream science they are not even allowed to accept the possibility of the existence of such variables, much less be able to ensure that they are the maintained the same for each event.  Taking it a step further, when mainstream science refuses to even allow for the possibility that there may be non-physical variables involved, then their tests are in fact, not based on the Scientific Method, with the end result being that the tests are being rigged to always provide them with a negative answer which is the only answer that they can accept.

How is it that researchers in the academic environment cannot even speculate on the possibility of other, non-measureable variables in this field, let us take a look at another excerpt from this textbook:

“Parapsychology needs also to be distinguished from popular concepts connected with certain areas of practice or belief which are sometimes confused or associated with it. Occultism is one of these. This term designating the study of hidden arts or principles does not apply to the scientific type of approach that characterizes parapsychology. Spiritualism is another term that has been widely associated with parapsychology. Spiritualism, however, is a religion, having for its central emphasis belief in the existence of a world of discarnate personalities supposedly able to communicate with the living, mainly through mediumship. They are also believed capable of manifestations such as hauntings and poltergeist phenomena (a sort of rough‑housing attributed to noisy spirits). As with all religious systems of belief, there are certain doctrines in Spiritualism based upon the assumption of capacities that have not been verified by scientific method in parapsychology. The relationship of parapsychology to areas possibly involving its principles is, in general, something like that of a pure to an applied science area. There is the important difference, however, that in no instance in parapsychology as yet has such application grown out of preceding laboratory discovery.

Certain of the terms more commonly associated with spiritualism have come into widespread popular usage; for example, the terms medium and mediumship. Strictly speaking, the term medium implies a theory of spirit survival and of communication of discarnate personalities with the living through the intermediation of persons known as mediums. This is a doctrine in the Spiritualist faith and is not a scientifically established fact in parapsychology. It is, however, correct to say that the investigation of the hypothesis of spirit survival and communication would be a parapsychological one (see Chapter 6).”

By definition, according to this textbook then, if the source of phenomena cannot be found in the manifest physical world, then variables associated with experiments involving the phenomena cannot be taken into consideration, must be assumed to not exist, and therefore cannot be included in the research.  Makes it kind of hard to do research in the area of Paranormal Phenomena, which is also defined in this textbook as phenomena that has no discernable physical source, if one is forbidden to look to the non-physical for collecting data.  Any data collected that might be related to the possibility the existence of Life after Death is regulated to the religion of Spiritualism and consequently cannot even be considered in Parapsychological Research.  If it cannot be considered in research by the academic community, then it certainly cannot be included in any curriculum that the school might develop related to Parapsychology either.

I have worked with, been exposed to, and felt driven to reconcile the seeming contradictions between the areas of non-physical phenomena and hard science all of my six plus decades.  Although I didn’t know then that I was doing paranormal research, my first project lasted for a period of ten years, running from the age of 7 to 17.  My education and means of earning an income have primarily been oriented around the hard sciences.  My avocation has been the study and personal development of an understanding of the area the textbook above labels as Spiritualism, and how it relates to the area of knowledge generally referred to as “hard science”.

During the thirty years or so that I have worked with the local Southern California community of those involved in the field of Metaphysics, New Age and “Psychic” philosophies, it has became apparent to me that there is a need in this type of research for both the hard science equipment operator and the psychic sensitive if the research is going to generate the greatest amount of usable data.   The most sensitive instrument that can be used to detect paranormal phenomena is the human instrument; it is also unfortunately an instrument that can be of fluctuating reliability with results from the same individual varying from investigation to investigation (there are a number of reasons for this variation that do not compromise the value of the human instrument, but it is far too an extensive area of study to go into here). 

As I stated in the opening, for the researcher to discount the use of Psychics or Mediums in the field of Paranormal Research I feel indicates a lack of knowledge of the subject matter being investigated, and will more importantly, limit the researcher’s ability to produce much in the way of new insights into science of paranormal phenomena.

Despite the official academic position regarding the reality of areas of life that are not measurable by yard stick or oscilloscope, it is my hope that those who are interested in doing research in the full field of Parapsychology, not just ESP or Hauntings, will do all they can to expand their personal range of knowledge in all of the areas of science and psychics, not just in one or the other.

[1] This text was first published in 1957 and went through a total of five printings, with the last reprint done in 1974, a respectable length of time for any college text to be in use.  If you wish to view this text, PARAPSYCHOLOGY, FRONTIER SCIENCE OF THE MIND is available in its’ entirety on-line at: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=743535.