Consciousness cannot be articulated. In the unconditional state it is inexpressible. However, this Transcendental Reality could be naturalized internally by the human brain, which has been evolutionarily primed to do this. On the other side, externally, this has been a spontaneous happening in nature.
Science is wonderful, but the worldview it offers is incomplete and too impersonal, but not everybody sees that... Not yet anyway... Spread the word!
The Galileo Commission for expanding the scope of Science (https://www.galileocommission.org) launched in 2018 has taken up this issue seriously. At this specific Galileo Moment, the author who happened to be a member of the Advisory Board of this Commission, has chosen zero-point energy state of the brain as an important central issue for this purpose which might initiate multidisciplinary research to push the envelope of science farther.
Altogether, our results provide first neuroscientific evidence underlying the phenomenological experience of induced light.
We have recently started to understand that fundamental aspects of complex systems such as emergence, the measurement problem, inherent uncertainty, complex causality in connection with unpredictable determinism, time-irreversibility and nonlocality all highlight the observer’s participatory role in determining their workings.
The Ladder of Cognition: Abstract Operation, Molecular Biology, Sytems Science – AK Mukhopadhyay, 2017
There emerges the broad outline of organization in the design of unified systems science. The outcomes have promises for pathology and molecular medicine, cell biology and synthetic biology, psychology and psychiatry, artificial intelligence and bio-robotics.
Books & Chapters
Several modern scientific disciples arrive fast in exhausting the one-sided mechanical and reductionistic thinking that were established upon. Biological Evolution is discussed as such an example here.
During the last twenty years or so, the investigation of fundamental aspects of complex systems in connection with the observer's participatory role in determining their understanding brings forth a novel perspective in science.
We proposed in the mid 1990’s that consciousness depends on biologically “orchestrated” coherent quantum processes in collections of microtubules within brain neurons, that these quantum processes correlate with, and regulate, neuronal synaptic and membrane activity, and that the continuous Schrödinger evolution of each such process terminates in accordance with the specific Diósi–Penrose (DP) scheme of “objective reduction” (“OR”) of the quantum state.
After nearly half a decade of transpersonal psychology, to be precise 43 years after the foundation of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology that gave the nascent movement an academic and scholarly appearance, it seems about time to pause and ask: What has the movement of transpersonal psychology really achieved?
One of the most persistent conceptual errors in philosophy, psychology, and neurophysiology is the attempt to explain memory by means of memory traces (sometimes called “engrams”). The underlying problems are very deep and difficult to dispel, and as a result, trace theories are quite seductive.
However, my own assessment was that Sheldrake’s staunchest supporters and detractors were both wrong: Sheldrake’s view of formative causation was neither viable nor as radical as it seemed. But it wasn’t crazy either; in fact, Sheldrake’s proposal revealed considerable intelligence, insight, and originality. Nevertheless, it was seriously flawed, and to my surprise I found it to be flawed for the same reasons as the theories Sheldrake was concerned with rejecting.
The subtitles of these books are significant in referring to a spiritual vision for modern man and the integration of experiment with experience in arriving at a coherent worldview. Both Max and Peter epitomised the Network approach of balancing rigour with openness, and indeed it was Peter who invited Max to join the Network after the initial meeting recommended writing letters to possible members.
At all stages, it is important to let go of fear and anger resulting in accumulating pain and leading to energetic instability. Richard shows how management of the emotions is a key in this respect, although the fulfilment of the ego’s needs and the soul’s desires is even more critical.
John Casey gives a magisterial overview of the Western eschatological tradition – death, judgement, heaven and hell – providing sympathetic and lucid summaries of a vast range of different and at times conflicting sources that is a real pleasure to read.
There is no doubt in my mind that the book is a seminal one for philosophy of science and should be much more widely known in the field. It consists of five parts, namely metaphysics beginning with Aristotle, anti-metaphysics, the existence of God, the metaphysics of Kant, and causation.
The author is surely correct in describing the collaboration between Krishnamurti (1895-1986) and David Bohm (1917-1992) as uncommon, since, as he points out, most collaborations take place within the same discipline. There is no doubt that they were both men of genius, deeply concerned with the human situation, its limitations and prospects.
The book is grounded in inter-spirituality and endorsed by Ravi Ravindra with its deeper exploration of the spiritual transformative journey, which is the primary purpose of religion – hence the term interspiritual rather than interreligious dialogue.
Reverting to the primacy of mind and consciousness, as espoused by Planck and many other pioneering scientists, it is showing is that universal mind, articulated as digitised information and represented as dynamic and relational patterns and processes of semiotic information, literally in-forms the formation of our Universe.
The question is: How can scientific research on NDE help us to understand more about the mystery of the mind-brain relationship? By asking this and other questions about consciousness my interest started in NDE research.
Esoteric knowledge has been saying these things for a very long time.
Marcelo Gleiser, a 60-year-old Brazil-born theoretical physicist at Dartmouth College and prolific science popularizer, has won this year’s Templeton Prize. Valued at just under $1.5 million, the award from the John Templeton Foundation annually recognizes an individual “who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension”.
The following is taken from the author’s forthcoming book How To Run A Planet: Global Governance for an Inclusive and Sustainable World. It is presented here as a contribution to the Galileo Commission debate on expanding the scope of science beyond a narrow materialism and naturalism.
I asked some of the leading figures in the field of transpersonal psychology and empirical spirituality. Has the long-awaited paradigm shift not happened because of weak evidence, or institutional and psychological resistance?
A list of more than two hundred well-known intellectuals - scientists, thinkers, writers, and artists of various kinds - who took the possibility of psychical phenomena seriously.
Author George Ritchie speaks with Joan Rivers regarding his near-death experience and what he was shown while declared dead for nine minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iqh8XB5k2w
iDigital Medium's team and contributors "share a common interest - to water the "plant" of human consciousness and watch as it blossoms into a beautiful flower."
In this presentation, Brian Josephson demonstrates the pathology of disbelief in different scientific communities. Such disbelief has hit Parapsychological research particularly hard and has deemed it 'antiscientific'.
At the recently held conference The Science of Consciousness 2019 in Interlaken, Switzerland, the Chair of the Galileo Commission David Lorimer presented a poster in relation to the initiative.
In this presentation Alan Wallace takes a look at what makes up for an exceptional claim and exceptional evidence. After looking at different types of evidence, such as physical vs subjective evidence, Wallace concludes that 'in today’s world, the notion that science is the sole arbiter of truth is highly questionable'.