This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Science Delusion – Reexamining our Worldview Mindset

Cognitive Dissonance's picture




 

The Science Delusion – Reexamining our Worldview Mindset

By

Cognitive Dissonance

 

If you are anywhere near a window or door why don’t you stop reading right now, get up, walk over and take five or ten seconds to look outside and absorb what you see. Hell, if that’s asking too much of you then just imagine what you would see if you were to look out your window. Go ahead and take a few seconds. I’ll wait.

Regardless of whether your (imagined) view outside was of lawn, woods, mountains, animals or other humans, homes or out buildings, a road or highway, tall office buildings or even skyscrapers, if I were to ask you to describe in detail what you (thought you) saw, what you (thought you) perceived, everyone would pretty much describe it using similar words, phrases, subtext and connotation.

This is because even though we all saw different things, we all employ pretty much the same basis of understanding or belief in how our natural world works and functions, of what ‘it’ is that we think we actually see. In short, we see, perceive and thereby ‘know’ through the (distorting) lens of our worldview and the individual/collective mindset that forms that point of view.

This in turn determines how we perceive, then interpret and finally describe what we see. Contrary to common belief we do not simply ‘see’ what is there. No one sees and perceives everything exactly the same way as anyone else and I’m not just talking about differences in visible color, clarity or contrast nor just through the distortion provided by a political or religious frame of reference.

Our mindset (selectively) interprets what our senses receive based upon our preconceived notions and beliefs. In short, all that we ‘see’ and perceive in every form is run through our worldview mindset for identification, interpretation and then integration. This means that there is great latitude for error when our mindset has been both created and distorted by prior beliefs, propaganda and bias.

If we don’t believe (in) what we ‘see’ or perceive, quite simply it is dismissed as unreal and nonsensical………if it is even ‘seen’ in the first place. For all intents and purposes from our perspective fully or partially accepted perception is reality, everything else is not. As I will outline below this is our deeply flawed personal and collective mindset and I contend that this is the basis for many, if not all, of our individual and global social problems.

Point of View

Our point of view determines much of what we perceive

Where we stand depends entirely upon where we sit. This wonderfully enlightening phrase works on both the micro and macro level because our basis of understanding and perception, our worldview, determines how we ‘see’ and perceive reality. Since all we know and all we think we know is right >here< in time and space, unless we make an honest, sincere and sustained effort to see beyond these artificial boundaries, to remove the self imposed limitations we all experience when we view everything through our worldview prism, we are personally and collectively condemned to a life of external and internal (self) manipulation and control.

In my opinion it is essential to understand that everything is a construct of our consciousness, so >here< is essentially non local, meaning even though for nearly all of us >here< is perceived as located between the ears, this is simply not the case. This perspective altering concept, that of non-local consciousness, is a wonderful example of our collective mindset since the vast majority will quickly and completely reject this notion simply because their present day belief system and worldview tells them otherwise. I will touch on this further down when I list some of the beliefs that form our collective worldview, but if just this one alternative view were widely embraced by the general population consider for a few moments how dramatically different the world we just viewed would seem to be.

If we fail to seek our inner knowing to effectively counterbalance the obviously subversive and manipulative external forces that are busily (re)constructing our ever changing, but still very narrow worldview, we become entirely dependent upon that external affirmation to confirm and inflame the internal dysfunction that results from our constant immersion within the insanity. Simply put we go mad, but still remain quite functional in an insane asylum sort of way. Just because I’m crazy doesn’t mean I’m stupid or unable to productively interact with others in our mad world.

This internal dysfunction, our inner insanity, aggravates and perpetuates the external manipulation by way of our collective actions in an endless positive feedback loop of escalating collective madness until finally it exhausts itself in a crescendo of war, starvation, deprivation and death. Our inner madness feeds the external madness which feeds the internal and so on.

We moan and groan about the obvious insanity of our increasingly psychotic world, about the financial, political and corporate corruption, the blatant greed and endless lies and manipulation, all while remaining comfortably blind to its inner source. Wash, rinse and repeat as needed generation after generation after generation. It simply does not need to be this way. But then again maybe it does since to accept that the source of our torment springs from within means not only that we are the problem, but that we are the solution. No one left to blame then.

A perfect example of a thoroughly dysfunctional social feedback loop is the closed society that is present day North Korea. While we do not know exactly what is happening inside that country we do understand that many if not all of its inhabitants do not receive much in the way of a ‘reality check’ to contrast what they are being told by their leadership. Their worldview mindset is horribly distorted by controlling external forces. While our egos might not like to hear this, we here in the West are under similar assault, though the techniques used are much more subtle and extremely effective. 

Our Worldview

Our entire cognitive spectrum is distorted by our worldview prism

On a micro mindset level our personal stand on gun control depends upon how we view guns, personal responsibility, local, state and federal government and so on. As well, our opinion of the stock markets’ relentless rise over the last four years depends upon our views and understanding (or not) of statistical manipulation, corporate and governmental corruption and self dealing, unlimited fiat creation and so on.

Expanding outward a bit more, on a personal level we believe that our (little patch of the) universe can be fully experienced and understood with just our oftentimes electronically leveraged five senses. Except for a few fuzzy undefined exceptions we believe that nothing further is required in order to fully understand and experience our world other than what we have not yet learned and experienced through our five senses. Man beheld what he cognitively created and it was good.

On a more macro mindset level how we view animals, plants, rocks, rivers and roads depends upon if we think of ‘them’ as sentient and conscious or dead and without awareness. For example, many believe that ‘feed’ animals should be ‘humanely’ raised and slaughtered (or at least they should be blissfully unaware of it when they are not) suggesting that we perceive animals as somewhat sentient. Perhaps this is because animals express emotions such as care and nurturing for their young and distress and panic when their young are threatened. Ask most cat and dog ‘owners’ if their animals are aware and emotional, human like in some respects, and the affirmative will come through loud and clear.

In other words we perceive (certain) animals as somewhat similar to humans principally because they show similar emotions and reactions, not because we have actually measured consciousness within them………or within humans for that matter. But we give little thought to ‘slaughtering’ woods, rivers and meadows, the very Earth itself, other than possibly holding some concern for the loss of the utility or esthetic value. I am, of course, speaking of the loss to us humans; not so much to those dumb, but still somewhat sentient animals……right?

Forget about seeing this as a moral judgment so much as just an irrefutable and near universal belief born of a decidedly narrow perceptional belief, or an iron clad fact some would say. In order for it to be a moral judgment all sides must at least be (carefully) considered, if only to be quickly discarded when it doesn’t square with that delicious steak on the table. It is one of those ‘Duh, that’s obvious’ moments where we roll our eyes and look at the questioner as if he just stepped in dog doo and is stinking up the joint. Humans are at the top of the food chain, alive and conscious. Animals are lower down and maybe conscious, depending on if our view squares with what’s for supper, while rocks and rivers are not at all. That’s just a fact Jack.

Our damned delusional unanimity

There is near universal agreement (among the ‘civilized’ world that is) that the fundamental basis for our worldview is essentially correct and quite obvious, though there are a few nagging details to be worked out here and there. So obvious in fact that rarely if ever do we talk about these concepts and even less often, either as a culture or as individuals, do we invest our time and/or money to study alternatives to these concepts, except maybe as <snicker snicker> career ending fringe science.

After all everyone knows that rocks are composed of dead inorganic material and are certainly not alive or conscious by any stretch of the imagination. This and other beliefs form our most basic assumptions about life and the world we live in and they are so firmly embedded within our way of life, within our worldview mindset, that we don’t even consider them to be assumptions at all, but rather as irrefutable and self evident facts.

And yet if these beliefs were to change, if our perception were to alter and evolve, how different would the world seem even though it did not change, only our prism. Then again, if this were to occur we could no longer be blissfully ignorant in our ravenous and insatiable consumption. It sounds to me like we are deeply conflicted and compromised sentient beings who really don’t wish to look too deep for fear of what we might see. Oops, did I just say sentient beings? I guess the answer to that would depend upon our worldview and perception. ‘We’, meaning the insane, never perceive ourselves to be anything other than sane, normal and very well adjusted to the insane asylum.

We are taught these most basic assumptions and beliefs first by our parents and primary caregivers, then by the state and corporate controlled primary and secondary education system, and finally by our corporate overlords. One is allowed, encouraged in fact, to examine the effects and intricacies of our material world in order to further ourselves personally and professionally as well as to contribute ‘economic value’ to the whole (meaning the overlords) as well as the self. After all I must march to the corporate machine because I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.

But one must never question the very basis of our worldview belief system unless one wishes to be declared a heretic and summarily expelled from the paternal patronage system of advancement and achievement. Only the wacko’s and crazies unnecessarily think so far out of the box that they must be declared permanently off reservation and dead to the academic and scientific world. You know, for their own good lest they rock the boat, spill the beans and hurt themselves and others. So we hitch up our pants, carefully adjust our blinders and then join the collective worldview of the hive mind.

Materials Science

All hail the mighty kings of material science

The modern day material sciences, the new global religion adored by nearly the entire world’s ‘civilized’ population, are thoroughly infiltrated and infused with carefully guarded dogma, blind beliefs, long held assumptions and blatantly obvious taboos. Obvious at least to anyone who steps outside the castle walls and gazes back with a clear and steady eye, not to those still deeply embedded within the meme.

The world’s declared religions must regard with envy and awe the degree of blind faith and revered belief the scientific community exhibits in service to the holy scientific grail, that of provable and repeatable scientific ‘truth’ and ‘fact’. Not to mention the degree of blind adoration we plebs exhibit in servitude to all things materially scientific, the ultimate effect of manufacturing consent.

If it can’t be measured and quantified using repeatable and verifiable experimentation, it just ain’t real folks. But since our measuring instruments are often limited by our own imagination to measuring only that which we are trained and conditioned to perceive, there is an obvious closed loop positive feedback cycle here very similar to a dog chasing its own tail. Good luck getting a government or corporate research grant to examine concepts that might just force us all to reexamine everything, then dismantle much of what we have built in order to preserve what little we still have left……our souls and self survival to name just two.

Since I was a young child I have always been a materials science geek so my love affair has not died, just switched from blind belief to critical thinker. For those of us who wish to look beyond the surface layer and ask the really tough questions that threaten to rock our socks off, these days of heightened awareness and self discovery are actually much more exciting than you might think. But only if one is willing to look beyond our pre-conditioned minds and discover a huge wealth of alternative science waiting to be (re)discovered and perused. In other words, only if we are ready and willing to question everything beginning with ourselves and what we ‘know’ to be true.

Arrogance

The agony of the arrogance

If I were limited to just one word to describe the ‘civilized’ western world (and rapidly the developing eastern world) it would have to be ‘arrogance’. We are so completely sure of our correctness, of our absolute certainty that the world, nay the universe, is pretty much constructed as, of and how we believe it to be because……..well, because our high priests of material science say it is so. See, it says so right here in our cleric approved indoctrination texts with all their pretty pictures, graphs and diagrams. No critical thinking needed since it has already been done for us. Just gaze at the flickering monitor and repeat after me.

With the benefit of hindsight we roll on the floor in delirious laugher at some of the obviously silly notions that were held as gospel decades, centuries, even millennium ago while rarely if ever considering that we presently labor under our own woefully wrong flat world perspectives so deeply engrained within our present day mindset that we are completely and utterly blind to how wrong we might be.

The amount of self absorbed naval gazing narcissistic hubris it takes to think that we are so much smarter, so much more enlightened than our mothers and fathers of just 20, 50 or 100 years ago is simply staggering to consider. In short we are afflicted with a severe and possibly fatal case of cranial rectal inversion and things don’t look good for a recovery anytime soon.

As Mrs. Cog and I continue our journey down the rabbit hole I can’t tell you how many times we have discovered books written fifty, a hundred, two hundred years ago that nail concepts (or just open the mind to other possibilities) that have all been summarily dismissed by the modern day material science priests as deluded and utterly wrongheaded. But after an open minded and thorough reading, we can often see that they clearly and creatively explain so much about the perplexities of our natural world. 

At the risk of insulting many of my readers I find little difference in motives and methods between the high priests of central banking & high finance and those so-called scientific authorities who are found in various in-house corporate think tanks and labs, government and corporate run research and development centers and the heart of the beast, glorious academia, with its deeply dug in keepers of the holy thought relics and rituals. For the most part true scientific advancement (rather than just ‘material’ science) only creeps forward when a few more of the old guard dies off and the discipline lurches another step or two ahead before the new crop at the top starts protecting turf while permanently closing their minds to non conforming thought.

Sadly our present day worldview is seemingly confirmed by so much of what material science gets right, at least when it comes to consumer products, electronic gadgets and fiat printing computers, that we can all safely ignore what it gets spectacularly wrong. Just as long as we can get Wi-Fi, or at least a decent cell signal, all is right in the world and we can remain blissfully asleep at the wheel. Even when it does get it wrong, it ain’t wrong for long thanks to a bucket full of scientific superstition, supposition and sensationalism as they announce the latest greatest wild ass guess disguised as scientific fact-theory, all designed to paper over their last wild ass guess gone horribly wrong.

One should rightfully ask a basic question at this point. What difference does it make if science gets a few things wrong here and there? The answer would be ‘not much’ if the errors were at the end of the scientific process rather than at the beginning where they compound over and over again. As anyone who has added, subtracted and multiplied a long stretch of numbers will tell you, while a mistake anywhere along the way will produce an error, mistakes made at the beginning send the resulting sum so far out of the ballpark as to worse than useless, but potentially dangerous. Especially if those errors in thinking and supposition are then used as the basis for other equations, which in turn form our worldview. The result is the insanity that is Earth 2013.

Ice Floes

 Bridging the ice floes

I have been writing about our disastrously distorted worldview for several years now, though never in detail and always as part of my ongoing theme of looking within for the answers we all seek. I rarely provide direct answers to specific questions (something that tends to infuriate my readers) because I wish the questioner to first ask better questions as part of their own search within, then to seek and find their own answers so that they may own them as their truth.

If I provide specific answers I am not much better than those who peddle snake oil, if for no other reason than I am expecting others to believe me, or at least believe that what I am saying is truth as I believe I know it. In my opinion it is much better for the questioner to seek out and find their own answers so that they may embody them as their own, leaving them better able to integrate that information within themselves. The ultimate authority is found within and the only way to break our dependence upon the external authority is to stop relying upon it for ‘answers’.

I feel the same way about recommending books, particularly books that claim to have answers. All writers, including myself, are ultimately propagandists since it is nearly impossible to write on a subject without holding an opinion on that subject. We wish to influence the reader to adopt our way of thinking and the conclusions that spring from it, thus we will present our best argument in favor of the position we are discussing even when we make a genuine effort to be impartial. This is why I prefer to ask open ended questions that appear to have multiple answers (or worse, only one answer) and then present my thinking.

However from time to time I will point in a specific book because it does present open ended questions or dramatically points to our cognitive dissonances, then it asks the hard ‘why’ questions while trying to fill in the blanks. Or I will recommend it because it pushes the cognitive boundaries well past the accepted norm. This time I seem to have found a book that does many of these, Rupert Sheldrake’s “Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery”. The UK edition is titled “The Science Delusion.

In his book Rupert Sheldrake discusses in great detail ten fundamentally flawed assumptions or dogma that have infiltrated the western world’s worldview. He then explores possible answers to his own questions. Below is Sheldrake’s summary of modern science’s materialist ideology which I transcribed from an interview of Sheldrake on Red Ice Radio.

Number one; there is the assumption that nature is mechanical or machine like. That everything in nature, plants, animals and humans are machine like. Or as Richard Dawkins famously said, we are just lumbering robots and our brains are like genetically programmed computers.

Number two; that matter is unconscious. The entire universe is made up of unconscious matter which includes everything in nature including our bodies, but strangely our minds are somehow conscious. This illustrates one of the biggest problems in materialist science, that consciousness should not exist at all and yet it does, but exclusively within humans and maybe some animals and possibly a few other species.

Number three; the laws of nature are fixed, that they are the same as they were at the big bang and they will be the same forever. This infers that the “constants” such as the speed of light or the gravitational constant never change or vary.

Number four; that the total amount of matter and energy has always and will always remain the same beginning with the big bang and extending forward into infinity.

Number five; that nature is purposeless, that there is no purpose in animals and plants or in life as a whole. The entire evolutionary process has no purpose; it has just come about by blind chance and the laws of nature.

Number six; biological inheritance is material, it is all genetic or epigenetic or possibly in cytoplasmic inheritance, but in any case material.

Number seven; memories are stored as material traces inside the brain. All your memories are inside your head in some way stored in nerve endings or phosphorylated proteins or some other way. No one knows how, but the assumption is that they are there.

Number eight; your mind is inside your head, that it is an aspect of the activity of your brain.

Number nine; psychic phenomenon such as telepathy is illusory. They appear to exist, but they are not real. That’s because the mind is inside the head and can’t have any effects at a distance.

Number ten; mechanistic medicine is the only kind that really works. Alternative and complementary therapies may appear to work, but that’s just because people would have got better anyway or it’s the placebo effect. That’s why governments, pharmaceutical companies, medical research organizations and universities funds only mechanistic medicine based upon the principal that the body is a machine working on chemistry and physics so it can only be treated by the same processes such as drugs or surgery. While that can be very effective up to a point, it’s just part of medicine.

 

Science Set Free

Please recognize that the purpose of my continuous exercise in cognitive discombobulation, of questioning everything beginning with myself, is not intended to form new conclusions or even to modify my present day belief system mindset. Rather the desired effect is to expand my perceptive capacity, to push my self constrained thought boundaries far beyond my well manicured cognitive back yard and deep into the wooded forest beyond.

In other words it is the journey, not the destination that matters. By challenging our core beliefs, by demanding of ourselves that we look where the emotional and intellectual pain lay, once we honestly begin to do so sweeping new vistas open up. I have no idea what you will find when you look, only that you will find what you are looking for if you are sincere and persistent in your search.

Please note that I have not thoroughly read this book, only skimmed, though it is on my must read list to be perused over time. However I have carefully listened to four of Sheldrake’s interviews and I was impressed with his originality and fearless thought process. While he is a classically trained scientist he seems to have found a way to bridge both ice floes, that of a contrarian and of a traditionalist. If nothing else you might want to take a closer look at this one. I most certainly will.

There is nothing more exciting, or frightening, than breaking from the herd and crawling way out onto the end of the limb. Provided I continue to seek the courage to maintain my own personal journey I suspect I shall find many of you out there where it all begins.

03-03-2013

 

Cognitive Dissonance

Out on a Limb

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 03/13/2013 - 09:54 | 3325658 King Dong
King Dong's picture

I've read the Sheldrake book and there is much to commend it. I must say that I am pleasantly surprised that I have found your piece on my favourite website, ZH, about one of my subjects. There is something about ZH that goes beyond the pages written - almost like a subjective meeting place for a collective consciousness

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 02:55 | 3300119 Aquarius
Aquarius's picture

I should supply a bit of Samuel for any interest arising and for the record. Excuse me as I have been having my afternoon nap

10 So Samuel passed on the Lord’s warning to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 “This is how a king will reign over you,” Samuel said. “The king will draft your sons and assign them to his chariots and his charioteers, making them run before his chariots. 12 Some will be generals and captains in his army,[a] some will be forced to plow in his fields and harvest his crops, and some will make his weapons and chariot equipment. 13 The king will take your daughters from you and force them to cook and bake and make perfumes for him. 14 He will take away the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his own officials. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and your grape harvest and distribute it among his officers and attendants. 16 He will take your male and female slaves and demand the finest of your cattle[b] and donkeys for his own use. 17 He will demand a tenth of your flocks, and you will be his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will beg for relief from this king you are demanding, but then the Lord will not help you.”   The pivotal point is in 8:18.   So it is confirmed (in my New World Translation it states "And YOU will certainly cry out in that day by reason of YOUR king, whom YOU have chosen for yourselves, but Jehovah will not answer YOU in that day" Ho hum

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 21:10 | 3299539 blindman
blindman's picture

two links more from recent persuasion and parentage.
consider, side by side, and then move on.
.
oh, and this right now live thing...
.

http://prn.fm/listen-live/#axzz2MchtH7oj
.
Daniel Gauntlett made “the fatal decision to abide by the law”
Posted on March 3, 2013 by stacyherbert| 29 Comments
A 35 year old man in Kent froze to death after he made “the fatal decision to abide by the law” and not break into an abandoned home due to be demolished in a few days.

Here’s the Artist Taxi Driver with his powerful take on the story:

http://maxkeiser.com/2013/03/03/daniel-gauntlett-made-the-fatal-decision...
.
Wealth Inequality in America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM
.
off the chart …..
.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 21:30 | 3299419 Aquarius
Aquarius's picture

@ CogDiss

 

with respect...

 

Allow me a small correction, please: "The Gods of Science are still spitting and sputtering ..."

 

Should read, 'The Priests of Science...'

 

From The Information Clearing House (ICH) a small but valued news agreggator:

 

"Information that is consistent with our pre-existing beliefs is often accepted at face value, whereas evidence that contradicts them is critically scrutinized and discounted. Our beliefs may thus be less responsive than they should to the implications of new information" - Thomas Gilovich, How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life

"I'm an expert in homo sapiens behavior. They can rationalize anything. Take war. They'll bankrupt their economies, sacrifie the best of their young, unleash a bloodbath that impresses even me, at the expense of providing shelter, food, and medicine for their own people." - Mario Acevedo, The Undead Kama Sutra

"What sets our species apart is not just what men will do to other men, but how tirelessly they justify it." - William Dietrich, Napoleon's Pyramids

"No one really knows why humans do what they do." - David K. Reynolds

 Please note that your message is consistent with a human behavioural constant for over ~3,000 and maybe more:

1. Impose upon peoples "beliefs' that arise from fraudulently prepared and manipulated Gnostic wisdom, as well as, history, fear, terror, etc., while,

2. Recursively scamming productivity, wealth, assets and the public purse, while

3. Having the governing elite drawn, a priori, from the most incompetent, ignorant, lying scum the planet has ever seen in its Billion year history (Vedics)

4. And, with a social ideology of Statism that maintains the feudal system of the Protection Rackets.

5. I add, every social War, genocide, etc., has arisen from the incompetences of those that would be Kings. aided and abetted by those of the counting houses which we today, entitle, Economists. and Bureaucrats. The picture is damned clear methinks.

Heed the Book of Samuel and hear what was said would happen when we elected a King. And, for ~3,000 years to date, it bears a precise Prophecy. Too precise to be ignored.

Thank you for your comments

Ho hum

 

Wed, 03/06/2013 - 10:29 | 3304518 akarc
akarc's picture

"No one really knows why humans do what they do." - David K. Reynolds"

Just a guess. Total lack of principles and respect and no lack of selfishness and greed. Science/technology has advanced beyond peoples ability to use it responsibly and ethically. This is a generalization and not a condemnation of science/technology. A simple example many here can relate to:

Early on as a motorcyclist I could see the threat cell phones posed to anyone close to traffic. I involved myself in fighting against the use of cell phones, hands free or not, while driving. Science confirmed my observation with multiple studies.  I marched the halls of the state capital armed with studies to make my point (A senators aide told me good luck considering the wireless company cash floating around the halls).  I printed up the literature and passed it out at motorcycle gatherings as they/we are at high risk to suffer the consequences of the general populations complete selfish disregard for the lives of others. I predicted that if action isn't taken we will end up with entertainment centers in the dashboards of our cars.

I was pretty much ignored because after all:

Science does not apply to me

The science is wrong

That shit won't happen to me

I was condemened as someone wanting to take away "rights". Whoa???  What about my right to use the public highways without having a target on my back? 

End Result? They now make vehicles with full blown entertainment centers in the freaking dashboards. Hell you no longer need your freaking phone (How bad do you need it anyway?). Double Hell, I caught one friend of mine (former) riding his motorcycle next to me fucking texting???

Nowhere but in traffic is the self centeredness of man best illustrated!

With all the advancements in science/technology stupid has become epidemic. My only refuge from hopelessness is when I stumble across threads such as this one and get blasted back to some 60's experiences. Problem, my friends from then are dead! Bittersweet indeed. 

   



Mon, 03/04/2013 - 19:07 | 3299181 Aquarius
Aquarius's picture

He said, " In the dynamic we be: the Sun cycle we call a year, the ~25,000 polar cycle we call Precession, the Galactic cycle we count as ~233m years. But what is common in this grande orchestral composition but 'cycle'? Rinse and wash? Yes the Acorn unknowingly evolves to the Mighty Oak, yet we?"

In 1982 Alain Aspect of the University of Paris, discovered that under certain circumstances, subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate, regardless of distance, with each other. Hence in 1982, the Speed of Light (c) was condemned to be a variable. (about time;)

There is something odd about our presence. We are missing something that our ancestors, I am sure found. It is like a churn, ever repeating to harmonious grandeur, but in the finite the details tend to be burning at something we hold. But, as "Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe), it is we that must break this mold. For me, I have had enough of petty tyrants, communists and bleeding heart statists, where their innate incompetance keeps me from becoming that which I entwine as my destiny. Break and shatter our Belief System, we must and a priori. 

I seek what I feel. I seek that which evokes within me. What is it burning in my heart and soul? What is this emergent light. Light? Who was Moses?

Excellent post, fascinating commentary.

Ho hum

 

 

 

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 19:12 | 3299216 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"In 1982 Alain Aspect of the University of Paris, discovered that under certain circumstances, subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate, regardless of distance, with each other. Hence in 1982, the Speed of Light (c) was condemned to be a variable. (about time;)"

Spooky action at a distance aka Quantum Entanglement.

The Gods of Science are still spitting and sputtering while desperately trying to modify their pet models with yet more supposition and wild assed guestimates combined with made up out of thin air particles and theories to explain that little conundrum.

<Must.Not.Admit.I'm.Wrong>

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 18:13 | 3299078 tickhound
tickhound's picture

 

 

"Good luck getting a government or corporate research grant to examine concepts that might just force us all to reexamine everything, then dismantle much of what we have built in order to preserve what little we still have left……our souls and self survival to name just two."

Nice line.  Nice work.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 15:18 | 3298513 blindman
blindman's picture

Quantum Mechanics meets
Conspiracy Theory by miles mathis
.
First published February 19, 2013
.
http://milesmathis.com/qmsheep.pdf
.
"...For those readers who are already down the rabbit hole and have taken the red pill, there is one more
twist of the screw. This performance was so transparent and so revealing, it looks a lot like another
staged fail. In other words, it looks like propaganda that was meant to reverse on itself. Like all the
failed stories at Sandy Hook and Aurora, it looks like a play that was scripted to implode. The timing
also points us in that direction. I would say it appears that someone behind the curtain is tired of the
propaganda and is cutting holes in the fabric on purpose, at critical times and places. Unless Hughes
himself is on the brink of a personal crisis, tears in the fabric like this just don't happen. The masters of
propaganda don't suddenly forget how to build the sets. Either someone has slipped something into the
drinking water at Langley, or we are seeing signs of a hidden schism.
Or was the propaganda always this poorly constructed? Is it only me that has got out beyond it?
Perhaps it is my ability to see that is moving forward, and not the abilities of the propagandists that are
moving backward. If so, then many others around me are also coming out of the dark, and about
goddamned time. Either way, the matrix is flickering all around us." m.m.
.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 17:20 | 3298930 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

I have always attempted to combine my quantum physics with my politics, unlike the author of this article, who asserts only recently attempting to do that.

Anyway, my view is that psychotic breakdown of triumphant systems of force backed frauds is inherent in their original achievements. The war against consciousness is a war against ourselves, since even those waging it still finally lose too.

When deceits work to win, that also drives its own contradictory "success" story. Too much "success" through fraud necessarily goes mad and destroys itself ... Those who are doing that, who may well also wake up, find that their problem. Indeed, I have more faith in the ruling classes going through paradigm shifts than I do in those who are ruled.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 19:32 | 3299123 blindman
blindman's picture

@".. Indeed, I have more faith in the ruling classes going through paradigm shifts than I do in those who are ruled."
there a horrifying thought, i hope to keep the horror at bay.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 14:54 | 3298433 e-recep
e-recep's picture

as long as scientists depend on funding, quasi-science will exist next to real science. but dissing science altogether is impossible. the west has lost its upper hand of being first in industrial revolution and is squirming with pain and agony as the east is catching up. the industrial revolution was a byproduct of the ongoing scientific progress in europe. western generations have profited from it for centuries, let us not forget it.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 13:28 | 3298162 skistroni
skistroni's picture

I know I'm a little late to the party (I could blame the earth for being so big and turning all the time but nevermind :-)). I know you're trying to facilitate people with your timings, but I just saw the post early Monday morning and then I had to get to work. Anyway...

I always savour your posts like a cold water bottle in a hot desert day. It is very rare to find such writings that question the validity of all we know and perceive, writings that stubbornly refuse to provide ready-made answers, and yet I regret that there is a very limited audience for these.

In my book, this is a truly religious quest that you're after, nothing to do with established religions, but everything to do with personal religion, as in "the bridge between the human and the universe, built by humans and facilitated by the universe" (at least that's what I call it with my limited understanding). I personally appreciate the fact that there are different Gods, my only surprise being the fact that they are less than the number of people existing on Earth. 

I have an engineering education and this is what I do for a living, but I consider myself lucky to have escaped the locking down of the consciousness in the scientific dungeons. I just left an open door for other things to find me. And they actually do. And here's a thought: at the same time that we are searching for truths, perceptions or other non-material things, these very same things could be doing their own search for open minds to enter into. A "eureka" moment is the time when both us and them converge. I have seen it happen again and again to the point that I don't think it's coincidence anymore. Do we see beauty or does beauty call us to admire it (and we happen to be open enough at that time to listen)? 

The things that cannot be explained by today's science are much more than those that can, but the repetitive dismissal of all the former in order to not disturb our hard to find peace of mind, has reduced their importance for our daily operations.

So how do I measure or even describe the feelings I have for my family? They say they can measure love by chemistry, but how do I measure the care, the patience, the understanding that I had to find in myself in order to help to bring up our children? Just one of my many unanswered questions, and I hope it doesn't get answered ever, because I enjoy the search more than anything. 

Things are what they are unto themselves in the end of the day. Each truth is singular and unique only when it is alone and isolated from everything else. Otherwise it is different according to each one's point of view. Just like Hydrogen is an absolute truth unto itself (and I suppose that it, unlike us, knows where its electron is at any given moment), but Oxygen, Carbon and Nitrogen all have different views of what Hydrogen is, thereby each doing very different things with the lonely proton-electron pairs.

I got a thousand more things to say, but English is not helping much. I just hope that you live a long life and that you will continue to share with us your searchings. Fare well, and thank you very much. 

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 15:49 | 3300150 tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

quantum dupe

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 03:00 | 3300123 tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

Do we see beauty or does beauty call us to admire it (and we happen to be open enough at that time to listen)?

eloquence seemed to have called you to write that comment skistroni.   your english is excellent, no worries.  

it seems that objective "science" seems to miss the dance in the space between things.   so be it.

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 06:47 | 3300227 skistroni
skistroni's picture

Thanks, I had to look up eloquence, and I still don't get it. It's just that my thoughts don't flow in English. 

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 16:33 | 3298332 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I try to revisit my latest article thread for at least several days after I post. Not everyone is looking at the same sun as I and I feel that if they take the time to leave their thoughts I should at least read them in a timely manner and maybe even respond. It is the least I can do for those who wish to interact. Call it an implied bargain of mutual benefit. The reader hopefully gains something from my musings and I in turn gain from their comments.

The best stuff is always in the comment section. Always!

"And here's a thought: at the same time that we are searching for truths, perceptions or other non-material things, these very same things could be doing their own search for open minds to enter into. A "eureka" moment is the time when both us and them converge. I have seen it happen again and again to the point that I don't think it's coincidence anymore."

I feel the same way. If one considers the idea of a collective consciousness then it follows (at least from my point of view) that those who are ready and willing to receive will be sent what they seek. Or maybe it is that by becoming willing to look we re-tune our frequency to that of the general broadcast.

Thus the reason why we must expand our worldview, for it is our worldview that binds (and blinds) us to this insanity. This is why I say in the article that I do not know what you will find when you look, only that you will find what you are looking for if you are persistent and sincere in your search. We begin that search within, the source of the collective mind and thus of what we seek.

Thank you for leaving your mark.

 

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 15:14 | 3301588 akarc
akarc's picture

Hell I find I have to revisit just to try and absorb what has already been written. 

"This is why I say in the article that I do not know what you will find when you look, only that you will find what you are looking for if you are persistent and sincere in your search."

I am no longer sure of what it is I was looking for. I do know that I usually find more places to look and fortunately enjoy the looking. 

Unfortunately and sadly

"If one considers the idea of a collective consciousness then it follows (at least from my point of view) that those who are ready and willing to receive will be sent what they seek."

I my neck of the woods even a disscusion of the topics covered here is rare to non-existent. I have forwarded this post to many I know. I suffer no delusion that any will read it and it will not be discussed, in my circles anyway. For some it will be a choice based on lack of time and or inability to comprehend much of what is written here. Thats not ego or arrogance. I am fortuante enough today (that can change at moments notice) to have the time and am masochistic enough to slog through much that I do not understand to discover the gem or two that I can.

Also for those that have unintentionally fallen through cracks to subsist at street level, survival becomes key and collective conciousness means nothing. Though I suspose one could say it is relative. That if one sincerely seeks a meal on the streets one will be found. Which I suspose were one chose the perspective the experience could be considered somewhat Zen like or "be here now".  Though having been there/here I personally found it difficult to not fall into the trap of zombie conciousness.

So often times I find myself trapped between enlightened intelligentsia and cries of desperation.  I have seen to many who through no fault of their own are trapped by trying to do the "next right thing".

Kinda like ya know where ya need to go, but then ya know where ya need to be.

Were I born in rural North Korea, this thread would not exist. Would something similiar exist? I don't know.

I do know that for the most part, at my street level anyway, most aren't even bothering to look because they were born into the propaghanda and will not violate their reality because it is their truth and they are 100% sure of it. They are the ones, that in the times to come, scare me.  They are the ones that during hard times will shoot you in a heart beat and take what you have if you think other than they do.

So as refreshing and invigorating as I find this thread I must here, as I must with most everything else, temper my enthusiasm with the knowledge of alternate realities. And sometime alternate realities collide. I love the chick on the "Big Bang Theory."

Anyway, keep it up, love it. 

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 19:41 | 3302790 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"I do know that for the most part, at my street level anyway, most aren't even bothering to look because they were born into the propaghanda and will not violate their reality because it is their truth and they are 100% sure of it. They are the ones, that in the times to come, scare me.  They are the ones that during hard times will shoot you in a heart beat and take what you have if you think other than they do."

Desperate men and women, whether in power or just out of work and hungry as hell, will do desperate things. As you, I also share a healthy concern that I might be defending myself from my friends and neighbors long before I must defend myself from 'my' rogue government.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments in this thread.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 16:36 | 3298764 nomadsky
nomadsky's picture

Like Attracts Like!

thank you for sharing; the view you are spreading is "in the air" and I feel that love is the fuel you are running on. Others are running on fear.The famous paradigm shift we are going through is just a switch from fear to love, both powerfull opposint energies. Whatever is fake cannot survive anymore, only what is true and authentic will....a nice one is http://www.thegreatillusion.com

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:53 | 3298041 kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

Great food for thought, CD

Anyone with a pet knows that cats and dogs have a full range of emotions and distinct personalities.  Cats are even embarrassed when they do something clumsy and look around to see who saw that.  Could there be any better evidence of consciousness?

Many long held verities are breaking down in physics and evolution.  Galaxies don't rotate the way Einstein says they must, and no one has ever observed a "beneficial" mutation, although experiments directed at that have been going on for decades.  Worst of all, for Darwin, the math doesn't work.  For evolution to proceed solely by accidental mutation is simply impossible.  Too many moving parts which would have to be coordinated.

It's always good to proceed from first principles..., and question those too.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 11:35 | 3297746 aka Gil
aka Gil's picture

Excellent post. We're all (humans, dogs, rocks etc.) complex little bundles of energy, aren't we?

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:44 | 3298007 darrenstory
darrenstory's picture

Take acid (lysergic acid diethylamide) in large doses, early and often... until it doesn't work anymore. And while you're at it, listen to Pink Floyd, Grateful Dead, and to some degree Phish. And by listen, I mean to completely disect every meaning of every word. Make your best effort to thoroughly get to the meaning of the words. Don't let anyone else tell you what they mean, and don't get lost in the music. 

Jerry Garcia once said - "If people ever listened to what I have to say, I'd have no reason to write the music"

This is a good start to freeing your mind. Just a start though, the work will never be quite finished and you will have to constantly defend your free mind to keep it healthy. 

Of course, there are many different paths but this one seems to work extremely well. The governments of the worlds are very aware of this - why else would they be so willing to exhaust ALL resouces to prevent us from taking this stuff?

The Truth is out there / in here somewhere...

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:24 | 3297928 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Yes we are.

My pet rock agrees whole heartedly. My cat does too. :)

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 11:21 | 3297699 blindman
blindman's picture

i suspect there is a world of discovery waiting regarding
the relationship of magnetic , electromagnetic fields
associated with all particles and matter and biological
organisms or molecules. the universe, even without conscious
life or life at all, would be full of an infinite number of
unique instances of fields and particles interacting, infinite
numbers of unique forces at play doing and manifesting one off
magic! displays with no audience, ongoing for eons, eternities.
that life should manifest through organic evolution in mimicry,
resonance or sympathy (concordance) , and in symmetry and imitation
is no surprise; the material and fields are the same.
note to self; life is about repetition and pairs, poles and
adaptation through motility or proper placement with corresponding
structural protection or some combination of the two.
the fields are fractal and express like that and in living systems
are paired or go through a process of twinning?
so he thought once .....

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:28 | 3297945 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"the universe, even without conscious life or life at all, would be full of an infinite number of unique instances of fields and particles interacting, infinite numbers of unique forces at play doing and manifesting one off magic!"

And yet the consensus tries to claim that there is rigidity and uniformity in all that complexity and possibility.

Thank you blindman for your many contributions to my article threads past and present. You always make me think hard.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 13:49 | 3298228 blindman
blindman's picture

there is cognitive resonance as well as cognitive
dissonance, thank you for pointing that out. when
do we get to cognitive effervescence !! soon me thinks.
you host an inspiring and energetic board c.d..
best to you and the lights that pop out in the night sky.
here a little off/on topic memories from recent movies.
.
lincoln: abe questions, in the prosecution of the civil war
what good is it to know "true north" (the principle of the right
and good) by the compass, and strictly follow that,
if the direct path leads you to
suffer and die in a swamp or fall off a cliff?
and..
the impossible: the tsunami movie, the old lady
star gazing with the child, survivor and separated from
his mother, the old lady comments that some of the stars
in the sky are dead but we don't know it yet. the child
asks how can you tell which one's are dead? she says,
that's the thing, you can't, it is a mystery. a necessary
mystery born of perspective. so it is not for us to
know everything all at once but to know our viable pursuit,
with sensitivity and the capacity to adapt?, that is enough.
i don't know why that came out just here? but there it is.
thanks again.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:57 | 3297629 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

CD, this was some excellent mental calisthenics this morning.  Thank you..

I am in strong agreement with you that it is vital to always take oneself to task as to 'where you sit'.  btw, I really like those wise words.

"..to think that we are so much smarter, so much more enlightened than our mothers and fathers of just 20, 50 or 100 years ago is simply staggering to consider."

Bravo!  This is something that has been bothering me a lot lately, so it is nice to see another soul write it.  Indeed, we are not.  The opposite trait of arrogance is the, these days, rare and wonderful trait of humility.

 

Finally, I want to add confirmation to your view from 'where I sit'.  You see, I've had a carreer in the biological sciences for 20 years now. I was trained by that 'old guard' - on the cusp of the two decades that dismantled what I call Little Sience.  It used to be that small grant monies were given to a vast number of independent investigators, allowing them to do with it whatever they deemed fit.  The ganting agencies, at that time, knew the PI had a better idea of what to do with the money than they did.  hmm, sounding oddly familiar, isn't it..?  To make a long story short.  Now, mostly only Big Science is funded, where only a few PIs get Big grant money to work on projects that carry very little risk but work on problems the agencies decide are best.  Serendipity in science, is gone.  Very sad..

Anyway, thank you again for the provocative work, keep it up! 

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:19 | 3297522 akarc
akarc's picture

Outstanding post, outstanding comments. Thank you CD and commenters as I will have to spend much time re-reading the comments.

I love the look on peoples faces when they ask me, "Is your glass half empty or half full" and I tell them both. And amuse myself filling my empty time with figuring all the ways 1+1=3.

That a discussion such as the above exist is comforting. And disturbing.

rc 

 

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:14 | 3297884 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

As is always the case the real meat can be found in the comment section and not in my article. I am just the catalyst.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 15:33 | 3298555 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

it's always better to be the catalyst than the cattle

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 15:54 | 3298611 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I'll take my catalyst medium well with a loaded baked potato, rice pilaf and a side salad with blue cheese. :)

<Heinz 57 tastes great on my catalyst.>

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:11 | 3297495 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Number 3 is not an assumption per se or is it required, it does make things simpler. In fact a number of theorists explicitly look at the time dependence of fundamental constants, e.g.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/1812884_Testing_cosmological_variations_of_fundamental_physical_constants_by_analysis_of_quasar_spectra

Or this highly debated result on the fine structure constant discussed here

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/astro/research/PWAPR03webb.pdf

----

As for Feynman, he was much more than a mathematician, he had a very deep physical understanding, if you don;t believe me, compare his "Lectures in Physics" series to a typical physics textbook...

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:03 | 3297474 Joe Davola
Joe Davola's picture

Nothing is so firmly believed as what is least known.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 11:00 | 3297642 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Very nice.

Everyone else is confirming what they know. I try to confirm what I (think I) don't, then reverse the process.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 13:43 | 3298199 akarc
akarc's picture

I was taught look not at what you see, look for what it is that you do not see. Sorry I can't quote it.

As much of the discussion focus is on what is or is not.  How much time do we spend thinking about how we are manipulated into believing what is or is not. This is a mental, physical, spiritual exercise that affects everything from the food we eat to how we allow ourselves to be governed to what happens when we die.

I ask myself why would Budweiser pay so much money to have a little bitty budwieser sign on a car goin around a race track a 200mph?

Then I think about the 10% +/- of the observers that after a few laps are gonna get thirsty.  

Show me a picture. One side may be a nice painting or whatever. The other side may contain a better view or be blank. I can not know if I do not look!

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:01 | 3297470 Dan Duncan
Dan Duncan's picture

Cog Dis...you're writing a post on delusions, while referencing "The Science Set Free" as a source of inspiration??

C'mon, man...I know you're REALLY into your "personal journey", but when is this thing going to evolve.  You write about the same thing every time.  It's as if you're simply changing the cadence:

"We suffer from collective insanity"

"WE-SUFFER-FROM-COLLECTIVE INSANITY"

"Today, I want to write about something different. Something I've been thinking about a long time. Here goes: We suffer from this thing and it's called Collective Insanity"

Now I know how you're always questioning your beliefs, because you tell us in every post about how you're always questioning and challenging yourself, so I'm sure you'll welcome this critique: It's time to move on. We get it. Seriously. We live in The Matrix. 

Now...If you continue down this path, digging deep into your interior musings and projecting them onto ALL of Western culture, it's nothing more than self-indulgent solipcism. 

And as for the touting of Sheldrake's achingly stupid book:  Sheldrake assumption that there are "10 assumptions of Western Thought", of course has it all wrong.  Western Science does not have "assumptions"; rather, they are actually rebuttable presumptions.  The difference is not trivial...because if, for example, you disagree with the notion that the constants of light speed and gravitation do not vary, then by all means, tell us more!  "Western Thought" would love nothing more that repeatable experiments demonstrating that the speed of light is variable.  The Nobel awaits you, Cog Dis.

Until then, believe it or not, the speed of light has been rigorously tested.  It may turn out that it is not a constant, but until "Western Science" gets additional info, it is better off operating under the REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION that the speed of light is c.

If you want to talk bullshit, Cog Dis, then tell us more about Sheldrake's theory of "Morphic Resonance"...you know, the "theory" that there is a "mysterious telepathy type connections between organisms and collective memories within species."  10 to 1 you're going to reference quantum entanglement and "spooky action at a distance"...which is just awesome:  Because there is nothing better than an essay writer with no training in physics using deep physics as a metaphor in an essay assailing the epistemology of said physics, while telling us that we operate under a delusional paradigm!  

[And the 3-03-13 sign-off at the end of your post? To quote the 8-GREAT OchoCinco:  "Child, pleaze!"]

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:34 | 3297968 High_on_Sarcotics
High_on_Sarcotics's picture

Everybody worships the "high priests" of "material sciences" because they have brought us useful things like: antibiotics, vaccines, nuclear power. 

Sift through Mr. Cognitive Dissonance's superfluous rhetoric and you can see that he is displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of the tenets of Scientific Methodology. (This is probably due to the subpar education that he received at one of the so called "corporate indoctrination institutions" or whatever we choose to call schools these days. Did he read any of the books or was he more fascinated by the pretty graphs and diagrams?).

Science does NOT purport to be the TRUTH. Science is a framework by which we, as fundamentally limited entities, can understand the seemingly incoherent universe that we live in. We test our hypothesis on how we think something works, with experimentation and observation. 99.999% of the time, our hypothesis is proven wrong, and we must alter our assumptions to fit the reality. Science is fluid, ongoing and constantly evolving. Scientific theories are not "THE TRUTH" they are more like "The best explanation we have to explain this phenomenon until somebody comes up with something better". In science, nothing is ever proven definitely, but we can disprove things definitely. This is a very important distinction. Since there are an infinite amount of possible explanations, we cannot rule out with 100% certainty just one.

But we are a pragmatic species, so for all practical purposes, we collectively assume certain hypotheses to be "correct", because we have not yet observed anything to disprove them.

If you can come up with a theory that can stand up to the rigorous onslaught of empirical peer review that allows me to reasonably conclude that rocks do in fact have feelings, then for practical purposes I would assume that rocks have feelings. But since that theory has mostly been disproven, most scientists are not going to waste their time trying to figure out if rocks have feelings. But anybody is welcome to try!

Maybe science is all bullshit, and the numbers on the chalkboard of a physics professor look incomprehensible, and scholars seem to be "blindly" follow science. But keep in mind that science has brought us some pretty concrete things like: the internal combustion engine, nuclear energy, the computer/laptop from which you are reading this text from, antibiotics, etc. So when it really comes down to it, which line of reasoning would you rather gravitate towards?

The line of reasoning that says that rocks may have feelings, but who knows? Because we humans are just too subjective and diseased by a "collective insanity"?

Or the line of reasoning that brought to you the automobile, condoms, medication, sanitation, infrastructure, rockets, jets, computers, satellites, vaccination, etc. etc.

I'll let the reader decide!

 

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 17:13 | 3298858 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

Dear High_on_Sarcotics, you left out of your list all the weapons of mass destruction, which have actually enjoyed the lion's share of the funding for "science."

I will repeat the most important points: the oldest and best developed science was warfare. Success in warfare was based on deceits. Those who were successful through warfare made states, with governments, and the covert organized crime gangs were able to apply the methods of organized crime to take control over governments.

Where is the science of the principles and methods of organized crime, which actually explain how and why our entire globalized Neolithic civilization currently operates?

I tend to agree that CogD. is too sublime and abstract in his article above, but nevertheless, he gets the point that the banksters are dominating the established systems, through triumphant frauds, which drives "science" to become extremely paradoxical and problematic!

Science has been systematically developed to have a blind spot towards itself! I like to day dream that a transnational scientific community that overcomes that self-imposed problem may eventually evolve, and emerge as a significant political force. However, for now, the best organized gangs of criminals are dominating our scientific establishments, the same as they are dominating everything else.

Therefore, those who call for a more science based policy, with respect to any issue you may pick, always tend to deliberately ignore looking at themselves in the same way, and especially deliberately ignore looking at the governments that make and enforce policies, because, IF THEY DO, they end up biting the hand that feeds them. They end up perceiving the entire system is based on organized crime, and must necessarily be.

Science, as a social enterprise, only exists inside the context of society as organized crime.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 13:17 | 3298127 akarc
akarc's picture

"99.999% of the time, our hypothesis is proven wrong, and we must alter our assumptions to fit the reality."

 

Could it be that the point was, more often than not, the collective "we" does not alter their assumptions to fit the reality? Or not.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 13:10 | 3298099 nowhereman
nowhereman's picture

You know it could be as simple as "rocks give rise to consciousness".

Rocks erode into dirt. A seed finds it's way into this dirt, and with a combination dirt water and sun the plant grows.  If it produces a fruit, vegetable or grain that can be eaten, it is eaten.  Now the minerals or whatever makes up that dirt provide the necessities for life and ultimately consciousness.

Would consciouness exist if weren't for that rock, that water and that sun?  Science recognizes this sequence, but somehow wants to seperate us from it.

I think the reason for this is so that we all become self important all consuming narcisists.  Represented here  as "collective insanity"

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 02:44 | 3300112 tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

"rocks give rise to consciousness"

+

"The clue," he said, " is time. time is a variable and subjective; a bubble out of the anvil of Eternity. Whenever time appears, so does the carrier of consciousness, that is, life."

=

:)

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 11:34 | 3297740 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Is it really that frightening to seriously consider 'what if'? I am trapped within my cognitive boundaries and even more so if I never even seriously consider expanding them.

Thanks for the feedback.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 12:55 | 3298049 High_on_Sarcotics
High_on_Sarcotics's picture

You can do whatever you want!

But if you feed in that paradigm for too long, you lose touch of reality, (or at least the reality for the majority of people, which for practical purposes, is the defacto reality) and it's like trying to build a house on constantly shifting ground. If you are constantly questioning everything, that leaves you no time to actually build anything.

Similarly to how when you take a hit of acid, or a fistfull of psilocybin mushrooms, your perception of reality is totally shattered and expanded. (Apparently, Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix was flipping out on acid when he got the inspiration for the double helix model of DNA). But if you stay disconnected from reality for too long and if your own beliefs begin to diverge too much from reality, you will end up somewhere fucked up... Like lying face flat on the sidewalk, dead, because you believed you could fly out your 24th story apartment window.

Everything in moderation.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 18:15 | 3299083 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

whoa,

you lose touch of reality, (or at least the reality for the majority of people, which for practical purposes, is the defacto reality)

is there really a majority reality??  and that would be the winner for the Real Reality??

the edges might be agreed upon, but there IS no shared reality of a majority of people - "they" can't even agree on "gods" let alone "realities" - think globally, there IS no majority.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 14:56 | 3298161 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I live on the first floor. :)

<And I am not afraid to 'die' though I would much rather live a long and healthy life.>

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 09:40 | 3297421 nowhereman
nowhereman's picture

Great stuff Cog.  If I may I'd like to impart my view of science and it's consequences.

As I understand it, material science requires an observer to be seperate and apart from the observed.

Heisenberg demonstrated that this is not possible, as the observer always has an impact on what is observed and vis-a-versa.  Yet we still hold the belief that this separation exists.

Without getting into too much phylosophical ideology, I posit that this "seperation", observer from observed, is the flaw.  It has lead to the "truth" that man is seperate from nature, and as such can manipulate it at will.  It has lead to the whole mechanicalistic world view.  And the belief that man comes into this world, instead of out of it.

To me, this is our fatal flaw.  By seperating ourselves from the process that we are all a part of, we limit our understanding and are blind as to how to respond to it

 

Tue, 03/05/2013 - 01:19 | 3300034 malek
malek's picture

Heisenberg demonstrated it? I think Heisenberg posted that theory and it hasn't been disproven yet.

But one or two years ago I read something that a method was found to align an atom with same position and spin as an existing one - if that is true and I don't misunderstand something that would be a way to circumvent Heisenberg's theorem by copying the information and then reading the copy, leaving the original undisturbed.

All that sounds pretty fantastic right now, but think who would have believed it is possible to create monochromatic and uniformly polarized electromagnetic waves before the laser was invented?

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 11:47 | 3297793 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Heisenberg demonstrated that this is not possible, as the observer always has an impact on what is observed and vis-a-versa. Yet we still hold the belief that this separation exists."

As I said in another comment reply I don't think this is by accident, but rather 'on accident'. Meaning that there is a vested interest in the powerful to promote this confused and self destructive thinking........even if only for their material gain or to maintain their hold on power.

Mon, 03/04/2013 - 16:57 | 3298826 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

INDEED, "there is a vested interest in the powerful to promote this confused and self destructive thinking!"

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!