tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5686500107282182587.post6123016440555146240..comments2023-10-29T02:43:58.464-07:00Comments on 22C+: Can Consciousness Levels be Measured?Marcus T. Anthonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15015648874488332379noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5686500107282182587.post-62089461266222271452011-01-13T06:08:26.736-08:002011-01-13T06:08:26.736-08:00Yes, Hawkin's system is simplistic and one-dim...Yes, Hawkin's system is simplistic and one-dimensional. I believe that there is general truth behind it and I think it can serve some good purpose, but I don't really champion his system because I haven't worked directly with it. As I mentioned, it can also easily be abused. One of the reasons why I think there is genral truth to it is becasue as "energy" or consciousness is processed and integrated more "light" enters the person's energy field, so they "rise" to a slightly higher "level" of consciousness. Hawkins also is right that consciousness fields work in a similar way to attractors in physics, and that's why it is easy to get "sucked" back down into a denser consciousness field/level. I hate to say it, but much of the spiritual "work" people do actually makes little difference to their energy field during a single lifetime.Marcus T. Anthonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15015648874488332379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5686500107282182587.post-89634588536782792472011-01-12T18:38:54.539-08:002011-01-12T18:38:54.539-08:00I find Hawkins' books can be useful. Your '...I find Hawkins' books can be useful. Your 'system' looks very useful also, and more integrated...My beef with Hawkins' is that it isn't integrated enough. Wilber's and others criticism of Hawkins' system is that it is a form of subtle reductionism and not integrated or wholistic enough; which makes it true but also very partial. I would like to see Hawkin's system be more integrated in this regard, which would greatly enhance his system and make it one of the premier levels of consciousness systems out there...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5686500107282182587.post-19826938710528066282010-05-16T22:42:31.219-07:002010-05-16T22:42:31.219-07:00I have found hawkin's book to ve very useful. ...I have found hawkin's book to ve very useful. However it will be most useful for people who are trully committed to spiritual development. I suspect it will not mean much to quite a lot of people in the popular spiritual movements, because they often have other agendas (albeit, unconsciously).<br /><br />To be honest io haven't read the papers which tested kinesiology, but I have read of them. I do agree though, that it would be extremely difficult to eliminate other extraneous factors from influencing the testing (e.g., what if there is toxic paint in the room, or an electrical field from the computer room upstairs, or the tester of subject was just having a bad day...?)<br /><br />The couple of Hawkins books I've read don't attempt to communicate these problems, which does seem a little strange to me. Still, I feel strongly that his work resonates highly. My reading is that his first book, "Power Vs Force", is the one you should begin with, Nancy.Marcus T. Anthonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15015648874488332379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5686500107282182587.post-47154175995039878852010-05-16T09:33:17.027-07:002010-05-16T09:33:17.027-07:00Very interesting. I've read some of these book...Very interesting. I've read some of these books, but now will put a couple on my reading list. Especially interesting to me is Discovery of the Presence of God. I haven't read The Secret, believing it to be more of a media-driven view of stuff I've studied for years. I liked The Celestine Prophecy, but it was not a favorite. I liked the original Chicken Soup but not the ones that came after, except for one that I gave to my teenagers at one time.<br /><br />I wonder about objectivity when it comes to measuring consciousness, especially when it comes to the scientific method. Wouldn't the consciousness of the people involved have a direct impact on the experiment? How could it not?Nancyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13178290697351352495noreply@blogger.com