How Much do we Really Know about the Universe?

How much do we really know about the universe? The answer is that we know an awful lot... but not much at all. I answer this question in today's video blog.

Marcus

 

Is This the Real ET? - Test Your Integrated Intelligence!

Real or fake? Can you feel it?

Is this the evidence that we have been waiting for? Is this really ET? You may have heard the story and sent the video already, as it appeared on YouTube today. The YouTube video, below has already been viewed several million times. It’s gone viral as they say. You can see  the video here:

How can we work out if it is really an ET who didn’t quite phone home fast enough, or a fake (for the sake of convenience let’s exclude other theoretical possibilities, such as that it may be some human mutation, a prehistoric creature and so on)?

My purpose here today to compare and contrast an analytical approach to the problem, with an intuitive one, using what I call Integrated Intelligence (INI). You might like to try the exercise below, which will test your ability at INI, and help you improve it.

Standard interpretations of the Siberian ET will take the observable data, and analyse it. The problem with analysis, like all logical deduction, is that there are always implicit assumptions which underpin the way the data is analysed. Let’s take a few examples.

A standard dismissal of the possibility that this is a genuine ET is that there’s no way that an alien could possibly travel the vast distances between stars, given the laws of physics. Yet how much do we really know about the laws of physics? Our science is barely 500 years old, as John Maddox, the late editor of Nature journal once commented. At the turn of the 20^th century a noted physicist stated that there was no way that human beings would ever travel round the world in 24 hours or less. His rationale? There was no way a ship could cut through water that fast, given the laws of physics. I think you get where I’m coming from.

Another obvious reason to dismiss the Russian ET is that it is essentially humanoid. The argument here is that evolution on distant planets would be very unlikely to produce anything remotely human looking. Our DNA is unique to Earth, as are our planetary conditions and history, which are crucial to natural selection and evolution. In fact alien life might be so radically different from us, that we might not even recognise it as life if we did stumble across it.

This is a reasonable argument, but again there are fundamental presuppositions which underpin the analysis. Firstly, it presupposes that there is no connection between Earth and other star systems. This might not be so, even at a physical level. Ironically, it is one of the two men credited with first describing the DNA double helix back in 1951, Francis Crick, who later argued that it was possible that the amino acids which are the foundation of life on Earth may have arrived here on comets. Some recent evidence makes his claim more credible, as apparently amino acids have been confirmed to be existent in some comets.

Given this, there may be some property of our DNA that is shared with other star systems, which lends itself to forming life structures such as we see on earth. Yes, it’s a stretch.

The other physical connection could be the aliens themselves. A common hypothesis in New Age circles is that aliens themselves may have “seeded” the earth. In that case, evolution is not a purely random process.

Evolution may also not be as random as we think if there is an active intelligence behind it. This is commonly ridiculed in mainstream science, and I won’t go into the arguments for intelligent design here. Let me just refer to one rather radical possibility. There are many anecdotal reports of people seeing nature spirits, or something akin to them. These are supposed to be “assigned” roles to nurture particular species of plants and animals. These would the equivalent of spirit guides, only not for humans. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, the late thanatologist, claimed to be a regular communicator with “fairies”. Of course nobody in mainstream science is going to touch this with a 40 foot pole, but I personally would not dismiss the possibility entirely. The reason is that I once had an eerie experience which makes me take the idea seriously.

When I was about 14 years old, I awoke in the middle of the night with a spooky sense that there was something outside my window. My bedhead was directly below an open window, and there was the edge of a garden outside. That night, I gingerly sat up, and looked outside the window, and into the garden directly below. To put it bluntly, what I saw scared the shit out of me. Right below the window, about four feet away from my head was a ball of glowing white light sitting in the garden, almost touching the outside wall of the house. It was about 2/3 the size of a soccer ball. I blinked a few times, then pulled my head in real fast – and right under the blankets. I was totally terrified. The next morning I got up and went outside, and there was nothing there. I had no frame of reference to process the event, so I told myself that it must have been a very fluffy rabbit – although I knew it didn’t look much like a rabbit at all. I put the experience out of my mind for over a decade, until some other “paranormal” experiences made me question once more what I’d seen that days as a teenager. One of those experiences was witnessing a huge ball of glowing white light flying through the night sky, as well as another UFO formation on the same night. (You can read it on page 44 of my book Extraordinary Mind - you can download the first 50 pages for free here if you want).

I could go on and address some other limitations of rational ways of knowing, but let’s just leave that there for the time being. All I am saying is that, despite its wonderful capacity to assist human cognition, rationality as defined in modern western cultures is somewhat self-limiting.

One of the prime differences between INI and rational ways of knowing, is that the former works through a collapse of the gap between knower and known. Western rationalism operates with the insistence of the separation between observer and subject. In fact it is a prime presupposition of Western rationalism that the gap between knower and known cannot be bridged. I, and many mystics and the Romantics of Western lore, believe that this is a false assumption. INI works with the presupposition that consciousness contains non-local properties, and that the universe features an essential, indivisible holism, as well as distinct parts.

OK, enough of the philosophy. Would you like to give Integrated Intelligence a try with the Russian ET? Here’s an activity which combines two INI Tools: The Light Trance State, and the Feeling Sense, as described in my book Discover Your Soul Template. The former is a state of deep relation which allows you to access a non-ordinary way of knowing, and the latter describes a deep intuitive feeling which comes to you as you permit intuition to operate. Here’s what to do.

Watch the video of the Russian incident on YouTube. Try not to make any judgments, just take careful note of the “ET” in the ice. Now, move away from the computer, and sit somewhere quiet where you can relax, away from any noise or distractions. Begin by closing your eyes and focusing upon your breath. Just feel yourself relaxing deeply as your breath moves in and out. Note any tension in the body, and just let it go. As thoughts come into your mind, just acknowledge them, and imagine them floating away in balloons (or just let them go). Return your attention gently to your breathing each time.

After two or three minutes, allow yourself to bring the image of the Russian ET into your mind. See yourself standing over the ice where it lays. Next, imagine your feelings moving out from your chest, and merging with the ET. Just imagine pulling it into you (if you like). What does it feel like? What does it feel like it is made of? Is it organic or non-organic? You might like to imagine yourself touching the surface of the ET with your hand? Go ahead, smell it! Is there any odor? Trust whatever feeling and impressions come to you. This should only take a minute or so. Then imagine yourself moving away from the scene, return your attention to your breathing, and open your eyes.

Ideally, when you do something like this, write down your impressions immediately in an Intuitive Diary. That’s one of the INI Tools I recommend in Discover Your Soul Template. If you can learn to trust your Feeling Sense, it is a very wonderful tool to have at your disposal.

I would love to hear of your impressions. I will tell you mine in a day or two. I don‘t want to “lead” you in any particular direction here.

Marcus

The WikiLeaks Mythology (part 1)

 Computer rationality: shaping the way we see the world

Julian Assange clearly fits the description of a dissident - a person who offers dissent, who questions deeply the way things are, or who rebels against the system. Interestingly, Australia futurist Richard Slaughter (just voted one of the top four futurists in the world by the Foresight Network says it is the duty of all critical futurists to offer dissent. It is not good enough to simply predict the future, but to question deeply what is happening, or what might likely or possibly happen. I am in essential agreement with Slaughter. And although Assange would not describe himself as a futurist, he is a person committed to not only critiquing the way things are run, but also changing the way the future unfolds. In this sense I am sympathetic to his attitude.

Nonetheless, I have argued in previous posts that a vital requirement for a truly responsible action in the world - and that includes activism - is to become more conscious of our inner worlds and connections with the spiritual domains of mind. I argued that Assange, like all of us, is driven by soul issues which will inevitably affect the results of his actions. There is a certain drive for power and control within his psyche. My perception of this comes from my intuitive reading of him via Integrated Intelligence, not so much from observing his real world behavior.

The ways of knowing (WOK) Julian Assange employs in his everyday life and work greatly affect what he is able to perceive and understand about the world he is trying to change. His preferred and habitual ways of knowing also restrict his capacity to fully comprehend the cognitive “systems” in which his consciousness is embedded. In other words, the way he thinks affects his capacity to understand both himself and the world.

Make no mistake. Julian Assange is no different from you and I in this respect.

Power, Spirituality and the Modern Mind

The modern mind and the way that we employ it is not "natural". The way we think and feel is not purely genetically determined. We use our brains far differently from the way our ancestors used them. The advent of writing, mass reading (the printing press) and computers and the internet have all heralded massive shifts in the way we operate mentally. In recent decades research has clearly shown that the brain is far more plastic than once thought. Repeated habits of thought and action imprint themselves upon the brain and its neuro-chemical pathways.

For example, long hours using the internernet tends to activate the the left-frontal area of the brain. This enhances visual spatial intelligence and the capacity to efficiently sort data into categories (schemata). However, as Nicholas Carr points out in his brilliant book The Shallows, recent research indicates that this enhancement comes at the cost of mathematical and linguistic intelligences and critical reasoning; and arguably retards the capacity to feel at depth, moralise and to assimilate wisdom. I'll be saying more about this in upcoming weeks.

For those interested in the historical interplay between scientific rationality, religion and mysticism, I have uploaded Chapter 3 of my book Integrated Intelligence to scribd.com. (it is in academic form, however). For those not inclined to read the whole chapter, you may be interested in the "map" at the end of the chapter which outlines the interplay of the history. You can read it here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/40289936/Power-Spirituality-and-the-Intuitive-Mind

Go well,

Marcus

Transcending the Rational Mind

It is commonly believed in many circles - particularly those dizzying circles one finds oneself in within academic and educational institutions – that the rational mind is the highest cognitive set currently available to human beings. The rational mind is higher than the emotional mind, it is assumed, because the emotional and unreflective mind led us into mass superstition during the dark ages. Then science, with its empirically founded scientific method, led us out from the darkness and into Enlightenment. Thereafter came massive progress in science and social science; and the benefits to society are obvious. Just look at all those clean hospitals, computers on office desks and airplanes that can whisk us around the world in a matter of hours.

In the dark ages of prehistory people pretty much believed whatever Mum or the village idiot told them. Most people couldn’t read or write for a start. It was said that there was only one literate man, a clergyman, in all of Britain after the fall of the Roman Empire. Now almost everyone in Britain can read and write; and you take your capacity to make sense of the black squiggles on this page for granted. Thank about that for progress!

People haven’t always employed the critical/rational mind the way we do today.

Sleepwalking Through the Extraordinary

Today’s blog post is based on the introduction of my academic paper “Deep Futures: Beyond Money and Machines”,which you cam find on my web site, MindFutures, if interested. Today's post will tell you a little bit about what I am passionate about as a futurist.

It was Washington DC Metro Station on a cold January morning in 2007. A man peeled a violin from his case, placed his hat before him, and proceeded to play six Bach pieces. During his sixty minutes in that place, some 3,000 people passed by, most on their way to work.

Three minutes after the man began playing, a middle-aged gentleman stopped to look for a few seconds, before hurrying on. About four minutes after that, a woman threw a dollar into the hat and continued past. A couple of minutes later, a young man leaned against the wall nearby and listened for a few moments. Then he checked his watch and left. Next, a boy of about three years stopped, but his mother pulled him away. As she dragged him off, he kept turning back to look at the man with the violin.

Similar scenes unfolded as several other children took an interest in the musician, but in every case the parents dragged them on. In total, only six people stopped to listen, most for just a few moments. About twenty gave money, then hurried off. The man collected a total of $32. He finished playing and humbly left. There was no applause, nor any indication his playing had been appreciated.

Yet this had been no ordinary street performance.