Is Science Dead?

I’ve just read an intriguing article on skeptiko.com, where Alex Tsakiris: is interviewing radical biologist Rupert Sheldrake. 

It really is worth reading if you are interested in the philosophy of science and consciousness, or just wondering why so many of the wonderful emotional and spiritual things we human beings experience every day have been rejected in contemporary science and education. The entire interview leads to a discussion about a possible end to science. As we now understand it. Could this be true?

The interview is essentially about Sheldrake’s encounter with skeptic Richard Wiseman. According to Sheldrake, Wiseman has deliberately lied about an experiment they mutually conducted. Wiseman attempted to replicate an experiment of Sheldrake’s, which attempted to affirm whether a dog could possibly know that its owner was returning home, without having sensory cues to work with. This involved a dog called J.T., which was allegedly able to know that its master was coming home an inordinately high percentage of the time. The experimenters simply got the owner to return home at random times, and then observed whether the dog went to the window before the owner arrived. They eliminated obvious sensory indicators, such as recognition of car engine noise (the owner arrived by various means). Sheldrake’s prior research had come up with a figure which indicated that the dog went to the window 85% of the time when its owner was arriving. Wiseman’s replication experiment showed 78% of the time, with the dog being at the window about 4% of random times that the owner was not coming. You don’t need to know much about statistics to know that this is an amazingly significant correlation.

Incredibly, Wiseman then went and did interviews, wrote scientific articles and even a book stating that he had refuted Sheldrake’s research!

The remainder of Tsakiris’ interview with Sheldrake is a discussion about why so much of hardcore skeptical research and thinking, and a great deal of mainstream scientiifc thinking features attitudes and behaviours like that exhibited by Wiseman. Why is it that even when convincing evidence is brought forward that consciousness transcends the brain and that ESP, telepathy, life after death and so on are genuine, there is an immediate denial amongst so many?

I have discussed this issue many times here on this blog and in my other writings, so I won’t elaborate upon it too much. However I’d just like to quote Sheldrake here on the idea that science as it currently exists has reached its limits. The insistence that the cosmos is essentially a giant machine, that human beings are robotic automatons, and that consciousness is an accidental bi-product of random evolutionary forces has done its day. 

Below, I will present a few of Sheldrake’s ideas, and then add an insight or two of my own. For those who are not familiar with my position, I am not a scientist. Firstly, I come at this problem as a researcher with a PhD in Policy Studies which addressed these issues. But secondly - and most importantly in my opinion - my understanding of these things comes from direct mystical and spiritual experience. I have spent twenty years exploring the mind at a first person level, including working with gifted mystics and teachers.

Here’s what Rupert Sheldrake has to say. In the following paragraphs he is addressing some of the shortcomings of mainstream science projects.

And consciousness studies show that the materialists’ attempts to understand the brain, which people 15 to 20 years ago thought we’d soon figure out by means of brain scans, etc., that consciousness itself is an impenetrable mystery from the materialist point of view. And consciousness studies is now really getting going. It’s an exciting field of science. It simply doesn’t fit the materialist model. Neither does the Genome Project and reductionistic molecular biology. It’s just running into problems over and over again. It’s simply not delivering.

So I think science is stuck. Although newspapers constantly tell us of new breakthroughs, that’s not what’s really happening. In medicine, too, there’s a dearth of new drugs that are coming out of drug companies that are really more expensive versions of existing ones. There’s very little that’s really new coming out. I think that this kind of science we’ve got at the moment, this materialistically reductionist kind of science, is running into the ground.

Here Sheldrake has hit upon an interesting feature of modern media and journalism. There is very little acknowledgement here that this crisis in science and society is upon us. Daily newspapers regularly report breakthroughs in genetic research and medicine as if it is business as usual. There is an implicit promissory stance: all the problems will be solved using reductionist and genetic approaches, and it is just a matter of time till all is revealed. Popular science magazines are no better. There is not enough questioning of the limits of what is happening. The result is that the crisis is staring us in the face, but we barely know it is there.

Make no mistake. This is not just bickering about some minor detail of a research project. It is a problem which drives straight to the very foundations of modern science. 

Sheldrake goes on…

And it is in physics, too. We’ve got superstring theory with 10 dimensions or M-theory with 11 that are untestable. We’ve got cosmologists adopting a multiverse theory, postulating trillions of unobserved universes for which there’s not a shred of evidence. Over and over again, science is no longer confidently going forward with discovery after discovery. It’s reaching a kind of dead end; it’s in a kind of cul-de-sac.

Many years ago Australian social scientist Gillian Ross wrote something about this in her book The Search for the Pearl. It is not uncommon to see outrageous speculative “scientific” claims posited side by side with denunciations of spiritual and mystical phenomena which are genuine, and - in my experience - not difficult to confirm at a personal level. This boils down to more than paradigm blindness. It is hypocrisy.

Finally, Sheldrake goes on to make a crucial point…

I think that, together with the rising health care cost crisis and economic crisis and stuff is going to lead a major, major shift in world view. I always have been an optimist. It may seem like extreme optimism to think that at the moment, but I think it’s closer than it ever has been. I think we’re going to see a really big change quite soon.

I am in agreement with Sheldrake that the current economic and political crises around the world will offer us an enormous opportunity for growth and change. One of my spiritual teachers – a spiritual genius if ever there was one - whom I refer to as Jessica in my book Discover Your Soul Template – used to deliberately try to “stir up the dust” during our gatherings. Her take on the spiritual evolution of humanity was that when people are comfortable, they don’t ask questions and they don’t grow. 

The frog slowly boiling in a pot of heated water comes to mind.

As an intuitive, it is my sense that there is a period of “disturbance” coming up, so I suggest you prepare yourself for it. Just how uncomfortable it will be, I am not sure. Yet instead of thinking of this as a negative experience, think of it as a chance for all of us to grow. The escalation of the financial crisis will most likely be exacerbated by economic and political unrest in China, which is just a matter of time now.

My perspective is that economic and cultural materialism has helped establish the domination of technoscience – scientiifc materialism. Technoscience is dominated by big business and driven by the greed and desire for power and control of the human ego. This has led to the creation of “money and machines” societies worldwide - societies where the central foci are financial success and titillation via technology. The entire system is a projection of the alienated mind – consciousness which exists in a state of dissociation from Spirit. Technoscience is a kind of distortion of science, just as money and machines societies are an extension of the ego. 

Technoscience is not the only kind of science which can exist. There is another kind of science which involves a passionate inquiry into the nature of things, driven by the joy of discovery and a genuine desire to make a better world. This includes enhancing our relationship with nature and the spiritual thread which runs through all life.

No, science is not dead. But technoscience is breathing its last breath. The end may be difficult. Hold your hats.

Are you Happy... or Peaceful?

"How happy are you?" is an important question. But it's not as important as "How can I be happier?"

There's a nice little video on the Sydney Morning Herald web site which summarises the main factors which determine happiness, according to certain research. It's worth watching if you haven't read much of the research.

http://au.tv.yahoo.com/sunrise/video/-/watch/24936171/worlds-happiest-person/

Here's what the video says can make us happier, in a nutshell.

1. Commit random acts of kindness
2. Be positive: see what is right in your life
3. Forgive! Let go of grudges.
4. Do things that make you happy.

These are all excellent suggestions. However I would challenge some elements of the research.

All research contains unexamined assumptions. 

Perhaps we are asking the wrong question when we ask ourselves whether we are happy or not. What if we change the question to: "Am I at peace?" This distinction between peace and happiness is one of the distinctions that is often not addressed in the happiness literature. The fact is that the research into happiness measures states of mind that are associated with what I would call the human ego. The ego makes judgments about what is good and bad, right and wrong, then feelings of positivity or negativity follow. No matter how "right" the ego makes something, the fact is that you are still amenable to the whims of ego even if you are happy in any given moment. I'm not saying that this is not a legitimate option in life. It certainly is. In fact disciplining the ego to optimise happiness is a great thing, and certainly a wise and logical process to undertake.

However we can go even further, and that is where peace comes into the picture. Peace occurs when we reside in perfect presence, without judgment. Peace is simply blissful. It is such a wonderful thing to experience. With perfect peace there is perfect love, - love for ourselves, and for all those around us. 

Peace is simple. It occurs naturally as we bring the mind to attention in the present. It doesn't require any particular goal to be achieved, nor anything to be resolved. There is no agenda, and this is the fundamental difference with the kind of happiness that the video and much of the research literature into happiness discusses.

Forgiveness is indeed important. In fact it is important in even more profound ways than the video suggests. We not only need to forgive those who have hurt us. If you observe your mind throughout the day, you will see that it will make judgments about people, ideas, and things , and many of these judgments will contain anger or negative projection. In a  nutshell, we often blame and hate, and this may be in subtle ways. Let me take an example from today in my own life.

Recently I have been becoming increasingly concerned with some of the actions taken by the Chinese government. The most obvious has been the crackdown on Chinese dissidents, including the arrest and detention of Ai Wei Wei, who was perhaps China's most famous dissident. He was considered by many to be untouchable, because of his high international profile (e.g. he helped design the Beijing Olympics' Birdsnest Stadium). Two weeks ago he was detained at Beijing airport and has not been seen since. The Chinese media have launched an often vicious attack on him. 

Ai Wei Wei's case is not the only development which has raised concern. Hundreds of Christians have also recently been arrested. And perhaps most absurdly, the Beijing government has released a notice telling the media and public that they cannot discuss numerous concepts, one of which is time travel. That's right. They have banned time travel in literature and movies! Apparently the concern is that people might try to challenge the Party's one correct interpretation of history. 

I think the best reaction to that is laughter.

The point is that some anger has been rising within me about these things. Now, as an intuitive, what I have noted is that the judgment has shifted my consciousness field, and taken me away from peace. 

It is physiologically disturbing to judge with anger.

What I do in such cases is simply to acknowledge the anger and judgment, and then confess them to God. This is not a confession of guilt but one of open acknowledgment and transparency before God. In doing so, the judgment lifts.

Note that this does not require that one no longer cares about the issue. one was judging  One may still have a conscious discernment that the situation is not as one prefers, or that it is creating suffering, or has "dark" intentions behind it. One can do this while letting go of the anger. The truth is that my anger towards Beijing is useless. It hurts only me. In fact in a small way it adds to the psychic drama of China versus the West, and the collective "fight" that is occurring there. The judgment pulls me into the collective consciousness fields, and i start unconsciously channeling that energy. I am adding to the darkness.

What is it that you can forgive each day? Your country? The Jews? The Chinese? The Americans?  The industry? The education system? Capitalism? City buses?...

To be truly happy and peaceful, we have to forgive, and that means releasing judgments regularly. Note that I did not say we have to eliminate judgment. That might well be impossible. It is simply about taking responsibility for it.

Choose happiness today. Most of all, choose peace!

Marcus

Crisis, deep meaning and the opportunity for change

I have failed in my foremost task – to open people’s eyes to the fact that man has a soul, there is a buried treasure in the field, and that our religion and philosophy are in a lamentable state.     Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, towards the end of his life

One day, when I was about eight years old, my school principal Mr Suley got up on the morning assembly and spoke from the heart. Now, more than 30 years later, I cannot remember all the details. What I do remember though, was his tone of deep concern. He spoke about war, the environment, cooperation, and simply what it means to be a decent human being. And I will never forget what he said at the end of it all.

“You are the future of this world. My generation has already had a go and we messed it up. You must do better, or we will not be here much longer.”

Of all the things anybody ever said in my schooling days, this was probably the most impactful. Here he was, an older man approaching retirement, and he decided to speak about something more than keeping the playground clean, punishing misbehaviour, or the principal’s old favourite: “Get ready because the exams are coming up.” Mr Suley spoke of life itself, and what it means to be a human being on this planet. They were words of deep meaning, words that moved me. They were moving words because they were not just spoken, but felt. I went through another ten years in the public education system after that, and I honestly cannot recall any teacher or administrator speaking with such impact, or about something so meaningful. This silence always puzzled me.

Mr Suley has probably passed on by now. I heard some years ago that he was involved in a car accident, and that his wife had been killed. I was deeply saddened. It would also have been a tragedy if he had passed up the opportunity of speaking meaningfully on the assembly all those years ago. He may not be here anymore, and maybe he suffered greatly though personal tragedy. But the seed he planted on that day lives on in the man writing this article in 2011.

Many of us can probably remember a defining moment from our younger days when a teacher, parent or elder spoke from the heart and moved us, made us think deeply. But what about public educators today? How many have ever engaged in a discussion or a lesson where they shared something from deep within? The answer for many educators is that they rarely touch upon the deeply meaningful. Why is that? 

At first glance the answer might seem obvious. There is the issue of personal vulnerability. Maybe the students will ridicule or ignore them. Maybe the teacher will offend someone’s religious or philosophical beliefs. And who wants to upset parents in these times of legal accountability? Besides, it is not in the curriculum or syllabus, so why go there?

To go deep requires courage.

Yet (rather appropriately) the absence of meaning goes deeper. To understand why education discourses have become an effective litany of surfaces we have to look at the situation in depth. At the bottom (or perhaps “top” is a better term) of all human experience lies the transcendent, that which connects us to a greater whole, where the boundaries between self and others, individual and cosmos become blurred. And that takes us into the awkward but profound territory of human spirituality.

Yes, the dreaded “s” word. 

To truly appreciate the lack of depth in modern education, media and popular culture, we must examine the way that our society has developed, who controls the dominant discourses, and the ways of knowing which under-gird them. And finally we must take into account the very way in which modern science and education view the human mind and its intelligence.

In this time of shifting global power and economic uncertainty, the restoration of cognitive depth along with associated “right-brained” cognitive processes (including spirituality), is something we can no longer ignore. The reactivation of cognitive depth is a necessity not only for economic and social stability, but for the long-term survival of the human race. The current uncertain global economic climate is the perfect time to begin to initiate change in both culture and curriculum, and expand the ways of knowing that we employ in the society and in the classroom. This is a discussion which lies at the heart of the creation of  Deep Futures – futures that are profound, passionate, engaging, and most of all deeply meaningful. More money, machines and amusement for everyone is not enough. These do not fulfill the human spirit.

Crisis and opportunity often arise together. Will we grasp the chance? Or will we be yet another generation that has failed to take the opportunity, the responsibility,  that we are being given.

Marcus

Visions of Tomorrow

Where there is no vision, people perish. So it says in the Bible, and there is much truth to the statement. As individuals, as societies, as nations and as a collective species we all require visions of the future. For it is our visions which draw us forward.

The kinds of visions that we are exposed to come from three common sources. These are the visions found in education, those delivered by governments and those found in the popular culture and media.

Visions in education and those of governments tend to be similar. They are usually focused upon building a sense of national unity, via developing a sense of shared history. There is typically a national mythology involved. These mythologies, although based in the past, tend to direct the way policy-makers construct visions in the present. If the vision is too disconnected from the past, the people won’t buy it. In the USA, the idea of freedom and individualism is central to the national psyche, so even a slight turn towards collectivism or socialism can cause significant levels of rejection from many people – a Obama has discovered.

In Australia, the national anthem drums into us Aussies: “Australians all let us rejoice, for we are young and free.” No such sentiments of freedom in the Chinese national anthem, which implores the Chinese people to create a great wall against the enemy. There’s quite a different sense of destiny contained in those stories.

There is a danger when visions fail to materialise. Obama asked the American people to believe in the audacity of hope (dare to dream). In China, President Hiu Jintau put forward the idea of the Harmonious Society. This macropolicy tells the story of Chinese people living together in trust and harmony, and in unity with nature. It even exhorts the value of democracy, believe it or not. Needless to say, the term “harmonious society” has been the object of great derision in China, because the reality and the dream are so vastly different. Whenever someone steps out of line (i.e. challenges the local, provincial or national leaders) the joke goes that they will soon be “harmonised”. Many westerners may not realise that although there is implicit support for the Communist Party amongst most Chinese (if for no other reason than there is no viable alternative), there is also a great cynicism and even distrust of it.

Visions can unite people, but they can also lead to negative consequences, or even disaster. 

The IT Trap

Advertising is an ever-present feature of the consumer society, and we are constantly being bombarded with images and messages which shape our lives, often unconsciously. It’s something of a chicken and egg story. What came first: the advertising which promotes mass consumerism, or the consumer society itself? The best answer is that that they feed off each other.

Advertising is linked to culture. In east Asia, IT culture has become pervasive. Take a look at this advertisement, above, currently running on the MTR (subways) of Hong Kong. It’s by HSBC, the biggest bank in Hong Kong. I don’t think I have ever seen a more perfect representation of the forces driving modern Hong Kong and east Asian culture, than this ad. It sums up Money and Machines societies to a “T”. The woman has sold her higher Self out to the immediate needs of the small self – for security, amusement, and to look cool. She has become a robot.