The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Mon Aug 03, 2015 7:01 pm

To each his own I suppose EZ, and it will be what it will be and other such cliches. For me, I see a significant factor in the science component. The neo-Darwinist, the reductionist, the materialist, all together are a major authoritarian voice in creating limiting belief systems for the rest of us that manifest themselves as a sense of separateness and ultimate finality.

When they are exposed by the very science they have touted as their proof, their philosophical house of cards will fall. While many may remain in denial - the earth is flat after all :wink: - many others will be compelled to finally acknowledge a connected universe that is born of abundance over one of limitation and lack.

Maybe it's that I am looking more at the details of transformation, and you Life movement as a whole. Both have their place in structuring a perspective of consciousness evolution unfolding. I know I like the way it feels, so until more clarity dawns, I'll enjoy the view from here.

WW

edit: Great post E2B. Very inspiring.
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby EnterZenFromThere » Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:23 pm

Yep to each their own. I'm happy to have my attention in a different area than yourself - keeps things nice and heterogenous. I suspect you're right about the reason for our differences. I am focused on things in this way at this time as it's a productive way for me personally to view life and thus open myself to greater clarity. I also appreciate the specificity of what you are saying. Given a slightly different timing on my part I may agree with you more enthusiastically. At the moment however, it's dissolving into that great unknown that exists beyond specificity which is my focus.

I also enjoyed your post E2B. I also joined a Facebook group recently which moves more together with my current mode of experiencing. It's a great place to find like minded people - though I do sort of hate it in many ways...yin and yang I guess :P

While we're sort of in the NDE ballpark, do NDErs often integrate their experience into their physical life as a part of their spiritual progression? I imagine a risk of an experience like that would be that it traps the individual to some extent as they experience something that seems so big that there couldn't possibly be anything bigger - thus limiting their potential for growth. Or the experience may be clung to by the ego resulting in a proud and unpleasant spiritual-type-ego. Does that ever get talked about on that Facebook page you mentioned?

I bring it up because I read an account by an NDEr that both you and WW liked posted up on here a little while back. The one where the guy met a boatman who looked like him but made of light and they shot off into an ocean of light. I remember him saying that this light was pure consciousness. It made me wince, because what he was describing was not what I currently consider to be pure consciousness. It seemed more like an experience within the higher selves, which I have had myself (his description was fairly similar to my own experience). I had thought what I had experienced could be that, and perhaps I was enlightened (after all there was a lot of light!) though having discussed this with people more advanced than myself (including some well respected spiritual teachers) I now feel very differently about it. I wonder with NDEs whether these people may be a little misguided by the sheer enormity of the experience they have had (and it is doubtless a huge shift that I'm not trying to take anything away from). I imagine (as with everything in life) there is huge variability between individuals - but I'd like to try and get a sense of whether, generally speaking, there may be potential risks to an experience like this. Do you guys have any thoughts? I know you are both far more read on the topic than myself.
User avatar
EnterZenFromThere
 
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 3:35 pm

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:39 pm

EnterZenFromThere wrote:While we're sort of in the NDE ballpark, do NDErs often integrate their experience into their physical life as a part of their spiritual progression? I imagine (as with everything in life) there is huge variability between individuals

This. The depth and nature of any one experiencer's experience varies with that particular person. I suspect there are all manor of factors that go into how an NDE unfolds. Certainly the literature on the subject bears this out.

EnterZenFromThere wrote:While we're sort of in the NDE ballpark, do NDErs often integrate their experience into their physical life as a part of their spiritual progression?

From my research I would say yes. But again that would depend on the individual. We only know of those who have come forward. There may be many others who discounted the experience based on their own existing beliefs or at the influence of others. That said, a whole lot of people have taken the trouble to report their experiences publicly and even written books on their NDE.

I bring it up because I read an account by an NDEr that both you and WW liked posted up on here a little while back. The one where the guy met a boatman who looked like him but made of light and they shot off into an ocean of light. I remember him saying that this light was pure consciousness. It made me wince,

Hmm. I don't recall that one. Maybe E2B. Not sure why it would make you wince though. It could well be just a matter of context.

I wonder with NDEs whether these people may be a little misguided by the sheer enormity of the experience they have had

Who's to say? Just because one's perception of an experience isn't perfect (whatever that is), it doesn't necessarily follow that they are misguided. There are no doubt lessons yet to learn in the evolution of consciousness and being through an inaccurate perception of events. Still, even with a misperception, their can be a substantial positive refocusing of one's life.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Enlightened2B » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:44 pm

EnterZenFromThere wrote:While we're sort of in the NDE ballpark, do NDErs often integrate their experience into their physical life as a part of their spiritual progression? I imagine a risk of an experience like that would be that it traps the individual to some extent as they experience something that seems so big that there couldn't possibly be anything bigger - thus limiting their potential for growth. Or the experience may be clung to by the ego resulting in a proud and unpleasant spiritual-type-ego. Does that ever get talked about on that Facebook page you mentioned?


What I've come to see from these people, is that some of them are trapped in duality. Meaning, some people came from religious or atheist backgrounds and had these experiences and simply are still trying to come to terms with their meanings to this day. Many have interpreted their experiences religiously while others felt shamed. Some experienced 'hellish' type of 'states' and have come to believe that there are demons and such and evil spirits which I don't believe as it's likely all manifested by our own states of consciousness at death of the body. Others have absolutely developed an ego and think they are higher than others because of their experience. An NDE does not make someone automatically enlightened nor does a profound meditative experience or an OBE. It depends on many other factors and how they integrated the 'knowings'. Problem is that some are still interpreting the experience through their human blinders (biases) which only limits.

I bring it up because I read an account by an NDEr that both you and WW liked posted up on here a little while back. The one where the guy met a boatman who looked like him but made of light and they shot off into an ocean of light. I remember him saying that this light was pure consciousness. It made me wince, because what he was describing was not what I currently consider to be pure consciousness. It seemed more like an experience within the higher selves, which I have had myself (his description was fairly similar to my own experience). I had thought what I had experienced could be that, and perhaps I was enlightened (after all there was a lot of light!) though having discussed this with people more advanced than myself (including some well respected spiritual teachers) I now feel very differently about it. I wonder with NDEs whether these people may be a little misguided by the sheer enormity of the experience they have had (and it is doubtless a huge shift that I'm not trying to take anything away from). I imagine (as with everything in life) there is huge variability between individuals - but I'd like to try and get a sense of whether, generally speaking, there may be potential risks to an experience like this. Do you guys have any thoughts? I know you are both far more read on the topic than myself.


I don't recall this NDE you speak of Jack. Perhaps WW will.

Yet, that aside, I would consider that any spiritual teacher, well respected or not's own experience is just that, their own subjective experience. Many people in the group I've been talking to have also had profound meditative experiences which they call ALE (after life experiences) which is no where near the level experienced by these NDErs. To believe a spiritual teacher is enlightened any more so than anyone else, is also perhaps misguided. After all, what human being can possibly understand the term enlightenment, other than through their own limited 'lens'? All NDE's are interpreted subjectively anyway. There is no non-subjective enlightenment experience that could possibly be known, because to claim an experience to be, requires an individual recall and recall only happens through sensory, physical or non-physical.

Enlightenment is just another term to cling on to I've discovered and state to believe you have to 'attain'. Whoever is more enlightened is completely meaningless to me. It's what they gained out of the experience. It's the message brought back from these NDE's that not a single spiritual teacher that I've come across (and I've encountered many) has replicated in the same manner. The message of Love is SO incredibly profound from NDE'rs that I can care less if they are more or less enlightened than a certain spiritual teacher or someone who might have had their own experience. Unless you truly understand the connectedness that these NDE'rs have witnessed through the understanding of the greater reality and being able to witness everything simultaneously, you cannot claim enlightenment. Unless you've had a life review and understand how every act you do, everything you say, everything you think, affects every and anyone else in existence because everything is energetically connected, you cannot claim enlightenment. There's no way around it in my opinion. The understanding of re-incarnation, the understanding of why we are here to experience contrast, in order to learn on a greater scale who we are as Love cannot be replicated by bypassing individuality. No matter how much we would like to believe that we are enlightened, every single one of us is going back to that same place depending on vibrational level, meaning individuality will absolutely still exist. There's no bypassing it nor would you want to. True enlightenment is not going PAST this, but understanding just this. Of course that's my own opinion. I'm going to post something below which resonated greatly with me in a minute.

I don't doubt at all that some of these teachers you speak of might have their own profound experiences, but until they experience the greater understanding that NDE'rs come back with, I would not call any of them enlightened, and the fact that their own experiences have been able to be recalled by their own senses means it's still on the level of individuality no matter HOW much they would like to believe otherwise.

Nanci Danison had one of the most profound NDE's to date and she basically 'merged' back with Source as did Mellon Thomas Benedict and both still found a clear sense of individuality, but not separateness. That's the whole point. Our individuality is our own free will and for any teacher or person to claim an experience, means there was still a level of individuality. You can't bypass it.

No NDE'rs that I know of are claiming enlightenment, so I'm not sure why you would think they would be misguided. They are just detailing their own experiences and bringing back what they have learned.

Here's an excerpt from 'Sparrow Spirit Guide which resonates a lot with this:

Some will try to persuade you that you will enter an infinite state of bliss where there is no longer separation seen, felt or experienced, and that your soul and spirit loses its individual identity.

They may say that you no longer have any distinguishing appearance or form and you simply enter into some void of everlasting state of completion and perfection with Creator.

As pleasing to believe for some it may be, such a reality would deface and defy every purpose and value of the life you now have.

In actual fact it would make your physical life journey completely irrelevant and pointless.

If such a state of union was so wonderful and desirable why do you suppose your own spirit left such a state to create an individual soul and a soul journey?

It was not so you could have one human incarnation then return back into ‘all there is’, for all there is - is a continuation of creation. To be One with all there is, is to be One with continuation.

This continuation is the journey of the soul, and the soul group.

Imagine This
The very fact that you have a soul is a proof of the pudding statement that reveals the spirit’s desire to know and be a separate entity of consciousness. The soul journey is the spirit’s way of being one with the continuum that God is experienced as. This is the true state of bliss. This is the true adventure and relationship with God.

For those who insist reality is contrary to the case, it reveals they themselves cannot recollect their soul journey prior to their own physical conception, and the work they are continuously doing in their soul group. The whole purpose of soul groups, of which all are a part, is to perpetuate the gift of free will and choice to manifest your own destiny through your own individual soul journey.

It is through this gift, this vehicle of individual-ness, that all of what God is can be created, explored and experienced through the mechanism of time and co-manifestation. The state of which you in fact ascend to upon your passing is more or less the same as you experience in physical life.

You still retain all the many human facets of thought and feeling, all those beliefs that form your identity. The difference will be that many souls will gain swift access to a much broader range of opportunities and potentials in the spirit world. They will have access to a whole wealth of resources, knowledge, understanding and direction.

Some soul pathways and modes of exploration, especially when venturing into other dimensional states, can be described as being ‘One with everything’, because that is simply a close approximation to the description of the experience in human language.

It is not in fact a literal experience of being One with everything, but a state of consciousness, a state of being that resembles your idea of what it would feel like. A literal experience of being One with everything cannot be achieved as and within a state of soul over spirit.

The soul and spirit would be required to be transcended and have no consciousness left of its Self whatsoever. So then, any experiences the spirit has via the soul journey which resembles being One with everything is purely an individualised interpretation.

It is not possible to experience a literal state of One-ness whilst in physical form, only a fragmented reflection that meets the individual’s current state of comprehension. The same applies in the immediate afterlife.

What is experienced then is the One-ness with your divine spirit, and the bliss attained within your own understanding of the continuum that God is experienced as.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:48 pm

Webwanderer wrote:Hmm. I don't recall that one. Maybe E2B.

Enlightened2B wrote:I don't recall this NDE you speak of Jack. Perhaps WW will.

:lol: Too good.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:15 am

Webwanderer wrote:
Webwanderer wrote:Hmm. I don't recall that one. Maybe E2B.

Enlightened2B wrote:I don't recall this NDE you speak of Jack. Perhaps WW will.

:lol: Too good.

WW


Ha, that's so awesome! I didn't realize that before.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Rob X » Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:46 pm

Some nice ideas here WW. However I did a double take when I read:

Webwanderer wrote: And even though Darwin got it wrong...


If Darwin was alive today he might refine some of his ideas to some extent - and I very much doubt that he would align with the neo-Darwinists (he was agnostic.)

But evolution through natural selection (the non-random survival of random variation) is surely as indisputable as the heliocentric solar system.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby EnterZenFromThere » Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:47 pm

I dispute the heliocentric model of the solar system :P

I read an interesting article that pointed out that the sun is not stationary - it orbits around the center of the galaxy (which itself is in orbit). Therefore, the planets may be more accurately described as moving as a vortex or spiral. This model is in keeping with the movement in patterns found throughout nature via the golden spiral.

I don't know WW's reason for saying Darwin was wrong though I'm curious to see. The little I know about Darwin and controversy is that some say his theory only briefly mentioned survival of the fittest and that mostly Darwin talked about co-operation in nature rather than competition. That and Darwin's cousin(?) Sir Francis Galton developed the bell-curve distribution and eugenetics theories which were used to support the ethnic cleansing agenda of the Nazis (theories also supported by many powerful figures within the UK and USA leading to law against specific ethnic groups from emigrating to those countries leaving them to be cleansed by the Nazis) - got to love humanity... :evil:
User avatar
EnterZenFromThere
 
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 3:35 pm

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Rob X » Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:30 pm

EnterZenFromThere wrote:I dispute the heliocentric model of the solar system :P

:lol:

Darwin wasn't responsible for the term 'survival of the fittest' although he used it in a later edition of 'On the Origin of Species'. He used the term to mean that a species was better adapted for a specific environment.

Of course the term has now taken on darker implications and is misused by those who don't understand its original meaning of reproductive success.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:16 pm

Rob X wrote:
Webwanderer wrote: And even though Darwin got it wrong...


If Darwin was alive today he might refine some of his ideas to some extent - and I very much doubt that he would align with the neo-Darwinists (he was agnostic.)

But evolution through natural selection (the non-random survival of random variation) is surely as indisputable as the heliocentric solar system.


It can hardly be considered indisputable when it is so often disputed.

While much of Darwin's work has value, those parts that point to the natural selection and random variation within species, he had no answer for the evolution of life itself, nor how new species come into being. Darwin speculated that life formed out of a kind of primordial goo. Well that's clearly wrong. Of course he had no access to the kind of microscopic technology available today. He also couldn't know about irreducible complexity - how some existing complex life systems have no functional predecessors from which to evolve.

It's been well demonstrated that proteins and dna and many of their component building blocks are mathematically impossible to have evolved by chance, let alone all of them together to create life forms - yet here they, and we, are. Intelligent Design offers a much better solution. It is often stated that our genes contain lots of 'junk dna'. Curious. Maybe there would be more to learn about dna if we see it as non-functioning dna.

Intelligent Design works quite well with a connected universe theory, the topic this thread is based upon. Infinite intelligent energy vibrating to frequencies of manifest life in physical form. I like it so far.

Don't get me wrong, I have no heartburn with the idea of evolution. I tout it often in terms of consciousness and being. But the limited understanding of Darwin considering the state of the art of his day simply couldn't see the greater scientific picture. Now of course his work has been bastardized into materialist reductionism - the neo-Darwinist ideology that supports much of atheistic philosophy. Maybe quantum spin theory is coming to the rescue.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Rob X » Tue Aug 04, 2015 9:12 pm

Webwanderer wrote: Darwin speculated that life formed out of a kind of primordial goo. Well that's clearly wrong.


That's a bit of a straw man. Darwin is not famous or celebrated for his ruminations about the appearance of life. He's known primarily for evolution by natural selection - the non-random survival of random variation. This is his profound discovery.

Yes, there clearly is intelligence in the universe - far beyond our abilities to formulate it. But Darwin wasn't that interested in metaphysical speculation. His interest was the practical study of how diversification occurs in nature.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Tue Aug 04, 2015 11:22 pm

Rob X wrote:
Webwanderer wrote: Darwin speculated that life formed out of a kind of primordial goo. Well that's clearly wrong.


That's a bit of a straw man. He's known primarily for evolution by natural selection - the non-random survival of random variation.

Wait. You're using a straw man argument to accuse me of a straw man argument? Interesting. I said a lot more about Darwin in my response than that. Besides, I thought I gave fair credit for his identification of natural selection and random variation as a driver for evolution within species. It's the evolution beyond species where natural selection and random variation based on environmental factors looses ground.

We've been ingrained with this argument through years of cute graphical cartoons of one type of creature turning into another. Maybe there is some mechanism, but it's hardly indisputable that it's the Darwin model. Again, there may be more to junk dna than simply junk. Somewhere there is almost certainly an intelligence driver beyond his model.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby rachMiel » Wed Aug 05, 2015 1:39 am

WW, could you talk just a bit about what you mean/think by an "intelligence driver" in evolution?

For a while now I've had this intuition that evolution might not be 100% blind, rather directed by some overarching design, i.e. a kind of guided randomization. I've been terrified to mention it in public because of the "intelligent design" taboo among intellectuals, figured I'd get lynched! My take is not anywhere near a denial of Darwinian evolution, rather an entertaining of the notion of some sort of teleology to it. A bit like Chardin's Omega point kinda sorta.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
rachMiel
 
Posts: 2421
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Pittsford

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Webwanderer » Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:02 am

rachMiel wrote:For a while now I've had this intuition that evolution might not be 100% blind, rather directed by some overarching design, i.e. a kind of guided randomization. I've been terrified to mention it in public because of the "intelligent design" taboo among intellectuals, figured I'd get lynched!

Yeah, it's risky to acknowledge an affinity for Intelligent Design amongst those who have been taught that it's a reference to creationism. While creationism itself isn't a completely unfair term in the appropriate context, many clever materialists and academics have worked hard to connect Intelligent Design to the fundamentalist view of a Biblical Creationism of a seven day creation some six thousand years ago. It helps in avoiding dealing with it's true implications.

WW, could you talk just a bit about what you mean/think by an "intelligence driver" in evolution?

This is my take on it at the moment. It is also a view relative to the context in which you asked. There are certainly other ways to perceive life and being. I'll try and flesh it out some but the actual mechanics are not all that clear.

The greater reality is one of pure consciousness and being. It is the foundation from which all experiential realities originate. This physical universe is just one possibility. There are likely many more.

Intelligence is a component of consciousness. In the greater reality it is infinite in its capacity. This physical reality didn't just happen, it was designed by that intelligence with intent for its experiential potential. And a component of that intent was capacity for evolution, both in relation to physicality of form and the expansion of consciousness and being. It is a driver of evolution to the extent that it's designed to take advantage of conditions and experience.

Evolution of species within species is just one expression of that design. That leaps to new species seem to have occurred, is another aspect of that design that is beyond the capability of simple natural selection and random mutation. In other words life is designed to mutate and survive relative to the environment and conditions at hand. There may be more however, inherent in 'junk' dna that simply awaits consciousness indicators in which to switch on, thus creating a leap of sorts.

The details are obviously rather speculative here (maybe goo like), but the essence is that life in physical form is designed by an intelligence that had a purpose beyond randomness in creation. Evolution is not an accident of fate but a design of intelligent being. The intelligent energy behind that design is the driver of evolution. Again, just my take.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: The Connected Universe - Breakthrough Science

Postby Rob X » Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:34 pm

Webwanderer wrote:
Rob X wrote:
Webwanderer wrote: Darwin speculated that life formed out of a kind of primordial goo. Well that's clearly wrong.


That's a bit of a straw man. He's known primarily for evolution by natural selection - the non-random survival of random variation.

Wait. You're using a straw man argument to accuse me of a straw man argument? Interesting. I said a lot more about Darwin in my response than that. Besides, I thought I gave fair credit for his identification of natural selection and random variation as a driver for evolution within species. It's the evolution beyond species where natural selection and random variation based on environmental factors looses ground.

We've been ingrained with this argument through years of cute graphical cartoons of one type of creature turning into another. Maybe there is some mechanism, but it's hardly indisputable that it's the Darwin model. Again, there may be more to junk dna than simply junk. Somewhere there is almost certainly an intelligence driver beyond his model.

WW


WW, I quoted that particular line because it seems to be the justification as to why you assert that Darwin got it wrong.

It's a bit of a straw man because your original post seems to suggest that it was Darwin's theory of evolution (natural selection) that was wrong.

Webwanderer wrote:"…it will gain status as genuine scientific theory that will be studied in academia much the same way as Darwin's theory of evolution. And even though Darwin got it wrong…"


As to the broader question of whether Darwin's model is complete. I would agree that it isn't - I don't think that the whole picture has yet been revealed. As RM suggests, I sense some teleology at work at some level.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests