顯示具有 Reality 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 Reality 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2012年9月17日 星期一

Spiritual Experience Through Drugs - Illusion Or Reality?


The origins of and spiritual practise are shrouded in mystery, belonging as they do to that period known as "prehistory" of which our factual knowledge is very limited. The roots of drug use also date back to that primordial era. Equally ancient and mysterious is the link between these two - the use of mind-altering substances as part of the search for truth.

Early accounts of the use of drugs in an attempt to induce spiritual visions or ecstatic trances are mostly connected with the practises collectively known as "Shamanism". The ancient Shaman used a variety of methods to achieve these altered states, including prolonged, repetitive, ritual dancing and/or drumming, sensory deprivation, fasting and the use of hallucinogens found in plants. These techniques were employed to either free the Shaman's

spirit from the body, allowing it to travel in the spiritual worlds, or to call down spiritual entities into the shaman. Shamanic practises of this kind are still to be found among indigenous and tribal peoples in Africa, Asia and South America. Echoes of these practises are found in many different religious cultures and in all parts of the world, with the longing for otherworldly experience driving individuals to explore all the techniques open to them as part of their quest - including the use of substances that fundamentally change the individual's perceptions and bring about altered states of consciousness.

In the late twentieth century, the discovery and popularisation of synthetic drugs which appeared to induce visionary or trance states led to a resurgence of interest in the spiritual nature of these experiences. The writer Aldous Huxley, a spiritual man with an interest in Eastern philosophies such as Vedanta, detailed his experiments with psychotropic substances in his book "The Doors of Perception". Huxley felt that the human mind in its ordinary state acted to limit our awareness of higher or cosmic reality, and that drugs could be used to reduce this limiting effect, opening the individual to a new and higher state of being. Huxley's book became a must-read among hippies and counter-culturalists in the sixties, as did works by Dr Timothy Leary and Robert Anton Wilson, both of whom saw drugs as an effective tool for opening people to higher spiritual realities within and around them. Later, in the nineteen nineties, the use of MDMA (ecstasy) as a recreational drug spread rapidly. Despite the powerful effects of the drug, and users reporting states in which they felt powerful emotions such as joy and unconditional love, the mystical elements of this experience were not trumpeted in the same way as with the LSD experiment of the sixties.

The fundamental question regarding these induced experiences of trance, vision and ecstasy is: are they real?

In comparing the effects of spiritual practise (prayer, meditation, devotional song, chanting etc.) with those of drugs, the key is to examine the effects on the individual not just at the time of the experience but in the days, months and years that follow. Spiritual practise is undertaken for its transformational power, expressed in the learning, change and personal growth of the individual. In different spiritual and religious traditions, this journey of transformation is seen in different ways. The Christian aspires towards salvation from all sin, the Buddhist is travelling towards enlightenment, the Yogi seeks first liberation from attachment then the realisation of his or her oneness with God.

Examine, if you will, two individuals. One has pursued for many years what Dr Timothy Leary called "the chemical route to enlightenment" while the other has engaged in the more challenging pursuits of spiritual discipline, perhaps including daily prayer and meditation and the renunciation of a worldly life. What differences do you see? Are their attainments of the same order? Have their experiences carried them forward on their spiritual journey,answered their inner questions, brought them inner peace and insight? I leave it to you to make your own observations and decide for yourself.

Let us close with the words of Sri Chinmoy, an Indian spiritual teacher who came to America in the sixties and began teaching spirituality when the hippy movement was in full swing:

"I have spoken hundreds of times on drugs. Here all I wish to say is that if you have a real coin and a counterfeit coin, they look similar; but when you examine them properly, you know that one is real and the other one is false. I have a few disciples who once upon a time were addicted to drugs. They had very high, lofty experiences according to their own understanding and realisation at that time. But now these same disciples have been meditating with me for a couple of years and by the Grace of the Supreme they have had spiritual experiences. They say that the difference between the two is like the difference between a counterfeit or false coin and a real coin."




Roger Chamberlain is an experienced runner representing Sri Chinmoy A.C. at races around the UK. He works in Run and Become, a well respected running shop in Cardiff, Wales. Roger also gives free meditation classes on behalf of the Cardiff Sri Chinmoy Centre.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 上午9:53 0 意見
標籤： , , , , ,

2012年9月16日 星期日

Music, Culture, and Reality


A psychoactive is defined as that which has a profound or significant affect on the mental processes. Although typically used in the context of drugs and substances, this concept is often extended to anything evoking a seemingly 'mystical experience.' What people describe as mystical experiences are indistinguishable, neurologically and empirically, from deep and poignant religious experiences. Moments of oneness and insight are typical in both cases. In "The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902)," William James describes mystical experiences as ineffable, noetic, passive (rather, a sense of loss of control), and fleeting. From the remote mystics of Sufism and Kabbalah, to modern day 'urban shamans,' psychonauts have sought methods other than imbibement to investigate the cosmos within. Through meditation, breath control, lucid dreaming, sensory deprivation, and a host of other methods, music has stood among cultures in this service probably since early man first danced around campfires.

Ethnomusicolgist Gilbert Rouget explores the connection between music and trance throughout history. Perhaps music is more than simply a mortal construct, rather having cosmic significance. Playing music (and truly appreciating music) forces an individual to focus on the present moment, which in turn is the cornerstone of meaningful experience. This emphasis on the present moment is the consummation of all other psychonautical resources (mediation, entheogens, etc.). Subscribers of the shamanic and mystical often view the passage of time as an illusion of the human mind, and regard a 'perpetual now' as true reality. Interestingly this is where science begins to align with the esoteric.

Quantum Mechanics argues that particles move backwards as well as forwards in time and appear in all possible places at once. String theory proposes that the physical world is composed of little, tiny strings of vibrating energy (It seems appropriate to allude to chordophones). Terrence McKenna, recounting a DMT (Dimethyltryptamine) induced experience, asserts that the constant dance of 'machine elves,' (entities occupying a parallel world) creates reality as we perceive it. Are the rhythms of music akin to the language of reality? Is music a method of staying in contact with the underlying 'Logos,' being the true virtue in which all things exist? Whether it be Spring's hymn of birds and bees or the elegant, geometrical dance of our physical world, music plays the universal tongue in a reality seemingly ripe with babbling discord.




Anthony Pace, a writer, philosopher, and web developer, blogs at [http://philosophy-explained.com]





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 清晨6:27 0 意見
標籤： , ,

2012年7月20日 星期五

Spiritual Experience Through Drugs - Illusion Or Reality?


The origins of and spiritual practise are shrouded in mystery, belonging as they do to that period known as "prehistory" of which our factual knowledge is very limited. The roots of drug use also date back to that primordial era. Equally ancient and mysterious is the link between these two - the use of mind-altering substances as part of the search for truth.

Early accounts of the use of drugs in an attempt to induce spiritual visions or ecstatic trances are mostly connected with the practises collectively known as "Shamanism". The ancient Shaman used a variety of methods to achieve these altered states, including prolonged, repetitive, ritual dancing and/or drumming, sensory deprivation, fasting and the use of hallucinogens found in plants. These techniques were employed to either free the Shaman's

spirit from the body, allowing it to travel in the spiritual worlds, or to call down spiritual entities into the shaman. Shamanic practises of this kind are still to be found among indigenous and tribal peoples in Africa, Asia and South America. Echoes of these practises are found in many different religious cultures and in all parts of the world, with the longing for otherworldly experience driving individuals to explore all the techniques open to them as part of their quest - including the use of substances that fundamentally change the individual's perceptions and bring about altered states of consciousness.

In the late twentieth century, the discovery and popularisation of synthetic drugs which appeared to induce visionary or trance states led to a resurgence of interest in the spiritual nature of these experiences. The writer Aldous Huxley, a spiritual man with an interest in Eastern philosophies such as Vedanta, detailed his experiments with psychotropic substances in his book "The Doors of Perception". Huxley felt that the human mind in its ordinary state acted to limit our awareness of higher or cosmic reality, and that drugs could be used to reduce this limiting effect, opening the individual to a new and higher state of being. Huxley's book became a must-read among hippies and counter-culturalists in the sixties, as did works by Dr Timothy Leary and Robert Anton Wilson, both of whom saw drugs as an effective tool for opening people to higher spiritual realities within and around them. Later, in the nineteen nineties, the use of MDMA (ecstasy) as a recreational drug spread rapidly. Despite the powerful effects of the drug, and users reporting states in which they felt powerful emotions such as joy and unconditional love, the mystical elements of this experience were not trumpeted in the same way as with the LSD experiment of the sixties.

The fundamental question regarding these induced experiences of trance, vision and ecstasy is: are they real?

In comparing the effects of spiritual practise (prayer, meditation, devotional song, chanting etc.) with those of drugs, the key is to examine the effects on the individual not just at the time of the experience but in the days, months and years that follow. Spiritual practise is undertaken for its transformational power, expressed in the learning, change and personal growth of the individual. In different spiritual and religious traditions, this journey of transformation is seen in different ways. The Christian aspires towards salvation from all sin, the Buddhist is travelling towards enlightenment, the Yogi seeks first liberation from attachment then the realisation of his or her oneness with God.

Examine, if you will, two individuals. One has pursued for many years what Dr Timothy Leary called "the chemical route to enlightenment" while the other has engaged in the more challenging pursuits of spiritual discipline, perhaps including daily prayer and meditation and the renunciation of a worldly life. What differences do you see? Are their attainments of the same order? Have their experiences carried them forward on their spiritual journey,answered their inner questions, brought them inner peace and insight? I leave it to you to make your own observations and decide for yourself.

Let us close with the words of Sri Chinmoy, an Indian spiritual teacher who came to America in the sixties and began teaching spirituality when the hippy movement was in full swing:

"I have spoken hundreds of times on drugs. Here all I wish to say is that if you have a real coin and a counterfeit coin, they look similar; but when you examine them properly, you know that one is real and the other one is false. I have a few disciples who once upon a time were addicted to drugs. They had very high, lofty experiences according to their own understanding and realisation at that time. But now these same disciples have been meditating with me for a couple of years and by the Grace of the Supreme they have had spiritual experiences. They say that the difference between the two is like the difference between a counterfeit or false coin and a real coin."




Roger Chamberlain is an experienced runner representing Sri Chinmoy A.C. at races around the UK. He works in Run and Become, a well respected running shop in Cardiff, Wales. Roger also gives free meditation classes on behalf of the Cardiff Sri Chinmoy Centre.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 下午4:31 0 意見
標籤： , , , , ,

2012年7月13日 星期五

Music, Culture, and Reality


A psychoactive is defined as that which has a profound or significant affect on the mental processes. Although typically used in the context of drugs and substances, this concept is often extended to anything evoking a seemingly 'mystical experience.' What people describe as mystical experiences are indistinguishable, neurologically and empirically, from deep and poignant religious experiences. Moments of oneness and insight are typical in both cases. In "The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902)," William James describes mystical experiences as ineffable, noetic, passive (rather, a sense of loss of control), and fleeting. From the remote mystics of Sufism and Kabbalah, to modern day 'urban shamans,' psychonauts have sought methods other than imbibement to investigate the cosmos within. Through meditation, breath control, lucid dreaming, sensory deprivation, and a host of other methods, music has stood among cultures in this service probably since early man first danced around campfires.

Ethnomusicolgist Gilbert Rouget explores the connection between music and trance throughout history. Perhaps music is more than simply a mortal construct, rather having cosmic significance. Playing music (and truly appreciating music) forces an individual to focus on the present moment, which in turn is the cornerstone of meaningful experience. This emphasis on the present moment is the consummation of all other psychonautical resources (mediation, entheogens, etc.). Subscribers of the shamanic and mystical often view the passage of time as an illusion of the human mind, and regard a 'perpetual now' as true reality. Interestingly this is where science begins to align with the esoteric.

Quantum Mechanics argues that particles move backwards as well as forwards in time and appear in all possible places at once. String theory proposes that the physical world is composed of little, tiny strings of vibrating energy (It seems appropriate to allude to chordophones). Terrence McKenna, recounting a DMT (Dimethyltryptamine) induced experience, asserts that the constant dance of 'machine elves,' (entities occupying a parallel world) creates reality as we perceive it. Are the rhythms of music akin to the language of reality? Is music a method of staying in contact with the underlying 'Logos,' being the true virtue in which all things exist? Whether it be Spring's hymn of birds and bees or the elegant, geometrical dance of our physical world, music plays the universal tongue in a reality seemingly ripe with babbling discord.




Anthony Pace, a writer, philosopher, and web developer, blogs at [http://philosophy-explained.com]





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 晚上11:36 0 意見
標籤： , ,

2012年5月7日 星期一

Free Will: Your Reality Or Your Illusion?


I will argue that if causality means anything, then everything is predetermined and therefore there is no free will. Causality rules - a cause causes an effect which in turn becomes the cause for a later effect which is hence the cause for an even later effect, and so on down the line. It's an unbroken causality chain starting from an initial set of fixed conditions. The past determines the present which determines the future. If you knew the past to an absolute infinite amount of detail, then you know the future to that same degree of infinite detail, and free will doesn't enter into things.

Our Universe could be a reflection, albeit on a far grander scale, of those computer-generated simulations, like "Life". Start with a simple set of initial conditions and relationships, add several rules to the mix, press 'enter' or 'go' and see what happens. Such simulations can evolve into immense complexity, but the outcome - as far up the track as you wish to extrapolate - is 100% predetermined.

You can download and run "Life" on your home computer - in fact I understand some come automatically equipped with the software. In a similar way, cosmologists run simulations where they vary the various parameters thought to have existed close on the heels of the Big Bang event or era, along with the laws and constants of physics and see if the simulation evolves into something approaching the large scale structure of our actual, observed, Universe. Their fundamental assumption is of course that causality is absolute. If you start with ABC, you end up with XYZ - the first time, the last time, and all the in-between times.

If causality however is a sometime thing (like a woman is - sorry, I didn't write the song, Gershwin did, so complain to him when you get to the afterlife part of your existence), then there must be (or probably is) such a thing as free will.

Now quantum physics as we currently understand it, is in-deterministic - it's all based around probabilities, not certainties. Einstein never accepted that, believing to his dying day that there was some undiscovered deterministic or certainty principle or hidden factors that would restore or reaffirm causality in the realm of the quantum. If Einstein were alive today, he's still be waiting. However, the indeterminacy and lack of causality in the realm of the quantum has nothing to do with free will.

Free will, if it exists, is a function of the mind; it's all in the mind - the ways and means of consciousness to achieve a conscious choice. Free will, if it exists, is ultimately then a function of brain biochemistry or neurochemistry. Chemistry is deterministic and causality driven. Chemistry is an atomic process, but chemistry is still macro compared with the micro of the quantum realm. If you combine sodium and chlorine in equal parts and only probably get table salt and thus every now and again you get quartz or stainless steel instead, well that's just not the way the Universe works. That's not the way chemistry, any chemistry including brain biochemistry or neurochemistry works.

Let's explore the issue further.

Firstly, free will means making decisions that have no predetermined outcome. Free will is coming to that metaphorical fork in the road and having the ways and means or ability to choose one path or the other. Even choosing neither, doing nothing, is in itself a decision.

Decisions require conscious thought - well, maybe not. There's something more fundamental at work here - physics and chemistry.

Let's start with simple life forms, say microbes and plants.

Plants and microbes make decisions but clearly they do not have free will. They respond to external influences. Plant roots 'decide' to grow downwards with gravity; the plant 'decides' to grow upwards, against gravity. Phytoplankton 'decide' to move up and down in the ocean with respect to light intensity, and plants can 'follow' the Sun as it moves across the sky. Unicellular organisms 'decide' to reproduce when the environmental conditions are right.

Even more complex organisms that we don't normal associate with free will make decisions. A snail will decide to tuck into its shell with threatened. We may call it instinct, but its still decision making, albeit somewhat involuntary.

At what point does instinct or blind response to environmental stimuli morph into the appearance (real or illusionary) of free will?

And so we have, slightly higher up the evolutionary chain, a threatened organism will decide to fight or flee or hide or go into its shell. The response is not 100% instinctive; not apparently 100% predetermined. The organism chooses, and if it is not instinctive, then the decision required thought.

Decision making, instinctive or otherwise, has an awful lot to do with chemistry, and ultimately physics, because organisms are chemical structures, and chemistry is ultimately based on physics.

So, thought processes are ultimately chemical processes, ultimately routed in physics - we're back to that micro world again!

Faced with a non-instinctive decision - fight or flee; red dress or green dress; scrambled eggs or boiled eggs - you have to think about it. That thought process sets into motion a chain of chemical and physical processes. It's like you've pulled the handle on a slot machine - when everything stops and the numbers (or symbols) come up, that's it bingo - decision made. But you had no actual control between setting the wheels in motion and the result. Your decision making was only an illusion of free will.

I repeat - once those chemical and physical processes are set into motion, you have no control over them - no say-so. You have no say-so in the reactions that happen, in the energies required to see those processes through to completion, what pathways electrons travel over your neural circuits.

Should that be surprising? Setting your brain aside for a moment, the rest of your body does not answer to what you want. In the exact same way you have no control over the natural chemical reactions that take place in your stomach when you dump a load of food into it, or for that matter any of the biochemistry that makes you tick. You don't dictate to your body what pathways electrical impulses take when they blink your eyelids or control your heartbeat or make you twitch or even when you put one foot in front of the other.

Every molecule, atom and fundamental particle in your body does not answer to what you want, free will or no free will. You do not decide what they do! If you really had free will - willpower or mind-over-matter - you should be able to decide to control your aging process, or control your hair growth or colour. You can't. You don't really have free will.

You can only hold your breath for so long, or deprive yourself of sleep. While a relatively few can have the willpower to starve themselves to death when food is readily available, few could willingly die of thirst, and astronomer Tycho Brahe* notwithstanding, you can only put off going to the bathroom just so long and no longer. On a less gruesome note, how long can you prevent your eyelids from blinking?

If you have no control over the operations of your own body - its systems, organs, tissues, cells and biochemistry, why is the brain - including the mind, or that inner 'You' within you any different?

Now let's take the case of human conception, through to blastula, embryo and foetus. I think one can agree that a human doesn't need to make any decisions for the first nine months, while still in the womb. Ditto the nine months following birth, and probably another nine months after that. But sooner or later, that baby or infant will make its first decision that's not based on fundamental body needs like 'deciding' to go to sleep or wet it's diapers.

The question is what is fundamentally different about the nature of the infant before it can make its first free will choice or decision and just after? The brain, the brain chemistry, the neural nets and pathways, would be seemingly identical. The only thing I can think of is that the infant and infant's brain/mind is receiving an ever steady input of sensory data, ultimately enough to allow the infant to make decisions - the baby wants scrambled eggs, not soft-boiled eggs.

The ever increasing absorption of external stimuli may provide the ultimate need or desire to make choices, but it doesn't provide the mechanism. Ultimately I don't think there is a free will mechanism as everything is predetermined, like the computer simulation of "Life". But does it really matter whether or not you have actual free will or the illusion of free will? It doesn't alter how you live your life and the expectations of those unknown choices you'll make between now and when Mother Nature makes that final choice on your behalf!

So far I've been muttering on as if you came to a metaphorical fork in the road and had some sort of free will to pick one path, or the other path; maybe neither path - or maybe not, if causality rules the universal roost.

There's no free will solace in the Many Worlds Interpretation of reality; in coming to that fork in the road, because all paths, all possible choices, are enacted as the universe splits to cater for each and every one. You may think you picked one path - the high road, the low road, or the path least travelled, it makes no difference - and thus could pat yourself on the back for having free will and acted upon it, but in actual fact it was, ditto, an illusion. All paths were taken, in one world you took the high road, in another the low road, in a third world the road in-between, so no cigar, you do not pass 'go', you do not collect $200 free will dollars as there was no free will exhibited.

I do have some unanswered questions. Say you have to decide between wearing that green dress or that red dress to - whatever. You set those thought chemical/physical wheels in motion. I'm not quite sure how the chemical/physical processes stay focused on the issue at hand. I mean, what if you hence decide to make scrambled eggs - nothing to do with the original green dress/red dress decision! Perhaps that's a part of the 'disease' we collectively call mental illness.

Then there's the old hairy chestnut of if there is no free will, can people, should people, be held accountable for their behaviour? The fact that people are, obviously suggests that society as a whole has voted for the concept of free will. Whether that has ultimately a religious base (God gave us free will) I know not, but I'd bet - probably.

Quite apart from that deterministic clockwork Universe scenario - what was set in motion at the Big Bang event 13.7 billion years ago, those initial fixed conditions, the set of particles and the laws and relationships that governed their interactions and evolution past to present to future - there are other slightly less plausible scenarios that also limit your free will if they reflect true reality.

For example, if you appear in your dreams as a character, or as a character in someone else's dreams, your (or someone else's) dream world representation of you, if questioned (not that that's possible of course) about your free will, well you would reply that within the dream you were a part of (not that you would know you were a participant in a dream) that you were exhibiting free will. But of course it's actually the dreamer's mind that's pulling the strings, and thus the characters (such as you) in a dream just dance to whatever tune is played out for them. No free will.

Dreams (wetware) aren't the only form of virtual reality. There's software, and computer generated simulations, like, say video games. The characters within, as per the dreams scenario, would tell you if they could that their actions exhibit their own free will. But of course that's not true; the programmer and ultimately the player dictate the action and tell the character what to do. Again, there's no free will actually exhibited by the characters.

Now, ask yourself what if our reality is actually the product of a higher reality wetware or software? That is, we're dreamed or simulated but ultimately generated beings akin to the beings we dream about or we create via our software. We're actually characters in someone else's dream (let's hope they don't have an alarm clock set) or the product of someone (something) else's software (let's hope they don't hit the delete key). If that's so, then, we got no free will. We waltz to their wetware or software tune.

Lastly, although according to legend God gave us free will, let's say for argument's sake that there's an afterlife and that we go to Heaven. Do you have free will in Heaven? That is, could you, of your own free will, commit a sin in Heaven?

Conclusion - Regardless of what society believes, I believe free will is an illusion. Everything is preordained, much like that next scene in the movie you've already seen a half-dozen times before. You know what's coming next and the characters you're observing have no choice in the matter - no free will. Well, maybe that's what life, the Universe, and everything is - something already recorded and set in stone. Or, like that example I gave above, "Life", perhaps we're a computer program or simulation with relationships and rules all set in motion, perhaps for the edification or amusement of that extraterrestrial computer programmer in the sky!

*Because of etiquette or protocol, Tycho Brahe, while in the company of royals so the story goes, apparently couldn't, or wouldn't excuse himself to go to the bathroom. As a result he suffered a ruptured bladder and snuffed it, getting a Darwin Award in the process. That was a hell of a way to die for king and country!




Science librarian; retired.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 凌晨2:08 0 意見
標籤： ,

2012年3月5日 星期一

Reality Check - Calibrate Your Life


Even if you know what you want in life, why you want it and you strive to achieve it, you're likely to eventually be led astray. Every day you dive into the small tasks trusting that they'll lead you to the bigger picture. You check up your smaller tasks with relation to your current goals to ensure you're on track. And yet, there are times when you get derailed. Even if it seems like you are pursuing the goals you've set, something doesn't feel right. You've lost your drive and don't feel the passion. You can't seem to notice what could be wrong from your current perspective.

The longer you're in the doing, the more assumptions you make around your goals and their achievement. Soon you think you have it all figured out, and from your current perspective it sure seems so. If you would try to rearrange your goals, you'd get a similar life plan. And so you feel stuck and confused. Reality check is something more than a check-up and rearrangement of your goals. It's a five-step process aimed to raise your awareness, interrupt the mental patterns and incorrect assumptions, bring your awareness to the true purpose in life and plan your life from there. You broaden your view and eliminate obstacles first and look around after. A frequent reality check is vital to ensure that you have chosen the right destination and you are headed straight at it.

The submarine metaphor

Think of your life as a submarine cruise towards the island of your own choosing. You need to be submerged to travel effectively but the water is murky and you can't see your destination while underwater. You emerge just for a while and set the right course.Then you go down and swim towards it. The ways slowly push you off course. Your navigational equipment is also a bit discalibrated. You can try to correct your course while underwater, but your calculations are inaccurate in there and can deceive you. Unless you emerge and recalibrate your course, you are going to miss the island. As you look for your island above the surface of murky water, you might also notice a better, more beautiful island nearby. Then you will congratulate yourself: 'I'm so glad I have reemerged and checked my course. Now I have found the island I truly wanted to arrive at'.

A personal story

I'm writing this post because a big reality check recently turned my life around. Somewhere about a year ago I realized that the area of relationships is strongly lagging behind all the rest. Therefore I made it a number one goal to improve it. Back then I was strongly growth-oriented, very spiritual and insanely happy guy. When I've fallen in love, I put relationship skills before spirituality or business. My intense education in that area followed the focus and soon enough most of my goals were circled around relationships. The number one thing I wanted to manifest in my life was an awesome intimate partner.I have linked my life's purpose and sense of fulfillment with social success, as the highest form of adventure, growth and fun.

Three times during that period I've done something like a reality check. Each time I realized how much energy I've been putting into the relationships, neglecting the true purpose of my life, which was much deeper and broader. What I failed to do each time was to interrupt my pattern of desperation about attracting the right friends and intimate partners. I didn't dig deep enough into the fundamental assumptions and the realignment with the true purpose of my life was only temporary. After a month or so, I went back to neglecting everything but the relationships.

It wasn't such a bad year from the external perspective. I've grown a lot and experienced lots of success in every area. The problem was that I've linked all my sense of accomplishment and inner drive with the relationships. I assumed that I won't be happy until I find a true friend or a girlfriend. And sure enough, I felt like a failure more and more often.

The days from February 1st to 5th I've labeled as my holidays from life. I joined a group trip to the comfortable resort in the mountains, far away from civilization. I asked for a single room with no roommate. I did nothing but exercise physically and meditate. There were girls I liked on the camp but I decided not to flirt with them, even though I could. I didn't socialize, write articles or make financial plans. I was just being there, enjoying the nature. During the second day I achieved a very peaceful state in which I sometimes felt as if I had no name. I truly reconnected with my soul. There was no assumed identity, no obligations or goals - just being. Most of the thinking processes disappeared.

On the fourth day I asked myself 'What is my life really about?'. The answer came in pieces from deep within me: 'You're here, in this body to have positive impact on the planet. You grow, and as you grow, you share your love and fulfillment with the world'. And that was it. That was when I realized how deceived I was for so long. There was no fulfillment in 'Earn a living. Find a friend. Build a website.' kind of things. How could I have been focusing on those so much, forgetting the simple reason of my existence? Growing and sharing the best of me with the world is so incredibly fulfilling that I now feel no gap that any friend or intimate partner would have to fill. I couldn't see it before, from the low-awareness, neediness perspective. I was too caught up in my thinking. What happened on those holidays is that I interrupted the thought processes that deceived me.

I've changed the very foundation on which I was building my life. Does it mean I wasted a year building on wrong foundations? Not at all. The growth and external achievements are still there, but now they have a different meaning. I'm now following the right track and enjoying every step of it. If I went slightly around it in the past, fine. I've gone farther all the same, I've just needed to readjust towards where I really want to go.

As for the changes on the practical level, I still do well in my relationships. However, I found that certain actions and beliefs of mine were inaccurate of my newly discovered life's purpose. I let go of some purely manipulative tactics for initiating relationships that were fun for both parties and successful, yet disaligned with love and truth. I spend much more time writing articles, as this is currently the best medium for my message to the world.

Reality check vs life goals check

Don't make the mistake of thinking that reality check is just thinking over your life purpose and choosing better goals. You can analyze your life all you want, but if you keep making the same unconscious assumptions, you will end up getting the similar answers.To see through your current flaws in thinking, you need to raise your own awareness. As uncle Einstein smartly put it, "a problem cannot be solved on the same level that it exists". You might even raise your awareness for a moment and see the bigger picture, different from what you assumed it would be. But still, if you still hold the same limiting beliefs in your mind, they will eventually lead you astray.

Look around from the valley and, no matter how hard you look, the view is more/less the same. Cut down a few trees and you can see more. Jump around and you'll catch short glimpses of a bigger picture. Yet you can't stay up long enough to accurately store it in your memory. Climb up a hill and you will see it all and more.

Do you know what your life is really about? I challenge you to free yourself from your current perspective verify your reality wth the bigger picture. Realign with your soul and see from that level how well your mind and body operates. Don't follow your goals blindly, hoping that fulfillment awaits you at their achievement. You will likely end up getting there and asking 'Is this all there is? What's the point?'. Make sure your life's purpose is the real purpose why you're in this world. Make sure your goals are directly aligned with that purpose. Do the reality check!

Step one - open your chakras

This is a simple, yet extremely effective meditation practice. As a first step you want to release the energy stuck in your chakras, which is essential for getting a clear vision of your reality. I do it at least once a day. You'll get by with it once a month. If you think it's an evil work of satan or whatever, don't call it opening your chakras. I'm not going to challenge your fundamental belief system. Just reframe it so you can still benefit from it. Think of it as a renovation of the house of your soul and you're painting the different parts of your body in the right colors. Whatever works :-) Really, there's no dogma, mojo or hidden truth to it. You just play with colors on the body parts in your imagination and it makes you feel better.

If you're curious to read more about chakras, I strongly recommend Erin Pavlina's article. Here I'll just cover the unclogging process sparing you as little detail as you need to get by. It's just a preparation for the reality check anyways.

There are seven major chakras in your body and each one is represented by a color:

* Root chakra - red color, in your feet, represents physical survival, sense of identity

* Sacral chakra - orange color, lower abdomen, represents emotional stability, sexual energy, creativity

* Solar plexus - yellow color, solar plexus, near the diaphragm, represents personal power and effectiveness, mental energy and focus

* Heart chakra - green color, heart and lung area, represents love, empathy, healing, connection to others

* Throat chakra - blue color, throat, represents communication, self-expression

* Third eye - deep blue, indigo, purple color, third eye, in your forehead, represents psychic abilities, intuition, clarity of thought

* Crown chakra - White or violet color, at the top of the head, represents connection with God, Universe, Divine, inner peace

Over the years the chakras became clogged, the energy got stuck inside them or whatever metaphor you'd like to use. A simple visualization exercise is enough to unclog it. For the first time it might take a few minutes per chakra, once you get good at it, it's just a few seconds each. Remember that it's all just a metaphor. You can imagine something completely different from what I suggest and get better results. Just stick to the corresponding colours, as there seems to be something fitting about them.

Imagine a ball of colorful light swirling in the corresponding place of each chakra. As the ball rolls, it gets brighter and brighter. A stream of energy flows from the universe through the ball. Over time it flows more and more freely and the ball gets brighter and brighter. The chakra opens. Start from the Root and end at the Crown. Keep visualizing until you get a sense that it's clean. This feeling is hard to describe, but once you feel it, you'll know it's there. It's like spending a day in the fog and suddenly stepping out of it into the clear vision. It's like having pressure on your arm for so long that you got used on it and then releasing it. It's like finally telling your buddy to brush his teeth more often after you put up with his breath for ages. Anyways, wait until it 'clicks' and move on to the next chakra.

Step two - stop thinking

The second step is to interrupt your thinking patterns. Focus entirely on the present moment and disidentify with the thinking mind and its story about who you are. You are the soul, the consciousness, the awareness beyond the thinking mind. You need to feel that intuitively before you go further. If you've been stuck in the conversation inside your mind for years, this may be challenging.

How do you know you are the awareness, not the thinker? it's simple. Ask yourself 'What is my next thought going to be?'. How could you ask yourself that? How could you perceive the thought? If you were the thought, you wouldn't be able to do that. You aren't the thinking mind if you can observe it. Play along with it for a while and listen to your thoughts. Don't identify, just listen as if it was a radio transmission. Then imagine you are turning the volume knob down and hear the radio gradually die out.

Once the thoughts disappear, the awareness of presence emerges. Perhaps for the first time in a really long time you are completely in the present moment, perceiving your office without mental judgement and the usual stream of thoughts. This is the state you want to hold. Don't let any thoughts interfere with it. You will often catch yourself striking up an inner dialogue and drifting away. It's normal, just keep doing your best. The open chakras make it much easier to stay in the present moment. Your mental clarity is higher than usual.

Another good way of going into the now is directing your focus on the body's energy field. Close your eyes and hold your hands in front of you without touching anything. Ask yourself: 'How do I know that my hands exist when I close my eyes?'. Feel the subtle feeling of living warmth in your hands. Once you get it, feel it in the entire body. Don't analyze it, don't think about it. Just feel it. Focus on the sensory perceptions, not on the mental interpretations of them.

Never rush the second step of reality check. It's a crucial foundation for the step three. If you're impatient, it's a very sign that your thinking patterns are still there. Even if raising your awareness takes you an hour, it's totally worth it. Most often the longer it takes, the more miscalibrated you are. Some people need just a small shift and will go through this step in five minutes, while others need a complete turn-over and it will take them hours. I meditated three days for the first time but it's not necessary :-)

Step three - realize your wholeness

This is something your mind wouldn't bear. Good thing that you turned it off in the second step, right? Realize that now, in this moment you are already whole. It might not seem so on the level of mind. You are programmed into the consumption 'Give me more' mindset. Look at the core of your being. You are the awareness, not the needy mind. As a soul, a presence you are whole in this very moment. No external event, achievement or posession can fulfill you. There is nothing you have to do first. Let go of all your social conditioning. You are already whole.

Basically you came on this world fulfilled and then people told you that you don't have enough and you are not good enough. This realization is the essence of the third step of reality check. Don't expect anything to make you whole. Your goal in life is not wholeness. You already have it. You've always had it, but the mind is deceived to want more. As you are sitting here, breathing, aware of the present moment, without analyzing anything or running through your mind-made life story - you are fulfilled.

Who are you without the mind? You are still yourself, as mind is not a part of you, it's a tool of you. Use it as a tool and don't seek fulfillment through the mind. The key word that you want to avoid is 'but'. Never 'but' your happiness. Who says you can't be happy if x or y happens? Does it really depend on external circumstances? Look inside yourself for the answer. Right now, in this present moment, in the core of your being, you are whole and fulfilled.

At this point, you can let go of any variation of the belief that you need to get or become something or someone in order to be happy. If you encounter internal resistance, let go of the thinking processes. Your mind will struggle with this idea. Yet don't you sense deep down in your heart that it is true?

If you are already fulfilled, what's the point of living? Life is not about making yourself whole, looking for lacking parts of your perfect identity. It's all about what you do as a fulfilled being. Once you get over the internal resistance and seeking happiness externally move on to step four.

Step four - your true purpose in life

What do you intend to do with your life now that you're already fulfilled? It's time to ask yourself this question. You might find the answer surprisingly far from what you've been doing :-)

Far too often people set need-oriented goals instead of desire-oriented ones. You may want something deeply, but restrain yourself because social conditioning tells you that one of your assumed needs has to be fulfilled first. This way you live in reaction, deprived of true purpose in life. This is all result of the conditioning that you have dropped during the first three steps. The answer that emerges now is something you truly want, something you could do for eternity and enjoy the process immensely. It can be vague, but you can just work on the possible clarifications later.

Perhaps some of the inner resistance and sense of lack is still inside you. If you were troubled about money, ask yourself "What would I do if I had all the money in the world?'. If you sought validation from people, ask 'What would I do if I would be totally famous and liked and had the best intimate partner on earth?'. Do you get the idea? Whatever you think you need, ask yourself what would you do if you already had it. Then go over the steps 1-3 again. You will realize that you either already have, or don't need at all, what this thing would provide you.

If the answer that comes up doesn't seem right, just get your mind out of the way and keep asking. Write all your answers in a text editor or on paper. It's important to write anything that comes up. Only this way you'll sustain a constant flow of answers instead of getting stuck with one you don't want. When you get the right answer, you'll know that it's your life purpose. You'll feel a certain emotional connection with it. Your soul will move when you hold it in your mind. You will get excited and eager to begin. Now all that's left is a one, final step. Don't stop at the fourth step or it all has been for nothing.

Step five - plan your life around the purpose

What you probably have at this point is a vague concept of your purpose of life. Unless you integrate and interpret it, all you have are a few inspiring words in your text editor. You want a visible positive change in your lifestyle.

This one was mine by the way:

Love unconditionally

Be in a resourceful state of mind and body

Explore the most of this world

Keep the truth of my real nature in mind

Share the best of me with the world

Another similar vague concept I received in answer was 'Live in alignment with seven growth principles', referring to the principles described in the book book 'Personal Development for Smart People' by Steve Pavlina, which I find as an extremely insightful book.

What's left to do is to translate such concept into do-able actions. You want to create a bridge between your new purpose and your everyday life. Review your habits and beliefs. Which of them have to be replaced? What would you want to replace them with? Those are the foundations of your life. It's crucial to realign them. Think about every area of your life and consider how it relates to your purpose. What vision of each area would be a manifestation of it? Consider at least your:

* Health and fitness

* Finances

* Career

* Mental development, learning

* Any big hobbies you might have

* Relationships

* Spiritual practice

Describe in writing what does your life aligned with the purpose look like. Create a list of all noticable shifts and actions that you are committed to do. Capture in writing anything that will help you align with the new purpose. Any kind of plan, resource, change, assumption. Just go crazy and write your butt off.

If you find your commitment low or average, something isn't right. Spend more time reviewing your purpose and letting go of conditioning until you get totally pumped up emotionally. Then make a commitment to follow through and write as much as you can.

Why all the writing? What if you don't like to write? Perhaps you're too lazy and prefer to do it all in your head. Writing is a crucial part of this step. Once you get on with your life, you will be once again exposed to the conditioning. Old patterns may reemerge and new negative ones will be formed. You need a firm base to return to. You have to keep it all on writing and remember that you wrote it in a very uplifted state so it is most probably true. Doubts are bound to come and you need to capture this turnaround to have a fixed orientation point on the horizon.

So how do you like the reality check process? Eager to use it? Your mind will probably start building up reasons as for why shouldn't you try it. It just tries to prevent you from alignment with the soul and disidentification with the mind. Why don't you just cut off all the excuses and try it anyways? Worst case - you'll feel slightly empowered. Best case - your life will completely turn around towards joy and fulfillment. Not a bad deal, is it?

I want you now to find at least an hour to commit to this process without any interruptions. Schedule it and cross that hour from your life in advance. Never accept any reason to move it from the schedule. It's a done deal.

Now that you planned when to follow through, consider every minute between now and that hour as at least partially wasted. You could have been living in the fulfillment and alignment with your true purpose of life if you hadn't procrastinated on the reality check! I hope this made your life more joyful :-)

Ralph




If you liked this article, feel free to visit my blog: [http://www.ralphdudek.com] for more!





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 下午1:45 0 意見
標籤： , ,

2012年1月26日 星期四

Reality: Really Real, Pseudo-Real, Or Unreal? Part Two


Reality from Two More Points of View - Squared:

Position yourself way above the Sun's North Pole and film the motion of the solar system, or just the inner solar system 'below' you. You'd film the Earth revolving about the Sun in a counter clockwise direction, and rotating in an easterly direction.

If you now role that film in reverse, you'd see the Earth revolving in a clockwise direction and rotating in a westerly direction. An inhabitant of that time reversed Earth would see the Sun rise in the west and set in the east! However, that's no violation of physical law. It's relatively easy to picture a solar system is which the revolution of planetary bodies is the opposite of ours; planets that rotate in the opposite direction.

Such opposites with respect to motion are what you'd see in a mirror reflection - if you had a mirror big enough. So, if you reverse time [T], you produce a mirror image of the motion (left handedness motion becomes right handedness motion and vice versa), which in physics is called parity [P]. If you look in a mirror, your right hand now looks like a left hand and vice versa - that's parity. That applies equally on the micro scale; with the added feature that to preserve the overall symmetry, the charge [C] needs to be reversed too. So, a positive [CPT] is symmetrical with a negative [CPT]. Since the macro is made up of the micro, in our time reversed; parity (motion) reversed, Earth; said Earth would have all the charges in all the particles that made it up reversed. In short, said Earth would be an antimatter Earth!

On the micro level, a positron (positive charge), rotating clockwise (spin up) while moving forward in time at one second per second is symmetrical with an electron (negative charge), rotating counter clockwise (spin down), and moving backwards in time, at a rate of one second per second! Again, there's no violation of physical law. The laws of physics do not make any distinction between time frames moving from past to present to future relative to time frames going from future to present to past. It's the same reality from two different perspectives. Which version you prefer is solely up to you - either interpretation is a valid one. Most people of course prefer the classical time frames forward version - the Earth revolves counter clockwise and rotates easterly and is composed of matter and goes from past to present to future. But, you can be, if you wish to be, justifiably stubborn and reverse the CPT and accept that reality.

Again, if you reverse the time frame, you need to also reverse the image of whatever is in motion to its mirror image instead. Now that image may be hard to swallow and isn't really a 'reflection' of your day to day macro world. If you look in your home mirror, and see a reflection of a grandfather clock with hands rotating and pendulum swinging, it will look odd - the hands going the wrong way around (counter clockwise) and the pendulum going right-left-right instead of left-right-left. But, physicists can handle it (at least via their abstract equations - just like the mathematics can deal with the ten or eleven dimensions required of string theory.

So, in general, negative [CPT] and positive [CPT] are the two symmetrical sides of the same physical law reality coin.

But there are two other ways of looking at and interpreting this. There's 1) a real mix of (a hell of a lot of) matter and (a very little amount of) antimatter all going forward in time together in step, or 2) you can postulate the concept of additional pseudo-antimatter by postulating that every now and then elementary particles of matter reverse direction in time (hence reverse charge and parity as well) thus mimicking what we call antimatter. That mimicked antimatter elementary particle can reverse time direction again and revert back to what we call normal matter. That applies equally to real antimatter reversing time's arrow and becoming pseudo-matter. While the former (1) is the commonly accepted, commonsense point of view, it's actually the latter (2) that has greater explanatory power in solving some of those mysteries of physics, such as entanglement, and double slit experiment weirdness and why are all electrons or positrons identical (because maybe there's only one of each zigzagging backwards and forwards in time).

Reality Really Is A Personal Thing:

The most unique thing about you is "The You" inside you - your mind. There's nothing unique about your sex, blood type, pigmentation, hair style, body shape, age, etc. Your genetic makeup isn't unique if you have an identical twin. Many of your body's organs can be transplanted into other bodies. But your mind is unique. Even if you had an identical twin, your minds would be different.

Your brain, which houses the mind, is the organ that has to absorb the sensory input we constantly receive from the outside world. While we have some limited control over the sensory barrage or onslaught reality inflicts on us, we so have some - control that is. You can often choose what you want to taste or listen to or see. You can close your eyes or stick your fingers in your ears if you want. Another form of control is that you can choose your surroundings, maybe eventually immerse yourself in a totally artificial reality, as in the Star Trek's holodeck programs. So, in one sense, reality really is all in the mind as all sensory input flows into it. And since your mind is unique, your reality, or your version of reality, must be unique too.

Quite apart fro having some control over external sensory input, the inner workings of your body also can affect the mind and therefore your notion of reality. Migraine headaches can cause you to 'see' flashes of light where no optical input is preset. A buildup of this chemical, or lack of that substance, can cause quite considerable alterations in your perception of what's happening - reality. Near Death Experiences (the NDE) is a case in point. Control over those inner workings is possible, in some cases, to a greater or lesser degree. However, you're body often tends to do its own thing and mind over matter is a useless exercise!

All of which leads to the point that you can also alter your own perception of reality, not directly via sensory stimuli, but chemically. There are lots of drugs, prescription, legal and over-the-counter (alcohol, etc.), not quite so legal (LSD, magic mushrooms, marijuana, various herbs, etc.) which affect brain (mind) chemistry and how you perceive the outside world. The question then arises, if you can alter your brain's (mind's) chemistry, and that alters your perception of reality, how do you know that your unaltered (normal) brain chemistry is giving you an accurate reflection of what's out there? If you're honest, you don't! But you can assume that you are getting a reasonable facsimile of reality, otherwise basic survival would be highly problematic. I mean if you thing that's a purring pussy cat approaching you when it's actually a roaring man-eating tiger, you're in deep shit. Or, equally in the fertilizer, that's not really table salt you're sprinkling on your veggies, its cyanide!

There's also the area of electrical stimulation of the brain that can produce realities which aren't real but which, to you, are very real indeed!

There's an opposite side to the altering-your-mind's-sensory-input. Instead of adding or replacing inputs, eliminate them - deprive yourself of as much sensory input as possible. I'm thinking of isolation tanks where you float in water at body temperature, there's no light, no sound, no smell. Of course your heart still thumps and you can still think (therefore you are and therefore you still have a grip on reality, even if the sum total of that reality is just you, and only you. Regardless, it's a far removal from your day-to-day perception of what's real!

Lastly, while mind melds (or telepathy) are probably an ever unlikely possibility, I can se the day when there is a direct interface between a computer, an artificial intelligence perhaps, and the human mind. Perhaps that computer link might be an interface between one human mind and another. That way you could directly experience another person's reality!

The key point: Actual reality has relatively little to do with your brain chemistry (apart from providing the matter/energy needed to run the apparatus). Your perception of reality has everything to do with brain chemistry. That's true even if reality is augmented by technology, from telescopes to microscopes; mass spectrometers to particle accelerators; eye glasses to hearing aids.

Relative Reality:

The same reality can be quite different from the perspective of two different observers. But does it really matter?

Does it really matter if when you witness a sunrise whether or not it's because the Sun goes around the Earth or because the Earth rotates while going around the Sun?

Does it really matter if you're driving along while it's raining vertically yet you see the raindrops hitting the windshield at an angle? Or, while driving, you see the posts go past the car, yet of course it's the car driving past the posts.

Does it really matter if you're flying in a plane as assume that the plane is suspended in the air and it's the Earth's rotation that's bringing your destination to you?

Does it really matter if two cars are approaching each other at a combined velocity of 100 km/hour whether car one is standing still and car two is going at 100 km/hour; car one is traveling at 30 km/hour and car two is traveling at 70 km/hour; both cars are each moving along at 50 km/hour? Does it really matter if you're in line between the two cars and thus have difficulty judging their relative velocities?

Well, 'yes" it really does matter if you believe there is such a thing as universal or absolute truth. The Earth rotates and goes around the Sun; the raindrops really are on a vertical path downwards and would theoretically intersect the centre of the Earth; the plane is really flying and not suspended in midair; and both cars are moving at 50 km/hour.

Well 'no', it really doesn't matter as long as you get to see the sun rise; you don't get wet regardless whether or not the rain is falling straight down or at an angle; you reach your destination; and you're not in either of the two cars on their collision course! The Universe certainly isn't losing any sleep over this, and I bet neither will you!

But Einstein and the other relativists who followed in his footsteps care deeply about such matters because they do illustrate the principle that there are no God-given (or Nature-given) absolute frames of reference. Different strokes for different folks can produce identical results, or different results, depending..

That second observer, the different folk, complicates things. You on the ground assume the Sun goes around the Earth; the observer in space clearly sees the Earth rotating and orbiting the Sun. You see the rain hitting the windshield at an angle while the observer standing on the roadside clearly sees the rain falling vertically (and gets wet for his trouble). That second observer on the ground clearly sees the plane flying through the air and the hell with what you, the passenger, observe. That second observer from a distant hilltop has a side view sees and easily sees both cars in motion, both at 50 km/hour.

So, what about we hypothesize two identical twins (well it would be odd to have three identical twins!), born on the same day, say, just to be evil, on the sixth of June, 2006!

They both die at the exact same time, say a century later. Trouble is, one has moved to the east coast; one has lived on the west coast. The east coaster dies local time at 1 am 6 June 2106. The west coaster dies at the same moment, but west coast local time is 11 pm 5 June 2106. Thus, when reunited and buried side-by-side, one has a headstone that reads b.2006-d.2106, age 100 years; the other's headstone reads b.2006-d.2106, age 99 years! It would now seem to be a case of relative reality trumping absolute truth!

Does evening and night come before the dawning day, or does the dawning day before evening and night? Does winter follow summer, or does summer follow winter? You may think that Wednesday comes before Thursday, but Thursday the 3rd comes before Wednesday the 9th!

One final example, you're standing on a railway platform, your partner is on the train. Now as the train passes by the platform, your better half drops from say chest height a rubber ball. You, on the platform see the pathway of the dropped but bouncing back up ball as a V. Your partner sees the ball go straight down and straight up. Is there an absolute truth here? Does it cosmically matter?

Relative reality is part and parcel of our overall reality.

Is Your Reality Certainty or A Fluke?

If there is one thing you are absolutely certain of it's that you exist, and I won't dispute that (even of you are a figment of my imagination or exist only as the creation of some kind of computer software). Seriously, you exist as a three dimensional, flesh-and-blood, absolutely unique entity inside a three dimensional Universe. However, is your reality something wildly improbable or 100% guaranteed?

On the surface, you are an absolute fluke. Think of those millions of sperm that could have won that race to your mother's egg, but didn't. Or that winning sperm could have fertilized some other of your mother's eggs. Either case, you're a total nothing in anyone's philosophy! Now think of all the males and females available at any given time and the odds are against your parents having met, courted, married, etc. Potentially, millions of other males could have married your mother; and potentially millions of other females could have married your father. And of course your mother and father are flukes because a similar argument holds for them via your grandparents, and further backwards for them to your great grandparents, etc, etc. Go back with those sorts of odds a hundred, a thousand, a million, a trillion, generations; back through your mammalian, reptilian, amphibian, etc. ancestry; back through your family tree of invertebrate ancestors (untold generations worth), right down to your unicellular ancestors. What are the odds, all those chance meetings be they sperm and egg, or male and female, of organisms that survived long enough through to a reproductive age (and relatively few, apart from humans do), that you would someday grace the world? Zillions upon zillions to one! You're an absolute fluke! Or are you?

There appear to be ultimately three sets of either/or conditions which ultimately govern that. The first is, is there one universe, our Universe, or many universes (a Multiverse)? Secondly, is there absolute causality resulting in a deterministic clockwork Universe where once the initial set of relationships were set into play, things evolved with 100% certainty from that point on? Lastly, is there one, and only one possible physics, or could our physics have been different, or are different in another universe?

But first some definitions are in order.

Universal Physics - One and only one kind of physics is possible, throughout all universes. If you believe in God, She didn't have any choice in the matter!

Variable Physics - Each universe could have its own individual brand of physics, and the physics that rule our Universe could have turned out differently.

Determinism Rules - There's 100% causality; there's absolute certainty.

Chance Rules - Represents less than 100% causality; free will if you will.

Multiverse - Lots of separate and apart universes, perhaps even an infinite number of them.

Universe - The one and only Universe; our Universe. However, if our Universe is near infinite in space and time and stuff, then for all practical purposes it's the same as the Multiverse since there's enough space and time and stuff for nearly all possibilities to take place within.

Combining the various possibilities suggests how fluky you really are! But first, let's deal with the supernatural, instead of natural scenario. If God exists and wanted you to exist, assuming there is a God of course, then you're Probability One - no contest. You're no fluke. Seeing however as how there is no evidence for any God (or gods), we'd better get back to all things natural and plough on.

Scenario 1: Universal Physics [+] Determinism [+] Multiverse = the exact same set of outcomes in all universes is predicted. If you exist in one universe, you exist in all universes. You're not a fluke. But if you don't, you don't, full stop. However, you probably don't since you're existence would be equivalent to tossing a coin several billion times in a row all billion coming up heads. The assumption here is that the initial set of conditions was identical in each and every single universe within the Multiverse. If not, then they won't be identical further on down the track. If that assumption is incorrect, you could exist in one or more universes; not exist in one or more other universes.

Scenario 2: Universal Physics [+] Determinism [+] Universe = if you exist, then you were a certainty from the get-go. If you don't, that too was a certainty. On balance, a betting person would probably bet against your existence ever happening because only one exact set of circumstances gives the universe you, while billions of other sets of circumstances don't.

Scenario 3: Universal Physics [+] Chance [+] Multiverse = your existence in one universe has nothing to do with your existence in any other universe. You're a fluke in whatever universe(s) you exist in. But, the saving grace is that you do probably exist in at least one universe.

Scenario 4: Universal Physics [+] Chance [+] Universe = If you exist, you're a fluke. The probability is extremely high given the odds against your existence such that nobody would have been willing to wager anything on your eventual behalf.

Scenario 5: Variable Physics [+] Determinism [+] Multiverse = assuming one universe has our kind of physics, then you're existence is a 100% certainty, or 100% against. In all other universes, since the physics are different, nothing remotely like you, or anyone else, will exist. If you exist, you're not just a fluke, but a super-fluke!

Scenario 6: Variable Physics [+] Determinism [+] Universe = if there's only one universe, then there can only be one physics, so assuming that that universe is our Universe, the outcome is the same as Scenario 2.

Scenario 7: Variable Physics [+] Chance [+] Multiverse = in the Multiverse, nearly all possibilities are realised (except in Scenario 1), so in at least one universe, you exist. You're not a fluke due to the vast number of universes that could contain you. But you're still a fluke in that you don't exist in the near infinite other possible universes.

Scenario 8: Variable Physics [+] Chance [+] Universe = again, one universe must equal one physics. Since things however are based on a throw of the dice, if you exist, you're a fluke.

In short, the betting odds towards your existence are to count on there being a Multiverse. If you're dealt one hand (one universe), the odds against a royal flush are extreme. Being dealt a near infinite number of hands (the Multiverse) doesn't ensure a royal flush, but it damn well improves the odds. So, if you exist and there's one universe, our Universe, you're a real fluke. In the Multiverse, you might be a fluke in any one universe, but there are so many universes that in that broader context, you're not a fluke.

Do you want to improve the odds in favor of your existence? There's a variation that could apply to the Multiverse theme called the Many Worlds interpretation of all things quantum. In the Many Worlds scenario, absolutely all possibilities are realized within any given 'moment' within the timeline. In terms of eggs and sperm, at any given moment, the universe splits into as many universes such that all sperm available fertilize all eggs available, and that applies regardless of species (so all possible males that can meet and mate with all possible females do so - or vice versa); all possible seeds that could have been are, and produce viable plants somewhere.

You might note the subtle combining of both the Multiverse and the Many Worlds concepts. Each universe within the Multiverse has the additional complication (or added attraction) of having to jump through the Many Worlds hoops.

Universes within the Multiverse can have differing timelines. Thus Cleopatra, assuming a Cleopatra, in another universe might have been born into a 21st Century Egypt, or Australia for that matter (assuming these nations exist or existed in this other universe). Likewise, in another, that other, universe, you may have been born a slave (or as Royalty) in an ancient Egypt, again, assuming such a nation existed. So, who knows, in some other universe (modern or ancient) you and (modern or ancient) Cleopatra (or substitute any modern or historical hunk male of your choice if you're female) have this thing going! I'm not that likely going to be, in any universe, the one to mate with Cleopatra, any more than you're (if female) are likely to get your act together with Marc Anthony. But, unlikely becomes Probability One when you merge the Multiverse with Many Worlds. The universe that contains you and Marc Anthony, or you (or me) and Cleopatra, will split when it come to that fork in the road. Many Worlds universe #1 split #1 fork - no pairings; Many Worlds universe #1 split #2 fork - you (we) live happy ever after! That's because all possibilities are realized; have to be realized.

That's a real headache inducer! So, to repeat, take a near (or actual) infinity of universes, each with its own unique timeline (which will not of necessity mirror our own). Then, multiply all those existences by all the possible forks in the road encountered by each of those universes since all paths are taken. Anything not forbidden is compulsory. You're wildest dreams may not come true in this, our Universe, and on this particular pathway you're experiencing, but somewhere you did, or will - but ditto that your worst nightmares, so perhaps be thankful for what you got in the here and now.

Now let's reduce that headache somewhat by unmerging again the Multiverse and the Many Worlds ideas. Say in one alternate timeline universe Cleopatra and I get our act together ('we do'). In another alternate timeline universe we don't ('we do not'). In both universes, the Many Worlds forks would now have us respectfully 'we do not' and 'we do' instead. But that's already happened in the two universes, so do we now have two universes where 'we do' and two universes where 'we do not'? Rather than accept that, perhaps the Multiverse and the Many Worlds concepts are ultimately, for all practical purposes, the same thing.

Ah, but the 'we do' in the first alternate universe took place in an alternate Australia thus the Many Worlds fork had us 'we do not' also in an alternate Australia. The original 'we do not" in the second alternate universe too place in that alternate ancient Egypt, so that Many Worlds fork now has us as a 'we do', also in an alternate ancient Egypt. So the two 'we do' universes and the two 'we do not' universes aren't the same after all.

But then again, all those four possibilities could also be catered for in four actual separate and apart universes that are part of the Multiverse, so again there's no need to bring into consideration the Many Worlds interpretation of all things quantum! Back to square one! And this sort of adding on further qualifiers, isn't going to ultimately alter the apparently near equivalence of the Multiverse and the Many Worlds.

I'm not however entirely sure this apparent equivalence will sit well with quantum physicists, because I'm not entirely sure this is what quantum physicists mean by the prase 'Many Worlds' (indeed, lots of quantum physicists deny any such interpretation at all exists - it's too big an ask for them). However, it seems to deal with the issue of That Cat! In two separate physical universes you have Schrodinger's Cat (in the box) experiment. Identical cats; identical setups; identical observers (and they can be identical because the fundamental bits that make them all up are identical - all electrons (neutrons, protons, etc.) are 100% clones of each other - absolutely identical). In one unverse, the observer observes the cat alive; the other, well it's the demise of the feline. Neither universe has to split into two. All possibilities have been exhausted without resorting to the requirement of a Many Worlds either/or split. The only real difference I can see between the Multiverse and the Many Worlds interpretation is that with Many Worlds, the outcome (all possibilities realized) is certainty; with the Multiverse it's only probable or possible.

In conclusion, you may think our planet is an example of total biodiversity, but imagine what things would be like if all the theoretical possibilities had come to pass (the Many Worlds and/or the Multiverse)!!! How many Einstein's were never born - on the other hand, how many Hitler's? Then throw in all the plants and animals that never were but could have been, and you could come up with multi-trillions upon trillions of alternative Earths! Ouch!

Perhaps it's easier to accept that there's just one Universe (our Universe) and no such a thing therefore as a Multiverse, and no such an animal as the Many Worlds interpretation of all things quantum. You're therefore a total fluke, and so just enjoy the company of the rest of us total flukes! That's unless of course our Universe is near infinite enough in extent, all on its lonesome, to allow for a duplicate copy (or three or four) of you - recall those elementary particles that make you, you, can be identically assembled elsewhere to accomplish exactly that.

Other Realities: I've mentioned parallel (or alternative or mirror) universes above, which are related to the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum physics. But there could easily be other less nebulous universes - a really real physical Multiverse. If Nature can create one Universe, She can create more than one. Other universes could have different physics relative to the physics we know. If that's the case, that opens up whole cans of different reality worms! However, such universes are probably forever out of our reach.

One set of realities I haven't mentioned yet, yet lots of people believe exist, center around the afterlife concept - heaven, hell, a spirit world, etc. We'll all find out for sure in or at the end.

Appendix: Here are some of the many faces of reality. Say you see across the room the most beautiful of beautiful naked bodies you've ever seen of the opposite sex (or the same sex if that's you bag). Lets call that vision "X" (but not because it's of necessity X-rated)! Now, what is the reality of your vision?

Well, perhaps you're involuntary dreaming of X.

Perhaps you're voluntarily imagining X.

Perhaps you're hallucinating X through disease, injury, a genetic defect, a biochemical imbalance (via drugs, lack of sleep, etc.).

Or, perhaps you are actually observing X and independent observers would verify the existence of X.

But, perhaps someone else is dreaming, or imagining or hallucinating both you and X.

Perhaps X isn't a real flesh-and-blood naked body but a hologram or maybe say a perfect representation such as a wax dummy.

You've also got to ask yourself, does X still exist if I close my eyes or turn my head away?

Since X resides in a Universe ultimately grounded in all things quantum, X only has a probability of existing and being where you think X actually is.

Ultimately, your perception of X is filtered via your senses into your mind where it resides in a vastly reduced in size; a two dimensional representation. You only get to experience the reality of X indirectly.

Conclusion:

I think it is fair to state that there are still many mysteries about the nature of reality left to explore, or continue to explore. The final word(s) has/have yet to be written, and maybe never will be.




Science librarian; retired.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 上午10:36 0 意見
標籤： , , ,

2012年1月21日 星期六

BDSM and Roleplay: Where Reality and Fantasy Combine


It takes a very special type of person to willingly dominate another human being, sexually, physically and emotionally. It takes a special kind of person to 'let' those things happen, and to give over completely to the person in control, offering up mind, body and soul to them to do what they will. Acting as a Dominant is never in the purview of a bully, nor is the submissive a shrinking violet, afraid of his or her own shadow. Certainly, Dom/mes can be aggressive and submissives can be shy or reserved, but nothing is ever written in stone.

One thing to understand is that when you take on the role of a Dom/me and your submissive wants you to do things to him or her that you might not otherwise do, it's all an act. You are playing a role. Pain and pleasure go hand in hand here, but always on terms that you both set. Spanking his or her backside, leaving bite marks, using clothes pins, playing with whips, tying up your partner (or being tied up yourself, if you're a switch), all of these things are part of the role. Causing pain in order to bring pleasure is a tricky line though.

Start out slowly, and pay close attention to every cue you can - auditory, visual, emotional, it is all important. Afterward, when you have both found release, talk with your partner about what went on. An open dialogue is the best way to figure out A - what is wanted on both sides for future fun, and B - what is best avoided because it didn't work out. Aspects of BDSM like pain play (spanking, whipping, etc.), domination (bossing your partner around), and humiliation/degradation play (name calling, emotional abuse) are all part of the whole package. Even a perfectly sane, rational, and kind-hearted person can enjoy these things. The thing you have to remember is that it is an act. Never once is the responsible Dom/me maliciously causing harm to his or her submissive and neither should you.

Examples of what you can do to get the juices flowing, to so speak are as numerous as your imagination is broad. Perhaps you want to pretend you are the star athlete, and s/he is the captain of the cheer leading squad. Or you are the randy nerd who seduces the aforementioned cheerleader. Additionally, you can give him or her instructions to heighten the experience. If you enjoy watching one another pleasure yourselves, tell him or her how to go about it. You can spice it up by blindfolding him or her, too. Sensory deprivation is a surefire way to add spice to any encounter, though as with any new thing, start slow. If you two enjoy toys, there are stores and even websites that cater to pretty much every whim, though as with anything, do your homework first. If it doesn't look reputable, stay away.

An exciting sex life can be spiced up immeasurably with the inclusion of BDSM. You don't have to go all out, living it 24/7. That's a choice for the truly committed. If you are interested only in the kink and fetish aspect of it, there is nothing wrong with that. Go at your own pace, and do things your own way, so long as you and your partner maintain an open, honest and loving relationship throughout. Once things go sour, it ceases to be enjoyable, and trust can erode if either party abuses their position or neglects the wishes of the other. In short, BDSM simply isn't for everyone, but for those who enjoy it, it can be a life altering experience.




Susan M is the owner of http://www.wealthybdsmdating.com where people can be free to explore their love of the BDSM lifestyle.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 上午8:51 0 意見
標籤： , , , ,

2012年1月5日 星期四

Music, Culture, and Reality


A psychoactive is defined as that which has a profound or significant affect on the mental processes. Although typically used in the context of drugs and substances, this concept is often extended to anything evoking a seemingly 'mystical experience.' What people describe as mystical experiences are indistinguishable, neurologically and empirically, from deep and poignant religious experiences. Moments of oneness and insight are typical in both cases. In "The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902)," William James describes mystical experiences as ineffable, noetic, passive (rather, a sense of loss of control), and fleeting. From the remote mystics of Sufism and Kabbalah, to modern day 'urban shamans,' psychonauts have sought methods other than imbibement to investigate the cosmos within. Through meditation, breath control, lucid dreaming, sensory deprivation, and a host of other methods, music has stood among cultures in this service probably since early man first danced around campfires.

Ethnomusicolgist Gilbert Rouget explores the connection between music and trance throughout history. Perhaps music is more than simply a mortal construct, rather having cosmic significance. Playing music (and truly appreciating music) forces an individual to focus on the present moment, which in turn is the cornerstone of meaningful experience. This emphasis on the present moment is the consummation of all other psychonautical resources (mediation, entheogens, etc.). Subscribers of the shamanic and mystical often view the passage of time as an illusion of the human mind, and regard a 'perpetual now' as true reality. Interestingly this is where science begins to align with the esoteric.

Quantum Mechanics argues that particles move backwards as well as forwards in time and appear in all possible places at once. String theory proposes that the physical world is composed of little, tiny strings of vibrating energy (It seems appropriate to allude to chordophones). Terrence McKenna, recounting a DMT (Dimethyltryptamine) induced experience, asserts that the constant dance of 'machine elves,' (entities occupying a parallel world) creates reality as we perceive it. Are the rhythms of music akin to the language of reality? Is music a method of staying in contact with the underlying 'Logos,' being the true virtue in which all things exist? Whether it be Spring's hymn of birds and bees or the elegant, geometrical dance of our physical world, music plays the universal tongue in a reality seemingly ripe with babbling discord.




Anthony Pace, a writer, philosopher, and web developer, blogs at [http://philosophy-explained.com]





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 凌晨1:44 0 意見
標籤： , ,

2011年12月12日 星期一

Spiritual Experience Through Drugs - Illusion Or Reality?


The origins of and spiritual practise are shrouded in mystery, belonging as they do to that period known as "prehistory" of which our factual knowledge is very limited. The roots of drug use also date back to that primordial era. Equally ancient and mysterious is the link between these two - the use of mind-altering substances as part of the search for truth.

Early accounts of the use of drugs in an attempt to induce spiritual visions or ecstatic trances are mostly connected with the practises collectively known as "Shamanism". The ancient Shaman used a variety of methods to achieve these altered states, including prolonged, repetitive, ritual dancing and/or drumming, sensory deprivation, fasting and the use of hallucinogens found in plants. These techniques were employed to either free the Shaman's

spirit from the body, allowing it to travel in the spiritual worlds, or to call down spiritual entities into the shaman. Shamanic practises of this kind are still to be found among indigenous and tribal peoples in Africa, Asia and South America. Echoes of these practises are found in many different religious cultures and in all parts of the world, with the longing for otherworldly experience driving individuals to explore all the techniques open to them as part of their quest - including the use of substances that fundamentally change the individual's perceptions and bring about altered states of consciousness.

In the late twentieth century, the discovery and popularisation of synthetic drugs which appeared to induce visionary or trance states led to a resurgence of interest in the spiritual nature of these experiences. The writer Aldous Huxley, a spiritual man with an interest in Eastern philosophies such as Vedanta, detailed his experiments with psychotropic substances in his book "The Doors of Perception". Huxley felt that the human mind in its ordinary state acted to limit our awareness of higher or cosmic reality, and that drugs could be used to reduce this limiting effect, opening the individual to a new and higher state of being. Huxley's book became a must-read among hippies and counter-culturalists in the sixties, as did works by Dr Timothy Leary and Robert Anton Wilson, both of whom saw drugs as an effective tool for opening people to higher spiritual realities within and around them. Later, in the nineteen nineties, the use of MDMA (ecstasy) as a recreational drug spread rapidly. Despite the powerful effects of the drug, and users reporting states in which they felt powerful emotions such as joy and unconditional love, the mystical elements of this experience were not trumpeted in the same way as with the LSD experiment of the sixties.

The fundamental question regarding these induced experiences of trance, vision and ecstasy is: are they real?

In comparing the effects of spiritual practise (prayer, meditation, devotional song, chanting etc.) with those of drugs, the key is to examine the effects on the individual not just at the time of the experience but in the days, months and years that follow. Spiritual practise is undertaken for its transformational power, expressed in the learning, change and personal growth of the individual. In different spiritual and religious traditions, this journey of transformation is seen in different ways. The Christian aspires towards salvation from all sin, the Buddhist is travelling towards enlightenment, the Yogi seeks first liberation from attachment then the realisation of his or her oneness with God.

Examine, if you will, two individuals. One has pursued for many years what Dr Timothy Leary called "the chemical route to enlightenment" while the other has engaged in the more challenging pursuits of spiritual discipline, perhaps including daily prayer and meditation and the renunciation of a worldly life. What differences do you see? Are their attainments of the same order? Have their experiences carried them forward on their spiritual journey,answered their inner questions, brought them inner peace and insight? I leave it to you to make your own observations and decide for yourself.

Let us close with the words of Sri Chinmoy, an Indian spiritual teacher who came to America in the sixties and began teaching spirituality when the hippy movement was in full swing:

"I have spoken hundreds of times on drugs. Here all I wish to say is that if you have a real coin and a counterfeit coin, they look similar; but when you examine them properly, you know that one is real and the other one is false. I have a few disciples who once upon a time were addicted to drugs. They had very high, lofty experiences according to their own understanding and realisation at that time. But now these same disciples have been meditating with me for a couple of years and by the Grace of the Supreme they have had spiritual experiences. They say that the difference between the two is like the difference between a counterfeit or false coin and a real coin."




Roger Chamberlain is an experienced runner representing Sri Chinmoy A.C. at races around the UK. He works in Run and Become, a well respected running shop in Cardiff, Wales. Roger also gives free meditation classes on behalf of the Cardiff Sri Chinmoy Centre.





This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

張貼者： 於 凌晨1:07 0 意見
標籤： , , , , ,
訂閱： 文章 (Atom)