Over time I have shifted from the traditional materialistic scientific world view to a more consciousness (phenomenology)-is-fundamental world view.
“I regard consciousness (phenomenology) as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness (phenomenology).” If so, then aren’t physicists ontologically positing an independent-of-consciousness (phenomenology) reality, defining it into existence?
Max Planck —The Observer, 25 Jan 1931
Throughout my youth I had experiences that could not be explained by conventional science or general understanding. For example I would “know” things way in advance and then they proved to be just like I “knew” it would be. As probably most children would do I shared these with my family but like so often they got brushed off as fantasy or worse. I don’t blame anyone for anything, let me make that clear. The consequence though was, I shut up and tried to suppress these notions of what might happen in the future.
An other weird even was when I came home from high school during lunch time, with a class mate (JF), and together we ate peacefully our sandwiches at the diner table in the living. Suddenly the hanging lamp fell from the ceiling and dangled from its electrical wire in front of us. The lamp was previously firmly connected to the concrete ceiling with a 5-6mm steel hook. The hook was still in the ceiling and not bent in any way. Of course I was blamed of pulling the lamp down…
Only much later in life I got interested in the why and how of these experiences. There have been so many but for a long time I ignored them and didn’t want to deal with them. Luckily I am active in the creative field so ideas (or premonitions) I could sometimes use in my work. Still, this didn’t and still does not satisfy me. I want to understand if there is a pattern, a logic or some underlying principle that can be used.
The flexible mind
So far I have noticed that premonitions come when I am busy doing nothing, like being in the shower or dreaming off while listening music. Bruce Lipton talks about the conscious and sub-conscious mind (here an example at The Higherside Chat podcast) where the conscious mind the creative mind and the sub-conscious mind is the habit mind. The habit mind, according the Bruce Lipton, is formed during the first 7 years of life when the child is in a hypnotic state. I have to check this but it does coincide with the story that floats around about what Jesuits supposedly have said:
Give me the child for his first seven years and I give you the man
Richard Dawkins — The God Delusion
My assumption is that when I am in a kind hypnotic state, the theta state ( 4-7 Hz ), my creative mind becomes more aware of the information created or received and transmitted by the sub-conscious mind. If this is the case, could I willfully create this state of mind and stimulate more reception of information? Could I push the envelope even further and be in that state and influence the matter around me? Wouldn’t this be akin to true magic (not the stage variation)? Interestingly Dean Radin evolved from Psi research to research in magic. See here the interview Gordon White had with Dean Radin.
To me praying and magic have so much in common that I wouldn’t really see them as being different from one another. They both seem to work for some people so what do they have in common? What is the underlying principle? First thing to note is that it seems you need to truly believe it works. This belief likely manifest itself at the sub-conscious level, the habitual mind. I think you need both positive feedback and repetition. This by the way is partially in contradiction to Bill Bengston’s research which suggests belief plays no role in the mind over matter issue in regards to healing mammals from cancer. Apples and pears but related.
But that aside, there are other aspects that I think plays a role: intensity and intent. For example Research done by the late Elisabeth Targ suggests that lots of focussed praying changes the outcome in our materialistic world. So a process inititated by the creative (conscious) mind and then taken over by the sub-conscious mind done often enough changes stuff. According to Thomas Campbell, a widely known consciousness (phenomenology) researcher, this is akin a principle he calls nudging. When there is enough variation possible in the next Δt (the Planck length ℓP ) a small amount of “energy” could nudge the outcome either this way or that way.
Imagine our reality consists of ℓP which we experience as time. The past has happened, and the future is to happen still. Each future step is experienced by us in ℓP like frames in a movie clip but then many more. Each next step has a probability attached to it. Often the likelyhood of something to happen is pretty certain, like dropping a full coffee mug from the table inevitably results in a mess on the floor. We cannot beat that. But when the outcome is less certain there seem to be room for influence by the mind (intention and intensity) or some other process (See Bill Bengston’s research).
What magic and prayer have in common is this focussed intention and intensity. The focus in both modalities seem to be aided by artifacts such as imagery, objects but also rituals and words. The cross (Christianity) and runes (some forms of magic) are the obvious examples to me. The intensity comes from repetition of the same rituals, words, enchantments, movements and the like. You repeat and repeat and repeat and keep the intention in mind. But you should not constantly think about the intention, that should subside and the sub-conscious process should take over. It has to become a habit.
When you do this with more people, with the same focus, then the intensity might or should add up. I do not know how this could ever be measured but this seems to be the case. Hence group praying or mass hysteria has a larger effect than individual people praying to their own saint or tripping over their own misconceptions. It can still do harm to one’s own life rest assured. So when you get more and more people to believe in a certain story you likely can turn this story into a form of reality.
This brings up a fascinating area of mass influencing by religions, mass media, advertising, political ideologies and what have you. I saw a pattern in those:
- repetion (intensity)
- same message (intention)
- But also:
- build a narative around the message
- create an easy to remember symbol
- build sub plots
- play in on primal emotions like fear and desires
- create an arcane language
Let me tear is apart for you and myself. I am thinking while I write you see. Number 1 and #2 we have dealt with already so now #3.
What do you want people to think or believe? What is a convincing story? What is a desirable story for you and your organisation?
Think of this as the cross (Jesus’ cross), the red cross, the Mc Donald arc , the Apple logo, the swastika but also particular color combinations and shapes. The job of a designer is to create a memorable and relevant shape. Sometimes the designer is aware of the wider context this shapes exsists in and what other meanings the color and shapes have.
Create a web of sub plots which all link back to the main story. You do this with good logic or fallacies and the audience should always get back to the main story and stay focused and repeat → intensity and intention
The main narrative, sub plots and symbol should reinforce or direct to a primal emotion. Think of this like seeing an advertisement. It plays with you not having something (fear) and enticing you to have it (desire). A narrative might be along the lines of:
if you don’t have this you are not popular anymore → fear
if you have this you are popular → desire
In Christianity and other monotheistic religions it would go like this:
you do as we tell you otherwise you end up in hell or worse → fear
you do what we say and you end up in heaven or some blissfull situation → desire
What I see often is that people create a language which is hard to comprehend. It is often for good reasons as one needs to be specific. But it also is used as a line of defence against those who question the narative and sub plots. The line of defence is like: you do not know our language so you cannot understand our logic and intentions. This is in most cases a fallacy and untrue. Logic and intention can be translated into most human languages. I see this in science, religion but also in soft-sciences like psychiatry and economics.
And the story continues…
Now what if I can use this to my own, personal, self empowering benefit? What if I can change my sub conscious beliefs by repetition, intention, narative and desire? How would I do that?