11/03/2006

WORLD VIEW-- 11

One Step Beyond

Earlier, I wrote about how it is difficult today to find agreement with others about all sorts of things. Indeed, that does seem to be a part of life today. Again, I reiterate that my entire discussion about world view is not intended to convince anyone to agree with me. I just hope it provides food for thought and encourages others to become more aware of the factors that influence their own behaviors and actions, and to grow in their ability to make free will choices based on both reason and love in their hearts.

Nevertheless, as a concluding chapter, I want to take note of a happy event that does take place in each of our lives--occasionally. That event is when we find another person who DOES agree with us. What fun! It is clearly a human trait to find joy in agreement. It doesn’t happen too often; so we do appreciate when it does. I want to include a couple examples of how this works.

When I was 18 years old, I was--even then--a serious thinker. Enrolled as a freshman at the University of Michigan, I took a course called “Great Books.” That course introduced me to the ideas and philosophy of Plato, the great Greek philosopher and teacher. Previous to this I had always felt much like an “outsider.” I knew no one who thought the kind of deep, philosophical, and (to even me) “weird” thoughts that I thought. But when I started to read Plato, I discovered that my thoughts were neither weird, nor were they just mine. I found most of my thoughts in Plato’s writings as well! What joy! I wasn’t alone in the world! That simple little experience lifted my soul and confidence to a considerable degree that carried me for years. I discovered “connections.“ I expect that many others find similar connections in various sources, philosophical or religious, or possibly even in self-help psychology.

Over the years I have found such connections in hundreds of books by hundreds of authors from the distant past as well as the present. This has continued to bring me great joy and encouragement. I intend to conclude this discussion with my most recent connection. I just completed reading a book by P.M.H. Atwater, a fascinating authority on death, near death, and the afterlife. I have read several of her works. This new one is called We Live Forever: The Real Truth About Death (A.R.E. Press, 2004). While I was reading this work, I was also working on my discussion of “world view.”

Here are some pertinent items I found in Atwater’s book. She said, “The real us is I AM; and what I AM everyone else is, for all of us are cells in the Greater Body, expressions of the One God. We are one with the One. Always and ever connected.” (39) She quotes from world scriptures that assure us that we are gods in the making: “I have said, You are gods; all of you are children of the most High” (Psalm 82:6); and “God becomes man in order that man might become God” (Bhagavad Gita).

Atwater expresses her belief system as follows. I find it is nearly identical with my belief system (or world view). “Oneness is the unity of all things within the reality of the One I call God. . . .Manyness is the diversity of ensoulment that God created . . . Littleness I consider to be you and I as personalities with an ego. I would also include dogs and cats, trees, boulders, and all created things, for each is an entity of purpose and potential.”
(So I could say that THIS is my current belief system, based on all previous experiences, studies, and insights.
I do like the way she says it.)

She summarizes:
“Oneness--unifying factor, the central source of the central vision; God.
Manyness--extensions from the central source charged with the outworking of the greater plan; souls.
Littleness--expressions of the greater plan; the myriad forms of entities that enable God to experience Itself as Itself through the process of individuation, of birth and death, beginnings and endings; individuals.”

Given that I taught Myths of the World for twenty years, and that the Hopi myths always intrigued me especially, I was also touched by Atwater’s comment about the Hopi. “In the Hopi language, the word family translates “to breathe together.” Humankind to the Hopi is a single unit with all people members of the same whole, the same oneness. Science essentially tells us the same thing: We come from a common ancestry, we are relations, we are one.” (This, too, is my personal spiritual belief.)

[By the way, “Hopi” means peace.”]

So I conclude (at least temporarily on this subject) by wishing everyone “peace.”

May God bless us all.

Namaste. (A Hindu expression that says: I honor the God in you and the God in me).

11-03-2006


WORLD VIEW - 10

How we learn and grow: Inner Seasons (a sonnet)

“Sonnet of the Inner Seasons”

The winds of autumn twist and tear the leaves
From trees, once green, now nipped by frost and cold.
The gusty blasts just toss them as they please
In heaps of soggy masses of burnt gold.
The trees then stand in naked, lone despair
Like stark and lonely hermits in the world.
It’s just the roots of inner strength, now bare,
That last till spring when life is next unfurled.
Just so, the winds of life do twist and tear
Our shreds of dignity and our disguise.
Life tumbles every man around and round.
It rips our Being bare--yet we grow wise,
Retreating into inner soul today
To gather strength to love another day.

Gayl (1985)

11-03-2006

WORLD VIEW - 9

Personality Factors

In one sense I feel I have returned to the topic of my first blog (Sept. 25) that discussed why we disagree with each other so often. We just can’t leave out the personality factor in our discussion of world view. Clearly, each individual born into physical life is a unique expression of life. Any parent can confirm that even within a few days of birth, a child starts to express a particular personality. Even the discipline of psychology, which once favored the “blank slate” approach to development, now acknowledges that certain innate qualities are apparent in each person.

Take the qualities of pessimism or optimism. Some people just seem to be born with a tendency to one or the other. Admittedly, others do develop those traits due to life experiences. Whatever the case, a negative or positive outlook or attitude toward life, the world, and even God, does affect one’s “world view.”
One could add multiple other factors that affect one’s attitudes, such as a tendency toward introversion or extroversion. The latter two traits often affect how a person applies or manifests his/her belief system. The extrovert finds it easier to reach out to others, whereas the introvert has to work hard to get the courage to do the same. Both, however, are fully capable, in their own ways, of applying a positive world view to their lives. (In general, for those who are curious, I am, I think, an optimistic introvert!)

Many people are confused about their “life purpose” or “divine mission” as it is sometimes called. They don’t have much self-confidence, and tend to believe that they are “unimportant” in the scheme of things. One major task of all spiritual mentors and teachers is to try to get the message across to each and all that every human being is important, each is a gift to the world, each has gifts and talents to share with others. The Bible itself has that wonderful parable about talents. We are not meant to hide or bury our “talents.” The problem for many people is that they don’t recognize their own talents, or they think they are too insignificant to share. Unfortunately in today’s society, the word “talent” has often been misinterpreted to mean some unusual skill in the arts or sports. It is important for spiritual mentors to help individuals see that kindness, generosity, or even a lovely smile is a talent to be shared with others.

There are, without doubt, reasons for each of us to be on Earth at this time.
It is also time for all of us to wake up to that fact.

11-02-2006

WORLD VIEW - 8

The Mysterious Subject of Consciousness

I didn’t intend originally to write a chapter about “consciousness,” primarily because of its complex difficulty as a subject. Indeed, it has been the subject of entire books by esoteric teachers, psychiatrists, psychologists, philosophers, and most recently, quantum physicists and neurophysiologists. (See list at the end of this section as well as “World View 6 - Recommended Readings). It is therefore far more than anyone could summarize in a brief discussion.

Nevertheless, I feel compelled to note a few points that relate to previous discussions, especially in reference to the “holographic universe.” If we peruse the many current studies referenced in the “recommended readings,” we shall find repeated studies of consciousness. That seems strange at first, but the far-reaching studies of these current scientists working at the very frontiers of science, all seem to move us toward the same conclusions, or at least speculative theories.

In The Field, Lynn McTaggart summarizes this point. She notes that theoretical biophysicist Fritz-Albert Popp drew the conclusion that “Consciousness was a global phenomenon that occurred everywhere in the body, and not simply in our brains. Consciousness, at its most basic, was coherent light.”

Then Edgar Mitchell, former Astronaut and founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, realized that a number of scientists--Puthoff, Popp, Beneviste, and Pribram--although working independently, had in effect developed “a unified theory of mind and matter.”

These “unified theory” studies have led to the hypothesis that “consciousness is likely to infuse all things in the cosmos, that it is just as fundamental as energy” (Laszlo, 2006). Whereas these scientists are seldom pressed to use the word “God,” the implication is there. Moreover, they suggest that this consciousness is expanding. Laszlo says, “The thesis [is] that the roots and potentials of the kind of consciousness I experience are inherent in every particle and every atom in the cosmos. It is the thesis that consciousness evolves: it takes on complex forms in complex systems.”

Now, if we can somewhat comprehend these statements and then recall the “nonlocality” theories of quantum physics, we now have at least a tentative explanation and confirmation of not only an omnipresent (non-local)God, but also an omniscient (all-knowing) God. In a commentary chapter in Laszlo’s book, Peter Russell, theoretical physicist and psychologist, notes, “If our own essence is divine, and the essence of consciousness is to be found in everything, everywhere, then everything is divine.” I agree with his additional comment that this understanding “raises my level of awe for the world in which I live.”

In the same book, Johannes Witteveen, a Dutch Professor of Economics and life-long student of universal Sufism, notes: “One of the most profound and fascinating developments in present day thinking [is] the reconciliation of science and spirituality.” He points out how the Sufi vision of creation comes close to the current understanding of quantum physics. “God is not a separate higher being but the all-pervading spirit that works in all elements, all atoms, plants, and beings of the cosmos, giving them energy, light, and direction.”

All of these new theories provide much for us to ponder. What would it mean to all humanity if ultimately we all came to realize our Oneness? In his introduction to The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World, Amit Goswani, Ph.D., proposes that “We can develop a science that embraces the religions of the world, working in concert with them to understand the whole human condition.” This possibility is, for me, highly inspiring. I envision the paradigm of the future being an integration of science and spirituality, wherein the two large disciplines are no longer antagonists, but rather loving companions walking the same idealistic path.

As McTaggart emphasizes, “Far from destroying God, science for the first time [is] proving His existence . . . . There need no longer be two truths, the truth of science and the truth of religion. There could be one unified vision of the world.”

Additional suggested resources:
Annie Besant. A Study in Consciousness. (Theosophical Publishing House, 1938). An esoteric, psychological, theosophical approach to the subject.

Richard Maurice Bucke, M.D. Cosmic Consciousness. (E. P. Dutton, 1901). A classic study of the evolution of the human mind. (One of my favorite all time books).

Julian Jaynes. The Origin of Consciousness in the Break-Down of the Bicameral Mind. (Houghton Mifflin, 1976). A revolutionary psychological discussion. Very different and another favorite of mine.

Rudolf Steiner. The Evolution of Consciousness. (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1979). Lectures from anthroposophist, Steiner--very deep and esoteric.

Ken Wilbur. The Spectrum of Consciousness. (Theosophical Publishing House, 1977). Philosopher Wilbur compares views of consciousness from Christianity, Hinduism, Gestalt therapy, and classic philosophy.

11/01/2006

WORLD VIEW - 7

Further Discussion and Implications

Before we move on to the implications of these new quantum theories, let’s look at one more. Karl Pribram, Stanford neophysiologist, working independently in the field of brain research, came to the same conclusions as physicist David Bohm: the holographic nature of reality. From his work Pribram believes “the brain is itself a hologram.” For example, “one of the most amazing things about the human thinking process is that every piece of information seems instantly cross-correlated with every other piece of information--another feature intrinsic to the hologram.” Constantly, one after another of the various research studies going on today seem to build up evidence of the Oneness of the Universe--”a universe in which individual brains are actually indivisible portions of the greater hologram and everything is infinitely interconnected.”

Surely some of the implications of all of this must start to register with us. And the concepts provide concrete models for our behavior, models that likewise reinforce all the significant and basic teachings of the major religions of the world. I wonder if people know, for example, that all the major religions of the world have the Golden Rule--to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Obviously, all great teachings provide guidance for how we should best behave. But consider the implications IF indeed each individual alive on Earth, each animal, each plant, each mineral, every single atom is a part of the “superhologram” of the Universe! Consider: if we are each an atom, a cell in the “body” of the All That Is--Divine Spirit--God--(whatever term you choose to use, even “Universe“ if you prefer a non-religious word), shouldn’t we be behaving on a much higher level than what we can observe in the world today?

Consider the human body itself. We could actually use it as a perfect model for proper behavior. Think about all the various cells in the body. We have brain cells, blood cells, skin cells, bone cells, muscle cells, lymph cells, and various other cells, all of which optimally communicate with each other instantaneously via electric impulses. When the body is in good health, that is, in balance and acting cooperatively, all the cells support each other, move quickly to correct imbalances (homeostasis), and fully cooperate to support the entire system.
We could say that each cell cooperates with unconditional love and support for every other cell. In the meantime, in any minute, hour, or day, millions of cells die and millions more are born and without difficulty, continue to work together supportively. Whenever the cells get “confused” or “uncooperative,” the body suffers from “dis-ease” and may or may not survive.

Is this a grand model for human behavior, or what? And isn’t it ironic, and tragic, that human beings act quite the opposite to each other in many ways. Instead of cooperating with each other and being supportive and communicative, and spreading unconditional love (as taught by Jesus, Buddha, and other great teachers), we see humans spreading hate, intolerance, competition, antagonism, and emphasizing differences instead of shared values and experiences. But if we only pay attention, the human body can demonstrate how to live life in loving, positive ways in order to honor “the God within.”

As we look back to the original discussion about “World View” we are reminded that any world view, whether it is this one that I relate to, or one quite different, that world view is always the basis for how we live. Where are we going? What is good, moral, ethical? What is our purpose for being? How can I know what is the best way to behave?

In other words, a world view is largely irrelevant if it doesn’t provide some means of guidance for getting along in the world. It doesn’t do us much good if it doesn’t guide us to honor the All That Is and ourselves as well. This thought leads directly to the great commandment taught by Jesus: “you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. [And] You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matt. 22: 37-39). Another version is: “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.” (John 15:12). For me these words are completely understandable when I realize that each individual life (whether human, animal, plant, mineral) is a cell in the super hologram we call God (or for scientists, the “holographic universe”). God is present in everything. We are present in God. We are meant to live in such a way as to respect and honor that.

To reiterate, a world view is always the framework beneath an individual’s way of living. What we see when we look around us is that a great majority of people either don’t know what is driving them to live the way they do, or they think they have a belief frame work that guides them, but so often we don’t see them living that belief in their daily life. In the current cliche, they don’t “walk their talk.”

That is one reason why I wanted to write out this discussion. It is absolutely NOT intended to convince anyone to believe what I believe, or to accept my world view as their framework. It is intended to open a discussion, to open some minds, so that others might self-examine their own world view, and to really do some soul-searching to see if they are indeed, living the life their world view inspires. This may or may not include religious beliefs. It may also surprise some readers to learn that so many serious seekers in many different areas of study and research are pondering the big questions that only religion dealt with in the immediate past.

11/01/2006

WORLD VIEW - 6

A Brief Respite - and Recommended Readings

As a teacher and eternal reader of books, I want to take a short break from our “heavy” discussions and note some significant sources for exploring some of the concepts and theories I have just introduced in previous “chapters.” This section is largely a recommended reading (or viewing) list of sources that have been useful or enlightening to me.

An organization that both supports and organizes explorations into the “frontiers of consciousness” is the Institute of Noetic Sciences, founded by former astronaut, Dr. Stephen Mitchell., Ph.D. IONS “explores the frontiers of consciousness to advance individual, social, and global transformation.” Their focus “includes emerging paradigms, extended human capacities, and integral health and healing.”


The film What the Bleep Do We Know!? is a trip in and of itself. A new “Quantum Edition” contains 3 CDs with multiple interviews with many of the world’s top physicists, engineers, biologists, and mystics.

A few of my favorite books on the subjects:

Norman Friedman, Bridging Science and Spirit: Common Elements in David Bohm’s Physics, The Perennial Philosophy and Seth (Living Lake Books, 1990, 1997).
Amit Goswami, Ph.D. The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness creates the material world, (Penguin Putnam, 1993).
Ervin Laszlo, Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos (Inner Traditions, 2006).
Lynne McTaggart. The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe (Harper Collins, 2002). Note: This is a personal favorite of mine.
McTaggart has reader groups all over the world.
Dean Radin. Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality (Pocket Books, 2006).
Fred Alan Wolf, Ph.D. Mind into Matter: A New Alchemy of Science and Spirit (Moment Point Press, 2001).

October 31, 2006

WORLD VIEW - 5

A Poetic Approach: The Macrocosmic Molecule

The organization of Life
Is so precise--
So beautiful,
So perfect the Plan:
The solar atom
Macrocosmic,
Is the home for man.

The Sun is the nucleus--
Protons positive,
Controlling the unit of One:
The planets, electrons--
Negative orbits,
Balancing the Sun.

The solar atom
Blends in the galaxy
Composite--
These macrocosmic molecules
Forming the element of
Being--
Universe.

Gayl (1969)

October 30, 2006

WORLD VIEW - 4

THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE

This discussion will be relatively “difficult.” Clearly, some will wonder how this could possibly relate to a “world view.” I can sympathize, and assure you that indeed, it is not necessarily related to anyone’s world view--except mine. What I am trying to do with these discussions is to point out the kind of factors that contribute to a person’s world view. By seeing what influences someone else, each person could expand the perspective for viewing his/her own views, and hopefully to better understand all contributing factors.

[Note: the following summary of information on the holographic qualities of the universe and relevant quotations come from “The Universe as a Hologram” by Michael Talbot, available at various websites on the Internet. See http://homepages.ihug.co.nz.]

In 1982 a French physicist, Alain Aspect and his team “discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn’t matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.” This relates to what quantum physicists call “non-locality.” This concept and other quantum physics theories were depicted recently in the film entitled What the Bleep Do We Know? This film was puzzling to many, but highly interesting to others to the extent that currently over 75 study groups have developed around the world to explore and discuss the concepts presented in that film. This concept of “non-locality” has possible significant spiritual implications. If we think of God as the “All That Is”--the conscious holographic universe-- then the religious idea of an omnipresent God makes complete sense.

Then University of London physicist David Bohm, along with other theories he developed, such as his “implicate order,” came to believe that the universe is “a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram.” Just what does that imply? I am unable to clearly explain how a hologram works, but most of us have experienced holograms, and there is one basic principle that is vital to our discussion. In general, a hologram is a three-dimensional image created by the use of laser beams. Anyone who has been to the Haunted House at Disney World has seen the holographic “see-through” images dancing like three-dimensional “ghosts.” That is fun, indeed. But the point is that if a holographic image is divided, each tiny snippet will always contain an intact version of the entire original image. In other words, “every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole.”

Now, stay with me on this. Next I need to use an analogy that keeps turning up in books by many different spiritual, and sometimes scientific writers. The analogy uses the human body and its cellular construction to makes its point. Let’s hypothesize that each human being, including the physical body and the soul are a “cell” in the body of “God.” Now we take the analogy in the opposite direction. What do we know about the cells in our body? Medical science seems to be telling us that DNA in each and every cell contains the entire “blueprint” for our body. In other words, our cellular structure acts much like the holographic image. Even the very smallest part contains the pattern for the whole. Now, if the cells contain the blueprint for the “whole,” what can we imagine if we consider each individual human being as a “cell” in the body of God? Once again, the spiritual implications are significant. Did not Jesus tell his disciples to seek the kingdom of God “within”? Hold this idea as you continue to read the following paragraphs.

Given the new theories from quantum physics that the Universe (GOD) is a hologram, then each part of the universe, down to its smallest part (sub-atomic particles) contains the “whole.” David Bohm argues, moreover, that “at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something.” To take the argument further, this means that “at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected.” We will come back to tying all these things together as we progress through our discussions. But meantime, try to just follow the gist of the main points here. Clearly, this all has metaphysical, spiritual implications. For example, if everything in the universe, down to the smallest particle (sub-atomic) is part of a holographic universe, we could theorize that the “superhologram” is the “matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe.” Now we are getting into theories of creation and God that are very different from what science has postulated in previous centuries, and a scientific way of stating something quite similar to the Bible's creation story.

All of the discoveries of quantum physics offer multiple potentialities that help me comprehend (to at least a small degree) the great mysteries of the universe. Many people are able to just accept these mysteries on faith. Admittedly, we all have to do that to some extent. Even the Dalai Lama, a very spiritually oriented individual, has written that we just have to accept that there are many things in the world that we can never understand.

Nevertheless, for me and for some other people, these new insights make significant connections for us that supplement our belief systems, our “faith,” in ways that confirm, expand, or support various teachings. Ultimately, one’s belief system is just the underlying framework that structures how we live our lives.
After all, the Bible also says, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Therefore, the ultimate goal is to live in such a way as to express one’s beliefs, or world view, in the most positive way possible. So our next goal is to make connections between all this “scientific” data and how that could affect how we live and how we treat others.

[My apology to readers if all or some of the above discussion is hard to follow or feels “incomplete.” It is important to remember that entire books have been written on the subjects. I am trying here to summarize them as simply as possible.]

Other references for this topic:
The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot (Harper Collins, 1991).
Holographic Paradigm by Ken Wilbur, Ph.D. (1982)

October 29, 2006

WORLD VIEW - 3

A Pair of Dimes (Paradigm)?

Seldom do I find a person who understands the word, “paradigm.” Actually, its usage has changed in recent years. Originally the term meant “a pattern or model, an examplar,” and that is what you will find in a dictionary. One of its original uses was in science to define the model for any particular experiment. Then in the second half of the 20th century, various scientists and social scientists began to use the term to refer to what we have been defining as “world view.” T.S. Kuhn (1970) defined a paradigm as: “an entire constellation of beliefs, values and techniques shared by the members of a given community.” In effect, it is a kind of “view of reality.” Social scientists in particular began to speak of “paradigm shifts.” To understand this, we need to look at such paradigms and how shifts have taken place in the past, and possibly may be taking place in the present time. [Information here comes from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on the internet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm].

Let’s take a very brief look at history and at some of the dominant paradigms at various times. A “dominant paradigm” means “the values, or system of thought in a society that are most standard and widely held at a given time.” Prior to the development of Christianity, the Western world was a kind of “mixed bag”. Since in those distant years, there was little communication, most people were illiterate, and opinions were largely scattered and more limited in scope than today. Some influences at the time, especially in the Mediterranean area, were Greek philosophy and then Roman power. Whoever was either in power or doing the teaching tended to influence how local people thought.

When the Christian Church developed and gained considerable power in Western Europe, the Church and its theology largely directed the thought and opinions of the people in the area. For most of those years the average person couldn’t read, and therefore was dependant on priests and scholars of the church who told them what to think about the Bible, God, and the world. Even most of the ruling heads of Europe were under the control and auspices of the Church. Therefore the paradigm at that time was centered on God and the teachings in the Bible as interpreted by the Roman Church. There were no other options, for any disagreement at the time brought the label of “heretic” and the threat of torture or death.

A paradigm shift involves “a new way of thinking about old problems.” (Marilyn Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, 1980). A shift, or transition in thinking about the world occurred around the time we now call the Renaissance. The word means “re-birth” and it was a re-birth of some of the older ideas from Greece and Rome. Plato and Aristotle’s philosophies became a part of the education of at least upper class students. The arts and architecture of earlier periods were examined, appreciated, and copied. New technology, such as the printing press, made it possible for greater numbers of people to learn to read.
The fact that many more people could read the Bible themselves contributed to the revolution called the Reformation, the time of Martin Luther. Protestantism challenged the former total power of the Catholic Church.

Ultimately in paradigm shifts, some blending or synthesis of earlier ideas takes place, and certainly various new perspectives about life, spirituality, government, evolve. At this very same time (1500-1600) the New World was discovered and explored. And we see the beginnings of modern science with Galileo, Copernicus, Isaac Newton, and Rene Descartes leading to new thoughts about the world and its reality. Somewhere around 1600 historians report the big shift to a scientific view, based on Newton’s description of the world as based on mechanical forces. This new paradigm, sometimes described as a “clockwork universe,” prevailed until the 20th century.

In other words, although most people still include a spiritual perspective within their world view, guided by whatever religious training they may have received, the predominant model of the world since 1600 has been largely “controlled” by the scientific community. People in general, especially in secular education, looked to science for the answers to how the world was created, and what we are expected to do within it. The mechanistic model is still apparent in many modern aspects of life, especially our medical model. For example, allopathic medicine, by definition, treats illnesses by focusing on symptoms. That is, the body is thought of as a machine. You go to the doctor to get “fixed,” much as you take your car to the auto repair shop.

Many writers today--social scientists, frontier edge scientists such as quantum physicists, and spiritual teachers--propose that we are in another transition period, moving toward another paradigm shift. One can easily observe this new trend in medicine with the growing interest in and support for what is called Integrative Medicine. Simple research will confirm that most major medical schools are now including integrative medical courses in their curriculum. Different in philosophy from allopathic medicine, integrative medicine views the patient holistically, as a combination of physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual being. Traditional medical schools fought this new idea for awhile, but many today, from Johns Hopkins to the University of Michigan to UCLA Medical schools and Duke University are encouraging the exploration of these new models (literally paradigms) of medicine. In other words, in medicine today we can see the “shift” towards some new perspectives, new opinions, new approaches to healing.

For the hard sciences, Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity “formed a new paradigm that superseded Newton’s physics.” Even more rapidly, the growing science of quantum physics is moving us into the new paradigm. Research and studies by Alain Aspect, David Bohm, and Karl Pribram, among many others, are discovering new aspects of reality that can drastically change many people’s world view. At least, it can affect that change when and if people learn and assimilate this new information. For me it has been highly significant and has clearly expanded my world view. We’ll get to that later. First we have to discuss “The Universe as a Hologram.”

October 28, 2006

WORLD VIEW - 2

HOW DOES ONE DEVELOP A WORLD VIEW?

Obviously, each person’s world view, conscious or unconscious, develops very slowly over a lifetime and has multiple influences. Let’s look at the influences as if we are examining a large onion. The outer rings of the onion will represent the big, general influences that are likely to be similar for all others born at the same time and place as the individual. As we go deeper into the center core of the onion, we will see the possible variables that make each of us unique.

Much of a person’s world view is somewhat accidental to the extent that portions of that world view depend on when and where one is born. Let’s look at some large generalities, analogous to the outer skin of an onion. We have all heard of the differences between the “Western world” and the “Eastern world”. The philosophies of the two demonstrate notable differences. But even such a division is variable and open to change over the centuries. At one time the Western world referred largely to Western Europe. But after the discovery and development of the Western Hemisphere, the “Western world” grew to include all of North America and South America, and then Australia and New Zealand. It is important to remember the paradox that change is constant!

Even within the “Western world”--a world highly influenced by the Judaic-Christian religions--one finds shades of differences and variables from country to country, often patriotic in nature, sometimes geographic, sometimes historical. The general “world view” of a German is not exactly that of a Frenchman or a Brit or an Italian. The American “world view” will differ from that of a European, as will that of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil. Besides a commonality of religious traditions, the factor of attitudes toward government shades the views in each of these areas of the world.

Therefore it is obvious that any individual’s worldview is shaped by the century or even decade in which he is born, the culture of the country or even the part of the country in which he is born [consider the different attitudes in New England, the Midwest, Deep South, and Far West of the U.S.], and certainly his family upbringing.

A person’s view of the world begins with the nuclear family. Does the child feel loved and safe? Or threatened and rejected? Is the child taught, or indoctrinated in a specific belief system? Or is he encouraged to think independently? In the past, even the immediate past, a family’s values were fairly easily transferred to the child. Currently, however, it isn’t so simple. Children are exposed to multiple values and mores (some clearly not beneficial) via television, video games, computers, peers, and general pop culture. Still, “whoever most controls a child’s early environment will likely be most influential in contributing to the development of the child’s worldview.” Some families, especially those with strong, fundamental belief systems, want the child to keep those values and worldviews for their entire lifetime. That is not easy to accomplish these days.

The fact remains, however, that the adult’s worldview may, but often does not, remain consistent. As one matures, even more factors influence one’s worldview. The further one proceeds with education, the greater his exposure to new ways of thinking. Travel exposes one to new experiences and different cultures. Even moving to another part of the country brings in subtle new attitudes toward life and the world. Clearly, personal life experiences often contribute great alterations of one’s outlook on life. This can come from economic situations, new relationships, parenthood, tragic losses, illnesses and other personal situations, or even life-time learning. All such factors contribute to a person’s perspective about the world and humanity’s place in it. All of these factors have certainly contributed to my world view.

And as for remaining consistent, I am always reminded of a quotation originating from famed American author, the Transcendental philosopher, Ralph Waldo Emerson: “A foolish consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.” Clearly, Emerson believes that as we learn and grow, we are expected to evolve in various ways.

Next, we shall examine a fairly recent term for a scientific view of the world, a term that has expanded in meaning and connotation to include “world view.”