• One word "experiment" in my previous comment should be "brain".

    Divine, mystical, and spiritual can be "just in our brain" or also somewhere out there, depending on one's open-mindedness or priorities. In both cases it deserves attention and respect. Even that neuro-biochemical construct from Ed Koffenberger's comment is ignored by "rational" individuals most of the time. Using one brain hemisphere is like using one leg because it's a scientifically provable fact is that my right leg is less clumsy than the left one.

    Just a reminder that more discussion about scientific findings from brain research can be found here: We can accept a specific interpretation of "findings" only if it fits in our perception of what is or might be possible.

    SEPTEMBER 2013: Ariane Page — Isis Code: Revelations from Brain Research and Systems Science on the…
    Today we kick start the Depth Psychology Alliance book club look into Isis Code : Revelations from Brain Research and Systems Science on the Search f…
  • Not long ago I remember a study that appeared showing that people who were in the midst of their devotional practices (Western or Eastern) demonstrated similar brain patterns. A friend of mine took this to mean that religion in all its forms is nothing more than a neuro-biochemical construct. Just to continue the debate I responded, somewhat tongue in cheek, if God wanted to have an on-going relationship with humanity, doesn't it make sense that God would build in a telephone. I guess today I would say the Organizing Force (The Divine) built in an app for that. 

  • - Author of "My Big Toe" (MBT) trilogy Physicist Thomas Campbell explains what happens during the Double Slit Experiment and why it happens.

    Let this be my first contribution to this discussion topic. I'm actively thinking on it on a daily basis, but I still need to think what to write here.

    • If a person becomes overtly interested and attached to “quantum mysticism”, sooner or later there will be more new questions than provided possible explanations. There will be many new “what-ifs”, “how-tos”, and “now-whats”. I didn’t answer this week’s poll about neurology and its contribution to the official worldview. Some people claim that our lack of free will is a proven scientific fact, but what is the concept of free will? If I make my decisions first on the unconscious level and become “aware” of it later, this fact says nothing about free will. I neither need nor want to be aware of every brain cell and its (successful or failed) attempt to sneak its agenda into the surface because in that case I would experience something like an epileptic seizure or catatonia. OK, the ego isn’t in charge as much as we tend to think, but so what? If a scientist isolates an individual experiment during an experiment, it will be isolated (without anything resembling free will). If the same scientist paints a wall green, that wall will be green for awhile without any chance to spontaneously become yellow. In order to further develop the experiment proving that there isn’t any difference between our decision making process and scientist’s electrodes influencing the way we think and behave, the next step would be to challenge intuition and evolution by killing every individual in the world who can’t tell the difference. My opinion is that self-awareness = (something resembling) free will = (origin of) intuition = strange causal and temporal loops = life. But, if this really is the case, this equation is just the beginning of searching for answers and asking relevant questions.

This reply was deleted.