Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
I was researching QM literature at amazon. Some results:
"Wilson managed to reverse every mental polarity in me, as if I had been pulled through infinity. I was astonished and delighted." -- Philip K. Dick, author of Blade Runner
"Readers with open minds will like his books." -- Psychological Perspectives
"What great physicist hides behind the mask of Wilson?" -- New Scientist
"Wilson is a Quantum leap!" --Israel Regardie
Throughout human history, thoughts, values and behaviors have been colored by language and the prevailing view of the universe. With the advent of Quantum Mechanics, relativity, non-Euclidean geometries, non-Aristotelian logic and General Semantics, the scientific view of the world has changed dramatically from just a few decades ago. Nonetheless, human thinking is still deeply rooted in the cosmology of the middle ages. Quantum Psychology is the book to change your way of perceiving yourself--and the universe for the 21st Century. Some say it's materialistic, others call it scientific and still others insist it's mystical. It is all of these--and none.
Review:
wow, this is one hell of a book. If you are familiar with Robert Anton Wilson, and have not read this book yet, you will love it. Robots, I mean humans, are programmed by our language that we use, our beliefs, and models of the universe, thus limiting us in understanding life and each other. We often tend to categorize or file everything, everyone, and every situation into certain prejudices. Aristotelian logic puts everything into yes/no, this or that, good/evil, one or the other. Wilson talks about 'maybe logic', as well as general semantics (Alfred Korzybski), dismantles hard 'science', and links quantum theory with our neurological brain patterns. This book, along with the exercises may help you break free of most conditioning, and expand to your mind to infinite possibilities of interactive perception.
Tags:
Views: 153
I found a website with some quantum- and Integral-related resources: Integral Science.
Here is one of the essays: The Physics of Peace: Quantum Nonlocality and Emptiness.
I just started reading Balder's linked article but this struck me:
"It is a standard tenet within the Middle Way to say that emptiness itself is empty,
without independent essence. I have not seen it said anywhere, but this must imply that
the Middle Way’s relationship to other traditions defines it at the deepest level. In other
words, emptiness implies that the Middle Way is defined by how it relates to other
worldviews."
Emptiness is not an "in itself" or a causal realm above or apart from any other thing or non-thing, for it too is relational to other views. I.e., it too is a perspective that can only be defined in relation to other perspectives. Certainly is can be argued it might be a better or more comprehensive or inclusive perspective than others, but it is not an absolute perspective.
Indeed. I was struck by that passage as well.
theurj said:
I just started reading Balder's linked article but this struck me:
"It is a standard tenet within the Middle Way to say that emptiness itself is empty,
without independent essence. I have not seen it said anywhere, but this must imply that
the Middle Way’s relationship to other traditions defines it at the deepest level. In other
words, emptiness implies that the Middle Way is defined by how it relates to other
worldviews."Emptiness is not an "in itself" or a causal realm above or apart from any other thing or non-thing, for it too is relational to other views. I.e., it too is a perspective that can only be defined in relation to other perspectives. Certainly is can be argued it might be a better or more comprehensive or inclusive perspective than others, but it is not an absolute perspective.
From chapter 13 of RAW's above book, chapter heading "E and E-prime":
"The case for using E-prime rests on the simple proposition that 'isness' sets the brain into a medieval, Aristotelian framework.... The weakness of Aristotelian 'isness' or 'whatness' statements lies in their assumption on indwelling 'thingness'....in simpler words, the Aristotelian universe assumes an assembly of 'things' with 'essences' or 'spooks' inside them, where the modern scientific (or existentialist) universe assumes a network of structural relationships" (98 - 101).
Theurj,
"I've been a RAW fan since the beginning and with Quantum Psychology he is at his finest."
Wait a minute, he is at his finest? Surely you mean "I consider Quantum Psychology RAW's finest work"? :P
"It is like a TSK book ..."
What?! It is like a TSK book? You must mean "it seems like a TSK book to me"?
Just kidding. I can't normally be bothered to write using General Semantics on forums, either.
And to anyone else, if you havn't read the book, this post probably won't make any sense to you.
At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members. We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join. In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.
© 2024 Created by Balder. Powered by