11/9/2007


Love should define the great Ultimate Reality more than anything. This sets humanity apart as unique in the animal world. This makes sense of existence. The amazing capability to experience and show love and how this supreme human value has transformed lives and human history in general. This is something that even the more secular-minded can hold to, sensing with a common human consciousness that this is a supreme value in life.
...It all speaks to something Unspeakable, Unknowable, Incomprehensible as the very ground of our being. In which we live, move and have our existence.
“All you need is love”- John Lennon.
Three profound mysteries confront us daily- reality exists (the universe), life exists, and consciousness exists. We have little idea what these mysteries are actually about. As scientists say, our familiarity with patterns and regularities fools us into thinking we really understand and can explain these. And we do explain a lot at a very superficial level. But at core they are all still profound mysteries. Yet all of us have first hand experience of all three. Faith is a form of human knowing or intuition or sensing. It is a response to or expression of fundamental impulses in consciousness. It is the hope and desire for completion, fulfillment of human potential, and ultimate liberation. It sees through nature to its real meaning, which is what Jesus did. It sees the core reality more clearly. Wendell Krossa


Even more profound, most profound of all truths, as noted by Karen Armstrong, is that ‘Yahweh is part of the human condition’. This transcends the mystery of all three great existences. And in comprehending something of this we do not violate reason or rationality. Again, as Armstrong says, reason is not denied but transcended.
Closer than our own breath or atoms. Where can we flee from this Presence?
(Wendell Krossa)

Bill Ferguson:

I too think there is but one spirit. I came to that conclusion when I tossed away the trinity. It’s the only thing that makes sense. There’s also very unique math properties about “1” that seem to work well for a “God”. But I like the way you put it. If I had to teach someone, I would use your explanation.

I’ve also come to the conclusion that the “body of Christ” as it were in Scripture, isn’t JUST some select group, its HUMANITY. “Many are weak and sick because they do not discern the body of Christ”. That kind of puts holes in the idea of going to a monastery to get close to God doesn’t it?

Bob Brinsmead: One of Paul’s finest expressions is, to called it, “the spirit of faith.” It is one of the vital aspects of the human spirit. The others are hope and love. They are all inspired by the human spirit, which, as I have said before, I find difficult to distinguish from what has been called “the Holy Spirit.” So listen to your human spirit and you will have “the spirit of faith.” Faith does not come by seeing. It comes by listening.
“Faith comes by hearing…”

Wendell Krossa:

Just to meander around this subject a bit more- watch how Michael Morwood engages ‘sight’ (knowing, perception, understanding) in Tomorrow’s Catholic and how this informs his faith. Faith does not operate in a vacuum. His reasoning is tied to material reality and things or facts in material reality and how this informs a person’s worldview. He even says in a related manner on page 19 that ‘theology is not done in a vacuum’. Try to separate out the reasoning from the faith here. From other elements of human knowing or perception. Michael informs his faith in all sorts of ways with all sorts of evidence or input. And in this he is expressive of many today who do the same.

Most people don’t sit Buddha-like and try to think of things unseen or invisible in an entirely disconnected way from any known reality. To empty the mind of material reality or the self and focus only on the unknown (the unseeable).

And anyway, the invisible is incomprehensible and unknowable. And Armstrong is right here that we don’t know such transcendent reality rationally (by observation, by seeing or measuring or quantifying- this is the mistake of the materialists to explain ultimate reality in natural terms). Reason is transcended though not abandoned for irrationality or make believe. Some reason and knowing still remains to inform faith (and if this makes one uncomfortable then call it what one prefers).

Another option emerging is to rethink the focus of faith to more of something in the here and now (a la Sheehan and others). Then what is this faith? Is this what Jesus advocated? Faith in the kingdom (God among and in you- in humanity)? What faculty is this then and what is its focus? The human thing? So many questions about these concepts and what do we mean when we state that faith focuses on the “evidence of things not seen”? What do we really mean when we say these things?

Or are we offering some new definition of faith with a new focus, new content?

What does this mean in relation to the old religious definitions?- trust in God or Jesus, belief in group doctrines or the Word of God (faith comes by hearing the word of God).

My basic point is that there is no operation of any faculty in a vacuum. So when we say faith is oriented to the invisible and transcendent what do we really mean?

Or is it shaped by our sense of what is humane which comes from our human consciousness and spirit? This inner intuition or sense or perception. And how much of this is informed by our culture and the various lines of insight in our particular culture? Things seen and knowable.

And I have clearly advocated for the wisdom of the ancients and the average person who got things right all along, whatever they called their human intuition- faith, knowing, insight, common sense, or whatever.

Faith is such an old term with so many meanings to so many people. And a few bible verses don’t really clear up much. I don’t know that Paul had the last word. I think Bob makes more sense when he elaborates on these things (taking Paul where he might not actually want to go). C’mon Bob.
-----------------------------------------

Wendell Krossa:
My point re Kay’s article on Richler had to do with one of the most important things anyone can contribute to public consciousness and the marketplace of ideas and that is hope. This is needed as much today as ever to counter the dreary darkness of contemporary apocalyptic (Bob’s comment that humanity faces a turning point to further advance or a drift back into another Dark Age). Julian Simon-like hope and affirmation of humanity and life is needed more than ever today, especially to protect human freedom which is threatened by such things as environmental fear-mongering.

I would also counter contemporary apocalyptic with an affirmation of meaning, purpose, and direction in life, as essential to hope. All the evidence points to this but then it’s a feedback loop thing isn’t it? Here I refer to something Julia said about Bob being sustained by his faith. Faith is almost forgotten in the transition away from religious ways of perceiving to the more naturalist bent of modern perception. But faith enables people to grasp goodness, love, generosity and so much more humaneness behind reality and life. It clears vision or perception to then see evidence of this everywhere. Just as Jesus saw through the apocalyptic darkness of his time to see an entirely different reality behind life and life experiences and events (for instance, that tower didn’t fall on them because of their sin or the grass being clothed by God and expression of divine care, generosity and love).

Faith opens such possibility- then it becomes so obvious that its not about accident, downturn, and other ‘peripheral’ things but its about something entirely different that dominates the main trends. The evidence is everywhere and Jesus certainly saw it. Faith then opens the way for human perception to experience the epitome of good reason and rationality. It, in fact, transcends reason (Armstrong) or, better, enables reason to reach transcendent new heights.

Consciousness book reviews:

Some reviews of the book Quantum Enigma by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner- first an editorial review (I have not read this but it looks interesting- has anyone here read it?)

Review
"In their lively and thought-provoking presentation, Mr. Rosenblum and Mr. Kuttner present several proposed alternatives to the Copenhagen interpertation, but all raise their own questions. Notable among them is the bizarre but increasingly popular 'many words' interpretation taht says that quantum mechanics correctly describes the simultaneous existence of many different worlds, which are continously being created and separating from each other."-- The Washington Times

"A remarkable and readable presentation of the basic mysteries of science, our universe, and human life. Critically important problems in our understanding are interestingly discussed with perception, depth, and careful objectivity."--Charles Townes, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics, inventor of the laser, and Templeton Prize recipient

"Employing the simplest, correct demonstration of the Great Quantum Dilemma that I have ever seen, Rosenblum and Kuttner starkly expose the hidden skeleton in the physicist's closet."--Nick Herbert, author of Quantum Reality

"This book is unique. I know of no other which so artfully tackles two of the greatest mysteries of modern science, quantum mechanics and consciousness. It has long been suspected that these mysteries are somehow related. The authors' treatment of this thorny and controversial issue is honest, wide-ranging and immensely readable. The book contains some of the clearest expositions I have ever seen of the strange and paradoxical nature of the quantum world. Quantum Enigma is a pleasure to read, and I am sure it is destined to become a classic."--George Greenstein, Professor of Astronomy, Amherst College, Co-author of The Quantum Challenge: Modern Research on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics

"The boundary of existence that modern physics finds itself butting against is consciousness. The cautious, sober approach of Quantum Enigma makes its astonishing conclusions all the more credible. This is an immensely important and exciting book."--Raymond Chester Russ, Editor, Journal of Mind and Behavior

Book Description
The most successful theory in all of science--and the basis of one third of our economy--says the strangest things about the world and about us. Can you believe that physical reality is created by our observation of it? Physicists were forced to this conclusion, the quantum enigma, by what they observed in their laboratories. Trying to understand the atom, physicists built quantum mechanics and found, to their embarrassment, that their theory intimately connects consciousness with the physical world. Quantum Enigma explores what that implies and why some founders of the theory became the foremost objectors to it. Schrodinger showed that it "absurdly" allowed a cat to be in a "superposition" simultaneously dead and alive. Einstein derided the theory's "spooky interactions." With Bell's Theorem, we now know Schrodinger's superpositions and Einstein's spooky interactions indeed exist. Authors Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner explain all of this in non-technical terms with help from some fanciful stories and bits about the theory's developers. They present the quantum mystery honestly, with an emphasis on what is and what is not speculation. Physics' encounter with consciousness is its skeleton in the closet. Because the authors open the closet and examine the skeleton, theirs is a controversial book. Quantum Enigma's description of the experimental quantum facts, and the quantum theory explaining them, is undisputed. Interpreting what it all means, however, is controversial. Every interpretation of quantum physics encounters consciousness. Rosenblum and Kuttner therefore turn to exploring consciousness itself--and encounter quantum physics. Free will and anthropic principles become crucial issues, and the connection of consciousness with the cosmos suggested by some leading quantum cosmologists is mind-blowing. Readers are brought to a boundary where the particular expertise of physicists is no longer a sure guide. They will find, instead, the facts and hints provided by quantum mechanics and the ability to speculate for themselves.

Absolute must-read, August 24, 2007 By
J. D. Nisson "jdn" (Northampton, MA) - See all my reviews

I just finished reading Quantum Enigma and it has left me stunned.

Although I am sure many folks would not agree, I think the topic of this book examines the most important questions facing us humans -- the fundamental nature of consciousness and "reality", and how the two interact. The authors explain how quantum theory clearly shows that microscopic particles behave in a way that does not "make sense". Not only can those particles exist in two places at once, but the theory shows that they only exist when observed by something or someone. And since our everyday macroscopic objects are theoretically made up of those tiny particles, what does that mean about the chair I am sitting on? Is it there only because I am here? As stated on page 156, "There is no way to interpret quantum theory without in some way addressing consciousness."

This is not a "pop-quantum" book like the Tao of Physics or The Dancing Wu Li Masters. Nor does it present nonsensical extrapolations of quantum theory to spiritual phenomena, as in the "What the Bleep..." movie. But it does explore realms where most physics text books do not go -- the juncture of physics and philosophy. It shines a bright light on physicists' "skeleton in the closet", the enigmatic meaning of quantum theory.

The book is written in a friendly and entertaining manner, without sacrificing depth or seriousness. I enjoyed the photos of the great minds of quantum theory - Bohr, Heisenberg, Einstein, etc - the guys who knew from the start that quantum theory required a different world view.

It may be true, in some sense, that nothing exists unless and until "observed"! How can that possibly be? The authors don't provide an answer, but the beauty of this book for me was the courageous and competent way in which it asks the questions. And they freely admit that "The more deeply you think about quantum mechanics, the more strange it seems." No kidding.

--Joel Nisson
Some customer reviews on Amazon:
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
A perspective shaking journey, August 13, 2007 By
G. Penilla "GTPen" (Los Angeles, CA USA) - See all my reviews


The concepts are simple but profound, mind creates matter. This book takes this idea and a few other mind bending, and mind blowing concepts that quantum physics has shown us about ourselves, and our universe and expands on them in a readable format. The astonishing realization for me is the apparent direct correlation between what quantum physics has told us about reality, and what mystics have been saying for thousands of years, especially the Buddha. This book is a must buy for any inquiring minds out there. It will change the way you look at yourself, and the world!!

Comment | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this) (Report this)
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
Excellent treatment of the subject, August 10, 2007 By
Ignatz97 (New Mexico) - See all my reviews


The authors do a great job of presenting the issue. Some of the basic quantum concepts seem a bit dumbed-down, but their focus on the subject of quantum physics vs. consciousness is precise and well-thought-out. Refreshingly free of all the wooly-headedness that plagues other discussions of this type ("The Holographic Universe" comes to mind as a particularly bad example), which hijack science, broadly and clumsily applied, to justify belief in everything from ESP to reincarnation. They stick to the science, and properly so. Quantum mechanics is already so weird, it doesn't need to be conflated into anything else.

Comment | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this) (Report this)
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
The Enigma's Enigma, August 5, 2007 By
Malcolm Fraser (Chicago, IL) - See all my reviews

A great and very entertaining read, which points to the issue that New Agers love and something the book addresses: How to avoid Silly Solipsism?

The human mind is a systems property of all the component parts. We know that what goes on in the mind-brain is a series of quantum events in the brain, seeThe Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force by Jeffrey Schwartz. (Read both books.)

It's good that the authors keep reinforcing just how shocking quantum theory is, in spite of driving one third of the economy. As the authors explain very clearly, in quantum theory, the photon doesn't have a +ve or -ve spin until we decide to measure it, thus collapsing the wavefunction. The term 'particle' and 'wavefunction of the particle' are synonymous, so collapsing the wavefunction solidifies its properties. More than that, it doesn't have the property of 'spin' until we decide to measure it. We are making up reality as we go along, with one qualification. Once you measure the spin, that's it, objective reality has been formed. I can't come along a split second later and 'create my reality'.

David Bohm resolved the issue of information being transmitted faster than the speed of light by saying that the photons, the measuring devices, and the observer were all part of the same holographic system, and that the information was everywhere, simultaneously. In any external example, you can picture yourself, the laboratory, the photons flying away, some measuring equipment and the observer as all there but somewhat distinct from each other. You can't do that with a quantum event in your own head, because observing must also be a series of quantum events.

When, as a result of all the quantum events, a picture or a thought arises in the mind, what collapses the wavefunction? Where or what is the observer who decides to collapse the wave function?

Benjamin Libet, also referenced in Quantum Enigma, made the problem even worse by showing that even when 'I' decide to observe the photon's spin, my neurology will gear up to do that half a second before I become conscious of my intention. Presumably that subconscious activity is also a series of quantum events. Would it even make sense to say that the subconscious does the collapsing? Not to John von Neumann it wouldn't.

If we can't find an internal 'collapser' on both counts, then what collapses the wavefunction when it comes to observing the spin properties of a photon? You can't say 'nothing' when the wavefunction obviously has collapsed. Is there a language problem in that 'collapse' presupposes 'collapser'?

If we were to suggest that any form of omnidimensional beingness, infinite informational field, divine being, does the collapsing 'for us', that's tantamount to saying that we are merely the smallest flickers of shadows: Not only is conscious individuality an illusion, but conscious choice (half a second later) is also illusory. That's hard to take - or is 'reality' quite that illusory?

The holism of the implicate/explicate order may be so deeply intertwined that it just doesn't makes sense to consider 'myself' as having any kind of independent, subjective existence distinct from not only the objective reality, but also from every process on all levels in all subjective and objective events.

Can we then resolve the quantum enigma by saying that there is continuous and spontaneous collapsing of the wavefunction, or as one would say in Buddhism, phenomena continuously arising from emptiness and returning to emptiness? No events, no things, only process?

In which case, you might also like to consider Blackfoot Physics: A Journey Into The Native American Universe because we might then need to reconsider our whole paradigm of science.

Blackmore's Book Reviews:
Its quite interesting to read all the contributors to Blackmore’s book and the way they approach consciousness. The materialists automatically limit themselves to reductionist answers- it must be explained only in terms of brain parts, the smallest physical units or material units or the activities between these bits and pieces. And yes, this is all a materialist can encompass or explain with. There can be no ‘mystery stuff’ and everything will eventually be explained naturally. This then shapes their conclusions on the larger metaphysical/philosophical issues. Interesting here is the blurring of any boundaries and refusal to maintain any separation of science from metaphysical speculation. The answers on the larger questions are given with great conviction and finality. It reminds me of Franklin Harold noting “how much wholesale returns of conjecture science extracts from its trifling investment of fact”.

Some materialists like Susan Greenfield castigate the more fundamentalist types, like Dennet, for being overly dogmatic and urge caution as we know so little yet.

Who was it that said that in discovering something about the bits and pieces and how they appear to work, we fool ourselves into thinking we actually know what its all about. The more we explore even material reality the weirder it gets. We find out we know less and less. Martin Rees again- “its embarrassing to admit that after 400 years of science we still don’t know what the universe is made of”.

Blackmore asks all her interviewees the same set of questions. She starts with the hard question- what is consciousness? Greenfield answers: “It’s a subjective phenomenon that we can’t really define properly…therefore its very hard to know how to even frame the question as to how a subjective inner state is associated with something physical?” She moves on to castigate the conviction and zeal against people who believe or have faith. She argues a true scientist must remain open to all ideas. Just because she can not see a point doesn’t mean it is wrong. This is a more moderated materialism amongst the other more fundamentalist types.

Richard Gregory: “How the hell does physics produce something which is so totally unphysical?” He then does some interesting material on the fact that consciousness is about living in the present moment- vividness. This in comparison to perceiving which is spread out in time. The present moment is tagged by consciousness. It gives this extraordinary sense of vividness in the present moment. And this is necessary to survival (is the light red or green?).

Christof Koch says, “Its possible that there are things that, as Chalmers has argued, are forever beyond us. At this point I have no idea…for the past 2300 years we have not made any progress on the philosophical aspects of consciousness”.

Most of these materialists go on to conclude, as Thomas Metzinger does, that “it is simply mindless, merciless self-organization” and the self and personhood are just illusions.

Other materialists make some interesting observations- Vilayanur Ramachandran says that animals don’t have consciousness. He argues that humans are a quantum leap above animal minds. Unique and special. But the rest don’t agree with him. Consciousness may go right down to insects and plants

News for Oct 2007

"God is spirit that pervades the whole universe, present everywhere. Life is only produced by life. God is Life. God is Love. God is consciousness." Bob Brinsmead
"God has disappeared by becoming incarnate in humanity and had thereby reduced all our obligations and goals into justice and charity." Dr Paul Sheehan

Wendell Krossa
The quite exceptional little book titled Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kutner, professors of physics at University of California, Santa Cruz. Other scientists have been lauding them for their exceptionally clear presentation of the basic features of quantum mechanics and what it very clearly points toward. The authors have maintained a good standard of credibility in refusing to countenance some of the wilder speculation out there- New Agey stuff from Big Sur. But they do acknowledge other speculative possibilities.

Most importantly, no matter how you cut it, every interpretation of quantum theory, the hardest of hard sciences, forces the encounter with consciousness. Consciousness is the fundamental reality behind all else. We have been saying this for a long time just as quantum mechanics has been saying it for decades.
you wrestle with all this stuff as you hear of it all over the place and now this book wraps it up so clearly. I don’t know. I think that, instead, these guys are just exceptionally clear in presenting their material. Kind of like Simon Singh in Big Bang.

And though one can see the basic issues more clearly from a book like this- it doesn’t lead to a clearer understanding of things, but as they say, to realize none of us really knows what is going on.

At one point they note that what physics has discovered does in one sense validate all the ancients have been saying. They make a disclaimer here while acknowledging this. Interesting. And they are good in repeatedly noting that any ordinary person knows as much as any physicist about where to take this.

Their strong point is to make certain things so clear- like waviness and what an atom is about (or better what this non real thing- this concept- appears to be about), probability, wave/particle duality, interference, the two slit experiments to prove these things, and all without math. Where a Penrose can snow you, this is for average people.

It is a very good read.