welcome to the site! Read the description to the left for details regarding the theory behind this site. Some may know this section as an "Abstract"
The History of Energy
the beginning is the end
Under this section is a paper written for an Honours Psychology course, the History of Psychology. The task was to trace a topic from contemperary Psychology back through various historical stages to see how that topic has grown over the course of time. The topic I chose was energy, or Energy Psychology. Enjoy research from Feinstein (most recent) all the way back to Pythagoras.
The Future of Energy
the end is the beginning. This section includes all the previous homepage fails ;) enjoy!
This is the major veiwpoint taken on this site in regard to these topics, but since the completion of my Masters degree in Gender Studies, I've been trying to go back and make it more inclusive. This link includes a proposed field theory for Psychology because the two major branches of Psychology (quantitative and qualitative) find it hard to see eye to eye. This (and the next) section is for members only.
This section proposes a Grand Unified Field theory or "theory of everything" for Physics, backed up by a mathematical equation.
This section unites all sections together to unite the branches of Science and Religion. Many different perspectives are taken and these two seemingly opposing forces are united through many different angles.
This section looks at the conflicts or cycles between New Age free thought and Orthodox dogmaticism. The feud between these two opposing forces revealed the truth regarding the story of Jesus, what he really taught and to whom he truly gave the rites to teach his faith. This section explores why the movie The Last Temptation of Christ was banned in other countries, looks at the Da Vinci Code and presents a controversial paper/theory showing the hidden meaning of world religious symbols.
This section begins with a confusing paper about taking back the spirit. If the point can be penetrated, it tells an interesting story about Modernity and the Age of Reason, with a twist by providing evidence that emotion could be considered superior to reason. It also complicates Carteasian mind/body distinctions by adding spirit back into the equation. Have fun following that one lol. I can't even follow it ;) There are other papers about explaining Mystical experiences and others comparing Western and Eastern styles of consciousness. My favourite is the book review of Kabbalah. I like how this site allows me to go back and fix/reword old papers/ideas. This section really details what it is like to have a theory in the making and shows how ideas develop over time. One day my ideas/theory will be comprehensive to others outside my wacky brain :)
This section includes research done on the importance of emotional charge on ESP communication. It proposes that it is emotion communication that makes telepathy successful. The second paper in this section addresses dreams and dream interpretation. Two Dream interpretation methods (Freud's and Jung's) were analyzed to determine which method produced the most accurate results. The third paper presents research on Understanding Altered States of Conciousness and the last paper in this section is about Western Consciousness and how we are very individualized and perhaps out of balance due to us being lost in the Grand Illusion (Maya). The next paper looks at The Implication of Eastern Concepts on Western Ideals, to propose a potential balance between the two world views.
This section includes a paper about the subject-object dichotomy in Philosophy
This section begins with a work that is a detailed analysis of the screenplay/poem found in the Art section of this site. This paper looks at the research behind the play that inspired its manifestation (or why I wrote the play). It is hard to avoid the Book of Revelations when the topic of the Apocalypse comes up, so the next paper in this section is a comparison of the similarities and differences of the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelations. Many similarities were found and the research leads one to beleive that we are in the dawning of the Age when we will see great changes in the world as we know it today.
This section includes papers on 3 pathways to happiness (physical, mental, emotional), followed by a paper on how to end prejudice, a paper on the polarization of the sexes is next (as it is hypothesized by this site that the true or pure unification of All That is in the Universe is solved by the reunification of the energy of the sexes ;). Finally, this section ends with an empirical thesis exploring the equal validation or rational and emotional styles.
This section contains a play or screenplay called the Grand Drama that is written entirely out of prose (the owner and creator of this website has personally written everything that appears on it). This work of art reveals a hidden message, one that may unlock the key to the mysteries of the universe! This page also includes a shortened poem of the Grand Drama and provides a link to a song that is about Plato's Analogy of the Cave (members only).
this is a collection of my poetry - enjoy!
This is a collection of my songs - enjoy! =)
This is my photo collection
Key to the Legend
Red = Philosophy
Blue = Physics
Yellow = mathematics
green = hard sciences
grey = psychology
the parts under construction are labeled as such or blanketed by <<< ____ >>> indicating personal notes to self to improve the site, or the layout of the information presented.
Part 1: Through Number
In this paper I will attempt the seemingly impossible: I will be uniting Science and Religion/Spirituality. I include the term Spirituality alongside Religion and not subsumed within the umbrella of Religion because they are different concepts yet are similar in the way that they believe in a higher power of some sort; whether it be the Earth as in the Gia theory, or a personal, knowable God as in Monotheist beliefs. To provide a brief operational definition of religion and spirituality, both attempt to unite the inner world with the outer world but differ in the sense that religion is a collective knowing and spirituality is like a mystical or individual knowing of the higher power. A spiritual higher power can be a personal God, or an impersonal one like an energy force.Uniting the inner world with the outer world, however, is where Religion and Spirituality bump heads with Science. Scientific thinking places ontological superiority over the outer world and behaviours because these things are observable and thus lend themselves more easily to scientific methodology. Science cannot truly falsify the fact that people experience things like love and spiritual ecstasy, but it is common for science to deny or brush off these things as pseudo-science or not worthy to entertain because they do not lend themselves nicely to testable hypotheses. For example: In 1873, in a letter to Dutch writer Nicolaas Dirk Doedes, Darwin wrote:
(as cited by Kuruvilla, 2017)
The origins of science come from the field called natural philosophy. The definition of natural philosophy is “The study of nature and the physical universe, especially before the advent of modern science” (The Free Dictionary).
According to these authors, there was strong opposition to the rise of atheism in various disciplines, which in turn fueled the mechanistic natural philosophy movement. These camps became polarized with mechanistic natural philosophy on one side and Aristotelianism or traditional natural philosophy on the other. Camp mechanistic natural philosophy included Descartes and Newton whose theories and work was attacked by Leibniz and others mostly on religious grounds alone. The traditional natural philosophy felt thatNewton had endowed absolute space with the properties of God, and that a God who had to interfere with His (sic) creation had created an imperfect world, which implied that Newton’s God was Himself (sic) imperfect. (Koetsier & Bergmans, 2005, p. 463)
Other mathematicians and scientists that resisted the mechanistic or atheist movement include Sir Francis Bacon who stated in his essay on atheism that:
Likewise, despite being convicted of heresy by the Roman Catholic Church the astronomer and scientist Galileo Galilei did not believe that
To simplify worldview to two major types, Einstein would therefore not be considered a member of the mechanistic version of natural philosophy because mechanistic worldviews see the world or universe as a machine, that can be reduced to its “component parts” (Koltko-Rivera, 2004, p. 9). Einstein said that “God does not play dice with the universe” (as cited in Nelson, 2017), indicating that God does have some control over Creation. Einstein would therefore, more likely support the worldview of Organicism which sees the world or universe as a complex living organism (Koltko-Rivera, 2004).
More recently in the 2014’s edition of Scientific American, Max Tegmark stated that
Moving on to Pythagoras’ rule number one. ‘All things are numbers.’ Einstein proved that all things are numbers with his formula E= mc^2. All things CAN be described by a numerical designation. For example, one of the stories in the Oliver Sacks book The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat was about twin savants who had “prodigious powers of visualisation” (Sacks, 1998, p. 201) in which they could look at a chair and say hello number 111. They could somehow see properties of things as qualities and relations; like a felt reality. Again, if everything in nature has a numerical designation, and if God permeates nature, there might be something to sacred geometry or sacred arithmetic or sacred number that can approach the realm of God.Many have tried to find a number or calculate the number of God and if you google “is God a number” you will get all sorts of hits. One of those hits is one of my favourite movies simply called the symbol for pi. In the movie they talked about a number with 216 digits, that when converted into the Hebrew letters of the alphabet and intoned was the true name of God (Aronofsky & Aronofsky, 1998).
"The tetragrammaton, which is the sum total of the different permutations of the letters
YHVH appears in the Jewish Bible 6,823 times. This is a surprisingly large number of references compared to other titles. For example, the term or “word God appears 2,605 times, Almighty (48), Lord (40), Maker (25), Creator (7), Father (7), Ancient of Days (3) and Grand Instructor (2).” (Creative Commons)The Hebrew language is a remarkable language because each letter is not only a letter, but also a number and a musical note. Focusing on the numbers for the purposes of this paper, Kabbalah, is the mystical sect of Judaism, involves a mystical numerology system based on the numerical form of the Hebrew letters. When the name of God, YHVH is added up, it equals 26 (Y = 10, H = 5/V = 6, H = 5).
Going back to the movie pi, the lead character who is a famous mathematician meets up with a Jewish Kabbalist and they have a very interesting conversation (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFmWhwyA0NU ).
In this movie, the lead character whose name is Cohen or Cohen has four rules 1) Mathematics is the language of nature, 2) everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers, 3) if you graph the numbers of any system patterns emerge and 4) there are patterns everywhere in nature (Aronofsky & Aronofsky, 1998). Sound familiar? Rule number one according to the Pythagorean cult is
"1a) All things are numbers.
Mathematics is the basis for everything, 1c) The physical world can be
understood through mathematics" (Open Math Reference).
The movie Pi turns out to be very relevant because the lead character slowly goes insane throughout the film by trying to figure out a pattern within the stock market. His best friend in the movie, who suffered from strokes due to his mathematical quests was a man who searched 25 years for a pattern in pi. They both came across a 216-digit number that represented some sort of pattern within chaos.
The consequences of pain, paranoia and insanity in mathematicians and philosophers analyzing the concept of infinity is not at all uncommon (Aczel, 2000). I am assuming the movie Pi is in part based on a real mathematician Paul Cohen from Stanford University in the 1960’s who took and further developed Gödel’s Proof or continuum theory of 1940. Gödel also went insane from his obsession with infinity, and from developing Georg Cantor’s infinite set theory from 1878. Cantor was eventually hospitalized with mental illness form his obsession with infinity. <<For details regarding how and why, read the book The Mystery of the Aleph: Mathematics, Kabbalah and the Search for Infinity by Amir Aczel.>>Before Cantor, Kabbalists had developed a mystical practice of Judaism, founded on the Zohar, which is a collection of writings, heavy in allegory, based on ancient Jewish secret interpretations of the Torah. Each letter in the Hebrew name of God represents a realm or world and the mysterious geometrical shape, called the Tree of Life consists of 10 Sefirot or “emanations.” I remember the year we discussed Gnosticism in the Philosophical Society, David found the idea of emanation very interesting because it is different from a creation.
Both Kabbalists and the Pythagoreans revered the number 10 as sacred. Part of rule number one is that geometry is the most sacred form of mathematics. The Tree of Life is considered a geometric shape (Aczel, 2000). Both Pythagoras and Kabbalah also use a tetractys.
"The Greek word signifies, literally, the number four, but it has been particularly applied to a symbol of the Pythagoreans, which is composed of ten dots arranged in a triangular form of four rows. This figure was in itself, as a whole, emblematic of the tetragrammaton, or sacred name of four letters… the one point was a symbol of the Active Principle or Creator, the two points of the Passive Principle or Matter, the three of the world proceeding from their union, and the four of the liberal arts and sciences, which may be said to complete and perfect that world…this arrangement of the ten points in a triangular form was called the tetractys or number four, because each of the sides of the triangle consisted of four points, and the whole number of ten was made up by the summation of the first four figures, 1 + 2 + 3 +4= 10” (Masonic Dictionary).I mentioned earlier that the number 10 was sacred to both Pythagoreans and Kabbalists, and discussed how when added up YHVH equals 26, but when the permutations of the name are added up in the tetragrammaton, the name of God equals 72.
Going back to the concept of infinity, the “Kabbalist definition of God is infinite and cannot be described or comprehended… [i]n Kabbalah there is a concept of the Ain Sof which is above or surrounds the Tree of Life.
Ain Sof is far beyond what a human mind can hope to glimpse (Aczel, 2000, p. 34-35).
According to Drob (2001),
"Kabbalist¹s God is both perfectly simple and infinitely complex, nothing and everything,
hidden and revealed, reality and illusion, creator of man and created by man, As Ein-Sof
evolves it is progressively revealed as "nothing whatsoever" (Ayin), the Infinite Will
(Ratzon), Thought and Wisdom, the embodiment of all value and significance (the Sefirot), the wedding of male and female, and ultimately the union of all contradictions." (p. 34-35)
Therefore, it may not be surprising that mathematicians went mad trying to quantify infinity. But here we see again the interaction and union of opposites. Here I also cannot see a clear distinction between mathematics or number and religion or spirituality. I am not sure where the lines of a mathematician’s journeys end and the lines of a mystical spiritual quest begin.
In Kabbalah, God is unified oneness, but is depicted as having two major parts, the upper world and the lower world, that of heaven and earth. The Sefirot are the finite and understandable parts of the infinite whole of God. This is more in line with my belief system. I do not stop at pantheism and believe that God more than just permeates or makes up the visible world. I believe that the sum of the parts of the visible universe do not equal the whole and God is above and beyond the universe, not just permeating it. So, the Tree of Life and its Sefirot are the visible parts of God or the visible universe and the circles above representing Ain and Ain Sof are above and beyond, yet all one. From this research I can conclude that if God is a number, then God is Infinity. But, looking into Gödel’s research on infinite set theory and continuum hypothesis, infinity, is an imaginary number and is therefore not considered a real number. So, my quest for God as a real number continues. The final section of my presentation will consider whether or not God or the universe can be described as one complex equation rather than just one number.
Bringing it all back to Pythagoras again, in saying that God is number, “by number they meant whole numbers and their ratios” (Aczel, 2000, p. 19). They did not mean irrational numbers. SLIDE Pythagoras believed that numbers represented God in pattern, symmetry and infinity. When his school discovered irrational numbers, it was a threat to their religious beliefs about mathematics because how could God not be perfect and symmetrical. Irrational numbers include numbers with decimals having no intelligible pattern (Aczel, 200, p. 18). For example,
The Mandelbrot set is a particular set of complex numbers that has a highly convoluted fractal boundary when plotted.” (freeDictionary.com) Discovered by Benoi Mandelbrot and first drawn in 1978, The Mandelbrot set is the ultimate example of Pythagoras' understanding of rational numbers and infinite pattern, but the pattern works on the irrational configuration of the Golden Ratio. The equation Z=z^2 +c consists of two Golden Spirals, one representing capital Z and another representing z^2 plus c. The Golden Spirals move out in opposite directions. When the formula is activated, it moves into itself without pixelating or dissipating, to what appears to be infinity, however, if numbers plugged into the equation (iteration) are over 2, then they will be outside the Mandelbrot set line. Therefore, irrational numbers such as pi and e lie outside of the beautiful fractal equation and are NOT a part of the perfect symmetry that is the Mandelbrot set. Making Pythagoras’ idea that God is symmetry plausible.
I am absolutely in love with the Mandelbrot set and God is love, so therefore perhaps we can glimpse a bit of God in this equation. If any number or mathematical equation can come close to describing the universe, it is this one. Not only does it run infinitely, free from entropy, but it produces music and colour and pattern beyond imagination. From watching these videos and learning from this research it is possible to say that a Mathematician’s understanding of the infinite and Kabbalistic interpretations of God are one in the same; thus, finding a way for science and religion/spirituality to unite. If we entertain the idea that God could be described by number, then I propose the Mandelbrot set which is an infinitely beautiful, symmetrical equation, to be the closest thing humans can get to understanding the universe and the relationship between God and Creation. In conclusion, science, math, religion, and spirituality have the potential for beauty.
Aczel, A. D. (2000). The Mystery of the Aleph: Mathematics, the Kabbalah, and the Search for
Infinity. New York: Washington Square Press.
Aronofsky, D. & Aronofsky, D. (1998). Pi. [Motion Picutre]. New York: Protozoa Pictures
Creative Commons. (2011). YHVH: The tetragrammaton. Retrieved from
Drob, S. L. (2001). The Lurianic kabbalah: Ein Sof. Retrieved from
Einstein, A. (1956). Out of my Later Years. New York: Random House.
Husserl, E. (1970). The Origins of Geometry. Paris, France: Northwestern University Press.
Irrational Numbers. In Your Dictionary. Retrieved from
Koetsier, T. & Bergmans, L. (2005). Mathematics and the divine: A historical study. Amsterdam,
Koltko-Rivera, M. E. (2004). The psychology of Worldviews. Review of General Psychology,
Kuruvilla, C. (2017). 12 famous scientists sn the possibility of God. The Huffington Post.
Mandelbrot Set. In freeDictionary. Retrieved from
Manuel, F. E. (1974). The religion of Isaac Newton. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Tetractys. In Masonic Dictionary. Retrieved from
Math Open Reference. (2011). Pythagoras. Retrieved from
Nelson, R. H. (2017). Existence of God: The rational arguments from mathematics to human
Consciousness. Retrieved from
On Truth & Reality. (n.d). Albert Einstein: God, religion & theology explaining Einstein's
understanding of God as the universe/reality. Retrieved from
Sacks, O. (1998). The man who mistook his wife for a hat. New York: Touchstone.
Tegmark, M. (2014). Our mathematical universe: My quest for the ultimate nature of reality.
Uniting Science and Religion Method 2: Energy
It must be understood, that one side or force is not better than another. The outer world is not more important than the inner world, and using rational capacities is not better than using emotional ones. Each side must come together in a balance before a Unified Field can be found (we must balance the talents of both sides). Evidence that life rests in a balance and one side is not better than another, can be seen when one of these sides, (say, science or religion), gets out of hand and crosses the line, the other comes in just in time, to bring nature back into balance. This is where a compromise must be reached in order to have rest (because life rests in a balance, without it you have stress or tension). Throughout this whole site there has been a dilemma between"two sides" that will now represent Force 1 and Force 2, while Force 3 would be the compromise or solution to their dilemma. The idea of opposing forces has remained a constant throughout this site, but the examples or definitions of each Force changes depending on the topic of discussion. A diagram of what the debates or research discussed on this site is displayed in Figure 1.
Figure 1:Diagram showing how the two opposing forces discussed on this site will interact. Different labels are given to the different forces in each demonstration.
To help you work through this diagram, using Science and Religion as an example of two opposing sides (let's say science is force 1 and religion is Force 2)
The task of this section is to find a compromise or balance between Science and Religion so they can be united. The difference between them is the outlook each Force has in regard to energy or nature. One side is usually searching for tangible proof and enjoys dominating and manipulating nature, while the other desires to unite with nature and live among it as an equal (showing respect and also the difference between the mechanistic and organismic world views of East and West). World View is generally defined as one's outlook of life and how it works. Mechanistic refers to the world is a machine that we manipulate and control. Organismic refers to the views of the world as a living organism to be respected.
In order to complete or fill in the diagram, the task would be to find the compromise or balance between the two "opposing" forces and make them complimentary.When looking at energy as a possible unifies, both Science and Religion have discovered what is called subtle energy (Feinstein, 2008). This type of energy, in the field of science was first discussed by Einstein and was referred to as"zero point energy" (1956, p.75). Miller's concept of Ether also relates to what is now called subtle energy (DeMeo, 2004). It has also been referred to as grand unification energy by both Einstien (1956) and Hawking (1988). This name is given to this energy because this type of energy is where all electromagnetic (strong and weak) forces "become indistinguishable from one another" (Hawking, 1988, p. 185). This is very important when searching for a unified field because it implies that there is a level of energy that makes opposing forces identical, therefore finding a compromise or unification of two opposing forces, in this case energy. This level of energy is defined by Einstein, (1956) as be the lowest frequency possible for energy to exist (also referred to as zero-point energy).
Other branches of academia have also discovered subtle energy. Philosophy's Leibniz has theorized about monads that are tiny particles that permeate the universe and when together act like an energy field when together. Leibniz is a good example because he believed that the outer world and the inner world (or spiritual world) were two sides of the same coin and thus equal (Benjafield, 2005). The monad would be the example of energy that unifies or is in all things in the universe.
Psychology has also found subtle energy through Reich's (1960) "discovery" of Orgone energy, which is described as having pretty much the exact same properties and behaviour as subtle energy. Reich would gather this energy into what he called an Orgone box and attempted to heal people of their ailments using this energy.
Reich believed that there were ley lines or energy centres located within the body where energy can be blocked due to stress and this would deplete their orgone energy level. He would place them inside the orgone box to heal them. Rolph, later took this idea a used massage to untangle the blockages (Rolphing). She found that when she gave the massages the people would burst out into tears for no reason, perhaps because they were holding all their tension in one spot in the body.
The idea of using subtle energy for healing is not new, and did not originate from Reich. There has been healing of scars on horses in the the field of Physics (DeMeo, 2004), and Psychology is using what is called Energy Psychology that uses these ley lines and energy centres to heal (Feinstein, 2008). The use of this energy for healing predates Science, Psychics, Psychology and even Philosophy!
The Chinese have been using Acupuncture and Acupressure for centuries. They are referred to as Meridians and as one travels up the body, the energy can reach or activate different 'gates' that represent different levels of chi.
The idea of ley lines and energy centres predates even that. The Hindus refer to these energy centres as Chakras. Yoga is used to align these Chakras for not, good health (which happens to be a happy byproduct of yoga and meditation), but to reach enlightenment.
(Depiction of Isis and Osiris). Theories of energy and light bulbs have been found in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs (Hope, 1996; Gardner, 2004).
This has been discussed as ancient understanding of the way energy works (oldest unified field theory ;) (Gardner, 2004).
It has also been postulated that Moses' staff, the caduceus, was also a symbol of an energy device capable of tapping into an utilizing energy (Hardy, Hardy, Killick and Killich, 1981). The staff turned into a snake, which represents the pathway of energy up the chakras, Kundelini, translates to 'snake.' Kundelini is a type of yogic meditation that activates all the chakras at once.
Science and Religion can be united through energy because they have both found and utilized the benefits of subtle energy. Again, just the focus is different, as one uses it for physical health and the other uses it for spiritual health.
It is therefore silly to think that one side is better than the other, they just have different focuses or beliefs for how it can be used. Why not combine the two and create a hospital that sends you to see both a traditional and a holistic doctor too (see Solutions section RE: Dream Hospital)!!! Both methods work equally well because it is not the method that creates good physical or spiritual health, but the belief that person has towards the method. If a person believes holistic measures will work, then they will. If a person thinks that holistic measures are bullshit, well then it won't work for that person.Therefore, if you are tapping into subtle energy with science, or with religion, you are still utilizing or tapping into the same energy; the purposes in which it is used are different.
Uniting Science and Religion Method 2: World View
Science and Religion could also be united through empirical world views such as qualitative research which includes ethnography, and involves providing a voice to other beliefs and cultures. Energy Psychology utilizes subtle energy much like how eastern traditions use it. Through Spirituality as a compromise between science and religion, we can open up our worldview paradigm to accommodate both deductive and inductive reasoning when they come together through a common goal as in health.
A person is like a transceiver or antenna that can send and receive information, but if the circuit is closed or in the off position, no messages will get through. If the circuit is open, or in the on position, the person will be open to anything.
(See this link for a more in depth, scholarly look at the information regarding the similarities between all these energies and if it is successful for the use of healing).
The possible union of science and religion could come from the ideas behind the paper presented in t History of Energy. Both science and religion recognize a basic particle or principle behind all things and wish to understand it, tap it, or use it to unify all things. Science and Religion are not too different, but the issue in which they would disagree on, however, would be their viewpoint or perception of approaching this energy.
One approach to this energy is to tap into it to feel at one with it, perhaps explore innerspace, and have a mystical experience. The other way to approach this energy would be to see it as something to dominate, control and subject to evasive testing. The lesson here is methodology and exploration and respect. Perhaps there should be an ethics board for molecular/enlightenment testing too ;) !!! Whatever the point of view, one's outlook is critically important, especially when going after the thing you think is the answer to all things!!! One's outlook (or bias) affects the interpretation of data one collects. For example, there was an old study done in psychology that was looking at morals or values and who was more moral, men or women (Eyenick, mid 1950's). The participant was presented with a scenario or a question that went: "Your husband/wife/person care about is stuck with an illness and the only cure was to administer "said pills". But, "said pills" are too expensive and you cannot afford it. Would you steal the medicine to save your loved one? The results showed that women were more likely to steal to cure their loved one. This was interpreted and published that women are more immoral because they would break the law and steal. However, recently the same data has been re-evaluated and it was found that women are more moral because they gave more importance to human life (or mercy) than to the law. This example shows how the same data, can be interpreted 2 different ways placing importance on the interpretation.
Another experiment had a participant sit in front of a TV and were supplied with headphones. An image was shown on the screen of a person saying da da da da over and over again. The headphones transmitted ba ba ba ba over and over again. When asked what the person in the video was saying, the participant said pa pa pa pa, above a chance level. This example shows that it doesn't matter what the person is saying, it is what you believe the person is saying that is the reality for YOU. What is real is what YOU perceive is real.
The biopsychosocial model of health as taught in Psychology states that the mind affects the body as much as the body affects the mind. For example, if one believes the drug treatment will work them, then it will. If one goes into a therapy session believing that it will not work for them, then it won't (unfortunately).
There is an artifact in controlled experiments called the Placebo effect which is basically an effect of something that is not there physically. For example, if a person is told they are to be injected with a sedative or something that will make them hyper (either or), the person then tends to act in the expected manner, even when the substance injected is neutral or causes no physiological effect(insert the plethora of references here). The only conclusion then is that it was all in the persons mind. It is surprising that the biopsychosocial model of health has been taught in Psychology for centuries and it doesn't look like there has been too much influence or implementation. (See the Masters in Psychology Proposal of the "Dream Hospital" under the Solutions section, <<<which is a dream in itself because it intends to change the mindset of the population towards health, and it is hard to go against the grain in this Western Society that wants you to believe what they believe. But, yes, I say that 6 billion people CAN be wrong!!!>>>
There are many things that refuse to be subjected to the scrutiny of the scientific method, however such as ESP, Love, Mystical Experiences, Synchronicity, free will, God. Perhaps the energy that produces the principles that science relies so heavily on is the breath or spirit of God. Psychology tries so hard to be a science, and it can never be, science works on principles that remain constant and rarely change. Humans are the opposite, they remain constantly changing and rarely behave in the same way twice. James (Varieties of Religious Experiences) believes that even the same stimulus will never affect a person the same way twice and it is true in my experience that I have never reacted the same way to the same stimulus twice <<<except for once when I had laughed at a movie, the same way twice - it was weird, the feeling was like having a deja vu. Shout out to Angel - A M's daughter>>> Therefore Science and Religion are utilizing the same energy field and/or particle (even though the motives appear to be different). What if they were to see eye to eye??? What if they realized they are tapping into or utilizing the same energy principles? <<<they appear opposite because of their perspective - the principles are the same; the one just mirrors the other. See the Physics/Math section for more details regarding this>>> Type 1 type 2 argument (it's the new nature/nurture controversy).
Uniting Science and Religion Method 2: Male and Female
There is an interesting story in the Gnostic Gospels (the Book of Baruch) that features a male and female aspect of God. His name was Elohim and her name was Eden. They created the world with their love. He donated the spirit and she donated the soul (Meyer, 2005). After they had finished creating the earth, Elohim wished to go back up to heaven to see if there was anything lacking in creation and when he arose, he saw a light brighter than his own and became curious. He thought, he was God so he approached the light. There he met with the True God, the God of foresight. Elohim then wished to destroy the earth because his spirit was trapped inside, the the God of foresight said he could do no evil while with him. It was there Elohim stayed and never returned to his bride, who he made a loving contract with. She, Eden realized she had been left and in anguish sought revenge so that Elohim would feel her pain. She began to torment the spirit within all humans to get back at him. This is how it stands today. The story ended with Elohim saying that if she knew that he was with the Good, she would not have done that. But, with his abandonment, torment and evil on earth began.
Perhaps this story has been circling around and manifesting itself here on earth. Perhaps the reason why there are so many divorces is because all of humanity itself come from a broken home and we are thus repeating what we know.
This story may help in the uniting of male and female, because if this is how it all began, then it must also be how it will all end. What if Elohim came back to earth to find his bride, or fell to earth from heaven? What if they were to meet again and fall in love? Would this create heaven on earth? The earth could possibly be healed by the reunification of male and female energies because they are out of balance.
If we go back to our roots and lived like Hunter-Gatherer societies did, then we would be living in an egalitarian state. Men and women, although had different chores, were equal. The leader would be a Shaman, and most shaman were women, but if a boy or man showed promise, then the position was open to all. All people in the tribe would discuss their dreams every morning and each person added to the lore and the stories to be passed down.
I do not feel that we are truly living in an egalitarian society or state. We now live in a Patriarchal society, where men rule all the high paying positions of authority and if a women wishes to obtain these positions, they are met with a glass ceiling. There still is no pay equity, if a women climbed through the ranks to get there. But, now we are talking two different forces of opposition, love and power. Women tend to seek love, whereas men tend to seek power. Since love is the most powerful thing I can think of, lets focus on love, and unification may occur. For this demonstration, Force B will be male and Force A will be female and their common focus will be love.
If we could acknowledge or utilize both male and female aspects, such as love and power, we may evolve to achieving heaven on earth. There are three different levels, however, in which male /female polarization (or balance) is needed before it can real this level. The 3 levels are: on a personal level, on a relationship level, then on a societal level.
Polarization: On an Inner, Personal Level
Each person has within themselves a male and female aspect or side (Jung termed them the Animus and the Anima respectively). In order to polarize the inner self, one must recognize that each side is important in their own rite, and in their own time. Sometimes it is best to listen to your reason and not say that thing you impulsively wanted to say, and sometimes it's best to listen to your instinct or emotion when it warns of a situation that might put you in danger.
Life is very situational and one may need to know when it is best to listen to your brain and when it is best to listen to your heart. This can be learned by getting to know yourself and paying attention to the consequences of the actions you make. To bring the polarization to the inner self, then for a further breaking down, the inner male aspect will be referred to as their stereotypical label, the rational side and the female aspect will be referred to as the emotional side. Therefore, on a personal level, balance is achieved when one can recognize the importance of both
rational (male) and emotional (female) tendencies.
There are many social stereotypes of male and female aspects and what our society says they should be like and how they should behave. It is false to assign any characteristic to any sex. These characteristics will appear in many degrees in either sex and in all areas in between. Ways to promote Androgyny, or equality are key to polarization on an inner level.
A good way to reduce gender stereotypes is to influence your own kids and make sure that they do not have blue clothing or things if they are a boy and pink if they are a girl. This example speaks directly to the arbitrariness of characteristics above. Blue is an arbitrary colour and who says it has to represent boys and boys only. This mentality breeds an "us vs. them " attitude that only segregates rather than unites. Give your child the opportunity to play with trucks and dolls. Let them pick.
Gender stereotypes run deep. In ancient Greece, they believed that emotions got in the way and that they were inferior to rational thought. This lead to the notion that boys or men don't cry and to hard core reductionism. Reductionism is the idea that the sum of the parts are equal to the whole and that if you add up all the physical anatomy or all the different parts of a thing, that you get its true meaning or purpose. Gestaltists would disagree and say that the sum of the parts does not equal the whole.
A good example of this would be the idea that if the earth was obliterated and aliens came to earth to check it out and research what humans were all about and they find a radio. They take apart the radio and analyze the pieces, then bring the pieces back together again and say "look, a radio" (p.c. K. Beliski, 2002). Does this really tell the aliens what its true purpose was? No. (see this link for a true debunking of radical reductionism).
Anyway, the point is that the material is important, but the spiritual or emotional is too. When gets to know themselves and reaches an understanding about this, then that person is ready for a relationship with another person. But, in order to truly win the the personal level, one must truly learn to love the self. Know thyselves! The next step may be to learn to love the outer as the self.
Polarization: On an Outer, Relationship Level
It must be known that the accepted definition of reality is that all matter and energy interact and everything affects everything else. Therefore, we live in a world that is in constant flux and nothing or no one is ever exactly the same twice. You can make up a marriage contract, but if you say in it that you want everything to stay the same you are setting yourself up for failure. Many couples who go in for counseling say “what happened to the man or woman I fell in love with, I want things to be like they were.” Well unfortunately things are never the same and it is impossible to keep anything the same, even from moment to moment. People will grow and change due to new experiences and knowledge learned. If a couple is smart, they will understand this flux and accept each other for who they are at any given moment. They must be able to continue their personal growth without chains and expectations. If the personal growth of the two people in the relationship is in relatively the same direction, the more successful the relationship will be.
Hinduism teaches that there are many roads to enlightenment and each person discovers it in their own way. So, one person’s path may not be good for another and even if the paths are different, the end goal should be the same. Therefore flexibility in belief and action should be respected in a relationship. My personal formula is each person needs alone time and together time and the guy needs the guys night out with friends and the girl needs the girls night out with her friends.
So, there also needs to be a balance between men and women to create a healthy relationship. Unfortunately the damage for adults and their socialization of gender stereotypes is already done. So, you will be with men who are aggressive and dominating or you will be with women who are emotional and irrational. To work with the current dilemma of those who are already damaged by gender stereotypes, the characteristics or strengths of women should be utilized when appropriate and the characteristics or strengths of men should be utilized when they are appropriate. Not only one person should be in charge of everything. The decision making should be delegated according to strengths. If he knows about fixing stuff around the house he can be in charge of getting that stuff done. If the woman knows more about cars she can be in charge of getting that done etc. What I have found to be the most important distinction between men and women is that men are rational and women are intuitive. It should be recognized that in some situations, it is better to be rational, and in some situations it’s best to listen to your gut.
The most important thing to know about relationships is the principle of habituation. It works very much like an aftereffect but it’s more like when you see or are exposed to a new thing you display what’s called an orientation response. Like a cat when it sees a mouse will freeze and become excited. But after the 27th time of being exposed to that same thing the response gets less and less until there is no response anymore. It is important to be aware of this principle when it comes to relationships because when you first meet the person everything is shiny and new, then after a while the excitement gets less and less until you see them everyday and you become habituated to that person. When this happens you tune them out or become bored with the relationship. This is a natural reaction and is built into us (Tyson, 2006/07). To avoid this situation, keep a never a dull moment rule. My boyfriend, who is now my fiancée asked an 80 year old man how he stayed married for 50 years. He said we never stopped dating; I never stopped bringing her flowers. The worst thing you can do in a relationship is come home and watch TV everyday or get into a routine, this quickly wears at the relationship. Keep a good balance between routine and spontaneity and remember that no characteristic or behaviour has to strictly belong to the man and no certain behaviour has to be only for women. This brings us to the polarization of the sexes within society.
The idea of keeping a balance between routine and spontaneity is that each takes the male/female stereotype ( routine = male, spontaneity = female). One is not better than the other but each is needed in their own time to create balance and satisfy the need for each.
Polarization: On an Outer, Societal Level
As stated before, the socialization of gender stereotypes must not be perpetuated further. When one is unhappy in their stereotyped role, it creates something called gender role strain. If someone is unhappy with their role, they should be allowed to change it and pursue the things that make them happy. For example, have any of you heard of Malsow’s Hierarchy of Needs? It is the idea that once basic needs such as food and shelter are taken care of we are able to pursue higher needs such as recognition, emotional security and eventually at the top of the pyramid, Self Actualization. Self Actualization is defined as the right to unfold oneself and become the person they wish. This is called Self Actualization.
The idea that every person can become anything they wish and can reach their own idea of Self Actualization points to the idea of equifinality. Equifinality is the idea that many different paths lead to one single end or event (as opposed to multifinality that states that many different outcomes can come from a single event). Everyone should have the right to unfold themselves as they learn in their own way, and achieve self actualization on their own terms. Gender roles have in the past prohibited individuals of achieving or striving for this goal.
The end goal or compromise is therefore, unification at a common point, like how the spokes on a wheel end at the hub. We are all connected in mutual love (and respect).
When reading the books, scrolls and codices regarding Religion it may seem very far fetched at times. For example, the Secret Book of John found in the Nag Hammadi collection talks about many different dimensions and the different angels that reside over these different dimensions that also make up the limbs and body parts of Adam. Yes, very strange and some may ask how we know there are these dimensions or how people come up with this stuff and why should we believe it.
Perhaps prophets get their ideas from visions or through possession trance and since Mystics get their visions from inner meditation and dreams, it would seem that these two methods are two means to the same end (See Hunter-Gatherer/Shananistic society vs the Agricultural society). These visions are very powerful and contain a lot of information all at once. These visions are usually ineffable and very hard to translate into words. Whether these visions occur or not, it is worth mentioning that the people experiencing these visions can show sudden behaviour and even personality changes. Jesus can turn a hardened criminal into a humanitarian, just like that. Perhaps Religion is the stuff we dream up and Science is what we use to explore it. This is why they are compliments (see Science and Religion).
To relate this to science it is parsimonious to suggest that these visions can inspire people to seek out this idea on earth or to “prove it” with science. For example, Einstein had a vision of how the world worked and how energy interacted while he was sitting on a bus in Austria (Einstein, 1956). He then sought to verify this vision through mathematics. Much of science is inspired by religious or spiritual experiences. This could be a good place to start when trying to unite these two seemingly opposite forces.For example Science looks to nature to invent, such as the camera and the eye. birds and the plane. Science has always been inspired by nature, but when did they become so separate? Did the Scientists think they have found everything and that nature is no longer needed? A rift has been building between people and nature, like between the rich and the poor. This could perhaps in the end be better in distinguishing between those who worship materialism and those that worship God.
Therefore, Science and Religion can be united through the desire to explore and know all about nature. The difference, however, between the two concepts is the outlook. One movement or force wishes to unite and continue growth together as compliments and the other wishes to control and subject nature to intrusive testing.
Some people “meditate on” a question or situation and receive answers. Sometimes through synchronicity (someone calls and says _____ then another and then you see it said on TV). This is when events occur that people interpret as having special meaning, just for them. And sometimes answers come through a revelation or a vision.
Some people explore through science and come to a similar conclusion as the intuitive religion. For example, The creative and the receptive unite for this demonstration. The ancient Chinese method of chi or Qi and the pathways of energy through the body coincide with Reich's scientific discovery of Orgone energy and how there are ley lines or point of energy along the body. Reich had no idea about any theory in the Orient about energy who have been using the same points of energy in the body for centuries in the practice of Acupuncture, Thai Chi, Chi Gong etc.
This is a great way to unite science with religion because this example outlines how one person can reach a conclusion about energy through spiritual experiences and how another person can find the same energy through scientific investigate.; Each coming to the same conclusion or observation. One found the energy through scientific method and testing the boundaries of the outer world, while the other found it through exploring the inner world, the body as the Temple. Science and Religion may thus be two different means to the same end.
So, when reading Gnostic texts or Gospels that describe a world with many different dimensions, it is fair to say that perhaps they have derived this information from the spiritual world. When it comes to reading about Physics and the fourth and fifth dimensions and later finding 11-13 through String Theory, it may be safe to say that they have come to the same conclusions or derived their information from the outer or natural world.Have the dimensions described in the Secret of of John (Gnostic Text) been verified by science???
**********************UNDER CONSTRUCTION*********************Uniting Science and Religion Method 3: Sound & Light
On the lines of Hunter-Gatherer Societies, the way people experienced their inner Light but can also be united through sound and light as discussed in the Physics/Math section of this site. Sound and Light were used to label the New Equation, the equation that encompasses all things. This section will attempt to unite Science and Religion using the metaphors of Sound and Light. The category of Religion will be broken down into two major parts for this demonstration and these two parts will be referred to as Mysticism and Propheticism. Mysticism will be more closely affiliated with Light and Propheticism will be more closely affiliated with Sound.
The term Mystic or Mystical usually comes up in reference to a Mystical Experience. This is an incredible and usually life changing event one experiences that is indescribable in words. A Mystical experience is one in which a person may have while exploring their inner world (as opposed to the outer world). A Mystical experience brings many people closer to “Oneness with everything”, a unification of the finite, with the infinite. These experiences usually come in the form of visions, hence its connection to light.
Light is a metaphor for Mysticism in this case because visions are the predominant form of experience when engaged in a Mystical experience. Even though, the visions are inner and perhaps seen more with a third or inner eye, the metaphor of vision is still linked to the realm of that are experienced by the people of this tradition. For example, Shamanic cultures and/or Hunter-Gatherer civilizations use their visions and their dreams to connect the people together. Depending on what was dreamed the night before, it may want a person not to hunt that day. Their trance (like Yoga, is static and there is little to no movement. This is a very individual experience, but the people of these tribes because they remain in a position. but instead of a position,
This Mystic tradition Both Mystics and Prophet s have their “dot in the Yin Yang”, so the speak, within the other opposite. Both Mysticism and Propheticism each have their exception that becomes the other (and vice versa). For example, each one is the other’s exception to the rule. Like the Yin Yang, how it has the dot of each reflected in the other (Apocalypse).
Propheticism is an artifact of the agricultural era or society. After "evolving" from the Hunter-Gatherer Society we began to settle and farm. This created a population overflow and many people began to disagree. The local gathering involved a ritual that would evoke a kind of possession trance that would communicate messages from God or the gods regarding some dilemma between families. The Hunter-Gatherers experienced more of a vision whereas these generations experienced it through sound, or verbal messages.
If spiritual guidance or messages can be experienced both visually and verbally, then here is a link between Science and Religion. Science would be the verbal and Religion would be the visual. BUT, not forgetting about the distinction between inner and outer worldly mysticism, some of the science will be visual (like Einstein) and some of the Religious will experience verbal communication (Joan of Arc).
Uniting Science and Religion Method 5: Time/Cause and Effect
Here on earth we live in a linear dimension where time unfolds in front of itself leaving a past and always trying to project a future (see Heidegger etc.) Science and Religion follow a particular cause and effect lead. Spiritual experience can lead to scientific investigation.
But, at the same time (no pun intended), perhaps scientific investigation can also lead to spiritual experiences. Should one be considered more superior? Should Science consider itself superior to Religion? Could this supposed cause and effect relationship work both ways? Could Science and Religion/ have been duped by the illusion of linear "cause and effect" time? Past and Future collide *BAM*!!!Time is simultaneous, time is NOW!! Live for the now
Is time linear or simultaneous, sometimes I confuse these and refuse to contain their memory. Never ask me what time it is, I will always reply and say this is how it is, it's the "time of our lives." and isn't everything, alright!? Is time linear? do we HAVE to not know the future (Adam was said to have been able to see across the universe before the fall (in which he denied the spirit of God within him - Satan told him he could have everything here on Earth as long as he revoked the spirit inside him.
Again providing an example of Leibniz/Spinoza mirroring (see History) and Subject-Object Dichotomies (Philosophy). One side reflects and effects the other, like a balance scale. The only thing separating them is a Transducer (Physics/Math).
Uniting Science and Religion Method 6: Left & Right
Left brain = detail oriented
Right brain = holistic
The interchange or "play" between these two forces in the brain create the full human experience most share. It represents the continuity of the homeostasis of life.
It has been proposed that we can represent or designate different parts of the brain for different functions, the Triune brain (Paul MacLean) would say one part of the brain is for emotions, which is an older function and another for rational/cognitive speculation. One is fast (emotion) and the other is slow (cognition), but each hemisphere creates the whole brain which thus creates the human experience. Who is to say that one side of the brain is better than another? They work together as compliment, or at least they perhaps should.
Our culture seems obsessed with one side only of the divine experience that is human.
creates one force that pushes through full steam ahead with their blinders on and another that sees it coming. It seems as though every argument comes down to one force that says my way or the highway and another that does NOT reject the other, but tries to unify it. The one is one-sided, while the other is a balance of both. Behaviourism and Mentalism in the field of Psychology for example remains unresolved because the one side is too ridged to be open. Perhaps a better metaphor here would be Open & Closed. This = the battle of time and why we do not live in a perfect world. What usually comes of this are theories and stances that are ri
Solomon and his casting of demons and David on his right with the dabble, but won't go too far in respect of the creator God. I Love God
women = emotional
Men = rational
Is one "better" than the other?
Uniting Science and Religion Method 7: Male & Female
see the Art/Screenplay...
This example bridges science and religion by relating it to after effects. New age came to be due to a collision with Orthodoxy, that threatened basic human rites. and development, or evolution. Since science wishes to reduce everything to the sum of it's parts which would include the idea that which pushed the limits of humanitarianism. The scientific
Uniting Science and Religion Method 4:Seen & Unseen
Seen could be male
Seen = Yin
Unseen = Yang
Seen = aggressive
Unseen = passive
Seen = light
Unseen = sound
Seen = creative
Unseen = receptive
Seen = outer world
Unseen = inner world
Seen = quantitative
Unseen = qualitative
Seen = white
Unseen = black
Seen = left-brain
Unseen = right-brain
Seen = extroverted
Unseen = introverted
Seen = science
Unseen = religion/spirituality
Seen = body
Unseen = mind/soul
Seen = objective
Unseen = subjective
Some can challenge another on the same realm (eg. Seen vs. seen or unseen vs. unseen). This can happen due to the idea of balance, and that the one is the dot or exception living within the other. The symbol of the Yin Yang represents this well because the colour dots symbolize the idea that you can go so far over to one side and end up at the other. For example concentrative meditation means to focus on one spot, what happens over time is that the one spot becomes the entire universe, or everything becomes one spot. Mindfulness meditation would mean to be completely open to everything that after a while, everything becomes one thing to focus on.
Seen = concentrative meditation
Unseen = mindfulness meditation
Seen = Type 1
Unseen = type II error
Seen = nature
Unseen = nurture
Seen = macrocosm
Unseen = microcosm
Seen = nomothetics
Unseen = ideographics
Seen = event
Unseen = non-event
Seen = multifinality
Unseen = equifinality
Seen = explosion
Unseen = implosion
Society wouldn’t let me be an inner worldly prophet, so I was pushed into being an inner worldly mystic. Think about it, if one desires to go back to their roots and share dreams and visions and mystical experiences, that would be fan-freakin-taskic. Our roots of civilization come from an open system, where everyone was open and welcome to having these experiences. But, at the same time there are those who have special talents.
Seen = inner worldly prophet
Unseen = inner worldly mystic
Seen = other worldly prophet
Unseen = inner worldly mystic...
Uniting Science and Religion Method: Consciousness
Intuitive understanding of consciousness matches the pattern energy makes. Therefore it is possible to have a conceptual understanding of how energy works or interacts. One may not need to understand the exact math, to tap into and utilize the subtle energy forces found within our experience. laws or principles in Physics seem to match or follow trends found in Psychology.