New scientific theory recognizes life’s spiritual dimension

When we consider the harsh circumstances of life throughout history, it is little wonder that the consciousness of most people was universally centered upon survival, and getting enough fuel, clothing and food put away to get through the winter. Those very few people with enough time and security to consider enlightenment were only marginally influential in their own small communities, because mass communication was unheard of. Those who wrote great ideas remained unknown to all but a handful of people who could afford hand-copied books; and many of those ideas have been re-transcribed with numerous errors, mistranslations and re-interpretations. What we call Religion is actually a confused mass of morals, codes, opinions, prejudices, myths and philosophical ruminations that have evolved through countless cultures and languages; which the original authors would probably not recognize if they were living today.


Today, with the advent of industrialization, technology and mass communication we now have the time and the means to delve into great ideas in ways that Kings longed for since time immemorial. In so doing we have discovered how newer facts of modern science are capable of replacing the many convoluted beliefs which may have served their purpose in the past. But, at the same time we are discovering that even modern science is lacking in ways that suggest that there is a spiritual foundation for all things we thought physical, solid and quantifiable.


However, in our enlightenment many of us have failed to recognize that the majority of people on this earth are still dealing with day-to-day survival, and thus have no time or inclination to consider far-reaching important ideas. At the same time, the majority of those with available time are blissfully involved in video games, blogging gossip, and fulfilling physical desires. This is not intended to criticize such activities, for each life has its purpose and some people need outlets that I might consider useless and wasteful. I recognize that I may suffer from my own Puritanical past-life values. But the fact remains that I and many people like me tend to look down our noses at those who have not achieved a higher level of chakra awareness. I have to remind myself, therefore, that each one of us has the right to purse our lives in ways that others may not agree. Our paths are unique to each of us, and if there is any universal lesson to be practiced, it should probably be tolerance as well as love.

 

I agree, Nightrain, but perhaps the world needs a little of a better balance of all 7 principal chakras and work upon the higher ones a bit more as well. Nowadays, in the era of information, I'm quite sure that certain issues and questions will eventually be pondered upon more often and more wisely... :thumbsup:

 

Actually religion and spirituality was a main characteristic of world cultures in early times. Even stone age peoples did not spend all of their time on survival activities, no more than the 8 hours a day that we put in today. I think that the early cultures were actually more focused on spiritual concerns than our modern era.


What makes us different from them is our knowledge gained from science. Yet our scientific knowledge has not yet explained everything, even those age old questions of "Why are we here? What is our purpose?" I think that there is still a mystical side of the universe, and many of the scientific discoveries of today only open up additional mysteries. I do think that many of these discoveries may help us to understand what lies at our foundation: a form of higer conscioussness perhaps? Yes it seems as though technology has the potential to destroy us, or the potential to advance humanity as we delve even deeper into the great unknown. I think Nightrain that you are correct in that there are dangers that we may become lazy and over dependant on our technology, to the point that we lose ourselves in our video games and other high-tech toys. That would be tragic.

 

It's interesting that all cultures and tribes should have had and have a belief in a creator deity, isn't it? Collective subconsciousness or instinctive knowledge? :thumbsup:


How could it be proven or not by science that consciousness persists beyond the physical? How can it be proven that there is an Intelligent Consciousness behind the Creation, if consciousness can only be perceived once it manifests in the physical? And if the phenomenon of a spiritual realm is truly dimensional, as I personally believe, how can it be accessed and proven? I think these are the fundamental questions. Meantime, all these issues will have to continue within the realms of "faith"...

 

Chevalier, you and I have known each other for some time, and I know that you will not take my following post as rude or argumentative. But for the sake of anyone else observing this discussion, my statements should not be taken as being from authority, for I am merely a student. And if I seem to challenge a point made by another member, it is only for the furtherance of understanding for all of us.


To begin...It is well-known among those in the behavioral psychology and social science that a pigeon will repeat a physical act almost religiously, if it is fed a food pellet at the right time. This is known as behavioral conditioning, and has often been also described as superstitious training. It is believed that this same conditioning tends to pervade all living organisms, and that humans in particular tend to exhibit more complex and organized systems of superstitious behavior in the form of Religion. In fact, history is rife with examples in which people flocked to their local churches, temples and shamans at the first hint of strange and unusual events like lights in the sky, earthquakes and the like. Diarists in New England often write of "the darkest day" on May 19th of 1780, which resulted in the re-invigoration of faith among congregations. Previous to this time participation in the local churches has been waning and tithing was down considerably. But when the darkest day arrived, everyone universally thought it was the hand of God, and their faith was multiplied. Although this event took place during a period of enlightenment and scientific discovery, the actual cause for the "darkest day" went unexplained for over two hundred years until evidence was found that there had been a huge forest fire in the Canadian province of Ontario at the same time. A combination of dense black smoke and cloudy weather had given the people of New England the impression that the end of the world was nigh.


This behavior was by no means unique, for we have seen this kind of thing take place throughout history. My question here is, does such behavior suggest some kind of universal awareness of our spiritual nature? A second question would be, is Religion evidence of enlightenment?

 

Wouldn't take it that way, Nightrain... My point is that, if such beliefs pertain to all cultures, even the most isolated of tribes, would this be more due to an intuitive sense of its existence rather than being of a cultural nature? In other words, is it something we might know intuitively rather than something we learn from others?

 

I agree with the point that organized, institutionalized religion often has regressed into the mundane, ritualistic meaningless mire. Once religion becomes institutionalized it quite often loses its meaning and original spiritual emphasis. I feel that the early tribal religions were the genuine attempts of the individual and society to find unity and solace with a supream being, to find meaning in the midst of a fragile existence.


I do think that a spiritual awakening is possible in a church or other religious instution. But I also agree that this is not always the way of enlightenment.

 

I don't think there's any harm in elevating one's thoughts, Ghost of Gumby, and work upon that 7th chakra, the one most closely connected to the Divine, no matter via by which means...

 

Scientific American / Ian Stevenson


STORY: Scientific American: Ian Stevenson's Case for the Afterlife: Are We 'Skeptics' Really Just Cynics?


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2013/11/02/ian-stevensons-case-for-the-afterlife-are-we-skeptics-really-just-cynics/


It's good that mainstream publications like 'Scientific American' and 'Psychology Today' (reference to publication of story in the original post) have demonstrated thoughtful discussions on "the soul" -- which can also add "grist" to thoughtful discussions on reincarnation.


Marc

 

I wonder why it has taken so long for the skeptics to write a story like this? Maybe it's because there are more and more cases like James Leninger and others that are hard to debunk.

 

I like the discussion of whether "reality" is linear. And I agree that spirituality and religion are distinct from one another. Neither is a sufficient cause for the other, but neither are they mutually exclusive, it seems to me.


I think that many questions can be explained by an understanding that everything happens at once. This is the fire of creation.

 

Very beautifully expressed, Doe. I especially love "the fire of creation". Welcome to the forum.

 

Just to come back to the original article: I do not get out of it how the concept of “biocentricism“ (aspects of quantum physics applying to larger systems, therefore conscious observance being necessary to collapse probability waves into solid form) necessarily implies an immortal soul. Could anyone be so kind to elaborate on this? Maybe there are other articles that make this clearer, the concept is new to me.

 

Hello Nightrain,


After reassessing older discussions on the topic of 'the soul' , I came across this discussion and posts.


The following thread, 'Soul Basics" esp. posts #25 and later provides additional perspectives on 'the soul:'


http://www.reincarnationforum.com/threads/soul-basics.5295/