Mysticism and the Scientific Method

Mysticism is a belief in the existence of essential reality beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that is accessible by subjective experience.

Our hypothesis is that consciousness is the essential reality that pervades all levels and all lines of development, including the paper the model is written upon. Consciousness, or Spirit, is all there is ultimately. Everything emerges from this invisible, non-material potential field. This is the theme of The Lotka Hypothesis and Larry Horstman’s psychogenic theory of evolution. Franklin Merrell-Wolff called this potential field “Great Space.”

Undulations in the Fabric of Space

The idea is found in the Wave Structure of Matter model presented in the book Schrodinger’s Universe: Einstein, Waves & the Origin of the Natural Laws by Milo Wolff. The great physicist William Clifford said, “All matter is undulations in the fabric of space.” Erwin Schrödinger expressed the same idea in saying, “All matter and laws are the appearance of quantum waves in space.” Introception is the mode of cognition used to contact directly this infinite potential field, as mystics have been reporting for centuries, with high levels of “noetic certainty.”

Meditation and Structuralism

The injunction, “the experiment,” used in the science of consciousness exploration is “profound introversion” or contemplation and meditation together with formal training in conventional science. Philosopher Ken Wilber says meditation and structuralism (a rational worldview such as in a conventional scientific discipline) must be used together. Meditation and contemplative used by itself, or a purely scientific theory by itself, will not give a fully integrated worldview.

Successful applications of this injunction include young Isaac Newton during his retreat to the isolation of his ancestral home to escape the Great Plague of 1665. The following two years of relative isolation were some of his most productive. Another example is the young Werner Heisenberg. While vacationing on the Island of Heligoland, he realized through contemplative insight the basic ideas of his uncertainty principle. The mystic uses the “experiment” of meditation to collect data on consciousness. Results are  submitted for peer review by other mystics who have also done the “experiment.” Validity is confirmed and truth is established, as in conventional science. Mystics can talk to other mystics, but often the outward expressions of the inner experiences take different forms. Yet they can talk about the same reality, or “varying interpretations of a single theory.”

Introspective Knowledge

Alan Wallace in his essay “Is Buddhism Really Nontheistic?” says, “…the cosmogonies of Vajrayana Buddhism, Vedanta, and Neoplatonic Christianity have so much in common that they could almost be regarded as varying interpretations of a single theory…if these cosmogonies are indeed based upon valid introspective knowledge, then there may be some plausibility to the claims of many contemplatives throughout the world that introspective inquiry can lead to knowledge, not only of the ultimate ground of being, but of the fundamental laws of nature as well.”

Contemplative observatories at The Riviere du Bois Welding Shop and Meditation Center and those planned for Alta at Franklin Ridge are set up for the young Isaac Newtons and Werner Heisenbergs in our midst to facilitate finding the ultimate ground of being and further revealing the fundamental laws of nature.

Noetic Certainty

The practice will provide “noetic certainty” and the “proof” for which scientists such as Deepak Chopra and Leonard Mlodinow in their book War of the Worldviews: Science vs. Spirituality are looking for.

Critics are welcome. For those who doubt, discriminative evaluations are welcome, however, to be competent, criticism involves rare qualifications. Competent criticism would require the mystical insight and intellectual acuity of a Shankara or a Plotinus, plus knowledge of modern epistemological and psychological criticism, as well as knowledge of pure mathematics. Therefore, not many can qualify as competent critics.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s