Reason • Reality • Philosophy • Science • Psychology • Spirituality
Is It All True?
I noticed that you do not express any views of non-existance of the mystical beliefs.
Has The Scionics Institute been able to mathematicaly prove the existance of other dimentional consciousness?
And if so, has open communication with such entities been achieved?
Can you clarify what you mean by the “non-existence of mystical beliefs?” Just to be clear, Scionics recognizes mysticism as the opposite of rational, reality-based thinking. Mystical beliefs, then, are irrational and non-real. By embracing the rational and real, and by rejecting the irrational on non-real, one comes into ever-greater harmony with all aspects of the world.
There are at least three meanings for the term “dimension” which come to mind. One is the idea of “measurement,” as in the dimensions of a table. A second is the idea of the number of orthogonal “directions” in some space – for example we experience the world as having three orthogonal dimensions (up-down, left-right, forward-backward) and time (past-future). There is also the fashion, often used in science-fiction, of using the term “dimension” as a synonym for another universe or world, which is inaccessible to us by ordinary means. In the cartoon “Rick and Morty,” for example, the title characters are able to travel to different “dimensions” through the use of a “portal gun.”
We have no evidence for the existence of other dimensions (in the “Rick and Morty” sense) or universes but this does not mean that they do not exist. We do have every reason, however, to believe that our observable universe represents only a tiny portion of a much larger (and very possibly) infinite universe. It is also possible that our universe may be one of infinite universes which spontaneously spring forth from a more fundamental “inflaton field” which itself is expanding at an unimaginable rate. That being said, we have no evidence of any sort of communication outside of our observable universe, and no mechanism has ever credibly been put forth by which such communication would be possible.
I guess what I was wanting to know was, do you believe in entities that are commonly known as spirits?
Are they known as another form of conciousness existing in a realm within our universe either undiscovered or discovered but little known about?
Maybe I should put it more like this.
What are your beliefs on concious existance outside the natural range of our senses being able to perseve?
Many of the common beliefs people currently hold about the supernatural originated in primitive times, long before humanity began to really understand the world we live in. Even the very idea of the supernatural, itself, is a primitive idea. As we biologically and culturally evolved from lower primates, there was ample time for all sorts of wrong ideas to be formulated as a way of explaining the world and all sorts of things in it. It is only natural that we invented the supernatural, so to speak, and even that such ideas spread so readily, while we were in that primitive state.
Furthermore, while we like to think of ourselves as much more evolved and sophisticated today – and in some ways we are, of course – in many ways most people retain much of the primitive thinking processes which characterized our earlier development, and upon which ideas regarding the supernatural are based. Thus it is that such ideas persist and are transmitted rather readily to this day.
The epistemology of Scionics, however, is “empiricorationalism.” Empiricorationalism is the creation of models of the world (beliefs) based upon actual empirical observations (empiricism) using valid, logical reasoning (rationalism) and then testing these models to see if they actually hold up under scrutiny (skepticism). Empiricorationalism is not only the epistemological approach of Scionics philosophy, but also the epistemological approach of science.
There has never been anything close to a scientific confirmation of the existence of anything like spiritual beings at all. There is no scientific reason to believe in spiritual beings, or in anything supernatural, for that matter.
Regarding “conscious existence outside the natural range of our sense being able to perceive,” we are no longer limited to the natural range of our senses. Through the advance of science and technology we can “see” much more than “visible light” – we can “see” x-rays, infrared, radio waves, ultraviolet, gamma rays, and in fact the entire gamut of electromagnetic radiation, of which “visible light” is just a small fraction. We probe matter at the smallest levels, employing electron microscopes and particle colliders. Not only can we sense and detect things through the technological extension of our senses, but we can also record that which has been sensed and detected. No credible evidence has ever been put forth for the existence of “spiritual beings” or any other sort of “conscious existence” which might be analogous to spiritual beings.
Now, there is all sorts of “anecdotal evidence” of all sorts of thigs: ghosts, the Loch Ness monster, Bigfoot, reptilian humanoids, and so on. But “anecdotes” are essentially just stories, and anyone can tell a story. There have been very real and serious scientific attempts to ascertain the validity of such anecdotes, but all attempts have failed. The conclusion: “spiritual beings,” or some analogous form of “conscious existence,” does not exist.
What is your opinion on this matter?
As you could probably tell from my questions that I have had things happin that have caused me to feel that their is some other intelligence
currently undetectable by normal means.
My knowledge of cymatics and vibrational manipulation of matter.
As well as electro magnitism and its effects on matter. Has created a question.
Matter can be changed easily, going form one state to another just by changing its vibration or the electro magnitic field around it.
I was inquiring as to whether or not you had any knowledge of a formulated theory of sustainable conciousness
during any such “transformations”.
Cymatics, in layman’s terms, involves the study of the patterns which become visible when some sort of flat surface or membrane (such as a pane of glass, a drum head, or the surface of some liquid) is vibrated; in the case of solids, small particles or a thin coating of liquid are used to make the pattern visible. These patterns are often symmetrical. There is nothing about any of this which involves anything mystical or supernatural; nor does it require or involve consciousness in any way.
A very quick Google search brings up the Wikipedia page for cymatics. The very second sentence of this article states: “The term was coined by Hans Jenny (1904-1972), a Swiss follower of the philosophical school known as anthroposophy.” This brings us to the Wikipedia page for anthroposophy, the first paragraph of which states:
Anthroposophy is a philosophy founded by the 19th century esotericist Rudolf Steiner that postulates the existence of an objective, intellectually comprehensible spiritual world, accessible to human experience. Followers of anthroposophy aim to develop mental faculties of spiritual discovery through a mode of thought independent of sensory experience. They also aim to present their ideas in a manner verifiable by rational discourse and specifically seek a precision and clarity in studying the spiritual world mirroring that obtained by natural historians in investigations of the physical world.
To the Scion, this reeks of mysticism, but it might be argued that this is merely “opinion,” and that anthroposophy is actually valid, and ultimately rooted in reason and reality. If this were the case, then we should have seen some real-world advances or technologies which have sprung from this well-over 100 year-old school of thought. There have been none.
You also mentioned “electromagnetism and its effects on matter.” Electromagnetism is very well understood, and like cymatics, also neither involves anything mystical or supernatural, nor requires or involves consciousness in any way. There have been claims that vibrations can cause or accelerate healing, but where any sort of vibration (whether electromagnetic, sonic, or whatever) actually does have some positive effect, such effects – again – don’t involve anything mystical, supernatural, or require or involve consciousness. In general, however, such claims are simply false. In other words, “cymatics healing” is just a modern form of snake oil.
Has this sufficiently addressed your claims/questions? Please let us know.
Yes you have given answers.
I guess I was looking for some sort of affermation for the known works of such projects like the philadelphia experiement, private works of Steve Huff, and Bill Chappel as well as the findings of Gregg Bradon.
Just understand that for me their are many puzzle pieces that I AM having to find places for.
Here are a few rational websites discussing and discrediting the things you have mentioned:
In the case of the “Philadelphia Experiment,” it simply didn’t happen. The story originated with the writings of a single crackpot, Carl Allen (a.k.a. Carlos Allende) and no one else at all.
In the case of the four individuals named above, each was selling devices or books. The devices didn’t do what they claimed they did, and the books were full of unfounded, unprovable and false assertions. These individuals were exploiting the naivete and gullibility of people, in order to get money from them for essentially fraudulent products.
The “puzzle pieces” fall into place neatly and effortlessly once you begin to recognize pseudoscience for what it is.
I believe that you know that the non-aggression principle, colloquially expressed as “Live and let live” is a primary rule of Scionics Ethics. You can choose to believe what you want, but you should know that a person makes better choices when what they believe is in accord with reason and reality. Pseudoscience is not in accord with reason and reality, and giving credence to such things always, to some degree, comes with a cost, even if that cost is only lost time and effort.
The non-aggression principle may be stated more precisely as “no individual or group of individuals may ethically initiate force, fraud or coercion against another.” Well, these individuals are violating that principle by initiating fraud, and no support should be given to their fraudulent claims and products.
While you are certainly free to believe whatever you want, we would gently suggest that when you encounter such claims – which obviously run counter to accepted science – you research them by simply typing the name of the claim or the individual into Google, followed by the word “scam,” “skeptic,” or “rational.” In this way you may more quickly and efficiently come upon valuable information by those who are better able to recognize and discredit such charlatans, and eventually may come to learn to recognize such pseudoscience yourself.