Choices and Illusions (22 page)

Some people seem to reason only with the tools of their

language. In other words, their reason is limited by the rules and

definitions of their language. Plus, there is some argument in favor of certain language structure as having greater or lesser faculties for developing logical thinking. literal languages such as German, for

example, tend to encourage the development of logical thinkers.

However intriguing this may be, it still seems reasonable that

reason preceded the conceptualization and development of speech.

As such, one is hard-pressed to limit the consciousness of a species on the basis of sound patterns called speech.

It gets still tougher. Sound patterns that resemble speech are

uttered by so-called nonconscious animals, such as whales and

dolphins. So, what is consciousness?

Is it a matter of wakefulness? no, it can’t be just that, for one can be a conscious being and still be asleep. Is consciousness memory?

According to the experiments of Cleve Baxter, plants exhibit

memory. Since science abandoned the study of consciousness

years ago, the problems inherent in describing consciousness

have proliferated during the interim. The advent of animal

studies, plant studies, and synthetic or artificial intelligence has 129

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 129

6/20/13 3:41 PM

CHOICES AND ILLUSIONS

greatly complicated the matters of consciousness . . . or perhaps

simplified them.

For most people, parts of the left brain handle language. Brain

hemispheric studies, including the now popular positron-emission

tomography (PET) scans show that the right ear sends acoustic

information to the left hemisphere. According to Marc Hauser

(formerly of Harvard University) and Karin Andersson of Radcliff

College in Cambridge, rhesus monkeys “display a similar cerebral

setup, with the left half of the brain often taking responsibility for vocalizations intended to signal aggression.”2 If that is true, does it mean that the anatomical evidence for language processing is

evidence for consciousness in the sense that we normally think of

humankind’s consciousness. If not, what are the differences?

For some,
mind
equals
brain.
But for many,
mind
is a more general term that refers to the processes handled by the brain.

Therefore, mind is often used interchangeably with
consciousness.

Is
mind
equal to
brain?
The chief area of inquiry offering evidence one way or another to answer this question is a discipline often

held in low regard. Still, literally thousands of laboratory experiments in scientific parapsychology demonstrate that many aspects

of mind cannot be reduced to anatomical or material brain. For

example, data clearly supports the “reality” of telepathy, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis. Indeed, although controversial, recent

Russian dnA research explains much of this phenomena (clair-

voyance, intuition, spontaneous healing, and so on) and proposes

that dnA can be influenced by words and frequencies, not unlike

the claim of Rossi.3

The biographies of some of the world’s most respected people

also provide a richer picture than can be found even in science.

Famous individuals throughout history have provided numer-

ous reports of their experiences with the so-called paranormal.

Throughout the world and even in America’s capital, Washington,

d.C., there exist numerous reports, ranging from Abraham lin-

coln’s ghost wandering the White House to the Reagan administra-

tion’s use of psychics. The point is simple. Whether it is from the genius of Einstein or the laboratory of a modern parapsychologist,

130

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 130

6/20/13 3:41 PM

Mind Is Not a Local event

mind is not equal to brain! What does that mean with respect

to consciousness?

Consciousness Evolving

A wonderful
Star Trek
adventure I can remember had the
Enter-prise
actually forming its own consciousness and then creating a new life-form. Somehow, as Mr. data explained, the activity of the

starship’s computers and records began to take on a “more than

the sum of the parts” activity, form its own neural network and so

forth. Will machines ever become conscious?

This was the headline in a
Science News
publication: “Simulated Creatures Evolve and learn.” The article, by Richard lipkin, cited

the work of Karl Sims, who “devised a simulated evolutionary sys-

tem in which virtual creatures compete for resources in a three-

dimensional arena. . . . The creatures, resembling toy-block robots, enter one-on-one contests in which they vie for control of a desired object—an extra cube. Winners—deemed more fit—reproduce,

while losers bear no offspring. Sims endows the virtual environ-

ment with physical parameters, such as gravity and friction, and

restricts behaviors to plausible physical actions.”4 Sims believes that it may be easier to evolve virtual entities with intelligent behavior than to create them from scratch. Artificial-intelligence researchers have long sought to develop the so-called thinking machine.

Unlike Sims, most begin by attempting to model the computer

after the patterns of man. For some, this is the neural model of

the brain, while for others it is the deductive/inductive model of

reason. Perhaps Sims’s method is more humanlike than the other

two. Humankind is thought to have evolved. does this help us

understand consciousness? What about the collective conscious-

ness? Will machines soon be contributing to this field of consciousness? Will a machine ever dream?

The “Genius Hypothesis,” advanced by Ervin laszlo,5 asserts

that the minds “of unusually creative people are in spontane-

ous, direct, though usually not conscious, interaction with other

minds
in the creative process itself.
” laszlo’s paper sheds light on the 131

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 131

6/20/13 3:41 PM

CHOICES AND ILLUSIONS

“archetypal experience” described by Carl Jung while using history, physics, psychology, artistic production, and cultural development

to clearly suggest the strong possibility (in my opinion, the only

real possibility) that not only do minds communicate, but they do

so at a distance as well!

Not only do minds communicate,

but they do so at a distance as well!

Is the collective, or the shared, consciousness experience an

independent consciousness? Is it possible that unique (individual)

conscious entities participate as transceivers, sending and receiv-

ing, and that the total of consciousness is this collective? does the collective have a plan, a will? does it dream? Or is it just a reposi-tory? does it have a neural network or some analogous something

that we might refer to as a nonspatial field? It’s not organic or

silicone, is it?

Conscious of Consciousness?

Perhaps consciousness is something that has to do with being

conscious of consciousness. Are monkeys truly conscious of being

conscious? Could they even entertain the idea of consciousness

without an object? Or consciousness as a character in someone

else’s dream? does a monkey ask itself if it really exists?

Is that a fair direction to take our questions regarding con-

sciousness? After all, are we not likely to be forced to admit the

notion of “devolution” if we do? Are there not altogether too many

homo sapien sapiens on the planet who don’t give the proverbial

“hoot” about who they are or where they came from? How many

of these people ask the question, “do I really exist?” Will silicone ask the question, “Who am I?” The Japanese have already built a

“darwin machine.” The artificial brain uses an evolving neural

network. Hugo de Garis, a researcher in the field of artificial intelligence, says the purpose is to produce a silicone brain with more

than one billion artificial neurons.

132

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 132

6/20/13 3:41 PM

Mind Is Not a Local event

Science News
says this machine “will come in the form of a

neural network and will exist within a massively parallel computer.

To create such a complex system, the researchers will have the net-

work build itself. ‘Cellular automata,’ each one a distinct computer program, will actually forge their own linkages.”

This approach, called “evolutionary engineering,” provides for

the growth of the silicone brain via connections. “The neural net

grows when cellular automata send ‘growth signals’ to each other,

then connect via synapses.”6 (And you thought genetic engineering

was something to wonder about.)

defining consciousness turns out to be a process somewhat

akin to searching for the core of an onion. Revisiting conscious-

ness is more than a philosophical exercise or a scientific inquiry.

It is a duty, even a moral imperative, to reevaluate the nature of

consciousness, for this inherently devises the strategy by which

humankind treats itself and all life. For me, and I suspect for countless others, many changes are necessary for the human race to

actualize the highest of its potentials. As in history, most certainly some of these changes will be brought about by difficult times. I am reminded of something Martin luther King, Jr., said: “I can never

be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be . . .” King pointed out that it is precisely the interrelated fabric of life that each of us is interdependent upon.

“I can never be what I ought to be

until you are what you ought to be . . .”

— m A r t i n l u t h e r k i n g , J r .

Perhaps it is the interrelated nature of all life, consciousness

itself, upon which we are interdependent. Perhaps, just perhaps,

humankind will only know its highest, most noble self when it

offers the deepest respect for all life. Perhaps the invigorated enthusiasm searching for a firm hold on this stuff called consciousness

will eventually give rise to the respect I speak of. Perhaps the Zero Point nature of consciousness now being experimented with by

respectable physicists will yield access, conscious access, to the

133

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 133

6/20/13 3:41 PM

CHOICES AND ILLUSIONS

one mind of the universe. (Theoretically, the Zero Point Field is

the unifying force that underlies the potential and existence of the universe. This concept is especially interesting but also somewhat

technical. For a great review of the work, see lynne McTaggart’s

book
The Field.
)

Is it possible that our minds are indeed some

sort of sophisticated transceiver?

Rupert Sheldrake has demonstrated what he calls the M-Field.

People who are taught Morse code in a dedicated room experience

both an easier learning curve and greater retention after previous

groups have studied Morse code in the same room.7 Is it possible

that our minds are indeed some sort of sophisticated transceiver?

If so, is tuning in to love and light versus greed, avarice, and anger just a matter of the station we choose to listen to?

Meditation studies have shown that when groups meditate on

peace, crime rates fall.8 new research into life after death, particularly the work by Gary E. Schwartz, Ph.d. (see his book
The Afterlife
Experiments
), has yielded surprising evidence for life after death.9

near-death experiences have not been adequately explained by the

so-called debunkers, and the data suggesting parapsychological

abilities just keep increasing.

Researching Consciousness

In my lifetime, many of my associates and acquaintances have

challenged the paranormal. Many scientists and sciolistic thinkers

often treat this subject as totally foolish and unscientific. The so-called paranormal or psychic phenomena, the near-death experi-

ences, the reports of reincarnation, astral projection, auras, and so on are all dumped into a bin of laughable irrelevance reported by

delusional people or individuals under the influence of chemistry,

including their own brain chemistry, such as is argued with near-

death experiences.

134

Choices and Illusions Interior.indd 134

6/20/13 3:41 PM

Mind Is Not a Local event

not all scientists view the extraordinary with such disdain

and ignorance, however. Indeed, some of the greatest thinkers of

all time, including this century, have conducted solid research

and otherwise made serious scientific inquiries that have led to

conclusions favoring a nonlocal mind interacting in a holographic

universe via principles including thought and belief, and thereby

co-creating what most call reality. It is definitely worth noting that as lynne McTaggart points out in her book
The Intention Experiment,
science has clearly demonstrated that “[t]hought is a tangible thing with the power to affect the physical world!”10 In a private

communication with me, Ms. McTaggart added this: “We’ve played

around with the idea for many hundreds of years that our thoughts

can change the world around us. For most, though, it’s an idea that has been dismissed as so much wishful thinking. But dig a little