Fear

Dear me. It's so predictable.

According to an article in the New Scientist1, a highly respected psychologist has done experiments that reveal a slight ability to 'feel the future' (as in precognition).

Some years ago I read that Nobel Laurette and physicist Niels Bohr reportedly remarked that "Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it".

In more recent times Prof. David Albert of Columbia University similarly explained that

There's something really indescribably strange about the picture that we're presented with of ourselves by -- especially by fundamental physics. And it's a picture that we just don't know how to fully take in. And I think it's very, very, very disturbing.

Superstition - "a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation."

While sharing various ideas on a forum recently, it became evident there are many people (including and especially atheists, scientists and the religious) who still very deeply rely on superstitious beliefs.

And by "superstitious" beliefs, none are more evident than when the topic of Zeno's Paradoxes is considered.

To put things in context:

Imagine we have a number of belief-systems, let's call them BS1 and BS2. Let's now see how well they match a particular set of evidence (facts and observations, as can be readily experienced on planet Earth).

Recently I joined a networking group and posed the question "Will Zeno's Paradoxes + quantum theory accelerate and ultimately ‘force’ acceptance of holodynamic systems thinking? "

Given the large and consistent amount of evidence, it was effectively a rhetorical question. Yes, it's only a matter of time.

During the dialogue I offered a reward to counter the Proof of the impossibility of physical movement.

This evening I watched a program on television which basically was about how those who oppose immunisation (vaccinations) are rabid do-gooders or some such.

The issue of immunisation (vaccination), and of children in particular, is a highly emotive one, judging by the commentary.

The arguments are the usual ones ... since vaccinations began we've seen off all sorts of horrible diseases like Polio and Whooping Cough, the list goes on.

While at a social function recently I got chatting with some religious people who started to talk about how we're all 'fallen', sinners in need of saving, and how we're all needing His forgiveness, and so on.

Now, from a systems perspective this all makes no sense.1

So I asked, "if God is infinite, isn't all necessarily WITHIN God? After all," I added, "if we and all else, including evil is not of God, then we're outside and beyond the infinite -- and that would make us and evil bigger than God. That would make God small relative to us, and relative to evil."

"Best not do that," I said.

Think of it this way, God is infinite ... literally that means "He" has no limits -- he's everwhere, and in everything, everyone, every spirit, including Evil. In other words, everything and everyone is of God.  It's His energy that's behind all the muck-ups, and the beautiful wonderful things, and ...

If it's not His energy, then it's someone elses, but that again means, He has limits to where His energy goes.2

Pretty straight-forward, I would think, to understand all this.

A recent article in the Sydney Morning Herald about the reluctance of people to believe in climate change, prompts one to consider the deeper causes.

As many cancer patients who've recovered often admit, cancer was the best thing that ever happened to them. Why? Because it forced them to seriously take stock and change.

There has been an at-times vigorous debate on various Internet forums1 over an age-old problem that has persisted for over 2,400 years.

It's a problem that was, in a metaphorical sense, wonderfully illustrated by the "Somebody Else's Problem" scenario in the Douglas Adams' Hitchhikers to the Galaxy series.

I have a confession to make. I've been unsettled ever since writing my book Be and Become ... as I've explained to close friends, when I finished Be and Become I felt that I had done what I came (into this life) to do. Such was the depth of that feeling that I've since largely drifted. Despite the courses, the presentations, seminars ... and subsequent books, largely I've lacked a sense of deep purpose. However, what has unsettled me most are the expectations that I've burdened myself with -- that the author of such profound, timeless material (The Theory of One and All) should be living some sort of expansive, amazing life. Those expectations have delivered quite the opposite ... struggle, and a perpetual anxiety to live up to those expectations.

So, analysing my situation I've come to realise that for the last few years I've been tentatively playing with the idea that there is a fuller dimension to my life. That, in having written the book, now it is time that I live more deeply, more fully than simply giving seminars, or writing more books, or achieving 'success', or acquiring wealth and so on. I've come to sense, rightly or wrongly that I am in the process of letting go, and learning, really learning that living is inherently supportive, and that I don't need to struggle, or that I need to live up to anyone's expectations.

Sometimes the most obvious things in life can be the most difficult to see. I've a good friend who once said to me he doesn't get lonely.

At first I thought this was a failing of his, an inability to feel deeply the connections and relationships in life, and when they are absent, their loss. Feelings of loneliness would, on this basis, simply be the sense of loss of those relationships. Seemed reasonable to me.