Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The Science of Truth

Expand Messages
  • JagGY 10QZ
    The Science of Truth Classically, the essential requirements of science consist of an organized body of conformable information that is comprehensible,
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 1 6:09 PM
      The Science of Truth

      The Science of Truth


      Classically, the essential requirements of science consist of an organized body of conformable information that is com­prehensible, logical, and replicable. In practice, therefore, science is composed of theory plus testable hypotheses capable of experimental (experiential) confirmation.


      Although "truth" has been the focus of erudite intellectual discourse and attention for thousands of years, no totally uni­versal agreement has ever been reached that would conclude the open-ended, ongoing discussion (e.g., see The Great Books of the Western World). Within stated contexts, however, workable definitions of heuristic value have, for periods of time, served a practical purpose. Each definition, however, has been limited by the lack of description of context or parameters. Therefore, as will be elucidated, no testable statements of any presentation of ostensible truth have any real validity because validity depends on context, content, and the specificity of their delineation.


      In addition to the above difficulty, all definitions and terms include presumptions about semantics as well as the dialectics of logic, epistemological premises, and perceptions, all of which end up at the impasse of the conundrum: How do we know, or how do we even know that we know? The conundrum then con­tinues on into discussions of theology, metaphysics, and, eventu­ally, the epistemological dilemma of differentiation between the subjective and the supposedly objective categories of argument and experience. This core dilemma of investigation attempts to differentiate Descartes' res cogitans from res externa (i.e., the mind cannot know the world itself but only its selective, abstract mentalization about it, just as a photo is not the object photo-graphed). It becomes the ultimate of all intellectual argument and irresolvable because of the dualistic nature of mentation itself, which artificially separates subject and object and thus becomes the very source of the intrinsic error that it seeks to resolve via circuitous tautologies.


      The end point of intellectual investigation arrives at the obvious conclusion that the mind and the intellect are each inherently defective and therefore incapable of arriving at absolute truth. The principle of causality itself calibrates at only 460, i.e., dualistic and therefore limited by virtue of its contextual paradigm and the limitation intrinsic to the structure of its dialectic.

      All mental approaches to a definition of truth are eventually confronted by the necessity of making a paradigm jump from the abstract to the experiential, and from the supposedly objective to the radically subjective. Thus, the statement "Only the objective is real" is a purely subjective premise. The mechanistic reductionist, therefore, actually lives in an intrapsychic, subjective reality the same as everyone else. The resolution of the dilemma of a descrip­tion and knowingness of absolute truth requires the leap into the field of research of consciousness itself, which makes it clear that the only actual, verifiable reality of knowingness is by the virtue of "being" (i.e., all intellectualizations are "about" something), which requires that the observer be extraneous in order to be the witness of the thing to be examined. For example, a human observation can "know about" a cat, but only a cat really knows what it is to be a cat by virtue of the quality of being a cat.

      In essence, the above observation is the explanation of the diversity of opinion about spiritual reality and theological discus­sions concerning divinity that cannot reach any great degree of truth without arriving at the purely subjective knowingness of self-realization, the state of enlightenment in which the essence of subjectivity is self-revealing as the very substrate of the core of truth and reality.


      As will be described later, consciousness research reveals that the capacity of the human mind to comprehend and understand the levels of truth depends on an individual's level of conscious­ness, which itself is in a state of continuous evolutionary develop­ment. This process has been continuous not only over preceding eons of evolutionary time, but also continues on in present time and during maturation.


      It is important to know that at the time of birth, every indi­vidual human being already has a calibratable level of conscious­ness. These levels vary quite markedly and, in fact, to extreme degrees. The calibratable level denotes a capacity to resonate to an identifiable range of frequencies similar to a radio or televi­sion antenna. In addition, the brain does not reach full maturity until approximately age twenty-five to even thirty-five, and the significantly most human part of the brain, the prefrontal cortex, does not fully mature until the very last, a fact that is now being taken into consideration in court determinations of the sentenc­ing of juveniles.


      From an overall view, it is apparent that comprehending truth is innately challenging and seemingly complex. The problem of defining and understanding truth results in many different conclusions, depending on a great multiplicity of factors in which even the overall level of consciousness of mankind at the time is a significant factor. Each level of consciousness results in a definition of truth that is concordant to that specified level, together with its own languaging and qualifications that fit its culture and time. Discord arises from definitions that are ap­propriate to other levels of consciousness, even of the same era. Even if there is agreement about the facts or definition of truth, there remains disagreement as to what it "means" or signifies (i.e., hermeneutics).


      The progressive development of a pragmatic yet theoretically elegant (a term that is used in scientific dialog to denote a germinal context) science of consciousness has already been presented in some detail (Hawkins, 1995-2004), including extensive demon­stration and confirmation (Hawkins' video lecture series, 2002, 2003, 2004).


      Summary of the Essential Principles of the Science of Consciousness


      1.    Consciousness is the formless, invisible field of energy of infinite dimension and potentiality, the substrate of all exis­tence, independent of time, space, or location, of which it is independent yet all inclusive and all present.


      2. Because the field of consciousness encompasses all existence beyond all limitation, dimension, or time, it registers all events, no matter how seemingly miniscule, such as even a fleeting thought.


      3.   Because the registration of all events occurs outside of time and place, they are timelessly accessible due to the unique qualities inherent to the energy field of consciousness it­self.


      4.   Consciousness is the irreducible substrate of the human capacity to know or experience, to perceive or witness, and it is the essence of the capacity for awareness itself.


      5.   The field of consciousness exists independently of mankind yet is included within it. It is the irreducible substrate, the Absolute, in comparison to which all that exists is relative.


      6.    Consciousness represents a field of infinite power and po­tential, out of which the manifest universe as Creation arises as a continuous, ongoing process.


      7.   The entire universe, both known and unknown, exists inde­pendently of human description and is essentially one uni­fied, total field within which are variable levels of vibrational frequencies that appear as the observable universe. As in the physical domain, the higher the frequency of the vibrational energy, the greater the power.


      8.   The universal, all-encompassing vibrational field of energy is descriptively omnipresent and is therefore omniscient and all-powerful (omnipotent). The presence of the field of consciousness is known by all sentient beings as the subjec­tive awareness of existence itself. Thus, the awareness of the presence of consciousness as the substrate of existence is the primordial subjective reality underlying all possible human experience.


      9.   The levels of consciousness are identifiable by use of a simple quality of consciousness itself, and the omniscience of consciousness recognizes and responds to that which has existence and is true by virtue of the fact of that existence. Thus, consciousness, like a mirror, impersonally reflects ac­tuality, which is unchanged and unaffected by that process. Consciousness, therefore, does not "do" anything, but, similar to gravity, it provides the context out of which potentiality actualizes from formless to form, from nonexperienced to experienced.


      10. Comparable to the laws of the conservation of energy or conservation of matter, the law of the conservation of life prevails. Life itself is not capable of being destroyed but can only change form by shifting to a different frequency range (in human experience, the "etheric," the "spiritual," and other energy realms described throughout time).


      11. Because all that exists represents a level of energy vibration, a scale of consciousness can be constructed that is internally consistent and of pragmatic value. A logarithmic scale of consciousness from 1 to 1,000, which starts at number "1" as the existence of life itself and continues to 1,000 (the highest level of consciousness ever reached by mankind), is sufficient to include all possible frequency ranges of human consciousness. Such a scale can be demonstrated to be highly informative and of great practical as well as theoretical value in understanding mankind, the question of divinity, and the universe.


      12. Consciousness research is the only science available to man­kind at the present time that enables investigation of the relative energy levels of both linear and nonlinear paradigms, their domains, and the realities that are beyond time, location, or dimension and that exist as both identifiably objective as well as subjective.


      The above statements calibrate at consciousness level 1,000, which is the highest level of truth and knowability of the current human condition.

      As in a doctoral dissertation, the above statements will be treated as though they are hypotheses to be clarified, amplified, demonstrated, and documented by presenting data that is suf­ficient to justify the fulfillment of the null hypothesis.

    • prakki surya
      dear friends Science is the logical analysis of the items existing in this creation based on only one authority that is perception (Pratyaksha Pramanam). Even
      Message 2 of 2 , Nov 1 6:40 PM

        dear friends


        Science is the logical analysis of the items existing in this creation based on only one authority that is perception (Pratyaksha Pramanam). Even in the ancient logic, all the authorities (Pramanas) are based on perception only. You see the fire giving smoke. This is deduction or perception. When you see the smoke coming from a distance and do not see the fire, you say that fire exists there and this is induction or inference (Anumana Pramanam). But this induction is based on your previous deduction only. Somebody says to you that fire gives smoke. If that person is your dearest, you believe it and infer the fire from the smoke. This is authority of word ‘Shabdha Pramanam’.


         Though you have not seen the fire, your dearest person has seen the smoke coming from fire. Like this all the authorities are based on perception only. I do not find any scripture of any Religion, which contradicts the experience of perception. There are four ways of authority. 1) Sruthi, which is the original scripture. 2) Smrithi, which is the commentaries of Scholars on the original scripture. 3) Yukthi, the logical analysis based on deduction, induction etc., 4) Anubhava, the experience based on the perception of the items in this world, which may be direct or indirect. Out of these four ways, the fourth way is the most powerful. If anything contradicts the fourth way, that is not valid or it may be a misinterpretation based on misunderstanding of the Sruthi or Smrithi or Yukthi. Thus Science and Philosophy are not separate. The very frame of the spiritual knowledge is Science only. Thus Science is the basic foundation and over all underlying structure of all the Scriptures.


        A true Scientist should always stand on the perception and should not deny the experience derived by perception. If he denies, he is not a scientist. All top most scientists were philosophers and spiritual people only. Those scientists have travelled along the river of Science and reached its end, which is the ocean of spiritual knowledge called as philosophy. Philosophy is pervading all the branches of Science. Every branch of Science gives Ph.D as the final degree. Ph.D means Doctor in Philosophy. If Science and Philosophy are different, why this word Philosophy is regarded so much by all the branches of Science? Philosophy means the essence of the knowledge of every branch that is experienced when one reaches the end of that branch.


        Therefore, the spiritual knowledge, which is the ocean is the Philosophy in which all branches of Science and all the Religions merge and loose their identity. A scientist who has not reached the end of Science and who is still travelling in the river only denies the existence of the ocean, since he is still perceiving the limiting boundaries of his knowledge – river. Such river-travellers are called as atheists. They neither see the ocean nor see the other rivers. Even the follower of any particular Religion is in the state of this atheist only. He is no better than these atheists because he believes that God is a particular form only, which is a small part of this creation. Some other followers believe God as formless, who is the all-pervading cosmic energy. Since cosmic energy is also a part of the creation, their form of God is very big. These atheist-scientist believe that this creation is God. Thus all these are atheists only. All these atheists, who may be scientific atheists or religious atheists, will realize the true nature of God only when they reach the end of the Science or Religion.


        A scientific atheist is contradicting his own authority, which is the perception. When the human incarnation performs the inexplicable miracles, how can they deny the perception of such miracles? You may do that miracle in an alternative way, but that does not contradict the different path of the original miracle. One may get first class by copying. Such false first class cannot contradict the genuine first class. The result is same, but the process is different. You may produce ash by putting a fine powder of wet salt in the grews of your hand like a magician. The same ash may be produced by a divine miracle also. Since the result is same, can you argue that the process also should be same? Since the first class result is same in the case of the original student and a fraud student, do you mean that the hard work of the original student is fraud?


        Do you mean that the original and fraud students are one and the same? Therefore, the same result can have two different processes. Since the result is same, processes need not be same. Do you mean that a result has only one process? Is it not contradicting the very fundamentals of Science? A Chemical compound can be produced in several ways (Hess Law). Since the compound is same, do you mean that the alternative reactions are also one and the same? Same Chennai city can be reached by several ways. Since the end City is same, do you mean that all the paths are not different? Do you mean that all the paths are merged as one path only and thus there is only one path to reach the Chennai city? Therefore, conservative scientists and conservative religious followers can be categorized as immature analysts. The immaturity indicates their position in the river and maturity indicates their position in the end of the river, which is the ocean. Einstein, Newton, Heisenberg etc., are the top most scientists who have travelled and travelled along the Science River and reached the final spiritual ocean.



        at the lotus feet of shri datta swami




        JagGY 10QZ <ixjaguarlight@...> wrote:

        The Science of Truth


        Classically, the essential requirements of science consist of an organized body of conformable information that is com­prehensible, logical, and replicable. In practice, therefore, science is composed of theory plus testable hypotheses capable of experimental (experiential) confirmation.


        Although "truth" has been the focus of erudite intellectual discourse and attention for thousands of years, no totally uni­versal agreement has ever been reached that would conclude the open-ended, ongoing discussion (e.g., see The Great Books of the Western World). Within stated

        Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.