> Dear Susan.
> Being a true stalwart of empiricism, it is clear
> that no-one is going to impress you with anything,
> any idea, thought, or concept, unless it is
> supported by objective evidence, something that
> can be weighed, measured, wrapped-up in a material
> package and delivered to your door. I very much
> admire your resilience to alternative
> perspectives, given that there is so much
> psychobabble out there.
> I don’t expect for one moment that the following
> will sway you in any way, but there could be
> others out there with whom this might resonate.
> I refer to a passage referring to
> ‘metaphysical’ phenomena from a book by the
> Russian writer and philosopher, P.D Ouspensky,
> one-time-student of the Greek-Armenian teacher G.
> I Gurdjieff, who founded the ‘Institute for the
> Harmonious Development Man’ in Fontainebleau,
> ‘It is a complete absurdity to think that it is
> possible to study phenomena of a higher order like
> ‘telepathy’, ‘clairvoyance’, forseeing the
> future, mediumistic phenomena and so on, in the
> same way as electrical, chemical, or
> meteorological phenomena are studied. There is
> something in phenomena of a higher order which
> requires a particular emotional state for their
> observation and study. And this excludes any
> possibility of ‘properly conducted’ laboratory
> experiments and observations’.
> Referring once again to ‘ideas’
> ‘thoughts’, ‘concepts’, which have no
> material existence (in your view), I personally
> view them as being as ‘material’ as the genes
> that make up your physical presence, but of a
> higher, finer order. ‘Bright’ ideas, profound
> concepts, are like metaphysical ‘genes’,
> dominant and successful enough to ‘self
> replicate’ in the minds of millions, billions of
> human brains across centuries,
> Wishing you well...