Yes, this a “different interest” and different take and focus then the approach and research in my recent book.
That being written I have been fascinated by Bohm and Pribram’s holographic theories. If I remember correctly Pribram also theorized the brain functioned holographically. I thought Michael Talbot’s book; The Holographic Universe did a nice presentation of their concepts and work. That and I find the study of fractals and their correlations to a holographic universe also fascinating.
I don’t want to go to off on to great a tangent from the research and theme of my book here yet at the same time such subjects of unifications inevitably share and overlap. I agree so many indigenous cultures take on cosmology and other subjects is wrongfully trivialized or ignored. Graham Hancock addresses this also.
In today’s Western society that is so heavily focused on physicality and materiality it seems it cannot understand or appreciate any societies, past or present, that were more centered on consciousness, the non-physical. The article you referenced points to this:
Peat uses his to plead for a more serious consideration of “indigenous science”. That is the heart of this book. It is not that Peat himself believes that Native American knowledge needs to be justified in Western terms, but rather, as he poignantly points out, that in the current intellectual climate it is difficult for indigenous people to get a serious hearing for their epistemological and metaphysical systems.
I’ll reiterate what I wrote in an earlier post; “I agree in the concepts shared by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Aldous Huxley and Edgar Cayce to cite a few; basically, that there are two ongoing evolutions, one of physicality and one of consciousness.”
Further in these cases their focus was a unifying of individual consciousness with a “universal consciousness”. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin called consciousness evolving to a “Noosphere” and ultimately to the “Omega Point”. To know oneself to be oneself yet one with the whole. Many spiritual philosophies share these “universal” ideas and I lay this out in my book, further that they created sites to assist and enhance this journey in evolving consciousness.
I liked another part of the article:
Throughout these pages, we gain tantalising glimpses of an elusive alternative to the thing we know as “science”. Just as Peat has had to learn by sitting quietly and observing over long periods of time, so the reader is led gently into another world and asked to simply sit and observe.
It reminded of something Huxley wrote:
If one is not oneself a sage or saint, the best thing one can do, in the field of metaphysics, is to study the works of those who were, and who because they had modified their merely human mode of being, were capable of a more than merely human kind and amount of knowledge. P.71
We have to combine these things: to walk on this tightrope, to gather the data of perception, to be able to analyze it in terms of language, at the same time to be able to drop the language and to go into the experience. P.54 The Divine Within by Aldous Huxley
|Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||505||Susan Doris||04-Aug-20 16:50|
|Re: Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||192||drrayeye||04-Aug-20 20:18|
|Re: Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||183||Susan Doris||05-Aug-20 05:10|
|Re: Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||200||DBCarroll||05-Aug-20 23:47|
|Missing element||184||drrayeye||06-Aug-20 01:07|
|Re: Missing element||185||DBCarroll||06-Aug-20 04:14|
|Different interest||195||drrayeye||06-Aug-20 10:09|
|Re: Different interest||270||DBCarroll||06-Aug-20 18:37|
|Re: Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||196||Susan Doris||06-Aug-20 05:16|
|Re: Three brief questions for Donald B Carroll||201||DBCarroll||06-Aug-20 05:47|