1st June Show with Dr. Bernard Haisch

[Bluntman]

I've listened to the show since around the 10th episode and never felt compelled to comment - I'm really pretty lazy. I had a little trouble accessing the discussion forums tonight and tried some links from google. I found a few forums where David Biedney, and to a lesser extent Gene Steinberg were savaged as hosts and interviewers and people.

[align=center]Let those people listen to this show.[/align]

It was superb. Every statement the guest made that raised questions in my mind prompted those exact questions to be asked by the hosts. I have rarely heard as intense and free flowing discussion as I have in this latest podcast. The ideas really had a "wow" factor.

This was a classic, the show was entertaining and thought provoking - I can't praise the show, or Dr Haisch and his ideas enough . I'll be buying the book.

Thanks

 

[BrandonD]

It was superb. Every statement the guest made that raised questions in my mind prompted those exact questions to be asked by the hosts. I have rarely heard as intense and free flowing discussion as I have in this latest podcast. The ideas really had a "wow" factor.

This was a classic, the show was entertaining and thought provoking - I can't praise the show, or Dr Haisch and his ideas enough . I'll be buying the book.

Thanks

I enjoyed this show a lot, these are some of my favorite subjects to think about.

There is a missing element to the discussion, in my opinion. If we take the discussion out of the purely intellectual realm, I think the idea that human existence is nothing more than a perfect god-like intelligence wishing to physically experience itself seems a little weak.

Take yourself out of the intellectual world and I think there is a sense shared by everyone (at least everyone I know who is not religiously brainwashed) that something is very WRONG. Things are not working as they should be, something is not right. I can provide numerous examples, but I don't think they're even required because I believe this sense is innate. The fundamental properties of existence are ignorance and suffering.

The first thing a baby does when it's brought into this world is to cry.

Does this overarching sense of wrongness fit in with the idea that existence is simply this perfect little mechanism for a perfect blissful God to experience itself?

I think David touched upon this problem when he asked "Is this existence the most efficient way to get the job done?" In my opinion the answer is a definite no. If you have an ounce of imagination, you can conceive of a world where these ideas of lessons and karma work much more efficiently and smoothly... where the majority of life experience isn't *absolutely wasted* in front of a television.

How much mindless TV does God need to experience? Apparently a hell of a lot.

I think there is certainly something to what Bernard is saying, especially the idea that consciousness is the fundamental element of the universe, more fundamental than matter. I've personally experienced this with ayahuasca, and I'd recommend this method to anyone with an adventurous spirit who wants to experience that sort of thing (and isn't afraid of getting the sh*t scared out of them, because that's probably going to happen).

I personally think that something is wrong in existence, all is not well. I think that this is related to the reason why consciousness is here... I get the impression that consciousness is either trapped, or has been "injected" into the universe from outside in order to set right what is wrong. Maybe both.

This is a very gnostic idea, and there's a really old story from the apocryphal acts of Thomas called "The Hymn of the Pearl" that relates to this idea. It had a major impact upon me when I first read it, I read it at work and I suddenly started crying and went into the bathroom so no one would see me.

Here's a link to a condensed "americanized" translation, if the gnostic sort of ideas appeal to you:

http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/The_Other_Gospels/Hymn_of_the_Pearl.html

Anyway, enough of that stuff. Great show guys, still tops on my list of podcasts.

 

[CapnG]

The first thing a baby does when it's brought into this world is to cry.

Babies cry because they've been removed from an ideal environment, where all their needs are catered to, so you can't really blame them! It's also however a mindless state of existence without thought or change or challenge.

I think David touched upon this problem when he asked "Is this existence the most efficient way to get the job done?" In my opinion the answer is a definite no. If you have an ounce of imagination, you can conceive of a world where these ideas of lessons and karma work much more efficiently and smoothly... where the majority of life experience isn't *absolutely wasted* in front of a television.

Efficiency is not without price. Sometimes the value of an experience is the experience itself. I can read a novel or I can read the more efficent Cole's Notes. Watch a movie or read an online synopsis. I can do many things more efficiently (and usually I prefer to) but almost always I am trading speed for substance. Do only read the first and last chapters of a mystery novel? Do you wolf down a delicious meal rather than savour it? Chimpanzees have "efficient" sex but I don't plan on copying their methods anytime soon...

I personally think that something is wrong in existence, all is not well. I think that this is related to the reason why consciousness is here... I get the impression that consciousness is either trapped, or has been "injected" into the universe from outside in order to set right what is wrong. Maybe both.

Right and wrong are human conventions, they have no bearing on the universe as a whole.

I enjoyed the episode although for me it was sort of like "Yep... uh-huh... yes, and?" since I agreed largely with the guest's views.

 

[UBERDOINK]

Good show. My only pet peeve is that they all discuss theology like children. They have an amazingly limited understanding of what religion, especially Christianity teaches, that all their arguments are paper dragon arguments against a parody of the belief-system.

Good show, but really, their "twilight zone" philosophical approach to this is just annoying.

 

[BrandonD]

Babies cry because they've been removed from an ideal environment, where all their needs are catered to, so you can't really blame them! It's also however a mindless state of existence without thought or change or challenge.

Ok, point taken. But as I said, examples aren't needed because, at least for myself and the intelligent thoughtful people that I've met, the sense of wrongness is innate.

Efficiency is not without price. Sometimes the value of an experience is the experience itself. I can read a novel or I can read the more efficent Cole's Notes. Watch a movie or read an online synopsis. I can do many things more efficiently (and usually I prefer to) but almost always I am trading speed for substance. Do only read the first and last chapters of a mystery novel? Do you wolf down a delicious meal rather than savour it? Chimpanzees have "efficient" sex but I don't plan on copying their methods anytime soon...

First of all, a question for you: Are you a religious guy? This would explain your objections to what I consider as simple observations of how life does not fit with this theory.

You are playing with semantics here, though maybe not intentionally. Efficiency does not relate to speed. Efficiency relates to a mechanism actually DOING what it is intended to do. So if the mechanism of reality is for God to experience itself in its highest form (hence the purpose of evolution), then your chimpanzee example and your wolfing-down-food example and your Cole's Notes example are all inapplicable.

As I said, IF the purpose of existence and consciousness is for God to experience itself and evolve into its highest form, then the vast majority of human experience is being absolutely *wasted* and not used in a constructive or creative manner at all.

Unless of course you consider mindless entertainment to be "savoring" life.

No, the mechanism of conscious existence on earth is not efficient for the stated purpose of evolving humanity and experiencing the highest form of God's consciousness. There is a wrench in the gears somewhere.

Right and wrong are human conventions, they have no bearing on the universe as a whole.

Semantics once again. If I state that the function of a car is to drive, then when the car is able to drive, it is working RIGHTLY and when it cannot drive it is working WRONGLY. I'm not speaking about human moral conventions, these are simply observations of how existence on earth does not actually match with what Bernard is describing.

It does partially, but there is another element that is not being addressed. In my opinion.

 

[Brian Now]

There is a missing element to the discussion, in my opinion. If we take the discussion out of the purely intellectual realm, I think the idea that human existence is nothing more than a perfect god-like intelligence wishing to physically experience itself seems a little weak.

I agree. The general idea that the "universe" or "god" created the universe in order to satisfy some need to 'know itself' or to gain experience seems a little off. Maybe my problem is really an ingrained notion of the supreme (whatever it is) being somehow perfect. And how can something be complete and perfect and still need or want anything?
But I can also step back and consider the idea and the universe isn't trying to do anything in particular. Maybe the universe-as-experiment theory is only a slightly more sophisticated stab in the dark than Adam and Eve. Maybe it really is just a pointless, aimless (yet ordered) universe we live in.
That's sort of a liberating idea because it frees us from living under some divine plan or higher aim.

PS...are we going to have another BrandonD vs CapnG smackdown? I wanna get my popcorn now if so.

 

[BrandonD]

They have an amazingly limited understanding of what religion, especially Christianity teaches...

Actually, that is a meaningless statement because only the shallowest tenets of christianity are universally accepted, the deeper ideas are all in dispute. HENCE baptists, catholics, lutherans, quakers, christian scientists, episcopalians, jehovah's witnesses, etc.

I know this not a pleasant fact to accept, but the bible is contradictory in many places, which allows for a whole range of belief systems, all of which are considered by their followers to be the "true" ideas of christianity.

 

[BrandonD]

PS...are we going to have another BrandonD vs CapnG smackdown? I wanna get my popcorn now if so.

Ha! Can you grab me some junior mints while you're up?

 

[louis belanger]

I enjoyed that show.Dr Haich explained clearly his theory.Idon't agree totaly with him,mosthly about his neurosciences opinions,but if we want a dialectic movement ,we need a "No-god theory"

 

[CapnG]

First of all, a question for you: Are you a religious guy? This would explain your objections to what I consider as simple observations of how life does not fit with this theory.

No. I'm a deist and a moderately agnostic one at that. I certainly do not believe in any man-made religious dogma.

You are playing with semantics here, though maybe not intentionally. Efficiency does not relate to speed. Efficiency relates to a mechanism actually DOING what it is intended to do.

Semantics? A-hem, from the dictionary:

Efficent
–adjective
1. performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort; having and using requisite knowledge, skill, and industry; competent; capable: a reliable, efficient secretary.
2. satisfactory and economical to use: Our new air conditioner is more efficient than our old one.
3. producing an effect, as a cause; causative.

As I said, IF the purpose of existence and consciousness is for God to experience itself and evolve into its highest form, then the vast majority of human experience is being absolutely *wasted* and not used in a constructive or creative manner at all.

The assumption of a need for efficiency on your part is just that, an assumption. None of us can know the motives or purpose of God so how could we possibly comment on his/her/its/their methods? We cannot therefore decry anything as "wasted". Simply because WE view it that way it would not follow that God does.

Unless of course you consider mindless entertainment to be "savoring" life.

Perhaps the purpose is to get you to realize it is indeed mindless? If so then bravo, your particular fragment of god-conciousness is ahead of those who haven't.

No, the mechanism of conscious existence on earth is not efficient for the stated purpose of evolving humanity and experiencing the highest form of God's consciousness.

By your standards, according to you.

There is a wrench in the gears somewhere.

Again, says you. Who are you to be telling God he's doing it wrong?

Semantics once again. If I state that the function of a car is to drive, then when the car is able to drive, it is working RIGHTLY and when it cannot drive it is working WRONGLY.

Really, must I go back to the dictionary AGAIN? A car that is unable to drive is not working "wrongly", it's not working PERIOD. But it's irrelevant anyway because right and wrong are simply judgements we make. Regardless of how we judge it, the car is still a car. Likewise whether or not you personally think the universe is operating correctly or not, it is still the universe. And those judgements are not always morally rooted either, sometimes they are arbitrary, kinda like the one you're making the case for here.

PS...are we going to have another BrandonD vs CapnG smackdown? I wanna get my popcorn now if so.

I hope not. I went twelve rounds in a debate with a guy on another board already this week and I doubt I have it in me...

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I use the words correct or incorrect when dealing with functionality, or agreed upon answers like 2+2=4. It helps bypass the semantical confusion that may arise when dealing with a moralistic right and wrong.

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

Dr. Haisch posits the existence of a god outside of time and space, utterly transcendent and thus unknowable.

Then he offers a theory on why existence exists: this master intellect, the divine "I AM," did it for entertainment. He explains the actions of a being who supposedly exists beyond time and space which the language of time and space.

In other words, Dr. Haisch, admittedly not having had a "mystical experience," analyzes what exists beyond time and space from the perspective of something that does. This is like measuring one's soul with a ruler, it cannot be done.

 

[BrandonD]

Really, must I go back to the dictionary AGAIN? A car that is unable to drive is not working "wrongly", it's not working PERIOD. But it's irrelevant anyway because right and wrong are simply judgements we make. Regardless of how we judge it, the car is still a car. Likewise whether or not you personally think the universe is operating correctly or not, it is still the universe. And those judgements are not always morally rooted either, sometimes they are arbitrary, kinda like the one you're making the case for here.

Alright, I get your point with the majority of your post. But I have to say that right and wrong can be precise (and not arbitrary) judgments when they are within a certain context. And I'm making them within a certain context, the context of Bernard's theory.

I could ramble on like I usually do, but to just sum up my contention with his theory, it really doesn't explain the necessity of suffering and ignorance. Especially suffering and ignorance on the massive scale that it exists here in the world.

This is always my problem with these doe-eyed theories that "all is well".

 

[CapnG]

But I have to say that right and wrong can be precise (and not arbitrary) judgments when they are within a certain context.

I never said they couldn't be just that they aren't always so. Context, of course, is everything. As our perspective gets less focussed, it's harder to make that call. It's easy to judge whether or not a cake came out right or wrong based on it's taste. Not quite so easy to cast pronouncements about the state of the universe, I think.

Especially suffering and ignorance on the massive scale that it exists here in the world.

This is always my problem with these doe-eyed theories that "all is well".

Well here's where I part company with guys like Bernard. I don't subscribe to the notion that this is all some grand design in which we are the star players. Our existence could be a minor, or even an accidental occurance.

We judge things like suffering and ignorace to be "wrong" because we're the ones who must endure it, ergo it's negative from our perspective. In the grand scheme of things however it may simply be the way things are, with no framework of morality what-so-ever (or at least not in a format we would recognize).

 

[Crow]

Enjoyed the show. All I can say is if there is such a thing as reincarnation...I hope we get to have some voice in whether we come back or not, cause there's no way in hell I want to come back.

 

[BrandonD]

Well here's where I part company with guys like Bernard. I don't subscribe to the notion that this is all some grand design in which we are the star players. Our existence could be a minor, or even an accidental occurance.

We judge things like suffering and ignorace to be "wrong" because we're the ones who must endure it, ergo it's negative from our perspective. In the grand scheme of things however it may simply be the way things are, with no framework of morality what-so-ever (or at least not in a format we would recognize).

I'm actually not referring to morality, I think you may be getting something different out of what I'm saying.

Here's an interesting mystery: all the thoughtful people I know suffer from a sense that they are in a state of disconnection and ignorance. We have no idea why we are here, we do not know the future, and our consciousness is most definitely separate from the outside world. And yet, this has been our condition for the duration of our life. We know of nothing else.

A blinded man only laments his infirmity because he knows of a time when he once could see. If he were born blind, and was isolated from people who could see, he would have no reason to even suspect the true function of his eyes. He has no frame of reference outside of his condition.

And yet within our consciousness we seem to have some frame of reference outside of this physical existence, a frame of reference that recognizes that our current state is one of disconnection and ignorance, and that there exists a state of connection and enlightenment. And thus we suffer and struggle.

This sort of thinking is generally considered absurd from the materialist point of view, but as consciousness rises to a place of prominence in the foundation of existence, I think it will become less absurd.

"A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth man's minds about to religion." -Francis Bacon

 

[Snoman]

but as consciousness rises to a place of prominence in the foundation of existence, I think it will become less absurd.

Seems to me mankind is heading the other direction and the decline of consciousness will eventually break the foundation of existence rather than contribute to understanding it.

 

[CapnG]

And yet within our consciousness we seem to have some frame of reference outside of this physical existence, a frame of reference that recognizes that our current state is one of disconnection and ignorance, and that there exists a state of connection and enlightenment. And thus we suffer and struggle.

So.... Buddhism?

This of course assumes that there actually IS a state of connection and enlightment to be reached and that it is not merely a coping mechanism devised by our imaginations to help us deal with the horrible reality of sentience.

 

[7 String]

Pardon the Pun,,,, but Jesus Christ! David you have out done yourself on this one. I'm going to have to listen to this episode a few more times just to grasp the information that all of you brought to the table. David, I don't even know where to start with you???? I've always been amazed by the wealth of knowledge that you bring to the Paracast. You and Gene both make me proud to say I'm a loyal listener. The integritity and knowledge you both have makes it very easy for me to feel confident to use the paracast as reference in conversations I have with others on the topic of Para-normal. Keep up the great work!

This entire episode has confirmed so many thoughts that I too have had over the years, hearing them from a very intelligent view point really laid some validation on the subject to me. WOW!

I've often wondered what do we really know about the universe and ourselves? Think about it,,,, the universe is so massive that we are in fact, here on earth no bigger than the microbes that we have living on our smallest stones in our plant box's! Just imagine that microbe may have it's own way of thinking and understanding, based on it's size in it's own world. It is probably no more able to shoot across the street to the next nearest plant box than we are to get to the next galaxy. Yet for us we can walk across the street in seconds, providing we aren't struck down by a delivery truck....lol
For all we know based on the large picture of the universe, the earth is no more than a Cell on something much larger, and we are nothing more than just parasites hitching a ride on that cell..... Crazy thought provoking episode.

David, I've been a guitarist for 26 years now and I know exactly what you talking about when you are in the moment with the music, all the theory in the world cannot teach someone to be present at that exact moment of "absolute musical expression" only musicians that dare know what that feeling is all about and that is what keeps us going until the next time. One of the drills I do in practicing is called "romancing the note". I will spend or lose hours at a time when I'm focused on a single note. I will strike a note and be there in that moment as the note is first brought to life, I listen to every nuance of that note as it comes to life, then as it slowly falls to silence. I add vibrato and simply focus on that note and everything it does as related to what I do and how I feel, I connect an emotion to that note and allow myself to vibrate and become one with it. This practice drives my wife nuts, understandably so...... however it's when this control comes to life and others feel it at the same time you do, those hours spent on that one note have hit pay dirt when the emotional attachment I placed on a note is heard by others!

Anyway sorry for the rant, Great show Dave and Gene!

Allen

 

[sk4p]

Great, great stuff. I'm another self-styled Gnostic: I think the reality of the Divine is waaaaay the hell bigger than the mainstream religions tend to give it credit for, but at the same time, I think that Something Is Wrong. There must be some interesting twist, or problem, or purpose, which all the tribulation and suffering in the human experience is intended to solve or address. Like someone said, it seems hard to imagine that the Supreme Being is so keen on reality TV that It has to watch it through so many different pairs of eyes so many times.

What I liked about Dr. Haisch was his complete willingness to make statements with great intellectual honesty ("Well, I think ..." or "I don't know, but I believe ..."). He was reasonably comfortable expressing his opinions and beliefs but was scrupulous in disclaiming them as such and separating them from things which can be demonstrated via the Scientific Method. And that gets big points from me.

Between Allen and Jim last week, and A.J. and Derek and Richard the weeks before, you guys are on a run of great guests.

--Shawn