Library » Conscious Creation » The Emerging New Worldview – An Introduction and Overview

By Paul M. Helfrich, Ph.D.

What is a Worldview?

A worldview is an action – the living lens through which we each perceive and project outward to the world. It’s the psychological filter that contains all of our belief systems about God, life, the universe, and everything, and the immaculate way it all works together. The deepest aspects of our personality and psyche thus express themselves through our worldview.

Changing any belief alters our worldview and changes the way in which we perceive reality. So the emerging new worldview can be understood as an evolution of belief systems to reflect deeper understandings of the nature of reality on personal and collective levels.

Throughout history, the belief systems about the way things work – called paradigms – have constantly been challenged and updated with new evidence of personal experience and discovery. When enough people agree that their versions of personal experience are “true,” then we create a collective view of reality; a consensus worldview.

In any period of history we can observe the evolution of the consensus reality that reflects the mass beliefs about how things work, the relationship of each individual to themselves and others, and the design and purpose of life. We can see reflected in mass media – movies, newspapers, television, books, the web, and radio – the mass beliefs that make up the consensus worldview of our own period of history.

Just because someone believes in something doesn’t make it necessarily true. That is, belief and truth are often uneasy partners. As the Roman philosopher Epictetus said, “What concerns me is not the way things are, but the way people think things are.” In this sense, history is really a history of consensus belief systems. There’s another popular aphorism that states that “history is written by the winners.” In other words, those that don’t align with the officially accepted view of things are often considered outcasts: heretics, blasphemers, or losers whose beliefs are inferior by rights of conquest. These beliefs are clearly reflected in the Western worldview of the past five centuries.

During the 16th and 17th centuries there was a major paradigm shift that some now call the Copernican Revolution or The Enlightenment. This was a period in Western history when the Roman Catholic Church dominated the political scene. As there was no separation of Church and State in those days, the consensus reality of this era embraced the idea that the Earth was the center of the Universe and humankind was the dominant of all God’s creatures, privy to using the Earth and its resources to suit its own needs. And the “word of God” as interpreted in the religious scriptures by a professional clergy clearly supported this view.

Gradually, supported by the scientific observations of Nicolas Copernicus and Galelei Galileo – both astronomers – a new worldview emerged in which the belief that the Earth rotated around the Sun became the officially accepted view. The process of this paradigm shift was quite stressful and caused social, political, and economic upheaval. If the Church’s interpretation of scripture could be wrong in that area, what other religious assumptions were wrong? Modern science and religion have had an uneasy coexistence ever since.

Regarding their present relationship, physicist Freeman Dyson observes that:

“Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect.

“Trouble arises when either science or religion claim universal jurisdiction, when either religious dogma or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance they bring both science and religion into disrepute.” – Science and Religion as Partners

As a result of the effects of the Copernican Revolution, today we live in an era dominated by scientific belief systems. To its credit, science has never claimed to know all of the answers but provides a methodology to actively discern the way that things work. A hypothesis is offered based upon a theory and rigorous experimentation ensues to validate or refute it. Once the results become replicable in multiple laboratories, the theory then becomes a law. Sometimes theories become so popular that they are assumed to be laws by the general public. Darwin’s theory of evolution and Einstein’s theory of general relativity are good examples.

Regardless, scientific method is one of the great achievements of the Western world! Though the benefits of scientific achievement are undeniable, there has also been a price to pay. Many theories find their way into the consensus worldview under the guise of Truth, but in fact are still unproven. For example, Freud’s psychiatry paints a dark view of the human psyche; to be human is to be an animal full of repressed violence and sexual urges that if unleashed would surely result in the destruction of the civilized world. Our impulses, the ineffable “language” of the psyche, are not to be trusted. To be considered impulsive is to be on a road to certain disaster.

Darwin’s theory of evolution claims that fierce competition is the primary value driving all interactions between the Earth’s species. In human terms this justifies endless environmental abuses, wars, and persecution of “enemy” religions, economies, and ethic groups. In complementary fashion, cooperation is understood to be a primary value only for the weak, who are easy prey for conquest.

Other belief systems belonging to the current Western worldview include the following:

The philosophy of Descartes implies that our minds and bodies exist as separate parts within Newton’s view of the universe as one big mechanism; all separate, unique, and existing purely by accidental combinations of chemicals, matter, and energy fields. All reality can be broken down into component parts that, once fully understood, can be fully explained by scientific method.

Since the body is a machine, doctors can easily treat the “broken” parts with synthetic medicines and invasive surgeries that “fix” them. Since the mind is an artifact of brain chemistry, when it “breaks” it too can be “fixed” by medicines, surgery, and even complex psychotherapy requiring strict professional mediation by qualified experts that purport to know more about us than we do ourselves.

Since we are all victims of the doctrine of Darwin’s “survival of the fittest,” the belief system of competition justifies the strong dominating and conquering the weak. Our economic models should accurately reflect this underlying belief system. Thus competition is the driving force that is the most efficient way to utilize our time and limited resources.

Since we are by nature a violent species competing for reproductive privilege, family control, and limited resources with others, we need to support a military-industrial complex and international alliances that prevent all-out war through means of the best equipped armies and most advanced military technologies in the world. This is the best way to deter further global conflicts and maintain our Western standard of living.

Since we have the strongest armies and best weapons that technology can produce, our way of life must be the way that God intended all humanity to live. Spreading our influence by surreptitiously dominating and otherwise convincing all other cultures to align with our economic, religious, and scientific values is a natural outcome of being in the strongest alliance of nations. And these are the values that should best inform and fuel our national security and foreign policies.

On the other hand, Western religious dogmas still perpetuate the idea of a flawed, sinful self that needs to be renounced and suppressed lest we all behave like primitive barbarians and animals. The concept of “original sin” most clearly reflects this belief, promoting the idea that we are born as flawed, sinful creatures. And if we exhibit “bad” behavior that we don’t recant, our deeds can earn us a ticket to eternal suffering at the hands of demons who really enjoy their work.

Our sexual nature is understood to be dirty, shameful, and somehow lower than the lofty nature of “true spirituality.” Anyone who enjoys sexual pleasure cannot possibly be spiritual; they just don’t mix. And even worse, heterosexual preference is the only choice acceptable to an angry God who enjoys punishing people and demons who break his divine rules and laws, all of which require the skillful mediation of professional clergy uniquely suited to understanding and explaining these to the rest of us.

At their worst, the majority of Eastern religious dogmas still perpetuate the idea of transmitting officially accepted metaphysical knowledge through the hands of masters, sages, and gurus. Though obtainable by the rare individual who attains direct knowledge, most people are better off giving up their authority to professional clergy who are the only authenticated holders of The Way or The Path.

And if you are lucky, you too can learn the secret methods whose purpose is to help you break out of the hellish cycle of linearly reincarnated lives whose main focus is to avoid the pain and suffering inherent in the physical condition but whose ultimate goal is the annihilation of the ego-self into the return to the blissful mergence with our Primary Source or God.

As long as scientific method, with all of its wonderful successes keeps its collective head buried in the sand of the five physical senses it will never be able to achieve its holy grail, the Grand Unified Theory of Everything, which we are lead to believe will solve all of our problems – health, abundance, relationships – whenever they arise.

As long as religious dogmas perpetuate doctrines of flawed selves and the need for professional mediation to attain the status of spirituality, so too will they never be able to empower people to trust in the authorities of their own selves, trust the spontaneous nature of their sexual and emotional beings, or directly experience God without mediation.

It would seem that some sort of hybrid of the belief systems of science and religion could lead us toward a new worldview that is holistic in nature, including the best practices of both disciplines.

[ Go to the top ]

On Bridging Science and Spirit

The schizophrenic separation of science (masculine traits of intellect, logic, reason) and spirituality (feminine traits of intuitions, emotions, feelings) continues to diminish as we move forward into the twenty-first century. Each discipline’s current, mainstream thinking is still locked in a calcified epistemology that is presently incompatible. Epistemology is a fancy word for understanding how we innately know anything and then agree on the rules that constitute evidence and proof of what we know.

There are many thinkers, philosophers of science and religion, who are adding immeasurably to the ongoing debate of the perennial big questions: Why are we here? Where do we “go” when we die? How does it all work? Who or what designed it all and toward what purpose? It appears that science is not the only discipline concerned with Grand Unified Theories, as theologians and philosophers are likewise. And some have begun to suggest that any type of true unified theory must include the totality of the human experience. No small challenge!

Willis Harman – philosopher, scientist, futurist, and former president of The Institute of Noetic Sciences in Sausalito, CA – states that:

“It is impossible to create a well-working society on a knowledge base that is fundamentally inadequate, seriously incomplete, and mistaken in its basic assumptions. Yet that is precisely what the modern world has been trying to do.

“There appears indeed to be no conflict between a mature science and a mature religion. Indeed, we must seriously question whether we have a mature science as long as such conflict appears to exist.” – Global Mind Change, Legitimizing the Transpersonal

We now live in a world where the big-eyed, big-headed alien is mainstream imagery. People no longer think twice about it. When I recently saw that alien archetype—the big head with slanted black eye-orbs—staring back at me from the cover of Popular Mechanics magazine, I realized that transpersonal phenomena are literally coming out of the closet into the mainstream.

In fact transpersonal phenomena, which acknowledge the multidimensional nature of the psyche, have always been with us. They have just been forced, more often than not, into the closet by the prevalence of limited scientific and religious belief systems. But even rational, scientific beliefs do not provide all of the answers to the big questions of God, life, the universe, and everything, much less our subjective experiences that don’t fit into current theories and models. Though many still believe in the promise that the big answers are just another implanted microchip, mathematical language, or nanobot away.

Most of our lives benefit from many of the scientific discoveries of the past three hundred years. We wouldn’t have the luxury of air-conditioning, word processors, or microwave ovens without it. But these benefits exist in a very narrow spectrum of reality that are the result of a type of thinking characterized by the beliefs of predicting and controlling our environment and lives.

What we can predict and control is very helpful to our sense of nation, economy, community, and personal well being, particularly in terms of military technologies and the international politics of warfare that have played out on such a large scale during the past century. But we must still ask ourselves, if science is so useful then why are there more diseases than ever? Why are there still so many weapons systems proliferating worldwide? Why is there still so much economic, spiritual, and intellectual poverty in our collective reality? The answers can be found by widening our thinking patterns to include ways of knowing that embrace subjective experiences. There is an important difference between predict-and-control thinking (knowledge) and intuitive ways of knowing (wisdom).

The transition from a purely rational, intellectual foundation to a hybrid that includes intuition, emotion, and other subjective states continues slowly as there is still much fraud, misinformation, and fear surrounding what we don’t fully understand in rational, scientific terms. And we may never achieve a wider understanding of the big questions if we cling to a woefully incomplete and inadequate epistemology.

If we don’t fundamentally understand the big questions, how can we even begin to find big answers? If we continue to ask the wrong questions… our answers will remain incomplete.

According to psychologist Charles Tart, the arena of “psi” phenomena (telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, telekinesis, etc.) has been scientifically proven through decades of rigorous laboratory study yet remains on the skeptical inquirer’s hit lists.

According to Harvard Ph.D. and Pulitzer prize winning author John Mack, the UFO sightings/abduction phenomena is now being seriously pursued by a variety of mainstream psychologists and psychiatrists.

Channeling, once a phenomenon relegated to shadowy séance rooms, is now occurring in ever increasing frequency and depth. As a simple search on the Internet will attest, it is now acknowledged as a grass roots populist phenomenon. Bodies of work like the thirtyfive-plus published books comprising the work of Jane Roberts called “the Seth material” are recent additions to Western thinking that are, in actuality, contemporary expressions of the perennial wisdom customized to the times and needs of the West that have yet to find their way into mainstream experience.

In other words, what the Eastern perennial sources have been saying for over three millennia are now being expressed anew in the language and cultural context of Western belief systems. This presents a challenge to the old worldview that still places channelers within the confines of a spectrum that covers Dissociative Personality Disorder, to false prophets and demonic possession. Again, these ideas reflect the beliefs found in incomplete and inadequate models of the human mind, the universe, and God.

Phenomena like remote viewing, lucid dreaming, and out-of-body experiences (OOBEs) have been the subject of legitimate scientific inquiry at the Monroe Institute in Faber, VA. Stephen LaBerge’s Stanford research lab, and other places for over twenty-five years. Near-death experiences (NDEs) are also the subject of serious scientific study by Raymond Moody, Kenneth Ring, and others.

All of these phenomena are being experienced in the personal reality of millions of people, regardless of what the officially accepted scientific and religious dogmas say is or isn’t possible. The direct experience of millions of people presents compelling anecdotal evidence that science and religion within their present set of limiting beliefs will never understand until they widen their aperture and, as some now suggest, merge their worldviews, building a conceptual bridge that includes their best practices.

A good example is the field of psychology. After spending more than a century becoming a legitimate scientific discipline, it is slowly broadening to include transpersonal psychology. This discipline’s origins lie in the late 19th century with the visionary work of William James, F.W.H. Meyers, and Sigmund Freud, and has continued into the 20th with Carl Jung, Abraham Maslow, Stanislav Grof, Jane Roberts, Charles Tart, Ken Wilber and many others. The transpersonal view is helping to redefine our understanding of the human psyche. It now includes the idea that our ego-self is only one aspect self, a primary aspect self, that continuously emerges and “surfs” the most outward physically focused conscious “layer” of a multidimensional collective consciousness.

“You are multipersons. You exist in many times and places at once. You exist as one person, simultaneously. This does not deny the independence of the persons, but your inner reality straddles their reality, while it also serves as a psychic world in which they can grow.

“I do not want to get involved in a discussion of ‘levels,’ in which progression is supposed to occur from one to the other. All such discussions are based upon your idea of one-personhood, consecutive time, and limited versions of the soul.” – Seth/Jane Roberts, The “Unknown” Reality, session #683

It is now increasingly suspected in scientific circles, what has always been known in the perennial wisdom traditions, that when the body dies the ego-self continues in some form, focused in another framework of consciousness, one that does not use space-time as its basis but a different “order” of perception.

Lastly, our space-time universe is beginning to be viewed as a single framework of consciousness in a vast, multidimensional omniverse. Upon reflection it seems that we’ve still got it backwards, or more to point—inside out—thinking that our physical sense perceptions and universe were somehow central to All-That-Is, in other words, the center of All Universes!

The concept of “the conscious universe” is as revolutionary to our postmodern era as the Copernican Revolution was to the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Both concepts pull the rug out from under our officially accepted reality and expand our understanding of what is really going on.

We are moving from a belief system in a “uni” verse—as single, physical, separated objects to an “omni” verse—a multidimensional, physical and non-physical, but both conscious, interpenetrated, and unseparated from its Primary Source.

So what impact do these developments have on Western society’s central creation myth of the Big Bang and Evolution?

[ Go to the top ]

The Emerging Mythos of the New Worldview

Scientific and religious dogmas serve as the collective bookends in our current collective worldview in the West. Their fundamental role is to offer an officially accepted view of God, life, the universe, and everything that explains the origins of our universe, species, and the laws that “govern” each. They offer unique versions of these concepts that form the underpinnings of our cultural value systems, including ethics and morality. These value systems also contain a subset of beliefs that can be understood as “creation myths.”

So what is myth and what role does it play in the emerging new worldview?

Myth is a belief system that incorporates intellectual, intuitive, and emotional qualities whose purpose is to provide a cultural framework, sense of continuity, and deep meaning to support cultural identity and its collective worldview.

Webster’s dictionary defines mythology as:

1. An allegorical narrative, 2. A body of myths: as a. the myths dealing with gods, demi-gods, or legendary heroes of a particular people, b. mythos.

According to Joseph Campbell, one of the 20th century’s leading mythologists:

“Mythology is an organization of images metaphoric of experience, action, and fulfillment of the human spirit in the field of a given culture at a given time.” – Reflections on the Art of Living, A Joseph Campbell Companion

According to Willis Harman, the following is a rendition of Western Society’s Central Myth:

“In the beginning was the Big Bang. Following that were something like 15 billion years of evolution of stars and planets; the coming together of certain chemicals to create life on planet Earth; the further evolution of more complex life forms, and their sorting out through natural selection; the resulting formation of increasingly complex neuronal networks culminating in the human brain with its fantastic capabilities. Thus the essential characteristics of human nature are to be understood as the consequence of an evolutionary succession of random events (from the origin of life to later mutations) and natural selections, and hence accidental—without purpose or meaning.

The essence of ourselves is to be found in a material substance, the DNA with which we are born. Since our basic drives appear to be survival, pleasure, and procreation, it is only natural that the economy should have become the paramount institution of modern society, around which everything else revolves, and that economic logic and values should be the primary guides to our individual and collective decision making. It is only natural that we should treat the Earth and our fellow creatures as ‘resources,’ to be used in the service of the economy, and that we should view controlling nature through technology as one of modern society’s most impressive achievements.

This central myth infuses and informs our education, healthcare policy, legal justice system, business, and other social institutions. If it were to be found fundamentally in error, the implications are far-reaching.” – Global Mind Change, The Worldview Challenge.

As we begin a new millennium our central myth is morphing right before our eyes. Even without turning our attention inward, we’ve begun to realize that our officially accepted view of space-time is changing. A recent headline in the L.A. Times announced “Time, Space Obsolete in New View of Universe.” It discussed an emerging scientific theory, called string theory, that speculates about infinitesimally small “energy strings” vibrating in a multidimensional pattern literally creating “cosmic music” that form the building blocks for our physical universe.

The emerging new worldview is a hybrid of the best scientific and religious practices that incorporates an ancient, perennial process that originates “outside” of space-time, or perhaps more literally “inside” in what physicists term to be a “non-local” state of no-space, no-time.

Non-locality is a fancy term for the concept shown in a scientific principle known as Bell’s Theorem. It shows how sub-atomic particles called photons can be split apart and instantly communicate status changes while “separated.” Non-locality means that in a non-physical area of consciousness consisting of no-time and no-space there is no separation whatsoever, as physical changes in state are instantly communicated.

Another example is found in the work of English biologist Rupert Sheldrake. His experiments deal with a concept termed morphic fields that support the concept of non-locality and offer an example of how it affects our lives. Sheldrake did a study on rats’ ability to learn the same maze in two discrete geographical locations. The first group took a certain amount of time to learn the maze. The subsequent group, however, learned the maze in a significantly less period of time hinting that the learning done by the first group was somehow available to the second group via a non-local morphic field that actually accelerated their learning. Could scientific discoveries work in similar fashion?

There are numerous examples of similar ideas being “discovered” at more or less the same time. For example, Marconi building on the work of Faraday, Maxwell, Hertz, and others to invent the wireless telegraph, Edison’s and Tesla’s numerous electrical inventions, and Leibniz’s and Newton’s inventing calculus. Could these ideas “be in the air” in such a way that individuals draw on some type of non-local collective consciousness for help when needed?

Inner knowledge seems to be constantly translated, individually and en masse, into the world of space-time in the creative guise of inspiration and invention, filtered through deep intuitions and intellect, to suit the needs of the people in any given period of history. As historical periods change, develop, and unfold, old myths calcify and new ones emerge to replace them. These changes always originate from within, not in some external cycle of cause and effect. This perennial pattern is well observed and reported by anthropologists, mythologists, and philosophers in what is termed the perennial, ageless, or hermetic wisdom. Regardless of labels, it expresses the idea that in spite of the changing value climates of cultural belief systems through history, there is an eternally valid Universal Truth that is constantly translated into physical constructs which originates in a non-physical domain.

Simply put, that Universal Truth is what is conventionally termed God, yet It is also holistically interpenetrated with all of Its creations, so It isn’t really “out there” or “up in the sky” somewhere. It is literally a part of you and me and everything around us. In another sense It-Is-Us or what the late author, psychic, and poet Jane Roberts termed All-That-Is. The exact words we use to describe our Primary Source aren’t really as important as the perennial idea that God is an ineffable, inexhaustible, eternal form of pure source energy, fueling everything around and inside of us.

Myth, then, is the very important psychological tool that helps us better understand our relationship with our Primary Source of Being since it is by definition ungraspable in its Totality. Our intellects can never fully express our Source in terms of written or mathematical language. As the Taoist saying goes, “the Tao which is written or spoken in not the true Tao.” So myths, archetypes, and other subconscious processes are the means by which to better understand where we come from, why we are here, and toward what purpose.

According to Joseph Campbell there is presently a new myth emerging from the collective consciousness in the Western world. When Bill Moyers asked him during an interview what the world needed now (during the mid-1980’s), he replied a new myth. Campbell didn’t pretend to know the specifics of this new myth, but he knew it had to be holistic and encompass the entire planet and all people, not just one region, set of special people or Holders of The Way.

According to Roger Walsh, a professor of psychiatry at The University of California Irvine:

“Myths are grand stories that portray, in an imaginative and symbolic manner, the basic mental structures, understanding and worldview created by a culture and which in turn create and maintain that culture. As such, myths seem to be essential to cultural coherence and well-being and much of our contemporary confusion may reflect the fact that our culture is ‘between myths.’ Ideally, myths complement and harmonize with other modes of knowing and explanation such as rational knowledge and transrational wisdom. However, problems arise when symbolic myths are not recognized as such but are mistaken for empirical facts or linear logic.” – Perennial Wisdom in a Postmodern World

Myths are thus archetypal, symbolic inner expressions meant to help us understand our universe and our place in it. They are not to be taken literally, but metaphorically. They are best understood through our own direct, subjective perception. And this requires an intuitive kind of thinking that is relatively new to the Western mind and neurological pathways but has been known by esoteric practitioners in the East for millennia.

The myths of our immediate future are, therefore, not set in stone. They are a matter of collective choice, imagination, and creativity. No one really knows what will unfold during this next century, but it should be an incredible ride! Though we still can’t label these new myths, the emerging new worldview is presently in the midst of its collective birth pangs, springing forth from the collective intuitions and creativity of our psyches. One thing is clear: the incomplete models of scientific and religious beliefs systems are rapidly merging as more and more people are awakening to the reality of a multidimensional understanding of the human mind, the universe, and God.

[ Go to the top ]

Closing Thoughts

Some thinkers see the context of the emerging new worldview in what is termed “the Second Copernican Revolution.” The major paradigm shift in this revolution is seen in the belief that consciousness is the Primary Source of Everything. The physical universe, being only one of infinite frameworks of consciousness, consists of a vast array of differing orders of consciousness, with human consciousness being one unique kind. The Primary Source is a divine source or ground of being from which everything constantly emerges. These ideas reflect the planetary and species-wide shift in consciousness that continues presently.

Researcher Duane Elgin reflects that,

“The shift to a new paradigm also brings a change in our sense of evolutionary purpose. We are shifting from seeing our journey as a secular adventure in a fragmented and lifeless cosmos without apparent meaning or purpose to seeing it as a sacred journey through a living and unified cosmos whose purpose is to serve as a learning system. Our primary purpose is to embrace and learn from both the pleasure and the pain of the world. If there were no freedom to make mistakes, there would be no pain. If there were no freedom for authentic discovery, there would be no ecstasy. In freedom, we can discover our deeper identity and purpose within a living cosmos.” – Our Living Universe

The emerging new worldview thus incorporates a multidimensional view of the psyche which exists in non-physical domains that are freely accessible through altered or non-ordinary states of consciousness. We are biologically equipped to experience more than our five physical senses, through a set of inner senses that have, to date, been the purview of the mystics, sages, and seers of the esoteric traditions. This includes the use of direct subjective experience incorporating the use of deep intuitions and emotions, hand in hand, with the intellect and reason.

In this worldview we each survive death. While this is an ancient idea, the body is, however, understood to be a sacred temple in which we each live during our physical lives. Its appetites are to be respected and nurtured, not renounced as flawed, sinful, or obstacles to fulfilling our spiritual nature. There is no need to search for some type of spirituality that is “out there” to be obtained in a quest or Hero’s Journey. There are no higher levels to attain where we finally become spiritual. We are each born into the world as blessed creatures and are spiritual beings by default.

Life is seen as a complex psychological process of temporal experiences that lead to value fulfillment—a foundational principle in which all forms of consciousness work together in a cooperative venture designed to nurture the maximum development of each individual consciousness in relation to the web of life. In other words, individual growth, happiness, and abundance are innately nurtured by a “conscious” universe, though not at the expense of other life forms, but, in full cooperation toward the maximum benefit of one and all.

Death is not to be feared as the annihilation of the self we know but as a transition to yet another state of being. It is not a dis-ease that requires a cure but a natural, spiritual process to be accepted and embraced. Time and space are not absolute qualities but instead are relative to the physical domain, to be used for our own personal purposes as long as we choose to live. So we all have the ability to create our own lives and the responsibility that comes with it.

When we shift our thinking toward living safely in a conscious universe, designed by nature to nurture us, there is a type of natural ethics intuitively discerned that promotes not only our individual well being, but also the well being of the whole. The natural process of value fulfillment makes it possible to know the best solution to any challenge we manifest for ourselves. But it takes time and effort, particularly since we are in the midst of the transition from the old to the new on a planetary scale unprecedented in human history. And what worked yesterday may not be suitable to the new and changing circumstances of today or tomorrow. So we need to be flexible, vigilant, and open-minded to the constantly changing context of our cultural value systems that are parochial and regional, not absolutes mediated by the purveyors of The Path or The Way.

Last but not least, the term “New Age” does not accurately describe the emerging new worldview. That’s simply because the majority of New Age values reflect the same old dogmatic religious belief systems spun into enticing new clothes. In other words, they are still dealing with inadequate models of the psyche and universe that squeeze interpretations of various paranormal phenomena into superstitious molds that oftentimes perpetuate our ignorance and fear of the unknown. It would seem that the intellect gets abandoned more often than not in most New Age thinking, though there are many gems to be mined if you look hard enough. And learning the art of discernment is critical to mining these gems, separating the wheat from the chaff.

Nurturing the balance of the intuitions and intellect in any activity, mundane or cosmic, brings a wider aperture and understanding. It is only through an equilibrium of subjective and objective perception that the so-called paranormal will ever be legitimized and understood as normal. It would seem that the emerging new worldview is intent upon making the unknown known and the unreal real by incorporating the best practices of scientific and religious legacy belief systems. And there is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water! It is time for the baby to grow up and mature to its next stage of development.

Rather than ending here, let’s just say that this is only the beginning! There is much ground to cover in the continued explorations through our Conferences, Author Seminar Tours, and website (www.newworldview.com).

Areas of interest and inquiry include:

The nature of God, life, the universe, and everything – “Why are we here?”

Science

Philosophy/Metaphysics

Religion

History

Fine Arts

The nature of ourselves – “Who am I and what is my place in the world?”

Psychology

Health and Wellness

Abundance

Human Potential

Business

Education

Economics

Do join us in the exploration of these ideas and all that they imply, in every activity, in all people. Let us continue the discussion and collaboration, the challenges and insights, the products of our new ventures! Let us, together, craft a new lens through which to view our world... ourselves.

[ Go to the top ]

Appendix 1 – Integral Conscious Creation: A Summary

“Science is not enough, religion is not enough, art is not enough, politics and economics are not enough, nor is love, nor is duty, nor is action however disinterested, nor, however sublime, is contemplation. Nothing short of everything, will really do.” ~ Aldous Huxley, Island (2002).

What is Integral Conscious Creation?

The phrase “conscious creation” has been used for decades, possibly longer. Applying the term to the Seth Material can be traced to Lynda Dahl, who published three books in the 1990s that used “conscious creation” to mean “you create your own reality.” (1) The latter phrase was coined by Jane Roberts in The Nature of Personal Reality (1974). It went on to become a New Age mantra most recently uttered by Amit Goswami in the New Age hit What the F%#? Do We Know? (2004). So it’s popular in the Seth community to use the phrase “conscious creation,” and sometimes YCYOR (you create your own reality) to represent the core ideas in the Seth material.

This concept has been around for millennia, and is traceable back to the New Thought movement founded by Phineas Quimby (1802-1866) in mid-19th century America. Moreover, it extends all the way back in some form to the Idealist philosophers, from Plato (c.427-c. 347 BCE) to Plotinus (c.205-270 CE) and Nagarjuna (150-250 CE), onwards to Fichte (1762-1814), Hegel (1770-1831), Schelling (1775-1854), Berdyaev (1874-1948), and others. Seen in this light, Jane Roberts’s The Physical Universe as Idea Construction (1963), the manuscript that preceded Seth’s emergence, and the Seth Material that followed are variations of Western idealism. When we compare the Seth Material to premodern and modern forms of idealism we discover three main similarities:

1. Universe As Multiverse: All-That-Is as nested fields of physical, subtle, and causal consciousness (exteriors).
2. Self As Multidimensional: All-That-Is as nested Aspects: I-I-I (interiors). (2)
3. Involution/Evolution: All-That-Is as Primal Cause and Effect (causality).

Therefore, conscious creation can’t be limited to only the Seth material, because the basic epistemology of concept 1 above and ontology of concept 2 above are found in some variation in all premodern and modern traditions.

1. The way that we create 100% of our reality in physical, subtle, and causal fields includes some variation of:

• (Eye of Flesh) - Physical senses/emotions.
• (Eye of Mind) - Mental/rational intelligences.
• (Eye of Spirit) - Inner senses.

2. The entire “You” who creates 100% of its own reality includes some variation of:

• (I) - Outer ego in the physical field.
• (I) - Inner ego in the subtle field.
• (I) - Pyramid Gestalts/Causal Consciousness in the causal field.

3. Involution/evolution describes the simultaneous action of creation in nonphysical and physical fields. Involution describes how All-That-Is acts as Primal Cause to create causal, subtle, and physical fields. For example, Seth used consciousness units (causal CUs) and electromagnetic energy units (subtle EEs) in this way in Dreams, “Evolution,” and Value Fulfillment (1986). (3) Sri Aurobindo (1872-1950) used the Hindu Vedantic version of involution in The Life Divine (1949). Involution also helps explain pre-birth choices like intent, gender, who our parents will be, etc., that are not made by the outer ego.

Thus, “conscious creation” more accurately applies to any modern or postmodern body of work that explores the simultaneous action of involution/evolution in physical, subtle, and causal fields via physical, mental, and spiritual senses.

Modern examples of conscious creation include Vedanta Hinduism and Vajrayana Buddhism. Postmodern examples include the information offered by Seth, Elias, Kris, Rose, Wilber, and others.

However, while the premodern traditions had an understanding of involution – the action of Consciousness as Primal Cause – what’s missing is an understanding of evolution: Consciousness unfolding in broad stages of increasing complexity over time in the physical field, or what Seth called Framework 1. We’re not talking about the crude distortions of Social Darwinism used by Robber Barons or Nazi Germany to justify economic inequalities or genocide, but the kind of evolutionary theories found in Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), Radhakrishnan (1888-1975), Gopi Krishna (1903-1984), Wilber, and others. These modern and postmodern thinkers all show the driving “Force” behind evolution – natural selection, genetic mutations, etc. – to be none other than Consciousness, not chance, chaos, or randomness.

Unfortunately, premodern forms of idealism have tended to demean the physical. Since they correctly intuit that Consciousness is Primal Cause, and not material quantum fields, idealists tend to reduce everything to Consciousness, which is no-thing and immaterial. This has led to extreme asceticism, denial of the flesh, and other “sinful self” ideologies that marginalize the physical as secondary. On the other hand, modern materialist science claims that everything is reducible to quantum fields, and consciousness is a mere after-effect or epiphenomenon of matter. This has led to alienation, fragmentation, and dissociation from Causal Consciousness that marginalizes consciousness as secondary. The two “value spheres” have been at odds for the past five centuries, and have yet to find a viable middle ground.

Therefore, part of what defines postmodernism are attempts to find that middle ground – ways to more adequately situate inner and outer, the ideal and material aspects of reality. Give each its place and don’t reduce one to the other, situate the physical and nonphysical as nested, interpenetrated fields within All-That-Is. Postmodernism attempts to bring Consciousness, which was present in premodern worldviews, back into the picture while acknowledging the advances and limits of modern science. However, this requires a type of cognitive development that can situate multiple contexts, some even contradictory, as all true but partial pieces of a larger puzzle. When taken together, we begin to hone in on more true and less partial explanations. It also requires a paradigm which can disclose and enact data through the use of physical senses, reason, and inner senses. Ken Wilber’s integral approach did just that in Sex, Ecology, and Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution (1995). (4)

Thus, when we combine Wilber’s integral approach with the above definition of conscious creation, we get Integral Conscious Creation (ICC). Integral simply means balanced, inclusive, and comprehensive. It doesn’t attempt to reduce inner to outer, or vice versa, but properly situates all dimensions of being in the world. We can have Causal Consciousness and quantum fields jointly creating and co-creating. Though integral theory has a lot of bugs to be worked out, it is the first viable postmodern theory of consciousness that doesn’t reduce all reality to the random, meaningless effects of quantum fields. The integral approach allows us to more adequately explore the physical, subtle, and causal fields of consciousness and the action of involution/evolution. No small feat! As such, it helps us further understand the riches in the Seth material in relation to other premodern, modern, and postmodern transformative traditions. (5)

In short, Integral Conscious Creation applies the checks and balances of an Integral Approach to any conscious creation source to help mine its many gems.

The results:

• Promote multiple perspectives yet make no claim to have the final say or one true interpretation.
• Include exercises and other practical applications that promote personal transformation.
• Provide a thorough overview of the core ideas.
• Outline a scalable methodology that anyone can use to mine new insights from existing and emerging knowledge domains.
• Help demystify the channeling phenomenon – one of the thorniest issues for the mainstream to come to terms with the Seth, Elias, and Kris Material.
• Show how all the above fits into a wider organizing principle – emerging postmodern worldviews – that affects all people globally, and doesn’t unduly privilege genders, races, or special interest groups.
• Is done in a way that doesn’t reek of scientism, New Age/Religious woo-woo, Sethism, Eliasism, or Krisism.

Integral Conscious Creation is part of an emerging postmodern worldview that reflects the following values:

• We create our own realities, individually and en masse, thus we each create our own worldviews.
• We exist in a time of accelerated growth and change, a transition from premodern and modern toward postmodern worldviews, that points toward a global evolutionary shift in consciousness.
• Integral Conscious Creation is not to be taken as true based on faith, belief, or authority, but through direct personal experience. Thus, the validity of these concepts must ultimately be verified or falsified by each of us through internal experience, not external mandates. Any truths not open to falsification are simply dogma in disguise.
• Postmodern worldviews are not fixed, and will in turn be replaced by even more complex worldviews. They are the result of ongoing involutionary and evolutionary processes. They are pluralistic, relativistic, and worldcentric. As such, they honor all races, genders, and creeds. Therefore, no single person, group, family, corporation, government, religion, or ideology can own proprietary rights to Universal Truth or can claim to be an infallible source of knowledge.
• Our physical universe and its evolutionary constructs – physical, biological, and mental – consist of conscious perspectives. They are interpenetrated in a wondrous Great Nest of Being that includes subtle and causal fields of consciousness. Other terms for this Nest are All-That-Is and Kosmos.
• The human body/mind and its relationship to Causal Consciousness is more fully explained by Transpersonal, Integral, and Aspect Psychologies. For example, the multidimensional “You” who creates all its reality is simultaneously nested within physical, subtle, and causal fields of consciousness.
• While Causal Consciousness creates all expressions of matter, the two work hand in hand. Linear space-time is a wondrous mental and neurological construction in the physical field.
• All species within the physical field are created by the action of evolution and involution in the subtle and causal fields. Thus, the modern idea of evolution from lower to higher life forms through natural selection and “selfish genes” does not fully explain how biological life evolved from quantum fields nor how humans evolved from biological life. Further, it does not explain the Primal Cause that existed “before the beginning” of The Big Bang. Integral Conscious Creation does.
• There are innate natural laws within the causal field that guide the action of involution and evolution. For example, value fulfillment is an innate quality of Consciousness that seeks to fulfill its own potential in all possible variations in such a way that furthers the creative potentials of every other aspect of All-That-Is.
• Understanding the differences between our socially constructed belief systems in relation to natural law is critical. Natural laws, like value fulfillment, are Universal Truths that apply to All-That-Is, thus they function simultaneously within the physical, subtle, and causal fields. As such, morality and ethics in the physical field – conventional notions of good and bad, right and wrong, health and pathology – are cultural, regional belief systems based upon our collective intuition of Universal Truths, but not in themselves Universal Truths since belief systems don’t exist in subtle and causal fields. Confusing beliefs as Universal Truths has limited our collective value fulfillment for centuries.
• There is an innate moral intuition in humans based upon natural grace, compassion, guilt, and violation that apply across a developmental spectrum from preconventional (me) to conventional (us) to postconventional (all of us) and wider (all sentient beings). Each moral stage embraces increasing depths of care, concern, and compassion. Thus, there is a spectrum of moral values not a fixed set etched in stone. When we confuse preconventional with postconventional, the results are often disastrous; for instance, elevating terrorism to high spiritual realization, or reducing all transpersonal experience to infantile dissociation.
• We each have direct access to Causal Consciousness through our inner self. There is no outside middle-man required. Therefore, it is crucial to discern the utility of inner, subjective messages from our muses, spirits, entities, and other aspects within subtle and causal fields of consciousness. All interpretations are filtered through preconventional (me), conventional (us), postconventional (all of us), and wider (all sentient beings) worldviews. Again, to confuse preconventional with postconventional often produces disastrous results, for example, elevating childhood experiences of nondual unity to sainthood, or reducing adult experiences of nondual unity to a psychotic break.
• Individuals who master high intellect – physical senses, reason, and inner senses – are needed to further develop our sciences, arts, humanities, theology, and mysticism into postmodern forms. Closing the epistemological gap – ways of knowing what is True and accepted as evidence of the True – between all disciplines, especially science and religion, is crucial for collective value fulfillment.
• Science and religion don’t now, and may never, provide all the answers to the fundamental questions of God, life, the universe, and everything. For example: Why are we here? What is my purpose in life? Where are we “before” birth and “after” death? Etc. Therefore, the answers to these questions must ultimately be verified or falsified by each of us through direct, internal experience, not external mandates based solely on faith.
• Our waking experience in the physical field emerges from the dream state in the subtle field of consciousness. In this light, the action of dreaming isn’t unreal or “less than,” but is the foundation that supports the waking state. As such, it forms an emerging frontier of important research and practical application.
• Impulses are an innate inner language designed to lead us to our own deepest value fulfillment. However, they can be repressed, dissociated, or blocked on individual and collective levels. These repressions, dissociations, and blockages can have disastrous results. For instance, addictive, violent, and abusive behavior on individual and collective scales.
• Cooperation is stressed over competitive modes of collective behavior, though both are necessary. This will have a crucial impact on collective value fulfillment in terms of educational, economic, political, scientific, and spiritual institutions that affect over six billion people.

[ Go to the top ]

How Does Integral Conscious Creation Compare to Creationism?

Integral Conscious Creation has little to do with Creationism or its more sophisticated formulation Intelligent Design. Integral Conscious Creation is postmodern, Creationism is premodern. Both contain the gem that Causal Consciousness created our universe. However, the similarities end there as the literal interpretation of Genesis and Christian dogma of the virgin birth, Satan as root of all Evil, and salvation in the resurrected Christ – ideals promoted by Intelligent Design’s leading proponent William Dembski – are premodern fairy tales contradicted by Seth and shredded by modern and postmodern sciences.

Phillip E. Johnson, a lawyer, coined the phrase “intelligent design” in 1991 to mean that biological life was created by an intelligent but unidentified designer. “Biochemist Michael Behe devised the argument of ‘irreducible complexity’ (IC) to which theologian William Dembski added his doctrine of ‘specified complexity’ (SC) as a supporting element. IC is, however, by far the most frequently cited of the two hypotheses.” (6)

Thus, Intelligent Design theory is a more sophisticated guise that premodern Creationism has taken recently. It offers some valid and not so valid critiques of modern Darwinism. That’s all well and good, but its covert political agenda is clearly regressive, seeking to elevate premodern fairy tales to modern scientific credibility. For example, in his book Intelligent Design; the Bridge Between Science and Theology (1999), Dembski states that “the conceptual soundings of the [intelligent design] theory can in the end only be located in Christ.” (7)

Again, Integral Conscious Creation, as I define it, shares the important premodern gem of Causal Consciousness and any valid modern scientific critiques but rejects the premodern exoteric dogma. Intelligent Design has been rejected, predictably, by mainstream science; the National Academy of Sciences calls ID a pseudoscience. It may serve as a bridge to bring Causal Consciousness back into the equation, but as long as it gets hijacked by fundamentalist agendas it will remain mired in premodern inaccuracies and distortions.

What About Creation Spirituality and Christianity?

Matthew Fox, an Episcopalian theologian, coined the term Creation Spirituality. A postmodern attempt to rehabilitate the original gnostic ideals in Christianity, it still hangs onto an odd mix of premodern Christian dogma. It contains the same gem of Causal Consciousness, and refutes the sinful self with what he calls the “original blessing.” His interpretations earned him the official censure of the Vatican in 1989, and forced his dismissal from the Dominican Order in 1993. Like Creationism, Creation Spirituality and Integral Conscious Creation share the premodern notion of Causal Consciousness, and perhaps a few more things, but in general have significant differences. To Fox’s credit, Creation Spirituality may well evolve into a reformed postmodern religion, but it is not clear how it claims to integrate the advances of modern science, something at the heart of Integral Conscious Creation as I define it.

So what does Christianity have to do with Integral Conscious Creation? Jane Roberts was raised Catholic, but rejected exoteric Christianity outright in her adult life. Her work doesn’t seek to rehabilitate institutionalized Christianity, but instead to move beyond worn out Christian mythos and pave the way for whatever comes next in postmodern terms. In particular, see The Further Education of Oversoul Seven (1979) where Christ is put into a retirement home along with Zeus and other gods whose time has passed. There is also a significant amount of so-called Christ material in various Jane Roberts books, including Seth Speaks, that provide Seth and Jane’s critiques on historical Christianity. For instance, Seth claimed that Christ was never actually crucified, but would reincarnate anonymously to participate in a global spiritual reformation completed by 2,075.

While the Seth material was produced in the cultural milieu of Christianity, it is at the very least an attempt to cast the gnostic elements of Christianity, and all the great premodern religions, into postmodern exoteric clothing. For example, the idea of the sinful self, or self flawed by Original Sin is refuted, the inner senses, or means of direct experience of Causal Consciousness is mandated, Consciousness is seen as in the world (immanent) but simultaneously not of it (transcendent), and the need for institutional spiritual middle-folk is rejected. In this sense, it could be the precursor of an authentic postmodern religion.

By precursor, I mean that along with other channeled sources like Elias (Mary Ennis) and Kris (Serge Grandbois), it represents a clear trend that gnostic teachings continue to bubble up from grass root sources. All authentic religions emerged when the collective went through major transformations in consciousness. According to Jean Gebser in The Ever-Present Origin (1985), we have evolved through premodern archaic, magic, mythic, and modern rational religions and worldviews to date. Gebser and others say that we are currently in the midst of a transition from modern to postmodern religions and worldviews.

Further, and more importantly, the Seth material may be a stepping stone toward a post-postmodern science. For example, Seth outlined something he called dream-art science, a discipline that uses the high intellect to produce and interpret scientific data. This part of the Seth material may foreshadow the emergence of an art-science hybrid that bridges modern science and premodern religion.

Ironically, the Seth material runs into the same problem facing all the gnostic traditions, namely, that they must have some kind of exoteric form to perpetuate and promote the teachings. That requires some kind of organization, and thus far there have been various grass roots efforts to keep the Seth material afloat, the books in publication, and promote affinity groups. For instance, several ESP class students continue to write and teach informally. Notably Susan Watkins continues to publish Seth-related books, and Rick Stack is one of the main publishers of Jane Roberts’s work.

Several groups went on to hold annual Seth-related conferences and seminars. Helen Walker founded the Rocky Mountain Seth Conferences in the 1980s, and Jim and Carol Funk continue with The Colorado Seth Conferences in 2005. Earlier, a nonprofit called the Austin Seth Center was formed by Maude Cardwell in the 1980s. In 1992, due to her failing health, Lynda Dahl and Stan Ulkowski took over and created Seth Network International, which ran from until 1999, when Stan passed away. However, its online discussion forum – Sethnet – continues to this day run by yours truly, and a handful of volunteer moderators. Lynda and Stan, along with Michael Steffen, Mary Rouen, Paul and Joanne Helfrich, founded NewWorldView.com and held conferences and author seminars during 2001 before limiting their efforts to web articles and discussion forums in 2002. Though the Internet has promoted various online groups, and the Seth material has found a permanent home in the Yale Sterling Archives in New Haven, CT, it remains a grass roots effort in 2005.

[ Go to the top ]

Endnotes:

(1) Beyond the Winning Streak: Using Conscious Creation to Consistently Win at Life (1993), Ten Thousand Whispers: A Guide to Conscious Creation (1995), The Wizards of Consciousness: Making the Imponderable Practical (1997).

(2) More importantly, this ontological distinction prevents the reduction of the “You” who creates all its reality to only the outer ego (physical field) which creates solely through thoughts – a common distortion found in many New Age interpretations of conscious creation. Since I define the “you” in “you create your own reality” as existing in simultaneous physical, subtle, and causal fields I sometimes use the term “I-I-I” to represent this ontology. Thus, to say, “I-I-I create my reality” more accurately reflects this.

For more details, see Who is the “You” in You Create Your Own Reality?

(3) In the first five chapters, Seth used CUs and EEs to explain how involution preceded the Big Bang in what he calls “before the beginning.” CUs are the causal “force” of All-That-Is within the causal field that formed the subtle field, EEs are the causal “force” within the subtle field that formed the physical field, and quantum fields are the form taken by CUs and EEs in what Seth calls Framework 1. Thus, All-That-Is creates all Its reality simultaneously through interpenetrated causal, subtle, and physical fields via CUs/EEs/quantum fields. These three nested fields are accessible through waking, dreaming, and deep dreamless states, because CUs dream and have inner senses.

Further, as evolution proceeded after the Big Bang, Seth is clear that there is an order of play which maps to Teilhard de Chardin’s three basic stages of physical (geosphere), biological (biosphere), and self-reflexive mental (noosphere) outlined in The Phenomenon of Man (1959). Also, the noosphere evolved, generally speaking, to include premodern, modern, and emergent postmodern worldviews.

For more details, see Seth on “The Origins of the Universe and of the Species” – An Integral Conscious Creation Myth.

(4) Wilber defined a postmodern theory of consciousness that integrated five basic capacities in our awareness right now: nested perspectives (I, We, It, Its), nested physical/subtle/causal fields, multiple intelligences, waking/dreaming/deep sleep states, and types (gender, Myers-Briggs, enneagram, etc.). These form the basis for an integral methodology which is still under development at the Integral Institute in Boulder, CO.

Wilber’s integral methodological pluralism (IMP) is outlined in Excerpt D: The Look of a Feeling: The Importance of Post/Structuralism. Essentially, it identifies eight major perspectives that complement each other. Thus, each perspective is true, but partial, and discloses something important about All-That-Is but cannot in any way claim to be the exclusive and only way to know Truth. The principles of nonexclusion, enactment, and enfoldment provide checks and balances to ensure that these eight perspectives do not claim to provide “the correct view” of reality and therefore “cannot be used ... to negate, criticize, or exclude other experiences brought forth by other paradigms.”

Moreover, there will never be an airtight case to logically prove the existence of Causal Consciousness. Since modern science reduces all ways of knowing (epistemology) to the five senses and logic, and Causal Consciousness is translogical, it requires a paradigm that includes adequate use of what Seth calls the high intellect, Ken Wilber calls epistemological pluralism, and I call hyperception. Thus, Integral Conscious Creation uses the physical senses (eye of flesh), reason (eye of mind), and inner senses (eye of spirit) to know what is true.

(5) For more details, see Integral Conscious Creation: Rocket Science for the Soul.

(6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dembski.

(7) p. 210. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dembski.

[ Go to the top ]

Bibliography

Adams, Douglas, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY, 1980.

Campbell, Joseph, Diane Osbon, ed., Reflections on the Art of Living, A Joseph Campbell Companion.

Dahl, Lynda, Ten Thousand Whispers: A Guide to Conscious Creation, WindSong Publishing, Eugene, OR, 1995.

de Quincy, Christian, The Big Bang: A Modern Myth Without Meaning?, http://www1.mightywords.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.asp?theisbn=EB00017483, November 25, 2000.

DiCarlo, Russell, Towards a New World View: Conversations at the Leading Edge, Epic Publishing, Erie, PA, 1996.

Dyson, Freeman, Science and Religion as Partners, Institute of Noetic Sciences Review, December 2000 – February 2001, Number 54.

Elgin, Duane, Our Living Universe, Institute of Noetic Sciences Review, December 2000 – February 2001, Number 54.

Friedman, Norman, Bridging Art and Science: Common Elements In David Bohm’s Physics, The Perennial Philosophy, and Seth, The Woodbridge Group, Eugene, OR, 1990.

Greene, Brian, the elegant universe: superstrings, hidden dimensions, and the quest for the ultimate theory, W. W. Norton & Co., New York, NY, 1999.

Harman, Willis, Global Mind Change: The Promise of the 21st Century, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA, 1998.

Harman, Willis, Christian de Quincy, The Scientific Exploration of Consciousness: Toward an Adequate Epistemology, The Institute of Noetic Sciences, Sausalito, CA, 1994.

Hastings, Arthur, with the Tongues of Men and Angels: A Study of Channeling, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1991.

Heinlein, Robert, Stranger in a Strange Land, Berkeley Publishing Group, New York, NY, 1991.

Huxley, Aldous, Island, HarperCollins, New York, NY, 1989.

Huxley, Aldous, The Perennial Philosophy, Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1945.

Klimo, Jon, Channeling: Investigations on Receiving Information from Paranormal Sources, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, CA, 1998.

Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1970.

Kurtz, Paul, A Skeptic’s Handbook of Parapsychology, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY, 1985.

LaBerge, Stephen, and Howard Rheingold, Exploring the World of Lucid Dreaming, Ballantine Books, New York, NY, 1990.

Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Liguori Publications, Liguori, MO, 1994.

Mack, John, Passport to the Cosmos, Random House, Inc., New York, NY, 1999.

McInnis, Noel F., Bridging Science and Spirituality: Toward a Seamless Cosmology of Consciousness, http://www.celenet.org/bridging.htm, September 25, 2000.

Monroe, Robert, Ultimate Journey, Doubleday, New York, NY, 1994.

Roberts, Jane, Adventures in Consciousness: An Introduction to Aspect Psychology, Sethnet Publishing, Eugene, OR, 1997.

Roberts, Jane, The God of Jane: A Psychic Manifesto, Moment Point Press, Portsmouth, NH, 2000.

Roberts, Jane, The “Unknown” Reality, volumes 1 & 2, Amber-Allen Publishing, San Rafael, CA, 1996.

Russell, Peter, Waking Up in Time: Finding Inner Peace in Times of Accelerating Change, Origin Press, Novato, CA, 1998.

Shah, Indries, The Sufis, Random House, New York, NY, 1971.

Schwerin, David, Conscious Capitalism: Principles for Prosperity, Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA, 1998.

Smith, Huston, Forgotten Truth: The Common Vision of the World’s Religions, HarperCollins, New York, NY, 1992.

Tart, Charles, ed., Altered States of Consciousness, HarperCollins, New York, NY, 1990.

Tart, Charles, ed., Body, Mind, and Spirit: Exploring the Parapsychology of Spirituality, Hampton Roads, Charlottesville, VA, 1997.

Talbot, Michael, The Holographic Universe, HarperCollins, New York, NY, 1991.

Walsh, Roger, Perennial Wisdom in a Postmodern World, University of California College of Medicine, Irvine, California, http://www.americanbuddha.org/article_perennial.html, November 27, 2000.

Wilber, Ken, A Brief History of Everything, Shambala Publications, Boston, MA, 1996.

Wilber, Ken, A Theory of Everything, Shambala Publications, Boston, MA, 2000.

Wilber, Ken, Integral Psychology, Shambala Publications, Boston, MA, 2000.

Wilber, Ken, The Marriage of Sense and Soul, Broadway Books, New York, NY, 1998.

Wolf, Fred Alan, The Dreaming Universe, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 1994.

Wolf, Fred Alan, The Spiritual Universe, Moment Point Press, Portsmouth, NH, 1999.

© 2000, 2005 Paul M. Helfrich, All Rights Reserved.

[ Go to the top ]

Home | Intro | Gems | Community | Events | Shop | Library | Cool Sites | Contact Us | Search

Comments to: webf...@newworldview.com
© 2000 - 2009 Wildfire Media, All Rights Reserved.