Our many Quantonics' local~online references include:
This essay started out as Doug's page 78 comments of William James' Lectures IV & V...The Religion of Healthy-Mindedness of his 1902 Varieties of Religious Experience. Our comments grew and grew and grew, so we decided to offer it to you, now as is.
Doug wants to offer some personal comments here, regarding his interpretations of James' opus. 'Catholics' beware.
First, and bluntly, Doug is not a religious nut case! Doug does not go to church! Doug does not wallow in senseless social state-ic ritual and aisle rolling. Doug practices no social forms of what might be called "organized religion." Doug's religion is wholly individual, totally, his quantum~spirihtual, his c¤mplæmæntary both quantum~local and quantum~reserve~energy 'experiences.' Doug issi quantum spiritual. Doug issi n¤t an atheist! For Doug quantum~G¤d is simply ineffable by finite sentient intellect. Doug experiences some rather profound phenomena which are metaphoric of what he understands about quantum reality.
Doug is interested in religion, just like metaphysics, physics, science, logic, epistemology, anthropology, etc., from a philosophical holistic complementarospective.
To study Western religion, one must study Jesus. That implies some studies of Judaism, Greek religions' practices. Those are founded on even more ancient, non Western 'religious' practices, primarily Arabic and Egyptian gnosticism. Too, one must study folk like William James and this review of his Lectures IV and V of his VoRE. Voltaire, Rabelais, Bruno, Hypatia, [Johann Georg] Hamann, Hume, and more modern and contemporary writers. Since Nag Hammadi, ~1947, bountiful gnostic works have appeared and we are devouring them as rapidly as we have qua. Elaine Pagels, et al., have helped immensely.
Prior 2005 Doug had a shallower interest in religion: a kind of neutral "all may believe as they, individually, wish" indifference. Then Dan Brown's Angels and Demons landed, via Bethahava's insistence, in Doug's lap!
Everything meaningful in Doug's life has changed since then. Prior, Doug enjoyed simply juxtaposing ' sciences' ' and ' religions' ' dialectical orthodoxy of their creed, dogma, and community cultures' uses of subject and object.
For Doug, his own very recent personal religious adventure has changed his life in this dramatic sense: Doug has found that Scott Peck's and Gary Zukav's heuristics regarding science and religion as ultimately unified are now (have recently become) personally real!
But some religions endorse (some have a long history of) hate and evil while others endorse good and love. Doug's metrics for hate-evil vis-à-vis love~good are multiparametric and dynamic, quantum, and his metrics compare classical(society, individual) and quantum(society,individual). (On Doug's usage of 'metric:' see measure, monitor, omnitor, and, QQA on Measurement.)
Some religions now, to Doug, are abominations simply due their clear past and present anti individualism, anti freedom, anti specific-human heritage beliefs and actions. Doug happily and with research justification cajoles verbally those religions and their, to him, orthodox idiocies.
Too, Doug sides with his own hermeneutics of Gn¤stic Jesus, what Doug refers "Quantum Jesus." Sadly, Doug is too ignorant to say here and now if he sides with a 'perhaps gnostic' Mohammed. If Mohammed is gnostic similar Doug's quantum interpretations of Jesus' Essene Tribe of Judah gnosticism, then Doug, via indirection and unsubtle inference, can say there is a high likelihood that he sides with Mohammed, too.
Allow Doug one exemplar qualifier. Doug abhors any religious notion that religion should socially coerce its followers and train its children to "bring a sword" and "strike the necks" of those who do not adhere one's own religion. For Doug, there are many religions. One size does n¤t fit all! But in Doug's view, Doug n¤r any individual n¤r any group, knows what G¤d wants.
In Doug's view though humans have been blessed with an ability to omniscriminate (semantics: 'di' scrimination is uniparametrically dialectical; omniscrimination is multparametrically quantum). We can assess, for us, locally n¤t globally-universally, what is better and what is worse.
In Doug's view all individuals and all religions must learn to cooperate individually and socially on a basis of omniscrimination of stochastic memeos, n¤t dialectical notions, of either better or worse. Cooperation may be as simple as just leaving those with whom you disagree alone. It isn't that easy, though. Who decides what "hate and evil," and "good and love" are?
Doug wants to know why:
Thence, what can we do as a quantum coherent quantum society to heal those classical social-individual wounds? Maybe we can't do anything. Maybe there are too many things we need to do all of those many things: knowable, known, unknown, unknowable some of which are simply beyond human qua.
Maybe, like 'global warming' we can't do anything given 'the problem' is evolving, ephemerally multiparametric, while 'the problem' is universally both local and nonlocal. Maybe nature has to select whatings happenings nextings. But we are ihn nature and nature issi ihn us. We are agents of nature and nature issi ihn agency of all of us. (Though we may be perhaps naïvely assuming some, perhaps most, of us believe that.)
Which is better? Love? Hate? Which is better? War? Peace? See! We do have choosings', chancings', changings' bases for selecting "radical goodness."
We can become unified in memes and memeos of "living Lila 'morally' for radical goodness," despite our personal religious and political leanings. (Lila is title of Pirsig's most recent, 1991 book.)
When Doug says 'unified' here, we intend unified n¤t in a classical sense of unitheocratic granite-like monistic monasticism, rather in a gravity~like sense of quantum~coherence, quantum~cowithinitness, quantum~included~middlings.
Our story appears too long and rigorous to fully benude here, but we want to say "science and religion are quantum~unified," to you, nowings. Why? It is subessence of A N¤vel Way of Think~king, an EIMA holographic Mae-wan Ho way of think~king.
See our extended reference link above for other authors who have impacted Doug's Chautauqua, his philosophic~scientific~religious Chautauqua.
Couple years ago, Mitch sent us a link to Thomas' (Didymos) Gospel. Catholics call it "heresy" using Irenæus' anti gnostic proscriptive charter (c. 100-300). Irenæus was full of dialectical hate, a blathering Roman-inane fascist idiot, much like GWBush's evangelicals today (c. 2006). He established 'catholic' anti heretical orthodox (i.e., dialectical: EOOO(heterodox_as_wrong, orthodox_as_right)) doctrine.
However, quantum~think~king~modalities have taught us this:
Elaine Pagels' opus has helped us immensely! Thank you, extraordinary sacred~feminine lady! Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln have made us keenly aware of Roman Catholicism's repugnant evils. Prior, we always wondered why our gramma (McCarty) and grampa (Tappan) held, almost pugilistically, 'catholics' in such low regard. We attributed it to gramma and gramps' ignorance. Wrong! They had valid infrathought weighting their judgments.
Pirsig's ancients were always enigmatic to us...until we read about Essene Gn¤stic Jesus...until Elaine Pagels taught us about what Jesus meant by 'the called AKA psychic,' and 'the elect AKA pneumatic.' Then we saw how so many of our ancient heroes and heroines were, similar Jesus, quantum gn¤stic: Confucius, Buddha, several Hindu masters, several Zen masters, Heraclitus, Zeno of Elea, Magdalene (hated and hunted by pre catholic Roman inanes), and more recently Hypatia of Alexandria (murdered by Catholics), and in 1600 Giordano Bruno burned at 'the stake' by Clement VIII, and so on... all of them share gn¤stic pneumatisms.
It is well, at this juncture, that we ponder too Plato and Aristotle's hatred of sophists and how Pirsig explained it. Why? What are sophists? Quantum rhetorical gn¤stic pneumatists! In Plato and Aristotle's eyes sophists believed and practiced gnostic heresies. Plato and Aristotle were anti-gnostic, anti-heretic, anti-sophist, anti-quantum. Sound familiar? Pure Error. Pure dialectic. Aristotelian and Platonic Error-prone flatland dialectic. Most amazing of all, is that Aristotle didn't realize it during his life time, but his syllogisms are sophist! See that Aristotle link for detail. (Essentially: suppositional significate self-assignment tautology is iterative, classically 'vicious-loop,' self-reference...sophism! 'Is,' 'equals,' 'identity,' etc., are classical self-referent tautologies thus implicitly quantum sophisms. Aristotle and Plato were doing what they hated. Quantum Gn¤stic Jesus said to his disciples, "Do n¤t do what you hate!" See (Didymos Judas Thomas') Thomas Gospel number 6.) Doug - 19-20Sep2006. (Doug sees quantum essence in several of quotes of Jesus in Thomas' Gospel. Doug used quantum heuristics and hermeneutics to interpret a few of them, including number 6, here. Use two adjacent browser tabs to view these side-by-side. Again, for emphasis, re cognize, quantum~recapitulatively, quantum~gn¤stic~complementarospectively Jesus did n¤t say, "Do not do what we hate!" Emphasis here: gn¤stic~individual you vis-à-vis dialectical-social we, with a unsubtle hint of gn¤stic subjective negation vis-à-vis classical objective negation. We see how important it is to avoid Error-prone psychic-hylic dialectic and to embrace quantum~pneumatic and gn¤stic~hermeneutic semantics.)
Jesus in a Thomas Gospel quote offers a way to see n¤væl Quantum Lightings.
Elaine Pagels gn¤stically saw how Jesus' words emphasize individuality while, without saying so (and in a way this is what we mean by gnosticism, especially esoteric (unsaid) aspects of gnosticism), his words deemphasize social hive drone state-mental 'catholic' cloning begged by his disciples via "we." (Read full text of Thomas Gospel number 6 and refer Pagels' The Gnostic Gospels.)
Pneumatic (spiritual) gn¤sticism often is more about said's quantum c¤mplæmænt than said. And exegetically, such gnosticism is just what puts dialectical literalists ("the psychic," and "the hylic") at such a hermeneutic disadvantage. Concretely, socially, materialistically, catholically, formally, common-sensically, mechanically, dialectically they wear blinders.
Quantum Sophism Ihn Quantum Lightings emphasizes individual excellence, martus aritos. Too, semantically, Jesus means quintessentially Ihn Quantum Lightings.
This is n¤n trivial. If you are timid, meek, weak...beware:
(Notice in Thomas Gospel 11, TG 11, Jesus emphasizes individual gnostic martus aritos in his twice repeated "...what will you do?"
(Gn¤stic Jesus is asking, "How will you be excellent?" "How will you achieve your martus aritos?" Pirsig's Ancients! Wow! Forgive Doug's colloquial exuberance, it just pops out. Like seeing Magdalene in bottom of a burnt biscuit...or on a cover of a Rarity Press copy of Rabelais' Gargantua and his Sonne Pantagruel...
(Similar 6, "Do not do what you hate," vis-à-vis "Do not do what we hate," he emphatically is n¤t asking, "How will we be excellent?" Ten of twelve disciples were "we" types. [Doug heuristic here: dialectical society, as Doug has directly experienced, lacks qua for excellence.]
(Only two, in TG 11 again, "What will you do when you become two?," Didymos (Jesus' twin) and John~Mary were "you" "two" types.
O'gadons should fathom here how Gn¤stic Jesus shines Ihn Quantum Lihghtings via his implied:
- One becoming two as a quantum~included~middling process, from hylic-psychic to pneumatic, and
- One becoming two as a "bridge over fact and value," quanton(Value,fact) replacing monism's deceitful dichon(fact, value) (which says, "...there is no bridge over fact and value...").
Doug - 21Sep2007.
("We" types hear "you" as "we." "You" types hear "you" as "you." Quantumists are "you" types. Dialecticians are "we" types.)
Help? Doug views sælf as quantum ¤næ (a y¤u) of "wæ." A quanton(fuzzons,fuzzons) quantum~human in a hologram called reality. Doug issi quantum_y¤u quanton(s¤cihæty,wæ). How? Hao? Tao! Quantum c¤heræncæ of ¤næ as many and many as ¤næ. Like photons as ¤næ c¤herænt macro~ph¤t¤n ihn a laser beam.
A laser beam is many photons quantum coherently acting (in Greek: hypocritical pragma) as one. For a beam of photons to be excellent "what must iht d¤?" Lase! For an IU basketball team to be excellent, "what must iht d¤?" Bæ quantum~c¤hærænt! Lase, baby!
"What shall you d¤? What shall ye bæ?"
Doug - 29Sep-3Oct2006.
Jesus, to Doug, is saying, "D¤ n¤t bæ dæc¤hærænt! D¤ n¤t c¤mmiht Error! D¤ n¤t bæ 'dialectical!' "
Subtly he asks us to gnostically and esoterically and hermetically infer, classically 'coherent' classical society is actually decoherent. Classical society cannot think, let alone achieve excellence. Classical society is Error! Classical society is dialectical! Classical society is decoherent! How can classical society witness self civically? Classical society runs on rote tote automatic rules for we fools. AKA Heraclitus' "toys."
Jesus' gnosticism is metabeing with meta~philosophy, ~epistemology, ~culture, and ~language. Jesus' gn¤sticism issi n¤t literal: lite real. View lite ral vis-à-vis sang ral. Latter is "blood royal." Can royal be 'lite?" No, royal, Jesus is saying should be pneumatic, spiritual Light, Quantum Lightings. (Clarification by Doug 6Oct2006.)
Those who like Plato and Aristotle, without realizing do what they hate are dialecticians. Dialectic is scientific and religious endarkenment: anti Jesus. As The Gospel of Truth says, paraphrased, "dialectic is prone to tragedy of commons sense Error." Dialectic is Satan. Heraclitus said "dialectic is war." (Satan, literally does not mean "the devil." Rather it is close kin of Jesus' "what we do 'not' like." (That last phrase is n¤n trivial. View we as society, dialectical society. View 'not' as dialectically ideal, n¤t quantum~subjective. Practice hermeneuting that phrase pneumatically, then psychically, then hylically. Doug - 4Oct2006.) See Pagels' The Origin of Satan. Satan issi n¤t quantumly better.
- Satan is quantum better's dialectical 'opposite.'
- Satan is dialectical worship.
- Good issi quantum~sophist bettership.
Thus gn¤stically, all individuals' Satans are omniffering. Be aware, however, that classical societies and organizations attempt to OSFA homogenize and hegemonize common, vulgar notions of Satan, et al. Of course, that is just what we are experiencing globally today, in late 2006. Nearly all Earth's beings practice dialectic...unreally, unreally, unreally sad... Doug.)
Gn¤stically, Jesus is light and is logos. Dialectic is darkness without Quality. Today's (late 2006) Christianity and Islam use dialectic to market their beliefs...
Those who do what they love are quantum rhetoricians, quantum sophists. In our view, they are "In the Light." Latter is title of a ebullient quantum~peregrinating, middle~including (~1985-1990) paper by a precocious young woman whom we refer Cibig C. Raven.
Doug - 20Sep2006.
What is most significant that we have learned? This: 'Catholics' have done their best to destroy all gn¤stics and all gn¤stic works! Damn them!
Quantonics web site pages which may help you place Doug's beliefs in comtextings you may want to know include: Science vav Religion and Better vav Worse, Quantum vav Classical Religion Recommended Reading, etc.
Perhaps our most telling bottom line here, which we want to offer and share with our dedicated readers and students, is: Essene Gn¤stic Jesus was teaching quantum~thinking two millennia ago! 'Jesus' elect' are quantum~pneumatic~sophists!
One more crucial point on quantum~respect: we respect anyone's right to their own beliefs. C¤mplæmæntarily, we are under n¤ obligation to respect what you believe and do. Simply, rights to believe, think, and express lingually and narratively vis-à-vis rights emerging from that belief to physically do and act according that belief are radically omniffering one another. Quantum pragmatism emerqs (verb) some unharmonious omnifferencings! Example? We respect Bush's right to be an evangelical neocon. We totally disrespect what Bush and his neocon fascist adherents do based upon that belief! Pirsig makes it pretty easy for us by saying that our emerging individual intellectual prowess can thoughtfully disrespect our societal foundations, but must be assiduously careful in how we go about changing them. We, as c¤hærænt individuals, are society; our primary worry is what kind of society we are. Doug's answer here is simple enough: we are classical, and we must invent better means of becoming quantum.
Notice what an approach like that accomplishes, for example:
However, we need n¤t attempt repair of all disharmony, indeed, it is likely that we cannot. Quantum cultures allow coherent localization of a culture's harmony while other cultures may, from an intracultural complementarospective, be unharmonious ours. In this example, disharmony of cultures is Good while those cultures accept quantum islandicity of cultural coherence as a means of managing global harmony. We can, we have individual rights to, pack up and move to cultures which are more harmonious our own beliefs and practices.
That is how Jesus' Gn¤sis works! Classical worship evolving into quantum bettership.
This set of James' lectures offers several hints re: William James' own quantum~gn¤sticism. Wow!
Doug - 31Aug2006 through 3Oct2006, and through 21Oct2006, and through 8Nov2006.