Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Map of Consciousness (Dr. David Hawkins)Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Map of Consciousness (Dr. David Hawkins) | Login/Join |
RWS, namaste. Wonderful sharing. re: Are we there yet? The journey IS my destination. The quest IS my grail. And, wherever I have discovered love holding together truth and beauty and goodness, I have encountered the Holy. Truly, we are searching for modeling power of reality and it is a discovery process that requires the illumination of heart and head and will to light the way, none of these faculties set over against the other. It is worthy of note, though, that of all the human faculties, whether cognitive or affective, memory or reason, mental or emotional or physical, only the will grows stronger with use with no sign, ever, of exhaustion or fatigue. God made us in such a way that we can exhaust and and even harm ourselves by over-doing it physically, emotionally or mentally. Not so with the will, which only grows stronger with each exercise. And this is for better or worse, resulting in, on one hand, good habits known as virtue, otoh, bad habits known as vice. So, it is love, then, that truly lights the way, drawing us toward truth, beauty and goodness, surely employing all of our faculties, which are servants, to be sure, not masters. It has been noted that Jesus was no wimpy personality and that humility is not to be confused with being weak-willed. Jesus and Hitler were both strong-willed individuals. The difference was that Jesus was willing, while Hitler was will ful . So, too, humility is not to be equated with any anti-intellectual disclaimer regarding human knowledge or any overly-intellectualized claims either, with either an excessive epistemological humility, on one hand, or epistemological hubris, otoh. Rather, it embraces an epistemological holism, an integral part of which, in my sense of it all, amounts to wisdom. Wisdom, to me, thus entails truth plus, beauty plus, goodness plus ... plus what? plus Love, of course. Love, then, and then do what you will. pax, jb | ||||
|
More, now, on concepts. Lonergan drew distinctions between the steps of sensation, abstraction and judgment. I think the postmodern critique helped us all to slow down and observe, more carefully, what it is that is taking place between the steps of sensation and abstraction/conceptualization, also between conceptualization and judgment. The linguistic turn in philosophy served us well in this regard, too. Even the behaviorists shed some light on what takes place between stimulus and response, S ---> R. Having thus deconstructed our cognitive processes, we don't just leave them sitting there in some incoherent heap. Rather, the trick is to reconstruct them, placing as much freedom in the intervals between S and R, sensation and abstraction, between abstraction and judgment, as possible. It is in this interval of freedom that love can grow. This is what we gain from our spiritual exercises, from our physical and mental and emotional asceticisms, freedom to love. If I may so bold as to sum up the crux of what it is that we have been wrestling over in this thread, it is nothing less than a struggle between radical deconstructionism and radical realism. The solution I think I hear most of us prescribing is a constructive postmodernism. Below are two quotes from Billy Grassie that capture this dynamic very well:
Those who are not familiar with it SHOULD read Bulverism by C.S. Lewis . Here is an excerpt: Try listing 21 facts about God without concepts. Rather, we must simply draw a distinction between the words incomprehensible and unintelligible. They mean different things and only the former is to be applied to God. S/he may be incomprehensible, but S/he is intelligible, especially if one uses love as their hermeneutical lens to gaze at truth, beauty and goodness. Spirituality is therefore much about using the corrective lens of love, which is decidedly nonrational, unconditional, ineffable --- to then gaze at reality, of course then using logic, aesthetics and ethics, of course using formal constructions and concepts and nonformal and nonconceptual approaches, too. The over-arching hermeneutic of love is intrinsically true, good and beautiful, needing no grounding or justification, conceptualization of formal construction or proof or argument. It is over-arching, however, and not over-against. There is a difference. The trick is not to saw off the epistemological branch we have climbed out on because, if we do, we're going to lose the nest in which our ontological eggs are hatched. pax, amor et bonum, deep, deep peace no nonshalom jb | ||||
|
http://www.contactradio.info/g...03/hawkins_david.htm Found four more radio programs featuring Hawkins sitting on that epistomological branch and hatching some ontological eggs. In the first program he explains why quantum mechanics is required to understand kinesiological method at 600 and Newtonian science's limitations at 499. In the second program he explains why the French government's position on the Iraq war calibrates below the level of integrity at 200, which does not surprise me since Michael Moore's pseudo documentary, Farenheit 911, is the first to win the prize at the Cannes Film Festival and represents the largest one day DVD sales in French history.  In the third program Hawkins explains why 80% of free speach is "hogwash", and the July 2004 program reveals why half of the American public are below the level of "integrity" and that Ronald Reagan reaches th level of "love" at 500.  Also, when "under God" is removed from The Pledge of Allegiance, it drops from 520 to 295. caritas, mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
In the third program Hawkins explains why 80% of free speach is "hogwash". And I might add that I think 80% of our problems are due to undue cynicism. He also said that it is �Freedom to share falsehoods.� Perhaps. But not all misstatements are attempts to deceive. Maybe not even most of them. Perhaps an enlightened person might have said that free speech is a vital means � perhaps the only means � to work out our misunderstandings and to expose falsehoods. So what is the alternative to free speech? Should we just needlessly trash the concept? What method would work better? Perhaps it would be more helpful to point out how to make better use of it then to add to the stream of cynicism. | ||||
|
More on politics from Dr. Hawkins: Q: The 'politically correct' activists seem to precipitate an endless series of social conficts and strife. What is the core of the problem? A: They are elitist and calibrate at 180, the level of pride and vanity of egotism. The error again is one of ignoring context. Although supposedly egalitarian, they paradoxically adopt superior attitudes and and pose as the high moral ground. They attempt to gain power and control over others by romanticized idealism. -p.62 I:Reality and Subjectivity The social consequences resulting from the implementation of any social engineering program can be predicted in advance. Those that calibrate below 200 will be detrimental. The traditional schoolroom in the first half of the last century in the United States calibrated at 405. Subsequent to the implementation of political positionalities and the influence of the teacher's union (which calibrates at 202) the average schoolroom now calibrates at 285. The huge decline is reflected in the worsening of classroom behaviors, disrespect for authority, and violence against teachers. -p.63 Acadamia is heavily politically biased. Ninety- four percent of Ivy League professors are committed to liberalism and only six percent are somewhat conservative (Arizona Republic, 2002). Conservative student groups are actually excluded from student councils. Thus, in practice, liberalism denies the truth of it's nominal title, that is, in truth, it is reactionary and exclusive. Secretly, it holds itself to be aristocratic. -p.64 Hawkins calibrates O'Reilly Factor at 450-460. Aren't you beginning to like him just a little? caritas, mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
Aren't you beginning to like him just a little? Ahhh...shucks, you're right, MM. But don't always correlate critiquing with like/dislike. I�m just giving my 2 cents when I feel someone is falling a buck short. But I stand in awe of someone who has the nads to make this kind of observation: Mr. Hawkins is seeking truth and appears to be making an honest stab at it. He�s doing a 90% good job in some respects. If he shows up at Shalom Place will show him how to achieve that other 10%.  | ||||
|
Michael, Michael, Michael . . . He is calibrating his own subjective judgments. What else could it be? And in that sense, this is valuable information for him, and AK can be a way to get at something of the strength of his own conscious and unconscious attitudes. I think what we're learning is that he's a tad on the conservative side of issues. Fine with me! Again, my preference when evaluating ideas, values, philosophies, theologies, cultural trends, etc. is to subject them to a more rigorous critique than what AK provides. If Hawkins calibrates something highly but a thorough critique doesn't do as well, I'll go with the latter and think that Hawkins has a bias in that direction. | ||||
|
I think our discussion of Ashtar got me googled to receive the follow spam: ----- How to Tell if Earth is Not Your Real Home If you . . . are deeply saddened by the way humans treat each other, feel somewhat alienated, even from friends and loving family, gaze out at the stars, with a sense that Earth is not your real home, are more comfortable with plants or animals than with most people, suffer from allergies and other sensitivities, have a sense that you came to this planet to do something important . . . ... you may be one of the seventy million Light Workers or Starseed Wanderers who are here to assist with the impending shift. These highly evolved beings assumed that their advanced state would permit them to quickly resolve the distortions of the Veil they were required to go through when assuming human form. They were wrong. At present, fewer than nine percent of these Wanderers have succeeded in cleansing the sleep from their eyes. Like the six billion souls they came to serve, the rest are trapped in the illusion, unable to break free. A short list of irrefutable scientific facts speaks volumes: the recent sunspot activity (which plays havoc with sensitive equipment) exceeds any previously recorded; a report leaked from the Russian National Academy of Science reveals that our entire solar system has moved into a "different area of space" with higher and more aberrant energy levels than previously noted; the sun's heliosphere (the magnetic "egg'" radiating from the sun) is now ten times its normal size, creating a glowing, excited plasmic energy field at its leading edge; the atmospheres of five planets (including Earth) are undergoing significant change; several planets have recently undergone shifts in their magnetic pole positions?just one of the many turbulent changes also predicted for Earth; magnetic shifts on our planet are already so significant that the aeronautical maps used by pilots have had to be revised. The point is clear: the changes long ago predicted by Mayan, Hopi and many other indigenous cultures are not in our future. They are here now. The governmental and scientific communities, although well-informed, are at a loss as to what to do. In their desire to keep us calm and secure, they are choosing to conceal rather than admit impotence. What is happening now is no mystery. It is exactly as it was meant to be, and, with full acknowledgment to the Mayan, Hopi, and other seers of the past, it is right on schedule. To those still struggling beneath the weight of the Veil, breaking free seems daunting. In fact, it is surprisingly simple. If you are one of these glorious beings who came to serve, all you need are a few fragments of information to rekindle the process of remembering. A new book has just been published that changes the way we perceive. This book is offered primarily to Wanderers and those souls within the illusion who have wielded their spiritual machetes sufficiently to hack through the tangles of the Veil and glimpse the first rays of light. Our collective mission on this planet at this time is clear: to help the beings currently trapped within the illusion to move forward, should they wish it. If you are such a person?a Sleeping Beauty who has descended into the dream state behind the Veil of Forgetting?then prepare for the kiss of your prince. You are about to awaken. <http://www.daissy.com/CHDV1564_2/1773/ukdorpsodfhG/53sklo/u.htm>GOING DEEPER How to Make Sense of Your Life When Your Life Makes No Sense by Jean-Claude Koven To order this book: http://www.prismhouse.com | ||||
|
Try cable news or National Review Online. They can work wonders. | ||||
|
Then there is Hawkins the spiritual director to consider: Q: For many years, you were a consultant to many religious organizations, including Catholic nuns and priests, Episcopal ministers and a Zen monastery, and you still counsel monks and clergy. Is the kinesiological test of practical use? A: In years past, there was inner spiritual experience, spiritual vision, awareness, and discernment which are still the mainstay, along with intuition. The problem that arose over the years was how to discern spiritual states from pathologic ones. They could be put in the form of a list. Differentiation is now quite simple and fast, using the kinesiological test. AUTHENTIC SPIRITUAL STATE - PATHOLOGICAL, or NON- SPIRITUAL STATE Samadhi - Catatonic Religious Ecstacy - Mania (bipolar hyper- religiosity) Illumination - Grandiosity Enlightenment - Religious Delusion Piety - Scrupulosity (obsessive-compulsive) Inspiration - Imagination Visions - Hallucinations Authentic Spiritual- False Guru, Imposter, Teacher- Spiritual Con-Artist Experiential - Intellectual Devotion - Zealotry, Hyper- religiosity Committed - Obsessed, Brainwashed by Cult, Victimized Dark Night of the Soul - Pathologic Depression Detachment - Withdrawal, Indifference Nonattachment,Acceptance - Passivity Transcendent State - Mutism Trusting - Naive Advanced State - Psychosis, Egomania Beatific - Euphoria Humility - Low Self-Esteem Spiritual Sharing - Proseletizing Committment - Religiosity Inspired - Messianic God Shock - Schizophrenic Disorganization Spiritual Ecstacy - Manic State,High on Drugs Genuine Spiritual - Spiritual Politician, Leader - Cult Leader Free - Psychopathic Teaching - Controlling ------------------------------------------------- If Hawkins has assisted religious organizations with this type of discernment, would not that lend him some credibility? mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
If Hawkins has assisted religious organizations with this type of discernment, would not that lend him some credibility? I wouldn't have the slightest idea, MM. But I think that's a dandy list of opposites/complimentaries. Doing nothing more than contemplating that list is educational. If one is able to put together that kind of list then I think one must have something screwed on right. | ||||
|
Yes, that's a good list of discernment issues. Hawkins notes, The problem that arose over the years was how to discern spiritual states from pathologic ones. They could be put in the form of a list. Differentiation is now quite simple and fast, using the kinesiological test. It's that simple and fast part that bothers me, Michael, especially for such complex issues as he lists. I would hate to think that traditional guidelines for discernment, not to mention the co-discerning that goes on in spiritual direction, is thought to now be irrelevant because it's "slower and more complex." Some of those issues do take time to sort out, especially when several are manifesting at once. Again, I have no problem with someone using the data from AK as part of the consideration, but it so often seems like Hawkins and others are proposing it as all that is needed, or the primary data. And again I must ask: what is really going on, here, anyway? Are we to believe that it's the Holy Spirit speaking in arm-resistance testing? You see what I mean? Now it doesn't surprise me that some religious communities have made use of AK and Hawkins' work. Through the years, I've come across communities that were enthused about all kinds of things, including zazen, homeopathy, tachyon energy (I kid you not -- products and all!!!), wearing crystals, Gaia spirituality, harmonic convergence, and other practices a little more off the beaten path. I can think of several communities that think Wilber is "the man," and quite a few that don't much like the Pope. So they're all over the place theologically and spiritually -- some having only the most tenuous connections with our Catholic tradition. All another story . . . | ||||
|
Out of all those catagories I can think of an obvious one that he left out: Less Filling - Tastes Great | ||||
|
http://www.members.tripod.com/~pp2000ad/theword.html From my POV this is where Dr. Hawkins misses the boat and where I will part company with him most frequently and emphatically. This Word is something different to him than it is to me, and there most likely is no form of consciousness research which can separate me from my relationship with Christ. My spirituality is Christ-centered. Hawkins was a scientific atheist up until the time of his "kundalini" (he doesn't exactly call it that) awakening, and proceeded from there to AK, Course in Miracles, Ramana Maharshi and everything else. He went to church as a child, but apparently nothing ever came of that. He seems to be operating outside of any living tradition other than science and Freud was his major early influence. I was reading something William Johnston S.J. wrote 30 years ago: More important than this, [ scientific research confirming ancient traditions] are the discoveries being made in the field of consciousness itself. Not long ago people (wise and not so wise)tended to lump together mysticism, hypnosis, schizophrenic experience, drug experience, and other altered states, as though they were all variations of a single theme. And this was not so terribly foolish because to distinguish the states scientifically is not easy. Yet now, thanks to rigorous laboratory experiments, it becomes possible to distinguish between the consciousness of Zen and that of Yoga; it is possible to demonstrate from brainwaves that hypnosis is not the same as samadhi or the prayer of quiet. Even within Zen, fine research is showing a difference between the Rinzai and Soto consciousness. All this will help masters and directors who, after all, should know as much as possible about the kind of consciousness they wish to produce and the kind they wish to reject. -Silent Music There was a kindly old man on the Trinity Broadcasting Network about 20 years ago who had a near-death experience and was a frequent guest, relating his passage into both hellish and the heavenly realms. He was quite something to alot of people. Later on it seems that some people caught on that he was using his imagination to embellish the tales, and he was relegated to telling his stories in a children's program format. He was a "consciousness researcher." Ken Wilbur, right here in his home town, is being relegated to the "metaphysics" section of the bookstore. He is also a "consciousness "researcher." Hawkins' books are now taking prominent display spaces in secular and spiritual bookstores, and I imagine that he will spread and gain influence around the nation and the world, until he is replaced by someone else. Still, I respect him as a consciousness researcher and feel that he is moving the dialog a bit further down the road. I'm still talking with Phil because the grounding to the Historic Christian faith is my number one path of "consciousness research." caritas, mm <*))))))>< | ||||
|
Man alive, Michael! I'm looking at the time of your posting - 3:18 A.M., with an edit at 4:25 AM. That's CST, so I hope you're on the other side of the world somewhere and had had a good night sleep. Hawkins' books are now taking prominent display spaces in secular and spiritual bookstores, and I imagine that he will spread and gain influence around the nation and the world, until he is replaced by someone else. Still, I respect him as a consciousness researcher and feel that he is moving the dialog a bit further down the road. What do you think AK is really evaluating, Michael? What, really, is causing arm resistance to be strong or weak? My response is that it is the unconscious of the person being tested, and that this is being influenced by suggestion, to some degree, from the one doing the testing. I'm still talking with Phil because the grounding to the Historic Christian faith is my number one path of "consciousness research." Well, yes, that's where my commitment lies. I do take the "real Jesus" to be definitive in determining the meaning of life, the nature of God, and the destiny of human beings. That's where I take my stand, as it is the foundation of my faith. | ||||
|
Phil, If he is mistaken about the efficacy of this method, then I wonder why he would not admit it. He's still trying to prove it in his demonstrations and says that even when he demonstrates it, some walk away not believing it. I know that scripture forbids divination, and if that is all it is, I want no part of it. It could be the subconscious response. Can it be empirically proven with double-blind studies and not just in a room full of mostly sympathetic folk? He strikes me as sincere, so I wonder what's up? By the way, I never sleep. I'm rather inclined to hang upside down from the ceiling in the manner of an olde Transylvanian mystical practise. It's often difficult to reach the keyboard this way and Franky and Wolfy are such poor spellers. countmikula.com | ||||
|
I don't think what Hawkins is doing qualifies as divination. If he is invoking a response from the subconscious, well, that's fine. That's what this page proposes is going on. But that means the response ought not to be defined as anything more significant than that -- i.e., it does not indicate any kind of "objective truth." It is not the universe responding, as TBiscuit asserted, nor the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, if it's detecting an unconscious response, then we ought to consider the many kinds of things that can influence such. Again, what I'm resisting most in all of this is using AK as a substitute for critical thinking and discernment, especially regarding the kinds of issues mentioned above. It's also highly inappropriate, imo, to say that this method can tell us which religious teachers/systems are of higher consciousness. I'd really rather not make this a discussion of Hawkins' integrity and character, as I don't think that contributes anything one way or another. - - - I'm rather inclined to hang upside down from the ceiling in the manner of an olde Transylvanian mystical practise. It's often difficult to reach the keyboard this way and Franky and Wolfy are such poor spellers. LOL! Well, whatever gets you through the night . . .  | ||||
|
If Hawkins has reached a certain level of enlightenment and believes that this is almost equal to Buddha or Jesus when he was in human form, then this might explain why his books calibrate at 850 to 970 and Krishna, J.C. & Siddharta Gautama at 1000. Then he would be calibrating only his sincere subconscious belief, which would not necessarily reflect poorly or otherwise on his character. The there is the philosophical debate between East and West to consider, and Hawkins has muddied the water further by attempting to reconcile them. Oil and water. William Johnston said that in all his Zen/Christian dialog no one ever changed their religion. When theological beliefs were left out and the experiential and subjective were emphasized, then there was communication. This is difficult at best, but many still find it worth the efforts and compromise. As I become more familiar with the maps, I hope to improve in the ability to discuss the territory and methodology. Kinesiology seems to have limits which are not yet generally agreed upon or standardized caritas, (P.S. too much blood rushed to my head, and I'm going to retire to the coffin for awhile) mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
I don't wish to sound rudely dismissive, but is it possible that Hawkings' technique is nothing but a glorified Ouija board? | ||||
|
According to Hawkins the kinesiological method only works for people who calibrate over 200, which automatically rules out 80% of the population. In addition, the question itself must be integrous. I know some Wiccans who practise dowsing and they always ask in the name of the Highest Good. There is an idea that everything in history is recorded in the Akashic records and might be tapped into by various means. This isn't limited to non-Christians, as many charisms have accompanied saints and mystics of all traditions. I don't know if any integrous human can be antennae for such vibrations, but Hawkins suggests that this may be the case. If I were convinced that I was called to try this, I would ask in Jesus' name, as well as for protection from anything which was not the will of God. Now we have "Angel Cards" for Christians who might fear an ordinary Tarot deck. I don't go in for it personally, but no longer fear the people who do. I picked up a copy of the I Ching as part of a study project on Confucious yesterday, but have no intention of actually practising the I Ching. There is a new biography of Bill Wilson, co-founder of AA which delves into his seances in the 1950s where they levitated tables and heard some knocks and bumbs. I thought of that today when I saw a sign on a telephone poll about the twelve steps leading straight to hell. ROTFLMAO Some people have had difficulty getting free from certain influences after playing with Ouija boards and the like, and I personally don't go in for that. I renounced Satan and his works at my confirmation a long time ago, and I believe this is still current practise in Roman Catholic Baptisms. Since I have the Holy Spirit, why would I need any other? I don't have any Spidey-senses tingling about Hawkins so far, and he just does not have the creep-me-out aura about him. Nevertheless, even Hawkins says that 55% of spiritual teachers are non-integrous, so stay away from Ashtar if you can. caritas, mm <*))))))>< | ||||
|
According to Hawkins the kinesiological method only works for people who calibrate over 200, which automatically rules out 80% of the population. I'm really not following this point. If AK is measuring their unconscious response, then what would that have to do with their level of calibration? Everyone has an unconscious, and presumably, their unconscious has an attitude about all sorts of things. Also, how could one evaluate if one is at a 200 or not if AK is not valid below? Doesn't that presume the validity of another way of evaluating beliefs prior to using AK? Why not continue to use that "other way" since it seems that even AK depends on it for verification, to a large extent? | ||||
|
"The reliability of the testing experience never ceased to amaze the public and patients-- and, for that matter, the practicioners themselves. When I was on the lecture circuit, in audiences of 1000 people, 500 envelopes containing artificial sweetener would be passed out to the audience along with 500 identical envelopes containing organic vitamin C, The audience would then be divided up and alternate testing each other. When the envelopes were opened, the audience reaction was always one of amazement and delight when they saw that everybody had gone waek in response to the artificial sweetener and strong in response to the vitamin C. The nutritional habits of countless people across the country wer changed due to this simple demonstration." -Power vs Force, p. 59 On the preceding page he states that reason can only work on isolated aspects of truth rather than the totality which is accessed by the method. I have two forces working in me on this thing, both scepticism and the desire to believe, so I seem to be stuck until I go try it or someone else sorts this out for me. I imagine this will go the rounds of the debunkers and rebunkers a few times before there is some general agreement on it's validity. I don't know if that helps, Phil, and I remain much confused myself at this point. caritas, mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
Well, Vitamin C and artificial sweeteners are chemical substances that the body can sense on some level and respond to. I give that a lot more credence than placing one's hand on a book and testing resistance to determine the level of consciousness of the book. As I noted in a post way (way, way . . . ) above, in one short demo at a workshop I attended years ago, I saw a blindfolded participant have a strong, then weak response to the Bible within a matter of minutes. I don't think the body and unconscious can determine the validity of truth claims in a book without reading the book. But, then, that's not exactly "fast and simple," is it? | ||||
|
I have two forces working in me on this thing, both scepticism and the desire to believe, so I seem to be stuck until I go try it or someone else sorts this out for me. I think the main problem, Michael, aside from the reliability factors noted above, is that the conscious personality is responsible for guiding one's life, not the unconscious. The unconscious isn't really some kind of impartial, objective intelligence over-and-against a subjective, deluded Ego. Yet that seems to be the presumption held by Hawkins and those who've come on this discussion to defend his approach. | ||||
|
Phil, I am great-full to have the opportunity to run this by you, and God knows how long I may have pursued this if I had not run into you. Hawkins is very sharp and not so easily refuted as some others out there. I'm not sure just how much information can come from our bodies, and western medicine has much to learn about this. The doctors of the future will probably listen a great deal more to patients and seek some kind of readings from their physiology other that blood pressure and stethescope. If Hawkins is trying to make a religion out of a new diagnostic tool or method, it would not be the first time someone had gotten carried away. caritas, mm <*))))>< | ||||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Map of Consciousness (Dr. David Hawkins)