The entire paradigm referred to as the scientific method is based upon Meditations On First Philosophy
by Descartes; a writing which
establishes the existence of the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ as the one indubitable fact and fundamental datum of human experience; and, thus,
the basis of all scientifically accurate (and true) descriptions of both human consciousness and the space-time reality.
Thus, it is not at all surprising that, when attempts are made by the scientists to develop, specifically, a “science of consciousness”, those
efforts are, for all practical purposes, exclusively focused on describing the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ and its perceptions of reality;
almost as if the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ is, in fact, the only
dimension of human consciousness.
A close reading of the Meditations
of Descartes, however, clearly demonstrates that there is, in fact, a second dimension of consciousness
referred to as the ‘unconscious’ or the “self”; anyone with even a minimal understanding of Jungian or archetypal psychology being able to
recognize that the opening passages of the Second Meditation
of Descartes are descriptive of the emergence of the ‘unconscious’.
But the very existence of the ‘unconscious’ or the consciousness of the “self” necessarily strikes at the very foundation of the entire
paradigm of the scientific method itself, which defines the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ as the very source of all
scientific truth. And,
while there have been very, very, very minimal efforts by certain ‘scientists’ of consciousness to consider, if not include the findings of
Sigmund and Anna Freud, C. G. Jung and Wilhelm Reich in the development of a “science of consciousness”, there is one fundamental and inescapable
Human consciousness cannot
be accurately described exclusively from the frame of reference of the consciousness of the ‘thinker’; a frame
of reference which specifically ignores and denies the relevance and reality of any information suggesting that there is not only a second; but, in
fact, even a third dimension of consciousness beyond the consciousness of the “self” and the consciousness of the ‘thinker’.
In other words, any “science of consciousness” which ‘succeeds’ only by focusing exclusively on the consciousness of the ‘thinker’—and
specifically ignoring any and all evidence of the existence of any other dimensions of human consciousness—is, essentially, of no value whatsoever;
the amount of data that it is incapable
of explaining being far
in excess of the data that it is capable
Now, according to the Buddhist and Eastern esoteric traditions (as well as certain Revelations, but not theologies, of the monotheistic religions),
there is a non-dualistic consciousness which exists ‘prior to’ and ‘beyond’ the dualistic consciousness of both the “self” and the
‘thinker’—a dimension of consciousness which, for example, has access to information beyond the consciousness of the “self” and the
‘thinker’; specifically, memories of previous lives. But, even in the absence of any memories of previous lives, there are certain elements of
reality which simply cannot
be either acknowledged or explained in any way whatsoever without the existence of a non-dualistic, non-spatial,
and non-temporal “observing consciousness”; for example, pre-cognitive dreams and Prophecies and certain ‘paranormal’ experiences such as
Thus, the task of any serious
“scientist of consciousness” in establishing an accurate description of human consciousness is really quite
daunting: such an understanding must necessarily not merely threaten—but, in fact destroy
—the fundamental assertion of the scientific
method itself (and the consciousness of the ‘thinker’) that it
is the fundamental determiner of the truth.
And, yet, there is another aspect of this problem.
While the “scientists of consciousness” have focused almost exclusively on the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ as an absolute or ‘inertial
frame of reference’ for the determining the truth about human consciousness
(see, for example, the discussions at: tech.groups.yahoo.com...
the followers of Krishnamurti
(see, for example, the discussions at: www.kfa.org...
focus, instead, on destroying the consciousness of the ‘thinker’, in the expectation that what remains after the destruction of that consciousness
is a non-dualistic consciousness; when, in fact, what remains is merely the dualistic consciousness of the "self".
In other words, they are no more interested in the existence of a third dimension of consciousness than are the “scientists of consciousness”.