Integral Science

One important feature associated with a black hole is the considerable slow-down in physical time which takes place (relative for example to a far distant object). This is due to an associated massive increase in gravity in the vicinity of the black hole. This again is replicated in complementary fashion with respect to the “dark night”, where likewise a considerable slow-down in psychological time takes place. And this is due to a corresponding increase in psychological gravity i.e. grief, leading to an intense experience of loss. As we know Einstein showed in his special and general theories of relativity, how both the speed of an object and also its acceleration (which he realised was equivalent to gravity) can lead to significant changes in the passing of physical time (relative to an outside observer). Indeed when his secretary was repeatedly burdened for simple explanations of relativity, Einstein’s reputed response is often quoted as follows, “When you sit wi

In the last blog entry, I explained how the black hole physical is intimately connected with the “dark night” psycho-spiritual phenomenon and that much can be learned regarding each separate aspect through holistic connection with its complementary partner. So relating directly to my own experience, I was thereby enabled to provide a more refined explanation of a crucial crisis point in the “dark night” journey, where orientation gradually switched from emphasis on the transcendent to corresponding emphasis on the immanent aspect of spiritual development. I also saw the failure to highlight this point as an important limitation of the classic exposition of the “dark night” process by St. John of the Cross. This problem of proper incorporation of both the transcendent and immanent aspects of spiritual development in St. John’s treatise on the “dark night” - though admittedly the issue is later indirectly addressed in a more poetic fashion in the “Spiritual Canticle” - is e

In this entry I will attempt to convey some of flavour of the holistic approach to physics. The starting point here is the recognition that all physical understanding of reality serves as a reflection of the psychological constructs (used to interpret such reality). Therefore there are both physical and psychological aspects to all such understanding which operate in a dynamic complementary manner. In the holistic vision of such reality - which reflects the ultimate interdependence of both physical and psychological aspects - a developed refined intuition plays a key role. However indirectly this finds intellectual expression in a circular form of reason (which appears paradoxical from the conventional linear perspective). Indeed the very process of viewing the world in a holistic manner gradually enables one to appreciate more fully the true complementary nature of both the physical and psychological aspects of reality. This can then serve as an immensely creative proce

As we have seen the fundamental relationship as between wholes and parts (and parts and wholes) - operating at all levels of physical reality - must be properly interpreted in a dynamic interactive manner entailing the two-way interaction of complementary aspects that are - relatively -   quantitative and qualitative with respect to each other. This has intimate implications for the very way we view the universe. In the standard reduced approach, the universe is considered as the sum total of its parts (that can be quantitatively measured). This entails that the universe is considered in phenomenal terms as the “whole object” (which thereby contains all part objects, such as the milky way galaxy, our solar system (within that galaxy), planet Earth (within the solar system) and so on.    However properly considered, in dynamic interactive terms, the whole is contained in each constituent part (regardless of how minute); equally all the parts are collectively contained in the

Yesterday, I mentioned how it is not possible to understand the (whole) universe unambiguously in a rational manner. So any definite statement regarding its nature in this context is inevitably bound to lead to paradox. Equally however it is not possible to understand any minute part of the system in an unambiguous manner. And the central reason for this is that the nature of reality is inherently dynamic so that the whole (which is qualitatively distinct) is contained in each part; equally each part (while also maintaining its distinct nature) is contained in the whole. Thus a dynamic interdependence constitutes the relationship between part and whole (and whole and part) with the two-way interaction of both quantitative and qualitative aspects. And this dynamic relationship - by definition - constitutes the nature of reality at all levels. Indeed this is the key underlining explanation of why it is not possible to reconcile the theory of relativity with quan

I have been reading recently an updated biography of Stephen Hawking by Kitty Ferguson. Though I have always found Hawking a very interesting and provocative thinker, I would consider the major weakness of his position is that he has adopted throughout an inherently reduced view of the nature of science without the need to seriously question its assumptions. Of course this is a criticism that can be made generally of the mainstream approach to physics. Despite many deep philosophical issues posed by quantum mechanics, most practitioners carry on regardless in the somewhat naïve belief that even its strangest findings can be successfully accommodated within the present approach. Modern science emerged from a mythical medieval worldview where both physical and spiritual realities were viewed as inseparable partners. Thus the subsequent clear differentiation of the physical from the spiritual aspect has enabled an unprecedented development with respect to the analytic aspe