Consciousness and Society
Course VI: How Materialist Science Affects Society
Course Outline: This course examines how materialist science affects our understanding of physical and non-physical consciousness and society. This includes economic, educational, governmental and cultural factors contributing to a functional understanding of self and others based on 4-dimensional individualism. If you have not yet taken Courses I-V, we recommend going back and doing so in order to understand the reference we make to them here.
A Society of Individualism
In Course V we threshed out how molecules of emotion create subjective biases regardless of scientific prowess or authority. We also introduced information linking the roots of the Scientific Revolution throughout Western Europe in the 1600’s to some very devout religious and philosophical posturing. This posturing significantly influenced the framework with which scientific inquiry, which we discussed in Course I, is undertaken by a majority of researchers to the present day.
The overarching premise of this framework, then and now alike, is “Individualism.” Individualism is the perceptual belief that a person’s private covenant with a higher power, be that a religious covenant like Newton, or a materialistic covenant like many scientific atheists or laypeople without official religious affiliation, supersedes a person’s relationship with, responsibility for other people and in many ways, stewardship of the planet we all share in kind.
It important to understand that Individualism and scientific materialism are intimately related…. because both theories rely on the perception of 4-dimensional spatial distinctiveness and, in this regard, the existence of only physical consciousness in a Universe comprised almost entirely of dead space. This, of course, is the entire basis for the “field theory of consciousness” we also discussed in Course I.
To briefly recap here: The field theory of consciousness states that consciousness is a passive state of awareness unique to each individual. Because of this, and the belief that all inert, changeless matter (human beings included) exists solely as separate physical markers in 4-dimensional spacetime, human beings experience consciousness individually.
Of course, there is no argument that we are all our own people in a physical sense. The human bio-body suit (Course III) has both electrochemical (particulate) and electromagnetic (energy) layers. These physical and non-physical layers combine to form each and every one of us in a holistic, consciousness-based sense. Physicist Russell Targ said as much when he stated that “although each of us inhabits a separate physical body, there is no separation in consciousness.”
Herein lies the gaping chasm between what we are now clinically demonstrating is the nature of (physical and non-physical) consciousness, and what science has helped conditioned society to believe to the contrary for the better part of the past 400 years or so….
In this context, individualism is the belief that there is no such thing as non-physical consciousness, nor such a thing as an electromagnetic component to electrochemical-based human beings. This is significantly different than (let’s call it) “Separateness,” which alludes to the fact that we human beings might be physically separate from one another in a 4-dimensional spacetime sense, but not in a 11 dimensional consciousness sense.
Due to the fact we were raised in a system of individualism and not separateness, we have been synaptically pruned to view consciousness and society, reality and each other in a fragmented sense. This means we have been trained for individual differences to stand out, and taught that these differences are measurable in quantitative and/or competitive terms.
And make no mistake about it: Individualism is a 24-hour per day, 7 day per week, 365 day per year festival of materialist metaphors and narratives that cater to the physical component of consciousness almost entirely and exclusively…. while marginalizing or outright excluding any metaphors or narratives that bring the non-physical consciousness component into the human equation.
But just how did the subjectively biased theories of a relatively small, homogenous group of natural philosophers in Western Europe in the 1600’s translate to consciousness and society in the present day. Let’s make this link clearer by connecting a few contextual dots, starting with the Age of Enlightenment….
The Age of Enlightenment
The connectivity between consciousness and society in the present day and the Scientific Revolution around 400 years ago is found in “The Age of Enlightenment.” This occurred from the late 1600’s to the early 1800’s. It was typified by the belief that humanity could be improved upon through rational change. Also called “The Age of Reason,” the Enlightenment ushered in major societal upheavals, including the French and American Revolutions.
Although Isaac Newton is not generally considered an Enlightenment philosopher, his 1868 treatise Principia Mathematica was widely read by those who came to define this movement. In 1689, Newton’s contemporary and countryman John Locke published his Essay Concerning Human Understanding; which, along with the Principia Mathematica, helped provide a scientific, mathematical and philosophical toolkit for the Enlightenment’s major advances.
Like Newton, Locke, an English philosopher and political theorist formally trained in medicine, was a proponent of using one’s God-given powers of objectivity to solve the problems of society. Locke believed that a mathematic reduction facilitates a responsible formulation of knowledge and human identity. His Calvinist upbringing, combined with his Socinian-Christian faith, firmly framed his philosophical and political biases.
Locke’s fellow countryman, Francis Bacon’s writings were also considered canon to many Enlightenment thinkers. As Course V detailed, Bacon was also a proponent of using objective reasoning, or “useful knowledge” to solve societal issues of all types. To Bacon, societal issues stemmed from man regaining control over nature that was lost when Adam and Eve fell from the Garden of Eden. Some historians call this agenda “The Baconian Program.”
The Baconian Program was responsible for many important industrial advances in the following centuries —including mining technology that led to iron and steel production, steam and coal powered engines, microscopic devices and later on, internal combustion engines, refining raw materials like oil into gasoline for those engines, and even electricity.
These advancements were key components of industrialization, which is also called the “Industrial Revolution.” The Industrial Revolution led to the rise of technology that enhances the physical consciousness experience almost exclusively. It also led to the rise of a homogenous group of men that mirrored Newton, Bacon, Locke and their counterparts in the way they viewed individualism and materialism.
How Does Materialist Culture Influence Society?
The Anglo-Saxon Protestant cultural influence was so engrained in industrial technology that some historians, including Susan Armitage, estimate that during the mid to late 1800’s, over 90% of America’s economic, industrial and political elites were well-educated Caucasian, Protestant men from prominent families who attended church services regularly. These men believed success was a calculated combination of hard work and divine providence. This combination of human and godly forces led to the “Gospel of Wealth,” which equated the pursuit of industrial success to unflinching religious zealotry.
The gospel of wealth is based on an interpretation of the Protestant-Christian Bible that stresses pious devotion to God supersedes responsibilities to one’s fellow human beings, and can also lead to material prosperity for the truly faithful. Or, in other words, that those men were favored by God to have the wealth they had, while those who served under them (Caucasian and non alike) were not favored. Along these lines, the unstated caveat of the gospel of wealth is that improving one’s status requires willing submission to the subjective biases of the keepers of said gospel. Of course, Individualism is a major tenet of the gospel, as are the following four accompanying tenets:
- Puritan morality, or Protestant-Christian guidelines for belief and behavior
- Work-success ethic, or the belief that one must spend his or her life laboring to earn money (which itself is merely a metaphor) to consume on material goods and services in order to be deemed successful
- Achievement Orientation, or the belief that the money and material one amasses, and the status achieved because of said money and material, dictates one’s value in society and worth as a human being
- Future Time Orientation, or the belief that one is incomplete the way he or she is now, and therefore must amass security from the outside in, and usually in the form of material to protect one from an unknown future
These five tenets actually served to bond both liberal and conservative minded people together as much then as they do now. For example, conservatives believe puritan morality should primarily guide society, and that in order to be an upstanding individual citizen, one should adhere strictly to Protestant values. For liberals, future time orientation, achievement orientation and work success ethic defines upstanding citizenship via consuming goods and services that can only be had by spending what one earns from laboring for the keepers of the gospel.
The overarching similarity is that the entire foundation of the gospel and its five tenets are deal only with physical consciousness…. specifically individualism and materialism framed as distinctions between people in 4-dimensional spacetime. This includes both in the way we view each other, and the way we treat ourselves, i.e. we are not good enough the way we are, but we always have the opportunity to become good by amassing the physical goods and services society offers us to this effect. Every societal institution is set up to purport and support the physical, individualist view of consciousness by reducing human beings to numerical values in the same way scientific materialism aims to reduce the entirety of the Universe down to one mathematical equation.
Reductionist Numerical Bias
From an early age, we are pruned to think in reductionist numerical bias terms based on competition between ourselves and the other members of our society. For example, we are strategically pruned to reduce ourselves to the sum of our physical-material worth, which is parsed up into numerical amounts. These numerical amounts are meant to become the extent of our conscious awareness of self, with the weight of all inherent numerical bias attached. We then compare this material worth to the material worth of others in order to gauge success or failure in competitive terms.
This is generally an “easy sell” to many people, because we have been taught that, just like science,” mathematics and numbers are objective and not subjectively biased. However, according to data scientist Cathy O’Neill, numerical amounts are actually very biased toward some people and against others. For example, in a formal educative sense, numerical bias is employed via grade point averages, test scores, or other manufactured quantitative markers used to solely judge one’s mechanical performance in a curricular system that educates learners based in large part on the five tenets of the gospel of wealth. These tests do not take factors like emotional/critical intelligence into account, but instead gauge and reward functional intelligence.
Outside of the classroom, these same algorithms are used in employment personality tests, when determining how many police officers to deploy in a given area, to gauge fiscal responsibility through credit scores, for determining auto, home and life insurance rates, and even through criminal sentencing algorithms that unfairly target minority cultures and communities by taking demographic factors like zip code into account when determining if someone is more likely to become a repeat offender based on where they currently live.
By instilling reductionist numerical bias into the deepest recesses of our physical consciousness, our perception of reality becomes fragmented and compartmentalized to the point we not only see others as fundamentally, perpetually different than ourselves, but we come to see ourselves as little or nothing more than the sum of our numerical ranking against all others. Forgoing how damaging this pruning is to cultivating meaningful relationships with others, it is even more damaging to cultivating a balanced relationship with our non-physical consciousness and selves…. because there is no room to even entertain the existence of non-physical consciousness in a materialist equation both socially and scientifically speaking.
With the Industrial Revolution in full swing, a cadre of professional and industrial elites, university professors, political leaders, and religious clergy, joined forces to combat competing cultural influences that drew critical light on materialism, individualism and reduction. As a result, and according to Educational Historian David Tyack, these men openly ridiculed the “exceedingly democratic idea all people are created equal and thus, felt that education needed to be adapted for social stratification.”
19th century Anglo-Saxon academics, including prominent Columbia Professor David S. Muzzey, were tasked with creating the curricular tools teachers would use in their classrooms. Muzzey saw a difference between genteel, Protestant land-owning Americans of English descent, and the rest of the immigrant population. That population included African and Caribbean people, Jewish people, Irish people, Italian people and Russian people. These people were aliens whom, “we must assimilate and mold into citizenship.” Muzzey felt failure to culturally assimilate those people risked “an undigested and indigestible element in our body politic, and a constant menace to our free institutions.”
The curricular tools Muzzey and his fellow academics created were rife with functional literacy and cultural bias. These tools spoke to recently immigrated Italian and Jewish children like they did not know the proper use for a toothbrush or a comb. The bias was so blatant that Latin immigrant Leonard Covello remembers the take home message from his childhood schooling in East Harlem, New York: “Italian means inferior.”
It was of the utmost importance to instill schooling that served two purposes: 1) to create future workers for the gospel keepers and 2) to create good citizens that would at least think like Protestants if not become them. The school day is divided into rigid, time-based learning parcels that present academic topics in a wholly fragmented, functional sense. This means physics classes do not question the four main tenets of materialist scientific inquiry, but merely presented them as objective facts to students. History classes covering the Scientific Revolution discuss the individual contribution of Newton and his contemporaries, but do not draw a line connecting their subjective biases to the theories the physics textbook calls “laws.”
By and large, the individuals discussed are of the same homogenous background as Muzzey and his contemporaries. Even when a minority group is mentioned, it is generally framed in an individualist context. For example, the story of Rosa Parks, who refused to move to the back of the bus during the segregation era in Alabama, is framed in the context of an old black woman who had tired feet and was fed up, which led to her impromptu action. However, Rosa Parks was not old, nor did she act impulsively. Instead, she was a member of a protest group, whose other members included none other than Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who planned and staged this protest.
Although this might seem like a minute detail, by framing Rosa Parks in an individualist manner, learners are pruned to believe individuals can make a significant difference. This stops them from conceptualizing and forming groups that, like Dr. King and his associates, stand a much better chance of actually fomenting change than one person ever can. This practice of “whitewashing” education to support individualist synaptic pruning and functional literacy is just as much of a problem today as it was 100 years ago.
Modern Cultural Bias
In 2010, Arizona House Bill 2281 outlawed the teaching of Latino Studies programs to students of all cultural backgrounds statewide. Then-state Superintendent of Education Tom Horne claimed that Latino Studies programs promote the overthrow of the United States government through a dangerous form racial solidarity.
Previously, Horne took offense to a speaker in a Tucson classroom that said that Latinos do not like Republicans. To disprove the speaker’s assertion, Horne arranged for a Latina Republican to address the same students as a rebuttal. Some of the students exercised their constitutionally protected right to protest through non-violent behaviors like taping their mouths shut, raising their fists and/or turning their backs. This protest prompted Horne and state lawmakers to enact legislation ensuring the curriculum remained solely within an individualist context. In 2017, a federal judge finally ruled HB2281 to be unconstitutional. Horne’s rebuttal was nothing short of a hat tip to the dominant cultural tenets he illegally upheld:
“I believe it is a fundamental American ideal that we are all individuals, entitled to be judged by our knowledge and character, and not by what race we happened to be born into. The proper role of the public schools is to bring together students of different backgrounds and teach them to treat each other as individuals. This program does the opposite: Divides students by race and promotes ethnic chauvinism.”
To Horne, educational curricula that heavily favors those the Gospel of Wealth was created by over all other subordinate groups and genders are objective tools of instruction. This means any competing social narrative from the point of view of a native Hispanic culture is not only factually inaccurate, but a subversive attempt to cause chaos to the system of order Horne profits from culturally, professionally and financially speaking.
Although many governing bodies take a much less blunt approach to rationalizing functional individualism than Horne, it is always an excuse for functionally pruning synapses at an early age. This makes growing them out again that much more difficult later in life, than if someone is educated through a critical literacy curriculum to begin with. Educational researchers Meller, Richardson and Hatch found:
“Primary-age (and younger) children are able to participate in discussions based on teachers’ use of critical questions. (Educational researcher Judith) Chafel and her colleagues have shown that young children can learn to make critical connections to read-aloud texts and respond to such questions as, “Who is telling the story?” “What do you think that person wants us to think?” or “Why do you think the character is poor?” When children practice asking critical questions about the text, they are developing reading and thinking skills that can lead to powerful insights into how texts work, how readers can become more aware of their place in the reading process, and where they fit into the social world that surrounds them.”
The researchers found critical literacy essential for cultivating heightened societal awareness based on inventory and accountability of one’s own subjective biases. The level of consciousness accompanying this level of literacy, although not in and of itself non-physical, would definitely be a step in the right direction by promoting balance through drawing our own biases, and the (complimentary or competing) biases of our society, into critical context. It would also help begin contextualizing why inequality exists, and what toll this takes on our own consciousness, and that of our neighbors near and far alike.
The gospel of wealth has effectively utilized the Industrial Revolution’s technological advances to entrench the “manufactured inequality” inherent in the Gospel of Wealth into collective consciousness. According to Physicist Fritjof Capra, this manufactured inequality is even employed to justify seemingly benevolent advancements like the “Green Revolution” in agriculture over the past 40 years…. which touted new agricultural technology that could effectively cure world hunger. Or, in Capra’s words:
“In an age of scarcity, so the argument goes, only increased (capitalist) production will solve the problem of hunger, and only large-scale agribusiness (or industrial-run farming) is able to produce more food. This argument is still used, long after detailed research has made it quite clear that the problem or world hunger is not at all a technical problem, but a social and political one.”
The Institute for Food and Development Policy, Moore Lappe and Joseph Collins, have found food scarcity to be a myth perpetuated by agribusiness in order to allow large-scale capitalist industrial influences to profit from manufactured inequality. In fact, Lappe and Collins’ extensive research led them to state: “In the Third World, on the whole there is more food and less to eat.”
For example, throughout impoverished countries in Central America, at least half of the agricultural land (including the most fertile land available) is used to grow cash crops for export while 70% of the native children remain undernourished. The same practices in countries like Senegal and Mexico supply high quality agricultural products to the United States and Europe while native populations remain largely underserved.
The corporate controlled agribusiness companies in these countries serve the interests of industrial corporations in the same ways other natural resources, including raw materials like oil and minerals, are sourced for pennies on the dollar and then redistributed into wealthier societies for the profit of those corporations and not the countries they originated from.
In this regard, the primary issue where world hunger is concerned is not the redistribution of food, but the redistribution of control over agricultural resources. As long as inequality is being manufactured from the top down, the agribusiness model will continue to benefit a small percentage of elite corporate “farmers,” while pushing countless numbers of people off of newly minted farmland and driving native populations worldwide into hunger pains.
As for hunger in wealthier socities like the United States, agribusiness corporations have successfully campaigned on the platform that hunger in Third World nations is exacerbating food scarcity at home. This “scarcity” becomes an impetus for constantly exacerbating manufactured socioeconomic divisions. This “playing both ends toward the middle” strategy makes the agribusiness corporations more profit, while successfully deflecting the blame of hunger from the very influences responsible for it.
According to Capra, in the United States alone, major processing corporations control at least 90% of vegetable production. Many farmers, who are saddled in debt based on rising costs for farming equipment and other supplies over the past several decades, have no choice but to sign on with these corporations or go out of business. Once they do, the farmers no longer control their own processes of production or distribution. Rather, the corporations predict desired crop yields, and then set the market prices for the finished products based on supply and demand. Those who can afford to pay constantly rising prices for produce get vegetables, and those who can’t go hungry.
In addition, the nations being exploited for their agricultural resources are usually being manipulated in other ways as well. This includes being coerced contractually or militarily to offer up their natural resources for provisions and protections to help with industrialization. John Perkins spent decades employed as a consultant for an international engineering company in Boston, Massachusetts. His primary job function was to convince the political and financial leaders of lesser-developed countries to accept enormous loans from institutions like the World Bank and USAID.
Once these developing nations signed their contracts, they instantly became saddled with debts they could not statistically pay. They were then forced to acquiesce to political pressure from transnational corporations with United States industrial roots who were privately representing the United States government on a variety of issues.
If the leaders refused, intelligence agencies, including the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA) retained the authority to launch covert “proxy wars” (or secretive and many times, unconstitutional military actions) when deemed functionally necessary to maintain order. When this occurs, extremely well trained military units are tasked with either arming internal subversives to violently overthrow many democratically elected governments of those nations, or in extreme cases, doing it themselves. This way, a dictator can be installed of America’s choosing, who will follow through with the contractual agreement.
Just like agribusiness, Perkins worked for a private corporation and not a government entity. Because of this, he and the agribusiness executives only have to answer to their shareholders who demand higher dividends and not a reduction in world hunger. Both at home and abroad, the march toward higher dividends is resulting in what Capra calls a “Global Supermarket.”
This market ensures the lower socioeconomic classes remain in direct competition with both themselves and the affluent and thus, will never be any closer to feeding or fending for themselves than they are currently…. which is exactly what the gospel of wealth dictates as necessary for the perpetuation individualism, materialism and a reductionist understanding of personal worth in relation to an existence based solely in physical consciousness. But what if a shift occurs toward the expansion of personal worth, as well as the awareness of non-physical consciousness? What could our society look like then?
The Washington D.C. Meditation Experiment
Between June 7th and July 30th, 1993, approximately 4000 individuals from 62 countries gathered in Washington, D.C. for a thought intention experiment project. The goal of this project was to reduce incidences of violent crime in the D.C. area including homicides, rapes and assaults. The Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy (ISTPP) oversaw the experiment.
To ensure accountability and accuracy, the ISTPP commissioned a 27-member independent project review board consisting of sociologists and criminologists from leading universities, police department representatives, local government and other civic leaders. All participants approved the project’s research protocol in advance, and they jointly monitored its progress to ensure proper oversight occurred throughout.
Specifically, the project’s goal was to determine whether or not independent variables, human beings trained in a form of thought intention projection called Transcendental Meditation, could alter a dependent variable, violent crime in the D.C. area. Prior to the experiment, a local journalist asked the D.C. police chief what it would take to have a significant reduction in the number of violent crimes during the summer of 1993. The chief replied to the effect of needing several feet of snow to hit the ground.
At the end of the experiment, the review board concluded that the maximum decrease in violent crime was 23.3% when the concentration of participants was at its height. In comparison to a longer variable, or the five-year statistics on file from the FBI for 1988-1993, there was a verifiable 24.6% decrease in the dependent variable, or violent crimes. Based on the results, the research team estimated that if the meditation team was to be permanently engaged, violent crimes in the D.C. area could have been reduced by up to 48% long-term. This project was so successful that it led the ISTPP team to state:
“Given the strength of these results, their consistency with the positive results of previous research, the grave human and financial costs of violent crime, and the lack of other effective and scientific methods to reduce crime, policy makers are urged to apply this approach on a large scale for the benefit of society.”
So, and as the global consciousness project and D.C. experiment demonstrate, the time has come to reassess how we consciously interact with each other, as well as the within society locally, nationally and globally alike. After all, since consciousness is around 95% non-physical, material individualism alone amounts to trying to solve a mathematical equation without taking 95% of the formulaic data into account. And as anyone who has ever performed math (simple or complex) can attest to, if only 5% of the variables are present, the solution will inevitably yield inaccurate results.
The Power of Consciousness on Society
Although all the factors we have discussed here might seem insurmountable; they, like scientific materialism, are really nothing more than a passive perceptual delusion of consciousness masking the much more active, powerful reality of our 11 dimensional Universe. Revisiting Bohm’s implicate order framework and Nelson’s Global Consciousness Project (Course I), the electromagnetic frequency vibrations our minds process as non-physical consciousness are already there, and here, and all around and inside of every one of us. All we have to do is make a conscious choice to tune into them.
This is all it would take to usher in an evolutionary revolution in consciousness and society in an instant. In order to accomplish this though, we first need to make a conscious choice to put our individualist fears of “self-preservation” into check. It is the fear of self-preservation, or as many call it “survival of the fittest,” that keeps so many people mired solely in 4-dimensional physical consciousness.
When we encounter someone from a different walk of life, socioeconomic class, or with subjective biases other than our own, we have been pruned to reference our own subjective individualist experiences as the framework for approval or judgment of that person. This framework, more often than not, results in encounters that are either awkward or contentious based on the desire for self-preservation.
Although this “survival of the fittest” mentality typifies societal interactions on all levels, as the global consciousness project demonstrates, that doesn’t make it irrefutable gospel anymore so than the Gospel of (materialist, individualist) Wealth. In fact, unlearning individualism to consciously cultivate non-physical global consciousness can and will positively alter reality and society for ourselves, and just like our friends in the D.C. experiment demonstrated, many other human beings we might never even meet face-to-face. As the late comedic philosopher Bill Hicks used to say (and as the very poignant video we recommend watching above recounts), all it takes is a choice right now between fear and love.
In Course VII, we discuss how vibrational medicine can help human beings tap into all 11 dimensions and 5 layers of their bio-body suits. This awakens our inherent power of thought intention creation by actively cultivating the balance between physical and non-physical consciousness, and contributes to overall health and wellness mentally, emotionally and physically speaking….
If you have any questions about how the culture of Materialist Science affects society locally and globally, please reach out to us directly….