Against Quantum Mysticism

Much of the popular association of Quantum Physics with mysticism is driven by conflicted purposes and fact-spin. And the uninformed urge to conflate science and mysticism is even more dangerously confused.

Daniel Pinchbeck wrote the quote I reference below today on his wall. As it represents a near-perfect example of a variety of contagiously popular misconceptions, I decided to dissect them. Line by line.

After all, if this conjecture is important, we must take it seriously, and examine its structure, suppositions… and the reasons and repercussions of our possible agreement or… refusal to agree.

Here is the whole statement:

“Experiments from quantum physics supports the Eastern mystical perspective that the universe is a projection of a single consciousness, Brahma or Atman, is accurate. That one consciousness is infinite, limitless in its creative potential, constantly playing hide and seek with us through its unfolding (the universe itself is Maya, a magic illusion, and Lila, divine play). That more and more people are experiencing and recognizing synchronicity is part of the ongoing evolution of consciousness to a new realization, integrating science and mysticism. It may be that, if enough of us realize that we are that consciousness exploring and experiencing itself, we can make a quantum leap or spontaneous mutation in the consciousness of our species as a whole — a tipping point phenomenon — where we attain direct access to psychic capacities that are now available but somewhat shielded from us. What do you think?”

One line at a time:

1. “Experiments from quantum physics supports the Eastern mystical perspective that the universe is a projection of a single consciousness, Brahma or Atman, is accurate.”

No, they do not. Experiments in QP do not support explicitly metaphysical speculations in any way. In fact, they do not support anything without interpretation, and those experiments have relatively narrow venues of applicable context that must be sustained in order for the results to be interpretable.

Experiments produce results. Results get interpreted according to purpose. We cannot just replace those of science with metaphysics and then claim experimental evidence for wild conjectures. Ever.

This conjecture here has nothing whatsoever to do with science, or with QP. The unnamed experiments casually mentioned here have nothing to do with this conjecture. This statement is an example of simply co-opting an experimental setting and results that have neither been named nor implied, for purposes that have nothing to do with quantum physics or with science (and yes, I am aware of various theories and recent discoveries related to the brain, vis a vis Hameroff and Penrose’s ”Orch OR” model).

This is a well-known gambit in which one ‘tries to acquire verity-authority from science for an otherwise clumsy metaphysical assertion’. Some go so far as to use the word ‘prove’, claiming ‘Quantum Physics Proves that… [ insert falsely mysterious conjecture here ]’. Such people are catastrophically confused about the nature of language, science, QP, and their own ability to form intelligible suppositions.

There is another problem with the conjecture (a problem repeated in the next line) that is at least as wrongminded: it supposes that everything can be collapsed into a simple, obvious container: ‘the projection of a single consciousness’. It sure as hell cannot be that. But here, this idea is presented as enlightened.

Our propensity for the ‘enmystification’ of scientific findings continuously spawns a florid variety of ‘misappropriated science’ cults (and ersatz ‘gurus’) that thrive on spinning physics concepts into ‘exciting metaphysical models’… or upon using scientific language in order to falsely substantiate poorly formed or even ridiculous claims. Often, people simply claim that their bizarre correlations are facts. ‘Because science…’

The macro and the quantum are distinguished. Irrevocably. No one is presently clear on the nature of the relationship, but, and this is crucial, they are distinct. Ours is not a quantum dreamworld. It’s real. Now. It’s macro. Supposing something opposite, or that this distinction is illusory throws away 99.99…% of reality as we are and experience it, and grossly misconstrues the remainder.

We might wish to bear in mind that, contrary to our suppositions of common scientific expertise, untrained people are not reasonably or even marginally aware of the complex nature of language, which they all use frequently. Such people are unlikely to be able to formulate any coherent picture of QP, physics itself, or of the actually bizarre relationship of QP to macro-scale reality (the order at which we perceive).

The people who take the position implied here are, by and large, seeing what their purposes demand, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with physics. And it is extremely shoddy metaphysics, because the whole starting position is crude and … wrong.

Consider the actual problem of people who want to explain consciousness… who, in fact, know next to nothing about neuroscience and the brain. Or the important and specific ways this organ relates to and mediates our experiences of consciousness. People with no understanding of neuroscience, little formal grasp upon the nature of consciousness, and no awareness of the context or specifics of quantum physics… should probably not be telling us about the nature of consciousness and quantum physics. When they do, what we will find is wild, giddy delusion. This is most often discovered running around claiming to deliver extraordinary powers and other ‘con-game’ style benefits. It doesn’t.

This doesn’t mean that it is not possible to acquire nonordinary intelligence or senses. It is. It means that the fairy-tale take is a conversion gambit aimed at the gullible, the uninformed, the hopeful, the ‘followers’, the passive, ignorant and lazy. ( Just about all of us? )

“Brahman or Atman” are matters for consideration in the knowledge-way contexts (traditions) that they arose in. Not science. Science has nothing to say about such matters as they are beyond its purchase and proper scope.

2. “That one consciousness is infinite, limitless in its creative potential, constantly playing hide and seek with us through its unfolding (the universe itself is Maya, a magic illusion, and Lila, divine play)”.

Dangerously incomplete at best. This deprives distinction of its myriad facts and natures, and attempts to collapse unimaginable actual complexity into a clumsy, facile theory. Also: what unity (one) means, in this context, is explosively not ordinary, yet is presented as a simple unity. This is naive, and dangerously deceptive.

Reality is definitely not ‘an illusion’ except to someone who is unbalanced in favor of abstractions… someone disembodied and/or obsessed with dreaming of theories that don’t touch down here in actual physical fact. Or relation. Or nature. Or science. But there is a more profound error here. The presentation of the idea that ‘the universe’ is actually just something simple! You can encapsulate it in some words! It’s great!

It’s hard to imagine just how dangerous and wrong this is if one has not been trained to sensitivity to the projection of class upon identity in language. Think with me for a moment about the structure of our conscious minds as it relates to concepts. If one collapses the universe into facile descriptions, you will destroy the fundamental nature and complexity of relationships with language, knowledge, nature, and intelligence. Most of the game is in the links. The topmost link… tells all others ‘what to appear as’ — and ‘what to do’. Flatten or destroy it? The nature and possibility of intelligence collapses. Don’t.

The complexities of reality and relation ‘have to be preserved’, just like in our own brain structure. We do not have ‘simply one hemisphere’, or even ‘simply two’. The left hemisphere exists. It is not an illusion. Or play. Our bicameral ( two-housed ) brains demand multiple ways of being in and of the world.

If one wishes to make statements about reality and consciousness that are actually meaningful or useful they must maintain the precedence of both sides (sometimes many) of an equation … or situation. A ratio without a denominator is no longer useful (and cannot be evaluated). Of all possible places where this is abjectly crucial to realize it is in discussions of the uniphore ‘everything’, here used in its common form of ‘universe’. This outermost container (a uniphore: the container from which all other divisions will be derived and imbued with meaning) is dangerously fraught with perils related to summation or reduction. Common people, and even experts are generally unaware of this danger. Nonetheless, we must be exceptionally careful with the outermost container of our semantic relationship with identity because whatever we do there, wise or ignorant, will inflect and reconnotate all other semantic structure, content, and capacity. When we make a mistake with the supercontainer of identity and all other structures collapse into incoherent derivations.

Be careful with this. The outermost and innermost semantic assets are crucial elements of structure in our language and knowledge systems, and our consciousness of identity and relation. Do not deprive them of diverse complexity for the sake of facile models.

Preserve the complexity and discover models that more accurately resemble reality. Not the other way around.

3. “That more and more people are experiencing and recognizing synchronicity is part of the ongoing evolution of consciousness to a new realization, integrating science and mysticism.”

The predicate of this sentence is incoherent. It appears to be trying to say something like this: people claiming to recognize synchronicity indicates that a new kind of consciousness is evolving. That a state of mind that integrates science and mysticism is the result.

It’s wrong. The idea of ‘integrating’ science and mysticism is terribly confused. Science is science precisely because it is not mysticism. Mysticism refers to any number of things, anything at all, or anything anyone wants it to. Science provides a stable ground against which mysticism can questioned or obliterated. These two things do not blend into each other. Notice have you have two hands? And that people who want to argue that they are ‘really just a single hand’ are probably either confused or under the influence of an agenda that demands we reveal it.

But let’s talk about coincidences. And patterns. And their relationship to schizotypal and schizophrenic experience, behavior… and implication. People claiming to experience hyperbolized coincidence is not a sign of the sudden evolution of human consciousness. Probably the opposite, actually.

The nature of coincidence is too complex to go into here, but it is not so much ‘in the world’ as it is ‘in the consciousness of the perceiver’. The idea that there is a ‘divine language’ hidden in coincidence is potentially interesting, but lacking demonstration, it is actively delusional. The sudden experience of the propagation of seemingly meaningful patterns of coincidence in consciousness is most often a signal about a destablized state of mind, whether this be from drugs, ongoing or incipient mental dysfunction, or other factors.

The intelligible relationship with the nature of events and situations, a kind of metapositional interpretive awareness… is a skill. It is probably present in all of us in nascent potential, but it can be developed. Nonetheless, it is never delivered by reference to theories involving QP or coincidence. It is the result of incredibly uncommon and intelligently personal intimacy with contexts, relationships, histories and outcomes.

The unimaginably rare person who is intelligently available to the metapositions of phenomenon in time… would appear to ordinary people as an intelligence of an order beyond their experience entirely. They would not be selling QP snake oil, or any other kind. All of us do have otherwise unimaginable sensing and intelligence potentials. Again, they are not delivered by clumsy models of poorly articulated relationships between topics in science and coincidence. If more people think they are experiencing synchronicity, this is probably more related to the fact that our common social context is shattered and is producing a relatively deep effect of paradelusional signalling in those affected and/or intoxicated by this.

The intelligence of coincidence if oft remarked upon. Few have anything of further use to say on the matter. A modest understanding of the neuroscientific principles involved in experiences such as the recognition of coincidence, deja vu, and the exaggeration or generation of coincidence experience is crucial to the topic. Without these understandings, it is impossible to make sensible conversation. The statement is confused, and, under careful examination, almost unintelligible. Even when carefully translated, it is still wrong.

4. “It may be that, if enough of us realize that we are that consciousness exploring and experiencing itself, we can make a quantum leap or spontaneous mutation in the consciousness of our species as a whole — a tipping point phenomenon — where we attain direct access to psychic capacities that are now available but somewhat shielded from us.”

It’s fascinating that people who cannot learn to assemble intelligent cultures, and are dominated and destroyed by the fictions that rise in place of such mutual activity, cannot wait to acquire advanced technology or psychic powers. In fact, it is typical. Those who fail to do the work, who have no actual idea what these matters relate to, believe they will be ‘delivered’ by some new wave of development or ascent of the popular consciousness. It is difficult to swallow this kind of unfounded confusion. It is also clear that these kinds of gambits are poised to replace the active formation of intelligent culture, ecological responsibility, and mutually-oriented goals.

If the people in cultures like ours had nonordinary powers, we would be in eight times the hell we are presently in. Similarly, if someone manages to deliver ‘free energy’ life on Earth will perish. Fast, too. Our species has utterly failed our developmental regimen, and substituted cults, machines, and false collectivity for intelligence.

There are astonishing nonordinary abilities inherent in our human birth. They are functions of our relationships with nature and each other. Nature first. They do not come from mysticism or physics. Those are the dessicated remains of actual relationships and progress. The senses and abilities I speak of are primarily available to us in tightly-knit groups, whose intelligence and purpose is mutual, ecological, authentic, self-correcting, and driven by prodigy rather than paradigm, ego, or profit.

Or prophet.

5. “What do you think?”

In closing I offer the following commentary and a possible re-statement of the original conjecture.

Active demonstration of nonordinary intelligence and unity is not a matter of seemingly exotic theories. Any actual demonstration, wins. Talk, doesn’t, and usually arises in place of active demonstration. Like intelligence, insight is either directly demonstrated in both conversation and action… or something else is going on. Wild, public theorizing, for example.

Yet, relational superfunction is human nature — beyond human ideas and culture. There is something astonishing going on in and as our minds, intelligence, and natures. But it is not discovered by immersion in theories or models, especially those diametrically opposed to the complex diversity of reality as we become and encounter it. In reaching beyond our ideas and models into direct experience, skeptical inquiry, and actually intelligent technique… we can rediscover aspects of our own actual human and animalian natures that surpass the entire sum of metaphysical theories, documents and traditions.

Those are artifacts.

We, on the other hand, are being. If we will merely allow and encourage it… we become intelligence… embodied.

If I were to attempt to translate the intention of the author whose quote I have dissected, I might say something like this:

“Some interpretations of specific quantum phenomenon suggest that there are nonordinary superpositions of identity, relation, time, and space. The possibility that these formulations may hold the promise of insight into the nature of consciousness remains intriguing, yet we should begin any such exploration with great sobriety and perspectives that correct themselves according to nature, and avoid those that reframe nature according to their whim.

Human consciousness is clearly not entirely as localized as we imagine. This implies it that most of its assets are ‘in the between’ of environment, role, and relationship… and thus undiscovered or forgotten by moderns. This may be, in part, because they are buried in theories and representations, when, in reality, their faculties only exist and function when embedded in contexts appropriate to their emergence, development, and exploration.

Strangely, these are the contexts of deep relational intimacy, not theory. They are the contexts of nature, not machines. They are the contexts not of singular possessors of powers or abilities, but of the naturally expansive developmental efflorescence that is the pulse of any authentic and intelligent human collective, presuming such a rare phenomenon still exists somewhere, relatively undefiled by representational overlays and deceptions.

The nature of human superfunction and nonordinary ability as it relates to consciousness is rediscovered only in such contexts as we have not yet been bold or insightful enough to actively organize. These are contexts of intelligent human collectives whose contexts, goals and assemblies are authentic. Such abilities require contexts appropriate to their emergence. Where we do not establish these, what we see instead are the dominant symptoms of these failures masquerading as authentic. This is, most often, a signal of emergency.”

I am insatiably curious about the nature of living beings, intelligence, language, and nearly everything else. I hope my work may contribute to our ability to assemble the authentic sources of what our modern cultures are but the broken remnants and falsified costumes of. Together. With and for each other and our world.

FREE ALL PRISONERS.

Facebook • Tumbler • Wondercloud • Organelle • yT

( My writing is a gift that I hope may inspire speculation, wonder, discovery and new relationships. If you enjoy it, kindly take a moment to share it, connect with me personally, comment, correct me, or tap the Recommend button ⇩ ☺ )