Knowledge and truth – different ways to knowledge and the new way in the making

We live in an age where the new truth has become equivalent to scientific knowledge!

Skjermbilde 2015-10-05 kl. 20.25.38

But what has been regarded as truth has changd through the ages. There was a time when people saw truth in myths and spirits of nature. Much closer to over time religious truth was the main paradigm. Even today conflicts between the truth of different religious groups or religious and non-religious are a main factor behind killing and unethical conduct between humans. Some people today only believe in profit and the only truth they are concerned about is; “What is in it for me?”

Today many people adjust these ways of truth. They might believe in myths, but as a symbolic analogy, they might believe in religion pragmatically from an ethical or humanistic perspective and they might believe that things have to be based on a healthy economy as a foundation. Most of all more and more people turn their belief in truth to come from science.

What is certain is that it will not stop here. So what will be the next step? Is this the end of the pursuit for truth? No, also science has its limitations.

Science has some ideals. Experiments have to give the same results if you repeat them or reproduce them. This is called replication. It has to be independent of any particular persons, so if somebody else wants to do it in the same way, they should also get similar results. It has to be independent of personal influence so we are blinding it, single and double and some even investigate if it should be blinded triple or more.

We can say science strives for objectivity. It wants results that are independent of any personal desires, manipulations or influences. In this ideal for independency and replication the subjective realm becomes something of little value, even a risk of bias, a risk of contamination or dependence.

But we forget that there are many steps even in any kind of “objective” research that is full of subjectivity. Like, what do we want to investigate, how do we want our research question to be, what kind of method do we choose, how will we measure the data, how will we assess the results, what do we regard as unimportant and neglect etc. etc.

All this subjectively influenced decisions are important for the result and our gain of knowledge.

In our daily life, we use knowledge in many ways and many kinds of knowledge. It is very little of our daily life and the way we conduct it that is based on us reading a scientific paper. We could say that science has given us tools and information, but most of what we do, and particularly in the inter-human realm is based on other kinds of knowledge.

We know how to bike, swim, cook and talk, without any scientific investigations.
We know what we did yesterday or how we dressed or where we went for vacation.
We know when our conscience tells us something is good or bad.
We know what the authorities (Teacher, parents, police etc.) in our society expect or regard as right or wrong.
We know that 2+2 = 4, or if we solve a riddle, we know it is right when we find the solution.
We know how a person reacts to what we say or do, even if we can be wrong.
We know how to fall in an optimal way, or react by instinct in other situations where we use our body.
With social intelligence we know how to interact with people.
Additionally we might have practiced internal work like mindfulness and know how it changes our state of being.

All this is knowledge that adds up to the truth of our daily life and our decisions and actions, we do not need science for those.

Let us take coffee as an example one day we read it protects us from cancer, next day it can cause cancer, one day it is good for antioxidants, next day it disturbs your sleep etc. etc.
All this are fragments of “coffee-knowledge” under constant change an amendment. It is almost impossible to have a scientific unified perspective on coffee and many other things as well.

In practice we end up making the choice from what we feel, what we like, and what we believe.

Let ut not forget the limitations of scientific knowledge, while we appreciate it. Yes, it is great, it is unique, it has given us understanding we did not have before, and most of all it has given us corrections and confirmations, but to most of the real important questions in life, how we conduct the mastery of daily life it has little value.

Let us not underestimate or under-evaluate the tools of concern, assessment, discrimination or choice that nature has given us, let us refine them, let us take back the right to feel what feels right, to choose from an inner perspective and not from a material scientific, let us take back the right to hold the steering wheel in our own life and appreciate the inner compass we are born with.
When you hear “you react like that because of this or that hormone”, say no! That hormone is there because I feel like that! That feeling creates it!
That is the new way to truth beyond myth, religion, profit and science, the truth of the realization of our inner potential. This is a truth coming from an increased holonity from within. The source to a higher knowledge will in the next step of our evolution be from within. This is what we call holonistic knowledge in this blog.
Read more here: https://wordpress.com/post/77855007/66/

Holonity and evolution

“Increasing complexity is regarded as one of the major aspects of evolution.

It is reflected in old creation myths too. From the oriental Tao dividing into yin and yang, becoming the many things (1 , 2 many) to the Bible with Heaven and Earth and later all the lifeforms on Earth.

Science tells us that as the Big Bang expanded and cooled down, galaxies and later stars and solar systems appeared. The primordial nucleosynthesis is the name of the process that happened from the firsts seconds to some 20 minutes after the Big Bang. This created the first few elements, very much later when the universe had cooled down to form galaxies and then stars the heavier elements were created in the stars.

Following Big Bang pure energy slowly turned into matter.
Here on Earth the basic building blocks are molecules a product from simple nuclear sub-atomic particles that created atoms and the atoms come together to create molecules. Everything around us on this planet is build up by molecules.

Atoms quickly form molecules here on earth, they do not exist for long as atoms. Molecules creates virus and cells and all lifeforms are build up of cells.

We do not know how life came about, there are theories of soups of complex molecules and electric charges “by accident” creating life, there are theories of “inseminations” through viral material from outer space. But then we can still ask where did that viral material come from?

If we leave the question open, we can still see and increasing complexity from virus, to the first cells (procaryotic) and later to cells that became so complex as to have their own “head quarters” or nucleus (eucaryotic). These complex cells are the building blocks of all multicellular life; plants, fungi and animals.

Without the plants the earth would not have had an atmosphere of oxygen, laying the foundation for animals. As animals developed we humans turned up.  All in an increasing complexity.

Today there are lots of activities, economically, politically, culturally or scientific that is based on the co-operation of hundreds or thousands of people. Behaving like complex organisms (organisations) with intentions, goals, relations and actions.

Humans used to look at the earth as the foundation of the universe. This geocentric world view regarded the universe as a lid, and life was organized as a ladder from chaos through the elements, life forms and angels and higher beings all the way up to God.

Then we open up to the solar system and moved out in to the solar system, the sun became the central nucleus and we a part of a mechanical machinery. All revolving around the sun.

In the last century we have moved out to clusters of suns in galaxies, and clusters of galaxies that today has turned into a network of galaxies looking much like living human tissues.

Perhaps the question of life or not should be turned upside down?
If we look at the universe at not far away small dust particles, but as a coherent organic and aware being.

From that perspective the whole question of where life came from has no sense. It was always there.

The perspective of a living universe, opens us up to a more sophisticated complex and coherent perspective. A conscious universe even more challenging to the contemporary materialistic mind.

But this perspective changes even the perspective of evolution.

A living universe might have planets that has done our cycles of evolution millions of years before us. And what seems to be evolution here, is simply following a pattern or sequence analog to all other similar planets.

A universe that is aware beyond our awareness, gives it not only reflection, intention and care, but wisdom and love.

So did we evolve by trial, failure, coincidence, a survival of the fittest?
Or according to a long long time universal wide plan, with connected intention of love and coherent wisdom of unity? A universal holonity?

The picture is a computer model that shows the evolution of galaxies and stars after Big Bang

Skjermbilde 2015-01-12 kl. 23.36.23

Under you see the nevrons in the brain.

Skjermbilde 2015-01-12 kl. 23.33.52

“That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing

Tabula Smaragdina

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them” Gen 1:27

Holon, Unity and wholeness, holonistic knowledge, self-development, spirituality, nature and mysticism as the search for truth