WESTERN science is growing every year more intolerant, wrote Mme. Blavatsky in her 19th Century article Occult or Exact Science.
Yet “every new discovery made by modern science vindicates the truths of the archaic philosophy…if approached in the right direction,” she wrote.
Not much has changed. In recent months a public controversy arose over scientific research into the fundamentals of consciousness.
“It involves IONS scientists, as well as some of our colleagues,” notes an article on IONS website titled Think Outside the Box, “and may reflect shifting attitudes about frontier research.”
The article continues: “TED, the popular conference organizer with the tag line ‘ideas worth spreading,’ recently removed videos of two TEDx talks from their official YouTube channel and then cancelled a TEDx event. The censored talks and cancelled event had a common theme—exploring the possibility that consciousness extends beyond the brain.
If “will has no special organ,” H. P. Blavatsky wrote, “how will the materialists connect it with ‘molecular’ motion at all? As Professor George T. Ladd says: — ‘The phenomena of human consciousness must be regarded as activities of some other form of Real Being than the moving molecules of the brain.'”
Yet TED’s justification for their actions “was that the contributors were promoting ‘pseudo-science.’ The videos were talks presented by Rupert Sheldrake and Graham Hancock, and the event presenters included Russell Targ, Larry Dossey, and IONS’ Marilyn Schlitz.”
“TED’s actions, based on recommendations from its anonymous ‘Science Board,’ kicked off a heated Internet discussion and shed light on how some segments of the scientific mainstream tend to stifle conversation on the nature of consciousness, including the kind of cutting-edge research that IONS conducts.
“However, the enormous attention this controversy has received, and the discussion it generated, may signal a shift towards more openness to including the possibility of non-local consciousness into scientific dialogues.”
Updated and republished at:
The Science Delusion
Theosophy Watch 
I want to to thank an individual for this great read!! We definitely enjoying every bit of it I have you ever bookmarked to view new stuff an individual post
LikeLike
What is the difference between mesmerism and hypnotism?
LikeLike
Mesmer’s patients did not lose their consciousness in the way that the subjects of hypnotism do when fascinated by a bright object, or by the operator’s eye. Mesmer himself: disapproved Puysegur’s methods as showing “a lack of understanding.” (Margaret Goldsmith, Franz Anton Mesmer, Doubleday Doran, New York, 1934, p. 172.) Of the two, Mesmerism and Hypnotism, H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
“One is beneficent, the other maleficent, as it evidently must be; since, according to both Occultism and modern Psychology, hypnotism is produced by the withdrawal of the nervous fluid from the capillary nerves. The latter being, so to say, the sentries that keep the doors of our senses opened, they become anaesthetized under hypnotic conditions, and allow these doors to get closed.” http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/issues/is-hypno.htm
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Ghost River Studios Blog.
LikeLike
Thanks for the reblog namaste!
LikeLike