Bains comments that -
In the last few years, the John Templeton Foundation has garnered substantial attention by advertising in many of the US and UK’s most prestigious scholarly magazines and journals. These advertisements have showcased debates on what the Foundation describes as the "Big Questions", some of which have a scientific theme. Various scientists, philosophers, and theologians have been paid to offer their answers to these questions.Let's not, of course, ask hard questions about the Giordano Bruno GlobalShift University (deliciously untransparent) under quantum mystic Ervin Laszlo, animateur of World Futures journal (dowsing & quantumbabble territory) and exponent of two-way communication with the dead and Mayan Calendar endism and similar beliefs that - although presumably held sincerely - are from a legal perspective nonsense.
This pronounced visibility has led many scientists and academics to wonder about the Foundation and how it operates. One of its stated goals is to forge a closer relationship between religion and science. To many scientists, this is anathema. They see religion and science as fundamentally incompatible and, therefore, that any relationship between them could only be built on dishonesty or ignorance. To others, the goal is laudable: Some scientists welcome the assistance as they attempt to reconcile their personal religious beliefs with their scientific understanding. To still others, religious or not, any science funding (part of the work of the Foundation involves providing grants for scientific research), from whatever source, is welcome.
For many who do not have a problem with the science/religion agenda of the Foundation, the issue is then one of integrity. Is the Foundation what it says it is? Are its stated goals and its actual goals the same (as judged by who and what it funds)? Does it operate in a transparent and non-corrupt way?
In this commentary, I consider five issues that suggest that the John Templeton Foundation is not what it represents itself to be:1. The Foundation began as an overtly pro-religious organization. It has since changed its stated aims and goals, and their presentation, in a way that seems calculated to make them appear more “open-minded.” Nevertheless, the Foundation’s agenda — based on its actual activities — seems to have remained the same.
2. The Foundation’s organizational structure and the awarding of its prizes appears to be rife with cronyism.
3. Respondents to the Foundation’s “Big Questions” (at least those questions with clear links to science) are disproportionately Foundation advisors and grantees, and yet it is implied that they represent a balance in responses.
4. The Foundation finances prestigious external organizations to run its activities, often without making the participants and/or audience aware of who provided the funding.
5. The Foundation and its current chairman, John (Jack) Marks Templeton, Jr., have a history of funding what could be seen as anti-science activities and groups (particularly concerning climate-change and stem-cell research).
'An Evolutionary Approach Toward Exploring Altered States of Consciousness, Mind-Body Techniques, and Non-Local Mind' by Arthur Saniotis & Maciej Henneberg in 67(3) World Futures (2011) 182-200 nonplusses me with the claim that
A special non-local technique used by extant shamans is the "soul flight", whereby the shaman's soul leaves his/her body and travels to the spirit realms where he/she communes with the ancestral and animal powers. Soul flight is a fundamental feature in many shamanic traditions since the spirit realm is the domain where a shaman fosters his/her mystical powers (Winkelman 2002, 1876). From an evolutionary point of view, shamanic soul flight was integral to group survival since information accessed from the spirit realms enabled group members to access game and edible and medicinal plants. Moreover, shamanic soul flight establishes coherency between the human and non-human realms of existence. In this way, shamanic soul flight may be categorized as an ecological technique for reaffirming the affinity between human and non-human realms of existence. Aspects of shamanic soul flight probably informed various non-local techniques used by the wisdom traditions.Call me a grinch but I don't believe that dropping a couple of tabs of acid - or mystic 'wisdom traditions' equivalent such as peyote - actually lets you track dinner by ESP. It is somewhat unsettling that researchers seem to be taking "the soul" as a fact, but then universities are strange places.
Some aspects of shamanic soul flight are cognate with what modern parapsychology calls "remote viewing" — a non-local technique where an individual can perceive phenomena beyond the range of ordinary vision. Kowalewski (2004, 66) states that trackers in hunter-gatherer societies have an ability to "extend their energy body beyond their physical body and see the creature's tracks somewhere else far away. Modern Amazonian trackers have amazed researchers by their seeming extra-sensory ability to find game" (Lamb 1971, 64). Kowalewski points out that tracking incorporates brain activity (2004, 65), which is synonymous with shamanic cortical integration. It is tempting here to know to what extent ancestral tracking may have influenced early shamanistic practices and visa versa. Such similarities between tracking and shamanic practices may support why both may trigger altered states of consciousness and psychological metamorphosis (Kowalewski 2004, 71). Both indigenous tracking and shamanic soul flight support modern consciousness research that "the psyche has no real boundaries” and may be a part of an all encompassing and infinite field of consciousness as purported by Laszlo's Akashic Field (Grof 1993, 202).
The two authors go on to state that -
If altered states of consciousness have informed human evolution, the question arises as to what extent may non-locality influence future human evolution? The rise in consciousness studies pioneered by Grof, Laszlo, Russell, Dossey, and others have challenged the prevailing materialistic paradigm of science. Laszlo and Currivan (2008) advance a theory of biological and social coherency that reconsecrates the unity of life and levels of co-operation found throughout nature and human societies. The current interest in the non-local mind fits into the model of coherency. Dossey (1999) explains at length the necessity for future medicine to include mind–body and non-local techniques that foster healing. He states that at present there is a collective denial by science of the non-local nature of consciousness, designating it as "the hard problem" (Dossey 1999, 207).Quite so, science - like Australian law - has difficulty with the claim that you can have a two way chat with the dead via a valve radio, that there is reincarnation (a salient claim by Grof, otherwise distinguished by a faith in astrology), that people can have precognition, can 'remotely view' something in another continent (ie psychically visit a distant place, in this or 'another' universe) or could remotely heal the inaccessible victims trapped under World Trade Center on 9/11. It is "hard" for me to take such claims seriously.
"The current interest in the non-local mind fits into" the "exteriorisation" (aka astral projection) model articulated by the colourful L Ron Hubbard and precursors such as Aleister Crowley. It works, apparently, for Tom Cruise, but not for me.
Saniotis & Henneberg are unabashed by what Dossey damns as "collective denial".
Dossey indicates that the future will herald what he coins as Era III medicine. In his vision, Era III medicine will fully recognize non-locality as characterized by distance healing, intercessory prayer, and transpersonal imagery. Thus, Era III medicine will include a repertoire of techniques reminiscent of shamanism such as soul flight, as discussed earlier.Intercessory prayer and remote healing? Oh dear. The authors appear to believe that distance healing will heal ailing mice and presumably other subjects.
One of my mordant readers has, in the past, responded to such belief by asking why doesn't intercessory prayer, transpersonal imagery or distance healing make missing limbs grow back or cause the blind to see? Is it because amputees (or their loved ones) simply do not want to get a spanking new leg, arm, foot or hand? Is the failure to get a nice new eye attributable to an unavailability of some mescalin? Somehow I don't think so. Is it because they failed to buy The Secret and other 'blame the victim' texts? Because they questioned the pious claim that dowsing proves "the mind's ability to communicate information from across the solar system is much faster than the speed of light".
In my crueller moments I've responded by asking why "non-locality" supposedly works only for good, not bad. If we have distance healing - making the mice better through magic hands and positive thoughts - why isn't there distance harming (oops, I have bad thoughts about the little critters - or the editor of World Futures - from several thousand kilometres away and the targets of my non-local wrath start to ail)? In the old days that was referred to as witchcraft or sheet utter humbug. Now it is non-locality and rewarded in a peer-reviewed journal, that boasts "peer review integrity" - "All articles published in this journal have undergone rigorous editorial screening and peer review". Uh huh.
If we accept some of the more bizarre claims made by enthusiasts for "quantum holism" (aka quantum mysticism) about remote viewing, the undead and telekinesis, what are the implications for criminal and civil law? Defendants getting off on the basis that evidence was removed or added by another party via "soul flight"? "Your honour, the ghost - rather than the butler - did it"?
The supposed "challenge" to the "prevailing materialistic paradigm of science" by people such as Grof, Laszlo & Co is not profound and is unlikely to have an impact on the practice of law in Australia. Don't rush to blame the "soul flight" or what Laszlo characterised as "entities that are no longer living in the familiar form in this world but are alive nonetheless" if things go wrong ... courts aren't going to accept testimony from ghosts or the undead and use of a pseudo-scientific litany will not make them real.
