The Science Of One The Human experience is the one unifying object that every person has in common.
The quality of everyones experience is no where near the same. The variety of experience is what gives rise to the vast differences we find between people in their views and accompanying actions.
But when it comes down to it the Human experience is the same. The only differing factor seems to be circumstantial differences in environment which give rise to thought unfamiliar to our own. So what does this idea lead us to? Where do we go with this idea that the basis of all thought is the same; that consciousness has an undeniable character to it that spans the whole of the human race? The whole of the universe perhaps.
Where does this enigma come from? What could possibly give rise to this absurd concept of a mind, a self aware object in a seemingly unaware system of rules?
Somewhere, deep in the heart of these rules there must be something (there must be because we have the undeniable proof that consciousness exists in our universe) that governs the rules of consciousness, something that allows the consciousness to exist and to act in the way that it does. Somewhere at the base of physics there lies the rules of consciousness, the “thing” that allows for certain portions of the universe to have a subjective experience of itself. And this thing is the thing of the universe.
In order for consciousness to exist at a large scale there must be something that is like consciousness, something that is the building block that allows for complex systems like our brains to act in the way that they do providing us with the unique view of the world that we have.
This fundamental building block. The seed of mind.
From this grows the most interesting phenomenon that has been discovered in the universe. Ourselves.
If consciousness is rooted in the physical there is no problem of Body and Mind. They are equal. Coexistant. Intertwined. Eternally married into the one object that governs both and all.
This is the essence of monism. The science of one. The next step in our spiritual development
10/24/2010
A chill reflection upon the surface of the lake of the internets
The spectrum of available information is really quite wide these days, and unless you grow up rooted in some kind of serious tradition, be it sacred or cultural or purely an invention of your immediate family, you are bound to have some pretty strange ideas about the world. Our general outlooks on life can be so different, even though we may spend lots of time interacting, which is a big change from really any other time in history that I can think of. You can go on the internet and nine times out of ten find whatever it is you are actually already looking for, which is a feat already. But what about those times when you find somethings so weird that it makes you question whether or not they are real? Let’s face it- the internet is killing truth. Whatever you claim to be true, I can find evidence for the opposite argument. Not that that actually makes it any more true or false- it just demonstrates the relativity of our understandings of the world around us to the world around us.
in search of GOD
In my work towards an inner peace and a healthy spirit, I’ve come to see God in a new light. Associating with God does not mean associating with a religion, and associating with a religion does not mean associating with the dogma of a religion.
God is not a thing or a person, the closest word I can use to describe him in reasonable terms is as a concept. He (it, she, they) represents what is unknown in our lives. He is everything I can’t describe using words, and everything I feel that can’t be explained with reason.
Faith in God requires a subordination of reason, because God cannot be explained in reasonable terms. My belief in God stems from a dissatisfaction with philosophy and science as a way to put life in context. God is the answer to all doubt and gives meaning to life otherwise aimless.
I am worried about my future and the state of my soul, but by simply putting faith in God, my worries disassemble and I can peaceably go on my way without getting bogged down by endless political/philisophical/scientific debate.
Once I stop worrying about my place in the world and just believe that I have a place, I can start to do my work. Without constant speculation about the higher meaning of my actions, I can put my head down and truly explore my connection to the earth and define myself by cutting a path through life.
I can now get over the modern stigma against religion, and embrace it as a community that shares the same fundamental belief that I do: faith in God without reason. The community reminds me that my life is more positive when I stop contemplating utopia and start letting God positively guide my actions. As we are faced with decisions, we can all instinctively judge between right and wrong, and it is faith in God that allows that feeling inside of us to guide our actions.
If you don’t already, try putting faith in God as an experiment. See if it is effective in curbing your doubts and anxiety. See if you can find meaning in your life by ending the aimless search for meaning in your life. Try not to be distracted by forces that make you question yourself and try putting faith in God as a answer your doubts.
God is not a thing or a person, the closest word I can use to describe him in reasonable terms is as a concept. He (it, she, they) represents what is unknown in our lives. He is everything I can’t describe using words, and everything I feel that can’t be explained with reason.
Faith in God requires a subordination of reason, because God cannot be explained in reasonable terms. My belief in God stems from a dissatisfaction with philosophy and science as a way to put life in context. God is the answer to all doubt and gives meaning to life otherwise aimless.
I am worried about my future and the state of my soul, but by simply putting faith in God, my worries disassemble and I can peaceably go on my way without getting bogged down by endless political/philisophical/scientific debate.
Once I stop worrying about my place in the world and just believe that I have a place, I can start to do my work. Without constant speculation about the higher meaning of my actions, I can put my head down and truly explore my connection to the earth and define myself by cutting a path through life.
I can now get over the modern stigma against religion, and embrace it as a community that shares the same fundamental belief that I do: faith in God without reason. The community reminds me that my life is more positive when I stop contemplating utopia and start letting God positively guide my actions. As we are faced with decisions, we can all instinctively judge between right and wrong, and it is faith in God that allows that feeling inside of us to guide our actions.
If you don’t already, try putting faith in God as an experiment. See if it is effective in curbing your doubts and anxiety. See if you can find meaning in your life by ending the aimless search for meaning in your life. Try not to be distracted by forces that make you question yourself and try putting faith in God as a answer your doubts.
10/07/2010
Testing to the Teach: how to give your students the itch to keep learning despite themselves
In a traditional test, one does not give feedback at all. This is a result of the limitations of the medium; give feedback on paper and you also give the game away. Working online, you can give extended feedback as soon as the question is answered, but how do you do it for maximum effect?
The problem we are trying to overcome: “in one ear, and out the other”.
If you just tell a student something, they will generally be able to repeat it and show you that they have ‘learned’ it. An hour later, it will be gone. It won’t automatically move from short-term to long-term memory. Classic teaching technique seeks to address this through repetition; language teachers, in particular, generally try to follow Ebbinghaus’ ‘forgetting curve’ when structuring reviews. However, repetition is not the only solution, neither is it always practical to apply.
Without oodles of repetition, simply giving students ‘the right answer’ doesn’t just fail them, it cons them. Immediately after the quiz, they think they’ve ‘got it’, but when they need it in real life, it’s gone. Many students will start blaming themselves and believing it is they, not we, who are stupid.
My preferred solution is what Milton Erickson called “building response potential”. I try to pique the students’ curiosity so they are motivated to go off an learn the answer for themselves. How they learn it will vary; they may look it up in a textbook, discuss it with friends or sit down and work it out on paper. They will come back and back until they are satisfied – thus doing the repetition for themselves.
Another way of describing the principle is “give them the itch”. In the end, they will just have to scratch.
How do you do this in practice? Here are some suggestions:
■Explain why they got it wrong.
■Give a hint, but not the whole answer.
■Tease them in some other way.
■Remind them of the mnemonic, without actually giving the answer.
■Remind them of a parallel.
■Use a rhyme or a riddle.
■Remind them of the rule or derivation method.
■Hurl a joking insult (thanks Andrew for this idea)
If you hold in the front of your mind that your main aim is to increase students’ emotional state of curiosity, you’ll soon develop your own preferred way of doing it.
The problem we are trying to overcome: “in one ear, and out the other”.
If you just tell a student something, they will generally be able to repeat it and show you that they have ‘learned’ it. An hour later, it will be gone. It won’t automatically move from short-term to long-term memory. Classic teaching technique seeks to address this through repetition; language teachers, in particular, generally try to follow Ebbinghaus’ ‘forgetting curve’ when structuring reviews. However, repetition is not the only solution, neither is it always practical to apply.
Without oodles of repetition, simply giving students ‘the right answer’ doesn’t just fail them, it cons them. Immediately after the quiz, they think they’ve ‘got it’, but when they need it in real life, it’s gone. Many students will start blaming themselves and believing it is they, not we, who are stupid.
My preferred solution is what Milton Erickson called “building response potential”. I try to pique the students’ curiosity so they are motivated to go off an learn the answer for themselves. How they learn it will vary; they may look it up in a textbook, discuss it with friends or sit down and work it out on paper. They will come back and back until they are satisfied – thus doing the repetition for themselves.
Another way of describing the principle is “give them the itch”. In the end, they will just have to scratch.
How do you do this in practice? Here are some suggestions:
■Explain why they got it wrong.
■Give a hint, but not the whole answer.
■Tease them in some other way.
■Remind them of the mnemonic, without actually giving the answer.
■Remind them of a parallel.
■Use a rhyme or a riddle.
■Remind them of the rule or derivation method.
■Hurl a joking insult (thanks Andrew for this idea)
If you hold in the front of your mind that your main aim is to increase students’ emotional state of curiosity, you’ll soon develop your own preferred way of doing it.