Amit Goswami, Ph.D.

Who killed Schrödinger’s Cat?

Can we do science of the primacy of consciousness? That is, can science be based on the idea that consciousness is the ground of all being and that all things of experience are chosen from quantum possibilities of consciousness? Where is the necessary objectivity? Now the quintessential proof: I’ll show you why the choosing consciousness of quantum physics has to be objective cosmic consciousness.

You may have heard of the famous paradox of Schrödinger’s cat. In this thought experiment,”a cat is left in an opaque cage with a door in the company of a single radioactive atom (with a half-life of one hour, which means that the probabilility is fifty-fifty that the atom will decay within the hour). The scheme is diabolical. If the atom decays, then a Geiger counter detects the radiation from the decay. The ticking of the counter triggers a hammer to break a poison bottle, releasing cyanide that kills the cat. If the atom does not decay, none of the sequential things happens and the cat lives. Because the decay is probabilistic, a quantum process, it follows that at the end of the hour the cat is a wave of possibility, having two equally weighted facets, dead and alive.

The cat is literally half-dead and half-alive? Continue reading…

An Invitation to Quantum Activism

Quantum physics in the form of its famous observer effect (how an observation transforms quantum possibilities into actual experiences in the observer’s consciousness) is forcing us into a paradigm shift from the primacy-of-matter to a new paradigm: the Primacy Of Consciousness (read my book The Self-Aware Universe for details). Quantum Activism is the idea of transforming ourselves and our societies in accordance with the transforming messages of quantum physics and the new paradigm.

So what are these transforming messages of quantum physics? First, consciousness is the ground of all being, and all objects of our experiences (of sensing, thinking, feeling, and intuition) are quantum possibilities for consciousness to choose from. Continue reading…

Can Science and Religion be Integrated?

Can science and religion be integrated? What comes to mind immediately is that religions themselves cannot agree with one another whereas science is basically monolithic. How can there even be trade between the two, let alone integration?

First, it is only a perception that religions are pluralistic and science is not. Science is monolithic only so far as science of matter–physics and chemistry–is concerned. Psychology, the science of the psyche, has three different paradigms–behavioral-cognitive consisting of hard science orientation, depth psychology consisting of Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian analytical psychology and their derivatives with psychotherapy orientation, and humanistic-transpersonal-yoga psychology with positive mental health orientation. Both the later paradigms of psychology acknowledge downward causation and subtle bodies in some form or other. Medicine has the conventional allopathic medicine and also alternative medicine practices that complement it. A prominent part of alternative medicine is Eastern medicine that emphasizes subtle energies called variously as prana, chi, and ki. And biology is in transition right now. The materialist biology is highly developed but with some unsolved (maybe unsolvable) problems. Alternative biology is biology that sees life as the handiwork of a purposive designer with the power of downward causation; but at present it is so poorly developed that hardly anyone can call it a genuine alternative biology. Continue reading…

The Issue of Secularism

Secularism is the separation of church and state. In the past this has worked for democracy. State carries out the democratic ideal of bring meaning to everyone in society. The church gives us the ethical canopy under which everyone pursues meaning. Unfortunately, the evolution of scientific materialism puts a monkey wrench in this equilibrium.

In this country, the progressive democrats who are supposed to advance the pursuit of meaning, follow (correctly) the vehicle of creativity for that advancement. But science is supposed to be one of those creative activities that democrats utterly approve. When science advocates a Godless materialism and meaningless existentialism, the democrats get thoroughly confused. Many of these confused democrats seems to be anti-religion even anti-ethics. How then can religious people trust them to be even-handed about religions and religious ethics? Continue reading…