November 19, 2020

Transpersonal Psychology: A Problem that’s Inseparable from Its Promise

By George-Harold Jennings, PhD

In the late 1960’s Abraham Maslow, Anthony Sutich and others wrote about what they called the four forces in American psychology.  The psychological forces they identified were behaviorism, psychoanalysis, humanistic, and transpersonal. Known as the fourth force, transpersonal was viewed as emerging at the time. In the first issue of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology (1969), Sutich provided a lengthy, detailed, and comprehensive definition of transpersonal psychology. In the same journal a few decades later (1993), Roger Walsh and Francis Vaughan gave a shorter definition of transpersonal psychology (known also as spiritual psychology), defining it as “a sub-field or school of psychology that integrates the spiritual and transcendent aspects of the human experience with the framework of modern psychology. The transpersonal is defined as experiences in which the sense of identity or self extends beyond (trans) the individual or personal to encompass wider aspects of humankind, life, psyche or cosmos.”

Although this way of thinking about humanity is relatively new within mainstream Western psychology, the underlying perspective is ancient and widespread across many cultural traditions. It is central to African worldviews that’s regularly discussed and applied in the writings of African-centered transpersonal psychologist Linda James Myers. It can be traced back hundreds to thousands of years to an ancient Egyptian (Kemetic) understanding of the human being that viewed spirituality and psychology as inseparable and recognized the intimate relationship between human life and the cosmos. Comparable holistic perspectives can also be found in many Indigenous traditions of the Americas, in Asian philosophical and spiritual systems, and in strands of classical European thought, all of which understand the human psyche as embedded within a sacred and meaningful universe

Maslow, Sutich and others effectively argued that the four forces in psychology were four unique approaches to studying human beings. As a student I was interested in learning about each of these approaches to varying degrees. I began studying increasing amounts of the material from year to year as a graduate student, when much to my delight, there came a moment when I believed a case could be made for arguing that the four psychological forces aligned with (and are means of expressions for) the four psychological functions Carl Jung identified as sensing, thinking, feeling, and intuiting.

Psychological Types (The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 6) (Bollingen Series XX)

Jung described the four functions in his book Psychological Types as follows: “Sensation establishes what is actually present, thinking enables us to recognize its meaning, feeling tells us its value, and intuition points to possibilities as to whence it came and whither it is going (pp. 540-541).”

The functions are configured in the human psyche with thinking and feeling existing at the opposite ends of the same axis.  Existing at the opposing ends of a second overlapping axis are sensing and intuiting. Together, the four functions represent our means and ways of knowing and understanding reality and all aspects of the human experience while mirroring aspects of the fourfold structure of the psyche. Worthy of note is that the two overlapping axes form a cross which can be referred to as a Jungian cross. 

Individuation Process: A Step-by-Step Look at Jungian Psychology

The single function (which can be any one of the four) situated at the north end of the cross is called the superior function.  It represents the most dominant and developed function.  Opposed to this function is the inferior function which has a special and unique role to play in an individual’s movement towards wholeness. Superior and inferior functions can also be identified in “the psyche” of the people of a nation or culture; and so, too, when identified, the inferior function may potentially, if not surprisingly, reveal a means to wholeness for an individual and/or the people of a nation; and yet, there is typically a price to pay on the journey to wholeness, as there are often considerable challenges to overcome in trying to integrate the inferior function with the other three in an effort to bring about a robust fully functioning psyche. 

Regarding an individual in relation to the four functions, the ego generally comes to experience three of the psychological functions as helpful.  They must, however, occupy the positions of superior, first auxiliary, and second auxiliary functions—or in other words, the positions of North, West and East, respectively, on the Jungian cross. The ego experiences its greatest comfort with the superior function (i.e., the one that develops first in consciousness) while over a period of time, a person’s ego learns to recognize the usefulness of a second function (usually called the first auxiliary function), and a third function that may be called the second auxiliary or tertiary function.  

The fourth remaining function (i.e., the one located at the South point of the Jungian Cross) is always the inferior function. Although it ultimately offers an important pathway toward psychological wholeness, it frequently generates discomfort, frustration, and anxiety whenever the ego encounters it or attempts to rely upon it. From the standpoint of the ego, the inferior function often appears unreliable or deficient, regularly falling short of the standards established by the dominant function. Because it is inferior and therefore the opposite of the superior, dominant function, the domain of experience to which it provides access is typically the least valued or least trusted by the conscious personality. Situated close to the unconscious, the inferior function may also serve as a channel through which aspects of what Jung called the shadow can emerge into awareness, bringing with it both the disturbances and developmental possibilities that accompany encounters with previously unrecognized parts of the psyche. At times, similar dynamics can also appear at the cultural level. For example, when certain human qualities or ways of knowing are collectively devalued, they may be projected outward onto others or onto marginalized groups, becoming part of what analytical psychology would describe as the collective shadow of a society.

In my book Passages Beyond the Gate (2010, ebook 2012), I discuss how these four psychological functions give rise to four strikingly different ways of knowing which we find in psychology. In American psychology they unfold in a dynamic and readily identifiable way. 

Passages Beyond the Gate: A Jungian Approach to Understanding American Psychology

As the functions begin to differentiate within the psyche of an individual, the order is such that the first to develop is the superior or dominant function.  This dynamic process determines which function will become the “troublesome,” unruly function, and that function is always the opposite function of the superior function. Two more functions will over time differentiate and become controllable and reliable (to varying degrees). 

Over time things stabilize, and the ego realizes it has three functions that it can effectively use, but one that is unreliable, difficult to manage, and thus often devalued. This dynamic is aptly named the problem of the three and the one.  It is a dynamic process that can be seen not only in an individual, but in a discipline—such as psychology, which in itself mirrors and identifies dynamics and those things of importance in the psyche of groups that comprise cultures and nations.
 
If the first force in American psychology, represented by behaviorism, is grounded in the function Jung called sensation—then the alignments of the three remaining functions with the three remaining psychological forces point to psychoanalysis (the original psychodynamic psychology) being grounded in thinking, and humanistic (sometimes referred to as humanistic-existential psychology) being grounded in the feeling function. Transpersonal psychology grounded in intuition represents the inferior function in American psychology; consequently, being on the same axis, it is opposite behaviorism which is grounded in sensation. With this in mind, the argument can be made that behaviorism (essentially, the tenets it rests upon that are consistent with the traditional scientific method) is not only the first force in American psychology, it also is a manifestation of sensation, the superior function in American psychology. 

There is a split in the thinking among transpersonalists regarding the means and ways one should go about studying transpersonal phenomena. On the one hand, there are those adherents, practitioners, and researchers who are compelled to explore ideas, acquire knowledge, and gather information gained only from identifying and exploring measurable phenomena. There are others who embrace a different, if not, expanded or broader view of the transpersonal that calls for the exploration and gathering of information in those realms of being that go beyond the concrete, and measurable aspects of reality. Still, some transpersonalists, like myself, believe both approaches are important, and should be pursued.

In order for transpersonal psychology to provide its ideal and unique contribution to American psychology, it must have and maintain a foothold in the metaphysical aspects of knowledge and reality. Metaphysical knowledge and spiritual values must be combined with practical applications of our understanding of science to best inform us of ways to enhance the quality of life for humanity. Such a statement points to this being a major problem in the United States because the psychology of Americans, as much as it can be discerned by how psychology is largely defined in the United States, and the value placed on it by the nation’s major and most value centers of academic learning, places an extremely high value on the sensing function which—as important as it is, promotes a materialistic viewpoint of reality, and leads to an overvaluation of science as the be-all and end-all means to improving the life of human beings. Traditional science denies or ignores the realm of the spiritual. Traditional science is grounded in a materialistic viewpoint of the world that seeks to comprehend and explain its objects, and phenomena—including its understanding of human beings. Traditional, mainstream science claims to reveal and describe how we are as human beings; and yet, over, and over again, our human lives point to there being truth in the viewpoint that “man shall not live by bread alone (Matthew 4:4)”

Sensing is the dominant function in American psychology: its dominance was originally expressed in behaviorism, but, in current day studies and practice, it is further expressed in the growing call or demand by many mainstream psychologists for all psychologists to embrace evidence based research only: that is, research based on the traditional scientific method where measurement and quantification rule. Transpersonal psychology tends not to be embraced by these mainstream psychologists because it is a psychology that in its purest form is grounded in intuition and it is open to the metaphysical realms.

A complete understanding of human nature will be gained from the contribution to knowledge that emerges from the four functions that give rise to the four forces in psychology. This means transpersonal psychology which embraces a spiritual understanding of reality cannot be pushed to the side or ignored—and yet, in American psychology, transpersonal psychology is the psychological approach mainstream psychologists are most determined to ignore, resist, ridicule, or even condemn. In order to make transpersonal psychology more acceptable to the mainstream, some transpersonalists are willing to deny the fullness of exploration and possibilities that characterize the transpersonal by avoiding the metaphysical side of the transpersonal or rejecting methods that explore it other than those ways that embrace the traditional scientific method.

At American leading academic institutions across the nation, approaches to the study of psychology (based on traditional scientific method and inquiry grounded in sensation) greatly mirror an acceptance of tenets embraced by behavioral, cognitive, biological and other related physical scientific approaches. Though, admittedly, and thankfully—so, too, can there be found at many of these institutions psychologists who adhere to the tenets of psychodynamic, and humanistic-existential approaches. All of the psychological approaches named above currently have a seat at the table; however, American psychology will never be whole or complete without transpersonal psychology also being granted a seat at the table. Once this occurs transpersonal psychology’s important contributions will be realized, as it will have been given the opportunity to fulfill its promise. In time it will be recognized that the contributions of an intuitively based transpersonal psychology are just as important as the contributions of sensation, thinking, and feeling oriented approaches, if not more so.

American psychology should be an expression of the best that each of the four functions will make possible in our quest for knowing the physical and material aspects of our being, the meaning of our lived experiences, the values that give importance to our lives, and the metaphysical possibilities as to whence we came and whither we are going both in our present earthly existence, and beyond this lifetime, given the spiritual beings that we (in essence) are from a Transpersonal perspective.

Note: This article was published in the Association for Transpersonal Psychology Newsletter in 2021 at:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C31&q=Association+for+Transpersonal+Psychology+newsletter&btnG=

Clarification of some concepts and examples to the article as it appears on this website were added on April 7, 2026.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Uncategorized

April 7, 2026

Beyond Fragmentation: A Unified Roadmap for the Modern Psychologist

By George-Harold Jennings, PhD
file_00000000f04861f98a1dc7c854f5cb3e (1)Download

An Unfolding Vision for Psychologists

For decades, American psychology has lived in fragments that remain divided among powerful and compelling advances in our understanding of human nature, led by scientific approaches inclusive of the theories and frameworks of the behavioral, cognitive, and biological, as well as the insights offered by psychodynamic, and humanistic-existential approaches. But what happens when we finally bridge the gap between science and the intuitive soul?

In April 2026, a retro book review of Passages Beyond the Gate: a Jungian Approach to Understanding American Psychology (which continues to be viewed as evergreen and prescient) was index on Google Scholar. (A link to the Google Scholar index is below.)

A Rare Trajectory for a Book
“In a review of the monograph originally published in 2010, James Hollis observed: “In Passages Beyond the Gate, Dr. Jennings calls American psychology to accountability for its own blind spots.” Chief among these, Hollis suggested, is the discipline’s failure to recognize the importance of engaging the intuitive and spiritual dimensions of the human journey which is an essential aspect of human nature. As a result, questions of meaning have too often been set aside, contributing to a psychology that is both fragmented and incomplete.

Although it is a layered work: existential, rich in metaphors, and archetypal symbolism, Passages Beyond the Gate, first runner-up in the Eric Hoffer Book Award Spiritual Category, and Montaigne Medal finalist in 2011, is ultimately a meta-theoretical critique of American psychology.

Writing in the December 2025 issue of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, Volume 57 No.2, the premiere journal in the field, Beth Cooper Tabakin, Ph.D., shares a personal shift. She notes that the book “personally and professionally changed me.” She characterizes the book as a “punctuation point to healing possibilities” and a “gem” for anyone interested in personal growth and a more expansive view of psychology as a discipline.

Fifteen years earlier, James Hollis’s early recognition finds meaningful continuity in the 2025 review published in the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology by Beth Cooper Tabakin, whose reflections speak not only to the enduring relevance of Passages Beyond the Gate, but to its lived impact. That the work continues to be engaged: first through Hollis’s interpretive lens and now through Tabakin’s personal and professional response suggests a trajectory that is less episodic than cumulative.

I am deeply grateful to the Editorial Board of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology for its publication of this retro review, and to Dr. Tabakin for the care and seriousness with which she approached the work. Together, these moments 2010 and 2025 stand not as isolated acknowledgments, but as part of an unfolding recognition of Passages Beyond the Gate as a book that fosters personal journey, diagnosis of the state of American psychology, and invitation—a call to address the fragmentation of American psychology and to participate in its ongoing healing.

Google Scholar: https://lnkd.in/ec8qJ5Pb

Dr. James Hollis: https://share.google/m3ct7EcM8Ox5uO9iT

The Association for Transpersonal Psychology promoting a vision of the universe as sacred. https://share.google/CgIugvVWGXNC9Px9h

Dr. Beth Cooper Tabakin: https://lnkd.in/eDCp4VBY)

Bloomsbury Academic: https://lnkd.in/e2kvzg7m

Amazon: https://lnkd.in/eQskJvJs

___________________

Download: The link at the top is for downloading an alternative book cover for Passages Beyond the Gate: a Jungian Approach to Understanding American Psychology

Leave a comment   |  tags: , | posted in Consciousness Studies, Jungian Psychology, Transpersonal psychology, Uncategorized

June 5, 2020

The Impact of the Pluto Return on the USA’s Chart: A Call for Transformation

By George-Harold Jennings, PhD

Throughout human history, thoughtful observers have wondered whether the rhythms of the cosmos and the unfolding patterns of human life might reflect a deeper underlying order. As a Jungian and transpersonal psychologist, I approach historical and cultural events with the understanding that human experience unfolds within a larger symbolic and archetypal field.

The relationship between psyche and cosmos has long intrigued philosophers, astronomers, and psychologists alike. In the work of Carl Gustav Jung, this relationship found expression in the principle of synchronicity: namely, the idea that meaningful correspondences can occur between inner psychological states and external events without direct causal connection. For Jung, such correspondences suggested that psyche and the material world may share a deeper underlying order, one in which symbolic patterns can manifest simultaneously in human affairs and in the broader rhythms of nature and the cosmos.

Building upon this line of inquiry, cultural historian and philosopher Richard Tarnas explored the possibility that planetary cycles may correlate with archetypal patterns in human history and collective experience, a thesis developed most fully in his work Cosmos and Psyche: Intimations of a New World View. Tarnas does not argue that the planets mechanically cause events on Earth; rather, he proposes that planetary movements and historical developments may unfold in synchronistic relationship to one another, reflecting a deeper resonance between the structures of the cosmos and the archetypal dynamics of human life. From this perspective, examining planetary transits in relation to major historical periods becomes less an exercise in prediction than an exploration of symbolic correspondences that may illuminate the psychological and cultural themes emerging at a given moment in history.

Seen in this light, the astrological phenomenon known as the Pluto return of the United States can be approached not simply as an astronomical event but as a symbolic moment in the life cycle of a nation. Just as individuals pass through developmental stages and periods of transformation, societies and nations may also encounter historical periods marked by profound confrontation with shadow, power, renewal, and rebirth—the archetypal themes long associated with Pluto.

The following reflections therefore consider the United States’ Pluto return through a symbolic and archetypal lens, exploring how the symbolic geocosmological or astrological language of planetary cycles may resonate with the psychological and cultural transformations unfolding in the nation at this particular moment in its history.

The USA’s Pluto Return (i.e., the time period that marks the “planet” Pluto’s return to its original astrological sign and degree in the birth chart of the United States) is worthy of study. The Pluto Return is a 248 years cycle–and that means it is currently moving ever so much closer to the degree marking its starting point in the USA’s birth chart—namely, 27 and a half degrees in the sign of Carpricorn. This is important because it means we are in the time period of Pluto’s assessment and judgment regarding what the United States has become from the time of its birth as a nation in 1776 until the present. Sadly, the recent unfolding of events–the COVID-19 pandemic, highly impactful incidents of emergent racial injustice, various forms of gender discrimination, ecological concerns, social unrest, political polarization, and social-economic distress affecting millions across multiple levels of society, all contribute to the facts based conclusion that we as a nation, and indeed, the world, are in extremely serious trouble.

When Pluto energies appear and are experienced, the truth and/or that which was hidden can more readily be revealed. Of equal importance, Pluto’s energies can manifest in other ways: including endings that are linked to new beginnings, destruction, healing, and/or transformation.  Pluto (along with, Uranus, and Neptune) is a transpersonal planet meaning it represents a path for humanity to higher consciousness.

The Call for Liberty and Justice for All are Values We Must Not Turn Against

Before saying much more about the Pluto Return, for the purpose of comparison, I will briefly write about the planet Saturn and its more widely known Saturn Return. Like the Pluto Return, the Saturn Return (occurring about every 29.5 years) is about assessing and judging how the life of an entity has been lived over the course of its planetary cycle.

Saturn will test the foundational strength of a life and the structure of a life built on that foundation, and if the foundation and life structure fail the test, then it will tear them down, and leave it up to the person/entity to rebuild or not. It’s analogous to a building that collapses under it’s own weight when Saturn makes its return, and decides the foundation and structure of the building are flawed. Once a life finds that it cannot bear the weight of Saturn’s various expressions of its energy or Saturn’s tests, Saturn “shakes it head” and moves on. One has failed and the person must build a better foundation and/or create a new life structure; however, if the life bears the test of Saturn, then Saturn still moves on, but the person/entity can live knowing that it has built a solid foundation and life structure. In other words, it has passed the test. This is why ages 28 to 31 are very important years in a human being’s life.

No human lives 248 years, so no human experiences a personal Pluto Return based on her or his natal chart, however, nations and other “long-lived” entities do.

Although Pluto, too, comes to assess and pass judgment in its return, its energies are different from Saturn’s energies. On the one hand, Pluto can be far more devastating in its destruction (think of a major volcanic eruption, or at its worst, the explosion of a megaton thermonuclear bomb). 

The Coronavirus

Among other things, Pluto rules viruses. In fact, the planet embodies a powerful transformative healing and deadly energy that can be expressed in many different ways. Oddly enough, the novel coronavirus (whose known impact can be deadly) has triggered many unexpected, yet positive transformations around the world. Pluto does not have to use viruses to trigger transformation, as it has many means and ways in which it can trigger physical, bodily, social, economic, mental and/or spiritual transformations. Some transformations (in the immediate and initial time period in which their impact occur) can be more welcomed by individuals and/or humanity than others. 

Attempt at Limiting the Spread of the Coronavirus

Although the impact of Pluto’s energy will typically take a very long time (possibly even years) to fully manifest and unfold in the life of a person or nation, sometimes the transformative healing energy of Pluto manifests more immediately in ways that can be experienced as growth enhancing, consciousness expanding, spiritually uplifting, and/or extraordinarily exhilarating—indeed, these positive manifestations or consequences of Pluto’s healing energy define an experience that is simply wonderful. For some people and/or societies the above will periodically capture their experience with Pluto’s energy, but for those who exist long enough, often the person/society will also experience the negative aspects of Pluto—meaning Pluto’s energies can painfully and stunningly reveal, and/or destroy that which is incapable of standing up to its judgment. Pluto breaks things down; consequently, even some forms of healing triggered by Pluto will by necessity involve significant levels of pain and/or discomfort. Unlike Saturn, however, Pluto will always trigger transformative healing after it has wreaked potentially devastating destruction or triggers the end of an event or experience. Pluto demands a rebuild, but its energies help in the rebuilding to make things better.

A Symbol for Pluto

We are closing in on the exact degree that defines the Pluto Return in the USA’s chart; that is, the degree from whence Pluto began its 248 year cycle. Yet, what we are witnessing now is only the beginning of the end, along with the demand for, and opportunities with the help of Pluto to bring forth positive changes in the USA across multiple social, governmental, and economic levels of the country. Soon enough the country will enter a period of a new beginning (2023 – 2024), as I, optimistically, believe, after a period of significant trials and tribulations—longterm, greater stability, and a better, more egalitarian way of life in the United States will eventually take hold based on Pluto entering the sign of Aquarius.

When Pluto makes its initial ingress into Aquarius, its transformative energy will continue to be released. The planet (note: in astrology Pluto continues to be viewed as a planet) will retrograde into Capricorn before turning direct, and ingress Aquarius again, as it begins its long 20 year transit of the sign. Once the long transit into Aquarius begins, Pluto will continue to symbolize deep, startling, and exceptionally stunning (for better and/or for worse) transformations perhaps most noticeably in its early transit of Aquarius but periodically in its transit throughout the sign.

A Black Lives Matter Rally

The United States has not fully lived up to its promise as a beacon of light for the world. Pluto symbolizes profound and unfathomable energies and abilities. Having the natal placement of Pluto in the second house (i.e., house of resources and values) of the USA’s (Sibly) chart supports the belief that when one is given much, much will be required (Luke 12:48). Having failed to live up to the standards the nation proclaimed it stands for, Pluto is revealing to the country and to the world its shadow side, the USA’s toxic underbelly, and its disease foundation. One aspect of this toxic underbelly is also known as “America’s original sin,” namely, the nation’s mistreatment of people of color; specifically, the United States’ government mistreatment of native people, going back to the periods when it was an active participant in the near genocide of native people, resulting in reducing many of the remaining Indigenous people to living on reservations—and its mistreatment of black people, namely its widespread acceptance and promotion of black slavery. These are examples of racism and white supremacy.

We are in the midst of Pluto revealing the breadth and depth of these social illnesses (perhaps in ways never before seen) as threats to the stability of the nation. It is ripping off its scabs and revealing its wounds for all the world to see. Racism and all sorts of other inequalities are truly being revealed for what they are as well as the damage they cause across all levels of American life. This is unacceptable to Pluto; and, consequently, much must be noted, addressed, rooted out, and eventually changed, transformed or even destroyed in the USA in an ongoing process before Pluto enters the sign of Aquarius and after its entry into the sign.

Aquarius is the sign of the people. In Aquarius Pluto symbolizes the empowerment of the PEOPLE! Aquarius is perhaps the most egalitarian and technologically advanced of all signs. The ideas of “Power to the People” and “the People will have the Power,” even as technology advances at an incredibly rapid pace captures what will foster an interesting compelling dynamic in the life of humanity.

As it closes in on the degree that marks its Pluto Return in Capricorn, Pluto is making it known (to those who understand its nature and purpose) that it is not pleased with all that it “sees.”

Protestors Making Their Viewpoint Known

Like Uranus, and Neptune, Pluto is a major planet of change impacting individual lives, but especially so, with regards to the masses (i.e., humanity). Its extremely powerful energies will not only demand that America live up to its promises, it will destroy any aspect of the nation, if not the nation itself, that fails to do so. The good news is that it will not just move on leaving us wasted, it will deliver energies that eventually will show us the way. Indeed, humanity can expect to experience consciousness raising insights and opportunities triggered by Pluto that will help us rebuild and undergo uplifting and needed transformation.

(References: Jung, Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle, 1952/1973; Tarnas, Cosmos and Psyche, 2006)

We are one Human Race–having the Beauty of Different Colors: Our Greatest Strength Results from Us Uniting

No copyright infringement is intended.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , | posted in Astrology, Geocosmology, Spiritual psychology, Transpersonal psychology

March 20, 2013

How Consciousness Creates Reality: Physics, and Amit Goswami, PhD

By George-Harold Jennings, PhD

The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Material World

Few questions are more profound or more controversial than the relationship between consciousness and reality. Is consciousness merely a byproduct of brain activity, as many neuroscientists assume? Or might consciousness play a more fundamental role in the structure of the universe itself? Over the past century, developments in physics, philosophy, and psychology have revived this question in surprising ways. One thinker who has explored this possibility from the perspective of quantum theory is Amit Goswami.

Although I did not realize it at the time, about ten years ago I attended a lecture that would significantly influence the way I think about consciousness and reality. Seated in the front row of a modest lecture room, I waited for the arrival of Goswami. Once the talk began, I was quickly drawn into the ideas he presented. Among the concepts he discussed, none struck me as more thought-provoking than his claim that “consciousness is the ground of all being.”

Goswami, a longtime professor of physics at the University of Oregon, taught theoretical quantum physics for more than three decades before retiring. Although no longer teaching full time, he remains active internationally as a lecturer and author. During his visit to Drew University, he spoke about consciousness and its relationship to matter which is an issue that sits at the intersection of physics, philosophy, and psychology.

When most people are asked to define consciousness, they describe it simply as awareness. Goswami, however, proposes a far more expansive interpretation. In his view (and in the view of a number of philosophers and theorists interested in the implications of quantum theory) consciousness is not merely a byproduct of the brain. Instead, consciousness may be fundamental to reality itself. From this perspective, the material world emerges from consciousness rather than the other way around.

This proposal draws inspiration from philosophical interpretations of quantum mechanics. In quantum theory, physical systems are often described mathematically as existing in a range of potential states until they are measured. Prior to measurement, the system is represented by a wave function, which describes probabilities rather than definite outcomes. Some thinkers have suggested that this peculiar feature of quantum physics raises deep questions about the role of observation and the nature of reality.

At this point, however, an important clarification must be made. Most physicists do not interpret quantum theory as implying that human consciousness literally creates physical reality. In contemporary physics, the transition from possibilities to observed outcomes is generally explained through physical processes such as measurement interactions and environmental decoherence. The mathematics of quantum theory works extraordinarily well, but its deeper meaning remains open to interpretation. For that reason, the suggestion that consciousness plays a fundamental role in reality should be understood primarily as a philosophical interpretation of quantum theory rather than a settled conclusion of physics itself.

Despite remarkable advances in neuroscience and physics, the nature of consciousness remains one of the most challenging questions in modern science. Increasing numbers of scholars across disciplines, including psychology, neuroscience, physics, biology, and computer science have taken renewed interest in the problem. In fact, the contemporary study of consciousness represents something of a return to earlier concerns in psychology. Before the rise of strict behaviorism in the early twentieth century, consciousness itself was considered a central topic of psychological inquiry.

Today, neuroscientists and psychologists commonly ask: What is the relationship between consciousness and the brain? Many researchers attempt to identify the neural processes that correlate with conscious experience. Few would deny that brain activity and consciousness are closely related. The deeper question, however, is whether consciousness is entirely produced by the brain or whether the brain might instead participate in a larger system of mind?

Philosophers often frame this issue in terms of bottom-up versus top-down models of causality. In a bottom-up view of the universe, matter is fundamental. Elementary particles combine into atoms, atoms into molecules, molecules into biological structures, and ultimately into complex systems such as the human brain; thus, from which consciousness is thought to emerge.

In contrast, a top-down perspective suggests that consciousness may be more fundamental than matter. In this view, the physical universe might arise within a deeper field of consciousness rather than producing consciousness itself. Goswami’s proposal belongs to this latter tradition, which resonates with certain philosophical forms of idealism which is the idea that mind or consciousness is ultimately primary in reality.

Indeed, the suggestion that consciousness may be fundamental is not entirely new. Philosophers have long explored the possibility that mind plays a central role in the structure of reality. Thinkers such as George Berkeley argued centuries ago that reality ultimately depends upon mind.

In psychology, a related insight appears in the work of Carl Gustav Jung. Jung’s depth psychology suggests that human experience is shaped not only by physical processes but also by the symbolic and meaning-making activity of the psyche. From this perspective, consciousness cannot be understood solely in terms of neural mechanisms as it must also be considered within the broader context of psyche, meaning, and the structures of human experience.

Jung himself occasionally speculated about a deeper level of reality in which psyche and matter might ultimately be connected. In his later writings, he suggested that both mental and physical phenomena could arise from what he described as a “psychoid” level of reality, a domain that lies beyond the simple division between mind and matter. From such a perspective, the relationship between consciousness and the physical universe may be more intricate than either strict materialism or simple idealism can fully explain. Questions raised by modern physics about the nature of observation and reality therefore intersect in interesting ways with long-standing psychological reflections on the relationship between psyche and the world it experiences.

These philosophical questions often arise in the classroom as well. During a lively discussion in one of my personality theory courses, a student argued strongly that consciousness must arise from the physical brain, describing it as a byproduct or epiphenomenon of neural activity. He was somewhat surprised when I explained that some philosophers and scientists have entertained the opposite possibility arguing that consciousness may not simply be produced by the brain, but that the brain itself could be an expression or instrument of consciousness.

If one adopts such a perspective, then intriguing questions naturally arise. If consciousness is fundamental, then how did the universe come into existence? Did consciousness create the universe? What role might consciousness have played at the beginning of cosmic history? For Goswami, the answer points toward a universal or cosmic consciousness underlying reality. Some philosophers and theologians have drawn parallels between this idea and classical concepts such as the Prime Mover or the ultimate ground of being which are terms that many traditions associate with the idea of God.

Goswami explores these ideas in his book The Self-Aware Universe, where he presents his philosophical interpretation of quantum theory and its implications for understanding consciousness. Whether one ultimately agrees with his conclusions or not, his work raises provocative questions about the nature of mind, matter, and the deeper structure of reality.

For readers interested in exploring these ideas further, Goswami’s writings offer a detailed account of his perspective. His work challenges us to reconsider a question that has intrigued philosophers, scientists, and theologians for centuries: namely, “Is consciousness simply a product of the universe, or might the universe itself arise within consciousness?”

Readers interested in learning more about his work can visit his website at:: http://www.amitgoswami.org/

 

 

4 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Consciousness Studies

March 8, 2013

Eben Alexander’s Book: Proof of Heaven | Eternea Website

By George-Harold Jennings, PhD
Reading Proof of Heaven, Dr. Eben Alexander's ...

Reading Proof of Heaven, Dr. Eben Alexander’s near death experience (Photo credit: Lost A Sock)

I loved reading Eben Alexander’s book Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Journey into the Afterlife. When it was first published, I mentioned the book to a friend who is both a theological school professor and a minister. Although I strongly endorsed the book and assumed she would be eager to read it as well, she gave me reason to pause when she said, “I do not need to read a book to know Heaven is real.” In a sense, she was right! And not only about her own belief, but about mine as well.

Whether one conceives of heaven as another dimension or as a higher plane of existence, it remains possible that consciousness is not entirely confined to the brain or to physical processes. Some philosophers and researchers in the study of consciousness therefore suggest that consciousness may not be entirely reducible to brain processes and may, in some form, persist beyond physical death. Such possibilities remain unproven within contemporary science, yet they remain legitimate questions for philosophical and metaphysical reflection. As a Jungian and transpersonal psychologist, I value the insights of empirical science deeply; however, I do not assume that materialist or purely sensate ways of knowing exhaust the full range of human understanding. The history of philosophy, psychology, and spirituality suggests that reality may be approached through multiple modes of inquiry: including empirical, reflective, symbolic, and contemplative, with each offering its own distinctive window into the nature of mind and existence.

Questions about consciousness, meaning, and the possibility of realities beyond the material world have long occupied philosophers, theologians, and psychologists. While science remains an indispensable tool for understanding the physical universe, it does not necessarily exhaust every form of inquiry through which human beings explore the nature of existence. Recognizing this distinction allows for a thoughtful openness to questions that may lie at the boundaries of current scientific understanding.

I did not value Alexander’s book because it made one or more higher dimensions (or what many traditions might call heaven) seem more real to me personally: for me, that possibility was already real. Rather, I valued it because it helped make the idea of heaven, or at least the possibility of it, more plausible to many readers who previously had little reason to believe such a reality could exist.

Alexander has therefore become an important voice in contemporary discussions within consciousness studies and transpersonal psychology. Many researchers, clinicians, practitioners, and scholars in these fields share his interest in science and possess strong scientific training, and many have explored questions of consciousness and spirituality for decades. Alexander’s entry into this conversation therefore represents a somewhat different pathway into the subject.

His contribution is distinctive for another reason. As a highly trained academic neurosurgeon who practiced at hospitals affiliated with Harvard Medical School and possessed a deep scientific understanding of the brain, his public willingness to take seriously experiences and forms of knowledge that he had previously regarded with skepticism is noteworthy. For many readers around the world (including some former skeptics) his account encouraged a reconsideration of questions surrounding consciousness and the possibility of an afterlife.

Alexander fell into a coma after contracting a rare and severe form of bacterial meningitis that affected the brain. During this period he later reported a profound Near-death experience. After his recovery, he described the experience as transformative and interpreted it as suggesting that consciousness may not be entirely produced by the brain alone.

Alexander has also helped establish an organization called ETERNEA, which promotes dialogue about the relationship between science, consciousness, and spirituality. I encourage readers who are interested in these questions to explore its work.”   

ETERNEA’s Website: ETERNEA – The Convergence of Science and Spirituality. 

 

 

.

13 Comments   |  tags: , , , , | posted in Near-death experience