At all ages men have sought to bring together the sum of knowledge and experience of the day, with everything one could explain his relationship with the universe and its possibilities in the . In the ordinary way could never achieve. Because the unity of things is not recognized by the ordinary mind, in the ordinary state of consciousness. The ordinary mind, refracted through the innumerable and contradictory intimations of the various aspects of human nature, must reflect the world so varied and confusing as the man himself. One unit, a model, an all-encompassing meaning, if any, could only be discerned or experienced in a different state of consciousness. This would only be achievable by a mind that had unified itself. What
unit, for example, might perceive even the most brilliant physicists, philosophers, theologians, which distracted while riding on a stool, gets angry for being disappointed, he does not realize when angry at his wife and, in general, is subject to blindness trivial everyday ordinary mind and whose work usually done with a lack of attention? Any unit that scope in such a state can exist only in his imagination.
Therefore, the attempt to gather into a single beam knowledge has always connected with the search for a new state with science. It is meaningless and futile, apart from this search. Perhaps
arguably even the few attempts that have been successful and that have reached us, show signs of being one mind-products of that search, when it proved successful. The only convincing 'models of the universe' in existence are those left by men who, obviously, achieved a completely different relationship with the world and awareness of him, one that relates to ordinary experience.
Because these real 'models of the universe' must not only In shape and internal structure of the universe but also must disclose the relationship of man with it and its present and possible destinations in it. In this sense, some of the Gothic cathedrals are complete models of the universe, while a modern planetarium, despite all its beauty, all knowledge and all its accuracy, it is not. Because the latter ignored the whole man.
The difference, of course, lies in the fact that the cathedrals were designed, directly or indirectly, by men who belonged to the schools to achieve higher states of consciousness and had the advantage of experience in these schools, while designers are the planetary scientists and technicians who, though intelligent and qualified enough in their field, can not claim a particular knowledge of the potentialities of the human machine that must work.
Specifically, if we have some keys to their interpretation, the most striking fact about these old models of the universe, that arise in ages, continents and cultures apart, is its similarity, so deep it could be done a very good defense of the idea that higher consciousness always reveals the same truth, based solely on the comparative study of certain existing models of the universe and appear to result from it-for example, the cathedral of Chartres, the Great Sphinx, the New Testament, the Divine Comedy or, on the other hand, certain cosmic diagrams left by the alchemists of the seventeenth century, designers of the Tarot cards and Russian painters of some icons and banners Tibetans.
Of course, one of the main difficulties in the way of this comparative study is the fact that all these models are expressed in different languages \u200b\u200band that for the ordinary mind unprepared, a different language implies a different truth. In fact, this is an illusion characteristic of ordinary state of man.
By contrast, even a small improvement their perception reveals the same language, the same formulation, may hold diametrically opposed, in both language and formulations that at first sight have nothing in common can actually refer the same thing. For example, while the words honor, love, democracy are universally used, it is almost impossible to find two people who attribute the same meaning. That is because the different uses of the same word may be not comparable. On the other hand, seem strange he thought the cathedral of Chartres, a deck of Tarot cards and certain Tibetan deities multicéfalas heavily armed and are in fact made of exactly the same ideas, that is exactly comparable.
It is thus necessary to consider at this point the question of language in relation to the construction of a model of the universe, and drawing up a scheme of unity. Basically, language or form of expression is divided according to interest either of the roles of men, family, or potential. For example, a particular idea can be expressed in philosophical or scientific language, appealing to man's intellectual function: can be expressed in religious or poetic language, which appeals to their role emotional rites or dances express interest to their motor function, and , every path can be expressed in odor or physical attitudes that appeal to their physiology instinctive.
course, the best 'models of the universe "created by schools in the past, aspired to combine the formulations of what they wanted to express, in many languages, so as to affect many or all functions at the same time and thus partly offset the contradiction between the different aspects of human nature, we already referred to. In the cathedral, for example, successfully combined with the language of poetry, attitudes, ritual, music, smell, art and architecture, and something similar seems to have had in the theater of the mysteries of Eleusis. In other cases, in the Great Pyramid for example, it seems that the language of architecture has been used not only in the symbolism of its form, but in order to create in the person going through the building in a certain sense, series well defined shock and emotional impressions, which had different meanings for themselves and were calculated to reveal the real nature of the person that supports them.
This objective relates to the use of language-that is, the use of a defined language to evoke a definite idea of \u200b\u200bthe effect prior knowledge to be created, the role that will be affected and the type of person who will respond to that . We again have to admit that such employment target language usually is not known, except perhaps in the elementary form of advertising, "and that the highest usage may result, directly or indirectly mind, the knowledge gained in states higher consciousness.
addition to these languages \u200b\u200brecognizable by men, through their ordinary language there are other ways of proceeding and appeal to supra-normal functions, ie functions that can develop in humans, but which do not ordinarily enjoy . For example, the language of a higher emotional function, in which the formula has the power to evoke a huge number of meanings longer be simultaneous or successive and. Some of the most exquisite poetry, and indeed memorable, but increasing reveal something new-can never fully understood, may fall into this category. With yet more evidence, the Gospels have been signed in this language and for this reason, each of its verses reminiscent of a hundred men, a hundred different and contradictory meanings ever,
In the language of a more emotional function high and, in particular, higher intellectual function, symbols play important role. They are based on true understanding of analogies between the two cosmos, which form, function or law of a cosmos used to suggest forms, functions and corresponding laws in other cosmos.
This understanding belongs exclusively to a higher role and potential of man and must always produce a sense of confusion and even frustramiento when he wants to achieve with ordinary functions, such as logical thinking.
However, higher degrees of emotional language does not require any external expression and, therefore can not be misinterpreted
This digression about the final language is necessary to explain in part the form of this book. For this, we must also admit, is intended as a model the universe-that is, a set or design knowledge at our disposal, ready to show as a whole or a cosmic unity
is certainly wrapped in the guise of scientific language and, therefore, is directed primarily to intellectual function and people who prevails in that role. Indeed, the author is well recognized that this language is the slowest, most laborious and in some ways the most difficult to follow for all languages. The poetry, myths and fairy tales, for example, can penetrate more deeply and bring ideas with much more strength and fluidity to the reader's emotional understanding.
Perhaps then possible an attempt in this direction
At the same time, the reader accustomed to the language and thought scientists encounter difficulties. Free use is made of the analogy throughout the book, may seem incongruous. And, for your benefit, it is best to do here for an explanation as complete as possible and advance a frank recognition of the shortcomings of this method. Two roads
man has to study the universe. The first is by induction: it examines the phenomenon, which classifies and then tries to infer those laws and principles. This is the most commonly used method in science, the second is by implication: having received or disclosed or discovered certain general laws and principles, attempts to infer the application of those laws to special studies and life. This is the method generally used by religion. The first begins with "facts" and seek to build up "laws." The second begins with "laws" and tries to descend to the "facts."
These two methods, in fact, relate to the work of two different human functions. The first is the method of ordinary logical mind, which is permanently at our disposal. The second is derived from a potential function of man, which usually is inactive due to lack of energy nerve of sufficient intensity and we can call a higher mental function. This feature, on the rare occasions that acts reveals man laws in action, go all the phenomenal world as a result of the law. All formulations
true universal laws come from, recent or remote, the work of this superior function somewhere and in any man. At the same time, the application and understanding of the laws revealed in large stretches of time and culture where such disclosure is not it, the man has to rely on the ordinary logical mind.
This fact is recognized even today in scientific thinking. In its "Nature of the Universe" (Nature of the Universe) (1950), Fred Hoyle writes: "The procedure in all branches of physical science, is the theory of Newtonian gravity, Maxwell's electromagnetic theory, the theory of Einstein's relativity and the theory of quan tum, is the same root. D comprises two steps. The first is to assume, by some sort of inspiration, a set of mathematical equations. The second is to associate the symbols used in equations with measurable physical quantities. "
The difference between the work of these two minds could not have said it better.
But this is where the large uncertainty arises of human understanding. Because these two minds can never ordinarily understood each other. Between them a very considerable difference in speed. The way it is impossible to communicate a laborer who toils beside the road with a load of firewood and a car that crosses quickly to eighty miles per hour, due to the difference in speed is usually impossible and communication between logical mind and a superior mind, for the same reason. A logical mind the marks left by the higher mind seem arbitrary, superstitious, illogical, unproven. For the higher mind, the work of the logical mind seem heavy, unnecessary, and forgotten the fundamental issue So
ordinary remedied this difficulty maintaining separate these two methods, which are given different names and different action areas. The religious books or those of higher mathematics, dealing with laws and principles, refrain from using the inductive method. The science, dealing with accumulations of facts observed, presumably refrain laws in advance. And how are people who write and read different books in one form or another class, or the same people read both kinds but quite separate parts of his mind, these two methods are arranged to be together without too much friction between them.
But in this book are used simultaneously both methods. Certain great principles and laws of the universe, which found expression in different countries and all ages, and from time to time, are rediscovered by individual men through the work of a higher role momentary receive free credit. Of these deductions are made down to the phenomenal world usually accessible to us, primarily through the analog method. At the same time an attempt is made to study and classify the events and phenomena that surround us and, by inference, so that sort of lead in the ratings rise to the abstract laws that descend, in turn, from above.
In fact, by above reason, which derives from the various functions in widely different speeds, never found the two methods. Among the allowable deductions from general laws and the permissible inference of fact, there is always an invisible area, where both should and must unite, but in which such a union and goes on forever without being unproved.
For these reasons, the author is prepared to admit that the plan of this book that attempts to reconcile the two methods, is impossible. Fully realize that an attempt of its kind in inevitably becomes a kind of sleight of hand, almost a trap. And also realize that this juggling tricks no form a professional scientist, exclusively linked to the logical method.
At the same time is satisfied, first, that the science of today, without principles, is moving towards speculation and increasingly obtuse materialism, and, second, that religious or philosophical principles, without coordinating with scientific knowledge that characterizes our age can muster for today only a minority interest. This conviction persuades him to take the risk. Those who use the logical method exclusively, never be satisfied with the arguments provided, which, admittedly, suffer from logical gaps and blemishes. On the other hand, for those willing to accept both methods, we hope to present sufficient evidence to make it possible for each player tries to bridge the gap between the world of facts-the quotidian and the great laws - for himself. Task
not it can ever be in a book either, nor would the largest number of events or greater amount of c cough, usually available to science whether present or future, which could make it possible. Plus, with the help and effort can be made for each individual to his own satisfaction.
Meanwhile, for the common man interested in their own destiny but not especially in science, we can say only, with closer examination, you may find that this book is not as 'scientific' as at first sight. Scientific language is the fashion, is now mandatory language and the language of psychology was fashionable thirty years ago, the passionate language fashionable in Elizabethan times and the language of religion was the Fashion in the Middle Ages. When people are induced to buy toothpaste or cigarettes by pseudoscientific arguments and explanations, of course this in any way correspond to the mentality of the time. Then the truth must also be expressed scientifically.
At the same time, does not suggest by this that the language Scientific employee is a disfigurement, a simulation or a fake. The explanation given, so far has been possible to verify them, are correct and correspond to the reality of the facts. What is claimed that the principles used with the same correction could be applied to any other forms of human experience, with results of equal or greater interest. And these principles are important, rather than the sciences to which they are applied.
"A new model of the universe" Introduction, PD Ouspensky
unit, for example, might perceive even the most brilliant physicists, philosophers, theologians, which distracted while riding on a stool, gets angry for being disappointed, he does not realize when angry at his wife and, in general, is subject to blindness trivial everyday ordinary mind and whose work usually done with a lack of attention? Any unit that scope in such a state can exist only in his imagination.
Therefore, the attempt to gather into a single beam knowledge has always connected with the search for a new state with science. It is meaningless and futile, apart from this search. Perhaps
arguably even the few attempts that have been successful and that have reached us, show signs of being one mind-products of that search, when it proved successful. The only convincing 'models of the universe' in existence are those left by men who, obviously, achieved a completely different relationship with the world and awareness of him, one that relates to ordinary experience.
Because these real 'models of the universe' must not only In shape and internal structure of the universe but also must disclose the relationship of man with it and its present and possible destinations in it. In this sense, some of the Gothic cathedrals are complete models of the universe, while a modern planetarium, despite all its beauty, all knowledge and all its accuracy, it is not. Because the latter ignored the whole man.
The difference, of course, lies in the fact that the cathedrals were designed, directly or indirectly, by men who belonged to the schools to achieve higher states of consciousness and had the advantage of experience in these schools, while designers are the planetary scientists and technicians who, though intelligent and qualified enough in their field, can not claim a particular knowledge of the potentialities of the human machine that must work.
Specifically, if we have some keys to their interpretation, the most striking fact about these old models of the universe, that arise in ages, continents and cultures apart, is its similarity, so deep it could be done a very good defense of the idea that higher consciousness always reveals the same truth, based solely on the comparative study of certain existing models of the universe and appear to result from it-for example, the cathedral of Chartres, the Great Sphinx, the New Testament, the Divine Comedy or, on the other hand, certain cosmic diagrams left by the alchemists of the seventeenth century, designers of the Tarot cards and Russian painters of some icons and banners Tibetans.
Of course, one of the main difficulties in the way of this comparative study is the fact that all these models are expressed in different languages \u200b\u200band that for the ordinary mind unprepared, a different language implies a different truth. In fact, this is an illusion characteristic of ordinary state of man.
By contrast, even a small improvement their perception reveals the same language, the same formulation, may hold diametrically opposed, in both language and formulations that at first sight have nothing in common can actually refer the same thing. For example, while the words honor, love, democracy are universally used, it is almost impossible to find two people who attribute the same meaning. That is because the different uses of the same word may be not comparable. On the other hand, seem strange he thought the cathedral of Chartres, a deck of Tarot cards and certain Tibetan deities multicéfalas heavily armed and are in fact made of exactly the same ideas, that is exactly comparable.
It is thus necessary to consider at this point the question of language in relation to the construction of a model of the universe, and drawing up a scheme of unity. Basically, language or form of expression is divided according to interest either of the roles of men, family, or potential. For example, a particular idea can be expressed in philosophical or scientific language, appealing to man's intellectual function: can be expressed in religious or poetic language, which appeals to their role emotional rites or dances express interest to their motor function, and , every path can be expressed in odor or physical attitudes that appeal to their physiology instinctive.
course, the best 'models of the universe "created by schools in the past, aspired to combine the formulations of what they wanted to express, in many languages, so as to affect many or all functions at the same time and thus partly offset the contradiction between the different aspects of human nature, we already referred to. In the cathedral, for example, successfully combined with the language of poetry, attitudes, ritual, music, smell, art and architecture, and something similar seems to have had in the theater of the mysteries of Eleusis. In other cases, in the Great Pyramid for example, it seems that the language of architecture has been used not only in the symbolism of its form, but in order to create in the person going through the building in a certain sense, series well defined shock and emotional impressions, which had different meanings for themselves and were calculated to reveal the real nature of the person that supports them.
This objective relates to the use of language-that is, the use of a defined language to evoke a definite idea of \u200b\u200bthe effect prior knowledge to be created, the role that will be affected and the type of person who will respond to that . We again have to admit that such employment target language usually is not known, except perhaps in the elementary form of advertising, "and that the highest usage may result, directly or indirectly mind, the knowledge gained in states higher consciousness.
addition to these languages \u200b\u200brecognizable by men, through their ordinary language there are other ways of proceeding and appeal to supra-normal functions, ie functions that can develop in humans, but which do not ordinarily enjoy . For example, the language of a higher emotional function, in which the formula has the power to evoke a huge number of meanings longer be simultaneous or successive and. Some of the most exquisite poetry, and indeed memorable, but increasing reveal something new-can never fully understood, may fall into this category. With yet more evidence, the Gospels have been signed in this language and for this reason, each of its verses reminiscent of a hundred men, a hundred different and contradictory meanings ever,
In the language of a more emotional function high and, in particular, higher intellectual function, symbols play important role. They are based on true understanding of analogies between the two cosmos, which form, function or law of a cosmos used to suggest forms, functions and corresponding laws in other cosmos.
This understanding belongs exclusively to a higher role and potential of man and must always produce a sense of confusion and even frustramiento when he wants to achieve with ordinary functions, such as logical thinking.
However, higher degrees of emotional language does not require any external expression and, therefore can not be misinterpreted
This digression about the final language is necessary to explain in part the form of this book. For this, we must also admit, is intended as a model the universe-that is, a set or design knowledge at our disposal, ready to show as a whole or a cosmic unity
is certainly wrapped in the guise of scientific language and, therefore, is directed primarily to intellectual function and people who prevails in that role. Indeed, the author is well recognized that this language is the slowest, most laborious and in some ways the most difficult to follow for all languages. The poetry, myths and fairy tales, for example, can penetrate more deeply and bring ideas with much more strength and fluidity to the reader's emotional understanding.
Perhaps then possible an attempt in this direction
At the same time, the reader accustomed to the language and thought scientists encounter difficulties. Free use is made of the analogy throughout the book, may seem incongruous. And, for your benefit, it is best to do here for an explanation as complete as possible and advance a frank recognition of the shortcomings of this method. Two roads
man has to study the universe. The first is by induction: it examines the phenomenon, which classifies and then tries to infer those laws and principles. This is the most commonly used method in science, the second is by implication: having received or disclosed or discovered certain general laws and principles, attempts to infer the application of those laws to special studies and life. This is the method generally used by religion. The first begins with "facts" and seek to build up "laws." The second begins with "laws" and tries to descend to the "facts."
These two methods, in fact, relate to the work of two different human functions. The first is the method of ordinary logical mind, which is permanently at our disposal. The second is derived from a potential function of man, which usually is inactive due to lack of energy nerve of sufficient intensity and we can call a higher mental function. This feature, on the rare occasions that acts reveals man laws in action, go all the phenomenal world as a result of the law. All formulations
true universal laws come from, recent or remote, the work of this superior function somewhere and in any man. At the same time, the application and understanding of the laws revealed in large stretches of time and culture where such disclosure is not it, the man has to rely on the ordinary logical mind.
This fact is recognized even today in scientific thinking. In its "Nature of the Universe" (Nature of the Universe) (1950), Fred Hoyle writes: "The procedure in all branches of physical science, is the theory of Newtonian gravity, Maxwell's electromagnetic theory, the theory of Einstein's relativity and the theory of quan tum, is the same root. D comprises two steps. The first is to assume, by some sort of inspiration, a set of mathematical equations. The second is to associate the symbols used in equations with measurable physical quantities. "
The difference between the work of these two minds could not have said it better.
But this is where the large uncertainty arises of human understanding. Because these two minds can never ordinarily understood each other. Between them a very considerable difference in speed. The way it is impossible to communicate a laborer who toils beside the road with a load of firewood and a car that crosses quickly to eighty miles per hour, due to the difference in speed is usually impossible and communication between logical mind and a superior mind, for the same reason. A logical mind the marks left by the higher mind seem arbitrary, superstitious, illogical, unproven. For the higher mind, the work of the logical mind seem heavy, unnecessary, and forgotten the fundamental issue So
ordinary remedied this difficulty maintaining separate these two methods, which are given different names and different action areas. The religious books or those of higher mathematics, dealing with laws and principles, refrain from using the inductive method. The science, dealing with accumulations of facts observed, presumably refrain laws in advance. And how are people who write and read different books in one form or another class, or the same people read both kinds but quite separate parts of his mind, these two methods are arranged to be together without too much friction between them.
But in this book are used simultaneously both methods. Certain great principles and laws of the universe, which found expression in different countries and all ages, and from time to time, are rediscovered by individual men through the work of a higher role momentary receive free credit. Of these deductions are made down to the phenomenal world usually accessible to us, primarily through the analog method. At the same time an attempt is made to study and classify the events and phenomena that surround us and, by inference, so that sort of lead in the ratings rise to the abstract laws that descend, in turn, from above.
In fact, by above reason, which derives from the various functions in widely different speeds, never found the two methods. Among the allowable deductions from general laws and the permissible inference of fact, there is always an invisible area, where both should and must unite, but in which such a union and goes on forever without being unproved.
For these reasons, the author is prepared to admit that the plan of this book that attempts to reconcile the two methods, is impossible. Fully realize that an attempt of its kind in inevitably becomes a kind of sleight of hand, almost a trap. And also realize that this juggling tricks no form a professional scientist, exclusively linked to the logical method.
At the same time is satisfied, first, that the science of today, without principles, is moving towards speculation and increasingly obtuse materialism, and, second, that religious or philosophical principles, without coordinating with scientific knowledge that characterizes our age can muster for today only a minority interest. This conviction persuades him to take the risk. Those who use the logical method exclusively, never be satisfied with the arguments provided, which, admittedly, suffer from logical gaps and blemishes. On the other hand, for those willing to accept both methods, we hope to present sufficient evidence to make it possible for each player tries to bridge the gap between the world of facts-the quotidian and the great laws - for himself. Task
not it can ever be in a book either, nor would the largest number of events or greater amount of c cough, usually available to science whether present or future, which could make it possible. Plus, with the help and effort can be made for each individual to his own satisfaction.
Meanwhile, for the common man interested in their own destiny but not especially in science, we can say only, with closer examination, you may find that this book is not as 'scientific' as at first sight. Scientific language is the fashion, is now mandatory language and the language of psychology was fashionable thirty years ago, the passionate language fashionable in Elizabethan times and the language of religion was the Fashion in the Middle Ages. When people are induced to buy toothpaste or cigarettes by pseudoscientific arguments and explanations, of course this in any way correspond to the mentality of the time. Then the truth must also be expressed scientifically.
At the same time, does not suggest by this that the language Scientific employee is a disfigurement, a simulation or a fake. The explanation given, so far has been possible to verify them, are correct and correspond to the reality of the facts. What is claimed that the principles used with the same correction could be applied to any other forms of human experience, with results of equal or greater interest. And these principles are important, rather than the sciences to which they are applied.
"A new model of the universe" Introduction, PD Ouspensky
