TAARP - Appendix E -
Letter to the Miami Valley Astronomical Society
DISCLAIMER: The addresses and phone numbers in this document are no longer valid.
| November 14, 1994 | |
| To: |
The Miami Valley Astronomical Society (MVAS), Dayton, Ohio Dr. Jim Grigsby, Prof. of Physics & Astronomy at Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio Select Administrative and Faculty Members of Various Institutions of Higher Learning Select Individuals Select Professional Journals |
| From: |
Fred E. Howard III 2124 Stocker Dr., Apt. 3 Kettering, OH 45429 (513) 298-6719 |
| Subject: | Science and Mysticism |
| Ref: | Professor Grigsby's Lecture at the MVAS 11 Nov 94 General Meeting Concerning the Scientific Method. He Presented His Work on the Formulation of Mathematical Models for the Chemical Composition of Certain Star Types as an Example of the Scientific Method. |
1. At the 11 Nov 94 MVAS General Meeting, three people challenged my comments on the relationship between Eastern Mysticism and the central concepts of some of the most renown modem Physicists and Mathematicians. One of these people was Professor Grigsby. The other two are members of the MVAS.
2. I now challenge these three individuals to a $3,000 debate. I will put $3,000 in the pot and each of them will put $1,000 in the pot. I will debate the three of them at the same time in front of the MVAS. The MVAS, by majority vote, will then decide who is the winner of the debate. Either I win, and I take the $6,000 pot, or they win and they take the $6,000 pot.
3. Here is exactly what we will debate:
I will argue the affirmative case for a. through c., and the other three gentlemen will argue the negative case.
4. Here is how all of this arose. At the 11 Nov 84 General Meeting, Professor Grigsby said that science was in ill repute amongst the Liberal Arts people. I asked why. He said something in response, and then I countered by alluding to the fact that Fritjof Capra in "The Tao of Physics" and Fred Alan Wolf in "The Dreaming Universe" demonstrate close parallels between Eastern Mysticism and modern concepts in Physics/Mathematics. Professor Grigsby then countered with something to the effect that Mysticism and Science have nothing to do with each other.
At this time, one of the other gentlemen that I am challenging to debate chimed in by saying (in a glib, arrogant, mocking tone of voice) that Capra never said what I claimed he said in his book and that he, Capra, had written something subsequent to "The Tao of Physics" in which he addressed the fact that many people had misunderstood "The Tao of Physics" in the same sense that I had. Another gentlemen (who I am not challenging to debate) added his two cents worth by saying that Capra was a newspaper man. This is incorrect. I think the latter gentlemen was referring to Arthur Koestler, who indeed was a newspaper man, and who has written on the subject Capra discussed in "The Tao of Physics".
At the end of the General Meeting, I had a very short talk with Professor Grigsby. I asked him how much he had studied about Mysticism. He said that he had not studied it at all, and that it did not interest him in the least. I then asked him how he could reach a scientific conclusion about something of which he knew nothing. I cannot remember exactly what he said at this time, but it reminded me of the kinds of things Christian Fundamentalists say when you try to have an intelligent conversation with them about evolution. Also, Professor Grigsby was starting to get emotional just like the Christian Fundamentalists do when their rational intellect is brought into stark contact with absurdities that they have cautiously stashed away in their unconscious, and which have consequently festered into putrid cesspools. It would be very beneficial to mankind if the horrendous quantity of psychic overhead that is required for their minds to keep the cesspools separated from the analytical intellects could be freed up for productive work.
Another member of the MVAS, who had been listening to Professor Grigsby and me talk, and who is one of the three people that I am challenging to debate, said that the thing that really counts is that Science has done such an outstanding job for so long without any help from Mysticism.
Professor Grigsby and the Two Gentlemen, who I am challenging to a debate, are not only dead nuts wrong, but they are being completely unscientific in the sense that they are reaching hard decisions on an issue they are completely ignorant about.
Science is in disrepute amongst the Liberal Arts people exactly and expressly because of close-minded, bigoted, and hypocritical "Scientists" like Professor Grigsby and the "Two Gentlemen", who only apply scientific reasoning to subjects they are interested in and irrationally criticize subjects that they are ignorant of, uninterested in, and/or have a virulent and instinctual distaste for.
5. I predict that Professor Grigsby and the Two Gentlemen will not accept my challenge. They will have every excuse imaginable, but what will really lie at the roots of their refusal is that, after they read this letter, they will know that they will be up against someone who is both a Scientist and a student of Mysticism. I also predict that none of them will even be man enough (or should I say Scientist enough) to respond to this letter in any form whatsoever. (By the way, I have a BS in Physics from the Georgia Institute of Technology. I have been an Aerospace professional for 20 years working in electronic countermeasures and pattern recognition. I had the great, good gift to be able to study Comparative Religion, Magick, Mysticism, Jungian Psychology, and Mythology under the guidance of Mr. Cecil Gwinn, who was one of the most creative Physicists ever to be employed by the Air Force Avionics Laboratory. He was a leader in the early years of Bionics Research at Wright-Patterson AFB. He was a colleague of Jack Steele, who coined the word "Bionics", which comes from "BION" = Life and "IC" = Like.)
6. The following are quotations from the cover and the text of Capra's "The Tao of Physics" - subtitled "An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism". From the back cover:
"The purpose of this book is to explore this relationship between the concepts of modern physics and the basic ideas in the philosophical and religious traditions of the Far East. We shall see how the two foundations of twentieth-century physics--quantum theory and relativity theory--both force us to see the world very much in the way a Hindu, Buddhist, or Taoist sees it, and how this similarity strengthens when we look at the recent attempts to combine these two theories in order to describe the phenomena of the submicroscopic world: the properties and interactions of the subatomic particles of which all matter is made. Here the parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism are most striking, and we shall often encounter statements where it is almost impossible to say whether they have been made by physicists or Eastern mystics."
"When I refer to 'Eastern Mysticism', I mean the religious philosophies of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Although these comprise a vast number of subtly interwoven spiritual disciplines and philosophical systems, the basic features of their world view are the same. This view is not limited to the East, but can be found to some degree in all mystically oriented philosophies. The argument of this book could, therefore, be phrased more generally by saying that modern physics leads us to a view of the world which is very similar to the views held by mystics of all ages and traditions. Mystical traditions are present in all religions and mystical elements can be found in many schools of Western Philosophy. The parallels to modern physics appear not only in the Vedas of Hinduism, in the I Ching, or in the Buddhist sutras, but also in the fragments of Heraclitus, in the Sufism of Ibn Arabi, or in the teachings of the Yaqui sorcerer, Don Juan. The difference between Eastern and Western mysticism is that mystical schools have always played a marginal role in the West, whereas they constitute the mainstream of Eastern philosophical and religious thought. I shall, therefore, for the sake of simplicity, talk about the 'Eastern world view' and shall only occasionally mention other sources of mystical thought."
Page 327 ... "I would now like to turn to the new paradigm in science and discuss its main characteristics. I have recently tried to identify a set of criteria for new-paradigm thinking in science. I suggest six criteria; the first two refer to our view of nature, the other four to our epistemology. I believe that these six criteria are common characteristics of newparadigm thinking in all the sciences, but since this is an afterword to 'The Tao of Physics', I shall illustrate them with examples from physics, and I shall also briefly mention how they are reflected in Eastern mystical traditions."
"Before I discuss the six criteria I would like to acknowledge with deep gratitude my debt to two outstanding physicists who have been my major sources of inspiration and have decisively influenced my scientific thinking: Werner Heisenberg and Geoffrey Chew. Heisenberg's book 'Physics and Philosophy', his classic account of the history and philosophy of quantum physics, exerted an enormous influence on me when I first read it as a young student. The book has remained my companion during my studies and my work as a physicist, and today I can see that it was Heisenberg who planted the seed of 'The Tao of Physics'. I was fortunate to meet Heisenberg in the early seventies. I had several long discussions with him and when I finished 'The Tao of Physics' I went through the manuscript with him, chapter by chapter. It was Heisenberg's personal support and inspiration that carried me through those difficult years, when I went out on a limb to present a radically new idea."
"Geoffrey Chew belongs to a different generation than Heisenberg and the other great founders of quantum physics and I have no doubt that future historians of science will judge his contribution to twentieth-century physics as significant as theirs. While Einstein revolutionized scientific thought with his theory of relativity, and Bohr and Heisenberg, with their interpretation of quantum mechanics, introduced changes so radical that even Einstein refused to accept them, Chew has made the third revolutionary step in twentieth-century physics. His bootstrap theory of particles unifies quantum mechanics and relativity theory into a theory that represents a radical break with the entire Western approach to fundamental science."
"I have been fascinated by Chew's theory and philosophy of science ever since I met him about twenty years ago, and I have had the great privilege of a close association and continual interchange of ideas with him. Our regular discussions have been a source of continuing inspiration for me and have decisively shaped my entire outlook on science."
7. For in-depth, scientific, and detailed information on the interminable relationship between Science, Magick, and Mysticism (Eastern and Western), see: "Magick In Theory and Practice" and "The Book of Thoth" by Aleister Crowley. Also, see "Psychology and Alchemy" and "Alchemical Studies" by Carl Jung. The student who is really interested in pursuing a comprehensive study of the totality of the Universe should also read such works as:
Note: Aleister Crowley is to the totality of human knowledge as Albert Einstein is to Physics, Carl Jung is to Psychology, William Shakespeare is to English Literature, Joseph Campbell and James G. Frazer are to Comparative Religion, etc., etc.
8. In closing, let me say that the technical aspect of Dr. Grigsby's lecture was very interesting. He is obviously a very intelligent being with in-depth knowledge of Physics and Astronomy. He delivers a clear, lively, and informative technical lecture. Also let me say that if I have erred in the exact details of what the Professor and the "Two Gentleman" said at the 11 Nov General Meeting, I do apologize, but one thing is indisputable. They challenged me for suggesting a close parallel between Eastern Mysticism and some of the salient thoughts of numerous, modern, world-class Physicists and Mathematicians. In this challenge, their remarks were not only dead wrong, but also were derived unscientifically in that the three of them know very little, if anything at all, about Mysticism, Eastern or Western. In order to regain my dignity vis-a-vis such an august body as the MVAS, I request the aid of the MVAS membership in my attempt to inspire Professor Grigsby and "the Two Gentlemen" to a debate in which the MVAS members will be judge and jury as to who is more scientific from a total perspective, me or Professor Grigsby and the "Two Gentlemen" . I am very good at spotting the bigoted "Scientist" because I used to be one until Mr. Cecil Gwinn opened my eyes. We must learn to appreciate the fact that we have a dual hemispherical brain. The bigoted "Scientist" is only aware of and interested in the left hemispherical functions related to strict rationality, cause and effect, and mechanistic phenomena. The bigoted "Scientist" must learn how to exercise and appreciate the right hemispherical functions of intuition and artistic flow.
9. "A Fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." - Sir Winston Churchill
(Signed) Fred Howard
