This book is about reality. It’s about drawing conclusions about our existence based on obvious, yet ignored principles that are fundamental to all the experience we know, including the experience of ourselves. It offers viable clues to understanding the who, what, and why of what mankind is, as well as all that exists.
The goal of science is to arrive at a Unification Theory, where Einstein’s Theory of Relativity can be reconciled with Quantum Physics, thus arriving at the answers to and explanations for the origins and function of all things that exist.
Religion seeks the same goal, but in terms of an intelligent Creator as the answer to and explanation for all that exists. So far Science and Religion cannot be reconciled with each other because of their inherent fundamental principles; Science’s cause and effect yielding predictability, and Religion’s faith in the unseen and unknown. Despite such opposite approaches to the discovery of life and all experience, reconciliation of Religion and Science, and all philosophies is possible. There is in fact knowledge we are aware of that can offer fundamental, absolute understanding that can explain and answer all questions. This is the perspective presented here.
It is not intended that this work should be viewed as an authoritative account of the concepts presented, but instead a challenge to each reader to put aside their preconceived notions about what each believes to be true about existence, and be open to at least comprehending what follows. In fact, there would be no other way to understand this book.
It is often said fact can be stranger than fiction, and that is especially true here. Yet the fundamentals we are about to review are established by Science and Religion and we each have the direct evidence of them. The purpose of this book is about its message, not its messenger. This author therefore has chosen to remain anonymous.
PART I: WHAT IT SEEMS
Reology: The overview of all experience and existence in terms of what is the ultimate fundamental ingredient of that experience and existence.
The Law of Reology: Conviction always precedes experience.
Who are we? What are we, and why are we here? What is the point and purpose to this life we each lead? These are questions we all ponder from time to time, especially when our lives are not going as we wish, and when events around us seem to indicate there is a futility to this existence that insures that, if not everyone, then at least most of us must suffer and experience aspects of life both repulsive and undesirable.
What about the inhumanity we display to each other, whether an obscene gesture to let another know we are displeased with something they’ve said or done to wholesale oppression of another race or culture. Why? With all the beauty and wonder in this world, with all the kind and loving behavior we are capable of and manage to exhibit, how do we also get so focused on hate, depression, destruction, and inhumanity? Why does it seem some of us consistently get the short end of the stick, while others seem to have everything go their way, whether they deserve it or not? Perhaps it is because we don’t fully realize what actually causes our experience. The Law of Reology offers us a clue, an insight to this very dilemma.
Conventionally accepted thinking would take an exception to this Law of Reology, since it is believed that convictions are not formed until after they are first experienced. Think of any conviction you hold. Did it become your belief before or after the experience of that conviction? It seems obvious that before you knew something for a “fact”, you first had to experience it, even if that experience was simply hearing it from another person.
The first time you ever burned yourself on the stove wasn't because you conceived the conviction that stoves could burn, or you would never have been burned to begin with. When Dr. Fleming discovered penicillin, he didn’t first decide that penicillin existed and that it would cure bacterial infection, and then go about finding the stuff. He discovered penicillin by accident, after which he realized it killed bacteria. We believe that every fact that we know came about through discovery, whether by intention or accident. Trial and error, the effect and its result; these are the means from which we believe we know all we do, regardless of whether it pertains to science or a better recipe for apple pie.
So how can someone be so mindless as to think up a Law of Reology that says existence occurs exactly the opposite of what all our senses tell us is real; that first you must have the conviction about a thing before it can have identity as experience in physical perception?
Presuming that the body of humankind has blinded itself to this Law of Reology, if for no other reason than just to be able to continue this book, how is it possible that life could proceed in a way that seems to flow with a consistency and predictability based on convictions that may be totally wrong?
Essentially, we go about our lives dealing with those events that arise on a daily basis. Some we overcome, while we feel dominated by others, and adjust ourselves accordingly to get by. We make life work, and life makes us work, and everything is what it is. Yet, what is it we actually do? Events occur, and we react. Our behavior seems always to be in response to some experience arising around us, whether from ourselves, others of our kind, or from elements of nature. While we consider ourselves to be creatures of action, our actions are really reactions to our desires, needs, imaginations, and to the influences we perceive around us.
This may first appear as a mute point, but reologically it is important, for in terms of what we think is our essential nature, we are responders to our existence. We are preoccupied with focusing on our experiences, as opposed to focusing on the actual source of those experiences. Even our actions are just reactions to whatever motivated us to take action in the first place. Something happens in our life, and if we don’t like it, we try to discover how it came about, so we can eliminate its effect or at least avoid its reoccurrence in the future. We do the same for pleasurable experience to insure its recurrence.
But how good are we at actually accomplishing this? Who has never made the same mistake twice? Most of us seem to meet the same old challenges over and over. It is the source of the phrase that refers to history repeating itself.
Despite what we believe are our most earnest attempts to discover the source or cause of our experience, we actually limit ourselves to dealing with its results. This indicates there is an illusionary aspect to existence. It makes us think the origin of our experience is somewhere other than where it truly resides. If we attempt to change experience, yet only wind up re-experiencing what we desired to change, we can't be addressing the cause, only the result.
While we are speaking in only the most general of terms here at this point, each of you have more than one experience that continues to repeat itself, despite all your efforts to change them. Fortunately, we all also have been successful in eliminating some of the experience we have found displeasing. The same applies to desirable experience; we’ve been unsuccessful in duplicating good events, and have been successful re-experiencing others. The problem is we are far less successful at eliminating the undesirable and duplicating the desirable. If this were not true, the world and all of us who occupy it would be far happier than we presently are, and that would manifest itself in far less conflict and suffering in this world.
Why then are we able to achieve some results, yet not others? As reasoning creatures, that is, life forms with the ability to think and conclude and manipulate our reality, we operate on certain generally accepted ideas. We call these ideas facts. We tend to associate with those who are like minded, and avoid those whose views differ. The differences between our ideologies and cultures are extremely varied and diverse while from individual to individual there is never any duplicity. We wind up then with, not a uniform concept of existence, but rather many unique concepts all converging on and influencing each other, and all subject to individual interpretation.
With all these diverse ideologies, and concepts of them, it shouldn't be difficult to understand how humankind can be blinded to the true nature of reality's source. Each culture and each ideological viewpoint, and each individual, thinks their convictions are the ones that are correct, and understandably so. But this can only result in conflict, between cultures, nations, groups, and individuals.
Despite this, at the same time there are some basic assumptions or convictions upon which we all agree. For example, we all know we are physical creatures performing physical endeavors, in a physical universe, regardless of whatever other ideas we may have. From these basic convictions about being physical, we also support other universally accepted basic convictions about ourselves and this universe we live in. We have to eat to live. We have to breathe. We all have needs, wants, and desires. We are able to exist within physical existence, unassisted, only within limited ranges of temperature, climatic, and other environmental conditions. We all wish to be loved. We all seek to be happy by our own individual definitions of what happiness is. We all perceive our world through one or more of our five physical senses. We are all subject to what are referred to as the laws of nature and its forces of gravity, electro-magnetism, and the strong and weak forces within the structure of matter. These are all some of the seemingly basic traits we all share, despite the great diversity between individuals and cultures and ideological beliefs.
If these basic traits were absolute, ultimate facts and conditions of existence, there would be no exceptions to them and we would know the true makeup of everything that exists. Exceptions abound however.
For example, there are many instances of people who have literally died, that is stopped breathing and having a heart beat for periods far longer then our bodies can survive, yet came back to life. There is no scientific or rational explanation for these occurrences, yet they have, and continue to occur. If we each were to grab hold of a red hot metal rod, we are going to be burned, with a handful of blisters to prove it. How can this same thing occur by someone grabbing a pencil at room temperature, while under hypnosis, and getting burned simply because the hypnotist said it was a hot metal rod, and produce physical burn symptoms to boot? Then, upon the further suggestion that it is only a pencil and not the hot metal rod, lose all the burn effects. How can anyone under hypnosis react to suggestions as if they were real experience, when instead they are only the suggestions of the hypnotist? Under hypnosis, people react to the suggestions given them, within reason, as if these suggestions were in fact their real experience at that moment.
Nor is this phenomenon confined to hypnosis as we understand it. We fill mental institutions with people who constantly react to a reality that is to them the only experience there is; we, the majority, simply do not share the reality they see. I guess we can say such people are permanently hypnotized, for this is how it appears. We cannot perceive the world the way they do, and they cannot perceive ours as we do, which is why we contain them, for otherwise they could be a danger to themselves or to others. With some of the things we do, they might be able to say the same about us.
That there are those who march to the beat of a radically different drummer then most of the rest of us in no way diminishes the fact that these people have their own valid version of reality. We just don’t understand it.
The exceptions to "basic" reality are not limited to human survivability or perception either. There are volumes of books and numerous T.V. productions about the strange or paranormal experiences of this existence that are contradictory to the laws of nature we live by. These describe unexplainable occurrences that have been experienced as real events
There must still be then, a more absolute basis to existence than those we now pursue and study. Only when we have an understanding that explains and allows for all of physical existence’s events and experiences, can we have absolute truth. The ultimate ingredient of physical being has to be true for all that is physical, without exception and without contradiction, yet acknowledges and allows for all the contradictions and exceptions we now perceive. What is ultimate or absolute, by definition, cannot be conditional.
What is most absolute to our physical existence then is that we, and all things physical, are composed of matter and energy in the mediums of space and time. What is most absolute to our creature hood is that we all share the ability to perceive this matter and energy in space and time and both identify it and create with it. This then is Reology; defining the three grand illusions we know of as physical perception and conception, matter and energy, and space and time. The evidence that these are in fact illusions is quite available to us. That evidence is what follows.