“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Give us a moment… The consciousness that you have, as generally described in psychology, is in a strange fashion like the bright shiny skin of a fruit — but with no fruit inside; a consciousness with a shiny surface that responds to sun or rain or temperature, and to its surroundings; but for all of that a psychological fruit that has no pulp or pits, but contains at its heart a vacancy. In those terms you experience only one half of your consciousness: the physically-attuned portion. Fruit trees have roots, but you assign no ground of being to this consciousness.

Jung’s collective unconscious was an attempt to give your world its psychological roots, but Jung¹ could not perceive the clarity, organization, and deeper context in which that collective unconscious has its own existence. Reality as Framework 2 is organized in a different fashion than it is in the Framework 1 world, and the processes of reasoning are far quicker. In Framework 1 the reasoning processes work largely by deduction, and they must constantly check their own results against the seemingly concrete experience of physical events. The reasoning of the inner ego is involved with the creative invention of those experiences. It is involved with events in a context of a different kind, for it deals intimately with probabilities.

I doubt if physicists in the 1920s were concerned about the psychological activity of atoms, molecules, or particles, although it seems that Heisenberg came close to Seth’s idea when he considered the free behavior of an electron emitted by a light ray. Albert Einstein, whose own work was rooted in strict causality, found a notion like the free will of an electron untenable, even though much earlier (in 1905) he had laid the foundation for quantum mechanics in his special theory of relativity.