“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

The scientist’s (Truzzi’s) letter had some good results, in crystallizing your attitudes in Ruburt’s poetry, and in passages for his book. It also made him think, however, that he was not changing the world in any way that mattered in any important degree—that those in authority did not even read them, and that even my latest work (Mass Reality) would make no inroads. He did not want book dictation on the one hand, for that reason. On the other hand, of course, he did. We will of course finish our book in our usual style.

When children are taught science, there is no criticism allowed. They are told “this is how things are.” Science’s reasons are given as the only true statements of reality, with which no student is expected to quarrel. Any strong intellectual explorations of counter-versions of reality have appeared in science fiction, for example. Here scientists, many being science-fiction buffs, can safely channel their own intellectual questioning into a safe form. They can say “This is after all merely imaginative, and not to be taken seriously.”

(9:36.) This is the reason why some scientists who either write or read science fiction, are the most incensed over any suggestion that some such ideas represent a quite valid alternate conception of reality. In a fashion, at least in your time, science has as much to fear from the free intellect as religion does, and (with irony) any strong combination of intellectual and intuitional abilities is not tailor-made to bring you great friends from either category.

(Pause.) Our books are read also more often that it seems, for they are borrowed from others, and from libraries, by people who would not buy them in a store—not for financial reasons necessarily. The letter in any case made him think in terms of responsibility again, but this session should set him right.