“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(As far as I can discover, science pays very little attention to any philosophical questions about why we’re here, even while most definitely telling us what’s true or not true. And while postulating that life is basically meaningless or goal-less [DNA doesn’t care what its host looks like, for instance], science fights awfully hard to convince everyone that it’s right — thus attaching the most rigid kind of meaning or direction to its professional views! [If I were very cynical, I’d add here that to Jane and me it often seems that science wants only what science believes.] At the same time, in mathematical and biological detail much too complicated to go into here, the author of many a scientific work in favor of evolution has ended up by undermining, unwittingly, I’m sure, the very themes he so devoutly believes in. I’ve hinted at some of those paradoxes in certain notes [mainly 5 through 8] for this appendix.

22. A note added later: I inserted “counterparts” here because in Section 5 of this volume Seth devotes portions of several sessions to his counterpart concept: “Quite literally, you live more than one life at a time” (his emphasis). Among others, see Session 721, here quoted, with its Appendix 21. As the reader studies those particular sessions, he or she will quickly see how counterpart ideas fit in with the subject matter of Appendix 12.

(The first quotes I’ve put together, then, are from the 44th session for April 15, 1964. In that session Seth gave us his interpretations of some of the basic laws or attributes of the inner universe, but it will be quickly seen that he was really discussing space and time,² as those qualities are perceived in his reality and in ours. In our world, of course, space and time form the environment in which conventional ideas of evolution exist. For that matter, all of the material in this appendix shows the interrelationship between our ideas of serial time and Seth’s simultaneous time. Connected here also is the philosophical concept known as “naïve realism,” which will be discussed briefly later.

You may see what we are getting at here. Our third law is spontaneity, and despite all appearances of beginning and end, of death and decay, all consciousnesses exist in the spacious present, in a spontaneous manner, in simultaneous harmony; and yet within the spacious present there is also durability.

I would like to make an aside here: In certain terms, you cannot destroy life by a nuclear disaster. [...]

3. A note added five months later: Diagram 11 in Chapter 19 of Jane’s Adventures is relevant to Seth’s material here. [...]

5. Seth’s statement here reminded me of my question about the consciousness of our species, as noted at the end of Session 699, in Volume 1.