“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

In one respect, and in quite a legitimate and objective manner, all thoughts are also projections. They leave you in an objective actual manner, and exert an objective effect. [...]

[...] The thoughts themselves, also psychic realities, were projected outward, changing and affecting the physical environment in direct and objective terms. [...]

“Revelation, Obedience, and Objectivity”—that is the heading for this evening’s discussion.

[...] Science on the other hand, constantly questions, and is so objectively occupied that the subjective world is entirely beyond its realm.

The beginnings of science were apparent before its full blossoming—and in a way it is important because of its strict interpretation of objectivity, exaggerated though it may be.

[...] They were untinged by objectivity. [...]

[...] I am saying that all exterior events, including your own bodies with their insides, all objects, all physical materializations, are the outside structures of inside ones that are composed of interior sound and invisible light, interwoven in electromagnetic patterns.

(10:28.) Beneath temporal perception, then, each object and event exists in these terms, in patterns that interact with each other. [...]

(Pause.) On the interior level of which I have been speaking, all happenings and objects are connected. [...]

[...] Because you cannot see them, it may seem to you that these qualities are not as real, say, as an object. [...]

[...] They form pseudo-objects from your viewpoint. [...] Only upon awakening do the dream objects seem not-real, or imaginary. [...] From your point of view these are alternate passageways, but in the dream state they allow you to perceive as physical matter objects that in the waking state would not be observable.

[...] This is precisely why they form the basis for dream reality, semicolon; why objects in a dream can appear and disappear.

Now: Many of these invisible particles (CU’s) can be in more than one place at a time — a fact that quite confounds the physically tuned brain perceiving a world in which objects stay where they are supposed to be.

(10:51.) There are psychic structures quite as effective as physical ones, and these underlie the reality of your objective world. [...]

[...] I was of course involved with the test object, and my initials are R.B., but this can apply to any test object. [...]

[...] I took care to slip the wet label in a coat pocket when neither Jane or the Gallaghers were looking, and as it developed Jane had no idea of the test object for the session.

[...] She was not nervous in giving the data on Dr. Instream, or on our own test object. [...]

[...] The house can be our own, the several people of course Jane and me and Bill and Peggy Gallagher; the Gallaghers were with us Saturday night when I picked the label as a test object.

It is even possible for the physical individual to train himself to change the nature of his own perception of such objects. [...] To a very large degree, the portion of any reality that you can perceive is determined largely not by the given, so-called real object itself, but from the perspective, and because of, the senses with which you perceive it.

Since perceiving an action is itself an action, the perceiving must because of its nature to some extent distort the object of perception.

[...] The nature of our object, our automobile for example, is indeed largely determined by those who perceive it, for it is different things in reality, and not one thing. [...]

Within your field the automobile is perceived mainly as a physical object. [...]

[...] Now the fish impression mentioned earlier may also be connected with the symbols on this object. The symbols on the object seem to represent creatures of the sea, land and air.

The object does not belong to Dr. Instream. [...] This is not the object now, but a separate impression. [...]

Now our object is something small and round, quite like a button but with symbols on it, and larger than a button. [...]

[...] In any case at one time the object was between papers.

It goes without saying that dream images certainly have form to the dreamer, even as physical objects have form. [...] These forms do not take up space in the way that physical objects do. [...] They are constructed more immediately and directly and spontaneously than are physical objects.

Dream images are indeed, in density, between the tangible nature of physical objects and the intangible reality that is entirely independent of physical matter. [...]

One is that because objects just originate in man’s imagination anyway, there’s always a strong connection between objects and man’s dreams. They act as symbols of inner reality, so it’s only natural that whether he’s aware of it or not, man perceives objects in such a fashion that they also stand for symbols that first originate in his dreams.

This also has to do with large events, that you might for convenience’s sake think of for now as psychological objects — that is, events seen and recognized by large numbers of people in the same way that objects are.

[...] Their “truth” is to be found by studying the objective world, the world of objects, including animals and stars, galaxies and mice — but by viewing these objects as if they are themselves without intrinsic value, as if their existences have no meaning (intently).

(Pause.) The scientists have long stood on the side of “intelligence and reason,” logical thought, and objectivity. [...]

(10:17.) How did such scientific gentlemen, with all of their precise paraphernalia, with all of their objective and reasonable viewpoints, end up with a nuclear plant that ran askew, that threatened present and future life? [...]

[...] There is a small object in this cave, but 15 feet approximately beneath to the left are many plants, with strange shaped blossoms; and in the roots, intertwined with the roots of these plants, are some objects of interest to you.

[...] She seemed to try to supplement her verbal descriptions by outlining objects with her hands, as though she was seeing things somewhat difficult to put into words specifically enough. [...]

[...] The month of May is a good one, but not in connection with these objects. [...]

Objects hidden then are easier to see. [...]

In daily language, objects have certain names. Obviously the names are not the objects, but symbols for them. [...]

[...] The psyche dwells in a reality so different from the world you usually recognize that there good and evil, as you think of them, are also seen to be as operationally or relatively true as the difference between the perceiver and the object perceived.

[...] It presupposes a far greater freedom in which perception is not dependent upon space or time, a reality in which objects appear or are dismissed with equal ease, a subjective framework in which the individual freely expresses what he or she will in the most direct of fashions, yet without physical contact in usual terms.

[...] Tonight I asked Jane if Seth would discuss the Instream object that ordinarily would have been named Monday.

[...] The object was composed of four squares. [...]

The object itself had something to do with a box, or box shape, that was a container. [...]

[...] This is the 68th Dr. Instream experiment.) Tonight’s object is shaped like an arrow or sword, but smaller, and seems to be either dull, or sharp on one side and dull on the other, of a dull gold color, and with a rounded top.

(For the test object I picked a black and white photograph of a dog Jane had owned when I married her. [...]

(Pause at 10:09.) Impressions again, perhaps a round object in his hand. [...]

[...] Perhaps the round object in his hands has something to do with lights, as a bulb. [...]

[...] Joseph’s initials have to do with it, but it is not an object with which he has great personal concern; though there may be a wallet connection, I doubt it.

Your father always tried to fix objects that were broken. To some extent you carried this with you, so that objects or figures not painted correctly, in those terms, should be fixed. [...]

[...] (True.) This sort of a painting however, that uses figures or objects, but not in representational form, bothers you, while you are strongly attracted in sketches of the same nature. [...]

[...] (Pause.) You trust the extrerior sense of order you perceive in objects, and when they are distorted this brings a sense of alarm—again, in paintings, not sketches.

[...] To portray an object faithfully represented a kind of truth to you. [...]

It should be clearly understood that the physical system with its physical objects are, the objects are, composed from the electromagnetic realities behind them.

All of these realities are not physically materialized, and some are materialized physically to a stronger or weaker degree than, say, an object regularly accepted as physical.

[...] The planets and the stars are materialized more fully than a chair, or similar physical objects. [...]

[...] I have used the candle twice merely to show Ruburt that I could affect independent objects, and to show you that I could.

[...] Whereas here, there is a time lag between the time we think of something and it results in a created action or object. In the time lag on this plane, there are other thoughts, projections on the same idea or object; Seth declined to go into their effects on the final idea or object until a later time.

[...] [Tom:] “My interpretation of what he said is that (1) good health is a natural part of ourselves, and so we should naturally desire it, and (2) good health in itself is not the objective at all. [...]

[...] Whereas here, there is a time lag between the time we think of something and it results in a created action or object. In the time lag on this plane, there are other thoughts, projections on the same idea or object; Seth declined to go into their effects on the final idea or object until a later time. [...]

[...] [Theodore:] “My interpretation of what he said is that (1) good health is a natural part of ourselves, and so we should naturally desire it, and (2) good health in itself is not the objective at all. [...]

[...] The free flow of his experience goes rather easily, and incidentally, safely and exuberantly from what you think of as objective and subjective experience, and his creative gifts then make subjective knowledge objective in terms of art.

He has been afraid to use his abilities freely, and therefore set up physical conditions that remind him constantly of his body and objective physical life, for fear that he will go too far beyond it. [...]

[...] He has been afraid of letting himself go and utilizing his energies fully, not objectively but subjectively.

[...] It is not viewed—this was a poor term—as much as it was experienced, for no portion of the personality can be viewed as an object.

The ego is the only part of the self that regards physical objects as anything but symbols. [...]

(Rough copy of the newspaper article used as the envelope object, in the 77th experiment in the 302nd session, for November 21,1966.)