“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

[...] The change of thoughts, feelings and beliefs into physical, objectively perceived phenomena is as natural as water changing into ice, for example, or a caterpillar turning into a butterfly. [...]

[...] you will experience them as the objective manifestation of circumstances, conditions, and events; what you write on the inside, you experience on the outside.”

(Whatever thoughts, beliefs, opinions, theories or dogma you write, engrave or impress on your subconscious mind—you will experience them as the objective manifestation of circumstances, conditions and events; what you write on the inside, you experience on the outside. [...]

[...] You may perceive them instead merely as undefined and undefinable veiled qualities of thought, ever-elusive and unformed, or as sacred physical portions of the earth, or as charged physical objects. [...]

[...] The existence of physical objects could be a highly debatable subject in other realities than your own, for example. [...]

They can often be recognized as attitudes, however, before they are seen objectively as beliefs. [...]

[...] Objective answers given to people are not true answers. [...]

[...] She wanted a clear and concise interpretation devoid of emotion, feeling there was little use in acting whatever the impressions said; she thought more objective data could be obtained through Seth. [...]

[...] These came as she wished however, quite calmly and objectively, and it was easy for me to make notes.

[...] The test object, sealed in the usual double envelopes, was the insurance slip for the manuscript of Jane’s ESP book, dated August 30,1965. [...]

Many small objects on display, and a chest of large proportions. [...]

[...] I have no objection now to the fact that you check the results of the envelope tests immediately afterward; but only when this occurs after the Instream material.

[...] More than anything else, I was interested in seeing if Jane could distinguish that the test involved two objects. [...]

[...] There is not one objective dream that is merely perceived in various fashions. [...]

[...] My personal idea is that “The number two” refers to the fact that two items comprise the test object. [...]

I believe it is apparent in our own tests, incidentally, that some preciseness is beginning to show through, for in the general associations connected with the object, identifying points concerning the specific object now appear.

[...] For the test object I used the front of an envelope addressed to Jane and me by my mother. [...]

[...] An assortment of objects or shapes.

(See the tracing of the test object on page 140. [...]

[...] It is the inner self, here termed the inner ego, that organizes, initiates, projects, and controls the EE (electromagnetic energy) units of which we have been speaking, transforming energy into objects, into matter.

[...] These, then, form physical objects, physical matter. [...]

Dream objects are secondary constructions, but very valid ones. [...]

(Tracings of the postcard used as object in the 69th envelope experiment, for September 5,1966, in the 283rd session.)

As mentioned before (in Session 828), early man had such an identification of subjective and objective realities. [...] To develop that kind of structure necessitated a division between subjective and objective worlds. [...]

The chair is neither durable nor continuous, and its reality is limited to the recognition which you give it as an object.

[...] It is sensitive however to panic and fear, and, affecting other glands working with inner subconscious mechanisms, it becomes overly stimulated and causes subconscious mechanisms to actually create, in matter, the object of the fears which have themselves caused the initial overaction.

In line with this, please consider the material already given, concerning the ways in which atoms and molecules form a simple object, such as a chair.

(Copy of the note used as the object in the 83rd envelope experiment, in the 317th session for February 6,1967.

[...] That critical explosion of divine subjectivity into objectivity is always happening, and you are being given life “in each moment” because of the simultaneous nature of that divine subjectivity.

[...] Seth manifests through me, addressing himself to others who feel the impact of his personality, but I can’t see this as they do from the outside, objectively. [...]

[...] Though the objective effects of this phenomenon largely escape me, I’m trying to learn all I can about the subjective aspects involved, for surely no one is in a better position to do so. [...]

[...] This book is about Seth, dreams and “astral projection” — all aspects of a different kind of consciousness than the objective one with which we are usually occupied.

In other words, while most books are written about events that occur in waking reality, this one will be mainly concerned with events that happen precisely when consciousness is turned away from normal objective life. [...]

[...] It was a rectangular object that reminded me of a gadget shown to us once by Jim Beal from NASA that reacted to light and another that reacted to pressure. [...] So did the object I saw now. [...]

By comparing the two couples, therefore, she receives an object lesson both for herself and her husband. [...] The other couple, the probable couple, have also helped you and your friend, though quite unknowingly at conscious levels, by serving as such object lessons.

That Robert Butts did not continue his painting with any purpose, trying to be objective and sensible, lacking the understanding of his parents that you have achieved through sessions. [...]

In dreams you continue to create pseudo-objects; even in your travels into experiences in other fields of reality, you continue to insist upon the paraphernalia of objectivity until it imprisons you, and you cannot see beyond it.

You have been so immersed in physical reality through reincarnations, that even your dreams involve you with objects; and even in your dreams you hardly escape the physical units that you have constructed.

[...] Simply put, naïve realism teaches that our visual and bodily senses reveal to us an external world as it really is — that we “see” actual physical objects, for instance. [...] The perceptual time lag, caused by the limited speed of light, is also involved in objections to naïve realism. [...]

[...] For Darwin and his followers — even those of today, then — nature’s effects gave the appearance of design or plan in the universe without necessitating a belief in a designer or a god; although, as I wrote in Note 7, from the scientific standpoint this belief leaves untouched the question of design in nonliving matter, which is vastly more abundant in the “objective” universe than is living matter, and had to precede that living matter.

[...] Darwin’s objective thinking, then, cut him off from such comprehensions as Seth advocates. [...]

[...] It seems to me that he combines certain aspects of naïve realism with some of the objections to it; see the 625th session for November 1, 1972.)

[...] As long as you believe your environment to be objective and independent of yourself, then to a large extent you feel powerless to change it, to see beyond it, or to imagine other alternatives that may be less apparent. [...]