“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

While this may sound quite sacrilegious scientifically, it is possible to understand the electron’s nature and greater reality by using certain focuses of consciousness: by probing the electron, for example, with a “laser” [beam] of consciousness finely focused and attuned — and more will be said about this later in the book. [...]

Suppose a scientist found a first orange, and used every instrument available to examine it, but refused to feel it, taste it, smell it, or otherwise to become personally involved with it for fear of losing scientific objectivity.

[...] A true doctor cannot be scientifically objective. [...]

1. Once again (as in Note 7 for the last session), I quote Seth from the 45th session: “Any investigation of the basic inner universe, which is the only real universe, must be done as much as possible from a point outside your own distortions … To get outside your own universe, you must travel inward … Your so-called scientific, so-called objective experiments can continue for an eternity, but they will only probe further and further with camouflage [physical] instruments into a camouflage universe … The subconscious, it is true, has elements of its own distortions, but these are easier to escape than the tons of distortive camouflage atmosphere that weigh your scientific experiments down.”

[...] There were men before you who journeyed to the moon, and who brought back data quite as “scientific” and pertinent. [...]

Ruburt’s vocabulary is not an official scientific one. [...]

Science has unfortunately bound up the minds of its own even most original thinkers, for they dare not stray from certain scientific principles. [...] That one sentence is basically (underlined) scientific heresy, and in many circles it is religious heresy as well. [...]

[...] It seems quite scientific to believe in inoculations against such dangerous diseases — and certainly, scientifically, inoculations seem to work: People in your time right now are not plagued by smallpox, for example. [...]

[...] Many of your scientific procedures, including inoculations, of themselves “cause” new diseases. [...]

[...] Jane hopes to use both events, plus some material she wrote on scientific experimentation with animals, in one of her own books.

(My questions had been rearoused because of an article I’d read a few days ago in a scientific journal; in their piece the authors explained that a certain significant percentage of women can develop cervical cancer from contact with a virus carried by the sperm of males who haven’t had vasectomies — or who haven’t been sterilized, in other words. [...]

[...] It is fashionable to say that some scientific laws can be proven at microscopic levels, where, for example, small particles can be accelerated far beyond [their usual states]. [...]

(Pause.) I will explain as best I can, though some of what I say will certainly seem contradictory to scientific knowledge.

(Pause.) In larger terms, there are really only scientific and religious men and women, however, and fields of science and religion would be meaningless without those individuals who believe in their positions. [...]

If you do this, your life will automatically be provided with excitement, natural zest and creativity, and those characteristics will be reflected outward into the social, political, economic, and scientific worlds. [...]

(Through all of our personal activities, Jane and I are intensely conscious of the cultural, scientific, artistic, and economic aspects of the world we’ve chosen to live and work in. [...]

[...] Any of your scientific or religious disciplines could benefit from a study of the dreaming consciousness, for there the basic nature of reality exists as clearly as you can perceive it. [...]

[...] They try to fall back upon religious or scientific or pseudoscientific explanations.⁸

[...] These (intently), activated, would then be picked up by your scientific instruments, and therefore change your ideas in such fields.

4. This material reminds me of Seth in the 681st session in Volume 1: “The deeper explanations, however [in this case of probabilities], demand a further expansion of ideas of consciousness … It is not so much a matter of Ruburt’s vocabulary, incidentally, since even a specialized scientific one would only present these ideas in its own distorted fashion. [...]

If the hassles surrounding TMI have engendered forces of a scientifically oriented consciousness, then, certainly those in Iran have released a very strong religiously oriented consciousness. Religious drives of whatever nature are much more comprehensible to us than scientific ones: I think it quite safe to note that in ordinary terms our species began struggling with religious expression long before it began recording history. [...]

Enjoying the sounds of life in the mysterious nighttime, I intuitively understood that not only did I want to mention in this Preface the feelings Jane and I have about Three Mile Island as a technological and scientific entity, embodying man’s attempts to extract new forms of energy [and yes, consciousness, in our joint opinion] from the far more basic and profound quality Seth calls All That Is; I also knew that I wanted to indicate how the very idea of nuclear energy, as an attribute of a national focus, compared with the situation in the Middle Eastern country of Iran. [...]

[...] Nuclear power can do the same thing with a new scientific force that can be even more devastating if not carefully “controlled” [in our terms]. [...]

The religious and scientific mass consciousnesses released in Iran and the United States respectively reach far beyond their countries of origin, obviously. [...]

I said (in Session 846) that you have religious and scientific cults, and the male-oriented scientific community uses its power in the same way that the male Jehovah used his power in a different arena, to protect his friends and destroy his enemies. [...]

[...] I took it for granted that he wouldn’t consider that we had any scientific evidence, but we did have the nearly identical sketches, and the impressions were correct. “He may not consider this scientific enough,” I said to Rob, “but he has to admit, at the very least, that clairvoyance occurred.”

Usually no one was present at these sessions but Rob and I—hardly a scientific state of affairs. [...]

[...] It was a beautiful compendium of all of the fallacies and distortions and wishing-thinkings concerning the scientific view of evolution.

[...] The same goes for the current theories of “the origin of life” in scientific terms. [...]

[...] Certain scientific treatises often make you believe that the attainment of your adulthood has little purpose, except to insure the further existence of the species through parenthood — when nature is then quite willing to dispense with your services. [...]

3. Seth referred to the latest scientific ideas concerning “selfish genes” — a subject Jane and I had been talking about today. [...]

[...] Jane and I think the idea of such self-centered genetic behavior is much too limited, simple, and “mechanistic,” to use another term that’s currently in scientific vogue. [...]

[...] She was greatly pleased at the results of the test, and so was I. Neither of us regard these tests as scientific but we do consider them a beginning toward scientific tests.

[...] For regardless of my own occasional irascibility with the behavior of your scientific communities, such men seek after truth, and there are few enough involved in that search.

[...] He enjoyed the thought of mediums defying organized religions, and of women in such a position putting scientific establishment investigators to shame. [...]

[...] The ideas of shame are simply new versions of old religious concepts, or of scientific ones: if there is something physically wrong with you, it is either a sign of inner sin or of incompetency in terms of survival of the fittest. [...]

Though this thought-image usually is not seen by others, it is quite possible that in the future scientific instruments may perceive it. [...]

[...] Some more sophisticated scientific instruments than you now have would clearly show not only the existence of these forms, but also vibrations in varying waves of intensity surrounding those physical objects that you do perceive.

[...] Also, as we grew up independently of each other, Jane and I gradually dispensed with conventional scientific ideas that life had occurred by chance; the emotional natures of our creative endeavors led us to question the theory. Now we don’t think it’s true even in ordinary scientific terms.

Now: You cannot prove scientifically that [your] world was created (pause) by a god who set it into motion, but remained outside of its dominion. Nor can you prove scientifically that the creation of the world was the result of a chance occurrence—so you will not be able to prove what I am going to tell you either. [...]

[...] It incorporates many of the features of the big-bang theory, and actually may answer certain questions in a better scientific fashion. [...]

[...] For most scientific materialists only physical matter is real. [...] (Such heretics are also called “vitalists,” a term related to animism, and one which also has a long history of scientific contempt behind it.)

[...] But for the materialists, the mind-brain duality isn’t scientific in the orthodox sense. [...]

Your scientific beliefs tell you that your entire world happened accidentally. [...]

[...] Here the generalized fears fostered by religious, scientific, and cultural beliefs are often given as blueprints of diseases in which a person can find a specific focus — the individual can say: “Of course, I feel listless, or panicky, or unsafe since I have such-and-such a disease.”

[...] For example: Scientific advisers to the government’s National Cancer Institute, which is conducting elaborate studies of many thousands of women of varying ages, have called for a halt to the routine screening of younger women. [...]

[...] It is a temptation at times to use more specific scientific terms, but these would be as confusing as the various definitions and classifications (with humor) that you read in the dictionary, so overall we try to hit a “happy medium.” [...]