Misplaced Pages

A Science of Consciousness (as long ago nominated and pioneered by Dr. Alan Wallace with international consensus)

Founding contributions of research toward a science of consciousness (higher definitive research on the 'mindfulness introspective'), pertain to established qualitative normal faculties and functions of the aspirational mind-psyche (in ISP established vocabulary as 'conative aspects') and its deeper dimensions of consciousness itself, in conjunction with a broader interface of epistemic and instrumental means included as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd-person guiding means: thus an empirical 3-dimensional science of consciousness (and integral contemplative-neuroscience as pioneered in collaboration with UCB,    *1    as the most comprehensive study to date regarding the effects of meditation on on mind and body). The interface was established through an initial Shamatha Project of the Santa Barbara Institute of Consciousness Studies (representing the higher foundational, developmental, and intuitive research on that ‘mindfulness-introspective’), after which, its foundational successful results expanded into the International Shamatha Project  (ISP: with 'International Dyn.Eq. Project'.   *2 The project (2007) in its basic outlines, was established by the interdisciplinary determinations of Dr. Alan Wallace, a primary practitioner and pioneer of contemporary scientific research on mindfulness, in cooperation with a community of dedicated researchers in the U.S.A and worldwide. Based on the extensive and dimensional elements of empirical breakthrough, teacher-training programmes for the Shamatha Project and other extensive organisation have been validly established, with Wallace as fully qualified interdisciplinary science master of such research.

A lexicon of dedicated and guiding terminology in its mutual definitions of purpose among related interdisciplinary research traditions (as the basis of dialogue), has been brought into being over the last half-decade through the Shamatha project research, having grown as an evolved branch-science interface of intricate dialogue. The natural-language (NL) interfaces of network practice (along with their principles of validation) express a valid contemporary-lexicon, longitudinally pioneered, and consensually guided by standards of epistemic scrutiny; conducted by general research-guidelines of primary import as the long-term responsibility (4 decades) of Dr. B. Alan Wallace in conjunction with a larger network of founding scholars and organisations in parallel-fields of science. The established principles in no way advocate yet another belief system for science, or spirituality; and claims that others do not accept such 'beliefs' in this instance is an error dispelled in dialogues from the outset, like a Zen Koan on humility: this is because a belief system, philosophical bickering, or quantum woo has not been  engendered amidst the intimations of such an experiential science and philosophy.   *3   The ISP is original in its dedicated non-sectarian functional-phrasings, that are clearly comprehensive of what is included in the scientific working-hypotheses that a science of consciousness maps. The originating scientific aspirations included in the authors manifold publications such as a Contemplative Science of the Mind, relate to prior historical phrasings: a natural philosophy of mind, was a prior entry for science in much the same way scientists used to be called natural philosophers. New disciplines have evolved out of such pragmatic nurture and paradigmatic shift into a world-view of interdependent dimensional realities, with a comprehension definitively emergent in positive and affective psychology, contemplative-neuroscience, social science, and other branch-sciences of such empirical association; as world-view of such presidents to a functional interface also contributive to a quantum-world-view of science in its own developmental and paradigmatic shifts (expressed in MB Mensky’s principled guidelines): as branch-science collaboration that acknowledges MB Menski’s principled and called-for empathetic (Mahayana) recommendations (specifically published in 2005 and 2010 by the Russian Academy of Sciences, Physics journal), for empirical content that can be sufficiently expressed by a natural language (NL) synthesis of propositional-calculus. That interface then indicates a high-level consultation on co-emergent templates of insight into a world-view and cosmogony. Nurturing such practical interfaces of foundational corroboration, in dialogue and consideration of the developmental-templates, are contemporary projects of basic generic contemplative-inquiry: that is, through reliably discursive outlines in view of quantum-shifts of perspective on manifold scientific realities. These also consist of research protocols and principles, of guiding exploration of deepening insight, with reliably established standards as functional roles clearly established by the 'Int. Dyn.Eq. Project'. It accompanies its prior collaborative and international research-history of interdisciplinary dialogue (since the 1970’s and continuing from previous integral scientific deliberations), serving to elucidate primary postulates and topics of historically related concern. Work on the interfaces through both secular and spiritual ethics are highlighted concerns, bearing clear presidents as worthy protocols for an ‘inter-faith’ of reliability, for cooperative factors that equally improve standards in relation to both spheres; where since the nineteenth century there has in fact been a slow paradigmatic-lessoning of confusion (developmental shifts) with respect to such an introspective interface: but in parallel to global aspects of intransigence and lacks of caring attentiveness or progress in explicitly practical remedial-work on a corresponding 'world-view' of the material eco-substrate.

Introduction to Ontological Relativity I: The developmental and paradigmatic, exploration and discovery modes of scientifically tested paths for psychological and other aspects of integral flourishing rooted in exceptional mental balance, are indeed credible in contrast to incredible, extraordinary but basically comprehensible. This is by way of evolved explicit of principles and protocol attenuating what has been phrased as ’quantum-woo’, in relation to empirical qualitative quantum-shifts of science and their evolved working hypotheses. Those principled aspects of network practice have signified the lessening of cognitive-fusion or speculation in terms of ‘secondary experimental anomalies’ of ‘dynamic equilibrium’s practice’, and deep-psychology. Of note are Sono Shamdasani (Editor) and Hollier’s (commentator) elucidations, dispelling confusion prior to and after 2009, on profound significations pending from the findings of Jung’s missing treatise (the ‘Red Book’); dispelling a mainstream of psychological scientific and common ontological illusions of knowledge with respect to the whole era and established work of Jungians and Freudians. Such reflections are significant to definitive phases of integral understanding and mental development (as integrated transformations of evolving practice), as integral to the working hypothesis of substrate consciousness and it's epistemic configuration of dynamic equilibrium: a deeper ontology in meaningful contrast to postulates of the mind-psyche. It is then most acceptable that such a theory of complementarity (as well-defined by Jung and Pauli), primarily applies to conclusive developmental modes and paradigm-shifts (from dream-like anomalies of reality) into transparent empirical modes of interpersonal percipient understanding.

‘gTOR’ and ‘sTOR’ Intimations

The ISP ‘General and Specific theory of Ontological Relativity’ (with an ‘g/sTOR’ byname *4), including a generic theory of interdependence, space, and vacuity, is well-formed as parallel complementarity in their aspects of quantum science, accompanying expression originating from pan-Buddhist and all related wisdom: that pertaining to a ‘relative and absolute space of phenomena’. Such complementarity is an aspect of both experiential-philosophy and quantum physics, e.g. in terms of: ’the meaningful spaces of experience at the interface between mental states and the psychophysical world of definitive quantum shifts in generic science’. Harold Atmanspracher in neuroscience at the Jung Institute has published with mainstream acknowledgement, on the consistent dialogues of integrity toward a science of consciousness, with inferential and epistemic calls of that research being consistent and most meaningful instantiations of mind-body inquiry; according to the principles of thorough investigation regarding pertinent dimensions of extraordinary and profound experience in consciousness studies. The international forums of furthering conference itinerary of integral relationship represent that mind-science of pragmatic nature and function, as an emergent developmental world-view of meditative achievements in first-person practice ('s/TOR'), and secondarily to what are the anomalous and extraordinary natural-phenomena, both implicitly and explicitly comprehended by the strait-forward discovered first-person means made available. Confirmation-bias and errors of inductive inference are what are directly dispelled in the principled development of ‘Dyn.Eq.’ (shamatha) practice and training, and from a quantum-holistic science perspective, configured by an explicit-implicit cosmogony; both ordinary and quantum science qualified by a concurrent ‘s/gTOR’ map of gradient psychophysical development: as generic vision-quest understood. That empirical perspective then is the necessary and satisfactory configuration of a science of consciousness (in its integral perspectives).  

The following statement is from back-cover of ‘Contemplative science; where Buddhism and Contemplative Science Converge’ by Dr. Wallace:

‘A copy should go to every scientist--both physical and contemplative--in the land’. 
 --The Scientific and Medical Network.

The acknowledgement is pertinent to that cross-disciplinary branch-science complementarity, realised by the corroborative background of primary research. In that background and foreground of qualified synthesis of insight, development, and discovery, principles of agreement on the natural language (NL) interfaces (expressing general and specific phenomenological methods) have then in contemporary senses been consensually researched for half a century, aside from abstracted (reified) scientistic-assumptions from the perspectives of science (e.g. neuroscience or deep psychology) or spirituality. The contemporary scientific discoveries with regard to four empathetic-factors of cultivation, also qualitatively define innate aspects of wisdom and caring attentiveness, that are reciprocal non-idealistic factors of ’Dyn.Eq.’, authentic well-being and happiness: a robust psychology of flourishing with pragmatic findings of plain extraordinary nature (exemplary embodiment in humans). In the dialogues of research, it was clear from the beginning to Wallace and the cross-disciplinary community of scholarship, that the postulation of a further conceptual belief-system was not the object of a science of consciousness, and at least among the three phases of Buddha’s teachings (‘three turnings of the dharmic wheel’, dharma referring to the deeper and deepest aspects of consciousness studies): as a dedicated generic outline pertinent to contemporary topics of ISP discursive mediation and teaching, with emergent principles on empirical kinds of awareness (percipience) also epistemically attuned. Historically, one tested part of Buddha’s communal research followed another, transforming into tried and tested foundations of culture and cultivation. In essence, these aspects embody such ethical foundations and directions for first-person and interpersonal contemplative-science, as a primary evolution of interdisciplinary-science. Thus, the genres related by Dyn,Eq. and its discovered generic-definitions of exceptional mental balance, are based on an a variety of innately-related disciplines; branches of both knowledge and science, as a world-view of applied practice in the complementary genres of: experience, reason, imagination, and intuition. The advanced Jungian-maps that develop on therapeutic-practice in the genre of imagination (development of active imagination), counter that which Wallace calls ‘imagination-deficit’ (as an adjunct to the ‘Wallace syndrome': obsessive compulsive delusional disorder OCDD), and are complemented by well-expressed templates of consciousness studies as yogic and other correspondent inner and outer science disciplines in common (esp. the science of lucid dreaming). A qualification of the Jungian and Freudian research is in their proto-contributions to that cross-disciplinary science, arising from initialised ‘experiential-truths’, both discursive and non-discursive; as generic principles relevant to a ‘contemplative science of the mind’. The ‘Special Theory of Ontological Relativity’ then relates to comparative stages of that inner scientific development and attainment (the above publication among others continue as primary works expounding on these postulates that accompany the foundational published papers of dimensionality, also in co-authorship).

Intro to Ontological Relativity II: 

In the same perspective as a theory expressing the 'Dyn.Eq' conservation of mass/energy: when the ‘course mind’ is not active it does not just dissolve into a nothingness--or into a composite of different nature to itself--but can be understood as dissolving into a substrate of consciousness; vis a vis, an underlying subtle-continuum of cognisance and luminosity. No research has inferred aspects of consciousness actually emerging from neurones and electrons (that is research-specific jargon); there still are no actual tests for choosing or validating among various classes of physicalist assertion: that the mind is either a function of, an emergent property of, or of equivalence to brain activity; thus, not being testable scientific theories they remain as conjecture (if reified they become metaphysical assumptions). The textbook, ‘irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century’. written by a whole team at Virginia University: ‘presents empirical evidence that reductive materialism is not only incomplete but false.’ 

By way of the integral research-breakthroughs and their sane international dialogues, unnecessary and false prejudice imputing controversy and philosophical difference on consciousness studies is solved; the principled elucidation of which does not veer from reasoning and empirical-standards of research-dialogue established in Chomskian linguistics, semantics, or from realist principles of cognitive science. 

ISP findings conclude that a perfect symmetry in that world-view has become scientifically explicate, of an integral substrate consciousness as together with its substrate: just as the substrate (space of mind and its contents) is regarded as various fields (Sir John Wheeler’s definitions). Dr. Wallace further empirically qualifies this with the postulate of a life force: (jiva, an intimately related factor to the nexus of bio-energetic factors, bio-energies, and consciousness; epistemically gauged by e.g. yogic adeptness (including foundational factors in Tai-chi and Chi-gong, as symmetry of complementarity among internal-healing systems): as co-extensive with that substrate. Such factors are correlated by subtle yogic templates mapping the bio-energies, in their being both physical and immaterial, like electromagnetic fields and other tangible scientific phenomena such as Hilbert space. Wallace’s publication of Mind in the Balance, 2009 (p.108), publishes these outlines as a knowledgeable template: the life force as 'epistemic field' is meaningfully correlated to research on the ’nature of sentient life in the universe’ (p.118); and in this sense to both an information configured space and non-conceptual nature of substrate consciousness; that is, more fundamental than the conceptual constructs of matter or mind-psyche; considered in quantum reasoning as figuring among fundamental building-blocks of the universe. These are of thoroughgoing investigation by way of primary experimentation of consensual agreement through exhaustive debate on such ontological relativity: as pragmatic modes of research into aspects of ‘non-paranormal’ phenomena. All those postulates including the postulate of life force, correlating to essential aspects of most basic contemplative-practice, are then separate domains of experimentation that contemplatives in professional training are bearing in mind with pragmatic outlooks of reliably purposeful phenomenological methods. Both the Alaya Test (or byname: ‘individuated-substrate’ test), and that of the life-force (jiva), are separate features of ISP experimental templates. The life-force is an important postulate to mention in being attributed as the psychophysical energetic continuum of the deeper awareness, and now well understood as the postulated repository of memories, mental traits, behavioural patterns; as a configuring causal-factor possible for physical marks of evidence in a plethora of scientifically correlated evidence on rebirth from one life to another (the dedicated forty years of illuminating research by Jim Tucker). This does not mean that premises such as a Buddhist theory of rebirth is then to be construed as a reified belief system; but to the contrary, a mentored practice of transformational consciousness remains qualitative, with its ongoing testing from the inside-out of congruent postulates (also embedded into templates of mutual quintessential practices), as primary science resources of concerted illumination: when the jiva postulate becomes physically embodied, and there are clear scientific-senses when consciousness is not, it is simply ’influenced by the experiences and behaviour of the life-form with which it is conjoined.’ (p.108).
 
Mind in the Balance (2009), elucidates successive phases of foundational experimentation over time, on unique patterns and signatures of substrate consciousness belonging to each individual; e.g. unique and subtle aspects of explicate-individuated substrate-consciousness, as they are being mapped by specific-inferences belonging to MRI-scan experimentation and other means. This has obviously been taken seriously in relation to the now 40 year-old contemporary science of lucid dreaming (that was validly and somewhat explicitly inferred as a possibility by pre-nineteenth-century western-science research determinations), and to its empirical analogies of rebirth, labeled so because of a vast extent of what are normative paranormal phenomena, accompanying empirically developed forms of contemplative scrutiny (correlating deeper and deepest aspects of normative reality) as explicit objects of integral scrutiny (including meticulous and meaningful aspects of normative evidence from a whole millennium of experimentation by monastic-universities). The contemporary dialectics of scientific orientation are relevant to how principle methods of Shamatha are valid basic templates of meditative ordinary and extraordinary attainment (relevant to a worldview of exceptional mental balance). In most pragmatic terms, DNA-type signatures and a plethora of integral data from every relevant perspective, relate to the attainments of meditators (mental development) of exceptional mental balance), and are the primary stable-sources of ongoing contributive data; via modes correlating praxis by way of both defined working-hypothesis, and dimensions of mind clearly documented. It is then evident to speak normally of most meaningful introspective relations (qualified in non-judgemental or formulaic ways) by interdisciplinary forums of research communities and dedicated cultures (as in all proposed Contemplative Observatory C.O. projects of the International Shamatha Project); as qualitative communal and cultural protocols corresponding to definitive trans-formative-attainment; qualitatively verified not only by communities of adepts and yogins, but progressively through many decades now in collaboration with appropriate branches of mainstream formal science. Such experimentation has set standards that adequately dispel contrastive negative assumptions, through the facts of ‘empathetic-discipline’, open-minded knowledge, and consistent questioning to find truth. This attitude contrasts from circular hopes and fears of speculation, concerning ‘explanatory-gaps’: implicit in these are an all round lessening of superstition that accompanies its introspective science of explicate and implicate principal, empirical in its world-view, as together with bracketing possible illusions of knowledge, as blind-tests in phenomenological method (elucidated by Husserl). Empirical confidence as faith also accompanies that introspection (without philosophical bickering): realities of such practice transpire as authentically motivated in mutually-congruent conative modes (contextual definitions of conative-intelligence that clarifies aspiration at the foundations of culture).


What if such precise signatures were able to be matched with another-life at a future time, then what? Because of the accrued evolution of integrity among adepts of meditative discipline, there would be no false-pride lost or complacency won (in that pragmatic meaningfulness) by way of communal secular and spiritual relations. However, none of such figuring is meant in contemplative ways of life as an object of superstition without connection to empirically congruent realities, and with that, introspection is specifically not the construction of a belief system. These are normal perspectives of focus in contrast to that regarded as paranormal or paradoxical; that have long comprised scientific scrutiny into a world-view of evidence.

Foundations of the Dyn.Eq. (shamatha) Project: both empirical and experiential

Various assumptions that psyches of personal-history bring to practices of dynamic equilibrium, at times tend to be coloured by various conceptuality (hopes and fears, gender specificity, ethnic background, upbringing, etc.); by static representations amassed over the course of a lifetime configuring a particular psyche (e.g. metaphysical illusions of knowledge relating to physical correlations etc, ect.). Therefore, meditative sessions involve modes of calming conceptual-elaborations, so that the complex-instrument of consciousness is first serviceable. Such questions of how epistemic (developmental) progress of consciousness is affected by the mind-psyche (observer-participance), is of rudimentary qualitative-relevance for Shamatha practices, to pathways of exploration on the cusp of insight (that involve deeper processes of epistemic-questioning, of vision quest). When the discursive-mind has calmed, epistemic questions may then be asked of whether innate-awareness, without the stirring of excitement or lethargy, is a nothing or something (out of which the gross mind has arisen). If to the affirmative, then what is its nature? 

Does the delusion remain of imputing experience through clinging to impressions of the five sense-fields or more subtle energy fields in body or mind, and what are the background processes of this occurrence? 

Are there extraneous impulses causing bias in the generation of both objective and subjective experience? 

If so, these basic factors colour such conclusions. Whatever our beliefs may be, vision-quests pertaining to the deeper nature of consciousness, are in epistemic senses of cultivated mental focus, not of intellectual or scholastic nature. In the science of lucid dreaming and its Shamatha-meditation, a core principle is of distinguishing conceptual elaborations from non-conceptual deeper modes of awareness, underlying that which is yogically phrased as a subtle-continuum of mental-consciousness in transitions to mental-stabilisation. Starting from a place of pragmatism, first-person extraneous conceptual and attitudinal-bias concerning innate-possibilities of nature and nurture, is an object in consideration of human developmental-potential, and for those contemporary empirical perspectives of necessary and ethically sufficient impetus. It is of functional care to bear in mind basic illusions and assumptions of knowledge made relating to mind having an identity as the brain or any bias aspects in relation to consciousness studies. However, the extent to which mundane but not ordinary life is configured by extraneous destructive attachment to the physical plane, does not at all mean there are no entirely relevant dimensions of consciousness as mediative, mapped by working-hypotheses of primary discovery across various science branches of endeavour. Historical analysis of excessive assumptions from the 17th c. century onwards reveal generalised attitudinal errors were starting to be of notice by the various fathers of science, that things were not quite as they seemed amidst the various branches of cognitive-fusion since Aristotle. Technological advances must also accompany mindful powers of stewardship and their proper use, free of extremes, efface recurrent delusional interpretation as materialistic-belief system based on hyper-speculation. Consensus may then directly enquire and facilitate answers to, what it is that obscures the dialogues on a generic-culture of such awakening; and what the readily-available content of authentic dialogue is that transforms with discerning wisdom, pitiful mistakes that are illusions of knowledge. 

Contemplative-science experimentation has already yielded an orientation process of thoroughgoing research, including longitudinal research-data that provides a magnanimity of bone fide precedents for reliance on principles specifically pioneered for consciousness studies. The tested data on the effects of empathy and compassion; mental health, exceptional mental balance and insight, skill and faculty development etc, all continue to demonstrate a definitive gradient of realisable standards, and applications of consensually applied direction in vocational studies (SciCVN specific outlines). The growing number people in the path of Tsunami storms on the planet who are the multitudes, those who are directly-affected by the subtle climate changes, are aware of how profoundly the dimensional climate is in need of the more profound rethink. This was voiced by unanimous science with valid consensual reason, at a continuum of conferences on climate change (including one in Copenhagen in 2014, ect, ect.). The grounds for continuity in implementing the remedies of evidence is unprecedented to mediate the root causes of negative awareness. Dialogues in contemplative neuroscience have shown that neural configurations do not somehow or other give birth to consciousness: neurones come from neurones, nor do images, emotions, love, sadness, emerge from them. Christof Koch of the Karl Jung Institute, has carried out exhaustive research into the neural correlates of consciousness and acknowledges:

‘The characters of brain states and of phenomenal states appear too different to be completely reducible to each other.’ (Koch: The quest for Consciousness,18-19).

Living up to the ideal of scientific scepticism and exploring the evidence is what is called for, with diligent and open-minded effort. Aside from conjecture, the basic hypotheses of a science of consciousness in one way or another have been longitudinally tested in pioneering research by way of both explicit and its implicit knowledge. Science would have progressed a whole lot better if the inner-science, the mind-science, was mutually determined as a first consideration in that history of paradigmatic-shift. Basic grounds for the projects of consciousness studies, are of course associated with the experiential foundations of human and mental flourishing; as part of conscious evolution in contexts of empirically known appreciable methods; in fathoming the deeper nature of reality through tried and tested contemporary working scientific-hypotheses.
 
Due to principle representations of Wallace and a dedicated longitudinal community of international scholars, the dimensions of consciousness, in view of a map of dynamic equilibrium concerning exploration of substrate consciousness itself, known as the deeper-substrate of the psyche: this has been thoroughly researched, debated, investigated, and patiently ‘dredged’ by those modes of investigation in contemplative-science mutual-practice over five sufficient decades; illuminating a deeper nature unspecific to human or animal species, and unspecific to conceptuality's of the psyche: not gender or ethnic-specific; and not configured by language-specific human expectations. An ordinary complexity of that nature is qualified by a larger map of psycho-physical development, beyond what is wrongly phrased as placebo or psyche, to a substrate consciousness phrased both for ordinary and mutually-extraordinary reasons as a stem-cell-consciousness ‘configured by explicate and tangible imprints on it’, including those of genetics and acknowledged discoveries with respect to complex brain chemistry. Associated with the psyche are also a wide array of internal and external factors, that in psychological terms form ‘a complex’, as an appropriate Freudian term among the many others. Historical Feature: By contrast, the Sanskrit term alaya-visnana, is in layering’s of research aptly sourced and construed as substrate consciousness, such that it is emergent in other mutually related languages including the Indo-European family. In Pali, a parallel postulate is of Bhavanga, as entry to the lexicon of 'epistemic inner-science' (the integral inner and outer sciences and knowledge commenced before Gautama), much assessed through manifold historical phases of experiential and experimental functionality. SciCVN.org's remit has long nominated emphasis on inner and outer peace-keeping and building, as primary applications of that science (and abstract on which is a feature of the website). 

The nature of that research itself, is then of valid empirical-nature, as qualified by a three-dimensional-science of validation: beginning with non-distorted first-person, interpersonal, and epistemic templates of empirical principle. These are orientations phrased as 'Dyn.Eq' practices, inclusive in qualifying the broad-range of related stages and modal pathways of practice, qualified by achieved principles of insight. Such replicable discovery then elucidates integral functions and features of substrate consciousness, more primal and foundational than a persons conceptual-history. Deeper epistemic-correlations are included in what can be phrased as a quantum cosmogony of primordial ground; of relevance to a world-view of affiliated practice with scientific orientations: aside from phenomenal reification of cognitive fusion. Therefore, the background in these senses of non-material dimensions of consciousness, are required foundational comprehensions for the bases of communal dialogue, in clear comprehension of the evolved natural language (NL) functional terms; as consistent with the classical-contemporary psychological understanding of archetypes, and in more scientific terms, as a ‘form-realm of archetypes’ (akin to the intimations of Roger Penrose et al), that express and configure the conceptual framework for exploration of substrate consciousness. 

Historic Features: There are many other definitions to include as basic models and outstanding features of comprehension. The characteristics of cognisance and luminosity, are primary explicate characteristics of a ‘relative-ground-state of awareness’ (vis a vis substrate consciousness); and beyond that individuation, to that posited as an implicate ‘ultimate ground-state of awareness’ or primordial-awareness: a quintessential level of implicate discovery that qualifies substrate consciousness. This is what is phrased, from the perspective of a broader bandwidth of Buddhist practices qualified by shamatha principles, as the Buddha nature in Zen-definitions of Mahayana practice; defined as a primordial layer of consciousness. The relationship between that level of explanation and that of substrate consciousness, is wholly pragmatic in that the former postulate allows for a synthesis of key-aspects, and an interdisciplinary world-view in relation to a science of consciousness; otherwise not forthcoming in previous history among the individual standpoints of that communal world-view and cosmogony. The explicit complex-distinctions or qualitative-developmental factors in regard to the above two generic outlines, are of import to both a foundational and essential integrity of that cosmogony. In normative pragmatic understanding, that level of understanding is however, a well-elucidated synthesis of consistent principles and linked-practices to alleviate and transform most deeply rooted mental afflictions of the mind (outlined by Wallace as the obsessive compulsive delusional disorder: OCDD); as essential psychological factors of procedural consideration that obscure those dimensions of reality. Such an innermost cosmogony is well expressed by such a synthesis of purposeful natural language of the ‘experiential-philosophy’, as a non-biased communal view of comprehensive assimilation and accomplishment of contrastive and integrated means. Since the earliest Sanskrit Buddhist knowledge this was aptly phrased as ‘innermost accomplishment’ (the Maha-Ati view); that is, a transformational-mode and of paradigmatic discovery: an apotheosis of wisdom. Multifarious Zen expressions contain essential research-records to that epistemic background: of integrative world-view and developmental praxis; as an epistemic template of consideration to non-contradictory insight. A general Buddhist and phenomenologically related science definition of consciousness (as salient characteristics of relative substrate consciousness) and basis for understanding integral psychophysical stability, is that which both illuminates and is of innermost-cognisance, as an explicate continuum of functioning (as internal system of healing): to illuminate and make manifest the qualia of all six senses aside from cognitive fusion; in relation to an inter-subjective worldview of dynamic equilibrium (bearing in mind that colours are not viewed as directly-arising from neurones correlated to the material-substrate: looking at a computer from behind the screen, appearances may be arising on it, but the screen is not making them manifest). As in the established science of lucid-dreaming, for related praxis, what directly-illuminates or makes-manifest the qualia of dream appearances (as purely non-physical postulates), is consciousness, that may become lucidly and aware of them with increasing epistemic-objectivity. In this there is also a parallel to specified discursive contemplative art, for cultivating empathetic aspects of exceptional mental balance in relation to the external world at large (phenomenal).

‘There is a reason why scientists constantly preach that ”correlation is not causation.”. Untangling the tightly woven neural tapestry to discover what is real is one of the challenges scientists confront when crossing the mind-brain divide, linking the physics of excitable matter to ephemeral subjective, conscious experience, the most real thing there is.’ (Scientific American Mind, p.29, Jan./Feb. 2015)

There was a great deal of sense in Freud’s assessment stressing the importance of dreams being ‘relative states of delusion imputed as real’, although when the salient characteristics of consciousness are fathomed in the nature of three salient characteristics: non-desirous bliss, luminosity, and non-conceptuality, it means that aspects of delusion have been to an extent dispelled. If there is no awareness of such cognitive fusion, in the same way as recognising a dream as a dream in its first-moment, this will act as cooperative cause for misapprehension of what is going on in successive moments. It is of regard that these working-hypothesis are profoundly trans-formative of conceptual beliefs, disbelief, faith and mundane-aspiration, inaccurately phrased as placebo-like effects; because even those in relation to salt-tablets could more accurately be phrased as ‘mind-effects’ .*

*Note: This relates to a topic of annual Thanyapura Phuket research, 30th April, 2010.  Integral Functions of a Science of Consciousness

Included in the basic research aspirations of William James and Jung, were ways to map, understand, and assimilate the pragmatic potentials of ‘dynamic-equilibrium's practice' in its manifold forms (even though the natural language intimations were at times grossly inhibited), as no less than the insights of wisdom and compassionate attention to the human roots of psychological dilemma. These were founding roles for modern psychology and its philosophy, as humble beginnings of reliant first-principles on which all levels of scientists have provisionally, and in the sense of aspiration, collaborated; to further consensus at university-level in a continuum since the end of the Victorian era as bridge to the cultivation of applied developmental virtue. Such dedication is in parallel to quintessential and foundational derivative aspirations of Buddhist research (Theravada Mahayana, and Vajrayana as three contexts of Gautama's dharma teaching), pertaining to contemporary praxis of inner science, with  a common basis of outer discipline in mind; no less than an empirical-research orientation for human flourishing (specifically outlined by cultivation of compassion, supported by other factors of wisdom). Like in science, it is for all its causes to thoroughly question underlying assumptions of interpretation, and then also to put into practice the conclusions of synthesis, based on verifiable introspection transforming the precedent theses. 

Other historic features: Buddhist and related dedication of research in scientific modalities of dialogue, have been by way of thoroughgoing analysis as to the contrasts of view, assimilated through their explicit progress of contemporary research, common to a movement dating back to 4000-5000 years of evident contiguous effort (aspirations for an unclouded inner-science), with extensive concurrence on developmental and experimental templates (epistemic wisdom-gnosis): in that spirit of an empiricism elucidating the discovered means of inter-personal realisation to be practiced.

Conative application (of ‘innate aspiration’) of the contemporary sophisticated and rigorous inner-science means available in practice, figures as a world heritage as art, science, and way of life, that bears a low noise-to-signal ratio of interactive bias; as introspectively supported by percipient mentor-ship (2nd-person, caring epistemic-stewardship) with regard to first-person practical observation of consciousness; out of which, contemplative records have become progressively congruent and adequately verifiable in their outer epistemic expression. The guiding attainments and realisations of means, through applied practices of wisdom, have then also become discursively pragmatic in various exemplary reliable praxis. Common roles in the caring empathy of that culture, also comprise purposes understood in the cultivation of equanimity: out of four reciprocal empathetic factors: (1) considerate attentiveness, deeper compassion for self and other, and empathetic joy, to directly alleviate despair and anguish caused by deep internal distortion, destructive-attachment, and frustration; the affects of which are all manifestations of disequilibrium. Extensive remedial work has been defined by such profound levels of deeper concern, as consensus of communal interdisciplinary-science in which there are extensive callings to recognise non-dualistic consensus on precedent discoveries that define those dimensions of consciousness, and conducive templates of practice as ways of realising these discoveries available in first-person (interpersonal) experience. The profundity of those research dimensions are precedent progress for cross-disciplinary curriculum studies. 

Epistemic principles for a science of consciousness have achieved a foundational and interdisciplinary role of configuring dialogue across branches of science represented by Wallace’s key scientific text: ‘Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge’, and other works among 40 or so publishings; representing core developmental factors of pragmatic realisation correlating a higher-level functioning-perspective of ‘primordial consciousness’, in contrast to a more primal and relative substrate-consciousness; by means of a synthesis of tested mental technology as also ‘epistemic-means of flourishing par excellence’ (WIlliam James). These means are also scientifically qualified in their contemplative neuroscience of explicit and implicit discovery, conceptually and non-conceptually expressed as a synthesis defining gradient means for mapping mundane and supra-mundane epistemic-realisations on a generic scale of empirical insight. These also correspond to course and subtle qualitative-levels of psychological, mental, and spiritual eudaemonia, and ethics as epistemic-experiential modes of knowledge and discipline expressed by contemporary parallels in ontological relativity. For the gifted neo-Platonist-as-mathematician Roger Penrose, the dimensions of such functional realisation are expressed as tangible expressions emergent out of a realm of pure-forms; and in adequate parallel dialogue correlating Buddhist narrative it is expressed as modes toward an innately accessible ‘form realm’, free of obscuration from the ‘desire realm’; sheer-archetypes of the natural world, and complementary in various kinds of natural language propositional-calculus (NL). The map of gradient forms pertaining to such mental development as deep psychology, are both qualitatively and quantitatively related to an essentially-relevant quantum view of science as illuminated by both a conceptual and non-conceptual working hypothesis of relativity (theory of interdependence). 

The synthesis of various advanced models is comprehensive of their intricate salient research documentation and branch-science correlation: as a deeper symmetry of epistemic inferential-and-direct-knowledge (Skt. pramana), expressing gradient development and configuration of ‘exceptional psycho-physiological balance’. This also yields a common-sense world-view of functional interactions concerning the abnormal material-world of relations, with a sane mental-balance of its subjects and objects, as together with a symmetry of non-dualistic paradigm-shifts by way of an objective functional view of substrate consciousness, of objective configuration.

Note:  The order of some outlines in these sections, follow on from a momentum of due dialogue of procedural inquiry, directly following on from a founding colloquium on Buddhism and Science at the Dept. of Physiology at Oxford University among intercollegiate parallels (Feb. 2010, and a plethora of other related key conference work of collaborative elucidation).

Updates: 23.3. / 20.8. / 27.8.2010/ June 2015.

1. For detailed information related to the Shamatha Project and its findings, visit: http://mindbrain.ucdavis.edu/labs/Saron/shamatha-project   and: http://www.sbinstitute.com/shamathaproject.html: 2. Dynamic equilibrium (byname: ‘Dyn.Eq', nominated by SciCVN.org) being a contemporary term determined by Wallace (and a definitive scholarly consensus of others), as most intricately related to 'Shamatha transformation' and that of exceptional mental balance. 3. Viewed on May 2015. 4. 's/gTOR', nominated as a byname by SciCVN.org.

Yes, this most general information has all the sources to place to make it more complete, it will take time and patience as everything.--DynEqMin (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Comprehensions of International Shamatha Project (ISP) Outlines in Dialogue, Research and Praxis, as pioneered by Dr. B Alan Wallace

Taking into consideration the assimilative protocols of being aware of any notable criticisms on the ISP project within its four decades of endeavour, presumes an understanding of this leading scholar through his pragmatic dialogical and successful progression of working hypotheses, in this, Wallace has sufficiently engaged in both the educated and uneducated questions arising from manifold dialogue. In the past of this Wiki page there was left mention without any specific details given on four aspects of criticism without basis, in what used to be a section on the page under that name of Criticisms. Since 2013 or so, this changed to a couple of lines of unwarranted text. The material accompanies a link to other libellous material (scientifically and legally), as if directly contributing to the integrity of ISP debates, and moreover the promotion of a website community of neuroscientists (where the ISP mainstream science, of contemplative neuroscience, has not been of reference in references to it); the material does not correspond to any scientific findings or any contradiction as rhetorically claimed (it is therefore not even in critique them, because that must demonstrate a preliminary understanding interdisciplinary consciousness studies). This also includes knowledge of the dedicated natural language (NL), lexicon, and established principles along with their definitions, pertaining to primary foundations of science and culture, that have from the outset been part of working hypotheses (as ontological theory of relativity, 'g/sTOR' *1 ). These qualms are partly mentioned on the nominated WIkipiedia entry on a 'Science of Consciousness', as long-ago the brainchild of Wallace's primary establishment. Material related to the extraneous qualms are outlines below.

First it should be clear that the perspective of primary ISP scientist Dr. Alan Wallace, there has never been any proposition of raising another belief system for the ISP project, in establishing a replete map of research confidence, in practice pertaining to clearly defined projects of an established science of consciousness. The ISP (with a byname of International 'Dynamic Equilibrium Project', and the abbreviation: 'DynEq' *2) not only includes larger mutual practice representations, from deeper discoveries of science within culture (as infused by co-extensive archetypes as a synthesis of ancient to contemporary practice (the Sanskrit construct expressing this is Maha-Ati, that brings historical research together to form a congruous interdisciplinary worldview, as together with an internationally established epistemic dialectics of equanimity in wisdom; evolved as a mutual synthesis-model of consciousness studies (not just in terms of the conceptual lexicon), with historical development prior to and after Buddha (and related cultures), as definitive continuation of the modern primary scientific research of essential import; as a foreground to the background in various schools of applied research (esp. through all corroborative breakthroughs in western science) of what were in continuation: 'inner and outer sciences' of research. Mutual sources for these notations have become a world heritage of inherited authentic praxis (represented by dedicated and most diverse international centres of learning), although clearly never advocation of a further material or spiritual belief-system.

With regard to an accusation of quantum-woo, Wallace has consistently been optimally critical on bias in science from every perspective, as cultivated in his well-composed practices of equanimity and profundity of practical wisdom.

Wallace has long conducted research that specifically qualifies foundational postulates and definitions, that are contributions as no less than both explicit and implicit, profound 'quantum-science' comprehensions (esp. in the domain of quantum physics), as contributed through the International Shamatha Project ('Int. Dyn.Eq. Project'), and its essential collaboration in other primary projects that engendered the 'mindfulness introspective'; as first long-ago concertedly and devotionally defined in the Sanskrit language and its foundations for linguistic science, as a primary root of Indo-European and other language, and reliable source of knowledge in cultural evolution itself. The Sanskrit Atiyoga (or Maha-Ati) progression from its beginnings (as one of Wallace's primary sources in the pragmatism of such empirical outlines of praxis), denotes an innermost synthesis of consciousness studies, as knowledge in practice (e.g. pertinent to peace-keeping and peace-building, and an outlining cosmogony of inner and outer science), as an ancient to contemporary scientific outline of correlated research praxis (with generic phases of exploration, expressing an epistemic wellspring of qualified DynEq, including dialogical structures at the foundations of linguistics). Such profound features 'introspective consciousness' that embody the working principles of DynEq, are not of speculation in such a fresh experiential philosophy of consciousness (otherwise it could be called 'quantum woo'). Nor is there any complacency in the understanding of such reliable knowledge, as nature of quantum realisation relating to what are found as all-interdependent levels of reality, but as such, scientists of that concerted research attend to multi-related epistemic dimensions of discovery as various aspects and modes of practice; of epistemic narration in tune with direct exploration and ex-pedition into those dimensions of consciousness. These are also phases and formats of experiential-philosophy in four genres: (1) experiential principles; (2) dialectics and epistemology; (3) salutary embodiment of creative praxis (known by various quintessential concepts such as 'foundations of culture'), including present Jungian perspectives of inner-healing of imagination-deficit disorder; and (4) intuition: the historical quantum-layer of such praxis (it may be said to be a definitive form of quantum intuition (that MB Menski speaks of). In parallel are deeper and deeper correlations of import to the various maps as interconnected epistemic branch-science research phases (esp, mind and cognitive science). ISP research outlines as correlated to extensive presidents in comparative western-research preservation, therefor a century ago, emerged with various weaves on such corroborative discovery in western science, and very well documented as an evolution of primary understanding integral to DynEq praxis: that of: conative, attentional, cognitive, emotional, intelligence: now with appropriate placement as mutual foundations of branch culture and science. These foundations of research acumen, comprise unique layers of scientific wisdom and knowledge in progress; transcending idealistic projection on empirical working-hypotheses. From consciousness studies in present phases, a generic branch-science structure has emerged both from the perspective of quantum cosmogony, and the practices of DynEq.

The Maha-Ati historical development of both theory (epistemic inquiry) and practice in contemporarily nurture, has long in the West and East, been a mutual embodiment of vision quest (and thus in its salutary representation by Wallace), and a wellspring of historical representation of essential principles, intricately relating to the explicit  historical research presidents as contemplative science par excellence. The presented spectrum of practices correlating such a synthesis of meditative science and western phenomenology, has emerged as a sufficient part of mainstream science in its aspirational research. The humility of that research is also due to devotion in the Himalayan-Sanskrit preservation of this related-knowledge, that thankfully all can celebrate in the aspects of purpose; as on the Buddhist and related side, the Maha-Ati and DynEq synthesis (as ancient to contemporary expressions of 'quantum science' and not: quantum woo) of learning principles is both a personal and interdisciplinary vision-quest of practice to internal healing and outer flourishing; understood after the foundational evolvement of such dialectics to properly express and attain to such discoveries of mental development; as an implicate level of accomplished understanding of interpersonal scientific acuity, as normative epistemic vision quest since the celebration of William James as a primary father of both psychology and its philosophy.

On absurd criticisms in mention of 'dualism' with respect to ISP methodology (not 'method-olotory' as absurd rhetorical aspects of scientism), opens illuminating answers that update such a relation as notation pertaining to the dimensions of consciousness: such a discussion relates to the subjective/objective perspectives, and also to the trans-relative processes of such ex-pedition as both pragmatic and paradigmatic. First a general lexicon of contemporary terms should be comprehended as relative to an acuity of the dialectics assimilated. The most pertinent epistemic interconnections as expressions of original and contemporary Sanskrit science in this regard, is from the perspective of non-duality ('nonduality'): e.g. the substrate consciousness as background dimension also in the Vedic Advaita philosophy; that in ISP maps, is a portal of relative and trans-relative factors.

To be cordially polite in Misplaced Pages, the listed qualms previously on this webpage are good topics for otherwise meaningfull discussion: there is no 'well-known' debate on duelism, that has occurred by way of any known ISP primary science dialogues, and the primary instance where Wallace does mention this is in terms of the meditative epistemic correlates between content in space of the mind, that feels like it is objective (philosopher: David Charmers intimations), and consciousness-itself as subjective construct. To conclude, Wallace consistently qualifies this by mentorship in giving attention not to impute further dualities between the contents of the mind and 'subjective vacuity'. If duality would mean that Wallace has used science terms in contrastive ways, then in his lexicon that does not in any way transgress the semantic-linguistics constraints, or those of any other discipline, thus there are no such discrepancies. If ever speaking from dualism, it is only from the perspective integrity of his epistemic science. Therefore, dualism, non-duality, and even epistemic modes beyond these are of a symmetry and complementarity, supportive of replicable working understanding in real possibilities of such transformational quests, presented in primary historical and contemporary science findings. That is: in the commonly illuminated outline of awareness of awareness, (Skt. advaita), there is no dualistic working hypothesis, and that also relates to the quantum level. Understanding these simplicities (as they are simply taught intellectually or practicably) are requisite in asking questions on 's/gTOR' quantum correlations. The fallacies are therefore invalid from perspectives in primary findings of cognitive science and linguistic science. 

A related SciCVN Misplaced Pages forum on the 'Science of Consciousness', outlines  clear protocols and principles, guiding foundations of integral cultural ethics, that have made those innate foundations of science possible to elucidate for the benefit of humanity. The newly nominated Misplaced Pages article, refers to efforts from the outset of the Shamatha Project, concerning integral practice toward adjustments or attenuation of what may be called Quantum Woo,  as concerted research into foundational aspects of empirical science. What astute philosophers talk of generally as consciousness as a primary phenomena, is very little in contrast to Dr. Wallace's qualifications that pose no contrary to fundamental scientific and pragmatic aspirations (an adept position to aspire with great clarity by proven generic-principle). Such cordial acknowledgements are not present in the previously associated webpage. The cosmogony of Wallace has been thankfully taken into consideration in primary consultations on his 'g/s/TOR' ontological theory with the quantum physicist: MB Menski, also as contributions and historical consensus in dialogues with a host of other pioneers. As a principle: successful DynEq qualified-working-hypothesis in its various forms of network science practice, relate to Wallace's two 'ontological theories of relativity' ('s/gTOR').

1. A byname for: General and Special Theories of Relativity, as'g/sTOR', was nominated as far back as 2010 by SciCVN.org support initiatives. This entered usage at the same time in circulated aspects of commentary on the ISP project.

2. A byname for: Dynamic Equilibrium, as 'Dyn.Eq' , and the International Shamatha Project (ISP) as 'International Dynamic Equilibrium Project', was nominated as far back as 2010 by SciCVN.org support initiatives, and then known to enter usage by Wallace in collaboration with Dr. P. Eckman to define parts of the CEB training.