There is a dimension of experience under entheogenic phytochemicals that is possible (although infrequent) that seems impossible for those that have not experienced it to comprehend. Those who have not experienced entheogenic consciousness expansion often assert that 'cultural' interpretation of the experience is paramount in understanding what is transpiring within a person's head. However, the pinnacle of experience is nothing less than the resolution of an omnipresent absolute consciousness. There is no cultural 'anything' (i.e., interpretation) to it. The threshold of the absolute reality resolves, where resides the quintessence of nature -- the fully evolved and resolved partitions (i.e., polarizations) of consciousness, called male and female, that are fusing into it by melding into each other. Why? To confer the supra-conscious absolute with self-awareness and thus existence.
The possibility of harmonizing science and religion rests on the assumption that scientific and religious worldviews are simply different understanding vantage points of the same ultimate truth. Yet, every effort at reconciling them has failed. Why? It is due to the rational belief that the logic of cause and effect should apply across the boundary separating their respective domains. For cause and effect to remain intact across the full extent of reality, events and actions occurring in the metaphysical domain that reference or pertain to the physical domain should produce observable effects in the physical domain and vice-versa. But, theistic religions have a common and serious flaw that violates the strictures of causality: if one looks for the effects of the activity of the God they envision, they cannot be detected. This indicates a fault with either the logic of cause and effect or with the tenets of a religion’s model. Because the logic of cause and effect has never been refuted, the model becomes suspect.
Humanity is at the threshold of the maturation of knowledge, and science and religion should not remain disjoint if reality’s foundations are not fractured. If a coherent cohesive unitary reality is true, the existing worldview camps must evolve until they converge. Under this assumption, the continuing plethora of conflicting scientific and religious worldviews indicates fundamental misunderstandings. Based on the antiquity of religion and its failure to align with observation, rationality has it that religion’s models must adapt the most. Science is constrained by observation and the requirement to cohere with nature; therefore, if alignment with natural truth is a requirement, the need to transform lies largely with religion. Most of the extant religions arose in the ancient past and have remained fundamentally unchanged, which is consistent with their misalignment with the surveyance of natural history. To remedy this situation, religion needs to take a sharp turn towards conformance with observation. At a minimum, religion needs to accommodate well vetted scientific knowledge (e.g., the reality of evolution, the measured age of the earth, the big bang, etc.).
The knowledge resources that are required for the modernization of religion have finally materialized. The abstractions that illuminate the themes of the architecture of physical reality are now understood and these themes also constrain the architecture of metaphysical reality. The upwelling of a truth rich, scientifically aligned religious philosophy has had to wait on science to uncover the essential motifs of the natural order. Science has only recently identified these abstractions, which derive from common architectural patterns that span all physical structure and behavior. In order for science and religion to contiguously affiliate, these themes must also underpin religion’s philosophical models. How can the primary themes of the physical realm’s architecture be identified and observed in the metaphysical realm of religion? This question cannot be answered unless the interface between the two realms is recognized. This touch point is known: the physical-metaphysical realm boundary phenomenon is consciousness, which possesses the same architectural understructure themes as the physical realm—the symmetry of existential neutrality and the discreteness of individuality.
False ideas can agglomerate into a sturdy structure that seems to contain truth but don't. This is the reason that the guidance of science and logical continuity of ideas is critical when modeling the metaphysical realm. Asserting that every metaphysical reality is mythical (i.e., non-real) is a mistake. There are states of consciousness that resolve under entheogenic phytochemical magnitude of consciousness expansion that are overtly 'metaphysical' because they transition ordinary individual consciousness into the realm of delocalized cosmic consciousness. This delocalized supra-consciousness is unmistakably understood to be the hidden heart of nature. Someone hearing an account of such an experience might say, 'those kinds of experiential states are hallucinatory fiction'. But, unless one has entered into delocalizing consciousness expansion it is very difficult to 'understand' a shocking, even fearful, truth: an omnipresent supra-consciousness resides at the heart of natural reality .
Science is the endeavor that tries to ascertain the "truth" by observation and abstraction. In the realm of consciousness, where science is not easily applicable, it is possible to make scientifically aligned guesses as to what the underlying architecture of that domain might be. A plausible guess is that the theme of symmetry (see www.symmetrymagazine.org for CERN's take on the centrality of symmetry in physical reality), which underlies the physical realm's architecture, also plays a central role in the 'metaphysical' architecture of consciousness.
And what is found by direct cognition? The fundamental architectural feature of consciousness is symmetry. At the final stages of consciousness expansion the simplest, the purest, the clearest pristine trans-beautiful symmetry of the supra-conscious absolute is what remains. At this threshold, reality resolved into two: the final forms of palpable reality melding by resonation into the unbounded awe of the formless absolute. This is the ultimate nature and purpose of the sexual allure.
No scientists that I know deny the phenomenon of the emergence of beauty and awe in the process of understanding and discovery. Is this the same as the experience of sacredness? It depends on what you mean by sacredness (and spirituality). Science and spiritually apparently have different farthest aims. Science aims at ultimate understanding of physical reality and in acquiring that knowledge the scientific journeyman experiences "sacredness" in apprehending the beauty and awe of physical reality's inner workings. But the (pure) scientist does seek or require knowledge of any highest aim of nature itself. Nature's activity can be comprehended and modeled but the reason for nature's changing state, as it might relate to an overarching supernatural or existential need, is not a goal. In this sense the scientist's quest is not to approach "sacredness".
Spirituality is an attitude that reflects one's deepest connection with a belief that nature's activity, life and consciousness, and existence itself have a highest purpose that transcends the awe and beauty of physical reality's construction. A "spiritual" attitude is (most probably) regarded as one that holds that the reason physical reality and its phenomenon exist is associated with an ultimate purpose rather than because it is more stable than nothingness (for whatever reason). An ultimate purpose implies the existence of an ultimate "something" -- called God.
The resistance to words such as reverence and spirituality in the scientific community arises because as they are commonly understood to imply the existence of God, which is outside the scope of scientific endeavor. Spirituality is not constrained by observation the way science is and therefore it strays from what science knows to be the truth. If spirituality and science are to converge, spirituality (e.g., religion) must be consistent with science--although it must extend beyond it. A scientist's
worldview is "scientifically spiritual" when it regards physical reality's design as a compass to discover the nature of something that lies beyond the physical realm. In this context a (true) "spiritual scientist" searches for the existence of an ultimate purpose (which certainly may be associated with a supra-natural consciousness whose "thoughts" are nature's mathematical architecture).
Blog excerpts from: http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/09/10/347422469/science-and-spirituality-could-it-be
Discussion on NPR 13.7: Cosmos and Culture
Nature provides entheogenic phytochemicals that can provide a window into advanced states of consciousness--to the extent that natures is saying, "there is an ultimate state of consciousness that can be conflated into".
Consider psilocybin (produced by certain mushrooms). Psilocybin binds diffusely to the neuronal dendrite tree and causes random depolarization wavelets that propagate to the neuron's axon hillock (which instantaneously sums all incoming dendritic depolarizations--random plus normal signal flow wavelets). The effect is to raise the average signal level at the axon hillock towards the firing threshold. This reduces the neuron's effective resistance to signal flow, which increases the brain's internal feedback signaling. At the higher limits of feedback the brain's signaling pathways that are normally feedback heavy become standing-wave like. This is similar to the ultimate stages of concentrative meditative practices such as Raja yoga (e.g., focusing on a mantra until one's thought train becomes standing-wave like). This is when many individuals report direct cognition of (i.e., near conflation with) an ultimate "cosmic consciousness".
Everyone (hopefully) agrees that there is such a thing as consciousness and most agree that it is difficult to classify as a physical phenomenon even if it arises from physical activity. But the relationship between consciousness and "spirituality" is much less clear. The idea of spirituality arises in the context of the belief in an ultimate aim for life (and consciousness). This aim relates consciousness in some final way to an ultimate state of being, call it God.
There are two major aims for consciousness aside from the no-aim of atheism. One is to "ascend" into heaven after death. The other is to fuse into the God itself (which is taken to be in some sense a highest state of consciousness) while alive. The revealed religions posit the former, while religions such as Advaita Vedanta posit the later.
There is no uniting science and the spirituality of the revealed religions because Heaven and the physical realm with its mathematical structure are (forever) unrelated and discontiguous. In the case where consciousness can reach a final state of fusion into "the absolute" no such overt discontiguity exists. The "metaphysical realm" possesses an architecture that can understood as possessing the possibility of hosting advanced consciousness, which can evolve according to architectural rules (laws of metaphysical nature). This view of the metaphysical realm is consistent with the possibility of uniting "spirituality" with science, while the revealed religion's view is not.
DMT binds diffusely to the neuronal dendrite tree and causes random depolarization wavelets that propagate to the axon hillock, which instantaneously sums all incoming dendritic depolarizations (random plus normal signal flow wavelets). The effect is to raise the average signal level at the axon hillock towards the firing threshold. This reduces the neuron's effective resistance to signal flow, which increases the brain's internal feedback signaling. At the higher limits of feedback (i.e. DMT activity) the brain's signaling pathways that are normally feedback heavy become standing-wave like. This is similar to the ultimate stages of concentrative meditative practices such as Raja yoga (e.g., focusing on a mantra until ones thought train becomes standing wave like). This is when overtly mystical experiences occur.
By emergent I mean that science cannot predict that consciousness will arise from the architecture of the brain from its components (e.g., neurons and neuronal tracts). However, it is clear that strong emergence has occurred (or we would not be conversing). The question is: can we anticipate the fundamental themes of the building blocks of the biological structure that supports consciousness are transduced across the "emergence" boundary? By observation I say we can (e.g., the sexual polarization of consciousness), which indicates a lot about the structure of the "emergent" domain.
The divide between science and religion arises because consciousness is an emergent phenomenon and seems impossible to explain as a denizen of the physical realm. But the crossing of the themes of the architecture of physical reality into the realm of consciousness is the clue to the connectedness between the two realms. When this is fully understood religion significantly aligns with science.
If there is a metaphysical realm, one might expect it to exhibit some form of continuity with the fundamental themes of physical reality, which are symmetry and quantization.Consciousness is usually thought of as an emergent phenomenon--effectively residing in a metaphysical (i.e., beyond physics) realm. Do the basal themes of physicality map into the architecture of consciousness? Apparently yes. Consciousness is polarized into male and female and consciousness is quantized.
If consciousness is fundamentally polarized, as is, say, the electric charge, is the only reason for the attraction between the sexual poles to pull life forward by reproductive continuation? Maybe, but I suspect there is much more to it. I think the attraction between male and female becomes ever stronger as the magnitude of consciousness increases. The ultimate end of this attraction is interleaving and annihilating union of the two polarities of form-wise consciousness. When this final union occurs and form enters formlessness, a conduit for an ultimate "hidden" consciousness resolves allowing it to be momentarily self-aware. Apparently, this end is required (and continuously as conflating quantized instance of consciousness) for the stability of the "cosmic consciousness". In this way a transphysical ultimate thoughtless consciousness is able to achieve self-awareness. This is the ultimate aim of nature (i.e. natural causal law), which separates existence from non-existence.
The design of nature is the principal evidence for the nature of reality.