|
|||
Trained as an
engineer in the hard sciences I migrated over
the years to teaching and coaching in the fields
of personal development, leadership and
management development. While moving from 'hard'
to 'soft', I could never let go of my desire to
have a solid logical foundation for what I did.
Consequently I was forced to become a practical
philosopher and discover 'the road less
traveled', leading to the development of the
LOTA philosophy of science. I shared these
insights with students for more than a decade
through courses, workshops, projects and
seminars on personal development, leadership
development, creativity and creative
achievement, with many positive life changing
experiences for them to account for. The bottom line of this
experience is this:
Once we accept a broader mental model on the nature of mind, we become aware of the powers inside us to heal our past, transform our present and shape our future. May this brief introduction encourage you to read on. The
problem Educators in the field of personal development learn sooner or later that Western science is grossly inadequate in supporting their needs. This is illustrated by the fact that the overwhelming numbers of books published in the field of personal development have no support base in the Western scientific models. This has irritated me to no end since I was initially educated as an engineer in the information sciences, enjoying the comfort of rational thought. In my early years as engineer I benefited for instance from physics since it is an excellent support base for the innovation of material things. Subsequently I moved
into management and discovered that our scientific
foundations are no longer an asset when it comes to
understanding ideas like people’s inner motivations.
This is eloquently illustrated by the following quote
from Abraham Maslow:
My full time involvement in education started 30 years ago, as European Training Manager for Hewlett-Packard. I became aware, through frequent examples, that the popularization of physics can be a barrier with respect to people’s abilities to discover their full potential. Because physics was holding the high ground in the domain of logical thought whereas it is often not compatible with contemporary and ancient insights in the mind-body relationships.
The
opportunity My own training
consultancy was formed in 1993 and in spare moments I
worked on the exploration of models for the integration
of mind, body, rational thought and science. Scientific reports emerged
during this period about the self-organizing nature of
complex patterns. Hence I pondered the question: What
kind of universe would we have if all interaction
patterns evolve in the most complex way? Note however that this
idea was not compatible with Western scientific thought,
which has its roots in a long European tradition going
back to the days of Aristotle. It is not
surprising therefore that I found no existing philosophy
of science where ‘complexity’ is taken as its starting
assumption. Do we really need another theory? Starting
assumptions During 1995 and 1996, I closed my
practice in order to work full-time on the development of
a model based on three starting assumptions:
The results were published in 1996 in my book ‘The Origins of Mind, Space and Time’. Do we need another theory? Alternative 1 If you are happy with
the things you have been told about the nature of
time, matter, gravity, energy, the mind/brain/body
relationship, evolution and the big bang, you are
encouraged
to read no further since it will merely make you
uncomfortable with no benefits for you.
Alternative 2 What will you get? A model, published in
1996, with predicting power. It predicted the potential for signals faster
than the speed of light and the potential to tap into
the background energy of the universe. Both are now
(2013) part of our established facts in science, with
commercial applications just around the corner. You will
find some references in the link pages to the relevant
experiments and emerging applications. These ideas were
very controversial in 1996 and I still have the
correspondence with several highly respected scientists
to prove it. They did not pull any punches and my
predictions were declared wrong. Hence science seems to
be moving in the direction of the model. Indeed the
original book version is still as valid today as it was
in 1996.
Where is this predicting power
coming from? It requires a carefully
crafted design approach in order to arrive at an
architecture that is built from only the three
assumptions mentioned earlier. Hence theories about
the nature of the universe based on starting
concepts like time, matter, gravity or the Big Bang
are a waist of time because we really do not know
what these things are.
They are to be seen as merely derivative aspects of reality once the fundamental architecture is established from the three basic assumptions mentioned earlier. It is a good way to reduce your reading list since it cuts out a large portion of the publications. Easy to learn The model is easy to learn and it will set you
off on a lifetime of fascination. Learning times are in
the order of hours and days, not weeks, months or years.
Integrator in science The
model is an excellent integrator for the sciences, because
it relates rather elegantly with any science discipline I
have come across, even when there are incompatibilities
among these disciplines.
Excellent tool for mind-body research and applications The model is an excellent support tool for those involved in the mind-body relationships. It is highly practical for these types of applications and leads to new innovations quickly. Explore in your own way There
are
three complementary branches to choose from
Thank you for your visit. I hope you will benefit from it. |
|
  |
| For
further writings by Cornel Slenters, explore the
website trilogy dedicated to: |
||
| LOTA science theories & debates |
Education |
Emotional Intelligence |
| www.slenters.info |
www.universe-grand-design.info |
www.mindstuff.info |
