The ‘Delusion’ delusion

The ‘Delusion’ Delusion

My last blog touched on the importance of being open to energies that work in ways we may not have personally experienced. It is easy to dismiss those matters with which we are not familiar by basing our judgements solely within comfortable boundaries of our own making.

This can apply to everyone – last time I was the one who had to look beyond my own boundaries when I talked about discovering more than I thought I knew about Feng Shui; only a few months ago I had also caught myself out again when I doubted the reality of some findings reported in the magazine of the Society of American Dowsers. My doubts were founded first on my thinking that what was being claimed was so amazing as to seem preposterous and secondly on the fact that, to begin with, the information which the dowsers were finding seemed unsupported outside of the dowsing process; with no hard evidence the incredible findings were justified only by the dowser’s assertions.

Those assertions were indeed so amazing that I found myself resisting them for that reason alone. What I should have told myself was that the claims and ideas I was reading about could well be true – and should be true if they were established by competent dowsing. I had no reason to believe the dowser was not competent and since the findings were backed up by other dowsers I should have been content to take it all on board as entirely possible; which I now do, with apologies to those I briefly doubted. The fact that additional hard evidence did show up later helped the overall case of course but doesn’t change anything about my personal rush to judgement!

I will say more about those findings in a future blog.

Pushing at our own boundaries remains always difficult, even for those who regard their thinking as impartial and led by the ‘evidence’. Scientists probably have the most rigorous self-imposed boundaries of all – a matter which they regard with some pride but a strength taken to extremes becomes a weakness. Typically, though there are exceptions, scientists dismiss the claims of those of us who work with energies – sweeping aside practices and practitioners of any kind. They similarly and sweepingly dismiss also any prospect of the existence of ‘God’.

Although I do have the advantage of first-hand experience of events that science generally approaches from an academic, theoretical, standpoint I always feel disappointed that science starts from the presumption that there is no universal power and then works backwards. The caveat always is that science will change its position as soon as there is evidence to support a change but seems to make no attempt find that evidence from the perspective that there actually is  – or may be – an interactive universal force worth examining.

Professor Sir Richard Dawkins is probably the best known voice arguing against God and particularly so in his book ‘The God Delusion’. His work made me discipline my own thinking when I was writing about my own work in my book ‘It’s a Whole New World!’ I remain grateful for what he was able to teach me but, led by my personal direct experiences as a healer and a dowser, the result of the professor’s arguments was to improve my concept of Intelligent Energies. My own contribution now clearly shows where conventional science is wrong – or, in fairness, where it is ‘incomplete’.

The Delusion delusion exists in fact as a serious flaw. There is now a conventional scientific argument which has considered the evidence for the existence of ‘God’ with reference mainly to how such a power is interpreted religiously – particularly by Christianity. This means that science is really concerning itself with religious opinion – not with the possibility of an interactive universal power in its own right. Problem is that if the religious interpretation is faulty then so is the scientific argument because that too is based only that (mis)interpretation. Scientists are hitting the wrong target by addressing a particular understanding of a force and not the force itself!

Science therefore dismisses ‘God’ and inadvertently fails to address Intelligent Energies as the universe’s greatest interactive force! Religion may have much wrong in its own centuries-old interpretations but that does not make the force of ‘God’ itself a delusion. Those who worshipped the sun were right about its importance to life on earth. Science may be entitled to have issues with how the ancients dealt with their take on the power of the sun but that does not mean the sun itself is a ‘delusion’ – nor is ‘God’.

Happy Christmas and a Peaceful 2014 to everyone!

Leave a Reply

  • (will not be published)