25 Comments

I resonate with some of these sentiments Joe. That why I wrote this book First Principles and First Values. So there is more possibiliy for addressing the meta-crisis and changing the source code of consciousness and culture. It's a NEW release now available on Amazon and aubible worldwide: https://bit.ly/4aqnaHV

Feel free to read our launch party at this substack post to get context: https://open.substack.com/pub/marcgafni/p/391-why-first-principles-and-first?r=26b8nn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

You can also get the first 5 chapters FREE here: https://worldphilosophyandreligion.org/free-download-chapter-1-5-of-first-principles-and-first-values/

Be a Hero. Read through and offer your reflections and feedback.

Expand full comment

I wasn’t going to comment, until I saw the part about manifesting a house. My wife managed to do just that. Back in 2008, when we got engaged, I asked her: If money was not an issue, and you could have any house you want, anywhere in the country, where would it be, and what would it look like? She replied: I want an old white farmhouse, on top of a mountain, with fruit trees in the yard, a creek somewhere on the property, a big fireplace in the living room, and a pocket door, because I think those are neat. It was a fun pipe-dream at that time. We never spoke or thought about it again, until November of 2017. We saw this house on the market, and as soon as we walked in, it was like we could sense the people who had the house built back in 1913 say, “Welcome home…” It was just barely within our price range, and the only reason that happened was because the owners in 2015 lost the house to foreclosure, which dropped the price by almost $100,000. We were shocked to find that this gorgeous mountain-top home had sat empty for over a year! Every single thing my wife mentioned, we have, including a pocket door in the master bathroom. The creek isn’t technically on our property, but before the original tract of land was subdivided multiple times, it was part of the original estate. Our neighbor, unprompted by us, told us that we are welcome to take our kids down to the creek on her land anytime we want. I didn’t tell this story to detract from your point, or to make people think that casually vocalizing your dream once will cause it to manifest 100% guaranteed, but only to illustrate that nothing is impossible, as my wife and I are living proof.

Expand full comment

That's a very egocentric and limited viewpoint. Thinking, feeling itself is like an iceberg in the ocean, you feel the waves (limitation, perception of a entity in the waters), you might think that you are an iceberg, an individuum and therefore seperatet from the ocean while floating in it, meditation reveals that you are the ocean, no-thing, nobody, unimportant to everything because you are everything and individuality just an illusion, the story in your head about yourself, the iceberg. Manifestation itself comes always from the ocean and never from a Individuum that is unaware of being the ocean. The water is the essence of absolutely everything. But all i see is, Icebergs studying the ocean. I am 15 years passionate, science says,,, viewpoints of a entity that swims. But what do I know, I'm nobody and i know absolutely nothing.

Expand full comment
Jan 5·edited Jan 7Liked by Joe Martino

Lovely summary, Joe, of Dean Radin's (and his associate's) work in this area. What has really impressed me most about this research with the random number generator and how a statistically significant departure from the expected 50/50 distribution of responses can be used to infer how reality 'works', is what they showed with a recorded sequence of randomly generated 1s and 0s rather than the random sequence being actively generated during the experiment. So first they created a tape of a random sequence spit out by a random number generator, with no one having observed the sequence or intended it in a certain direction, so that it existed only as a recording and played it for the first time, to each subject for them to intend either more 1s or 0s. They wanted to see if a recorded event could still be 'influenced' by the subject's intention, even though the random number sequence had already happened and was 'set in stone', as it were, in an unalterable past, in our common understanding of how reality 'works'. But the subjects were still able to 'intend' the recorded sequence in their desired direction, except that there was a 'belief' factor involved with some subjects, in that if they were informed it was a previously recorded sequence, they could not produce the same degree of effect as when they were led to believe the random number generator was working spiting out more 1s or 0s ' apparently on their command' (even though it had already completed its job).

They also discovered a factor -- that was most interesting -- since it made a recording unalterable from a 50/50 distribution, and was based on whether any person had already observed it, i.e. listened to the actual sequence with active awareness, but had not intended it to change it in any direction -- then that particular recording could not be changed by another's intention later (to have more 1s or 0s). Of course they ran these experiments 'double blind' where neither the subject nor the experimenter knew if a particular recording had already been 'observed' by someone or not -- and the reels of tape had been coded by an independent person who made the code available, to classify the results, only after the experiment was over.

So these results suggest that if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, then that event didn't even happen. Our commonly held idea of there being a past that just exists, and is the same for everyone, is not really true, but depends on whether at least one person had actually witnessed all the events at the time, that make up this past. It seems that some past events, ones that had never actually been witnessed by anyone, could be just as as consensually based and still alterable, as is our actively evolving present. Still, hard 'evidence' can always be found that points to stuff having happened in the past in the expected way. There are lots of trees that appear to have fallen in lots of forests, when no one was there to actually see them fall.

Radin et al, however, did also run some of the above experiments, using some non-human subjects -- animals acting as observers of the recorded sequence of 1st and 0s -- and obtained marginal effects -- in that if an animal had already observed a sequence, it proved to be more difficult for a trained human subject to later 'intend it' in a desired direction. (This also begs the question (which i haven't seen any evidence of yet, in the literature) -- whether animals can actually influence the sequence of a random number generator, i.e. if they are given a treat only when a green light comes on, rather than a red one, and the red/green decision is operated by a random number generator -- would the results point to more green lights coming on than red ones, even though the sequence was supposed to be random ? If there was such an effect, it could implicate unaccounted for, 'conflict of interest' (experimenter vs subject) type errors having been made in the case of many classic animal studies relying on conditioning models ?) Also based on the somewhat positive results with animal observers being able to make a sequence they had observed, be later unalterable by a human -- we may need to get off our high horse as assumed arbiters of all that is -- and is not, e. g. in the "if a tree falls in the forest . . . " proposition -- since one can readily assume such an event as a tree falling in a forest (of all places) would have been witnessed by many eyes, of many creatures, it would thus confidently be cast into the great unalterable past of having actually happened.

But are we through this type of experimentation actually seeking answers to loaded questions which we pose through our fundamentally limited beliefs of how things could only be ? Is Nature itself, really limited by the same paradoxical perspectives that we seem to stuck on -- of existing only on a small island of the present moment that gets constantly washed over by a moving stream of this thing called time coming down from an unknown future, and then inexorably marching on into an unalterable past -- or does Nature inherently possess some more evolved conception that works much better ?

There have always been people, we now call shamans, who have claimed to be able to alter 'reality' and time itself -- while we, in our typically cynical human character, are immediately drawn to query their claims, against the dubious hallmark of how everyone just 'knows' reality to work, and what happens to those who try to make it work to their own liking. But lately even some physicists have been revising this reality of ours, which is just known to work the way it does, to one that might work just a little bit better. https://www.amazon.com/Road-Time-Changes-Everything-about/dp/B07GRVSHGR

Expand full comment
Jan 5Liked by Joe Martino

Thank you for working with these exciting and mysterious ideas! I've pondered similar questions. I'd love to see you have some conversations on this on your podcast. I liked the Adam Curry episodes. More to come?

Expand full comment
Jan 5Liked by Joe Martino

That was the best thing I've read since Admiral Byrds notebook. Thank you for sharing this very promising vantage point backed by science.

I've written a lot of poetry regarding these exact principles and reading all this just highlights how much I've had passed down almost by the very nature of consciousness and it's very polite and rewarding ways in which it shows these things to me.

I read this out loud and it just hit that much harder.

So again,

Thank you for your time

Thank you for your space

I appreciate you

In every language

On every plane

In every race

•.°∆

Expand full comment
Jan 5Liked by Joe Martino

notable pioneers in this field are Cell Biologist Bruce Lipton and researcher/investigative reporter Lynne McTaggart - their relevant seminal works on the subject were first published 15+yrs ago:

https://www.brucelipton.com/landing-biology-of-belief/

https://lynnemctaggart.com/about/lynnes-books/

What Lynne McTaggart continues to accomplish with her groundbreaking Power of Eight groups that now span the globe demonstrates a very powerful answer to the question posed in the title of your post Joe.

https://lynnemctaggart.com/the-8-revolution/

Expand full comment

Dear Joe. I love your musings and explorations and wish to share with you a special reading that I think might spark a deeper understanding in your explorations. I have been pondering it and just happened to notice you are pondering it too. Before I share it, I need to define the word Knowledge. In my spiritual path it is the deep inner-knowing of Greater Intelligence that all sentient beings have been endowed with by our Source:

"The emphasis here is Knowledge. It is not your personal Knowledge because there is no personal Knowledge. In Knowledge there is only individual expression. There is no individual reality. Drawing from a Greater Reality means that you have passed beyond your own interpretations sufficiently that you can now have a direct experience of life. You can see in a new way, hear in a new way, speak in a new way and experience life in a new way.

Therefore, when you hear others talking about “creating their own reality,” see this only as a sign pointing in the right direction. What this means for you is that you must take responsibility for the content of your mind. What are you thinking at this moment? What you are thinking is relevant to what you are experiencing. This is accurate. But beyond this is reality, and that is the great gift. Achieving this, then, is more a settling down than a building up. It is the result of becoming still and observant so that you can penetrate your own interpretation. A still mind is a mind that is collecting its own power. It can direct its full resources in any direction, and that is the definition of power in the world." - Perception - Marshall Vian Summers, from Wisdom from the Greater Community, Volume 1

Expand full comment

Joe, Great read, I'm looking forward to part 2. I'd be interested in your opinion on the work of Dr. Joe Dispenza. He has partnered with the Heart Math institute out of Stanford University to measure as much as he can, of groups of people meditating and the health manifestations that have come out of that group meditations.

The phenomenon of a group of people meditating on peace in cities like Detroit and Chicago showed a drop in crime for a short period of time. Within a week the crime returned to normal levels.

One theory on why some manifestations don't always happen is that the manifestation goes against purpose or intent of the person's journey to evolve within this life. But this would be hard to prove.

My personal experience is the more you get in touch with your I AM, that original source of light within, the more connected to source you become. Most of this occurs in the Pineal Gland and that is why there appears to be an all out war on our access to the processes of our Pineal Gland. Those who actively access the higher levels of consciousness have a similar understanding of purpose and intention. Your writings show that you are one of those people.

I have also been conducting a self study of this area for decades, I don't have access to the science and the time to do the research and write about is as much as I'd like. But this self growth or awareness is what more people need to do. The fear based programming of Tell-Lie-Vision has kept most of the people stuck in fight or flight and not able to access the higher levels of consciousness that require a love based thought process to access. Many are now turning away from the controlled media due to the amount of lies and manipulation of society. Far to many still have the idiot box running in their home 24/7/365 to program them into fear. Enough of my rant... I look forward to your second part... Peace...

Expand full comment

A beautiful piece to wake up to, something about this really resonates. ❤

I'm intrigued by this idea as many attempts to manifest have not worked out in my life, others have though. Most of the time those around me have little success too. It has always made me wonder why and I've been unsatisfied with people claiming people are just not doing it right.

I agree with your sense, a combination of action and intention is the way. I love your wise and intelligent approach to this and hope your voice grows again in 2024. 🙂 The world needs your practical wisdom. 🙏

Expand full comment

Comment #2: Dean's Book, "The Reality of Magic" is a must read! Along with Gordon White's "Chaos Magic" show the possibilities of thoughts and intentions creating realities. He also dives into why manifestations work and why they don't. If we study the phenomenon of magic like a science, we can begin to see what we need to do and don't do to ensure that we increase our chances of success.

This is the ethos of my substack and my very first book: https://www.unorthodoxtruth.com/store/p/an-unorthodox-truth-book.

To close my comments on this fascinating topic, in order for us to see more changes in the world, a combination of attention, intention, and action are needed. If one thing is off, the results are also thrown off. I talk more about this in the following links below:

Why we should journal our miracles: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/why-you-need-to-journal-your-miracles

Magic, Manifestations, and The Reality Inertia: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/faith-and-the-reality-inertia

Expand full comment
Jan 4Liked by Joe Martino

This is one of the best interpretations of this concept I've read so far. I remember you talking about the fine line between healthy thoughts/focus on something and where it goes a bit too far and becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, it's this nuance that seems to be unexplored when it comes to this concept. Also appreciate your points around the idea that we almost avoid the physical aspect of change in favor of just trying to change things with our minds and intentions. Looking forward to part 2, thanks Joe!

Expand full comment

Comment #1: "Why are staunch skeptics so hell-bent on crushing these new theories when they show promise? What is the addiction to a nihilistic and meaningless world proposed by the materialist worldview? This I’ve never been able to understand."

I too have had this burning question as to WHY do we ignore the science in this area when we have multiple studies that show this to be effective. The conclusion I've come to is that there's a spiritual force that doesn't want humanity to study this aspect of reality -- thus keeping us in this nihilistic perspective. I discuss that here: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/love-the-ultimate-weapon and https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/the-spiritual-perspective-of-reality

When we study this spiritual aspect of reality much deeper, we then understand why the blinders against such topics.

Expand full comment