Scientific materialism is headed for the dustbin of history

TOPICS: Are humans a law unto themselves or is there a higher authority – enlightened self-interest – the ego and self-destruction – the ego’s quest for infallible belief systems – seeking to destroy conflicting belief systems – materialists blinded by the ego – unwilling to look at the limitations of your mental box – revolutionary leaps in knowledge comes from questioning established mental boxes – science has generated moral questions that materialism cannot answer – science has given humanity technical ability to self-destruct without the maturity to avoid doing so – materialists have very contrived arguments – a genetic explanation for everything – this leads to superiority and racism – the fallacy of thinking people cannot transcend their genes – a view close to that held by Nazi Germany – some segments of human race more fit than others – the difference between intelligence and humanity – scientists also have egos – quantum physics point beyond the war between materialism and Christianity – the brain is not the totality of a human being – scientific materialism is anti-democratic – the human mind is the portal between the material universe and what is beyond it – humans are not defined by their genes – only a power elite wants to create philosophy that limits growth – scientific materialism is an elitist philosophy – genes are communication devices that transfer information instead of storing it – people can transcend genetic defects even in one lifetime – healing at the level of cause – race and intelligence – spiritual racism – Africa’s problems do not have western solutions – western definition of intelligence is simplistic – new respect for the individual – 


Question from Kim: Jesus, the American scientist, James D. Watson, recently made some comments that were widely criticized for being racist. Watson is famous for discovering the double-helix structure of DNA, for which he received a Nobel Prize in 1962.


He told the Sunday Times that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says not really.” Watson also said that there was no reason to believe different races separated by geography should have evolved identically, and he said that while he hoped everyone was equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true.”

Apparently this isn’t the first time he has made similar remarks, including saying that if the gene for homosexuality could be isolated, women could abort homosexual babies. He also once said that stupidity is a genetic disease that should be treated.

My reason for bringing this up is that I saw an interview with James Watson, and he seems to me like the quintessential materialist. He seems to believe that religious tendencies are simply genetic abnormalities and that the theory of evolution has proven there could be no God.

This in itself isn’t that remarkable, since there are many materialists. However, combined with the seemingly racist views, it reminds me of the troubling connection between the science of genetics and eugenics, the idea that the human race should be improved through selective breeding. This philosophy deeply influenced Hitler, and I think any tendency for it to reemerge – however disguised – in modern science is troubling.

This also made me realize that we practically never talk about race on this website, and it is my impression that race has nothing to do with people’s intelligence, their spirituality or their “value” in the eyes of God. I wonder if you have any comments?

 

Answer from ascended master Jesus through Kim Michaels: (October 22, 2007)

 

I have many comments because the underlying issue here goes to the heart of what is missing from modern society.

What is the underlying issue? It is the question of whether humans recognize any higher authority that can restrain their behavior or whether they are a law unto themselves and can do whatever they want. In the context of science, the question is whether something that can be done, should be done? Will society restrain scientists or let them do whatever is technically possible?

When I say higher authority, I do not mean the traditional view of an angry God who is seen as wanting to restrict people’s freedom and punish them for transgressions. What I am really talking about is whether humans recognize that there is such a thing as the human ego and that it causes a form of spiritual-intellectual blindness. This places humanity on a slide of acting out selfish desires until people destroy themselves. Do humans recognize the need to restrain their behavior according to certain higher principles that define what we might call enlightened self-interest, meaning that by voluntarily staying within certain boundaries, humanity will not destroy itself?

This is an essential issue in modern society, and I am not simply talking about going back to the Middle Ages, when church doctrine defined limits for human behavior. I am talking about taking this to a higher level, where humanity begins to recognize – through a blending of science and spirituality – the concept of enlightened self-interest. Thereby, people attain a higher understanding that causes them to voluntarily refrain from certain actions

This must begin with the recognition that self-destruction (through nuclear war, environmental disasters, genetic manipulation or other factors) is a very real possibility and that people need to openly study the problem. And if self-destruction is to be avoided, then a study of its causes would inevitably lead to a recognition of the ego and its effects on human behavior.

In this context, the most relevant effect is that the ego has an insatiable need for security. One way people deal with this need is that they seek to define a belief system that they elevate to the status of being complete and infallible. In other words, they feel the entire universe can be fit into their mental box, and this gives them a sense of having control over the universe, which means the ego can feel secure.

The problem is that this sense of security is fragile. The ego’s need can never be fully satisfied because ultimate security can be found only when the conscious self recognizes its true identity and unites with the spiritual self. Because the ego can never reach beyond the material world, it is engaged in an impossible quest of seeking security where it cannot be found. Thus, the ego never actually feels completely secure, which is why people feel threatened by other belief systems. This is why they feel they have to destroy such belief systems, be it by killing other people or ridiculing them. One obvious example is medieval Christians who engaged in the crusades, but a modern example is materialistic scientists who seek to discredit or ridicule any belief system besides their own.

James Watson is a typical example of a group of scientists who have elevated materialism to the status of infallibility. What they have actually done is that they have taken science – which is a completely open-ended activity, designed to forever expand human knowledge – and they have used it to create a mental box that they have defined as the ultimate box. In other words, they sincerely believe that they can fit the universe – including God – into their mental box.

The irony is that in doing this, they have done the exact same thing that was done by medieval Catholics who had used Christianity – which as all true spiritual teachings was also meant to be open-ended and forever expand human knowledge – to create a mental box in which they thought they could fit the entire universe. Scientists are well aware that the universe refused to fit into the Catholic box, but they are completely unwilling to see that the universe is just as unwilling to fit into their own mental box.

What causes this blindness? The ego’s need for security! Once people have defined a mental box and elevated it to the status of infallibility, they are unwilling to reconsider the basic beliefs that define the walls of the box. For if they were to do this, the ego fears it would lose its sense of security. Thus, people accept that there are certain premises that are beyond questioning, and this inevitably causes them to go into a state of spiritual and intellectual pride. They now believe that they actually know everything that is important about the universe and that any idea that questions their beliefs is either of the devil or is unscientific.

There are certain questions that these people refuse to ask, and this sets limits for the progress of human knowledge. Modern scientists see clearly how medieval Catholic doctrines set limits for human knowledge, but they fail to see that materialism is doing the exact same thing in the modern world.

The problem is that when people create a mental box that they refuse to expand, they create a closed system. By the way, when I say that modern scientists refuse to expand their mental box, I know some will say that science is continually expanding. Yet the reality is that materialistic scientists are expanding their box only within certain parameters, namely the unquestionable doctrines of materialism. Thus, they refuse to consider certain questions that point beyond materialism, even though many scientific discoveries, from Einstein forward, have pointed to the need to look beyond the material universe for the causes of material phenomena.

If you look at history, you will see that it is precisely when someone dares to question what the “establishment” defines as unquestionable, that human knowledge takes a revolutionary step forward. In other words, materialism is open to evolutionary growth but not to revolutionary growth. This is again caused by the ego’s need for security which makes people unwilling to question the foundations for their sense of being in control.

History has clearly shown that whenever a civilization creates a closed system, it is only a matter of time before something destroys the civilization, be it an external enemy or internal conflicts. Yet history also shows that some civilizations were successful in taking themselves beyond the closed systems of the past by accepting a revolutionary idea.

One example of this is how European society did transition from a Catholic to a scientific world view. This expansion in knowledge could actually have gone much further, but because of the rise of scientific materialism, the progress has been slowed down considerably. Instead of serving as a vehicle for continued growth, science has been taken into the materialistic blind alley, which is now slowing growth.

The effect has been to create a system that is almost as closed as the medieval church. The consequences are obvious to anyone who is willing to take a look, namely that the growth in scientific capabilities has given rise to fundamental moral and ethical questions that modern society finds it very difficult to resolve. Obvious examples are nuclear weapons, planetary pollution and the ability to manipulate human genes—all capabilities brought forth by science. There is nothing inherently wrong about these scientific discoveries, but the problem comes in when society does not know how to discern between what is technically possible and what is desirable based on enlightened self-interest.

Why are moral and ethical questions so baffling to modern society, which many scientists claim is the most advanced civilization ever? Could it possibly be because materialism – in its fanatical denial of human spirituality – has created a rift in the collective psyche that makes it difficult for people to deal with moral and ethical questions?

What if materialism had not become dominant? Is it possible that we would have seen an increase in both scientific ability and spiritual development that would have made it easy for modern society to resolve moral and ethical questions? In other words, science would not have grown faster than humanity’s spiritual maturity.

Surely, the questions raised by science are questions that touch on the survival of the human race. For the first time in recorded history, humankind has the technical ability to self-destruct in more than one way. The essential question now becomes whether humankind has the mental – or spiritual – maturity to avoid doing so.

I suggest that neither traditional religion – including mainstream Christianity – nor materialistic science has the capability to take humanity to the needed level of spiritual maturity. Only an entirely new world view – that goes beyond traditional religion and materialism – is capable of doing this. Such a revolutionary world view is freely available to humanity, because we of the ascended masters have foreseen the development of the current crisis and have created the tools that will empower humanity to solve it.

Yet for humanity to take advantage of this, people must be willing to look beyond their closed mental boxes, both those created by religion and the one created by scientific materialism. We would gladly have released this new world view several decades ago, which would have prevented many of the problems that modern society is facing—or rather not facing. Yet we are still willing to give humanity the solutions to all problems in modern society, if people will but ask. For we are ever faithful to the law that when the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

***

Having set the stage, let me return to doctor Watson, for we can now see what forms the background for his remarks. To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes, it is, “Elementary, my dear Watson!”

James Watson is a typical representative of materialistic scientists and their world view. They have created a closed mental box, and the inevitable result is that the closed system has certain inherent contradictory forces. So as scientists attempt to force the universe to fit into their box, they inevitably end up with some highly contrived interpretations—as did medieval Catholic theologians.

Materialists believe there is nothing beyond the material universe, meaning that there can be no such thing as a lifestream or soul that can survive the death of the physical body. All human mental activity is produced by the physical machinery of the brain, and the design of a particular person’s brain is explained by one of the most sacred of all materialist doctrines, namely that every aspect of a human being – including a person’s mental and emotional state – must be defined by the genes.

Once you have elevated this belief to the status of infallibility, James Watson’s views must inevitably follow, namely that there must be a genetic explanation for everything seen in human society. And when this is combined with the spiritual and intellectual arrogance of the ego, the result is predictable.

Many scientists believe they belong to a class of people – scientific materialists – who are superior in intelligence to all other human beings, especially those who cannot see the infallibility of materialism. They implicitly believe that the world would be better off if every nation followed their vision of what is best for them. They even think people are somehow obligated to do this and that failure to comply is proof of inferior intelligence, which probably means that someone ought to forcefully protect such people from their own stupidity. This is very similar to how members of various religions have felt and in some cases are still feeling today.

Many scientists also believe that materialists are directly responsible for taking modern western society to its superior level of civilization. They then look at Africa and conclude that it has a much lower level of civilization—compared to their own society which they define as the standard. What could be the explanation? Well, it must be that people in Africa are not as intelligent as people in industrialized nations, and this must be due to a difference in the genes.

The problem with this view is that when genes are defined as they currently are by materialistic science, they set absolute boundaries for human growth. It is believed that a particular human being cannot change his or her genes and thus cannot change how the genes affect that person’s potential. In other words, if a person is born with a certain level of intelligence, there is not much, if anything, that person can do to increase its intelligence. So if the people in Africa really are less intelligent because of genetic factors, then what can be done to overcome the problems in African society?

Well, according to scientific materialism, there is not much that can be done in the present generation. The only option seems to be to improve the genetic material in future generations, whereby the intelligence of Africans might approach that of white people, empowering them to solve their problems as white people have done.

Obviously, I am not saying that James Watson or other people have said this publicly. Yet I am saying that when you take their materialistic view of humanity and their deterministic view of the role of genes, the consequence is as I have outlined.

So the only option open for improving conditions in Africa is to seek to improve the genetic material. Does that mean mass abortions to eliminate children with certain genetic characteristics—as Watson implied should be done with homosexuality (a view I do not share, despite my remarks on homosexuality)? Does it mean sterilization of people deemed genetically unfit? Or does it involve artificial insemination of African women with sperm from genetically superior white males? Or will it in the – near – future involve genetically manipulating the African population as the technological capacity is developed?

As pointed out in the question, the ultimate logical conclusion that follows from scientific materialism is a view of humanity that comes perilously close to that held by Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and other totalitarian societies, namely that certain segments of the population should not be allowed to breed and that it were better – for the survival of the race – if their inferior genes simply disappeared.

Again, I am not implying that James Watson or other scientists are saying this—at least not publicly even though some certainly say it privately. I am not necessarily implying that most scientists believe this consciously. Yet many scientists do hold views that are on a slide that leads to the same basic view of humanity as that held by Nazi Germany.

Take note that I am not hereby saying that scientists are Nazis. But I am saying that many of them – without recognizing it – are holding the same basic view of humanity that led the Nazis to define the “final solution.” It simply follows logically from their belief in evolution, which has elevated “survival of the fittest” as the fundamental factor for determining survival.

If you truly believe that ONLY the fittest survive and that all others will inevitably become extinct, then it is only a short step to believing that some segments of humanity are more fit than others and that those who are most fit have a right – even an obligation toward the survival of the entire race – to solve the problem represented by the less fit by whatever means are available and acceptable to them.

This view is not actually exclusive to scientific materialists, for it can be found disguised in many religions as well. The Christians who engaged in the crusades had used their doctrines – doctrines that had nothing to do with my original teachings – to conclude that since Muslims were sure to burn forever in hell, it was more merciful to kill them first. And in today’s world, some Muslim extremists have made the same conclusion about non-Muslims.

In reality, this view is another effect of the ego and its need for ultimate security. The ego bases this sense of security on its infallible belief system, so people who bring the mental box into question are inevitably seen as threats. It is just a matter of using the basic belief system – be it religious or materialistic – to come up with a justification for eradicating them and restoring order. Even beyond that, the ego will inevitably imply a value judgment, for in order to feel secure, it must see itself as superior, which means that certain other people must be inferior—or there would be no comparison.

I am not disputing that James Watson and many other scientists are highly intelligent people, but a distinction needs to be made between intelligence and a more holistic measure of maturity, a feature we might call “humanity” or spiritual development. My point being that – as has been observed by many people – it is possible to have a highly developed intellect while being relatively immature in other areas, such as emotional maturity or even the ability to look at the overall picture rather than a specified field. There are many examples of how this unbalanced development has caused scientists to draw conclusions and perform actions that were later seen as being highly problematic. Certainly, James Watson has delivered another such example.

Thus, it needs to be recognized that even – or perhaps especially – the most intelligent scientists are susceptible to the games played by the human ego. For only then is there a potential for acknowledging that materialism is a philosophy that has perverted science by allowing the ego to turn it into a closed mental box. And western society will not be able to solve its moral and ethical problems until society frees itself from such ego-based belief systems, the two most powerful of which are scientific materialism and mainstream/fundamentalist Christianity.

***

How can humankind transcend the current catch-22 represented by the war between scientific materialism and orthodox religion? One way would be to look at the findings of quantum physics, which make it abundantly clear that scientists can no longer uphold the decision to ignore consciousness. If the consciousness of the scientist – as quantum physics has proven at the subatomic level – has a fundamental influence on scientific experiments, then consciousness must be studied scientifically.

If this was done in an unbiased way, scientists would soon conclude that there is indeed a “parallel universe” beyond the material world, namely what I call the spiritual realm. And the connecting link between the two worlds – the link that can span the divide where energy becomes matter – is indeed the consciousness of human beings. Even by using current scientific discoveries – but interpreting them without the straightjacket of materialism – scientists would quickly conclude that despite the enormous complexity of the brain, the brain cannot account exclusively for the total complexity of a human being.

For example, it is possible to program a computer to simulate human intelligence, but this will not make the computer alive because it will not give it the basic human quality, which we might call “humanity.” A machine can only emulate what humans beings have been given from a higher source. And human beings are not machines. It is only the ego that effectively turns certain segments of the population into a kind of biological machine, and after having dehumanized them comes up with a justification for exterminating them. Anyone who truly looks at reality will see that the inherent value of human life comes from a source that is beyond the material world and thus cannot – or should not – be overridden by ANY condition in the material world.

This is why democracy is based on the concept of rights that are NOT defined by any earthly authority but given by a super-earthly authority. Am I hereby saying that scientific materialism is anti-democratic? Yes I am! If materialism is not replaced by a higher understanding, democracy simply will not survive—it has already been severely undermined by a power elite who believe they are equipped by nature to be more fit than the general population and thus have the right to rule.

Anyway, my main point here is that an unbiased evaluation of current scientific discoveries would lead to an expanded world view in which it is seen that the most fundamental human qualities are NOT the products of processes in the brain. Although the brain does have a profound influence on human behavior, what makes people truly human are qualities that are defined by their non-material consciousness, which has traditionally been called the soul, although I prefer to call it the lifestream. I freely admit that people can turn off these qualities, which basically turns them into biological robots, and many people have done this. Yet this does not invalidate my basic point.

Once it is recognized that there is a higher consciousness that inhabits the body, it will become clear that the human genes do not form an impenetrable barrier. People can indeed be genetically predisposed in certain ways – for example, their brains might not be as “wired” for what in the western world is defined as “intelligence” – but they can develop their faculties even within one lifetime. Thus, there is nothing that is set in stone, nothing that is predetermined.

One of the basic messages I came to give to humankind 2,000 years ago is that “with God all things are possible,” meaning that human beings have a spiritual potential for rising above ALL human limitations. Thus, both individuals, a society or an entire continent can rise above their current limitations even within the short time span of a lifetime. This is the basic message given by all true spiritual teachers—growth is ALWAYS possible.

Any philosophy or belief system that denies growth – be it a religion, a political ideology or scientific materialism – is out of touch with reality. So why would human beings create a philosophy that denies growth? One explanation is the ego, which will gladly stop growth in order to obtain security. Yet on a larger scale, every society has had a power elite that wanted to maintain status quo in order to keep their privileges and power.

Any philosophy that denies growth is deeply influenced by the power elite. Christianity is one obvious example, and although it is not as powerful as in the Middle Ages, it is still very much influenced by the power elite’s desire to prevent the people from exercising their Christ potential. Yet it should be recognized that scientific materialism is very much a creation of the modern power elite, and again the motive is to get the population to accept limits for their potential. This pacifies people so they do not dare to overthrow the status quo that keeps the elite in power.

Let us now return to the topic of genes. The basic fact is that genes do NOT set impenetrable barriers for the human potential. In fact, once science frees itself from the straightjacket of materialism, it will be seen that genes do not actually define even the characteristics of the body. Genes are communication devices that do not define information; they merely transfer information from the energy field to the physical body. Certainly, genes are complex and as such they may distort some of the information, but their true function is to transfer information from a person’s energy field to the body, so that the physical body can grow to fill in the “blueprint” defined in the energy field. Thus, the body is an expression of the person’s state of consciousness.

When the true role of genes is recognized, it will be seen that people can rise above – cure if you will – genetic defects even within one lifetime. For every genetic trait is the physical outpicturing of a state of mind, a condition of the lifestream—not to be confused with the outer personality and mind. Thus, if a person sincerely seeks to heal a particular condition, that person can indeed change his or her genes and overcome a defect that today’s scientists would define as set in stone.

In the not too distant future, scientists will develop instruments for making the human energy field visible. This will gradually be developed into an entirely new form of therapy that will empower people to work directly on changing their energy fields. Which means people can seek healing at the level of the cause instead of seeking to heal only at the level of effects, meaning the physical body.

Since the genes are material devices, they are somewhat mechanical in functioning, which means they can be manipulated by mechanical means, as science is now exploring. Yet this very primitive form of mechanically manipulating the genes will eventually be replaced by a much more sophisticated approach, whereby people seek to heal the underlying spiritual condition and thereby make mechanical manipulation of genes unnecessary.

James Watson therefore represents a dying breed of scientists. They are much like the physicists in the late 1800s who talked about the “end of science” and believed all the basic discoveries of physics and chemistry had been made. Einstein didn’t agree, and in the next decade or so most scientists will come to accept a much broader world view that will put materialism in the dustbin of history.


Kim: Just to cover the issue of race, are you saying that traits such as intelligence or spirituality have nothing to do with race, and thus there is no basis for saying that certain races are superior to others?


Jesus: Your intelligence and spirituality is first of all determined at the level of the lifestream, and thus it has nothing to do with race. It is determined by the maturity of an individual lifestream. There is no deterministic link between race and the maturity of the lifestream. There are intelligent people and spiritual people in every race because there are mature lifestreams who have volunteered to embody in all races and ethnic groups in order to help humanity progress.

It is only the ego that looks for outer differences and then uses them as the basis for a value judgment. Thus, only human beings who are blinded by the ego can believe you can generalize and say that all members of a particular race are inferior to those of another race—or any other grouping of people. Likewise, only the male ego can give rise to the belief that women are somehow inferior to men. All of this is complete unreality, for in God’s eyes all human beings truly are of equal value, for all are extensions of the Creator.

However, it must be said that there are certain characteristics that are shared in large groups of people. The planet is home to lifestreams at different levels of spiritual maturity, and in many cases large numbers of lifestreams at a similar level will embody together in a particular outer setting, such as a nation or continent. Maitreya explains the various evolutions in his book, but this is a very complex teaching that I will not go into here.

I will say, however, that the human ego can distort any teaching and use it as the basis for a value judgment. Thus, it is quite possible to develop a form of spiritual racism that makes people seem inferior or superior based on spiritual characteristics. Obviously, the ascended masters do not support such ego games.

The reason is that we of the ascended masters do not have any value judgments whatsoever. Thus, we do not agree with the assessment that western society is more advanced or civilized than other civilizations. We recognize that different lifestream groups have different needs, and we work with each group in order to help its members grow as much as possible.

Yet we also see that various groups have various good qualities that need to be expressed. One consequence of this is that people in Africa or the East are not meant to live like people in Europe or America. I am not thereby saying that Europeans or Americans should not live like they do, for their current lifestyle is an expression of their present level of spiritual development.

I am, however, saying that it is an ego illusion that western civilization should be exported to all parts of the globe. People in Africa are NOT meant to live like people in Europe. They are meant to discover their lifestream qualities and express them in their societies. In doing so, they might very well find solutions to the current problems in Africa that westerners – no matter how intelligent – simply would not be able to think of. And this is precisely what needs to happen, for attempting to solve Africa’s problems with western solutions will only create new problems—as you clearly see with the introduction of western weapons in African society.

Obviously, many of Africa’s current problems are the result of western influence. Westerners have created the problems that they are now trying to solve, yet you cannot solve a problem with the same state of consciousness that created the problem. Take note that I am not hereby saying that the people in Africa have no responsibility for the current problems. They most certainly do, and only they can solve them. However, they will find solutions only by discovering who they are as unique spiritual people, not by trying to turn themselves into westerners.

***

Finally, it must be noted that the western definition of intelligence is still rather simplistic and does not cover the totality of what it means to be a human being. Yet westerners are indeed meant to be more analytical and rational than for example people in Africa or the East. So one could very well come up with a different definition of intelligence based on other characteristics. And according to such a definition – equally valid as the western but based on different premises – people in Africa or India would be superior in intelligence to people in the West.

Let me also make it clear that there is no human condition that could ever make a person “unfit” for being born on this planet. For example, I do not hold the view that people with certain characteristics – be it race, homosexuality, inferior intelligence, genetic diseases or a thirst for power – should not be born. Any person who has ever been born on this planet deserved the opportunity for growth that life on earth represents.

Any human condition is a condition of consciousness and by outplaying it in the material realm, the person has a unique opportunity to transcend the condition. Many people do not take advantage of this opportunity, but those who have had it have all deserved it. Thus, without deserving it was not any human born that was born, and this should give rise to an entirely new respect for the individual, no matter what outer limitations a person might be displaying.

Only the ego can think otherwise. The ego loves black-and-white thinking, but reality stubbornly refuses to conform to the mental boxes created by the ego. In fact, many people have volunteered to be born with certain limiting conditions precisely to give other people an opportunity to question their ego-based mental boxes. Here is just one example from my own life on earth:

 

1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. (John, Chapter 9)

 

Things are never as they seem to the mind that is blinded by the ego’s dualistic vision.

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2008 by Kim Michaels