On Albert Low and Consciousness...

On Albert Low and Consciousness
Brief Commentary on "Creating Consciousness: A Study of Consciousness, Creativity, and Violence" by Albert Low


One of the more exciting discussions between science and religion today is emerging in circles that point out that both hold the unknown or the Unknowable, “So, another name for the One is Truth.” and the cultural complexes that have evolved around the word God over the last few centuries (Low, A. p.25, 2002). When people of vastly distinct epistemologies come together to attempt an understanding of the most abstract of all mental constructs, a substratum of existence, energy and matter, I see the differences coming more from the way that some words have lost meaning in some context and that we are in the process of creating a new language, than from actually a disagreement on the fundamental

Agreement and disagreement:
Both needed, but most of our drives are wired to seek agreement. And in the arguments that Low presents on page 66 of the 2002 edition, he shows the emperor´s new clothes of the work of scientists, “…the claim that evolution does not need a deus ex machina is refuted by the presence of the scientist himself. He is the deus ex machina and chooses among a vast variety of highly sophisticated mathematical formulae in order to find the appropriate one to establish the necessary parameters.

Interesting that cultural complex or the social constructs of reality also affect scientists, let me explain this more. Elan vital, a concept most likely borrowed from the Sanskrit universal Prana, though Low engages in philosophical diatribe in a “highly sophisticated” elaboration on evolution not evolving ex nihilo, Low´s mathematically inclined subjects are divorced from the time/space, head/heart and transcendent experience as components that the Yogis of ancient time had to first cultivate before engaging in another type of experiments on the nature of human awareness and the experience of transformation.

Low brings it all beautifully together as he states, “One cannot consciously and intentionally prove the nonexistence of consciousness and intention.” About this statement I would say, forget about intention, who can disprove the non existence of consciousness? The subject herself expresses in the field of consciousness. Scholars seem to get stuck most when one word means something different.

Mr. Low, or Dr. Low (In 2003, he was awarded an honorary degree of Doctor of Laws for scholastic attainment and community service by Queen’s University, in Kingston, Ontario.), Dr. Low, do we agree, the Buddhist and the Adwaita Vedantin, that beyond the discursive mind, there is a growing expansion to be experienced in degrees*, or do you hold that access to consciousness, or better stated: Consciousness, is reached in satori, also described as an illuminating lightning flash? Dr. Low, I agree with both.
Then, consciousness is not created. Thanks for the tea, the cup is both full and empty.

*As described in the different spiritual traditions elaborated in the Raja Yoga Sutras (Yoga Darshan), by Patanjali and later on adapted to a more Christian-centric part of the world in "Variety of Religious Experiences", by William James.