|
Lasse Laine's [lasse.laine@vidorg.se] comments on Mr. Pitkänen's paper : Remote mental
interactions and molecular recognition mechanism as different
aspects of a same phenomenon?
Matti Pitkänen has presented an interesting paper about the explanation of parapsychological phenomena. For non- physicists, the learned paper seems to solve the empirical data presented, such as remote mental phenomena ( various kinds of "like hypnosis, telepathy, remote healing, remote vision, identfication phenomena, and psychokinesis") according to the author and possibly even materializations and the problem of survival/ deceased. For a philosopher, Pitkänen uses old philosophical ideas of consciousness, volition - cognitions, representational ideas in the theory of knowledge and different variations of Mind- Body theories. I feel symphy with his trial to present a general model about explation of parapsychology with the help of his new kind of Physics, p-adic physics as Physics of Cognition and Intention. Unfortunately, this leads to the begging of question: to blur the difference between physical-electromagnetic dimension of ordinary matter and mental- cognitive realm. How ? If the new kind of more abstract physics contains the cognitive levels of organizations, how could the physical, magnetic mirrors bridge the relation between the physical and mental if, as the parapsychological evidence suggests, there are active entities in question which even, thr. information from the future, can change the nowadays now ? The philosophical difficulties of Pitkänen are also connected to his selective choice of empirical material from the parapsychology, which supports his findings, but leaving out the most questioning ones. It's possible that Mr. Pitkänen does this by stating that magnetic mirrors are non- material, based upon quantum leaps, which leads then to the question: how could these leaps correlate information or carry back and forth it between these different levels. According to undersigner's tentative, new proposals in physics, there is a need to present a new, more abstract solutions: about the many- dimensional atom, the new kind of mater- energy relationship ( in relation to the epistemological discussion about reality in the light of parapsychological data such as information carrying, active precognition , changing not only history but even future ), about many- dimensional view of universe, a new particle- theory, continuation of the discussion about the unification tradition of forces ( these tentative, physical theories or models are grounded on the more general and abstract work in the philosophical paradigm, presented in Laine's unpublished dissertation work, 1. version 1974 and the project work from 1983). Epistemologically the discussion should include philosophical vocabularies too, such as ontologies of different entities, how knowing is possible about the physical things, how different "selves" can have different evolutionary concepts about the physical entities, about the concept of time, when it includes even active causation when using fe. precognitive knowledge about the future. Pitkänen discusses about the different aspects of the biological evolution too, but his conclusions or discussions about the components of evolution , through amino acids and the formation of different proteins as a results of choices and volitional acts are not conclusive . Why ? He uses at the same time the concepts of individual evolution / consciousness and collective consciousness , and different conceptual shiftings of the Time: geometrical time order, based on atomic spacetime sheets according to him, psychological, individual times, mnemes of ( about ? ) the deceased, cognitive choises in the front of time direction towards the future and other interesting but mostly physical notions which are not abstract enough to be used fe. in biology, psychology, astrophysics and other sciences. In a way , for an philosopher, his discussion or tentative models and theories are the latest answers from the new kind of physics which takes the parapsychological data seriously, but in trying to explain these anomalous data in a reductionistic way- explaining them as if from physical science point of view,uses old philosophical vocabularies, theories and unclear concepts. His revision is a sympathetic. He seems to be on a way to give us a physicist's point of view and discussion in our common work for the paradigmatic shift of science. Unfortunately, the shift seems to need more abstraction and many- disciplinary effort than these proposals. But in the teamwork Mr. Pitkänen has a strong point to give , and he seems to be sincere in his work in trying to understand the anomalous data of parapsychology. As a non- physicist, from a philosphical point of view, it would be interesting to get an answer if Mr. Pitkänen could internalize the many- dimensional concept of Time, working on astrophysical or cosmic level too through the evolution of Materia, with a more general concept or model ( or theory) of forces in physics which path prof. Korotkov from the Department of Physics in St. Petersburg seems to follow in his discussions about the different forms of energy or the undersigned writer Lasse Laine in his unpublished project versionof his proposal for the new paradigm of science from 1983, or about the active, ontological , independent entities of Spirit- Soul- Mind in the incarnated level of reality, working through volitional acts during the re-incarnation stage of life. The proposed teamwork should even include biologists ( discussion about the new DNA- theory which could explain fe. evolutionary differences evenif having the common collective consciousness), neurologist's discussion about the brain, using non- physical abilities ( here Pitkänen's explanations seem to be on a right path) and internalizing the evolution of the holistic brain, social scientists and transpersonal psychologists when trying to formulate a more general, many- dimensional theory of evolution which includes even ethical choices, not only the volitional ones as stated by Mr. Pitkänen. In summary, an interesting work, on the way. A strong paper, carrying forward the front of the new paradigm of science and philosophy. -- Writer - evaluator , Lasse T. Laine, 54, is a philosopher- social scientist by his education from the university of Uppsala, Sweden. In Laine's unpublished Ph.D thesis, 1. version, 1974, in Theoretical Philosophy, Uppsala university, he presented his first, tentative proposal for the new paradigm of science as he understands it, and continued to develope it further in the project version of 1983, in the paper taken up in The Evolution Seminar, Department of Political Science, at the same university. He works now in his own company Vidorg and / or in different short time works forwarding the evolutionary work or collecting resources for the further work on the new paradigm. A general presentation of his various papers can be found on the his company site, at page: http://www.vidorg.com/vidorg5.html
© 2002 Lasse Laine
|
||
 |
|
|