The general meaning of the term 'realism' is “A tendency to face facts and be practical rather than imaginative or visionary.” (ref) however it is also the name of a particular philosophical movement.

Realism is "in philosophy, the viewpoint which accords to things which are known or perceived an existence or nature which is independent of whether anyone is thinking about or perceiving them." (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/493091/realism)

"The nature and plausibility of realism is one of the most hotly debated issues in contemporary metaphysics, perhaps even the most hotly debated issue in contemporary philosophy. The question of the nature and plausibility of realism arises with respect to a large number of subject matters, including ethics, aesthetics, causation, modality, science, mathematics, semantics, and the everyday world of macroscopic material objects and their properties." (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism/)

The aspect being discussed here is that of the "everyday world of macroscopic material objects and their properties" and the idea "that physical objects exist independently of their being perceived." (http://www.answers.com/topic/realism)

In recent conversations and on several videos on the web I have noticed that there is a tendency for minds to confuse the name of the movement with the meaning of the word. This leads them to redefine within their own minds the terms 'real' and 'reality', which leads to enormous confusion in conversations about reality (that which actually exists). For example, they say things such as “Reality doesn't "actually exist"! All Realities are illusions. They are only what we each perceive in our own minds. Realities only exist in our own minds.” This is a common colloquial use of the terms, which is directly contradictory to the standard dictionary and philosophical meanings.

If we cannot coherently work towards an understanding of reality (that which actually exists) so that we can effectively participate in reality then we may soon no longer be a part of that which exists (extinction). For this reason those who wish to converse coherently about reality should clearly distinguish between the name of a movement and the meaning of the word, and should keep to the commonly accepted definitions of 'real' and 'reality'. Arbitrarily changing the meaning of such key words creates confusion that is very harmful to coherent rational discourse.

To assist with this I include below a table with commonly accepted meanings along one dimension and different usage patterns along the other. Then I offer an explanation of why the confusion arises and some alternative ways of communicating with naïve realists. Then I also include a list of quotes from genuine realists (those who are realistic) not nominal realists (those who ascribe to a particular philosophical movement).  More >

It can be difficult being an agent of change. Here is an anology to help you understand what it means to be an agent of change and how to go about it effectively. Below are some quotes about caterpillar / butterfly anatomy and the vital role of imaginal cells.  More >

An oracular consultation brings a message
from Universal Consciousness.

Question:

Great Spirit, through the I Ching please give advice to
all who seek to nurture the emerging memeplex.

Summary of the Response:
 

The old memeplex (paradigm) is dead so transform it into an interface into the Ageless Wisdom through which blessings will flow. No longer interpret it literally, but use it as an analogy by which to comprehend the deeper reality. When you serve the Ageless Wisdom you can become Great. Prepare for the arrival of the new and approach of something powerful and meaningful. Welcome it and draw near to it without expecting to get what you want immediately. Let your desire for contact be expressed through a willingness to work and serve. Invite it to come nearer by bringing things together. Tolerate and protect things and people outside your normal set of values without setting limits on them. There is an undeveloped potential that you rely on without knowing it. Continually correct yourself. Rushing to completion will leave you open to danger and the whole situation will dissolve. Meditate on Reality and spread the teachings to inspire the lives of all. Gather the resources for a great project. Through self-knowledge and inner awareness establish an enduring connection with reality in your innermost selves. Through this you can participate harmoniously in the unfolding stream of events. Love and Spirit return as an entirely new space of possibility and field of activity opens up and awareness expands into a joyous new state of existence.

Full description of the response:

see Advice on Nurturing the Emerging Memeplex.

For more on the I Ching in general see here.

There is an emerging paradigm (memeplex) in the collective consciousness that will change the face of the planet and the nature of humanity. For some information on its likely 'shape' and some advice on how to nurture it in positive ways please see:
Shape of the Emerging Memeplex and How to Nurture It.

An oracular consultation brings a message
from Universal Consciousness.

Question:

Great Spirit, through the I Ching please give wise counsel
to all workers of the Light, in this phase of the journey.

Summary of the Response:

Workers of the light, you are collectively like a foetus in a womb, bearing
a gift from the spirit. The many obstacles serve as protection whilst you
nurture your inner energy. Eliminate outmoded ideas and ways of thinking
through mutual effort and support. Prepare yourselves to undertake a great
paradigm shift. Overcome fear and denial, liberate your confined energies
and connect with what is real. Through this transition you will collectively
emerge into the full light of day and be honoured at the centre of power,
thus initiating a time of abundant, creative growth. Through self-knowledge
and inner awareness establish an enduring connection with reality in your
innermost selves. Through this you can participate harmoniously in the
unfolding stream of events. Love and Spirit return as an entirely new space
of possibility and field of activity opens up and awareness expands into a
joyous new state of existence.

Full description of the response:

see Wisdom for this Phase of the Journey.

For more on the I Ching in general see here.

Comments inspired by the article: Quantum Phenomenology http://www.elea.org/Phenomenology/

Excerpt from the abstract: "Starting with the Descartes' cogito, "I think, therefore I am"--and taking an uncompromisingly rational, rigorously phenomenological approach--I attempt to derive the basic principles of recursion theory (the backbone of all mathematics and logic), and from that the principles of feedback control theory (the backbone of all biology), leading to the basic ideas of quantum mechanics (the backbone of all physics)."  More >

I have been very busy lately and not posting much at all so here is a quick update...

I recently wrote an article for The Explorer, which is the newsletter of the Society for Scientific Exploration. The newsletter has yet to be published but you can read the article here:
Signs of an Emerging Paradigm Shift.

I am also writing a book. It is a detailed explanation of the core principles of my work. In style, the book is somewhere between a popular science book, an introductory textbook on advanced mathematics and an introductory treatise on abstract metaphysics. Part one is complete and the last part is coming soon. You can read part one here:
System Science of Virtual Reality: Toward the Unification of Empirical and Subjective Science.

Right now I am mostly involved in a fascinating online conversation about naïve realism, its ramifications, its role in the global systemic crisis and how to overcome it for the sake of us all... If you have an interest in this subject then check out STAR for some background information.

The essay Changing How we think for the sake of all describes my input to that conversation. The comments have been arranged and edited into a single essay that expresses the vision that I am sharing in the conversation.

Before I start I will mention that this explanation has been simplified into common sense (naïve realist) language hence it doesn't accurately convey what I think but it is adequate. The points are not random but develop in sequence.  More >

Let us begin with the proposition that:

1. Consciousness is fundamental and universal.

2. The individual self is not unitary.

3. The world is not an illusion as in 'unreal' but is an illusion in that it is not as it appears to be.

Clarification of (1 and 2): Many millions of people have successfully performed the experiment of deep meditation and attained the realisation that everyday consciousness is a complex self-propelling system of thoughts, emotions, day-dreams and so on which self organise into a personality, but beneath this there is a level of pure awareness that is often called the watcher or the seer. This deeper level transcends the individual personality and has its source in an underlying universal consciousness.

It is this level of consciousness that is proposed to be fundamental and universal. Let us call this level of consciousness pure-awareness and the more complex levels of consciousness can be called mind. Think of pure-awareness as a thread of consciousness and mind as a complex dynamic knot of pure-awareness.

Clarification of (3): Whilst the world appears within the mind as objects and events within space and time, these are the appearances of things but not their deeper reality. As the many streams of pure-awareness interact they produce in each other the contents of consciousness (phenomena) and thereby each stream of consciousness experiences a phenomenal world. But that world is an interpretation of the contents of consciousness whereas the actual reality is a field of interacting pure-awareness that are part of a single unified process.

This sounds rather counter-intuitive to many people who are habituated to a common sense realist (naïve realist) world-view – however it does make sense. Furthermore, given its explanatory power and ontological simplicity Occam's razor would fall in its favour.

Is there some comprehensible model or analogy through which we can make sense of these propositions? We cannot use models involving objects and events in space and time so are there any other known models we can use?

How about virtual reality – not the current technology of VR where a physical human is tricked into perceiving a virtual world, but rather a simulated universe within which simulated systems exist and experience that universe from within. I will be considering a particular type of reality generative simulator called SMN. The idea that reality may be virtual is growing in acceptance and becoming a compelling world-view, hence here we look at its spiritual implications. For an introduction to the scientific approach to the subject see the article God Is the Machine and A Cybernetic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.  More >

Following is a collection of quotes from leading thinkers that variously point towards an emerging paradigm that challenges many of our deepest assumptions about what is real and what is reality.  More >

What is this experiential process that is happening right now? What is experience?

What is this individual stream of experience? What am I?

Why do I experience things right now and only remember past experiences? What is the present moment, the arrow of time, time itself, the process of change and memory?

What do the contents-of-experience (phenomena) represent? What is the phenomenal world?

What is that persistent complex phenomenon that closely accompanies my stream of experience? What is my body?  More >

Some comments inspired by two fascinating essays written by David Chalmers, The Puzzle of Conscious Experience and Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness.

The “hard problem of consciousness” is the issue of why is it that we experience anything at all, or why is it that there is something that it is like to be something? The reason why this problem is intractable to empirical science is because in its philosophical foundations empiricism takes the contents of experience (phenomena) to be the foundation of its ontology, upon which all its later knowledge depends.

However it is impossible to use the contents of experience to construct a theory of experience because, in a causal sense, experience precedes the contents of experience. Empirical science studies phenomena, their perceivable attributes, behaviours and functional relationships hence it can explain much of the functional aspects of consciousness such as how do we integrate information from many sources into a coherent knowledge base or how can we verbalise our internal states (the easy problems of consciousness) but it cannot explain experience itself (the hard problem).

However, empirical science is not the whole of science. There are rationalist methods which, as quantum physics shows, can be very accurate (quantum physics is by far the most accurate science ever developed and it has rationalist rather than empiricist foundations). Rationalist approaches must eventually connect with, and be verified by their correspondence with the objects of experience, however these are not their starting point. They take a rational theoretical model as their ontological foundation and only when this foundation later connects with experience are they considered to be verified. It is conceivable that a rationalist theory could overcome the limitations of empiricism and provide a scientific explanation of conscious experience.  More >

Lately my focus has been primarily on inner work hence there has been very little published for a while. But below are some links to some recent work.

Unification of Science: A brief outline of the path towards unifying introspective science (Eastern spirituality) and empirical science (Western science).

Roots of Meaning: an essay on meaning, conditioning and misunderstanding - proposes a way to overcome entrenched misunderstanding.

Perception, Cognition & Communication Ontology: to help clearly reason about what we experience, think and say.

Exploratory Analysis of Naive and Unified Realism: uses the PCC ontology to clearly explain the difference between naive and unified realism.

SMN Latest Version: Introduces the latest version of the SMN general system simulator.

How Does SMN Work: Introduction to the details of how the SMN algorithm works.

SMN Ontology: An ontology showing the logical structure of the SMN algorithm.

SMN System Modelling Using Ontologies: A tutorial introducing the idea of using ontologies to create system models that can be immediately simulated in SMN.

STAR: STriking at the Roots - a proposal for a project to identify the root causes of systemic social dysfunction throughout history and work towards rectifying the situation.

I have also brought an end to the experiment with public discussion of these issues, it has not been successful, hence there are no more public comments on this blog. If you wish to discuss these things then email me.