Fwchapman

Re Akashic records

Be not dismayed, brother. Why would people expect to find "scientific" evidence of matters of the metaphysical realm? It is precisely because these are supra-scientific that they are of interest!! blessings!! Pandeist (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Pandeist, thank you very much! Beautifully said. Indeed, it had crossed my mind that saying "There is no scientific evidence for existence of the Akashic records" is like saying "There is no scientific evidence that kittens are cute." As you pointed out, this is metaphysics, not physics.

As the saying goes, "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." When your only tool is science, every problem looks like an experiment, but life is not a science experiment. It is much richer than that, which is why we also need tools like philosophy, theology, mythology, and more. Science studies the physical universe with great success, but the universe of human experience, which is where we really live, often lies beyond the reach of science.

That being said, I am heartened to discover quite a few research groups studying consciousness and related ideas from a scientific perspective:

• Institute of Noetic Sciences
• Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness
• University of Arizona Center for Consciousness Studies
• The Monroe Institute
• Society for Scientific Exploration
• Association for Transpersonal Psychology
• Parapsychological Association

In addition, scientifically interesting anomalies are reported with journalistic integrity by media outlets like these:

• The Anomalist
• Fortean Times

Given the amount of serious study by well-credentialed people, such matters can hardly be considered a "fringe" point of view. This is protoscience, not pseudoscience, which is exactly the point I tried to make in the article before all my edits were expunged—a temporary victory for the soulless minions of orthodoxy.

Am I correct in assuming that our conversation is public? I've been working with IT professionally for decades, but I find Wikipedia to be the most confounding user interface of all time. Blessings to you as well, Pandeist! fwchapman (talk) 01:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)