Science as Cult Soience of Life (c) SIG, the Foundation for advancement of  Integral Health Care

A cult is a society operating and maintaining a specific belief system.
Reality is such a belief, which means that science may well be a cult.
Cults have strict rules for admission (and use of eviction as sanction).
Scientists have to comply with requirements for admission, and can be ousted.

Science is a factory (production site) of beliefs about reality realisation.
History has shown that many of these beliefs were wrong: mere superstitions.
We need to understand to which extent science can be wrong' (a pathology).
Because presently scientists (science') are destroying life and/on Earth.

"Science" is a group activity of individual scientists ('working for money').
As a group-activity, science is operated by collective/individual processes.
The (information) processes defining science operate at the unconscious level.
Therefor we must understand how science is a construct of our (hidden) beliefs.

    The basis of Mathematics lies in its Axioms; the basis of Physics lies in it Singularities.
    The Axioms are the equivalent of the social Taboos, in every culture on Earth.
    These are the hinge-points of our understanding of the universe, as relating to us.
    All those points are Singularities, where the System turns Inside-out; and opposites unite.

    A simple example of this is: “Is the UniVerse inside a Box, Bottle, Bag or Bubble?”.
    That is, is it defined by laws of solid, liquid, gaseous or plasma ‘objects’?
    As long as we cannot answer that question, all our descriptions are unfounded.
    Although our equations/formulations may ‘work’, they have no real ‘explanation’…

If the most basic questions cannot be answered, then we must question the questions.
As described in Quantum Theory: WE operate “the Collapse of the Vector of State”.
Reality is a realisation; and the measurement (verb) creates the measurement (noun).
In our brain we can ‘see’ how perception and projection are intricately interwoven.

In our brain the signals and codes for perception and hallucination are quite the same.
Sensoricepsis (surface) and Propriocepsis (core) operate the same electro-chemical signals.
The forebrain (surface) and hind-brain (core) interplay via the shared signal dynamic.
Our ‘reality’ (surface) and Realisation (core) are inverted forms of the same information.

‘Reality’ as such does not exist; it cannot exist: it is a construct from body-surface sensors.
“Samsara” is the name used in India for the information construct from the sensory system.
“Maya” is the corresponding name if the information construct created in our brain.
This means that Objective Reality as such does not exist; it is always a subjective realisation.

For generations scientists have told themselves and each other that reality is objective.
In fact, reality does not exist (it is a realisation) and objects do not exist (they are processes).
In not understanding the nature of objects, scientist misconstrued their understanding of reality.
It has taken for centuries for scientists to realise that matter = molecules = matter = information.

That means that objects are forms of information (in formation); the same holds for Reality.
In fact, the so-called ‘Objects’ of Science, are linguistic objects only (concepts, models).
In the same manner the so-called ‘facts’ of science are social mental artifacts only.
All of the equations of so-called ‘reality’ are in fact formulations of realisation/observation.
The so-called understanding of science must be related to its origin/inverse: consciousness creation.

Scientists still neglect/ignore/deny the nature of consciousness, and its basis in existence.
Scientists pretend that they can know what they know ‘without consciousness being involved’.
As a result scientists disregard the workings of consciousness, and how they work with it.
Thence scientists do not know when they disrespect/ignore/deny/abuse how consciousness ‘works’.

The result is that scientist do not know how they use consciousness in creating observations/ideas.
They are unaware of the way consciousness has its own logic, and can thus be in error.
The misconceptions (errors of Logic) are errors in our/their use of “Freedom of Choice”.
(Which Scientists do not know because they deny it because they disrespect it because they ignore it.)

By our choices we operate consciousness, the functioning of our thinking, and the forming of ideas.
The correspondence between concepts and context determines the nature of our ideas.
“Concepts”, “Ideas”, “Thoughts” and “Beliefs” all represent the same concept, in different contexts.
The different contextual integration pertains to different connections with/in the context.

Scientists have chosen to disregard their involvement in their context: “Outsider Observer”.
It took many centuries before scientists realised that their observations created their observation.
Slowly scientists are starting to realise that observations (noun/verb) are information in formation.
Scientists yet fail to address/understand that consciousness also is information in formation.

Scientists yet have to understand how that affects their being, their thinking and their findings.
Most often they do not realise how their intent creates the conditions for their observation.
Their observations are therefore conditioned by their beliefs; and their conditioned reflexes.
This means that they tend do ‘see what they choose to believe’; but they don’t know that…


Science is a belief system; a cult; a society operating by unfounded beliefs: superstition.
This can only be realised by looking into the nature of a society; and a superstition.
It requires the understanding of the relationship between choices and beliefs.
AND it requires the understanding of the relationship between choices and community.

Science is the society of scientists, operating/acting under a (uniform) code of conduct.
This code of conduct develops/functions as/at subconscious levels of behaviour.
Much of the activities of science are determined by protocols and procedures ('Reflexes').
Almost all of science is determined by superstitions ('models', 'laws', thus Beliefs).

Science, like any form of social organisation, operates on tacit/embedded code.
In our body we can see how communication code operates in four dimensions.
Each functional level operates its own form of logic/program/code/conduct.
The same we find in the conduct/code/protocols/procedures in social dynamics.

It is necessary to study and understand these communicational codes creating science.
The tacit/embedded codes/beliefs determine the behaviour/decisions of scientists.
As a result, science is shaped by forces that the scientists neglect thus don't understand.
This determines the functioning of the scientists in forming science; as superstition.

Scientists have a tendency to claim that what they measure is 'true' and 'universally valid'.
Quantum field theory make explicit that this never can be the case; reality does not exist.
Whatever we measure and determine, thus describe, is merely a formulation of realisation.
Creation as such is never a noun, but always a verb; "Reality is always a realisation".

That is why we must juxtapose the belief in science with the beliefs of any cult/religion.
The earlier texts in the creation of our bones/reflexes/belief/realisation all apply.
In this case we can see that science is the result of sciencing; the product of the process.
Just as our anatomy is created the dynamic of physiology, by regulation, in integration.

In our body we see how anatomy, physiology, regulation and integration are the same.
It is the relationship between matter, molecules, atoms and information.
It is the same relationship as that of physics, chemistry, electromagnetism and informatics.
It is the relationship between photon-leaps, electron-leaps, electron-valence and electron-bonding.

The change in relationship is based on a change degree of recursion in electron-bonding.
This is a topological change in the relationship in interfacing in the interface.
This is reducible to the principle of change in the interface (‘turning a singularity inside-out’).
This (and only this) is the basis of Freedom of Choice; the essence of Life and Creation.

We operate/shift between different forms of logic (“dimensions”) by Freedom of Choice.
Freedom of Choice operates in the interface (singularity) between different dimensions.
Every dimension is defined by a specific mode of LOGICAL coherence.
Freedom of choice operates in/as/by changing the mode of involvement.

As long as scientists do not understand Freedom of Choice, they do not understand (their) involvement.
As a result, they will confuse observation (noun) with observation (verb).
They will not understand that what they experience is the opposite of what is taking place.
They will confuse realisation with reality; and kill ‘reality’ in ‘killing magic’.

Magic is the act/art of operating intent: the use of consciousness in creation.
As Quantum Theory proposed: experience is but a Collapse of the Vector of State.
In changing our intent/assumptions/beliefs/reflexes we (re)condition our experiences.
Reality in that sense is a projection of our reflex conditioned beliefs.

Science and scientists are nor constructs nor entities to themselves.
Scientists are normal humans; people operating under a specific code of conduct.
Science is the process of group formations, of scientists interacting together
Therein we see the same principles as group formation of cells; of ‘microbial clusters’.

"Scientists' do not exist; neither does "science" as such exist.
Compare it to the labelling of specific forms of dance, or of musical compositions.
Or the different code of conduct known as the different culture of humanity.
It is the tacit code of conduct (the beliefs) which determine the social organisation.

In the case of science it is important to study how, and why, this happens.
Because science as a whole is reshaping the Earth/reality as we know it.
It is evident that science is a manifestation of disease: destroying Earth.
As in our body, the origin of the disease lies in erroneous belief (miscommunication).

That is why it is necessary to regard the aspect of science which is in fact a superstition.
In our body/mind we operate specific mechanisms to compensate for our Blind Spots.
In the same way we create, individually and collectively, forms of superstition.
Superstitions are scaffolding (wound crusts') to compensate for lack-of-knowing.

Science as a whole is a social instrument for anxiety reduction of our culture(s).
It serves to observe the unknown; and (as does our immune system) get to know it.
It operates by the principle of digestion, just as we see operative in mind and body.
In science/sciencing we observe the same processes, as a form(ing) of social dynamic.

The social organisation/formation thus operates by the same principle as in health.
It follows the principles of cellular communication; as seen in metabolism and digestion.
It operates by the same dynamics of organisation as seen in embryology and immunology.
It manifests the same principle as that of manifestation of our body, and of life/cosmology.

Bearing this in mind we can understand that these processes of (in)formation can go wrong.
That means that any/every disease we known in body and mind we can see in science/society also.
In this case we need to be attentive to the social diseases of the mind; "superstitions'.
Because science as a whole still operates to a large extent by denied ignorance: superstition.

Only when scientists make explicit what they don't know, can they see what is unfounded.
There are many measurements based on beliefs which are in fact based only on superstition.
As under hypnosis, we can see that the measurements'/'findings' seem to make sense.
It is only years later, when the beliefs changed that the falseness of the findings can be acknowledged.

Science is a dynamic process; compare it to the development of physiology and mind.
The principles of/for development of science as the same as those we find in our body/mind.
For that reason we must include the system pathology into our considerations, of science.
And we must see when, and how, the process/dynamics/findings/result of science is sick.

At present we see that science is the prime cause of planetary pollution/destruction.
Scientists placed themselves outside of reality, thereby starting to play god/devil
Below we see how the disease of science stems from scientists' misidentification.
This understanding is needed to be able to heal the dis-ease (pathology) of science.

For that we must address that science is a social activity of redefining ((y)our) beliefs.
Therein we must take into account the relationship between beliefs and superstition.
We can compare the superstition as the scaffolding used to build a bridge.
And the belief as the bridge itself; the means to get from one realisation to another.

This text is based on the principles which have already been described in "The Bones of Belief".
The creation of the scaffolding and bridges, parallels the dynamic of the formation of bones.
The production of scientific findings and outcomes parallel the creation of beliefs.
But we must combine both insights to see how scientists create science: a social 'bone/belief'.

    Realise that we MUST regard the pathology of science.
    We will find that science is an abstraction; we must understand what this means.
    We must realise that science as such does not exists: it is a form of behaviour of scientists.
    We must realise that even scientists do not exist: it is a form of conduct of (individual) people.

We must reduce/deduce science to scientists to people to codes of conduct.
That means that science/scientist/protocol must be understood in terms of choices.
In chemistry, the phases of bonding determined the form(ing) of matter (materialisation).
In society, our individual choices, together, form the social construct/outcome.

  • Beliefs
  • Behaviour
  • Conduct
  • Protocol
  • Many people live by reflex.
    Many people let their lives be determines by protocol.
    Many people let their lives be determined by books.
    Many people thus let their lives be lived by others.

    Science too, operates in this manner, which makes it irresponsible.
    Philip Zimbardo described how abstraction leads to evil behaviour.
    1) Anonymisation, 2) generalisation, 3) abstraction, 4) irresponsible.
    = 1) Personal, 2) relational, 3) group, 4) humanity identification loss.

Loss of identity/identification is the same pathology as underlies cancer.
Cancer is a system disease, determined by local loss of information integrity.
As a result, cells locally no longer act in correspondence with the whole.
In a sense, the local cells try to survive in a situation where they can not.

Cancer illustrates the need of information integrity, for the whole system.
It exemplifies that identification must be addressed as a topic in science.
It involves the integrity in our participation in creation.
Thus it is based on the manner in which Freedom of Choice "connects up".

"Hell" is the traditional term for loss of freedom of choice.
"Purgatory" is the traditional term for erratic inconsistent choices.
"Paradise" is the term for local-non -local consistent choices.
“Heaven” describes the universal ability to make coherent choices.

"i-god" starts with "i", representing information integrity/integration/identity.
"G" represents "Generation", the power of for creation; also known as Magic.
"O" represents "Operation", or Organic Organisation; also known as Health.
"D" represents "Destruction" or "Determination" Or Decision; a.k.a. "Death".

All of these principles underlie the existence/creation of science.
Scientists traditionally look at the way they can regard the world.
Scientist however must also apply their findings … to their finding.
Science, and scientists, evolve from the same principles as scientists describe.

Science has become totally irresponsible; creating world-wide destruction.
This is due to the behaviour of individual scientists, working together.
They do not behave responsibly, because their theory made them outsiders.
When the theory showed them to be creators, they denied the implications.

Classical Theory described the scientists as 'outsider'; response-unable.
Relativity Theory limited scientific involvement by the 'Event Horizon'.
Quantum Theory stipulated that the observer determines the outcome.
Unified Field theory describes that the universe is one integral system.

This means that the scientist is never an outsider, but always a creator.
That means that the Observation (verb) creates the observation (noun).
That means that the scientist is responsible/response-able always.
That means that science/scientists are NEVER objective; ALWAYS subjective.

Science is an active act of participation in creation; as alchemists described.
Every finding of science applies to the scientists also, always.
It is necessary to understand how scientists create science, as abstraction.
It is necessary how that abstraction can scientists (together) create evil.

    The findings of Philip Zimbardo apply to the scientists, thus to science.
    Scientists create evil when they let abstractions determine what they do.
    Thereby whatever they do can become toxic, thus totally evil.
    This operates by the same principle (as described above) of "cancer".

Science has become toxic by scientists calling themselves 'outsiders'.
As a result, they 'started to play god' and called their 'laws' 'universal';.
Even when relativity limited their validity, they ignored this.
Even when quantum theory stated their involvement, they ignored this

Scientists are destroying life on Earth, via GMO, radiation, and toxins.
Ignorance, Denial, Superstition is The ONLY reason science is toxic.
Scientists ignore/deny that/how together they form/create science.
And that the irresponsibility of science stems from their superstition

Science MUST be understood as a constructs of beliefs; a superstition.
Sciences does NOT propose, postulate, universal laws 'of nature'.
Scientific laws are always rules for/of collective subjective observation.
Scientific 'laws' are linguistic constructs, of our own subjective realisation

Most of the present-day problems of science originate from its origination.
When science was first defined/created, the church claimed monopoly on god.
This was presented as a monopoly on creation, presented as a trait of god.
That served to keep those scientists subservient to church mind domination.

It has taken hundreds of years for humanity to develop out of that mental prison.
Even now, social mental control by 'the church' is still effective, via money.
Scientists (like others) let their life be determined by money; thus by others.
Money determines the sequence (thus consequences) of their choices.

    Freedom of choice always involves four levels of consciousness/consideration:
    1) local, 2) relational, 3) contextual, 4) unconditional; which corresponds with:
    1) conscious, 2) subconscious, 3) unconscious, and 4) out of conscious; as in:
    1) individual, 2) relationship, 3) group, and 4) humanity/community/society/science.

    We are dealing with four distinct related levels of operation/choice/code/abstraction.
    Each of these levels operates its own specific kind of code (Dirac/Fourier/Moiré/Gabor).
    This makes that each of these levels operate as distinct sets (‘levels of consciousness’).
    This is the basic principle for Interfacing (Total System Inversion) using 4D Dynamic Logic.

    Each of these modes of logic operates at the subatomic level, also known as Phase Space.
    This same logic operates in the dynamic of materialisation (photon/electron/valence/bonding).
    This determines the coherence/cohesion/division/integration dynamics between living body cells.
    This is the basis of inter-human (and inter-species communication), which operates by the same logic.

    Due to this logic we will always need to deal with the relationship of the Part in/and/as the Whole.
    That means we need to address every ‘object’ as a ‘relation’ in ‘transformation’ for ‘integration’.
    It means that we MUST regard everything ‘material’ on basis of its 4D phase organisation only.
    That requires that we make use of a languaging with 4D Logic dynamic capacity; which we have not.

      This means that we can never describe the nature of Nature, by any non-4D dynamic logic.
      It means that we will never describe the determinant system singularities defining the system.
      Because we can NOT describe our own involvement, in our participation in creation.
      We can experience it but not describe it; because of the limitations in our language.

That means that we will ALWAYS have fundamental lacunations in our formulations: “axioms”.
There where we use cultural language to describe ourselves we will experience the same within is.
That is the basis of the operation of Beliefs; the compensation for the psychological Blind Spots.
By knowing this Belief can be replaced by Faith; the non-verbal counterpart, based on experience.

We all make use of Tacit Knowledge; the non-verbal information communication (Body Knowledge).
Our learning, and capacity to learn, is based on this (body-based) internal communication dynamic.
We cannot ‘map’ our internal experience of information integrity (health) into/onto our context.
Because, in transforming it from inside to outside we must do a total system (involvement) inversion.

This is why we use belief; as part of our form of communication.
Internally what we operate is the counterpart, known as “faith”.
The word belief as used in conversation has a different meaning.
It is the formulation of ‘Internal Blind Spot Compensation’; the cover-up of/for ignorance.

That is the form of “belief” that we address in discussing science as belief system.
Science itself, as a whole, is a social communication system for Angst reduction.
This evidently requires the understanding of the basis of Angst: Ignorance, not-knowing.
That makes science as a whole a belief system, a cover-up patch for not-knowing


NavUp NavRight
[Welcome] [Core Concepts] [Topics] [Participants] [Publications] [Research] [Projects]
Scence__of_Life_-_Presentation_Title (t)