Critics of Seth may say that his teachings are merely ideas or theories. One way of overcoming this criticism is to show that someone else has reached similar conclusions from a different direction or angle. One such possibility is in the work of physicist David Bohm. Bohm was an American born in 1917 and died in 1992. There is no indication that he had heard of the Seth teachings, and his conclusions could be said to be independent of those teachings.
David Bohm was born in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, in 1917. His father ran a successful furniture business, making his way to the USA from what was then Austria-Hungary. He obtained his doctorate in physics from the University of California, Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, and was afterwards involved with the Manhattan Project. He later became a victim of McCarthyism due to his supposed communist leanings.
After Bohm's arrival in Brazil on 10 October 1951, the US Consul in São Paulo confiscated his passport, informing him he could retrieve it only to return to his country. He applied for and received Brazilian citizenship. In 1957, Bohm relocated to the United Kingdom, and in 1961 he was made professor of theoretical physics at the University of London's Birkbeck College.
The similarity between Seth's teachings and the findings of David Bohm have been highlighted by Norman Friedman in his book, “Bridging Science and Spirit: Common Elements in David Bohm's Physics, the Perennial Philosophy and Seth”. Friedman points out that Bohm's concept of the “implicate order” correspond to Framework 2 described by Seth:
“According to this view, when the implicate order unfolds, the explicate order displays. The
explicate order is the ordinary world of experience. It is the unfolded portion of the holomovement,
which displays to us an aspect of the implicate order. The implicate order, on the other hand,
provides the commonality for matter, life, and consciousness. It is in the implicate order that matter
and consciousness are basically identical, differing only in subtlety.” (p.43)
“Seth arbitrarily designates the various levels as frameworks but cautions against too much
reliance on any demarcations since the levels are utterly interpenetrated. His construct clearly is
similar to the spectrum of implicate orders and the hierarchy of consciousness. Although he
discusses only four frameworks, Seth clearly indicates that this enumeration can extend without
limits. “Behind [Framework 2]” he says, “are endless patterns of orderliness and complexity that are
beyond your conscious Framework 1 comprehension.”
An obvious correlation exists between Bohm's explicate order, Ken Wilber's physical (material)
level, and Seth's Framework 1. This level stretches from electrons to stars, encompassing the world
in which we carry on our daily lives, the everyday world of experience, the world of display. Seth's
Framework 2 can be identified with Wilber's deep structure and with Bohm's implicate order.
According to Seth, Framework 2 houses the probabilities that are available to Framework 1. Thus
all the events of Framework 1 emerge from Framework 2, which is the creative medium responsible
for physical life. In Framework 2, the moment point is operative, as it is in the implicate order and
in the deep structure.
“Seth says that reality is formed from elementary consciousness units (CUs), the arrangement
and form of which result in our universe. This seemingly reductionist approach falls apart when the
CU is defined. According to Seth, CUs have definite propensities and purpose; therefore, the basic
building blocks of the universe are conscious. In order to avoid confusion, we must remember that
the consciousness of the CU is not like that of a sentient being. The CU is not inert, however, and it
has the uncanny ability to appear as a particle in our three-dimensional universe and to swarm as a
wave outside our universe.
The similarity between Seth's concept of CUs and Bohm's view of particles is apparent. To
Bohm, the elementary particle is so constituted as to enable it to react to active information found in
the wave function through its quantum potential. Basil Hiley, Bohm's collaborator, makes clear that
this does not mean that the elementary particle has cogs and gears on a microscopic level; this
would be returning to the Newtonian model of inert billiard balls. Rather, the elementary particle
should be viewed as an aspect of the whole as defined by quantum field theory. The particle is a
manifestation of the field (or implicate order) in our three-dimensional space and as such it has a
kind of protointelligence. This intelligence is evident because the implicate order is itself alive.” (p.112)
Topic: Independent confirmation of Seth teachings (Read 608 times)
