Mainly because if what Lovelock is saying comes true - it's most likely going to be 1 billion people living in the 3rd world, rather than in the most advanced countries. So, probably a rather smaller bunch of self-actualized people aiming to be "multi-dimensional" (whatever that is).

Of course, Lovelock may just be wrong - here's to hoping.

Though I'm not particularly optimistic.

---

_{They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm.}

it's most likely going to be 1 billion people living in the 3rd world, rather than in the most advanced countries.

Lovelock apparently thinks that the survivors will make their way to the arctic regions in order to survive desertification (water insufficiency) that will reduce the food supply and lead to the expected consequences.

So, probably a rather smaller bunch of self-actualized people aiming to be "multi-dimensional" (whatever that is).

"Multi-dimensional" means aware of different vertical levels of possible experience. According to perennial wisdom — the reports of mystics and teaching of masters around the world from time immemorial — there are three relative changing "worlds" nested within each other — the gross physical world, the subtle word of energy, and the causal world of intelligence — whose source is the Absolute (unchanging). A completely multidimensional being, i.e., one who is fully conscious, is comprehensively aware of these in the eternal present as an indivisible unity. A unidimensional sentient being is only aware of the gross physical world. Beings that are partially multidimensional are in between.

For example, a unidimensional being is aware of the gross physical world and uses energy and mind, but is aware of them only through their effects. A unidimensional being projects an idea of the Absolute as "God" or some such without any awareness of what that word means other than conceptually, e.g., through negation or superlation. In contrast, a being that is subtly conscious is directly aware of energy, and a being that is causally conscious is directly aware of mind.

This is not a speculation or ideology but is based on subjective reports that scientists are now correlating with physiological and neurological observations. What is particularly interesting is that masters have left teachings about how to cultivate these states of awareness. The relevant literature is vast and ancient, and it is embedded in a causal theory that enables corroboration subjectively and objectively. Enough people have now been practicing these teachings long enough to create a sufficient basis for scientific study, and numerous studies have already appeared in peer-reviewed publications.

My mind is open to this, but it all seems to be quite subjective still. The states of enhanced awareness, and their interpretation are subjective. The methods of the masters can cause the brain changes that cause these varieties of experience - but isn't the best explanation of them still phenomenological? They experiences reported are similar because our brains are similar - not necessarily because of anything else objective behind them.

Yes, meditation can bring enhanced well-being and a more philosophical or spiritual (or maybe even more complete view) of things - but it's a bit of a jump to say that it's a reflection of anything beyond our own craniums.

---

As you can tell, I'm entranced by the scientific materialist view of things - it *has* been rather useful - and as far as I know hasn't been refuted... Could you perhaps suggest a better "philosophical supposition"?

---

_{They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm.}

This is really a crucial point. In my view and that of my others, real change can only come from a shift in the collective consciousness and this only occurs through shifts in individual consciousness.

The response you give is rather typical because it is shaped by the prevailing worldview. Many people confuse that worldview for reality, but it is a just a cultural "moment" in the Hegelian sense. Every cultural moment is succeeded by another on the historical time clock. Each successive moment is shaped by the previous one, both building on the previous moment and reacting to it.

What is happening at the edge of the envelope right now is that ancient wisdom is interacting with modern scientific knowledge to produce a new paradigm, which will be the basis for a new worldview. The "hot topic" is discovering a theory of consciousness. The exciting part is that a comprehensive theory of consciousness already exists in perennial wisdom. It is summarized in some detail in Meher Baba's God Speaks, for instance.

There is also a practical aspect corresponding to this theory that provides the means for testing the theory in the laboratory of one's own awareness. Then, one can come to one's own conclusions based on one's own experience and understanding of it. As I've said previously, this is not mere speculation or ideology.

As you can tell, I'm entranced by the scientific materialist view of things - it *has* been rather useful - and as far as I know hasn't been refuted... Could you perhaps suggest a better "philosophical supposition"?

I just finished a short book that outlines this in a pretty easily understandable way. It is called What Is Philosophy? (And Why You Should Care). It a free PDF download here. Just scroll down to the bottom of the page.

There are a number of books that addressed this scientifically. A good summary, although a bit dated, is Michael Talbot's The Holographic Universe. It is largely based on the work of physicist David Bohm and psychologist Karl Pribram. For short summary, see Talbot's "The Universe Is A Hologram". I highly recommend David Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order to those who want to get into the meat of it and have some scientific chops.

BTW, there is no proving or refuting philosophical presuppositions like materialism or idealism, whose role is chiefly normative and prescriptive rather than principally descriptive. Norms like these delineate the boundaries of a universe of discourse. The problem with scientific materialism is that is often used to justify the belief that there is nothing significant outside its universe of discourse, which it cannot legitimately do logically, since it applies only to its own universe.

What I've read so far is pretty mind blowing.

And for completeness, I'll link to this recent Agonist story: Our world may be a giant hologram.

---

_{They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm.}

I'm sure we will be talking about this more, since it is key to the solution. BTW, there is much much more to this and it's very mind-blowing once you really stick your nose into it. It would be remarkable that it is so little publicized, if it were not so far removed from the current universe of discourse. It is therefore being introduced bit by bit.