https://marktdugshq.com/avstriya-shladming-zakladki-v-nalichii-amfetamin-boshki-kokain-spais-ekstazi-mdma-gashish-geroin-mef-mefedron-skorost.html Певек Купить закладку кокаин амфетамин гашиш ск мдма Deep Institute Rationale
ТАРАЗ Купить закладку кокаин амфетамин гашиш ск мдма The Deep Institute Rationale calls for scientists and researchers in various fields of knowledge to post texts and videos on the importance of moving the academic world away from simplistic definitions of reality with their subject-object Cartesian split, and moving ahead towards implying the synergic and synchronistic, multi-causal forces of connectivity and poiesis.
A subtle level where creation occurs like a ripple on the vacuum has been defined by physicists as the quantum field. Complex systems researchers have hypothesized that such chaotic level would bridge the subjective and the objective, and allow for and explain connectivity and synchronicity. It would be the deepest level of perception a human could develop. Our words are certainly poor at describing it. Human perception implies a subject-object split, while the quantum level is integrative.
Physicists as well as biologists and complex systems researchers have described a number of functions characterizing what has been named the quantum dimension of reality. It is auto-poietic: self-sufficient, self-organizing and self-generating. So far most experiments and studies on the quantum field have been seated in what in the modern era was named the ‘hard sciences’; but from a quantum perspective there is no hard or soft science. The major error of modern research, following the scientific method of René Descartes (1634), has been to separate the study of the objects from the study of the subject. There must be a subject to know the object, and both are in a state of mutual implication. For example, the study of physical anomalies through random generators suggests that the human mind has an impact on the objects (Jahn & Dunn, 2011). Thus it is possible to handle objective reality from the subjective realm as well and find new solutions to human problems and to the problems our society currently faces.
Around the planet, there are indications that ancient and non-Western knowledge does exist or has existed of what is named today the quantum field. In numerous anecdotal reports and experiments throughout centuries in various civilizations and cultures, this deep level has been described as having a living texture. It would seem to be built—for the people who experience it—in a dynamic texture of energy, intelligence and love. Some people would be able to perceive it, and even to project thoughts and intentions as ripples from this energy field, as they report it. Such testimonies have not been considered seriously in academia whose purposes have been in the main focused on the quest for objective knowledge. Yet the purpose of this new understanding is also scientific, giving a new meaning to the word ‘science’.
Quantum knowledge implies a new definition of science, in which science embodies a much deeper understanding. Within this understanding, subjective and objective knowledge are integrated. They are one. A new vision of science and of the way of organizing scientific research and academic departments follows that deep understanding. Robustness and rigor, systematic comparisons and connections, open-mindedness and method are still crucial to approach deep knowledge. However it responds to a new form of logic. In the Western world, Reason has been largely understood as the process of valuing certain principles, which entails devaluing the opposite values. Such polar and dual approach to Reason is not integrative. Research methodology takes a new sense, as the quantum field is both a field of ontology (or beingness) and of emerging epistemology, which molds emerging and possible ways of knowing.
A number of researchers and practitioners in various fields have alluded in their works to the importance of reaching depth in their field. Quite a few demonstrated that taking depth into account would help re-conceptualize their field in a way that would support a paradigmatic shift. Their works have been met more or less with success, but depth so far has not been understood as a trend. These researchers have not been connected across fields. Now it is possible to promote a large gathering of interest around a deeper approach to knowledge.