Here are some sources that offer support for the idea that we are one consciousness, support for the philosophy behind mental unity, and/or leads for the direction of our research in creating mental unity. These sources appear in the following order; asterisks signify the most prominent sources of the scientific leads for mental unity:

  • * Michael Persinger: "No More Secrets"
  • * Robert Duncan: "Intelligent Systems of Control"
  • Peter Russell: "The Global Brain"
  • Wai H. Tsang: "The Nature of Reality"
  • * Stuart Hameroff: "Consciousness Is More than Computation"
  • * Anthony Peake: "The Infinite Mindfield"
  • Michael Talbot: "The Holographic Universe"
  • John Hagelin: "What the Bleep Do We Know?"
  • Alan Watts: "The Real You" and "The Dream of Life"
  • B.F. Skinner: "Beyond Freedom and Dignity"
  • * Larry Dossey: "One Mind"
  • Miscellaneous Quotes

If you have any professional background in science, please read through the following leads found particularly for the idea of mental unity, contact me with any questions or concerns about these leads, and let me know if you have any advice of your own on how mental unity may continue to be researched and eventually actualized for all humanity. Your advice is especially important if you are knowledgeable in anything regarding the human nervous system, consciousness, or any of the specific topics listed below. Suggestions about any other topic, especially if you are reminded of any as you read through the following reviews, can also prove just as helpful. Your insight is very much appreciated, thank you.

  • the human brain and associated areas, particularly the right parietal lobes, the right occipital lobes, the left cerebral hemisphere, the hippocampus, the parahippocampal gyrus, the entorhinal cortices (the relevance of all of which is discussed below by Michael Persinger), or the pineal gland (discussed by Anthony Peake)
  • individual neurons, particularly the microtubules within them (discussed by Stuart Hameroff), the traits-associated amine receptors found on some of them (discussed by Peake), or the ionotropic glutamate receptors found on some of them (discussed by Persinger)
  • parapsychological phenomena, particularly telepathy, clairvoyance (both discussed by Persinger), or telekinesis (discussed by Michael Talbot)
  • the Earth's magnetic field (Persinger)
  • lunar transits (Persinger)
  • the human heart (Persinger)
  • the effects of waves of particular frequencies on the brain, especially seven to eighteen hertz (Persinger), any of the Schumann resonances (Persinger), forty to eighty hertz (Hameroff), and eight megahertz (Hameroff)
  • signals, waves, or frequencies emanating from the brain (discussed by Michael Persinger and Robert Duncan)
  • cybernetics (Duncan)
  • intelligent nanotechnology (Duncan)
  • neurolinguistic technology (Duncan)
  • the microwave hearing effect (Duncan)
  • quantum tunneling (discussed by Wai Tsang) or teleportation (Hameroff)
  • quantum entanglement (Persinger and Talbot)
  • psylocybin (Hameroff)
  • dimethyltryptamine (Peake)
  • fish that communicate via electromagnetic signals (Persinger)
  • out-of-body experiences (Hameroff and Talbot)
  • the human retina (Persinger and Hameroff)
  • fullerenes or other particles with quantum properties (Hameroff)
  • downloading consciousness or consciousness in artifical intelligence (Hameroff)
  • bioluminescence (Peake)
  • nonactive DNA (Peake)
  • the zero-point field (Peake)
  • parts of the brain activated during a sense of awe (discussed by Larry Dossey)
  • savant syndrome (Dossey)
  • the sense of being stared at (Dossey)

Michael Persinger: "No More Secrets"

Michael Persinger, professor of cognitive neuroscience at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario, provides by far the most significant scientific support for mental unity in his lecture "No More Secrets", delivered on March 3, 2011 (uploaded by YouTube user esoyoga on May 22, 2015).

Such is clear as he opens with this: "Suppose you have access to information within every other person's brain and they had access to yours. [...] What would it mean for the future of human societies? No more secrets"—the lack of which will bring supreme understanding to establish peace for us all, which is indeed the goodness of mental unity (1:10-1:26). Even better, he states that the concepts of both humanity's essential oneness of mind and our ability to reconnect are indeed scientifically verified: "Are we all connected? The answer is yes; we are all immersed in the Earth's magnetic field, the human species is about seven billion conductive brains all sharing this field. Think of seven billion wires all immersed in the Earth's magnetic field. This field contains enough energy to store the experience of every human being who has ever lived" (1:38-2:00). This theory about the geomagnetic field would explain perfectly what has been called the multiples effect (by which historic discoveries and achievements seem to be made at the same time by people who have no physical contact with each other), and this general premise of humanity's interconnection and our possibility for mental connection is corroborated by several other scientific discoveries:

Since the 1870s, there have been many verified cases in which people, in their dreams, envision tragedies such as death being inflicted upon their loved ones, only to soon after receive the news that such a tragedy has actually taken place. These instances of precognition occur primarily when the Earth's geomagnetic activity is calm, seemingly allowing individual minds to have greater chances of receiving messages from each other (4:21-6:26).

Another discovery arose from an experiment at the Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, in 1964: Subjects simply fell asleep in one room, while in another room, another person was simply looking at a picture. On the mornings after nights where there was low geomagnetic activity, the sleeping subjects were given a series of pictures and told to pair the content of their dreams with one of the pictures, and they most often picked the exact picture that was being observed by the other subject. This again suggests the ability of minds to influence each other through the Earth's electromagnetic field when there is little competition against them (6:40-7:55).

This leaking of information between minds can also take place when one is completely awake, as in the case of a man named Ingo Swann. In an experiment at Persinger's own Laurentian University in 1998, Swann was left alone in a room and asked to draw and write short phrases to describe what other test subjects were seeing. These other test subjects were randomly assigned destinations on the campus toward which to walk, and when they arrived at their locations, they simply looked at their selected targets for Swann to depict, which he ended up accomplishing with astounding accuracy. The accuracy was diminished, however, on days of recorded geomagnetic storms, as opposed to the much stronger days when his right cerebral hemisphere—particularly his right occipital lobes (an area warranting further investigation)—vibrated to a frequency of seven hertz: the same frequency generated between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere. Again it seems that this harmony with the Earth's electromagnetic field increased his extrasensory ability (which has since become known as remote viewing). Certain types of fish are also known to communicate with electromagnetic signals which are nonetheless disturbed by thunderstorms; research on these fish may also serve to establish mental unity for all humanity (8:27-8:439:41-14:5215:26-17:31).

This ability has also been recreated in other people: Another experiment took same procedure as Swann's, where one ordinary university student was assigned a destination and another was isolated in a room to draw the target. When the two students were exposed to the same electromagnetic frequency through a device designed by Persinger called an "octopus" (for its eight points of attachment to the students' heads), the drawings became just as accurate as Swann's. Due to the similarity of their brainwave frequencies, their "two minds effectively became one." In these experiments, however, there were slight complications since the emotive and visual patterns, which are processed by the right hemisphere, had to be partially translated into language, the job of the left hemisphere, so people's "verbal overlay" partially distorted the signals received from the other person (17:45-21:35). Since the goal of mental unity is to convey pure thought (free from the packaging of words that are so liable to ignorance and misunderstanding), there ought to be further research on how the diffusion of thoughts in mental unity can be modified to overcome these apparent limitations of the brain's left hemisphere. Here it may be helpful to know that the human heart also generates an electromagnetic field, one much stronger than that of the brain, and since exposing two brains to similar frequencies seems to unify them, perhaps synchronizing two hearts' frequencies can also work.

There is another possible effect when two subjects are exposed to the same electromagnetic frequency: If one subject is in a room with a flashing light and the other is in a room with total darkness, the latter subject still shows the same brain response as the subject witnessing the flash. It is a neuroscientific fact that when the a person's retinas take light into the brain, it is not just neurons that are firing but actual photons that are travelling through the brain, so when the subject in the dark obtains photons out of no apparent source, this can only be classified as a case of quantum entanglement: The photons taken by the subject actually witnessing the flash are copied into the other subject's brain, and these copies behave in exactly the same way to create the exact same brain response. Thus the phenomena of quantum physics have manifested onto our level of biological functioning (21:35-21:5626:08-27:35). (This also relates to quantum entanglement as evidence for the universe's overall oneness, considering that all particles were once connected before the Big Bang, and therefore humanity's oneness of consciousness as well.)

Last is the example of Sean Harribance: a man who could read people's personal memories. Single-photon-emission computerized tomography scans revealed high levels of electromagnetic activity that actually distort the Earth's electromagnetic field around Harribance, particularly from a part of his brain in the right parietal lobe (an area also worthy of further study). He had access to information from the other people's brains through the Earth's magnetic field, and the longer he stayed close to them, the more similar their respective brainwave patterns became—with, again, increasing prominence of the Earth's very own seven-hertz frequency, which is also tied to the brain's memory hub the hippocampus (something also worthy of further investigation). His abilities demonstrate that memories can be accessed from anywhere, but we have to figure out the mechanism to obtain the information (28:29-31:4732:09-33:21).

It is also mentioned how humanity's "seven billion brains [...] immersed in the Earth's magnetic field, all with similar intensities, the whole equal to the sum and the sum equal to the individual, [set] up the conditions for a hologram" (2:17-3:18). In other words, creating this collective intellect would make the body of human knowledge holographic, with the aggregate of our thoughts reflected in each part—in each individual's brain. This concept of a hologram also alludes to the reality of our entire universe as a hologram, further reminiscent of the ultimate oneness of our minds and how they ought to be reconnected. (The concept of a hologram is further explained below by Michael Talbot.)

Plus, it is not only the Earth's electromagnetic field that pervades us but also our own communication systems of the internet, television, and radio, which themselves have pervaded the air with an electromagnetic density high enough to make our own radar detection devices obsolete—a thick matrix also believed to pulsate with our brains (33:27-34:35). This similarity between the technology mankind has developed and the Earth's natural field which interacts with our individual brains seems to justify Peter Russell's view of the Global Brain (below): We are bound to unite not only through the Earth's field but through our very own fields, since our technology has already brought us closer together than at any prior point in history (though we still have many gaps to bridge).

It is also noted how in the phenomenon of blindsight—which enables blind people to walk around objects despite not being able to see them—, brain activity is still evident in the brain areas which would otherwise be activated if they could avoid walking into objects by actually looking at them: yet more evidence of influence by other minds, or perhaps even guidance from the Earth's electromagnetic field itself (47:10-47:30).

This is an important distinction to make for the process of mental unity, where it is only the thoughts that are transferred between people and nothing material, so that people are able to completely empathize with each others' experiences without physically sensing them.

With all of this, Persinger puts forth the actual possibility of everybody's minds being connected, as mentioned at the beginning. He even addresses two apparent complications regarding mental unity: the possibility of information overload with everybody's thoughts, and complications regarding how we would be able to discern each other and our respective thoughts.

Regarding the former complication, an overload of information will not be an issue since people can extract the overall essence of what is going on in each other's situations and understand the critical matters. (I would like to second this with my understanding of what is called the cocktail party effect, by which people exposed to many auditory stimuli are able to focus on those personally relevant to them; there's no reason this selectivity can't simply be expanded to all the knowledge to which we will have access in mental unity.)

Regarding the latter, the technology can be perfected so that we can discern each other and what meaning we can take from each other's experiences; the fact that genetic similarity between individuals facilitates their mental connection is also noted, and while this implies that family members may be mentally united with particular ease, it may also resolve some complications in deciding whether it will be only humans who are assimilated into the unity, or humans along with any other organisms with a certain degree of self-awareness—presumably evolutionarily similar animals such as our ape cousins, or animals such as dolphins who (like humans) have relatively large brains and perhaps even surpass us in intelligence (36:55-39:56).

Speaking of technological development and perfection, he leaves some cogent notes to the disbelievers of such progress, reminding us that devices such as telephones, radio, and video recording all would have been considered crazy or impossible centuries ago, yet they are taken for granted now; the same is bound to take place for mental unity (8:53-9:2231:52-32:07). The system may start out faulty, too, just like how Alexander Graham Bell's first telephone signal was scratchy, yet the telephone has since become much more sophisticated, as can be the case for mental unity. (14:55-15:20). Anything is possible, "because the brain is matter based upon the physical principles of the universe, and if you have the capacity to imagine it, that means the potential is there for it to be done, because our brains are reflective of these essential aspects of the matter of this universe"—also reminiscent of the holographic nature of the universe (28:10-28:28).

Finally, he emphasizes the good that would result from mental unity: Corrupt governments, for one thing, would crumble without the ignorance of those they control or their own lack of empathy for what they inflict upon their subjects (34:38-36:13). A world without victimization in general would be realized: "Just suppose [that] you could feel the searing, burning bullet [killing someone] in Northern Africa right now, or [that] right now you could feel the unbelievable torture of having your stomach empty in Central Africa. I guarantee you, there'd be no more war and there'd be no more starvation. [We would fully become] an empathic civilization" (54:04-54:36). (He uses "feel" in the sense of "empathizing" with the weight of emotional negativity entailed in the murder and hunger, not in the sense of feeling the physical sensations themselves, since that would debilitate us from all action considering the immense physical pain experienced by humanity collectively at any given moment. This is the importance of the distinction between the material and the conscious phenomena, and the importance that only the latter are diffused. From 48:00-48:13, Persinger also alludes to this distinction as he mentions the difference between the light particles that move through the brain and the purely energetic electromagnetic patterns that correlate with our thoughts.)

I have corresponded with Professor Persinger, and he has recommended the following three articles of his (on which his above lecture is based) for additional leads in the creation of mental unity. Anyone knowledgeable in the more heavily technical content of these articles is especially welcome to probe them for further leads:

In "Human Quantitative Electroencephalographic and Schumann Resonance Exhibit Real-Time Coherence of Spectral Power Densities: Implications for Interactive Information Processing", (co-authored by Kevin Saroka; published May 25, 2015 in volume 6, issue 2 of the Journal of Signal and Information Processing), "maximum coherence" is noted to take place in the right caudal hemisphere (the back end of the brain) near an area called the parahippocampal gyrus; "star-shaped cells" called the verrucae gyri hippocampi, which are located in the stratum stellare of Stephan (the second layer) of the entorhinal cortices of this parahippocampal gyrus, are of particular interest. (The entorhinal cortex, in the center of the temporal lobe, is the main interface between the hippocampus and the cerebral neocortex.)

Extrasensory abilities can be increased by synchronizing people's brainwaves with the Schumann resonances, particularly between 7.5 and 8 hertz. "Conspicuous phase coherence" between people's brains and the electromagnetic field are also found at the frequencies of 7.8 hertz, 14 hertz, and 20 hertz.

The transfer of information from the atmospheric magnetic field to the brain is also seen to be affected by the physiological water in the brain ("the aqueous environment in which neurons and glial cells are immersed"). This transfer may also be facilitated at night, or (as in the Maimonides experiment) while a person is dreaming.

It is also noted that the lightning strikes thought to have contributed to the formation of the first microorganisms four billion years ago did so with the Schumann resonance; this may be useful to keep in mind, especially as the electric currents generated by lightning strikes and action potentials (the firing of neurons) have roughly the same densities (approximately ten thousand amperes per square meter).

A forty-hertz wave that has been detected to travel back and forth throught the brain ("that integrates large areas of the cerebral cortices between the rostral and caudal cerebrum") is considered one of the correlates of human consciousness; perhaps the synchronization of this wave among different people can unite their minds.

It is also mentioned that "one mode of information exchange between the Schumann and cerebral fields will involve discrete and very small quantities of photons through non-local processes." In other words, photons can be teleported between the Earth's electromagnetic field and the human brain, similar to the phenomenon described in Persinger's lecture.

It is also proposed that "changes in atmospheric density variations following lunar transits should display significant increases in brain-Schumann coherence" between thirty minutes and three hours after these transits (when the moon is seen, from a particular vantage point on Earth, to move across the sun).

In "On the Possible Representation of the Electromagnetic Equivalents of All Human Memory within the Earth’s Magnetic Field: Implications for Theoretical Biology" (published 2008 in volume 3, issue 11 of Theoretical Biology Insights, pages 3-11), the entorhinal cortices and the hippocampus are again listed as "a central interface [for] extracerebrally represented information;" it is also noted that the fifteen to thirty minutes of electrical lability, during which firing patterns in the brain correlate with the creation of long-term memories, a person's memories are also stored in the Earth's geomagnetic field (3). This article also presents calculations for how the Earth's magnetic field can indeed store the memories of everybody on Earth, as mentioned in the lecture.

It is mentioned that the resonance frequencies between the human brain and the Earth, and between the dolphin brain and the Earth, both range from seven to eighteen hertz; this may be the "frequency range" of animals intelligent enough to be assimilated into the unity. It may also be useful to know that the "minimal duration of a percept", or a quantum of experience ("the basic blocks of information processing"), is thought to be about 80 to 120 milliseconds (7).

Recalling the "verbal overlay" challenges mentioned in the lecture, it is suggested that the right half of the parahippocampal formation should be emphasized in receiving extracerebral information (7). Also deserving of emphasis is the "magnetic component [...] of neuronal activity," as opposed to the electric component (8).

Persinger's assertion that "the existence of entanglement between two particle-waves, one within the brain and one represented externally, would create the conditions for stability over long durations of time" affirms my understanding that mental unity should be created through some kind of signal that will permeate our brains and allow us to become telepathic (9).

An additional experiment is mentioned, in which rats with learning deficits were exposed to an artificial magnetic field, which re-normalized the CA1 and CA3 regions of their hippocampi, making the rats' behavior normal. An artificial magnetic field for humans that stimulates these same brain regions might also work to make us more openminded, which (along with empathy) is indeed the goal of mental unity (9).

In "10-20 Joules as a Neuromolecular Quantum in Medicinal Chemistry: An Alternative Approach to Myriad Molecular Pathways?" (published June 30, 2010 in volume 17, issue 27 of Current Medicinal Chemistry, pages 3094-3098), he explains how energetic phenomena in the brain can be broken down into discrete units of (as the title suggests) one hundred-million-trillionth of a joule. This may indeed be a useful quantity to keep in mind for further leads, especially for the following reason given near the conclusion of the article:

"The information involved with the maintenance of cell function, particularly within the brain, can be strategically affected or 'treated' through either particulate matter (chemical sequences) or the equivalent wave functions (electromagnetic patterns) that reflect the organization of this information in space and time, respectively. New and yet-to-be-developed technologies that focus upon directly influencing the temporal pattern of biological quantum within the range of 10-20 joules could be a more direct and efficient means of changing cell function and hence treating the physicochemical bases of diseases rather than attempting to isolate and to map the innumerable and different molecular signaling pathways that differ not only between cell lines but between types of the approximately ten trillion cells within the body" (3097).

In other words, keeping this measurement in mind can simplify the development of new treatments for the body—including the neurological bases of why people currently lack empathy for each other and openmindedness toward each other's understandings (a lack which, of course, mental unity can developed to overcome, even in people with antisocial personality disorder who are often considered completely incapable of empathy).

Another measurement to keep in mind is that one millisecond is "the typical [...] duration of the action potential" (3095).

In this article Persinger also mentions ionotropic glutamate receptors ("ionotropic" meaning "allowing ions to flow through") that "mediate most of the fast excitatory neurotransmission of the brain" (3095). These receptors might be essential to altering brain neurotransmission so as to allow information transfer between brains.

Robert Duncan: "Intelligent Systems of Control"

Doctor Robert Duncan of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) specializes in artificial intelligence, robotics, and redefining what human beings will be in the future. In his lecture about "Intelligent Systems of Control" at the Bases Project Second International Conference in 2015 (uploaded by YouTube user UnNatural Vids on February 27, 2017), he reveals some recent scientific insight on the progress toward mental unity. He also touches on how this technology can also be turned against those who plan to use it maliciously.

He concedes that some people feel, "'I don't want to be redefined, I don't like this idea of something that's beyond my control, [my] very sense of self is going to be altered,'" and to them he replies: "Well, you're actually under control [right now], and you have been since birth: indoctrination—how did you learn to speak the [very] language you speak? What's etiquette, how do you know how to behave in society? [...] There are a whole bunch of forces that are controlling and manipulating you at any time" (0:33-1:08). Indeed under mental unity we will be no more controlled than we are now; we will simply be controlled toward good. (See the heading on the Clarifications page, "It takes away people's free will...")

"Even bionics or other human augmentation [...] is still part of us," since we are, after all, interconnected with everything anyway (1:30-1:39).

Scientists have come to the point of "literally connecting brains of other species. [...] They prove that this is actually occurring [by] look[ing] at the entrainment;" for example, three rat brains are cybernetically linked, and one rat is given a cognitive problem to solve; through observing similar electroencephalogram patterns between the rats, it is clear that they are solving the same problem. The experience of "one rat [will also be transferred] into the next brain into the next brain; it's a type of indoctrination, just like with human beings. This will be great for children, [whom you want] to think the same way you do and rush to your understanding" without having to go through the same trial-and-error experience you did; "instead we use spankings, lollipops, and verbiage," which are much less effective (4:22-5:20).

"The government is working on what's called cybernetic hiveminds, [which has actually] been around since the Sixties, but it has many positive uses" like increased intelligence, which has also been displayed in rats as one rat learns to solve a maze and its obtained knowledge is transferred to other rats, who can solve the maze faster (5:38-7:02). Although he uses the term "hivemind", please refer to the Clarifications page (under the heading, "It would create a hivemind...") for why I would not call mental unity the same.

"Cybernetic hivemind[s have also used] the computing power of multiple people." He reveals one experiment where an ape was mentally connected to a little girl, and this experiment went wrong as the ape ended up killing the girl; of course this is no small mistake, but as Persinger has revealed previously, the technology can be improved (8:10-8:49).

"In these cybernetic hiveminds right now, only about four to six people can be hooked up," and this is a great way to accelerate brainstorming, but with "more than that, the brains become schizophrenic; the thoughts overlap too much and the people can't focus;" again, however, the technology can be improved (9:41-10:10).

"These are [also] a great interrogation tool; imagine you can't keep any secrets,"—directly echoing Persinger's emphasis. "What they're working on is not just [...] probing the mind, which [can happen] even in [one's] dreams, when [he or she has] no defenses; they want to see if [they] can insert thoughts into another human being." In other words, mind control (also a term I consider not to represent mental unity), which seems to be "a problem because we all love our privacy and sense of free will;" however, once again embracing determinism, "it is just a sense of autonomy: Unless you are in a sensory deprivation chamber, you are always getting other influences to which your mind is reacting" (and even in a sensory-deprivation chamber, you are simply left to interact with your prior memories in your preconditioned thought patterns) (10:16-11:22).

Now, it would clearly be a problem if corrupt governments planted corrupt thoughts into people's minds in a one-way stream of influence, and if such corrupt governments could obtain specific information from people's minds simply to further their corrupt ends, but that is why mental unity needs to include everybody's minds and bring to light the highest morality for everybody in society to follow. The fact that this research is being conducted by any government does not guarantee that any malicious intentions will be fulfilled by it; people like Duncan working within the government can turn against it and use the technology for good, by first perfecting it to fit the true benevolence of mental unity and, perhaps, use it first on those who plan to use this technology for bad, and therefore reform their morals entirely. In other words, there is still hope.

Duncan also concedes that such technology, when used for the proper benevolence of mental unity, will allow for "accelerated education: [...] a system that clones your professor's ideas and thoughts quickly, eliminating all the errors of thoughts." Besides, regarding mind control, "is[n't] education [as it is now already] mind control? It's a way to teach people how to think," and though it may be flawed now, these flaws again will be corrected in mental unity (11:53-12:35). It will also be everybody who can reveal to anybody else the flaws in their thinking; again, the stream of influence won't be one-way.

Duncan admits, unproudly, to having worked on "the Voice of God weapon [...] using neurolinguistic programming [to rewire] people's thought processes." This became "offensive information warfare [...] in the Gulf War to tell the enemy, 'Lay down your guns, this is Allah,' and it worked pretty well: Hearing voices with no direction of sound, you have to assume it's a spiritual entity" (13:00-14:00). Although this can also be used malignly—as it may have already been in this example—, it can still be turned against the aggressor, perhaps by transferring improved moral dicta into their brains; although these moral dicta, using this neurolinguistic programming, seem as if they would still be mere words liable to ignorance and misunderstanding, the technology can (again) be improved so that direct understanding is instead transferred.

There's also "something called hyper-game theory [intended to] walk [some] people to their death, [perhaps as a] eugenics program." Of course this would also be terrible, but it can be turned against the aggressors as well if doing so becomes truly necessary. Plus, for this specifically, Duncan reveals that it would be necessary to "sample all cultures and languages throughout the world to see which deceptions work" for this; another possible way to sabotage this evil is thus to instead pre-sample all the world's moral understandings—again rather than mere words—which can be transferred into the aggressor's minds (14:03-14:20).

He also claims that intelligence includes "a capacity for empathy, [because] people who can't empathize [...] do not have enough life experience to put themselves in [another's] shoes." Since this intelligence—or simple "experience" or "awareness" in general—is also to be diffused in mental unity, it necessarily follows that people will empathize with the suffering they cause for others; ensuring that mental unity goes this way, against any government's malign wishes, and then using this forced empathy against such malign governments will put an end to their evil ways (15:10-15:21).

He also mentions how "the SETI project, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, [...] is like encryption [in the effort to decode] signals of intelligence: How do you know some source out in the universe [that] you're scanning is intelligent? Maybe it's a quasar star;" to determine if it's intelligent, it has to be "an abnormal signal [...] to decipher, [...] because that's what intelligence [or a unique thought pattern] is: a complicated signal" (16:39-17:15). This points in the direction of how to solve the problem of discerning which minds are to be included in mental unity: minds that work within a certain frequency-range of consciousness so that they exhibit self-awareness, ideas of morality, and so forth; it is expected that these minds will be mostly human—since some other intelligent animals (again, like dolphins or our ape cousins) are possibly just as intelligent in their own right—and, as mental unity expands, possibly other intelligent extraterrestrials as well, whom we will convert to our newfound ways of peace. Thus, Duncan's insight on the similarity of intelligent signals to encrypted codes can be effective in determining which minds will and will not be assimilated into the unity.

How are human minds connected? "There's the age-old way of hooking a person up to an electroencephalogram [...] and reading and deciphering the electromagnetic brainwaves as they are created within [and directly around] the scalp; this can also be done with infrared. [...] Things have come a long way: Now we have magnetically activated nanoparticle sensors, [... which] are activated under a certain magnetic frequency [to] alter the brain's patterns and pathways" (17:25-18:57).

Another development is "smart dust," which consists of "really tiny microcircuits that act as transmitters all over [one's] neurons and settle there," so that that person's brain can be read remotely (20:29-21:07).

"Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, have invented a brain decoder that's able to work out what you're thinking based on neural activity; they use mostly fMRIs." When most people read, they speak to themselves in their head the words they are reading, and these researchers have deciphered the words certain subjects were reading to themselves. "Similarly, several other universities have been working on dreams, [...] decoding visual images." Experiments have also been conducted where subjects look at images while they are in an fMRI, and then they are simply asked to think of the image, and the researchers have compared the subjects' neural activity in both instances to determine what areas activate when certain images are either directly seen or imagined (21:18-23:29). These developments in knowing how certain thoughts activate certain parts of the brain might also fit in to the transference of thoughts in mental unity.

Duncan states, in apparent incongruity with what he stated earlier about empathy, that "morality does not seem to be a part of intelligence;" however, he says this in reference to artificial intelligence, which, as far as we know now, is not actually self-conscious, unlike human beings who can both transmit empathy and enforce morality (24:33-24:39).

He talks about a "human mind project [or] Global Brain project"—directly reflective of Peter Russell's theory—"to decipher the mind, every possible thought and uniqueness due to culture and language" (41:33-41:56).

He even advocates "pressuring your government for transparency; [...] there are a lot of great possibilities out there of technology from military to civilian sectors." In other words, while the government may be hypocritical in saying, "if you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide," while hiding information from all of us, it does not have to be hypocritical; government can be forced to reveal what it is doing for the good of all. Alternately, if it refuses to be open or to act to the benefit of humanity, the aforementioned tactics against it can still be employed (42:24-43:12).

He reveals that the technology used in the Voice of God project was made through the "microwave hearing effect," which was formed after "hypothesiz[ing] that the brain expands ever so slightly with [...] heat energy conducted to the inner ear. There are several other technologies that use ion, cyclotron, resonance heating, or calcium-2+ as a mechanism of influencing the nervous system; all the ions have their different resonances under the Earth's magnetic field,"—reflective of Persinger's findings. There is also the constructive interference of two ultrasonic waves, which a person can nonetheless hear. All these techniques, again, can be used for good even if the government intends to use them for bad (44:06-45:17).

Finally, he reflects my intentions in saying, "Is this the end of humanity, or the beginning of a new species? Many believe that transhumanism will be the end of the human race; I disagree: Perhaps it's just a redefinition of what the human race is. What if we are the mothers and fathers of a better species than our own? Perhaps we can amplify love and happiness, end all wars; perhaps the new world will be [better] than what we have now; I don't think we should be scared. We should embrace the future and understand the consequences" (32:23-33:05).

Peter Russell: "The Global Brain"

Noetic scientist Peter Russell, in his 1982 video The Global Brain (summarizing his book of the same title, published the same year) (uploaded by YouTube user ErdLing on July 3, 2014), puts forth the Gaia theory, the idea that the Earth is an organism in itself; in doing so, he emphasizes our interconnection (a concept of special significance in light of the understanding that we are One Consciousness) and suggests that this interconnection will manifest on the level of our conscious perception.

He explains how the planet exhibits an amazing degree self-regulation, through aspects like its overall temperature and the salinity of its oceans, just like any living thing would. Considering the Earth as a living being, "we might then consider our days and nights to be like the heartbeat of Gaia, the seasons her breaths, the tropical rain forests her lungs, and the oceans her circulatory system" (4:49-7:16). Mankind, in this scheme, can be seen as the Earth's brain, since our most salient feature is our ability to reflect and to learn (16:13-16:25).

If we consider that the simplest cells are made of a few billion atoms, and that a human brain is a complex system of a few billion nerve cells, and that the human population is now in the several-billions and is becoming more complexly interconnected, it seems that we too are becoming a single integrated being (14:53-16:13). Our growth also directly parallels that of the brain in a single human fetus: When a fetus' brain is first developing, the neurons multiply rapidly at first, but after a few billion, the growth decelerates and the focus of development shifts to the connections between individual neurons; humanity has witnessed a similar population explosion into the billions, but the growth is slowing down a bit in favor of our own individual connections, via our postal systems, the telephone, radio, television, and the Internet (16:25-17:58). As "we are beginning to exchange information with each other across vast distances, we are beginning to share our thinking, to connect together mentally, to link up mind-to-mind" (13:57-14:22).

Aerial views of human communities also directly resemble the appearance of certain organisms, further emphasizing how everything seems to be repeated at different levels in our holographic universe (a concept explained below by Michael Talbot) (13:00-13:21). However, on a more serious note, this visual similarity also applies to bad urban planning and industrial overgrowth, whose aerial views look just like microscopic images of cancerous tissue (18:20-19:00).

The similarity of mankind's unwise decisions to cancer is in more than just appearance; when a cell becomes cancerous, its genes malfunction and it over-reproduces, disregarding the well-being of its organism as a whole. When individuals lose touch with how they fit in to the greater whole of society (often through some faulty development or personal tragedy which affects their brains and, consequently, their mental dispositions), they too become selfish (19:00-20:10).

Thus, "humanity's current crisis is not, at its root, an economic crisis or an environmental crisis; it is a crisis of consciousness, a crisis in how see ourselves and the world around us" (32:20-32:35). That is why an "inner awakening [is] the crucial ingredient in the linking of humanity into an integrated society, a society in which we are linked spiritually through an awareness of our inner unity, an awareness that we are all part of something greater, as well as a greater awareness of our individual potentials and uniqueness: a synthesis of greater individuality along with greater community" (30:25-31:05).

Indeed the current plight of humanity is our view of ourselves as skin-encapsulated egos: "'What's inside the skin it me, and what's outside the skin is not me.'" This view paradoxically arises from an aspect of how we are indeed one consciousness: Our consciousness is nonmaterial, a zero-point singularity of space (as explained below by Anthony Peake), what some would call the "nothing" that "matters" (the void, filled with potential for being, that gives rise to the experience of the world through us). In this way then, each of us is like a hole in a piece of wood, and in trying to describe the hole, we can only describe its surroundings, not the actual void within; as such, we each identify with what immediately surrounds the our respective loci of consciousness. "This limited sense of identity may not in itself seem very dangerous, but it does have some far-reaching consequences: It turns out that many of the ways in which we mistreat and abuse the environment stem from our seeing the world as separate from ourselves. We may take fairly good care of what is inside the skin, but we don't care nearly so well for what is outside the skin. As the late Gregory Bateson said, 'If this [me-versus-the-world attitude] is your estimate of your relationship to nature, and you have advanced technology, your likelihood of survival will be that of a snowball in hell. You will die either of the toxic by-products of your own hate, or simply of overpopulation and overgrazing. [...] The whole of our thinking of what we are, what other people are, must be restructured. The most important task today is to learn to think in a new way'—[not only that, but] to experience and be conscious in a new way" (20:33-24:05).

In the past, the wisdom of individuals was spread only by word of mouth and by parchment, and their insight was mostly corrupted as it spread across time and across cultures; things can be different today thanks to our advancements in recording and disseminating information (28:23-30:25). However, simple words are still not enough, especially since (as unforeseen by Russell) the Internet has in fact exacerbated the phenomenon of group polarizationby which people's insular mindsets are reinforced through only conversing with like minds. Therefore, we need a cross-ideological connection where people will actually listen to the true value of what others have to say, regardless of their current initial predispositions to agree or disagree with them; that is how we will truly develop the worldview necessary for our peaceful survival.

Wai H. Tsang: "The Nature of Reality"

Computer and brain researcher Wai H. Tsang elaborates upon the idea of our One Consciousness in his article "The Nature of Reality".

He justifies the philosophy of idealism in contrast to materialism: "Some of the greatest philosophers—namely Descartes, Berkeley, and Kant—have all concluded that we can never have certain knowledge of the physical world because we really only ever know the subjective world perceived from our senses, i.e. our consciousness. Therefore, the idea of materialism is flawed from the outset, for it tries to downplay our consciousness—of which we have true knowledge—while regarding the physical world with certainty, despite our only apparent knowledge of it coming from our undeniably real consciousness."

He acknowledges, however, that "the trouble with idealism has been that it seems impossible to explain the nature of material reality, if it really is just consciousness. Idealists have responded that the physical world is somehow illusory, but with no further explanation of why this illusion is so convincing. There is obviously 'something' behind the appearance of the external physical world, but there has been an explanatory gap as to what this 'something' is."

He goes on to explain how in more recent times, the development of the Mandelbrot fractal and the rise of virtual-reality systems can finally fill this explanatory gap: The infinitely complex and "beautifully intricate patterns" of the former are "rendered onto a computer screen by an algorithm calculating the Mandelbrot set," and the latter also consist of complex algorithms that create visual and audio experiences when manifested on a computer. The formulae behind both can be likened to the ancient idea of Platonic forms: "perfect archetypes" of physical objects that exist mathematically, and which all the transient forms in this world only approximate; these formulae are then actualized into experience when they are plugged into the computers that display them. Similarly, our current laws of physics use mathematics to describe the apparent nature of our physical universe: an understanding that has led Newton to conclude that "God is a mathematician" and Eugene Wigner to recognize an "unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences." What actualizes these formulae into the experience of this physical reality is our consciousness.

Consciousness, therefore, simply processes the formulae of this world in the same way that a computer screen processes the Mandelbrot fractal or a video game. With consciousness as the substrate from which the apparent world of matter arises, it is one consciousness that gives rise to everything. In that way, all the seemingly separate entities in the universe are "sequential expressions" of our one consciousness. This one consciousness is also God—not any particular deity, but the simple ground of all Being that experiences the universe through us.

As an analogy, Tsang asks us to imagine that every life form in the universe is a pearl, and all these pearls are strung out on a single thread; that thread is our One Consciousness experiencing every life form, one-by-one. In that way, "the relationship between [all] conscious entities that exist on planet Earth, including all human beings, is that we are each other's subjective past and subjective future. [When] we are walking down the street and looking at the people around us, we are really looking at our past and future lives."

He also mentions how Richard Feynman and Roger Penrose have postulated that "every electron in the physical universe is really the same electron, manifesting in a way that makes it seem as if it is at all places at one once thanks to the phenomenon of quantum tunneling, therefore appearing as a myriad of different electrons." The simultaneity of this electron's presence everywhere in the universe would correspond to our one consciousness pervading all the sentient forms of the universe as once, while each such life form is only aware of its own lifespan; our one consciousness identifies (so to speak) with certain collections of these illusorily different electrons (certain life forms), and our consciousness and the appearances it generates (via the formula of the universe) are ultimately one, since all distinctions are illusory. This understanding makes the interconnection witnessed in the (apparent) physical universe reminiscent of our oneness of consciousness. This understanding also makes sense of the quantum-physics discoveries on how consciousness affects the behavior of particles (most popularly the double-slit experiment), even going so far as to alter the past (as revealed in the quantum-eraser experiment). Perhaps quantum tunneling additionally serves as another clue in establishing mental unity among all sentient beings.

Finally, he relates this modern understanding of our one consciousness to the true original tenets of the world's major religions: "If we examine key metaphysical assertions made concerning the nature of God in the world's great religions, we do find an amazing correspondence to this idea of an all-encompassing singular consciousness, such as with the universal theme that God is immanent within us all: the 'Christ within' in Christianity, the 'Krishna within' in Hinduism, Allah 'closer than your jugular vein' in Islam, the 'Buddha within,' etc. Also a central tenet to the major religions is that God is an inseparable unity: Judaism and Christianity say that 'the Lord is one,' and Hinduism states in the Bhagavad Gita that the 'supersoul' or 'oversoul' which is God 'appears divided but has never divided, and is always situated as one.'"

In two related articles, he continues explaining how reincarnation and the claim that everybody is God are common among the major religions. Regarding the former topic, reincarnation is a known tenet of the Jewish school of Kabbalah, whose central text the Zohar claims that souls "emerge from" and "re-enter" the Absolute; two more Jewish sects, the Pharisees and the Essenes, believed similarly. Several prominent early Christians also believed in reincarnation, and the Gnostics were known for the same; also, the Bible passage John 9:2 in which Jesus refers to a man being "born blind because of his [own] sins" implies the acceptance of past lives; "it was at the Second Church Council of Constantinople in the year 553 CE that the idea of reincarnation was made heresy" by the Byzantinian emperor Justinian, against the wishes of Pope Vigilius. Muhammad, the founder of Islam, is known to have conveyed secret teachings called the batin, and the sects now professing these teachings, such as various Sufi groups, are known to believe in reincarnation. It is of course central to Hinduism, many schools of which equate the atman or spiritual self with Brahman or the foundation of reality. It is still popular in Buddhism as well, and the Buddha denied his critics' accusations that he was a nihilist for claiming that there was anatman or "no self", clarifying that there is "no self" distinct from the Void from which everything arises—the "nothing" that "matters".

The esoteric teachings of all these religions also specifically support the idea that everybody is truly God: The Kabbalists, again, claim that a person's true identity is the Ein Sof (the infinite) and meditate on the Cosmic Tree of Sepphiroth (symbolic of our interconnection); Christ himself was known to take part in this. That would explain his statements, "Whoever drinks from my mouth shall become as I and I shall become as he and the hidden mysteries to him shall be revealed," and, "Is it not written in your law that you are gods?" Muhammad also said, "Whoever knows himself knows God," and, "Man is mystery and I am his mystery, for I am he himself and he is I myself," even though Islamic adherent Al-Hallaj was martyred in Bagdhad in the tenth century for his similar understanding; still, Sufis to this day speak of fana or the end of the "self" in the same sense of the Buddhist concept of anatman. Advaita Vedanta Hinduism also equates individuals with God, and the Bhagavad Gita claims that the soul is the essence of God, and lila the play witnessed by God through us. Buddha, finally, denied that he was a God in the sense of a "deity" but again understood that we are all inseparable from the Void, the ultimate and infinite.

Stuart Hameroff: "Consciousness Is More than Computation"

Stuart Hameroff, professor of anesthesiology and psychology at the University of Arizona, claims in this interview with Nikola Danaylov (uploaded by YouTube user Singularity Weblog on September 12, 2013) that "Consciousness Is More than Computation", supporting the idea of our One Consciousness and providing some clues for the creation of Mental Unity.

The problem with consciousness arising from matter is that there's no specified threshold for the number of neuronal firings that produce consciousness. There are many complex calculated phenomena throughout the universe that do not produce consciousness, so computation and complexity is not the answer to how consciousness arises (6:58-7:17).

He mentions that the brain is a classical computer for patterned behavior and that the microtubules in neurons can be described as classical molecular automata, whereas consciousness involves quantum mechanics and cannot simply be reduced to computation (11:47-13:19). This would support the view of all our behavior as causally determined but our experience of it simply arising from the foundation of the universe—undergoing the classical laws of physics "plugged into" the basic particles that correspond with our consciousness (as mentioned in my review of Tsang's "Nature of Reality").

Physicist Roger Penrose, in his 1989 book The Emperor's New Mind, suggests that conscious awareness results from a collapse of the wave function, some type of quantum computer in the brain (which Hameroff has since helped him identify as the microtubules). This reduction of the wave function by an objective threshold is a process intrinsic to the fine-scale structure of the universe, suggesting again that consciousness is co-fundamental with the universe itself, not merely produced by the brain, and that consciousness arises through the universe (as Tsang also suggests). This idea is furthered by the explanation that, in Einstein's theory of relativity, curvature is equal to mass; since, at the quantum level, a particle can be in two places at once, the two versions of the particle have curvatures facing away from each other, creating two separate bubbles in the fabric of the universe; if these separations continue, two separate universes are created, but these separations are unstable, so the probability is eventually collapsed only to one version of the particle, which is associated with a moment of conscious experience. This is called the model of orchestrated objective reduction, orch-OR (16:00-20:36).

Hameroff hypothesizes that our unconscious (our knowledge deeply hidden from our current awareness) is embedded in memory and manifests as quantum information, and that dreams are quantum information, since dreams are very bizarre and unorderly, matching with the quantum world (21:22-21:46).

He supplies evidence that the electric energy in photosynthesis is quantum coherent, allowing the efficiency of the process; if plants can use quantum coherence, so can the microtubules in the brain. Heat uses energy to drive quantum coherence in the brain, allowing the computation required for orch-OR. Thus, absolute-zero temperature is not necessary for quantum coherence (25:16-28:24).

He confirms that consciousness and quantum mechanics are related, as is evident by how observer affects the behavior of particles in the double-slit and quantum-eraser experiments; the collapse of the wave function and consciousness could indeed be the same thing (32:16-33:14).

He mentions that the brain exposed to ultrasound at eight megahertz for fifteen seconds improves mood; longer exposures can also reestablish connections in the brain, promote neuron growth, and even alleviate Alzheimer's (39:52-41:20). This ultrasound frequency, like Persinger's studies of the brain's operation at and exposure to certain frequencies, perhaps can be modified to actually enhance connectivity between brains and to reverse people's forgetfulness of each other's lives.

He mentions again that consciousness is really happening at the Planck scale, at the base of the universe (41:37-41:49).

When the coherence in the brain is lost in out-of-body experiences, the quantum information is not destroyed but simply leaks out, remaining entangled (like quantum particles are) in the external environment. This supports the ideas of reincarnation as well as of parapsychological phenomena. These ideas and consciousness in general are not outside of science; consciousness (recognizing itself through its physical creation) is the emergence of the material from the quantum state of possibility (41:54-45:00).

He describes the Eastern concept of qi as quantum coherence. Proto-consciousness is everywhere in the universe, and it becomes our everyday consciousness when it is collapsed by our brains as a sequence of discrete events. Buddhists in deep meditation have encountered a flickering in their awareness; these flickers were counted as fifty per second: fifty hertz, equal to gamma synchrony. This is higher than the forty-hertz state experienced by most people, and recently, the brains of the best meditative monks have been found to vibrate at a frequency of eighty hertz, and can potentially go to even higher frequencies (47:55-50:29). Perhaps, then, it might be as simple as somehow getting everybody's brains to operate on higher frequencies, which can potentially make them share each other's awareness (since higher frequencies could mean the ability to retain more "discrete events" of awareness), or at least can make most people more receptive and compassionate—like the enlightened ones—as a step closer to the universal empathy and understanding of mental unity.

He also mentions that downloading consciousness may be possible through quantum teleportation, as through the photon echo of the retina; since consciousness is holographic in the brain (as explained by Talbot below), quantum signals can be obtained from the retina, which could reflect the entire consciousness in the brain, which could potentially be quantum-teleported to a vat of fullerenes (or other organic particles with quantum properties that can assemble into microtubules) to reproduce consciousness (53:17-53:43). This might be another way to approach mental unity: downloading consciousness into some external physical medium that will serve as our aggregate intellect.

People given the hallucinogenic substance psylocybin showed no brain activity on fMRIs yet recounted vivid experiences, proving how consciousness can go down to a deeper, more purely quantum level; perhaps these substances can also somehow prepare our brains to be assimilated into the unity. It is noted people on psylocybin lose their rational cognitive abilities under these substances, but there might still be away for higher awareness and objective reasoning to reconcile (55:21-57:22).

He once more emphasizes the importance of neuron microtubules, which need to be preserved if conscious organisms are to be preserved, as in cryonics (57:56-58:26). Mental unity might take place simply if these microtubules are made to communicate with each other nonlocally: a process that might, of course, be aided by the other aforementioned clues. 

Closing, he affirms that consciousness is more than computation; it is connected to the quantum structure of the universe, bridges science and spirituality, and will blur the distinction between them (1:00:37-1:00:57).

Anthony Peake: "The Infinite Mindfield"

Anthony Peake, in this interview with Greg Moffett summarizing his book The Infinite Mindfield (uploaded by YouTube user LegaliseFreedom1 on October 21, 2013; book published the same year), supports "the mind-blowing proposition that all living beings are one unitary consciousness experiencing itself subjectively," and offers some more clues to the creation of mental unity (2:54-3:05).

After some elaboration on the significance of dimethyltryptamine, he cites University of New Mexico research psychiatrist Rick Strassman, who, in his own book DMT: The Spirit Molecule, that DMT is the modulator of reality; it is DMT in the brain that creates the illusion external world (34:13-34:53). In this case, DMT may somehow play a part in altering what we experience of this world—altering it so that our perspectives on it can merge in such a way that will produce the intended effect of mental unity.

He mentions that this reality is "consensual", and thus real reality, because we share our experience of it and thus assume it is external; however, this can just as well be a collective dream, again emphasizing the philosophy of idealism and how we can't really know of the external world (41:09-41:44). This doesn't mean that the appearance of the external physical world is to be neglected or that it will stop adhering to its predictable and reliable façade of substance, for as long as we're in this collective dream, we may as well avail ourselves of what we can of it—that is, stop all our suffering in it and ensure that each other's lives are enjoyable, and the way to do that, of course, is through mental unity.

It has been discovered that the human brain contains traits-associated amine receptors (TAARs): receptors on neurons that are specifically designed to receive DMT, suggesting that it is a natural neurotransmitter for humans. DMT has also been found directly in the pineal glands of rats, whose brain structure is similar to that of the human brain, suggesting that it can facilitate consciousness in all mammals; this molecule may even be the "final piece in the jigsaw puzzle of how consciousness actually functions" (42:27-44:24). These TAARS of course warrant further research; these neuron receptors might even directly serve as the channels between which our thoughts are transferred in mental unity. Also, the structural similarity of the brains of other animals may help indicate which of them are capable of some certain degree of self-awareness and thus need to be included in the unity.

He argues that the light that produces our visual images is processed by the pineal gland, which is an eye, as proven by the tuatara lizard whose pineal gland is immediately behind its forehead and responds to sunlight through it. Our pineal glands also have vestigial structures for direct response to sunlight, and the secretion of the sleep-inducing chemical melatonin—the primarily recognized function of the pineal gland—is known to be stimulated by darkness, since it sits right above the optic nerve and thus responds to the lack of photons travelling down it. Eyes have also been known to give off light, not just take it in, and DNA has been known to do the same in what is known as bioluminescence, indicating that light is generated inside us; this may also be the role of the pineal gland as it processes DMT (54:44-1:01:02). This gland, therefore, also seems of great importance; it may also serve as a locus for the reception of other people's awareness.

He also mentions the possibility of consciousness existing outside the brain—proto-consciousness, as Hameroff distinguished it—and the brain acting as a receiver for it, which would make additional sense in light of Persinger's findings. Meanwhile, assuming that the brain creates consciousness, rather than simply a medium for it, is like assuming that a television produces the images it displays and does not simply receive them from another source. Consciousness, as the truth of our ultimate oneness would suggest, is indeed the base of the universe, as the ancient religions (like Tsang points out) agree. He points out the commonly recognized fact in physics that 99.99% of the world is empty space, and that even the subatomic particles which comprise the rest of the world are truly nonphysical bits of energy. The energy of consciousness, which underlies everything, originates from a zero-point field, "where everything is encoded"—that is, where the "formula" for this physical universe (as Tsang mentions) is actualized by our one consciousness as the experience of this universe; "space" is not merely a vacuum but is full of the potential that is God. Objects have been created with photons as evidence of this zero-point energy. The God Theory by Bernard Haisch describes this field of consciousness of which we are all part, and in which our individual loci of consciousness are just waves that eventually return to the one sea of consciousness (1:01:57-1:08:16).

He also suggests a link between our unused DNA and this zero-point energy, supplying another hint toward the direction of accessing each other's thoughts nonlocally in mental unity. (1:10:32-1:12:09).

He refers to Stephen Hawking's top-down hypothesis of quantum physics, whereby "every [potential] outcome of every action is already encoded in the quantum field; [...] the act of observation of a sentient observer or the act of measurement collapses that particular wave function rather than another particular wave function"—presumably a wave function determined by this universe's formula (1:12:18-1:12:48).

The anthropic principle (the fact that the initial conditions of the big bang allow, to an astonishing degree of specificity, just the right conditions for life to evolve) makes sense in light our one consciousness that experiences this world through a formula—a formula that would have of course necessitated those perfect initial conditions for life to evolve in the universe (1:15:36-1:16:11).

He echoes Descartes: "The only thing I can ever know is that I am a sentient something observing something; everything else [...] could be just an illusion given to me by my senses, because I don't know any different" (1:17:44-1:18:01).

The book Inner Paths to Outer Space by Rick Strassman and others also portrays "the universe itself [as] a manifestation of a singular consciousness—one entity, forever, past, present, and future. [...] This entity is so overwhelmed by its own loneliness—which is our loneliness, yours, mine, everyone's—, so consciousness is forgetting itself, hiding from itself by becoming you, me, and every seemingly separate form that exists" (1:18:10-1:18:50). Loneliness, however, is just a human interpretation of the real reason God chose to become us—a mystery which may remain elusive.

Philip K. Dick, in his book The Divine Invasion, suggests that God awakens from its amnesia for the reawakening of its own divinity. God is creating its own surprise, its own "soap opera", because if we could imagine ourselves as God undifferentiated, we would get bored and imagine ourselves as we are now—though again, it's just an interpretation of the real reason (1:19:03-1:20:22).

If God wants to forget, then, why are we remembering? It is because we are at a point in history where we have to become aware or be destroyed completely; in other words, we have endured too much suffering. It is up to us to wake up and make our experience enjoyable again (1:21:29-1:22:11). Mental unity is the way to do this: to reawaken our divinity.

Michael Talbot: "The Holographic Universe"

Michael Talbot, in his interview with Jeffrey Mishlove about his book The Holographic Universe (uploaded by YouTube user ThinkingAllowedTV on December 18, 2010; recorded around November 1991; book published the same year), explains what "holographic" means and how it relates to the truth of our one consciousness.

This model developed as Karl Pribram discovered that the brain operates holographically, and as David Bohm found that the universe is reminiscent of a hologram. A holographic film can be cut in half and the original image appears in each half; since the universe operates that way, as William Blake says, you can find the whole universe in a grain of sand; every portion of the universe contains semblance of the whole (1:24-3:02). Since the brain and the universe both operate like a hologram, they can also be said to act as a fractal (as Tsang emphasizes); this reinforces the notion of the universe operating on a formula plugged into our one consciousness for it to experience.

"There's a deep level, an ocean of energy, where everything is interconnected." We think of everything as separate, but this is only superficial or artificial. Indeed we are interconnected, not only in this apparent physical reality but through the one consciousness that pervades this reality and experiences it through us. This interconnection extends to quantum entanglement, whereby when something is done to one particle, the same thing will happen to the other. There's nothing in classical physics that can explain how this instantaneous connection takes place faster than the speed of light, which Einstein believed was impossible, but Bohm explains it in a different way: Imagine an aquarium with a fish, one camera facing the front of the aquarium and one facing the side, and (in another room) monitors displaying the images from each camera. Also imagine that you have no prior knowledge of aquariums, fish, monitors, or cameras, all you are privy to is the two images on the screens. If you look at two screens, you are going to see a side view and a frontal view of the fish, and because you do not know what the deeper reality is (the reality of the aquarium) you may assume these fish on the screens are two separate things, but every time one moves the other makes a corresponding movement, and you may then jump to a conclusion that somehow one fish is signaling the other instantaneously. This is what we've done with subatomic particles where we assume there is instantaneous communication, when at the deeper holographic level of reality, every particle in the universe "collapses into a cosmic unity," and there is no separation between electrons, or between people (4:50-8:02). This cosmic unity is our one consciousness, which fundamentally is not separate from this universe which it experiences through us.

We've always tried to explain psychic phenomena as some sort of signal, but in a holographic universe, it could be that I have the entire universe in every atom in my head, as do you, so when we can access that, we can access information beyond our normal sensory breach (8:07-8:33). Perhaps, then, in the creation of mental unity, signals will only be necessary to orient our brains in such a way that they can more easily access they each process.

Talbot offers specific evidence of how the brain operates holographically: The belief that memory is stored in certain places in the brain was tested by removing parts of rats' brains as they ran mazes to see if the portion of the brain responsible for the maze-running ability could be isolated, but each time a part of the brain was removed, the rats slowed down but still retained the memory of how to run the maze. Doctors have also recognized this with amnesia patients who don't forget half of the alphabet or half of their family but have impairment of their entire memory. A hologram is made out of interference patterns, and our synapses are constantly sending ripples of electrical signals throughout the brain; plus, since every time a hologram is cut the image becomes smaller or fuzzier, that is what happens with memory loss (9:07-11:18).

However, since consciousness can extend beyond the brain (as shown by out-of-body experiences such as those experienced by Talbot himself), it may not simply be electric interference patterns in the brain, since consciousness can extend beyond the brain, but instead it may be quantum wave potentials in the brain (as Hameroff suggests) (12:43-14:41).

"Mother nature uses all kinds of mathematical languages" in physical phenomena (again echoing Tsang's findings), and the brain and holograms are both found to operate on the mathematical language of Fourier transforms, again emphasizing their similarity (11:37-12:34).

When, through the uncertainty principle, the act of observation changes the behavior of particles, the difference between subject and object breaks down; some physicists think this does not translate to our level of reality, but there is evidence that it does, such as how helium cannot be frozen solid because it would go against the uncertainty principle if its atoms to align in a solid form, and that there is a type of electrical coil a squid that can spin in both directions at once (16:56-18:47).

The holographic operation of our brain and its hidden powers are further proven by findings on how we respond more to the models of reality in our head than to the reality "out there". In one psychological study, a group of soldiers were all marched twenty miles, but some were told they were marching ten or thirty; physiologically, they all witnessed different levels of exhaustion according to how far they thought they walked. Also, in a stunning case of the placebo effect (verified by this article in the New York Times), a lymphatic cancer patient had "tumors the size of oranges" throughout the body, and his doctor gave him three days to live; however, the patient heard about a new drug called Krebiozen and asked the doctor for it, even though it took weeks to take effect, but the man implored and the doctor gave in as an act of pity. Three days later, the man's tumors "melted like snowballs in a hot stove," as the doctor put it, completely cancer-free. Three weeks later, he read an article saying that Krebiozen is not that effective, and suddenly his tumors return. The doctor realizes it wasn't the drug but the man's belief that cured him, so he lied to the man, saying that the articles were wrong and that there was a better-working version of the drug that he could give him; the doctor then gave him an injection of saltwater, and the tumors melted away again. Months later, he read the final studies saying that Krebiozen was totally ineffective, his tumors came back, and he died. He accessed some deep level of healing according to the model in his head. Other cancer patients have also intentionally been given fake chemotherapy drugs, which they were told would make their hair would fall out, so it did (19:00-22:31).

With increasing knowledge of the connection between the brain and the body, there is no difference between them, nor is there any solid distinction between our bodies and the rest of the universe, again emphasizing our overall interconnection (23:31-24:12).

Psychokinesis can be explained as a realization by the person performing it that he or she is a continuum with the object he or she is moving, just like the patterns in a carpet. In reports of people who undergo near-death experiences, they frequently describe other realities as different frequencies or energies or even as holograms, suggesting that they are moving deeper into the hologram to a more plastic level of reality that can be more easily manipulated (24:53-26:59). For mental unity, maybe there is some way to harness this plasticity to change how we experience each other in this world, perhaps with the aforementioned dimethyltryptamine (which Peake mentions can evoke new levels of awareness).

John Hagelin: "What the Bleep Do We Know?"

John Hagelin, Ph.D., in his interview from the 2004 documentary What the Bleep Do We Know? (directed by William Arntz, Betsy Chasse, and Mark Vicente; uploaded by YouTube user TheCanuckdian on April 7, 2014), repeats the idea of our One Consciousness from a quantum-physics perspective.

He explains: "With the discovery of the unified field, the so-called superstring field, we now understand that life is fundamentally one; at the basis of all life's diversity, there is unity. At our basis, you and I are one, and that unity, at the basis of mind and matter, is universal consciousness. Consciousness is not created by the brain—not purely an outcome of chemical processes in the brain—but the fundamental core of nature" (1:24-2:05).

"At the core, the basis, the foundation of the universe is a single field of intelligence, [...] so that all the forces and particles of nature are now understood to be one; they're all just different ripples on a single ocean of existence" (3:14-3:44).

This unified field "is a nonmaterial field; it is ultimately a field of consciousness, and all our separate consciousness, wherever there's consciousness, is merely consciousness by virtue of the fact that my consciousness and yours are ultimately that [superstring field]: Everything in the universe really nothing but that. [...] We're all just waves of vibration of this underlying unified superstring field" (4:24-4:51).

"There is only one consciousness in this room, and it is you, and it is me, and it is each and every one of us. We individualize our consciousness through the filter of our nervous system, but the consciousness itself, our very intersubjectivity, the 'Self' in the big sense—that is universal" (4:56-5:18).

"In the realm of quantum mechanics, particles are replaced by wave functions, and a wave function is a vector in a linear space—the same thing of which thoughts are made. We're really living in a thought universe, a conceptual universe. Quantum physics is just the play and display of potentiality," supporting the philosophy of idealism as the universe is just another experience which we, as the one consciousness, undergo (6:24-6:58).

The unified field is also "the fountainhead of all the laws of nature," echoing Tsang's idea that the universe is run on a formula just like fractals and computer simulations (7:24-7:28).

"The experience of pure consciousness really transcends any one religion or philosophy. It is as scientific as it is religious; it is, after all, a state of functioning of the brain" (11:31-11:44). The same applies to the simple knowledge of it, since (as Tsang again points out) it underlies all the major religions and is now being verified scientifically.

Without any public awareness of our fundamental oneness, we'll "get the same old result: five-percent development of our mental potential, another generation of war and terrorism and human cruelty, and that'll go on forever until the experience of life's essential unity is bestowed and the brain is properly developed"—and the latter may indeed have to come first through mental unity (12:00-12:18).

"There's a deeper perspective in which the observer does not yet exist separate from the observed; the reality of life today is unity, which unites the observer and the observed in one indivisible wholeness," where the creator is not separate from the creation; this differentiation arises simply from the life-formula being plugged into our one consciousness as the illusion of separation (12:42-12:59).

The "Self, which is ultimately the same for you as for me, [...] is essentially the creator of the universe" (13:51-14:04).

"If only we knew our Self and how precious it is, then we would rush to experience higher states of consciousness"—and we will know our precious Self through each other in mental unity (14:06-14:15).

Alan Watts: "The Real You" and "The Dream of Life"

Twentieth-century philosopher Alan Watts studied Eastern religion and bridged it with that of the West; keep in mind that religions like Buddhism and Hinduism are well-known for their tenets of reincarnation, and it therefore can be more easily learned from a Buddhist or Hindu perspective that we are one consciousness. This clip (uploaded by YouTube user Tragedy & Hope on August 25, 2012) from one of Watts' lectures, then, is his testimony for this truth:

"When you are in the way of waking up and finding out who you really are, what you do is what the whole universe is doing at the place you call here-and-now. You are something the whole universe is doing, in the same way that a wave is something that the whole ocean is doing. The real you is not a puppet which life pushes around; the real deep-down you... is the whole universe.

"So then, when you die, you're not going to have to put up with everlasting nonexistence, because that's not an experience. A lot of people are afraid that when they die, they're going to be locked up in a dark room forever, and have to undergo that, but one of the most interesting things in the world is to try to imagine what it would be like to go to sleep and never wake up.

"Think about that. It's one of the great wonders of life: What would it be like to go to sleep and never wake up? And if you think long enough about that, it will pose the next question to you: What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?

"That was when you were born.

"You see, you can't have an experience of nothing; nature abhors a vacuum. So after you are dead, the only thing that can happen is the same experience, or the same sort of experience, as when you were born.

"In other words, we all know very well that after people die, other people are born... and they're all you, only you can only experience them one at a time.

"Everybody is I; you all know you are you, and where-so-ever beings exist throughout all galaxies, it doesn't make any difference; you are all of them, and when they come into being, that's you coming into being.

"You know that very well, only you don't have to remember your past lives in the same way you don't have think about how you work your thyroid gland, or whatever else it is in your organs. You don't have to know how to shine the sun, you just do it, just like you breathe."

This clip (uploaded by the same YouTube user on February 10, 2013) from another lecture supposes why God would experience this world—though, again, the real reasons we might never know, even with all of humanity's wisdom in mental unity.

"If you awaken from this illusion, you can feel yourself not as a stranger in the world, not as something here on probation, not as something that has arrived here by fluke, but you can begin to feel your own existence as something absolutely fundamental.

"So then, let's suppose that you were able, every night, to dream any dream you wanted to dream, and that you could, for example, within one night, dream seventy-five years of time, or any length of time you wanted to have.

"Naturally, as you began on this adventure of dreams, you would fulfill all your wishes: You would have every kind of pleasure you could conceive, and after several nights of seventy-five years of total pleasure each, you would say, 'Wow, that was pretty great...

"'But now let's have a surprise. Let's have a dream that isn't under control, where something's going to happen to me and I don't know what it's going to be...'

"And you would come out of that and say, 'Well that was a close shave, wasn't it!'

"Then you would get more and more adventurous, and you would make further and further gambles as to what you would dream.

"And finally, you would dream... of where you are now. You would dream the dream of living the life that you are actually living today, within the infinite multiplicity of choices you would have, of playing... that you weren't God.

"Because the whole nature of God is to play that it is not, so everybody is, fundamentally, the ultimate reality. Not God in a political, kingly sense, but God in the sense of being the Self, the deep-down basic whatever-there-is.

"And you're all that, only you're pretending you're not."

Given our current situation, however, it's in our best interest to start remembering.

B.F. Skinner: "Beyond Freedom and Dignity"

B.F. Skinner, the famous psychologist and pioneer into the school of behaviorism, delineates his research and position on the psychological concept of operant conditioning in his 1971 book Beyond Freedom and Dignity (published by Penguin Books in Middlesex, England). In doing so he also offers ample support for the philosophy behind mental unity—most notably the ideas that (1) we need more than words to transform the world, and that (2) control is inevitable, so we may as well be controlled toward good.

For the first main point, he notes that "folk wisdom and practical rules of thumb [...] have been available for centuries, and all we have to show for them is the state of the world today" (10). Almost half a century later, this still applies; it's clear by now that we need more than words to fix the world.

Mental unity (though Skinner himself didn't conceive of it) is this next step beyond words: "The alphabet was a great invention which enabled men to store and transmit records of their verbal behaviour and to learn with little effort what others had learned the hard way—that is, to learn from books rather than from direct, possibly painful, contact with the real world" (60). Mental unity has the same goal of spreading the wisdom of what one person has done and what others ought not to do, but in a much more effective way by not only making such wisdom far easier to spread but compelling its intended audience to listen.

Meanwhile, "overpopulation, the depletion of resources, the pollution of the environment, and the possibility of a nuclear holocaust [...] are the not-so-remote consequences of [our] present courses of action, [and] pointing to [these] consequences is not enough. We must arrange contingencies under which consequences have an effect. How can the cultures of the world bring these terrifying possibilities to bear on the behaviour of their members?" (136). In other words, what conditions can we set up now so that we understand the danger posed by our current behavior, and thus change our behavior? The answer is mental unity, in which the new "contingencies" will be everybody's shared emotional negativity caused by our current actions and everybody's shared knowledge on how to stop our suffering, effectively illuminating us all on how to behave properly and ensuring that we do so.

"Neither biological nor cultural evolution is any guarantee that we are inevitably moving toward a better world" (172). We see this today through evidence that the size of the human brain has indeed decreased, and through the lingering presence of discrimination despite the many laws (in place since Skinner's time) intended to prevent this backwardness, but the ability to stop this collective recidivism still lies within us—through mental unity, whereby biological progress (via medical progress) as well as social progress will be guaranteed.

For the second major idea, on pages 22-23 he explains the idea of humans working as automata: "We can see what organisms do to the world around them, as they take from it what they need and ward off its dangers, but it is much harder to see what the world does to them. It was Descartes who first suggested that the environment might play an active role in the determination of behaviour, and he was apparently able to do so only because he was given a strong hint. He knew about certain automata in the Royal Gardens of France which were operated hydraulically by concealed valves. As Descartes described it, people entering the gardens 'necessarily tread on certain tiles or plates, which are so disposed that if they approach a bathing Diana, they cause her to hide in the rosebushes, and if they try to follow her, they cause a Neptune to come forward to meet them, threatening them with his trident.' The figures were entertaining just because they behaved like people, and it appeared, therefore, that something very much like human behaviour could be explained mechanically. Descartes took the hint: Living organisms might move for similar reasons."

This description of humans as automata sheds light on how we are one consciousness: The entire physical universe simply plays out as if all the sentient beings on it are mere automata, and our one consciousness simply enters into each life form; that is how it can go "back in time" (as mentioned in "The Egg") and, according to the timespan of this universe, experience all our life forms at the same time (as mentioned above in my review of Wai Tsang's "Nature of Reality"). This universe simply plays out in its own causally determined fashion (determined by the universal formulae, as also mentioned) which our one consciousness simply undergoes in all its different life forms. Now, shifting from metaphysics and back to practicality, since we as organic entities, despite our consciousness, are causally determined mechanisms, we are controlled by our circumstances and will always be anyway, so we simply need to be controlled for our own benefit.

Control over a person's behavior is often impersonal; it "occurs when a person simply avoids a hot sun" (32). This proves how essential it is to human behavior, long before its recognition; we're already controlled by whatever circumstances we find ourselves in, so it's no problem to simply improve our circumstances.

Even literature that encourages liberation (specifically from oppressive governments) is "designed to induce people [...] to free themselves from various kinds of intentional control. It does not impart a philosophy of freedom; it [merely] induces people to act," revealing again how insidiously inescapable control is—despite, again, how it can be control toward the better (34-35). "Attacking controlling practices is, of course, a form of countercontrol, [but] it may have immeasurable benefits if better controlling practices are thereby selected" (emphasis added) (177).

"No one is greatly disturbed when important details of works of art and literature, political careers, and scientific discoveries are attributed to 'influences' in the lives of artists, writers, statesmen, and scientists respectively, but as an analysis of behaviour adds further evidence, the achievements for which a person himself is to be given credit seem to approach zero" (49). Again, we as personalities are simply the product of our genetic and environmental influences; the one consciousness within us simply "goes along for the ride," so to speak.

"The individual tells himself what to do and what not to do, [but] it is easy to lose sight of the fact that he has been taught to do so by the verbal community. [...] The visible stages [of control] have simply faded farther into history" (71). When a person "makes a choice" to do something, that choice is predetermined by his or her values learned from others; that person's "will" or desire is never truly "free."

All the reasons behind a person's actions "can be restated in terms of the environment to which a person has been exposed. What a person 'intends to do' depends upon what he has done in the past and what has then happened" (75).

"Those who object most violently to the manipulation of behaviour nevertheless make the most vigorous efforts to manipulate minds"—to change behavior indirectly, by changing how people desire to behave (92).

"The great individualists so often cited to show the value of personal freedom have owed their successes to earlier social environments, [... and] even those who stand out as revolutionaries are almost wholly the conventional products of the systems they overthrow"—again emphasizing the ultimately illusory nature of independence, in favor of a greater recognition of our interdependence (122-123).

This interdependence should indeed be recognized; otherwise, "to refuse control [upon someone else] is to leave control not to the person [it]self but to other parts of the social and nonsocial environments" (85). Stated otherwise, "When we seem to turn control over to a person himself, we simply shift from one mode of control to another"—a mode of control that may indeed be worse for the individual and/or for others (97). "The fundamental mistake made by all those who choose weak methods of [over others] is to assume that the balance of control is left to the individual, when in fact it is left to other conditions" (99).

Specifically, "a permissive government is a government that leaves control [of its people] to other sources" (98). It is neither government that is always bad or civilians that are always good (since governments, after all, are simply made of people as well); laissez-faire politics takes place when one set of people designated to govern simply chooses to exert little influence over the rest of the population, which can be good or bad, depending what other forces are present. "C. S. Lewis protested that 'the power of man to make himself what he pleases [...] means [...] the power of some men to make other men what they please'" (201-202). To avoid intervening in the world is to permit intervention by others, so once more, what matters is intervening for good. 

Therefore, the term "freedom", as far as practical life is concerned, can thus simply be equated to happiness: "the absence of aversive control, [like how,] according to John Stuart Mill, 'Liberty consists in doing what one desires'" (36). What matters is curbing people's desires so that their "freedom" or happiness does not interfere with other's "freedom" or happiness.

"Control is clearly the opposite of freedom, [so] if freedom is good, control must be bad, [but] what is overlooked is control which does not have aversive consequences at any time. Many social practices essential to the welfare of the species [already] involve the control of one person by another, and no one can suppress [these practices or any future practices of similar merit] who has any concern for human achievement. [...] The problem is to free [people] not from control but from certain kinds of control, and it can be solved if our analysis takes all consequences into account" (45-46). Though in this sense he refers to "analysis" as that of his experimental processes of operant conditioning, it can just as well refer to how we will all assess each other's situations in mental unity, and how the wise will be able to point out the past determinants of others' present flaws and instead show them (by directly sharing their more enlightened perspective) how to act better.

"We accept the fact that we depend upon the world around us, and we simply change the nature of the dependency" (46). Again, we recognize that control is inescapable and simply embrace control toward good; our intention is "not to free [people] from control but to analyse and change the kinds of control to which they are exposed" (emphasis added) (47).

"T. H. Huxley saw nothing wrong with [automatic goodness]: 'If some great power would agree to make me always think what is true and decide what is right, [...] I should instantly close with the offer'" (69). We already act upon our own beliefs about what is true and right—beliefs over which we truly have no control—, so we may as well simply have better beliefs, over which we will have no more control.

With that, we should understand specifically that our identities are ultimately illusory: "A person's behaviour is determined by a genetic endowment traceable to the evolutionary history of the species and by the environmental circumstances to which as an individual he has been exposed:" nature and nurture (regardless of which is more influential) (101). People's characteristics "may be attributed to genetic idiosyncrasies (and subject to change only through genetic measures), and the rest to environmental contingencies, which are much more important than is usually realized," putting forth once more the concept of nature and nurture determining everything about a person (182). "The nomad on horseback in Outer Mongolia and the astronaut in outer space are different people, but, as far as we know, if they had been exchanged at birth, they would have taken each other's place;" had they exchanged each other's DNA as well and undergone all the same experiences since birth, they would have definitely taken each other's place (180-181). (The same applies between any two people, which is why hatred toward any person is unjustified: You're only hating the center of consciousness that underwent all the conditions to adopt that personality, which you would have had just as little control over undergoing—and indeed did undergo since we are all one consciousness, and that other person is another incarnation of you.)

People like François de La Rochefoucauld believe that "no man deserves to be praised for his goodness unless he has strength of character to be wicked. All other goodness is generally nothing but indolence or impotence of will" (51). However, this "goodness" (of personal character) is a mere nominality anyway due to everyone's aforementioned control, by which none of their virtues or flaws are to any true credit or blame of their own; all we can hope for is our own sense of satisfaction with the way things are, and since all who are good learn to be so, everybody who isn't moral simply need to be instructed similarly. "A technology of behaviour [...] will not solve our problems [...] until it replaces traditional, [strongly entrenched] prescientific views [such as] freedom and dignity" (30). We need to move past these nominalities and simply find out how to live without making each other suffer. "The gain in freedom from aversive stimulation may [and will] compensate for any loss of admiration" or personal credit as all the world's tribulations are alleviated (61).

"When we make the world less punishing, [...] we are not destroying responsibility or threatening any other occult [and nominal] quality. We are simply making the world safer" (77). Indeed "a person never becomes truly self-reliant. Even though he deals effectively with things, he is necessarily dependent upon those who have taught him to do so" in the first place (92). "Our task is not to encourage moral struggle or to build or demonstrate [independently developed] inner virtues. It is to make life less punishing and, in doing so, release for more reinforcing activities the time and energy consumed in the avoidance of punishment" (83).

If this culture "continues to take freedom or dignity, rather than its own survival [and actual peace], as its principal value, then it is possible that some other culture will make a greater contribution to the future. The defender of freedom and dignity may then, like Milton's [depiction of] Satan, continue to tell himself that he has 'a mind not to be changed by place or time' and an all-sufficient personal identity ('What matter where, if I will be the same?'), but he will nevertheless find himself in hell with no other consolation than the illusion that 'here at least we shall be free'" (177-178). It is "freedom" from suffering that matters, not nominalities of independence.

Skinner brings up other ideas behind mental unity as well. He mentions that "Darwin himself declared species 'to be purely subjective inventions of the taxonomist,'" suggesting the overall interconnectivity of life and the illusory nature of separation (204). Some might consider this a complication in creating mental unity for all humanity, but that is why, again, it might not only be humans that are assimilated (as explained above in my reviews of both Persinger and Duncan). This reminiscence of our physical interconnection is also itself reminiscent of the overall oneness of our consciousness with the universe.

Implied in our physical interconnection is the idea that everything is nature: "The designer of a culture is not an interloper or meddler. He does not step in to disturb a natural process, he is part of a natural process. The geneticist who changes the characteristics of a species by selective breeding or by changing genes may seem to be meddling in biological evolution, but he does so because his species has evolved to the point at which it has been able to develop a science of genetics and a culture which induces its members to take the future of the species into account" (177). This also implies that our own salvation is not outside of our own capacity, since we are nature and nothing is outside nature.

Until we do save ourselves, "almost all our major problems involve human behaviour,"—since they are caused and/or exacerbated by our ignorance and lack of empathy—"and they cannot be solved by physical and biological technology alone" (29). Our ignorance is manifested in how our accumulated technological intelligence largely exceeds our ethical wisdom: "Decisions about the uses of science seem to demand a kind of wisdom which, for some curious reason, scientists are denied;" mental unity, of course, is one way science can be used, and then our aggregate wisdom will guide all our other decisions (102). Our lack of empathy is also noted: "Everyone approves of the suppression of wrongdoing, except the wrongdoer," so his mind needs to be reached by everyone else's, and the way to do this is through mental unity (80). "We have the physical, biological, and behavioural technologies needed 'to save ourselves'; the problem is how to get people to use them" (155). The same applies for solutions in general; not everybody wants them to be implemented.

We should recognize, however, that this public apathy is not always intentional: "The reinforcers contrived by cultures to induce their members to work for their survival are often in conflict with personal reinforcers. The number of people explicitly engaged in improving the design of automobiles, for example, must greatly exceed the number of those concerned with improving life in city ghettos. It is not that the automobile is more important than a way of life, but rather that the economic contingencies which induce people to improve automobiles are very powerful. They arise from personal reinforcers of those who manufacture automobiles. No reinforcers of comparable strength encourage the engineering of the pure survival of a culture" (173). People are not given enough incentive to act beyond themselves, which is why the personal and the global need to merge through the creation of mental unity, so that people are freed from their insular and (as revealed) less important personal commitments in light of the (as revealed) more important tasks of helping everyone else.

When we are reformed through mental unity, we will all be able to govern ourselves: "A free and virtuous man needs no government, [...] and under anarchy he can be naturally good and admired for being so" (84). This will be true for everybody in mental unity, if we understand "freedom" as freedom from suffering and "anarchy" as enlightened anarchy.

This will be true across cultures: "Each culture has its own set of goods, and what is good in one culture may not be good in another. To recognize this is to take the position of 'cultural relativism.' [...] Anthropologists have often emphasized relativism as a tolerant alternative to missionary zeal in converting all cultures to a single set of ethical, governmental, religious, or economic values" (127). Mental unity as well will not pressure people to conform with one way of life; however, rather than the other extreme of tolerating everything (established earlier as inherently problematic), all non-harmful cultural practices and personal idiosyncrasies will be respected, but those which are determined, through the aggregate wisdom of all cultures, to be harmful or illogical will be recognized as such in light of better practices and insights. Mental unity, in this way among others, is indeed a golden mean. "A culture must be reasonably stable, but it must also change, and it will presumably be strongest if it can avoid excessive respect for tradition and fear of novelty on the one hand and excessively rapid change on the other;" mental unity will also ensure moderation in this sense (150).

Regarding all the rest of the world's problems, "the important thing is not so much to know how to solve a problem as to know how to look for a solution," Skinner says in favor of a scientific approach to the world (158). The formation of the aggregate wisdom is not itself the solution to all the world's problems, but it is the way to find—with the best scientific analysis—all the solutions. "Awareness [of a problem] may help if the problem is in part a lack of awareness, and 'insight' into one's condition may help if one then takes remedial action;" mental unity will ensure this awareness and remediation (188).

Finally, he expresses optimism about perfecting the world: It is only because of present circumstances that "the utopian world seems unworkable. History seems to offer support; various utopian designs have been proposed for nearly twenty-five hundred years, and most attempts to set them up have been ignominious failures. But historical evidence is always against the probability of anything new; that is what is meant by history. Scientific discoveries and inventions are improbable; that is what is meant by discovery and invention. And if planned economies, benevolent dictatorships, perfectionistic societies, and other utopian ventures have failed, we must remember that unplanned, undictated, and unperfected cultures have failed too. A failure is not always a mistake; it may simply be the best one can do under the circumstances. The real mistake is to stop trying" (153).

When utopia is successful (as it will be for the entire planet in mental unity), those living in it "can be kept from behaving badly toward each other through censure rather than the specialized punishments of a legal system. They can produce and exchange goods without specifying values in terms of money. They can help those who have become ill, infirm, disturbed, or aged with a minimum of institutional care" (151).

"It is hard to imagine a world in which people live together without quarreling, maintain themselves by producing the food, shelter, and clothing they need, enjoy themselves and contribute to the enjoyment of others in art, music, literature, and games, consume only a reasonable part of the resources of the world and add as little as possible to its pollution, bear no more children than can be raised decently, continue to explore the world around them and discover better ways of dealing with it, and come to know themselves accurately and, therefore, manage themselves effectively. Yet all this is possible" (209).

Larry Dossey: "One Mind"

Physician Larry Dossey, MD, in his book One Mind: How Our Individual Mind Is Part of a Greater Consciousness and Why It Matters (published in the United States by Hay House Incorporated, October 2013) offers ample additional evidence in favor parapsychological phenomena, with the proposition that they are indeed caused by our unitary consciousness, which he calls the One Mind and which also is the source of all potential knowledge; he also advocates direct awareness of this unitary consciousness.

Throughout the book he confirms that we are indeed one consciousness, and quotes others who have said the same:

"All individual minds come together in a collective domain of intelligence" (XIV).

An individual "is in fact part of a greater mind that is infinite in space and time" (XXV).

"In some sense, all minds come together to form a single mind" (XXVI).

David Bohm said, "Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one'" (XXVI).

"All individual minds are united via the One Mind, for which there is impressive evidence" (XXVIII).

The One Mind is "an overarching dimension of consciousness of which we are already a part" (XXXI).

Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "There is one mind common to all individual men" (XXXIV).

Emerson also mentioned a "Unity within which every man's particular being is contained and made one with all other" (XXXIV).

"Our individual consciousness is subsumed and nourished by an infinite, absolute, divine, or cosmic source and is ultimately one with it" (XXXV).

Philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said in his 1840 book On the Basis of Morality, "My own true inner being actually exists in every living creature as truly and immediately as known to my consciousness only in myself" (6).

Erwin Schrödinger said, "The overall number of minds is just one" (11). With his knowledge of both Hinduism and physics, he upheld (in Dossey's words) the "concept of a single mind, in which consciousness is transpersonal, universal, collective, and infinite in space and time, therefore immortal and eternal. [...] Although there are billions of apparently separate minds, the view that humans have of this world is largely coherent. There is only one adequate explanation for this, he wrote, 'namely the unification of minds or consciousness. Their multiplicity is only apparent; in truth there is only one mind'" (13). Schrödinger also said, "Consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown" (210).

"As [Carl] Jung put it, 'In addition to our immediate consciousness, which is of a thoroughly personal nature, [...] there exists a second psychic system of a collective, universal, and impersonal nature which is identical in all individuals' (emphasis added)" (89).

"French physicist Olivier Costa de Beauregard finds evidence in mathematics and physics that is cordial to 'the existence of an all-pervading 'collective unconscious,'' which is suspiciously akin to a timeless, immortal One Mind" (89-90).

Doctor Eben Alexander learned from his near-death experience detailed in Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Journey into the Afterlife, "[There was] really just one consciousness" (93).

"Some aspect of the mind cannot die, even if it tried" (118).

Physicist Russell Targ proposes "an unbounded, nonlocal feature of consciousness," believing that "who we are is a reflection of our extraordinary nonlocal (and probably eternal) consciousness" (157).

John Graham wrote about a mystical experience in his book Sit Down Stranger: One Man's Search for Meaning: "[I] experienced a totality in which all souls melded, each being part of the whole, not as a petal is part of a flower, but as a wave is part of the ocean" (179 or 179-180).

"My own conscious soul is united with the conscious Source of everyone and everything, which simultaneously lives in us and as us" (257).

To justify these claims, he provides plenty of proof that parapsychological phenomena are possible; here are just some of his arguments: (The book as a whole explains them much more fully.)

The intuition of people and animals that someone else is staring at them, which Rupert Sheldrake has studied, is evidence that we can know things beyond our ordinary senses. These are not "just stories;" these instances "are supported by dozens of laboratory studies and experiments showing that people can detect the gaze of a certain individual. All told, these studies provide strong evidence for the conjoining, interaction, and linking of distant minds" (41-42). Maybe the parts of the brain that are activated when one has this sense of being stared at can permit other intuitions necessary for the transfer of understanding and compassion in mental unity; the photon echo of the retina (discussed by Hameroff) of the person staring may also be related.

Dossey explains how swarms and flocks of animals also exhibit "collective intelligence—a proto-One Mind that is not dependent on sensory information" (49). Indeed Rupert Sheldrake agrees they may be "organized telepathically" (50). Indeed still "telepathy or nonlocal awareness might by now be present unconsciously in nearly all humans to some degree" (51).

Telepathy proper has already been proven possible among certain groups of people: "David Unaipon [...] elaborated in 1914 how the use of smoke signals [by Native Americans] depended on [telepathy]. Westerners who witnessed this custom assumed that some sort of code was involved in the signal. Not so, Unaipon explained; the function of the smoke signal was to get everyone's attention to that distant, mind-to-mind communications might take place" (125). "In his 1927 book The Sixth Sense, author Joseph Sinel described how his son, who lived among the tribesmen of southern Sudan, had found that 'telepathy is constant'" (126). "Psychologist Joseph Clinton Pearce described a study of the original Anglo-Saxon settlers in the southern mountains of Appalachia, who were isolated for generations and who used 'telepathy', as the researchers called it, as an everyday means of communication, without any self-consciousness of the novelty involved" (emphasis added) (126). Therefore, "the knowing of others [can be] made possible by the linking, the coming together, of individual minds" (129).

Near-death experiences are also discussed, and "the fallback position of those who doubt the validity of [near-death] experiences is that they are the last gasp of a sick, dying, oxygen-starved, dysfunctional, broken brain. In recent years, however, this explanation has become increasingly untenable because of the discovery that these experiences occur in healthy individuals as well as those in near death" (95). Indeed "shared-death experiences" have been undergone by "people who are in the proximity of a loved one who is dying" (100). Therefore, psychiatrist Raymond Moody agrees, "This shared sensation [...] by several healthy people who are not ill or dying does a lot to demolish the skeptics' argument that the light seen by those who have near-death experiences is nothing more than the dying brain shorting out. If a number of people who are not ill or dying share a mystical experience of [this] light, then the light can't be caused by the dying brain of just one of them" (103).

Nancy Clark wrote of her NDE, "Every word and every thought that was or ever will be spoken or written was made known to me" (97). (Reminiscent of "The Egg": "It would all come back to you." (see Background).) Another woman reported of her NDE, "Reams of information seemed to be exploding in my brain, like an empty library suddenly being realized [...] in the Oneness of it all." "The 'conversation' that takes place during these events is usually described as occurring by thought alone. This, too, suggests that individual minds unite as a single mind, making possible extraordinarily intimate forms of discourse that no longer depend on speech and hearing" (107). (This suggests that, in mental unity, can process extreme amounts of information, especially with our combined cerebral mass.)

He discusses cases of communication with the dead. There are fraudulent mediums out there, but "when all such cases have been dismissed, there remains a substantial number of really puzzling and carefully investigated cases that deserve attention;" that some are fake doesn't mean that they all are (122).

He offers an explanation of savant syndrome, by which people with severe mental disabilities have one extraordinary unlearned talent; as Doctor Bernard Rimland concluded, "statistical probability of coincidental knowledge is nil," so these savants must have "genuine psi abilities." His explanation is based on "the collective unconscious that psychologist Carl Jung used to account for 'inherited traits, intuitions, and collective wisdom of the past'" (134). However, some savants demonstrate knowledge of current information, so "how could it [only] be 'ancestral memory' [...] when information such as [modern-day] hotel facts did not exist when the savants' ancestors were alive? [...] The low intelligence of savants may be an advantage by limiting their attention to a narrow band and screening out extraneous stimuli. Fewer distractions might increase the 'signal-to-noise' ratio from the timeless information source and heighten the reception of what comes through for the savant" (135). Perhaps the brains of people with savant syndrome can be studied to find which areas are inactive, and which areas can therefore potentially receive information nonlocally.

Dossey also discusses the phenomenon of twins separated at birth developing extraordinarily similar lives; this must be more than coincidence because the differing environments would have to create some major differences. Indeed some twins have even given their children the same name, and "the possibility of coincidence is lessened by the fact that choosing a name is a joint decision of husband and wife;" therefore, the similarity of twins is not simply due to them having the same brain (141). It makes more sense that "if consciousness is somehow unbounded and unitary, these similarities would not be surprising, because separated twins—or anyone else—could share thoughts across the separations of space and time" (142). Indeed "a nonlocal, shared One Mind makes chance a less attractive explanation" (143). In general, "some coincidences seem so coincidental they beg for another explanation [...] even for skeptics such as Peter Watson, who wrote, 'Are all the coincidences that are being collected [...] a sort of camouflage, a signal for something else that is going on at a deeper level?' [...] This 'something' is an expression of the One Mind" (146).

There is even evidence for telesomatic events, where "two bodies [seem to be] sharing a single mind" because when one is inflicted with an injury, another experiences that same injury (147). "Sometimes the pain that is shared is emotional and not physical," such as one case where a Stony Brook University student in New York woke up at 6:00 AM (3:00 AM in Arizona) screaming about her sister who lived in Arizona, only to call and find out that a car bomb had exploded outside her apartment, even though she was not injured (152). These cases are very similar to Persinger's findings of people waking up to find out that their loved ones have died.

The remote viewing capabilities of Ingo Swann (from Persinger's lecture) are also discussed: In Operation Deep Quest (overseen by cognitive scientist Stephen Schwartz), his abilities were to find lost airplanes and a lost submarine; the probabilities of finding either were astonishingly low, and the submarine particularly was found covered in so much seaweed that it couldn't have been disturbed for decades, proving that his abilities could not have been faked (158-170).

Experiments with remote healing—sending good wishes to the ill—were conducted using fMRI scans of the ill. "During the send[ing] periods, specific areas within the subjects' brains 'lit up', [particularly] the anterior and middle cingulate areas, precuneus, and frontal areas. There was less than approximately one chance in ten thousand that these results could be explained by chance" (178).

He explains mutual dreams—much like the phenomena observed at Maimonides (referring again to Persinger)—and concludes that "dreams may coincide [...] because only one mind is at work" (230). This can also explain the Maimonides experiment where one mind was focusing on the picture and therefore "putting in the effort," so to speak, for the other mind to produce the same image. "Collective, mutual dreams are a calling card of the One Mind. They are reminders that the boundaries separating single minds are not absolute" (231).

This and other evidence for parapsychological phenomena (again, explained much more fully in the book itself) suggest that consciousness is nonlocal, not merely a product of the brain, and fundamental to reality.

"Thoughts are really impressions that we get from outside" (XIV). Indian consciousness researcher Koneru Ramakrishna Rao says, "Consciousness in the Indian tradition [...] is a fundamental principle that underlies all knowing and being. [...] The cognitive structure does not generate consciousness; it simply reflects it, and in the process limits and embellishes it" (XVIII). It is not simply a product of the brain.

"Individual minds turn out to be not just individual. They are not confined or localized to specific points in space, such as brains or bodies, nor to specific points in time, such as the present" (XXIII-XXVI). There are "hundreds of studies suggesting" that "consciousness [...] can [...] manifest outside the confines of the brain and body" (XXXII).

"The ultimate argument for the One Mind, [therefore,] is the nonlocality of consciousness. [...] Individual minds turn out to be not just individual. They are not confined or localized to specific points in space, such as brains or bodies, nor to specific points in time, such as the present. Minds, rather, are nonlocal with respect to space and time. This means that the separateness of minds is an illusion, because individual minds cannot be put in a box (or brain) and walled off from one another. In some sense, all minds come together to form a single mind. Throughout history, many individuals, including eminent physicists, have glimpsed this fact. This includes Nobel physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who proclaimed, 'There is only one mind,' and the distinguished physicist David Bohm, who asserted, 'Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one'" (XXIII-XXVI).

There is also an empirical basis for the notion that the brain does not produce consciousness:

"In an article provocatively titled 'Is Your Brain Really Necessary?' British neurologist John Lorber questioned whether an intact cerebral cortex is needed for normal mentation. Lorber did CT scans on hundreds of individuals with hydrocephalus (excess fluid in the brain leading to pressure) and found that many of them had normal or above-normal intellectual function" (80). Consciousness is not dependent on the brain; physical alterations to the brain have changed people's mental capacities and inclinations, "but none of these observations prove that the brain produces consciousness. Consider your television set. Although you can damage it physically and destroy the picture on the screen, this does not prove that the TV set actually makes the picture. We know, rather, that the picture is due to electromagnetic signals originating outside the set itself and that the TV set receives, amplifies, and displays the signals; it does not produce them" (81). Indeed people's brain activity and DNA patterns "may correlate with their abilities, but in either case this will not prove that brain mechanisms or genes account for or cause these facts, any more than a television set produces the picture that appears on its screen. Rather, brains and genes may be a relay station for information originating outside themselves, just as a television's picture originates elsewhere" (135).

1890s Oxford philosopher Ferdinand Schiller agreed: "Matter is not what produces consciousness but what limits it and confines its intensity within certain limits." "In cases of brain trauma, Scholler suggested that the manifestation of consciousness has been affected but consciousness itself has not been extinguished. He further proposed that it is forgetfulness, not memory, that is in need of an explanation. If it were not for the limitations of the brain, he believed, total recall would be possible," and with Persinger's claim that the geomagnetic sphere can hold all our memories, maybe total recall is still possible (81). William James also noted how "all we ever observe is the concomitant variations or correlations between states of the brain and states of the mind. James is stating that venerable maxim of science that 'correlation is not causation' (82). Neuropsychiatrist Peter Fenwick claims that, since near-death experiences take place when there is no brain activity, "some forms of experience are transpersonal—that is, they depend on a mind which is not inextricably bound up with a brain" (84).

Paul Brunton said, "The brain does not generate thought [...] any more than the wire generates electric current" (79). "Although memories are held partly in the brain, a large part of memory is stored external to the brain. This off-site repository of consciousness would survive the death of the brain and body" (84). "If consciousness is genuinely nonlocal, as the evidence suggests, it is infinite or omnipresent in space and time," and since space and time are ultimately illusions that collapse into a singularity, this singularity is the one consciousness within us all (85).

Carl Jung (like Wai Tsang from earlier) supported the philosophy of idealism: "It is almost an absurd prejudice to suppose that existence can only be physical. As a matter of fact, the only existence of which we have immediate knowledge is psychic. We might as well say, on the contrary, that physical existence is a mere inference, since we know of matter only insofar as we perceive psychic images mediated by the senses" (200-201).

Since consciousness is essential to reality, all our individual minds are ultimately one. Dossey also details evidence for reincarnation, with children who remember intimate details of the lives of others who died before they were born, which makes sense because "nonlocal consciousness does not simply imply immortality; it requires it" (124).

"Lewis Thomas, [...] director of research at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, has never been accused of 'going mystic.' Nonetheless, he wondered what happens to consciousness at death, writing, 'There is still that permanent vanishing of consciousness to be accounted for. Are we to be stuck forever with the problem? Where on Earth does it go? Is it simply stopped dead in its tracks, lost in humus, wasted? Considering the tendency of nature to find uses for complex and intricate mechanisms, this seems to me unnatural. I prefer to think of it somehow as separated off at the filaments of its attachment, and then drawn like an easy breath back into the membrane of its origin, a fresh memory for a biospherical nervous system'" (115).

"At the death of one personality, a new one comes into being, much as the flame of a dying candle can serve to light the flame of another" (117). It is indeed the same fire in everybody—in all the new people who are born after you are (as Watts noted). "The temporal nonlocality of consciousness, for which there is immense evidence, suggests that some aspect of the mind cannot die, even if it tried" (118).

The understanding of the universe as fractal and holographic (which supports the overall oneness of the apparent physical world and its oneness with our consciousness) is also discussed:

David Bohm's book Wholeness and the Implicate Order supports the holographic view of the universe, where "the whole of the universe is in some way enfolded in each part, and each part is enfolded in the whole" (31). Mathematician Ralph Abraham speaks of "fractals in [the] mind" and "fractals in the world soul" (34). Dissociative identity or multiple personality disorder occurs when "isolated components of the mind cannot communicate with one another." Since our one consciousness indeed has multiple personalities, Abraham agrees "boundaries which are too firm (iron curtains) may be involved in world problems" as well. We must cross these boundaries with mental unity.

"Frederick Turner, professor of arts and humanities at the University of Texas at Dallas, sees in fractal science a path through which individual minds may unite in the universal One Mind. In his book Natural Religion, he suggests that a visual experience that momentarily fills us with a sense of awe—e.g., a powerful artwork or a jaw-dropping sunset—'stuns the mind into a blur.' At such a moment, says Turner, a 'delicate attunement or calibration' can take place in the brain, in which the 'strange attractor of the divine mind' influences the individual mind to become 'a fractal miniature of the universal mind itself'" (35). Perhaps we can find the parts of the brain that are activated during these experiences and find a way to induce this stimulation remotely, allowing minds to be more open to each other.

The concept of the universe as a "hologram is strikingly similar to the metaphor of Indra's net, developed in the third century by the Mahayana school of Buddhism. When Indra fashioned the world, he made it as a net or web, in which there is a glimmering jewel at every know. The net is infinite in dimension; therefore the jewels are infinite in number. In the glittering surface of every jewel is reflected the image of all the other jewels in the net—an infinite mirroring process, symbolizing the interpenetration, interconnectedness, and simultaneous mutual identity of all phenomena in the universe" (32). The metaphor that the universe is within us in the same way that "the single drop of ocean water is a scaled-down version of the ocean itself" is also reminiscent of the holographic nature of the universe, where everything is found in everything (215).

"Schrödinger and Heisenberg and their followers created a universe based on the superimposed inseparable waves of probability magnitudes. This view would be entirely consistent with the Vedantic concept of the All in One" (15).

The phenomenon of quantum entanglement is also brought up: "As physicist Menas Kafatos and science historian Robert Nadeau said in their book The Conscious Universe: Parts and Wholes in Physical Reality, 'The universe on a very basic level could be a vast web of particles that remain in contact with one another over any distance with no time in the distance of the transfer of energy or information.' [...] According to the Big Bang theory, all the matter in the universe was originally in contact, [...] so [...] a requirement for nonlocal connections—original contact—was met early on" (30-31). "Dean Radin [...] in his illuminating book Entangled Minds, [...] shows how entanglement may apply at the mental level," as Persinger has also showed it can (31).

Oxford physicist Vlatko Vedral, in his June 2011 article in Scientific American said, also agreed with what Michael Talbot says about quantum entanglement and other quantum phenomena "spilling over," so to speak, to our level of reality: "Over the past several years experimentalists have seen quantum effects in a growing number of macroscopic systems. The quintessential quantum effect, entanglement, can occur in large systems as well as warm ones—including living organisms. [...] The entanglements are primary" (72).

The equation of our one consciousness with God is also discussed: Doctor Eben Alexander, in the aforementioned account of his near-death experience, also equated our one consciousness with "a Divine presence," a kind of "superpower of divinity [...] far beyond [...] any kind of human consciousness" (93).

John Graham (also aforementioned) continued of his mystical experience: "That 'ocean' [of which everything is part] was God, the ultimate context for our lives, and the intelligent, organizing force for everything. God was not the separate, anthropomorphic Almighty of my Catholic youth, on whose whims I was punished or rewarded, condemned or absolved. I—and everyone else—was part of God, part of the totality. Our connectedness at this level was a core aspect of creation and—if we choose to acknowledge it—a strong basis for compassion and co-existence in our earthly lives" (179-180 or 180).

"A drop of water is one with the entire ocean in terms of chemical composition but not in terms of volume and power. Just so, a human may be identical to the Absolute in some ways but not in others" (211). "We share qualities with the divine, just as the single drop of ocean water is a scaled-down version of the ocean itself" (215).

Dossey confirms, like Wai Tsang does, that our one consciousness is something that "the esoteric sides of all the major religions recognize" (XXXV).

"The nonlocal One Mind [...] involves the inevitable premise that we share features commonly reserved to God. [...] Jesus said, 'Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?' and, 'The kingdom of God is within you.' [...] India's ancient Upanishads proclaim tat tvam asi, 'Thou art that'" (210).

Erwin Schrödinger himself compared "the early great Upanishads' [...] recognition that atman = Brahman (the personal self equals the omnipresent, all-comprehending eternal self)" to the experience of Christian mystics who proclaimed, "Deus factus sum (I have become God)" (210-211). This is not surprising even for the latter religion, for as Meister Eckhart said, "If it is true that God became man, it is also true that man became God" (210).

Aldous Huxley also spoke of a perennial philosophy (philosophia perennis) central to all religions: "the metaphysic that recognizes a divine Reality substantial to the world of things and lives and minds; the psychology that finds in the soul something similar to, or even identical with, divine Reality; the ethic that places man's final end in the knowledge of the immanent and transcendent Ground of all being" (211).

"During meditation, reverie, or prayer, time is often perceived as an eternal present in which the divisions of past, present, and future meld into an all-encompassing now. In this state, it is not just the separations in time that disappear, but also separations between people and things. This state is a doorway to the One Mind"—a gateway to God (190). Modern science proves that time and space are inseparable and illusory, and they collapse into the singularity that is the consciousness within us all.

With the truth of our one consciousness established, Dossey advocates direct experience of it. The following sections from his book emphasize the problems of our world today (caused by our egoic separation) and the way to solve them (by overriding our separation):

"More than words are needed as we go forward"—mental unity (XIX). "The [direct experience of the] One Mind is a potential way out of the division, bitterness, selfishness, greed, and destruction that threaten to engulf our world—from which, beyond a certain point, there may be no escape" (XXII). "An existential shift can make it possible for us to see the world in a new way, a way that redefines our relationship to one another and to the earth itself" (XXIII). 

Doctors like Lewis Thomas agree that "the limitations of our minds constitute a kind of planetary emergency" (XXVII). "The problems we face are systemic and metastatic. They may not be as dramatic as nuclear horror, but they are equally deadly. They involve the gradual degradation and deterioration of our world because of the way we choose to behave, abetted by an unremitting greed, a paralysis of the will, the clouding of vision, and a willful ignorance" of our present situation (XXVII).

The solution to our problems "involves the awareness that we are an inseparable part of life on Earth, for without this perception it is unclear whether we can muster the will to make the choices that are required to survive. We know intellectually that we cannot secede from nature, [...] yet the colossal importance of this insight is broadly denied. It is clear that in addition to factual knowledge, we need something that can stir our blood and connect us with something beyond our me-centered selves" (XXVII-XXVIII). "We are an inseparable part of life on Earth; [...] without this perception, it is unclear whether we can muster the will [...] to survive" (XXVII). "In addition to factual knowledge, we need something that can stir our blood and connect us with something beyond our me-centered selves" (XXVII-XXVIII).

"If all individual minds are united via the One Mind, for which there is impressive evidence, it follows that at some level we are intimately connected with one another and with all sentient life. This realization makes possible a recalibration of the self-oriented, Golden Rule, from, 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,' to, 'Be kind for others, because in some sense they are you.' The task of the great wisdom traditions throughout history has been to transform this awareness [of our oneness] from an intellectual concept into a felt certainty that is so real that it makes a difference in how we conduct our lives." Words have not sufficed for this, so we need "a felt unity with other minds" (XXVIII). "Isolated individual acts will never be enough. We must act collectively, in concert" (XXX).

"As members of the One Mind, we continue to act individually, but as we become more aware of our communal selves, [a synergism] kicks in, in the form of heightened imagination and creativity. [...] Solutions to problems surface that we did not anticipate. We become more imaginative, inventive, inspired, productive, resourceful, and innovative. In the One Mind, pooled neurons outperform individual brains" (XXX).

The One Mind is "an overarching dimension of consciousness of which we are already a part. We have simply forgotten our belongingness, trading our oneness for the illusion of isolated individuality, that insidious, erroneous belief that personhood is all we are. Once we cease believing that we are a coin with only one side, we shall wonder how we could have deceived ourselves so thoroughly for so long, and we can begin to act accordingly" (XXXI). It simply needs to be brought to our level of everyday awareness.

"Einstein clearly saw that our very survival depends on a transition from the sense of the isolated self to an expanded level of awareness that includes all sentient beings. He said, 'A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal decisions and to the affection of a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty'" (XXXII).

"We can read every word of Schopenhauer, Campbell, and a thousand other philosophers who have expounded upon this idea [of our oneness], but it will not become real without experience" (8). Heinz Kohut maintained that "empathy [is] crucial [...] to prevent scientific pursuits from 'becoming increasingly isolated from human life'" (203).

"Unity, commonality, and a One-Mind consciousness are not philosophical niceties but necessities preventing our descent into depravity" (37). The solution to the world's suffering involves "going beyond the boundaries that separate us from one another and from other life forms: [...] entering the One Mind" (202).

Internet connection—on top of not sufficing to bring the world together (as mentioned in my review of Russell's "The Global Brain")—has paradoxically increased loneliness, and "it's not just that 'I am lonely;' it's that the 'I' is lonely. We are lacking an essential harmonious relationship with some universal force, [one that will not] be achieved by Twitter, Facebook, or any other of the hundreds of available social networking sites. A candidate for the universal connecting force that is up to the task is the One Mind"—also known as mental unity (237).

"Only through willful blindness can one not be aware of the challenges we face—global climate change, polluted air and water, exploding populations, habitat and species loss, water scarcity, desertification, murderous ideologies, resource depletion, grinding poverty, endless wars of choice, ethnic and religious hatreds, on and on, all abetted by the I've-got-mine/every-man-for-himself philosophy that currently infects our society"—our selfishness, the root cause (252). "There is a way of recalibrating our collective response to all of these problems—a move that then permits a cascade of solutions to fall into place: [...] The unitary, collective One Mind, a level of intelligence of which the individual minds of all sentient creatures are a part, is a vision that is powerful enough to make a difference in how we approach all the challenges we face—not as a mere intellectual concept, but as something we feel in the deepest way possible" (last emphasis added) (253).

Czech author Vaclav Havel has indeed already "endorsed a collective entry into a One-Mind type of awareness." In his own words to Congress on February 21, 1990, "Without a global revolution in the sphere of human consciousness, nothing will change for the better in the sphere of our being. [Even] if we are no longer threatened by world war or by the danger that the absurd mountains of accumulated nuclear weapons might blow up the world, this does not mean that we have definitely won. [...] The only genuine backbone of all our actions, if they are to be moral, is responsibility—responsibility to something higher than my family, my country, my company, my success—responsibility to the order of being where all our actions are indelibly recorded and where and only where they will be properly judged" (253-254). Our actions are "indelibly recorded" by their effects upon each other, which we must recognize in each other if we are to stop each other's suffering. In 1994 at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, he again spoke of "transcendence as a deeply and joyously experienced need to be in harmony even with what we ourselves [(our egoic selves)] are not, [...] but with which we are nevertheless mysteriously linked; transcendence as the only real alternative to extinction" (emphasis added by Dossey) (254).

Consciousness researcher William Braud agrees: "Having direct knowledge and direct experience of our interconnections can greatly increase our love for one another and enhance our ethical behaviors toward one another" (256). Overall, "our struggling species requires the full spectrum of consciousness if we are to survive" (258).

Miscellaneous Quotes

Here are some general expressions of support for the philosophy of mental unity:

"I offer you peace; I offer you love. I offer you friendship; I see your beauty. I hear your need; I feel your feelings. My wisdom flows from the Highest Source. I salute that Source in you. Let us work together for unity and love." —Mahatma Gandhi

"Let us put our minds together and see what life we can make for our children." —Sitting Bull

"The empires of the future are the empires of the mind." —Winston Churchill

"If we are to have peace on Earth, our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation, and this means we must develop a world perspective." —Martin Luther King Junior

"We need an alternative vision, to see the world as one, as interconnected." —Dennis Kucinich

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten we belong to each other." —Mother Teresa

"We disinfect, we do not probe, the crime. [...] This Earth by struggling men was scuffed [...] and will be so again, and yet again, until we trace our poison to its bud and root, and there uproot it." Edna Saint Vincent Millay

"The reason the world lacks unity, and lies broken and in heaps, is because man is disunited with himself." —Ralph Waldo Emerson

"When we all relate to each other as we would like to receive if our roles are reversed, we move closer to utopia." —Bill Blackman

"We need to cultivate a universal responsibility for one another and the planet we share." —the Fourteenth Dalai Lama

"Teach me to feel another's woe, to hide the fault I see, that mercy I to others show, that mercy show to me." —Alexander Pope

"We can have justice whenever those who have not been injured by injustice are as outraged by it as those who have been." —Solon

"When complaints are freely heard, deeply considered and speedily reformed, then is the utmost bound of civil liberty attained that wise men look for." —John Milton

"I should do unto others as I would that they should do unto me. [...] Only by all men acting thus is the highest happiness for all men attainable." Leo Tolstoy

"If you see yourself in others, then who can you harm?" —Buddha

"I hope someday you'll join us, and the world will live as one." —John Lennon