The True Test of Science is How it Faces the Unknown

Long before the discovery of bacteria, people were getting infections of many kinds and foods would still go rancid. Science didn’t invent bacteria, neither did it understand it for a long time… until it had the tools to measure it with.

Long before the Geiger counter, the uranium rock carried radiation, as do other minerals and foods. Science didn’t invent radiation, neither did it understand it for a long time… until it had the tools to measure it with.

Long before the discovery of the atom, atoms existed, as did the solar system that we inhabit, the possibility for ultra-violet radiation emitted by the sun to contribute to skin cancer, the possibility for X-ray imaging, and the movement of the tectonic plates of the earth as a cause of earthquakes and volcanic activity. It is fair to suggest there remains much in life that is unknown to science.

So how does science approach the unknown?

In all of the above cases, the default position was for Science to dismiss or even ridicule what was being proposed. Science is great at many things but it continues to fail when faced with aspects of life that it does not yet understand.

The reality is things have always existed outside the current understanding of science. Yet somewhere, the assumption is made that because science does not understand something that this thing doesn’t exist or that it is folly to suggest that is does.

It is a bit like a traveller that wants to understand a foreign country but dismisses the locals as stupid because they speak a different language… but on a brief tangent, isn’t this what most colonising countries did!!

To truly understand something (and someone), you need to learn the local dialect and customs. There is a whole world of nuance and understanding that is lost when someone is not willing to admit the tools (in this case language) they have for understanding are limited.

There is so much that science can and does contribute to the world, and there is no doubt we need science and the scientific approach. Indeed, science is not limited in what it offers humanity, its only limit is the tools they use to understand life.

However, rather than embracing different dialects (tools) that can broaden understanding, science seems to take its limited understanding very, very personally. Science prefers to ‘own’ and even control the path to understanding. The result of this position is that alternative ways of understanding are dismissed, rejected or ridiculed as a threat to their ‘ownership’.

Surely what is important is not who owns the path to understanding but what might be learnt from it? Surely the true scientific response to the unknown is to find someone who can demonstrate a hypothesis and then back that hypothesis up with replicable results over a period of time, across a range of conditions: thus a scientific approach, just using a different dialect.

One such example is the cardio-centric approach to life presented by Universal Medicine since 1999. The Universal Medicine hypothesis is that the dominant way of understanding the world is currently through our mind and that understanding can also be achieved through our body, more specifically our heart, and more specifically again our inner heart.

So, let’s break this down. The body receives information from all its senses which is transmitted to the mind for processing. From here there are a series of automated and decision based actions. We automatically regulate our body temperature with things like sweating and shivering, and we choose various responses to the world based on our mind’s interpretation of what we see and feel. This is important; in the mind driven approach to understanding, we feel, we interpret, THEN we respond.

In the mental approach we develop beliefs about life through our experiences, then we start to filter our experiences through these beliefs to make choices about our response. It is the ultimate self-affirming cycle, of interpreting life to fit our internal picture of what we are seeing. Someone that sees the World Trade Centre crumble that holds a set of beliefs that says the people in those towers are evil will respond differently to people who see fathers, mothers, children etc. in the towers.

Society has tried and championed this mental approach for decades and the result is a more divided society than ever before. Through this approach we have created enclaves of ideology, fortified by the fact that we are able to filter what we see in the world and thus interpret everything to fit what we believe.

Enter Universal Medicine, and their suggestion that more understanding can be achieved through the body than through mind. They are not the first outfit to suggest this, but nonetheless they are an organisation that has put a methodology behind this hypothesis and enabled people from across the world, across cultures and demographics, to test it for themselves.

Hypothesis: The cardio-centric approach offers a different way of understanding life.

Rationale: In both approaches we receive millions of messages and inputs from our senses all day, every day. The cardio-centric approach suggests that it is possible to learn to understand what is felt BEFORE the mental interpretations of our beliefs kick in.

Who hasn’t walked into a room where other people are gathered and felt that something was happening, even though there are no verbal or non-verbal cues to suggest it? Regardless of education, geography or religion, we all seem to have the capacity to feel what is going on around us. Not only feel, but accurately interpret as well.

It is also true that we have the capacity to override this feeling, misinterpret the feeling or be oblivious to what we feel around us, but there is a difference between overriding, misinterpreting and being oblivious to what is felt and to not feeling it in the first place. In fact, we can’t override or dismiss something without feeling it first on some level.

The cardio-centric approach suggests that any choice to override, misinterpret or choose to be oblivious is a choice to NOT feel what is truly happening – or put simply, we are reacting to what we feel.

What if we could learn to not react to what was felt but stayed with that feeling? What if we can understand what is going on through the body rather than dropping into the mind and following the interpretations offered by preconceived ideas?

This ability is called conscious presence and it is developed through the Gentle Breath Meditation™. Of course, like all skills, it is a process of development over time and not an on-off switch.

Why is it called cardio-centric? Because to build this ability (conscious presence) requires the fostering of our connection to our body, and more specifically our inner-heart.

Why inner-heart and not heart? Because there are at least two layers of body awareness.

Layer 1Feeling based on the mind’s beliefs and imagery. Spend 2 minutes thinking about the most juicy, ripe lemon you can find and then biting into that lemon and your body will respond to that imagery like it was real.

This is the first layer of body awareness and many will swear what they feel is true and in many ways, it will be true because it is what they feel, BUT is it a feeling generated in response to the imagery of the mind?

Layer 2Feeling what is felt FIRST, before and beyond our body’s reaction based on the images of the mind. To highlight this differently, Universal Medicine uses the term inner-heart.

Methodology: Build conscious presence through the Gentle Breath Meditation™ to develop a greater awareness of feelings that are either are driven from a mental construct or/and those that are simply felt from the world around us.

Over time, learning more about the images we project onto our lives and determining if they truly support us or not.

Results:

  • The more you live with conscious presence the more energy and vitality you have because you are not driving your physiology from your mind’s ideas of what is happening or what might happen, but rather responding to what is happening.
  • The more you live with conscious presence the more you notice the gap between what is felt and how our mind interprets these feelings.
  • The more you live with conscious presence, the less reactive you become to the world around you and the more connected you feel to yourself and others.
  • The reality is, there is far more to learn from the cardio-centric approach to life than can be written about in a single paper.

These results are reported and replicated by people from around the world in various cultural, socio-economic and geographic backgrounds. Of course, in scientific terms these would all be considered subjective experiences.

However, for the people living these experiences, they are very real. They may look and sound strange to science because it is a different language. But it is a dialect that can and does explain life in a different way.

As with all discoveries before it, the initial response to a new dialect may be scorn, mistrust or even ridicule. However, the truly scientific response to this difference would be a willingness to explore any tools that would offer a deeper understanding of life.

What is there to lose?

By Joel Levin (Western Australia)

Further Reading:
What Is Science?
This is Science
Connecting to a Body More Intelligent Than The Mind

677 thoughts on “The True Test of Science is How it Faces the Unknown

  1. Joel, I’m currently attending a trade show where most of the attendees are staying in the same hotel. And even though, I don’t drink alcohol and go to bed at a reasonable time, I have woken up this morning with a feeling of being out of sorts with myself like being hung over! And reading the part in your blog about how you can walk into a room and feel that something was happening. I can feel how the attendees have been out partying for 2 nights running and the affect this is having on everyone staying at this hotel regardless if they are attending the show or not. Too me this is a perfect example of how energy affects us more than we are willing to admit. If we truly allowed ourselves to feel and read energy then we would have to take responsibility for our own way of life because we are giving off energy all the time.

    1. I can relate to this Mary, as the majority of my life I have not been a big alcohol drinker and would feel the effects of the alcohol as my friends drank, and I agree you can wake up feeling hung over even when no alcohol has been physically consumed.

      1. It is really interesting Julie how this has not been scientifically researched as far as I know, but we know the effects of this from our own experiences. Just as I was reassured many year ago that passive smoking was not a problem, it is obvious now that this is not the case. We have no need to wait for proof when the body gives us the wisdom.

  2. “The reality is things have always existed outside the current understanding of science.” that is so true and if we stay focused on just knowing what conventional science states we will miss out on the answers to the problems we face as a society.

  3. If the ultimate test is how science treats the unknown, then for me it fails most of the time. It is willing to make up a story and run with it rather than really seeking the answers. It calls it a theory rather than a story but it treats the theory as the whole answer until it is found not to be, as it invariably is shown to be. So long as scientists put recognition and self before the truth, we will continue to have this situation.

  4. It seems to me that we only really understand the tiniest speck of of the truth of our universe and live in the most enormous arrogance about that which keeps us from seeing what else there is. And the biggest truth under our noses is LOVE, and yet we don’t even make that part of our education system, its crazy.

    1. Indeed Shirley-Ann but it is with this enormous arrogance that the word LOVE has strayed so far from its true meaning & become so vacuous that no-one really trusts or relates to it.

  5. Unless we approach science in true open enquiry, our narrow thinking will ensure we never discover anything more, true or wise to expand our awareness of our world.

  6. I was reading this and thinking of course this is from Dianne T, our beloved scientific raconteur, so imagine my surprise and delight when I found that this was from Joel whose stories are legend. How wonderful to feel Joel your words expanding into other realms… And indeed on one of my favourite subjects… I was just talking about it this morning, How true scientists will always be so open to their ignorance of so much with no doors being shut.

  7. Appreciating how the mind filters our experiences through its beliefs reveals how we limit who we are to such a degree that the lives we live are essentially false and do not express who we truly are. This appreciation allows me to throw out all those limitations on myself like I’m this or that – usually negative attributes- or I can do this or that; and open myself up to, well actually what if I dropped all that and allowed myself to be, what miracles could happen then?

  8. We know from the heart first, as you say, any one of us has experienced walking in to a room and feeling / knowing something is going on, with no words spoken….the energetic equation is a very much underestimated factor in life and science.

    1. Yes and even if you want to play dumb and think you didn’t feel anything when you walked in the room, you know deep inside you did but there may be fear about how you actually deal with what you are feeling so you dismiss it all completely.

  9. With this blog Joel you uncover very clear what we do with science. By saying how Some individulas try to own it is disempowering for others to connect with the wisdom they Can connect too through their body, their inner heart. As science is not for a few. It is our library of wisdom hold in the universe.

  10. Yes, we place a lot of value on Science giving us all of the answers and accept that it knows everything and we wait for the confirmation of new discoveries and go, wow, that’s amazing. But what about those things that cannot be defined by Science yet, do we discount what we feel to be true from a body that is all about science?

  11. One of the things I find interesting about science and ‘scientific discoveries’ is that someone was feeling or connecting to the truth or just knowing what these discoveries were long long before they were ‘officially’ discovered, because science had all of a sudden caught up. The most fascinating thing about this is that those who knew about uranium or the atom as examples here would have been ridiculed, accused of lying (How can this be true?) and even just plain making things up and what’s interesting with this is once it’s found to be true, no-one ever goes back to say oh this person was talking about this very thing thousands of years before hand. What we need to be asking then is well how did they know this then, without any whizz bang instrumentation or equipment etc? In the future there will be people who will find instrumentation to measure energy and more specifically the energy that we are choosing to live from and what this results in and then someone will look back in history and find all the teachings of the Ageless Wisdom and presentations by Serge Benhayon and say how did he know all that then, before we had anything to prove it with? And then find that our body is the greatest scientific instrument of measure there is.

  12. I think the one thing we can all agree on is there is so much we don’t know, so it kind of defies belief when we are unable to be open to what is there for all of us to connect to. The mind is so limited whereas the inner-heart knows no bounds.

  13. “Science prefers to ‘own’ and even control the path to understanding.” Consequently it can never be truly objective as it claims to be unlike the cardio-centric approach where there is no ownership, just the illumination of what already exists.

  14. “The more you live with conscious presence the more energy and vitality you have because you are not driving your physiology from your mind’s ideas of what is happening or what might happen, but rather responding to what is happening.”
    And this is the very joy and freedom with which we see our young children move and relate to life.

  15. I offer testimony to the fact hat I have developed conscious presence through a choice to be aware of my body and breathe in a way that supports it, in so doing I have become aware more of what is happening within me and around me, my energetic awareness has increased, and so I know more, I am wiser than when I began, but in a sense I did not learn anything, this has come from a simple physical connection and a knowing has become unearthed….yes science is amazing and we all have a relationship with it, it is not for the select few.

  16. Even if we know living from our hearts as we have done it as babies and at very young age it feels like most of us have forgotten about it and accumulated a lot which does not serve us. So we have to let go of all the mess and relearn and reawake to live from our hearts.

  17. There is unfortunately a belief that one must live according to the limitations only of what is proven, which is unfortunate. What is equally unfortunate is that true philosophical thinking and freedom of ideas is only accepted in society whilst it does nothing to challenge the status quo.

  18. Being willing to re-connect with and live from my inner heart is the most loving choice I have ever made. Shedding the mental energy by shredding the pictures and de-constructing ideals and beliefs allows for the space to open up and actually support myself to feel what is there to be felt.

  19. Funny how we think that things don’t exist until we ‘discover’ them – in fact it is most arrogant. And it closes the door to the ever present Universal Intelligence that is constantly running through and with us.

  20. It is necessary for the scientific body to look at the bigger picture and not be marginalized into pockets where it reduces itself so small that it can actually be very misleading. We can feel when something is not true whether science proves it or not.

  21. I woke up feeling tension on my left ear and nose and it is easy to react to what my body is feeling without first understanding what the messages are. When I communicated with my body what that was about, there is no need then to react and be in protection.

  22. There is a massive difference in understanding something on an intellectual level and trying to regurgitate words, equations or textbook pages for exams and assessments, than actually translating what might be the same information into a language we can connect to on a whole body basis. Exams are an interesting experience because you can really feel the difference between reciting information as opposed to having a deeper understanding for the bigger picture of whatever is being asked and what it means.

  23. “The true test of science is how it faces the unknown”- it almost makes me laugh that such a fact needs to be stated.

    Life is forever expanding and we are offered opportunities to learn and evolve. It means we are consistently invited to expand our awareness into what is as yet unknown. This ought to be embraced even more so by those who claim to have a specific interest in science and evolution of mankind. If there is talk of doing anything other than that, we can be certain that there is an agenda at play.

  24. What is there to lose for science, and subsequently humanity, by being open to something that may seem different and even unusual at first? Surely, that is the only way to truly evolve.

  25. I’m learning to set aside preconceptions about how an event will be – it could be a party or a work meeting. I’ll usually have nerves prior to the event – a physical response to something that hasn’t happened. Sure there are times I know certain meetings may be tricky but I’m also learning that my nerves seem to call in what I’m nervous about -crazy though that seems. But also, I’m not present enough to respond with confidence so what I could have reflected to people is now much lesser. Being open to what is there rather than predicting/prejudging things makes a huge difference to the results or what would perhaps have been considered ‘evidence’ in scientific terms.

  26. There’s much to be learnt from life. There are forever miracles that transform our accepted ‘normals’ from today. What if life is only truly lived from observation. Rather than reacting and absorbing life. Life is magic and science could (should?!) support this magic to forever expand.

  27. We seem to often be one step behind the game, trying to catch up with the consequences of our actions.

  28. ‘The cardio-centric approach suggests that any choice to override, misinterpret or choose to be oblivious is a choice to NOT feel what is truly happening – or put simply, we are reacting to what we feel.’ This is vital because we tend to think that we do not, or cannot, feel when in truth we are actually registering feelings all the time but what we often do is convince ourselves that we do not or cannot feel simply because we are not giving ourselves enough space To feel. Slowing down and bringing attention to our breath and the movement within our bodies brings us back to ourselves and this natural ability to begin to feel at a very fundamental level. Building on this we become more aware of what is actually going on. Opening ourselves to this is a wonderful unfolding adventure where we begin to appreciate how much we hold and what an awesome relationship we can have with our body and the wisdom it can offer us. We are no less than walking miracles.

  29. The foundation of Science for me is curiosity, openness, discovery, observation and hypothesis on an ongoing loop, thus forever expanding, deepening and evolving.

    When we set up institutions to be representative of an aspect of life, then we have people jump on the band wagon with personal agendas and start to limit the founding principles in order to protect their own niche, humanity is trouble. This is the face of science in our current times.

  30. There is a saying that true wisdom comes from knowing what you don’t know – that takes a humility that unfortunately is quite rare in our scientific approach to date. However, what I find interesting is that the greatest minds of our time are all well documented to having a respect for the unknown and the magic that lies therein. These are the people who are stretching into the unknown and realise that while their hypothesis might answer that small question, there are still unfathomable depths that still have no rational explanation….

  31. The inner-heart knows while the mind pretends that it knows whilst trying to work out the answer. The inner-heart respects the body while the mind does not care about the body. This differences are very significant.

  32. “Surely what is important is not who owns the path to understanding but what might be learnt from it”. Such a great question Joel and one that I instantly would say yes to but there appear to be many involved in science who want to own certain paths, consistently telling others that theirs is the right path and discount any other and then keep their learnings to themselves. Surely at the end of the day, each path, and the learnings from them, is a path for the good of all humanity; no one owns them, they belong to all.

  33. Skepticism is a bit like buddhism, the latter of which say detach, detach detach – the problem with which is of course, if you do happen to find “enlightenment”, you probably won’t know, because you will have detached from it. Science, or more precisely skepticism, has become a little like that – whereby we have become so skeptical that we do not even believe things even when they are proven. We simply accept them as the best belief system we have currently developed. The problem with that is when you come across the truth, you are still going to deny it, insisting that it will probably be disproven in time anyway.

  34. To me Science seems to be taking over from religion in that it wants to own and control everything and the Scientists seem to me to have an answer to something and then work backwards off of that to find the theory.
    The other thing that worries me about Scientists is that they are usually sponsored by the big corporations such as the sugar industry so it was no surprise that the Scientists discovered that eating sugar was good for you. Now of course we know that actually it is very harmful, a poison to the body. Scientists have their place but they should not be allowed to become the dominant voice and control our lives.

  35. I don’t need a science project to prove it to me, I use my body and it tells me loud and clear and then I know for sure.

  36. I read a paper recently that wrote about an enormous disturbance that was happening in the world of physics…. The ‘theory’ that everyone had ‘sort of’ agreed on, that explained 90% of the known universe was possibly about to be debunked…. If we simply sit with this … a lot is revealed.

    1. That is so interesting Chris, so it must have been in the past when the ideas changed, like from everyone being convinced that the world is flat to there may be a new way of understanding something.

      1. Yes exactly Gill… And the enormity of the ‘ not knowing’ and the propping up of ways of thinking with extraordinarily complex theorems is simply staggering… And we, in this era, think that we know so much

  37. “Enter Universal Medicine, and their suggestion that more understanding can be achieved through the body than through mind.”

    Since being introduced to this notion, and developing a more loving relationship with my body, I can vouch that the wisdom shared through my body, feels much more all encompassing of my whole body, and of others where as when I am in mind, it is much more about the mind/head only (i.e. eating for taste even though the body is full), and more about me.

  38. Openness is one of the values of true science as it allows us to forever learn about life and the Universe without the arrogance of thinking that we know it all…

  39. Science can be such a beautiful thing when it comes with a true exploratory and open approach, but often it’s coming with a predetermined head set and can be very controlling.

  40. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain – seeing the mess we have created globally and locally, in all areas of life one would care to mention.

  41. What a lot of sense you highlight here Joel with all we feel and the way science has its view based on proven facts. “The more you live with conscious presence, the less reactive you become to the world around you and the more connected you feel to yourself and others.” This is so beautiful to know we can live in a more harmonious way with our bodies ,our selves everybody and the outside world around us and this is something we seek underneath the so called acceptance of life as it is.

  42. Indeed we have nothing to lose so it is a great first step to let go of our arrogance as a spirit and start to be more on a honest level with ourselves and each other.

  43. A developing relationship with humility is opening up a whole new world of questioning for me; a willingness to explore stuff and question things that I have avoided or not given the time of day for before. A lot of this has been based on a false arrogance and belief that I want to come across as knowledgeable and that it is important to have things concluded in some way.

    1. I can relate to that false arrogance too Matilda. Science is an observation, a learning to take a new idea and view it openly without prejudice or judgement. Who knows what unfolds when we don’t slam the lid on it.

  44. When reading the title of the writing ” the true test of science is how it faces the unknown ” but we come from that unknown I thought , so therefore all is truly know , as there is nothing that is not known. And brings it back to my science days in school and the history of the periodic table of elements by Dmitri Mendeleev where he drew up a box chart and left , boxes empty on the chart where he knew but had no tangible evidence that an element would fit . So as time went on the spaces got filled with newly ” discovered ” elements , but the elements always fitted into the space that Dmitri had set aside for them with the way he scientifically configured the chart . Now thats science of knowing the unknown.

    1. Great comment John. Mendeleev knew he didn’t know it all at that point, but knew to leave space for it to be filled at a later date. An inner knowing and no arrogance there. I agree ‘Now thats science of knowing the unknown.’

  45. “The reality is things have always existed outside the current understanding of science. Yet somewhere, the assumption is made that because science does not understand something that this thing doesn’t exist or that it is folly to suggest that is does.” So true as I have scientist academic friends who defend their known science for all its worth. Yet I thought science was about being open to new ideas and frontiers. We certainly don’t know it all and our world is proof of that. – otherwise why would highly intelligent people do stupid things to and with their body? Perhaps there is another Way…?

  46. We all know from personal experience that when we come across someone who absolutely refuses to be open to new ideas and new concepts comes across as rigid and dare I say a little idiotic.
    I don’t mean this in a judgmental way, I to have my own moments of doing that. What I mean is that we all know that this is not a wise stance in life.
    So how on earth have we ended up allowing our scientific understanding and exploration become limited in such a way?

  47. Surely what is important is not who owns the path to understanding but what might be learnt from it?
    Humanities need to own knowledge is the crux here, the separation and mistrust that has ensued has consequently delayed the might that is possible through our equal connection & purpose.

  48. Just imagine an organization of any sort.. standing up and proclaiming forth … OK we don’t know about 95% of what our business is about but if you challenge us we will ridicule you, humiliate you and render what you say naught… would you trust this organization to lead you forth? I think not

    1. Yet because they don’t proclaim it quite so blatantly and in fact they promote that what they do is ‘it’ then we believe them when it suits us to not discern for ourselves.

  49. Science can incredibly distinguish the difference between this cancer and that cancer, one disease and another, even one minuscule atom and another, but what would be interesting to explore is WHY a person might have this particular disease and not something else? WHY their cells act in this way, and that a ‘random mutation’ configured the way it did…

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s