Are direct knowledge and universal brain
facts or myths?
Noetic is an area of research that claims that direct mental knowledge /
inspiration is possible.
Noosphere is the theory of a global or universal brain / consciousness.
A kind of intelligence globalization?
As evidences are scant, those notions are largely debated.
The notions at stake
Noetic: can we receive direct knowledge?
The Noetic notion addresses what some thinkers assume to be a direct
mentalinspiration / knowledge that people would
experience without using their brain logical circuits.
It is philosophic notions, but some present it as a science under the
phrase "noetic sciences".
According to that theory, mental inspiration :
would not be just the unconscious work of specific neurons
This subterranean work is a normal phenomenon, helped
chemical neuro-transmitters and electric waves that pump up
continuously the whole knowledge and experience
that is accumulated in the brain. It might deliver at breakfast a customized solution to tackle
an up to now unresolved issue.
would come also from a direct contact with external forces,
in a communication with what are supposed superior
sources of knowledge
The underlying hypothesis is that external universal physical
particles or electromagnetic waves are at play in such
knowledge transmission to the brain.
Thus, no motorcycle helmet allowed in the lab !
By the way, some go a step further and consider that the process entails
a direct action of the human mind on the physical world. Wow!
if the question of intuition raises a puzzle, frankly, the idea of
changing the universe just by using our mind seems really far fetched.
Even the "observer puzzle" the fact that the observer could change what
it observes, does not entail such magic.
The related academic (some say pseudo academic) explorations was made
popular by a Dan Brown's novel. But until now, no widely accepted scientific
breakthrough has been put on the plate.
Noosphere: is there a universal brain?
Another notion that could be related is "noosphere", the idea of a global
brain, a global consciousness, also a universal pool of knowledge and
This is a rather old philosophical idea (under various flavors).
Myth? Fringe? Or prescient understanding? Who knows!
has now its own surge of popularity, as the global communication
growth, notably through the Internet, could feed the emergence of
such a collective "intelligence".
A kind of "intelligent" globalization in the making?
Something that the "transhumanism" projects (article only in French, but
you can find plenty of related ones on the Web) might reach ?
Some cooperative encyclopedic Internet platforms / forums could then be
seen as nodes of that global cultural network.
cross between the two notions seems also in the making by some
as if direct inspiration could reach the whole humanity
some common ideas.
The debates: Reality or magic?
Constructive or destructive?
Those theories, seemingly on the verge to become buzzwords, raise two
types of questions that are to be debated:
1) Are they based on reality?
Or do they, at least for noetic with its direct knowledge powers, express
fanciful illusions, magical thinking, esoteric prophecies ?
At the moment there is scant evidence about the reality and practicality
of those notions. Better be watchful, quacks might be hiding, as we can not exclude that some self-appointed gurus could present them as hard science, using
them as deception tools to manipulate weak minds.
But some coincidences are put forward that could give some clues that
there might be some reality here. And anyway a non existence of those
human properties has not been proven either, thus research goes on.
2) And in the case that there is some beef in them, would they:
Bring opportunities of progress?
Human beings need to reach more global unity to solve the
current world challenges and to switch towards a more
collaborative world. This would break a long sequence in History based on fighting
one another, under banners of allegiance to divisive national or
Or on the contrary would those beliefs
bring human regressionand be highly risky, if based on:
The primacy of emotions to shape decisions and behaviors,
at the expense of rational / critical thinking (emotional biases).
Not that an emotional togetherness with all human
beings should be relinquished.
The primacy of mimicry, conformity and collective thinking
...Would it leave some room for freedom and individuality? Or eliminate it?
A topic far from being settled
Even if the author, it would be unfair to hide it, does not have much
respect for esoteric, this article does not bring any conclusion.
Its purpose is to collect information and advices on obscure topics that
have been only superficially explored.
Please bring your suggestions and comments.