On [experiential] Objective Consciousness

I found an applicable knowledge by chance and named it ‘objective consciousness’. I found later that a person by the name of Gurdjieff to have used the same term for the very same notion.. To experiential objective consciousness, time and space cease to exist or to be relevant. Time to experiential objective consciousness is actually simultaneous in nature with no fixed present i.e, everything from every time line is happening in every moment of now. Individuality too is transcended in objective consciousness so that it is possible to transpose one’s consciousness into the consciousness of other living beings i.e., to experience others or group of others as self. We are just different expressions of the same sacred essence. Because objective consciousness transcends space-time, it can be argued that consciousness is more fundamental than matter since all matter occupies space-time, i.e, that matter is as illusory as space-time and individuality. That space-time (hence matter) and individuality are the illusory constructs of subjective minds. By illusory, it doesn’t mean that space-time and the self don’t exist but rather their true nature eludes most people’s perception.

As with my previous warnings in my posts, with regard to provided external links take in what is suitable to you. DO NOT assume that other parts of the same link are credible or in line with my personal views. I may even disagree with some aspects contained within provided external links in my blog.

In my personal opinion, my discovery of objective consciousness is directly linked to my past ordeal in Singapore in 2002. I have started glimpsing objective consciousness since around 2004/2005 while I was in my 20s. I didn’t know what it was or how it was possible. Only when I continually had moments of glimpsing that I began to understand. I invented the term ‘objective consciousness’ but found that another person by the name of Gurdjieff to have coined the very same term for the same idea. I’m a Christian by faith.

Furthermore, the idea of objective consciousness (just a term to denote a different kind of consciousness than its ordinary subjective counterpart) is not nonsense. Science has been slow to acknowledge this and it has become much like a religion. When Boltzmann proposed the concept of atom, those within the scientific community bitterly opposed and ridiculed him due to their rationale that atom could not have existed since it could not be seen.

While it is true that we were not born into this world with a manual, most people lost their independence in the experience of living, on becoming and forgot about being. Until we really explore what it means to be a human being, until we really understand the nature of being we will never really be a complete human being we are destined to be. Objective Consciousness can be cultivated through the weakening or outright annihilation of ego. The ego, that personal inner identification we ascribe to ourselves is false and is a hindrance to transpersonal state of being or existence. The annihilation of ego is hence the Jacob’s ladder to God and the result would be an objective being, one who is more acceptable to God, one who is living a transpersonal existence by the realization of one’s true Self.

But with a society ruled by the tyranny of mediocrity, greatness is often mistaken as madness unless of course, that greatness is not really that great then it would be called greatness because it fits the idea of mediocre people. New ideas become accepted not because people change their minds about them but because new generation grew up with their notions.  I found a scientific journal one time which was written by a Chinese scholar and he suggested that  quantum superposition happened within the consciousness and as one was aware of its own consciousness, this state of superposition collapsed and this was what set off the possibility of attaining a fuller human potential that I term transcendental experience (it’s been a while since I glanced at the journal and I don’t keep a copy so I’m sorry if this is not accurate). Attempts to re-find the journal up via Google were fruitless though.




7 thoughts on “About

  1. This blog is one big joke.

    Besides, the blogger appears to be ill equipped to write in proper English, contorting phrases together in the attempt to disguise his/her lack of actual competence in the issue.

    Have a life. Singapore is a crime syndicate? Come on.

    Posted by Chew Hong Jie | August 6, 2011, 8:11 am
    • If you really think this blog is so bad why bother commenting on it. If this blog is so ineffective why does the Singapore Police force bother to put it on watch.

      What do you call the last 2011 Election where the opposition despite getting 40% of the votes only received 6 seats of the overall 87. In percentage that is a mere 6.89% of representation. A far cry from the 40% of popular votes they received.

      Now I call that one big Singapore joke. Voters should have a better life than casting their votes but since voting is made compulsory by law because Lee Kuan Yew wanted a stamp of credibility to his dictatorship and fear of losing this, people are intimidated into voting theirs even though electoral reforms are badly needed to give it any impression of credibility to begin with.

      Posted by exposingsingapore | August 6, 2011, 8:28 am
  2. We like to watch. Cool story bro.

    Posted by Chinese Assassin | October 3, 2012, 9:27 pm
  3. the general elections divide seats by area and not as a total. I think your opinions regarding Singapore are extremely shallow. While it is true that the late Mr. Lee ruled pretty much with an iron fist, you can’t exactly decry the success he had. Could you find any other individual who can run Singapore better than Mr Lee had? Pretty sure you can’t. So why bother living in the past and continue to harp on the old PAP and their actions? Our people are more than capable of figuring out who they should vote into power now.

    Ps: Singapore has established itself as a country of modeled democracy and we are not in any means a full democratic state like that of USA or any other.

    Posted by Jokebot | March 23, 2015, 11:36 am
    • “the general elections divide seats by area and not as a total”, yes and they change the size and groupings often before elections to suit predicted outcomes. In real democracies, that practice is called gerrymandering. Hypothetically, if you were to to take it to the extreme, it would be possible to have 90% of the population vote for an opposition party yet they’ll only attain just one seat while the ruling party with 10% of the votes can get the rest of the seats. This can be done by surveying and classifying people by residency and voting patterns prior to elections and grouping all the likely opposition-voting constituents into a single constituency with one seat, while dividing the 10% ruling party voters into as many constituencies with as many seats as possible. While this is an extreme example, the logic is there and it certainly is a favorite model for pseudo-“democracies” the world over.

      Posted by RonnieNolan | November 6, 2015, 8:48 am
  4. While Lee Kuan Yew had indeed brought some measures of success, but to think that a freer democratic model wouldn’t bring more benefits to Singapore is ludicrous. Lee Kuan Yew in half of his rule was interested in entrenching his position than to bring genuine progress to Singapore. He did this by, among other things, manipulating the voting system and destroying the civil society and the people’s engagement in the running of the country. Let’s just say I know Lee’s character than most others. You get to know people more when they fight you. And he’s one very insecure person. Singaporeans are smart and responsible enough for more freedom. A vibrant, robust and successful society needs passionate people in every field including politics. Lee Kuan Yew had destroyed the spirit of the people in exchange for the security of his position and that of his family and party. Singapore may have a first world facade but it has been governed by the mentality of a third world ruler. Perhaps the following sentence would describe it best: Lee Kuan Yew had successfuly turned Singapore into his private property where ordinary men have no right recognized by the state whatsoever and the rule of law is easily bent to serve those in power. He had created an atmosphere of fear and he had shown time and again that he was able to strike any of his opponents with impunity and get away with anything and although he tried to justify his methods for the sake of the country, in truth his draconian methods were a necessity to keep him, his family and thus the party in power.

    Posted by exposingsingapore | March 24, 2015, 12:08 am
  5. It is patently disingenuous to claim that LKY’s model of Singapore is the best. In the world of the blind, the one-eyed harry is king. LKY’s Machiavellian methods is undeniable and well known. He was exposed at least three decades ago by no one less than an Israeli thinker who wrote a long critique on reviewing and commenting on his methods and actions.

    Posted by george | August 16, 2016, 2:21 pm

Leave a Reply

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: