Answering John Powell's Questions
John L. Waters
Use down arrow or vertical scroll bar
to view whole page!
Answering John Powell's Questions
sent to me in an e-mail September 21, 2000
John L. Waters
September 24, 2000
Copyright 2000 by John L. Waters.
All Rights Reserved.
-----------------------------------------------------
John Powell's Question One: What is the argument for
working to synthesize the science you know with these
domains outside science? Showing how to do it is not
the same as arguing that it should be done.
Argument one. Over the centuries, past extensions of
science have added new and useful sciences and
technologies. References: books on the history of
science and technology.
My independent research is following that historical
trend.
Over the centuries, past extensions of science into
new domains have enabled human beings to do things
which weren't possible for humans to do before.
Extending medical science into the realm where my
research goes will enable science to be successful in
ways in which science can't yet be successful.
Argument two. My research is on integrating the brain
and the body more effectively by using natural forms
and energies which cost nothing or they cost much less
than hospitals, M.D.s, medications, and other
high-cost forms of treatment. Benefits are savings in
cost and the treatment is more effective in many
cases. This last sentence won't be valid until many
more people have tried the treatment and it has worked
for them.
More testing of this method needs to be done. More
persons need to try this method of chronic disease
treatment under medical supervision, to see how well
it works for many people.
Argument three. My research promotes mathematics and
science to people who never studied these subjects
with serious intent because these subjects seemed
non-relevant or periferal to the human interest and
the human need.
My research also promotes art, music, writing, and
other creative activities to persons whose mental
activity and physical activity have been focused on
some activity which is more destructive. Evidence:
examine my own works and the works of other creative
persons.
My research is on education as well as on medicine.
The creative process is also beneficial to health
insofar as developing the means for being more
creative also involves reconditioning the brain and
rejuvenating the brain. In this way innovative
medicine and innovative education are related and
reinforce each other.
Argument four. My research is on exploring the
process of problem-solving and inspiration so that the
intense divisiveness and the strict exclusiveness
which is so common in present cultures and subcultures
will gradually be reduced. The full potential of a
human being includes abilities which present medicine
and present education can't explain or take full
advantage of.
For example, certain processes I use, such as
sungazing, and vegetarianism and the spontaneous
drawing movements I use are not taught in educational
institutions, in churches, or in medical centers. But
these processes have been very beneficial to myself.
(Integration of science with spiritual energy will
help bring about the long-prophesied messianic age of
peace and understanding. However this claim can't be
proven until the actual work is being tested and
proven in many nations at the same time.)
-----------------------------------------------------
John Powell's Question Number Two:
How can you deal with the prejudices of those
fundamentalist scientists who condemn these topics as
superstitions or nonsense? I take it them are part of
an audience you want to reach, but I have my doubts.
Their dismissal may be so automatic and so deeply
engrained that reaching them is hopeless.
My answer:
There are fundamentalist scientists, fundamentalist
Christians, fundamentalist Muslims, fundamentalist
Jews and fundamentalists in other faiths. Atheists,
agnostics, and skeptics are very firmly rooted in
their particular belief and methodology of life.
Conversion is a study in itself. If your mind is set
in concrete you have a fixed pattern of thinking
which you rely on. You're satisfied that this
pattern is reliable. But when problems or phenomena
you can't explain by using this pattern of thinking
come up, you ignore these phenomena or you dismiss
them. You don't dwell on them or really investigate
them because you can't predict them, explain them, or
control them. So they make you feel uneasy and
uncomfortable. To remain comfortable you wall these
anomalous phenomena or strange persons out of your
life and out of your thoughts.
When a conversion takes place, a true believer in one
fixed pattern is converted from one fundamentalist
camp to another. Like Anton Boisen moved from
accepting himself as a "schizophrenic" to accepting
himself as a "saved Christian." As a Christian he was
able to live outside the fixed pattern world of a
mental institution. Other men are converted from one
rigid pattern to another.
During conversion the mind is more fluid. This is the
state of mind a young child cultivates until he is
educated out of it and trained out of it. Very few
older children retain the fluidity of a much younger
healthy child. And children are more open to new
ideas and to unusual persons.
Adults who are unusually creative have more fluid
minds and imaginations like little children. These
adults are often looked up to for their creative
ability and their achievements in creative work. Also
creativity and youthful fluidity are both healthy for
the brain. And what is proven to be health-promoting
is likely to appeal to people in all nations, in due
time. And since poor health causes the unhealthy
person to experience unpleasant symptoms, unhealthy
persons are motivated to do things which improve their
health. Since my method is much less expensive than
conventional medical care, more people will be able to
use the method. Over time this will convert many
people in every nation and the old intolerances
gradually will be reduced. Of course, the first step
is for more people to test this method under the
supervision of medical experts.
------------------------------------------------------
John Powell's Question Three:
What arguments can you give to those who argue that
your insights are just delusion? That is, there is a
need for you to articulate things that go, This is not
just a delusion because..... Part of that might
involve answering their arguments. Are you aware of
how their thinking goes? It might be good to say what
they would say quite clearly and strongly, but then
answer them in such a way that they have to listen.
My answer:
First of all, there is a difference between my
insights, which number in the many thousands and which
quite a lot are rather silly or funny, and my methods,
which are only a few.
My basic method involves (1) spontaneous physical body
movements, particularly in my chest, arms, hands, and
fingers to lead me to new ideas (2) sunbathing and
sungazing and using my eyes to gaze and see things
many other people don't see because they haven't
conditioned themselves the way I've conditioned
myself, (3) vegetarianism, and (4) the direct
perception of an energy which I have called "psychic"
energy or "spiritual" energy or "divine" energy. Each
of these practices can be termed an irrational and an
ineffectual delusion. But I can take each of these
four aspects of the method in turn and discuss them.
First, my spontaneous body movements, my improvisation
of music, of art designs, and my improvised writingg.
Anyone can see that it is no delusion that I have used
improvisation to generate a large number of ideas. A
person can see this by making a careful inspection of
my collected works. This would take a long time. I
think it's clear that I've used improvisation to
produce a prodigious number of ideas. Some of these
ideas of course are silly, funny, or wrong. This is
the nature of every collection of intuited ideas.
Even the acknowledged mathematical genius Ramanujan
produced some formulas which have been proved
incorrect.
Second, my vegetarianism.
There are many books on vegetarianism and there are
many websites on vegetarianism. At the start of my
dietary change I got ideas on why vegetarianism is
better than eating animal flesh and other animal
products. Some of these ideas probably are silly. I
don't remember them very well. But what needs to be
investigated is the physiological changes which have
resulted by my becoming a vegetarian. One of these
changes has been an increased blood flow into my brain
and out of my brain. I deduce this because I often
lie on my back and gaze up into the sky and I see
thousands of points of white light swirling about and
I've read an opthalmological paper which states these
light points are caused by red blood cells hitting
cells in the retina as they pass through tiny blood
vessels in the eyes. So as I am relaxing I am letting
a lot more blood flow through the retinal tissue in my
eyes. But retinal tissue is brain tissue. And it
makes sense to me that since I have learned better how
to relax, the tissues of my whole brain are getting
more blood flow. More nutrients are being supplied to
my brain and more wastes are being removed faster from
my brain. This would explain how I am better able to
be more productive since 1980 and less subject to
spells of destructive rage and depression, not to
mention psychotic delusions.
Third, my sunbathing and my sungazing.
This is probably the hardest one. There is so much
publicity these days against exposing one's body to
the sun. And of course a lot of this publicity is
justified. The skin cancer rate is rising. Of course
there are lots more people. I don't know all the
details of this medical scare. But I have studied
some articles about the dangers of suntanning.
I personally found suntanning to be very beneficial.
I observed the same thing in my son when he was a boy.
He tended to be very moody and difficult here on the
foggy coast but when he went on a Scout trip inland
and spent ten days in the bright sunshine, and he got
a suntan, he came home with bright spirits. In a few
days, though, here on the cool, damp, and foggy coast,
he was back to his old self.
Moodiness tends to run in families, and not every
person may respond to sunshine in the same way. Some
persons are more susceptible to sunburn and sun
damage to their skin. In my case, I tan easily. In
all cases, when a person hasn't been getting a suntan,
he has to start slowly and expose his skin only a few
minutes a day to begin with. After a few weeks of
tanning a person can stay out for hours without being
sunburned. And with sungazing it's the same. It took
me a couple of years to really become a strong
sungazer. That was probably because here on the coast
there are so many days when a person can't practice
sungazing or sunbathing.
As for the damage of sunbathing, I think it makes a
difference what chemicals are on ones skin and in ones
skin. I think diet is important and I think what is
in the air is important. And I think what is on your
skin is important. But in the research papers on
suntanning and skin cancer I've read or heard about, I
don't think the medical scientists controlled these
parameters. I think the research was just really done
on the fly.
Cancer is more likely to occur where there is a
persistent irritation to some part of the body.
Sunlight reacts with many chemicals to produce skin
irritants. Just being in a city or close to pollution
is enough to produce irritants on the skin and in the
skin. I think it's important to try this method in a
pollution-free environment. Unfortunately these
places are getting harder and harder to find!
As far as the sungazing is concerned, it's easy to
damage your eyes by just looking right at the sun or
at some other very bright point of light. In 1980 I
damaged my right eye in this way. In time the damage
was repaired by my own body without help from the
doctors. But I learned to use means of illuminating
my eyes which kept the sunlight moving about on the
retina so there was no time for the light to burn the
retina. There are different ways of doing this.
As far as the suntanning and the sungazing being
delusions, what is needed is just for more chronically
ill persons to try this method I have used. They need
to try the method for at least one year, under medical
supervision. I have personally met two other persons
who used sunshine in the same way. But they were not
scientifically inclined.
Fourth, my direct perception of "spiritual" energy.
This is certain to be dismissed as a delusion by lots
of hard scientists, because they themselves haven't
been trained to be able to see this effect.
There are many reports in the literature of persons
who have seen this "spiritual" energy in the same way
I have seen it, and the reports have a familiar ring
to them. In my case I experienced the "spiritual"
energy hundreds of times before I read these reports.
It took me a long time to find them.
I have found that people who regularly practice
meditation are more likely to easily see this
"spiritual" energy or feel it in my presence or in the
presence of another so-called "master." I also
suspect that body size and weight tends to make a
person able to project more of this "spiritual" energy
but I could be wrong in this. I have seen the same
"spiritual" energy in trees, especially pine trees,
redwood trees, and other coniferous trees. Other
trees which accumulate a lot of this energy have a lot
of oily, milky, resinous, or pitchy sap. I have
tested a number of local persons and found that they
respond in predictable ways to exposures of large
amounts of this "spiritual" energy. Conditioning the
body is very important.
9:45PM Sunday, September 24, 2000
John L. Waters
The information on this page represents that of
John Waters and not
necessarily that of Humboldt State University. John
Waters takes full
responsibility for the information presented.
This page is maintained by: John Waters