I was reading a post this morning on “alchemical healing” and was a little puzzled by it.
I believe in the scientific concept of “emergence”. Namely that the sum is greater than its constituents parts. I believe that great complexity has arisen from a few simple rules of nature and that as time goes by science will reveal more to us. I believe that eventually intelligent life will become what our ancestors would have considered “gods”
We now know the aims of alchemists are achievable – we know that any one element can be turned into any other element given enough heat and pressure.
On “spirituality” we are coming to understand more about the mind and indeed I am interested in recent scientific research on qualia and the nature of consciousness.
But I believe one must distinguish such concepts as “art” on the one hand from “science” and the search for facts on the other.
My sense of spirituality is to sit in a Norman Church in the English countryside and read the book of Psalms. Not because I believe in a god or gods but because it puts my mind at ease. I do not believe my experience is “mystical” in any sense; I believe rather that the space and peace, the beauty and the language give my tired mind the ability to rest and to contemplate my “weltanschauung” in tranquility.
I believe that the world is a miraculous enough place as it is without the necessity for belief in anything other than what is there, than what we can prove by experiment.
I love the idea of pixies and goblins; I have been an avid fan of Tolkien, CS Lewis and fantasy all my life.
But I am very aware that I must not confuse fantasy and fiction with reality.
Beauty and escape in art, literature, music and theatre are essential to me. But when I want to know about healing I look to science. I may be inspired by Ents and Gandalf but if I want to know how the world works I look to CERN or Roger Penrose rather than Ursula le Guin.
You really know how to get the cerebral juices flowing… Thanks!