Non-Localized Consciousness & Remote Viewing The Future

[MrRING]

The most recent episode of the great Unexplained podcast introduced me to Stephan A Schwartz:
http://www.unexplainedpodcast.com/episodes/2023/3/10/s06-episode-29-extra-through-a-mind-darkly

In 1978, having been satisfied that remote viewing could enable people to look into the past, Stephan A. Schwartz had an epiphany.

If experienced remote viewers could look back in time, could they also look into the future?

And so, he decided to try and find out...

In general, I know he has a theory about non-localized consciousness, and he began work about trying to remote view into the future with some interesting results. I can't find where he talks about non-localized consciousness, but it is discussed in other areas like these two links:
https://www.consciouslifestylemag.com/non-local-consciousness-and-the-brain/

Some observations from the study of holotropic states (non-ordinary or altered states of consciousness) are so radical that they not only challenge the theory and practice of psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy, but also undermine some of the most fundamental metaphysical assumptions of Western science. None of these conceptual challenges are more
drastic and far-reaching than the new insights regarding the nature of non-local consciousness and its relationship to matter. According to Western neuroscience, consciousness is an epiphenomenon of matter, a by-product of the complex neurophysiological processes in the brain and thus an intrinsic and inseparable part of the body. Modern consciousness research conducted in the last five decades has made this hypothesis highly questionable.
Very few people, including most scientists, realize that we have absolutely no proof that consciousness is actually produced in the brain and by the brain. There is no doubt that there exists vast clinical and experimental evidence showing significant interconnections and correlations between the anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of the brain, on the one hand, and states of consciousness, on the other. However, it represents a major logical jump to infer from the available data that these correlations represent a proof that the brain is actually the source of consciousness, and, in fact, the data largely points to the fact that consciousness is non-local. Such a deduction would be tantamount to the conclusion that the TV program is generated in the TV set, because there is a close correlation between functioning or malfunctioning of its components and the quality of the sound and picture.

It should be obvious from this example that the close connection between cerebral activity and consciousness does not exclude the possibility that the brain mediates consciousness, but does not actually generate it. The research of holotropic states has amassed ample evidence for this alternative—that consciousness is non local to the body.

https://noetic.org/blog/non-local-consciousness/

A recent interview with Dr. Jeffrey Mishlove of the New Thinking Allowed:

https://stephanaschwartz.com/

 

[Victory]

Very plausible "version" of 40 year ahead..
Let's hope some of us live long enough to find out.

I think remote viewing has a strong possibility of being real.

 

[Coal]

I think remote viewing has a strong possibility of being real.

Why?

 

[Firefly29]

I absolutely love Unexplained. Always a decent story.

 

[Victory]

Why?

Accessing a shared supra physical consciousness.

To some extent a dream can include an element of that.

There are many anecdotes on here of people sensing something, or being aware of an unexpected visitor to their home before the visitor arrives.

So if techniques can be understood and practiced to access that consciousness...these can include remote viewing.

I have no scientific way of explaining, it.

Just my thoughts on balance of probability.

 

[MrRING]

An academic work on non-localized consciousness:

Dossey, L. (2014). Spirituality and nonlocal mind: A necessary dyad. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 1(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000001

---

Abstract​

A growing body of empirical evidence suggests that human consciousness is nonlocal—i.e., it is not confined to specific points in space, such as brains and bodies, or specific moments in time, such as the present. Evidence for nonlocal consciousness can be found in distant cell-to-cell, organ-to-organ, and person-to-person interactions. Throughout history, what are commonly called spiritual experiences involve a similar motif of experience: the felt transcendence of space and time and a sense of unity with all there is. This article proposes that nonlocality is a common feature of consciousness in general, and of spiritual experience in particular. Consciousness is seen as fundamental in this view, as working through the brain but not produced by the brain. Entanglement, now recognized to occur in biological systems, is proposed as a mechanism for the nonlocal interactions of conscious beings. A consequence of nonlocal consciousness is immortality, because temporal nonlocality implies infinitude in time. Because the experience of nonlocal consciousness often involves a sense of the spiritual, nonlocal consciousness and spirituality are seen as a complementary dyad. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Citation for academic publication of Schwartz on the topic:

Schwartz, Stephan. (2013). Crossing the Threshold: Non local Consciousness and the Burden of Proof. Explore (New York, N.Y.). 9. 77-81. 10.1016/j.explore.2012.12.009.

 

[MorningAngel]

The most recent episode of the great Unexplained podcast introduced me to Stephan A Schwartz:
http://www.unexplainedpodcast.com/episodes/2023/3/10/s06-episode-29-extra-through-a-mind-darkly

In general, I know he has a theory about non-localized consciousness, and he began work about trying to remote view into the future with some interesting results. I can't find where he talks about non-localized consciousness, but it is discussed in other areas like these two links:
https://www.consciouslifestylemag.com/non-local-consciousness-and-the-brain/


https://noetic.org/blog/non-local-consciousness/

A recent interview with Dr. Jeffrey Mishlove of the New Thinking Allowed:

https://stephanaschwartz.com/

I have often wondered if you can remote view into the past. I really want to have a go at that.

 

[Victory]

It's an extraordinary subject.

Logically, it should be more likely we can remote view the past than the future, because the past has happened, whereas the future has yet to occur.

How can you see something that has not happened!!!

And if we take into account human free will, there should be no way of knowing what will happen, unless one is G-D who can exist outside of any laws of nature/physics/science.

Yet our humanity is full of experiences of prophecy...(if you believe they occurred that is.)

So prophecy equals G-D putting a vision of the future into the mind of a human, or putting an vision of what is possible to occur.

Or - if one is atheist (which I am not), it could be prophecy is remote viewing a shared consciousness, that exists also as a tangible "interactive film" of future events, and is viewable regardless if it is exactly the current time one is viewing, or the future, or the past.

And that then allows for someone to try and view the very beginning of existence, and the end.

 

[MorningAngel]

It's an extraordinary subject.

Logically, it should be more likely we can remote view the past than the future, because the past has happened, whereas the future has yet to occur.

How can you see something that has not happened!!!

And if we take into account human free will, there should be no way of knowing what will happen, unless one is G-D who can exist outside of any laws of nature/physics/science.

Yet our humanity is full of experiences of prophecy...(if you believe they occurred that is.)

So prophecy equals G-D putting a vision of the future into the mind of a human, or putting an vision of what is possible to occur.

Or - if one is atheist (which I am not), it could be prophecy is remote viewing a shared consciousness, that exists also as a tangible "interactive film" of future events, and is viewable regardless if it is exactly the current time one is viewing, or the future, or the past.

And that then allows for someone to try and view the very beginning of existence, and the end.

I didn’t watch all of it (I got bored and thought I ought to go to bed.). But they were just touching on if it was a future or the future.

If there are parallel existences and every eventually is possible how do you know you will see the one you’ll experience?

 

[Ascalon]

I find this fascinating, but there was nothing there that a decent punt at deduction from today's trends wouldn't produce.
Climate change is real and will cause coastal flooding, a fully green electric grid, cars that charge from the road. The end of gender wars and transphobia, etc. All fairly stock stuff. Even the US political reorganisation and loss of preeminence is not hard to extrapolate.

I'm not looking for some shock revelation, but in the manner of a cold read by a 'psychic' it is vague, general and non-specific enough to be fairly pointless.

 

[Victory]

If there are parallel existences and every eventually is possible how do you know you will see the one you’ll experience?

You don't know if you will see the one you experience.

But this could explain positive and negative prophecies of the future.

Both futures are possible, but only one will happen.

The other is real when viewed from the past, but by the time it becomes current, it is relegated to an equivalent of an "Alternative ending" type section on a DVD.

 

[eburacum]

I think that non-localised consciousness solves nothing about the hard problem of consciousness. If consciousness happens outside the brain/body system, it still has to exist somewhere. Since we know that the brain and body do process information, then it may as well happen there as somewhere else. If consciousness occurs in some sort of external spirit-world processing system, how does that work? Is this hypothetical external processing system capable of performing activities that the human brain cannot? Occam's Razor says that 'Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity', so if we have a physical system (the brain/body system) that can perform complex processing functions, why do we need to imagine another one somewhere else, in an unknown location, which does the same thing?

I also think that precognition in a many-worlds universe also solves nothing. You, or I can look into the future and make predictions; they may represent a possible future, but if it is not the one we eventually experience then the act of precognition is meaningless.

Or as Morning Angel said;

If there are parallel existences and every eventuality is possible, how do you know you will see the one you’ll experience?

 

[IbisNibs]

Very plausible "version" of 40 year ahead..
Let's hope some of us live long enough to find out.

I might just make it. Don't know if I'll have all my marbles tho.'
Will have to start doing sudoku.

 

[Aether Blue]

In terms of how this might work, a hypothetical being outside the universe (and time) might see it as essentially "complete," with all events revealed. How and why such an entity would communicate such information to us temporally trapped beings is another question entirely, of course.

 

[Robbrent]

Of course the acid test is

If you can see into the future tell what next years Derby Winner will be that type of thing we need specifics