Showing posts from July, 2012

Hyper-dimensional fantasies...

There seems to be a lot of talk in the New Age community these days about hyper-dimensional ideas, like "5D ascension," "higher-dimensional realms," and what not. Much of the stuff is either completely unsubstantiated or articulated in a way that flies in the face of science and reason. So although the fantasies are rich and appealing, their lack of any grounding is a complete turn-off. Yet, hyper-dimensionality, as a concept, can be explored in full accordance with materialism/physicalism to weave surprising possibilities about what it means to be a human being. Amazingly, it can even reconcile survival of consciousness, eternal life, and reincarnation with strict physicalism. Curious about how? Read on, and/or watch the short video below.

According to different versions of String Theory, and especially M-Theory, up to 10 dimensions of space are required for describing and explaining the behavior of matter. For years now popular culture has acknowledged this abstr…

Rational, evidence-based, non-materialist model of mind-brain interaction

An article which embodies my best attempt thus far to explain my own non-materialist view on the relationship between the mind and the brain is finally out. The article is the first in the magazine, linked below. I refer to none of my books in it, so there's no marketing. I'd like to kindly urge you to pass this on to anyone you think may be interested; it's free. We need to divulge rational, evidence-based alternatives to the dominant materialist paradigm, which many people still hold to be the only model available that is reasonable and consistent with the empirical evidence. The person I was 4 years ago would much appreciate it if someone sent this link to him! So please pass it on as widely as possible. Here is a link to the magazine:

Here is a direct link for a FREE download of the PDF:
Copyright © 2012 by Bernardo Kastru…

Meaningful evolution

A few days ago I released a new video in which I discuss my thoughts on a neo-darwinist spin on the theory of evolution by natural selection. See the video below. Motivated by the comments I received on the video, I feel the need to elaborate a little more on what I am saying – and, perhaps more importantly, what I am not saying – in the video. In what follows, I'll assume that you have watched the video.

The first thing to highlight is that the main thrust of my argument is not a new hypothesis for the processes underlying genetic mutations, but, instead, to point out that there is no evidence for what neo-darwinists casually peddle as established truth: That the genetic mutations that get selected for – or not – by natural selection are random at origin; that is, entail no identifiable pattern. There is simply no evidence for this. In order to get such idea across, I contrast this with the obvious alternative possibility: That there is an underlying, as-of-yet undetected pattern…


As many of you know, my 'day job' is in the corporate world. This past week, I was completing a relatively long corporate leadership capability programme, and one of the topics addressed was the professional legacy the participants wanted to leave behind. Of course, I immediately started thinking about legacy in general, not only executive legacy. The appeal of the idea is that legacy is something that survives us: Through our legacy, many of us imagine to achieve an aspect of immortality; our legacy stays behind after we check out from space-time. Under a purely materialistic metaphysics, which dominates Western culture today, legacy is the human being's best shot at transcending death. But then, to my own surprise, I didn't seem to have a ready answer to the question posed by the course leader: What legacy do I want to leave behind?

You see, I have always been very achievement-oriented. From early life, I saw great meaning in building devices, winning school tournam…