Skip to content

On Embodiment, Manifestations, Relevance and the Intrinsic Meaningfulness of LIFE

The following quotes have been excerpted from the book Beyond Fear and Rage edited by Ervin Laszlo. (N.B. bold highlighting added for emphasis by me.)

The Buenos Aires Institute of Technology (ITBA)
pp. 33-34

“This is a time of re-membering our dance in the web of life—of bringing our membership back into the Council of All Beings,7 and of re-storying our relationship with the cosmos, weaving a new story built of ancient wisdom and insights born of a connected consciousness. Indeed, this is a Triple Birthing process where we are being called upon to be simultaneously mid-wives of the new constellation, mothers birthing the new constellation, and the new constellation being born—all at the same time! This is the triple role we are being called upon to play into the 5th World.

Evidently, it is less an issue of seeking to heal and humanize the fear-mongering and government-blundering of our times than it is to evolve ourselves and transcend them. Evolutionary pathways involve sloughing off anachronisms, allowing for the dinosaurs to exit gracefully stage left as we nurture the furry evolutionary experiments that emerge in their shadows. As such, this time is far more about breakthrough than it is about breakdown. Of course, both are happening and each of us has a choice as to where to put our energy, our attention, and ultimately our love. This is why the time is one of mid-wifing, of birthing, and of being born—all simultaneously. The essential energies (what are sometimes called the “the core gestures”8) of this time are those of an emergent sisterhood among all human beings with all of life’s expressions of love and nurturance.

Consciously participating in and curating the conditions for such systems to thrive is a matter of syntony*, which in terms of evolutionary systems thinking denotes evolutionary consonance or the occurrence and persistence of an evolutionarily tuned dynamic regime. Through conscious intention aligned with evolutionary purpose, it is possible to embody and manifest conscious evolution. However, this requires a purposeful creative aligning and tuning with the evolutionary flows of our milieu.

The key lies in recognizing and resonating with the harmonics of coherence. Everything vibrates—thoughts, emotions, sensations just as much as the physical world of sight, touch, taste, smell and sound. Sensing the harmonic resonance of each vibrational state—both in and around us—allows us to co-create the coherence domains that support life. Doing so involves tuning into the dynamic regime of the matrix that undergirds life and nurtures the life-enhancing play of emergence. It is a matter of sensing when one expression of reality aligns, harmonizes, resonates and vibrationally syncs with another. Sensing the harmonic overtones and the deep, deep vibrational undertones that reverberate at different pitches within ourselves can bring us into resonant alignment at scalar values of being, from the subatomic to the cosmic. Developing this ability to syntonize, to tune into and consciously align the multiple dimensions of existence, responds to a call to be the change and resolve the dissonance of our times, transcending and transmuting discord into harmony. This requires empathy, intuition, evolutionary consciousness, and above all, agape: the form of universal, unconditional love that transcends and embraces all of creation across time and space. We can do this—indeed, the viability of our species may well depend on our ability to develop and hone our individual and collective sense of syntony.

7 Macy, Joanna, John Seed, Arne Naess, and Pat Fleming Thinking Like a Mountain: Towards A Council of All Beings. New Catalyst Books, 2007.

8 see Müller, Cornelia (ed.). Body – Language – Communication, Volume 1, De Gruyter Mouton, Pubs: Frankfurt, Germany, 2013.”

[* added to quote: syntony – (electronics) A condition in which two oscillators have the same resonant frequency –]

Laszlo Institute of New Paradigm Research
pp. 36-38

“Beyond the laws of nature, what information can we believe? The news media whose task it is to convey information of
relevance to people’s lives is a human institution, manned by communicators who may be conveying faulty information simply because it is what happened to come to their attention—and they did not take the time and make the effort to double and triple-check its source. Presidents and other politicians may also be conveying misinformation on purpose, serving the narrow self-interests of lobbies and of states and of ethnic groups. It is no longer clear whether the political process that determines the social and economic wellbeing of entire nations is based on true information or on intended misinformation. The social media is a precious independent source, but it carries information from a large variety of sources more or less indiscriminately, and while many of these sources are well-intentioned, others could have hidden agendas. How do we know what information we can trust?

The answer is that, in principle, we can trust information based on controlled observation and rigorous reasoning. That is the ideal of what is known as “scientific information.” The problem with scientific information, however, is that it is not necessarily relevant to the immediate concerns of people and societies. The information that fills the pages of the thousands of accredited and credible scientific publications needs to be sifted for relevance. In many instances it would have to be actively “relevanted”—to use the term introduced by physicist David Bohm. That means placing it into a particular context—interpreting it. This is not needed if the information concerns the evolution of the atmosphere of a planet circling Gamma Centauri, for example. But if it touches on human nature, or the nature of nature, it is relevant and requires correct interpretation. How do we know that an interpretation is correct? Most and arguably all, scientific theories allow a variety of interpretations.

There are, of course, laws of scientific reasoning—not everything that we can deduce from observation and experiment is assuredly correct. For one thing, deductions must follow the laws of logic. For another, there is the so-called principle of economy. Known as “Occam’s Razor” it tells us that “entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity”—we must not invoke principles and entities that are not clearly indicated by the evidence. Einstein expressed it well in saying that scientists “seek the simplest possible scheme that can tie together the observed facts.” That scheme must be simple and adequate. It must tie together all the observed facts without unfounded assumptions and hypotheses.

But when faced with competing interpretations, with differing and perhaps incompatible and even contradictory claims, the laws of logic alone do not decide the question of correctness. Here, however, we have another criterion we can invoke: the intrinsic meaningfulness of the interpretation. This is a cognitive, psychological and hence ineffable factor, beyond the rigorous methods of science, and it was mostly dismissed as irrelevant. Yet it is not necessarily that. The litmus test in regard to intrinsic meaningfulness is the degree to which the information corresponds to our own insights, whether we have formulated them consciously or not. If the interpretation calls forth an “Aha experience”—the sense that yes, this must be the case, I have always known or at least suspected it—then it is more likely to be true than if it is strange and contrary to our intuitions.

The insights accumulated over untold generations in the cultural history of humankind tell us something about the true nature of the things we encounter in our experience. The insights that survive the test of time merit being taken seriously.

The conclusion flowing from these brief but fundamental considerations is that information based on controlled observation and rigorous reasoning, supported by our own insights and intuitions is the information we have the best reason to believe. That is why the insights that bring together the new paradigm in science with sustained spiritual beliefs are likely to be the most reliable kind of information that is available to us. It is our hope, and it has certainly been our sincere intention, that the Messages in this volume convey information of this kind.

The final test, of course, is in the hands of the reader. Is the information carried by these messages veritably based on cutting-edge science, and does it genuinely call forth the “Aha experience” of “re-cognized” truth? These queries merit consideration. Perhaps, beyond the welter of untested and purposively or inadvertently dubious information there is a kernel of information about ourselves, our times, and our world that we can truly believe. That would be a ray of light to guide our steps in these chaotic times.”


The Messages conveyed in this Manifesto are by leading exponents of the new paradigm that comes to light at the cutting edge of contemporary science and lived spirituality. They are explorations and examples of the thinking we need to understand the nature of the problems and their possible solutions—and then finding the solution by ourselves. This kind of thinking could replace irrational fear and blind rage with deeper understanding and informed behavior. It could orient our aspirations, our values, and thus our steps. In these extraordinary times this is the kind of thinking we need—in our most urgent and best interest.

Ervin Laszlo, is Director of the Laszlo Institute of New Paradigm Research (Italy), Founder and President of The Club of Budapest, Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science, Member of the Hungarian Academy of Science and the International Academy of Philosophy of Science, Senator of the International Medici Academy, and Editor of the international periodical World Futures: The Journal of New Paradigm Research. He is the recipient of the Goi Peace Prize (2002), the International Mandir of Peace Prize (2005), the Conacreis Holistic Culture Prize (2009), the Ethics Prize of Milano (2014). Laszlo is Honorary Professor of the Buenos Aires Institute of Technology and Honorary Citizen of the City of Buenos Aires and holds Honorary PhD’s from the United States, Canada, Finland, and Hungary. Laszlo is the author or co-author of fifty-four books translated into twenty-four languages and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004 and 2005.



Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: