Hi guys,

I'm curious in hearing your take on this. Basically I've noticed that when I read Hawkins' work, I tend to feel better, and lead a more loving life, which ultimately I feel is the bottom line. However, there are a lot of inconsistencies in his work that I'm interested in exploring, because that really shouldn't be the case in an objective science which Hawkins says calibrating accurately is.

For example, in PvF, Hawkins calls the MoC "logarithmic", even though in later books he corrects it as being exponential. If kinesiology was objective and accurate as he says, wouldn't it have picked that up when they were calibrating the level of truth, or doing the initial research?

Another thing is the math in he often refers to just doesn't add up. Like approximately 4% of the population is at level 500, and each person at level 500 counterbalances 750,000 people below 200. That means that out of 6 billion people, 240 million of them are at the level of Love. If you multiply the 240 million times 750,000, you get an astronomically huge number that would easily counterbalance all of mankinds negativity many times over.

There's many more examples of inconsistencies throughout his calibrations. In the big picture I don't think it's really a big deal, because a lot of what he says rings true intuitively. A lot of his calibrations make a lot of sense, even if some of his math is well... apparently just wrong.

One of the reasons I'm bringing this up just to talk about is because I've been burned by some spiritual teachers in the past (haha sounds like a bad relationship story). Basically finding out that they weren't all that and a bag of chips, if you know what I mean. And it's just a little concerning to me that a supposedly objective science, doesn't add up.

Thanks, I appreciate your input.
Jeff

Jeff...


This sort of topic comes up from time to time. If you run some searches, you might come across discussions on these exact topics.

I was only able to find three threads, myself...

1 - 2 - 3

These go to specific posts that happened to contain search terms. I don't point to those posts as answers, just to get you into a thread that touches on the topics, so look around in the thread itself.

If anyone else is able to find some that address these questions, please post.


Tim

2 differing calibrations could mean that a different context was held in mind in each separate test. Quick example, there are 2 calibrations for the movie The Passion Of The Christ. One is the full movie calibration, another is with 10 minutes of violence removed. Hawkins doesn't always clarify his exact context being held in mind, so that might help the understanding.

If I come across 2 differing LOC's on the same thing I ask how important that calibration is anyways. As far as it concerns me, calibrations on spiritual truth is helpful, and the rest is more for entertainment. Having said that, i have a few threads floating around this board trying to get calibrations on entertainment;)

Jeff,

I know what you mean about the counterbalancing aspect. It is a little confusing. One possibility is that he could be referring to the capacity for the person involved. A person at LoC 500 has the capacity through their engagement with other people to counterbalance 750,000 people below 200. Most people, at any LoC, just don't interact with that many people. "Silent transmission" doesn't begin until LoC 700 anyway. So, we are talking about actual direct interaction with the world being needed at any LoC below 700. Perhaps that could happen through a book or other wide-reaching media but most people at LoC 500 would reach far fewer people than 750,000. People at 500+ are still only rarely world-famous.

The only people that can silently transmit to so many people number fewer than one dozen. This, I think, may explain why many mystics retire to some remote location and simply concentrate on raising consciousness through their mere presence on Earth rather than working through materialistic means. My own guru Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev said that his own guru has done this.

Also, the meanings of logarithmic and exponential are so similar as to be mere semantic in difference in this context. Let's face it. Dr. Hawkins is a psychiatrist not a mathematician. And the difference may not be of great importance to him. This is why I once said on this forum that "the Enlightened don't necessarily know everything". I meant that they don't necessarily have all worldly knowledge at their fingertips because their ability to utilize and memorize is limited by the mind through which they interact with the world. Their wisdom however is limited only by their LoC. So, it is best to pay attention to the meaning of their messages rather than focus on the individual words. At least, that's my theory anyway.

In any case, the only thing that matters is that the MOC scale increases several times more with each point increase over the previous one. I don't think the exact term used is a problem personally.

Blessings,

Michael

Thanks for the responses. And thanks Tim for links to those threads.

One of the reasons I noticed that this was concerning me was because lately I've been interested in sharing Doc's work with some new people, but the fact that the math isn't consistent was giving me some reservations because I wasn't really comfortable with it myself.

I think there's all kinds of ways to try to rationalize the calibrations to make sense in a uniform way, but ultimately as far as straight logic and common sense go, I can't really see that working for me.

I guess, I can just say to myself and others, "Hey, I really got a lot out of this material, his math and science don't really add up, but since reading them my life has gotten a lot better." And really that's the bottom line.

Quote:
Straight logic and "common sense" are linear. Most of the subject matter of Hawkins' material is non-linear. Getting too hung-up on precision of numbers keeps us attatched to linear thought which can be found in the 400s.

To some, that is their goal, to achieve the hard-set logic and accurate data. It is sometimes difficult to transcend the 400s because of this.

Entering the non-linear experience requires us to move away from linear thought. Things do not have hard set difinitions or calculations anymore. They just are. Descriptions do not do them justice, because descriptions use linear tools (words, etc.) to communicate non-linear. Think of it this way... how would you describe love? Which holds more power? The description or the experience? Joy? Peace? What about the way an orange tastes? If one person says an orange is sweet and another says it is sour, does that mean one is wrong? Which is it, sweet or sour?

When you do something illogical because you love someone, say, quit your high-power job that has brought you much of what the world sees as success to move to a small-town and marry a girl you love... it doesn't make sense. But that doesn't mean it's not love. In fact, it only proves that it is.

So rationalization only keeps things in linear mode. When referencing non-linear things, very little can be rationalized.

Peace,
Charity

Everyone is human, even Hawkin's. He has had a hard task and errors can happen. On the map of consciousness, 300 is said to be log 10 to the 300 greater than 150. At least in my book it says that. Every point is 10 times greater than the previous point. So 151 is 10 times greater than 150. 152 is 10 times greater than 151. 153 is 1000 times greater than 150. Thats 10 to the log 2. or 10 followed by two more zeroes. Take that all the way to 300 and it is 10 to the 149. Or 10 followed by 149 0s. 149 zeroes plus the zero on the 10 equals 10 to the log 150. That would make 300 at 10 to the log 149 greater than 150 (I AM LAUGHING AT MYSELF LOTS BY THIS TIME.) Humor me, PLEASE.

Hawkins said that in lesson 75 of the Course in Miracles one does not go weak with kinesiology. He did not say what that lesson stated. In his DVD, Advanced States of Consciousness, he states that at lesson 98 which states "I am only affected by what I hold in mind", one no longers goes weak. By the way lesson 75 states "The Light Has Come". I checked the Course myself, and the closest thing I could find about being affected by thoughts is Lesson 338 which states "I am only affected by my thoughts." I double checked to be sure.

Hawkins is great. I like his literature. My only question is 'Why did'nt the proof readers catch this?' LAUGHS. And it is all fine. We make mistakes. If these were the worst of mine, then I would be an angel. Fat chance on that. By bringing these things up, I don't intend to attack. It is no real big deal. But it is wise to have all these things correct so as not to make some in the general public question the validity of the info. All one has to say is "Hawkins, it's lesson 338." And he says, "Oh, yeah, thanks." And everyone laughs, glad that an error is corrected. Over and done.

Even Hawkins said, that "the teacher should be questioned, and not the students." In other think for ourselves, examine the info and if there is an error, find an answer. Simple. No hard feelings. The great teachers are not God. Don't worship them or attack them. It is simple.

God bless Hawkins. I like his work. Now one final question. (IS MY MATH REALLY THAT BAD?)

Dr. Hawkins does not remember the 1000s of calibrations too well. in his last radio interview dd Jan 9, 2010 he erred on Abe Lincoln's LoC. Lincoln (565) is way over 500, he said that his loc ranges in the high 400s. it was simply a guess.

around 2004 or 2005 (i guess) Doc announced that Adolf Hitler - to his astonishment - calibrated now above 200 - explanation given: high spiritual beings had prayed for his soul.

in the recent radio interview and in others he returned to tell people that Hitler (on the other side) calibrated below 200, makes the arm go weak.

he said USA calibrates at 421. however, he calibrated in Oct 2009 that USA's loc has dropped to 406.

the interviewer Warren asked the Doc about his rate of Accuracy of Calibrations. he replied: 98%.
so, case closed.

never forget: it is your responsibility to ask the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth on anything to you.

David Hawkins, radio interview 'Power vs. Force', presented by Speaking of Strange, host Joshua P. Warren, 46:00 minutes duration, 9. January 2010

Quote:

Hi Jeff

I was going to post on some of the inconsistency issues a few days ago, but realized that I didn't know what I was talking about!

I don't think that what you said in the quote above has been commented on, so I thought I would provide a little reassurance for you:

Doc Hawkins is one of those teachers who doesn't ask anything of his students. He has provided some information in the form of his written works and lectures, which is there for us to take or leave. Like teachers should, he doesn't seek followers nor true believers. He simply wishes to pass on his experience.

Although the Doc presents a few spiritual exercises in his work, one can focus on the practices of any enlightened teacher (as well as any non-enlightened teacher who calibrates at a higher LoC than us).

The Doc's teachings to me seem like a detailed road map of how to reach our destination. It includes details of the specific terrain we will pass through, as well as detailing which road to take when we reach a fork, and there are a few of those along the way, as I understand it.

In the Doc's books he provides us with a couple of different modes of transport for the journey, as well as lists of other individuals who can provide us with their own engineered conveyances. Whether we walk, cycle, run, drive, rollerskate, etc, whatever method that resonates and gets us further is the one we take. Even if we are not yet ready to commit to the journey, it worthwhile having the roadmap in our back pocket, should we suddenly find ourselves on that road....

Be Well

Robert

Quote:

I see; the illogical proves the irrational!

Nick