The Compass of Truth Part 3

[The Compass of Truth Part 3]

A striking aspect of Diamond´s research was the uniformity of response among his subjects. Diamond´s results were predictable,repeatable, and universal. This was so even where no rational link existed between stimulus and response. For totally undetermined reasons, certain abstract symbols caused all subjects to test weak; others, the opposite.

Some results were perplexing: Certain pictures, with no overtly positive or negative content would cause all subjects to test weak, while other "neutral" pictures caused all subjects to test strong.
And some results were food for considerable surmise : Whereas virtually all classical music and most pop music (includig "classic" rock and roll) caused  a universally strong response, the "hard" or "metal" rock that first gained acceptance in the late ´70s produced a universally weak response.

There was one other phenomenon that Diamond noted in passing, although he devoted no deeper analysis to its extraordinary implications:

Subjects listening to tapes of known deceits - even though the speakers seemed to be telling the turth and sounded convincing - tested weak.

While listening to recordings of demonstrable,true statements, they universally tested strong.

This was the starting point of the well-known psychiatrist and physician, David R. Hawkins (M.D.,Ph.D).
In 1975 Dr. Hawkins began research on the kinesiological response to truth and falsehood.

It had been established that test subjects didn´t need any conscious acquaintance with the substance ( or issue) being tested. In double-blind studies - and in mass demonstrations involving entire lecture audiences- subjects universally in response to unmarked envelopes containing artifical sweetener, and strong to identical placebo envelopes. The same naive response appeared in testing intellectual values.

What seems to be at work is a form of communal consciousness, spiritus mundi, or as Hawkins calls it, following Jung, a "database of consciousness."

The phenomenon seen so commonly in other social animals - whereby swimming at one edge of a school will turn instantaneously when its fellows a quarter mile away flee a predator - also pertains in some subconscious way to our species. There are simply too many documented instances of individuals having intimate acquaintance with information experienced firsthand by remote strangers for us to deny that there are forms of shared knowledge other than those achieve by rational consciousness.


Or perhaps, more simply, the same spark of inner subrational wisdom that can discriminate healthy from unhealthy can discrimate true from false.




                                         

[Go on to Part 4]

[inspired by Power vs. Force]

The Compass of Truth Part 2

kinesiology: - n. The study of muscles and their movement, esp. as applied to physical conditioning. [Gk.Kinesis, movement (kinein, to move) +- logy.)

[The Compass of Truth Part 2]

The study of kinesiology first received scientific attention in the second half of the last century through the work of Dr. George Goodheart, who pioneered the speciality he called applied kinesiology after finding that benign physical stimuli - for instance, beneficial nutritional supplements - would increase the strength of certain indicator muscles, whereas hostile stimuli would cause those muscles to suddenly weaken.

The implication was that a level far below conceptual consciousness, the body "knew", and through muscle testing was able to signal, what was good and bad for it. The classic example, (cited here), is universally observed weakening of indicator muscles in the presence of a chemical sweetener ; the same muscles strengthen in the presence of a healthful and natural supplement.

In the late ´70s, Dr. John Diamond refined this specialty into a new discipline he called behavioral kinesiology. Dr. Diamond´s startling discovery was that indicator muscles would strengthen or weaken in the presence of positive or negative emotional and intellectual stimuli, as well as physical stimuli.
A smile will make you test strong, while the statement, "I hate you" will make you test weak.

Before we go any further, let us explain in detail how exactly one "tests", especially the readers will certainly wish to try this themselves. Here is Dr. Diamond´s outline, from his 1979 book, Your Body doesn´t Lie, of the procedure adapted by him from the classic description in H.O. Kendall´s Muscles:Testing and Function.

Unlike  LYL-SMTs , it takes two people to perform these kinds of  kinesiological test.
They are a perfect start to get familiar with the topic (fun too!) of kinesiology.. (If you do not have someone who can be your partner right now ,just use one of the SMTs instead)

Choose a friend or a family member for testing. We´ll call him or her your subject.

~ Have the subject stand erect, right arm relaxed at his side, left arm held out parallel to the floor, elbow straight. (You may use the other arm if you wish.)

~Face your subject and place your left hand on his right shoulder to steady him. Then place your right hand on the subject´s exteended left arm just above the wrist.

~Tell the subject to resist when you try to push his arm down

~Now push down on his arm fairly quickly, firmly, and evenly. The idea is to push just hard enough to test the spring and bounce in the arm, not so hard that the muscle becomes fatigued. It is not a question of who is stronger, but of whether the muscle can "lock" the shoulder joint against the push.

[Basics of Muscle Testing]

Assuming there is no physical problem with the muscle and the subject is in a normal, relaxed state of mind, receiving no extraneous stimuli (for this reason it´s important that the tester not smile or otherwise interact with the subject), the muscle will "test" strong" - the arm will remain locked. If the test is repeated in the presence of a negative stimulus ( for instance, artifical sweetener), "although you are pushing down no harder than before , the muscle will not be able to resist the pressure and the subject´s arm will fall to his side."

[Go on to Part 3]

                               
[inspired by Power vs. Force]

The Compass of Truth Part 1

Learn to navigate your [Compass of Truth]

Imagine - what if you had access to simple yes-or-no (Y/N) answer to any question you wished to ask ? A demonstrably true answer to any question. Think about it...

There´s the obvious "Jane is seeing another guy?"(Y/N?);
"Johnny is telling the truth about school?"(Y/N?)
But it´s only a short step to: "This is a safe investment ?"(Y/N?) or "This career is 
worthy of my pursuit?" (Y/N?)

What if everyone had such access ? Staggering implications suggest themselves immediately.
Think again: What would happen to our ponderious and all-too-often flawed judicial system if there was a clear, confirmable answer to the proposition, "John Doe is guilty as charged?" (Y/N?)

What would happen to politics as we know if all of us could ask the question, "Candidate X honestly intends to fulfill this campaign promise ?" (Y/N?) - and all of us got the same answer ?
And what would happen to advertising, period ?

You get the idea. But the idea gets bigger,fast. What happens to nationalism ("Nation X is really dedicated to the ovethrow of Democracy?") ? To government "This bill does in fact protect the rights of citizens?")? What happens to "The check is in the mail"?

If, as has been said, man learned to lie an hour after he learned to talk, then a phenomenon such as the one we´re discussing would be the genesis of the most fundamental change in human knowledge since the beginning of society; the transformations it would wreak - in fields from communcations to ethics, in our most basic concepts, in every detail of daily existence - would be so profound that it´s difficult to even conceive what life would be like in a subsequent new era of truth.


The world as we know it would be irrevocably changed, right down to its very roots.

                             [Go on to Part 2] 


[inspired by Power vs. Force]