consciousness, human being, inner cosmos, Uncategorized

Thoughts on the Inner Cosmos

We resemble the Cosmos in many ways. This surely suggests that it resembles us too, because resemblances always work in both directions. This gives us the fascinating possibility that the Cosmos is as human as we are Cosmic! So, what are the practical implications of this? I believe that the implications fall into two main categories. First, we human beings have the potential to know Cosmically. And second, we have the potential to be Cosmic. Let’s look first at our potential to know.

If it is true that we and the Cosmos resemble each other, then it follows that one way of getting to know the Cosmos better is to get to know ourselves better. I am by no means the first to suggest this. It was at the heart of Pythagoras’ work and, more recently, it was Peter Ouspensky who pointed out that to know the world, we should study ourselves, and to know ourselves, we should study the world. As above, so below!

Perhaps I hardly need add that this is not the way of modern science. As you probably know, science studies the so-called objective world “out there”. Very separately, it also studies the so-called subjective world “in here”, the world of human thoughts, feeling and behaviour. When it tries to connect the two worlds, science ties itself in knots, because it makes the sweeping assumption that objectivity can be applied to subjectivity (but not the other way around!). It therefore assumes that the “objective” laws of physics and chemistry can be applied to the subjective world, such as consciousness. It has not occurred to science that this might operate in both directions, that the laws of consciousness might apply to the world “out there”. This is where the Pythagoras/Ouspensky approach comes into its own. My own shorthand for this approach is “inner cosmos”, because this term tells us that when we look closely into ourselves, we see a reflection of the Cosmos. If you like, each one of us is the Cosmos in microcosm.

The inner cosmos approach differs radically from the approach of science in two important respects. First, it makes no distinction between objective and subjective. And second, it assumes that all the laws of Nature are underpinned by deeper, metaphysical laws, the laws promoted by the Pythagoreans. I will go into detail on this later, but here is one example, just to give you a sense of what I am talking about. The Law of Octaves can be found in physics (e.g. light), in chemistry (e.g. the Periodic Table), in biology (e.g. plant morphology), and also in the arts, music being the most obvious example. It is also found in aspects of metaphysics, such as the seven major chakras, and the Seven Rays. The point I want to make is that all the laws of Nature are underpinned by deeper Cosmic principles, and that these principles underpin everything about us, just as they underpin everything about the Cosmos. Effectively, they connect us to the Cosmos, and the Cosmos to us.

As for dropping the distinction between objective and subjective, ultimately everything is subjective, insofar as everything “out there” is as seen through our human eyes, from our human standpoint, and through the prism of our human mindset. In this sense, everything is subjective. Conversely, everything is objective, insofar as it is shared between us. I leave you to ponder this thought.

What about our potential to be Cosmic? I hope this does not need much explanation. If we are indeed miniatures of the Cosmos, size should not matter. Each of us is, potentially, a very small version of the Cosmos. The more closely we look into ourselves, we more we realise the truth of this. Hence the importance of learning to access our inner cosmos. As to what it might look like to be Cosmic, I believe that we all have some sense of this, even if this sense fades too often.


human being, Intelligence, less is better, natural, simplicity, Taoist, Uncategorized

Writing and Publishing

Things are on a roll! With the help of Steve Hobbs in Canada, I am writing more and publishing more. Each month, we will publish a three-part series of articles on a particular theme. This month’s theme is The Inner Cosmos and you can read the first article at

Inner Cosmos from Chris Thomson 3719

Please share the articles with friends and colleagues

The theme for the October articles will be Intelligent Simplicity

And the theme for the November series is Matter and Consciousness

Many thanks for reading




inner cosmos, natural, Uncategorized

Strange Connections

I use the term “strange connections” to refer to connections that do not have rational or scientific explanations. These fall into four main groups:

Coincidences – when two or more things happen at the same time, and this feels very significant for you

Telepathy – this literally means “feeling at a distance”. It does not mean “reading minds”

Precognition – knowing across time…typically knowing some aspects of the future

Non-locality – this is instantaneous reaction, regardless of distance. (One implication is that the speed of light is no longer a limiting factor)

Although Carl Jung wrote about coincidence, calling it “acausal synchronicity”, he offered no convincing explanation for it. He did, however, write extensively about the “collective unconscious”. I have often wondered whether David Bohm had something similar in mind when he coined the term “implicate order”. He assumed that there is an underlying, invisible unity, in which everything is intimately connected to everything else. Out of this invisible order springs the “explicate order”, which is our familiar physical world, in which everything is discrete and separate. Although Bohm, a physicist, could not explain this “total connectedness” at the implicate level, he believed that it existed, and he knew that it was already being verified experimentally.

“Strange connectedness” is today one of the main focuses of quantum physics, and scientists have given it appropriately strange names, such as “entanglement” and “non-locality”. While it is true that they have come up with many theories, they still have no adequate explanation. It remains one of the great mysteries.

You may be wondering whether I am about to offer you a convincing explanation for strange connections. The answer is a tentative yes, because this still very much work in progress of me. As a convenient shorthand, I use the term “inner cosmos” for my thoughts about this question. I will go into more detail in future articles. For the moment, I will just give the “headlines” of my thinking.

At the heart of my work is the idea that everything is part of something bigger. As we shall see, some of this is very obvious, but some of is not. It is obvious, for example, that each of us is part of the human race. Because of this, we all contain the “essential nature” of the human race – i.e. those characteristics that are unique to the human race. (It is an interesting and rewarding exercise to list as many of these as you can think of)  I see this as part of our “inner cosmos”. Another part of our inner cosmos flows from the fact that each of us also part of another bigger thing, Nature, which I define as the totality of all living things. It follows that we all contain the “essential nature” of Nature herself…those characteristics that are unique to Nature. They seem to include the following. Like all other living things:

We are born

We mature

We interact with the rest of Nature and with this planet (e.g. food, shelter) – this is              mainly for survival, but as we become more sophisticated, it is increasingly for                    recreation and creation

We reproduce

We rear our young

We age

We die

All of us are born with the potential to do all of this. That potential is an important part of our inner cosmos.

At this point it becomes less obvious and more controversial. Although it may not seem like at – and most of us never even think about it – each of us is also an integral part of planet Earth. As with all forms of life on this planet, we are products of it, and shaped by it. This may need a little explanation.

It should be obvious, but perhaps it needs to be stated explicitly that our home planet has a unique combination of physical characteristics, which include:

Average surface temperatures

Strength of gravity

Presence, and composition, of atmosphere

Radiation from outside…including heat and other radiation from our Sun

Availability of certain chemicals and compounds – e.g. for food, for fuel, for manufacturing

(You my wish to add to this list)

The list could be continued, but I am sure you get my point. This planet’s uniqueness has shaped us. We look like we do because of this planet. If we had evolved on another planet, we would reflect the uniqueness of that planet, and no doubt look different, and live different lives. In any event, there can be little doubt that we all reflect the uniqueness of this planet. That refection is another part of our inner cosmos.

As we move higher up the Cosmic holarchy, it becomes increasingly difficult to know how this manifests in our inner cosmos. Although it should be self-evident that our home star and our home galaxy are both unique, it is no easy task to describe all their unique characteristics. Of course, it is true that astronomers and cosmologists can tell us many of their unique qualities, but these will only be quantitative and physical. It is at this point that I stretch out my neck and state my strong belief that this planet, our Sun, and our home galaxy all have non-physical (spiritual) qualities, as well as their physical ones. I stretch my neck even further and say that this applies to everything in the Cosmos, including the universe itself. I did warn you that this is work in progress, so I am still exploring what these higher, spiritual qualities might be, and how they might manifest in our inner cosmos.

In any event, I do believe that we all contain the “essential natures” of all the higher “levels” of which we are part, and that the totality of these “essential natures” inside us is our inner cosmos. I find it helpful to visualise it as a kind of onion. The higher the outer “level” is, the more deeply is its essential nature contained inside us. So, at the very core of our inner cosmos is the essential nature of the universe, whatever this turns out to be. Similarly, the essential nature of the Sun is deep inside us, but not as deep as that of the universe.

As I will explain in future articles, I believe that a central component of human evolution is to become fully conscious of successively deeper layers of our inner cosmos. As each deeper layer reveals itself and comes to the surface, so to speak, this enables us to resonate with its external counterpart. We experience this resonance as knowing and consciousness.

Back now to the main theme – strange connections. We have little difficulty in seeing that all the parts of ourselves – the parts and systems of our body, as well as mind, emotions, spirit  – are connected to each other. Our own integrity, or unity, is easy to see. Although it gets more difficult to recognise integrity and unity as we ascend the scale, it still exists. It is just less apparent to us, probably because we are not accustomed to thinking in terms of wholes. It is all a matter of perception. We find it easy to grasp the integrity, the unity, of relatively small things, such as a frog or a watch. This is no doubt because we are able to see the whole of them at once. We even experience ourselves as single units in which all the parts are somehow connected to each other. The problem arises only when we try to adopt a perspective higher than our own and try to see much larger entities – the whole human race, for instance – as single units. As it happens, we can probably stretch our minds far enough to be able to recognise the integrity of the human race as a whole, as a single unit.  And, although it becomes increasingly difficult to do so, this process can be repeated up the scale, so to speak, seeing things from ever higher perspectives. If we do so, the unity and integrity of larger and larger things becomes apparent. We come to recognise that each is, in its own terms, a single entity, a single solid body. The following description of the solar system, seen from the perspective of something much larger than it (a galaxy), beautifully illustrates this:

“There will then appear an extraordinarily complex and beautiful figure. The planetary paths, drawn out into manifold spirals of various tensions and diameters, have now become a series of iridescent sheaths veiling the long white–hot thread of the Sun, each shimmering with its own characteristic colour and sheen, the whole meshed throughout by a gossamer–fine web woven from the eccentric paths of innumerable asteroids and comets, glowing with some sense of living warmth and ringing with an incredibly subtle and harmonious music. This figure is not in one detail fantastic. The width of the planets’ orbits will determine the size of each enveloping sheath: the diameter of the planet the coarseness or fineness of the thread of which it is spun: the planet relative curvature its refractive index or colour: the number and distance of its moons its sheen or luminescence: while the speeds of planetary rotation will the cause the totality of sheaths to emit a magnetic or living emanation.”

(Rodney Collin:  The Theory of Celestial Influence)

Now, try to imagine seeing from the perspective of the universe itself. From its own, inconceivably huge perspective, it is a single, solid, unified, totally interconnected body. All its parts are intimately, and instantaneously, connected to each other. Time and space do not act as limits.

I need hardly add that we inhabit this universe. Perhaps we should not be surprised at “strange connections”!