How physicalism is hindering us
Physicalism is one of the belief systems of our civilisation. Its main principles have permeated modern science and are preventing science from exploring areas beyond the gross physical world.
Prof Daniel Whiteson and Jorge Cham, in their book We Have No Idea (2017)1, have acknowledged the vast ignorance of our current civilisation about everything around us. They have stated with striking honesty that humanity's understanding of the physical world is full of gaps. And these are not tiny little gaps that can be ignored, but huge yawning gaps in our basic ideas about how the world works. They point out that, according to conventional physics, science has no clue about 68% of the universe, about 27% is made up of 'dark matter', which science also has no idea about, totalling at least 95% of the physical world alone.
Only 5% of the physical world is 'known' to science - that is, everything that ordinary people see and experience with their eyes, e.g. the atoms in the body, in our galaxy, all the stars, dust and planets within and outside our solar system. They claim that humanity is in an age of precision ignorance, when we know very well that we know very little about the universe. The first step to discovery is to accept our ignorance. This sounds like a step towards Socratic realisation, which is the basis for opening up to real knowledge and setting out on the path: "I have realised that I know nothing (of value)".
Indeed, very few scientists have come to the realisation that science has very small reality content. The majority of the learned ridicule and scoff at everything they cannot understand, and precisely at that which is essential2.
And yet even such a straightforward assertion by those modern scientists of the scale of ignorance is too optimistic. Hylozoics, the profound world view formulated by the philosopher Pythagoras and brought to us by the modern Swedish philosopher Henry T. Laurency, teaches that in fact we do not know more than hardly one per cent of physical reality. The visible world is about one per cent of total material reality, and it will take a long time before this single per cent has been explored.3
The greater part of the matter aspect of reality is invisible at present. If we include the entire manifestation, then about 99 per cent of matter is invisible. If we limit our discussion just to the worlds of man, then about 85 per cent of matter is invisible to others than those who have acquired higher objective consciousness.4
Prevailing physicalist view of the world
Physicalism has reached a significant position in our times. It is a belief that “everything is physical”, that there is “nothing over and above” the physical or that everything supervenes on the physical. It is “one substance” view of the nature of reality as opposed to a “two-substance” (dualism) or “many-substance” (pluralism) view.5 Physicalists also assert that also all the mental things – sensations, thoughts, ideas, all experiences – are really physical things: matter, energy and physical processes.6
It is preferable to use the term "physicalism" rather than "scientific materialism", as physicalism conveys the message in the correct way - those who hold such beliefs argue that physical matter is the only matter existing. Materialism includes those – also hylozoicians – who are convinced of the material basis of all in existence.
As with many other things in our present human civilisation, which is dominated by emotional energies and emotional thinking, several disciplines have been taken to extremes. The importance of the matter aspect - physical matter with its three states of aggregation (solid, liquid, gaseous) - has become dominant. But Western science is almost completely ignorant of the laws of consciousness and the laws of matters and energies of the higher worlds.7
The purpose of science is, starting from the empirically given reality, to discover and formulate those exact laws which make prediction possible.8 Natural science seeks to explore visible, physical reality. This defines its task and at the same time its inevitable limitation.9 Natural research must keep within the domains of physical life, since it is unable by its methods to explore superphysical reality.10 Science cannot answer the questions of What? and Why?, only that of How?.
Science is a method of hypotheses and will remain so. It can never become more than an orientation as to the current situation and never become a basis for a life view. This is true of both beliefs and assumptions. Without a tenable basis, all of them build on sand, not to say quicksand. That is why philosophy must always be critique, until it has found the firm basis of knowledge still lacking.11
The physicalist erroneously assumes that the visible world is the only existing one, that organisms are the only forms of life, that the organism’s sense organs are man’s only means of apprehending the material external world.12 Science is totally ignorant of the real composition of matter. It is ignorant of the fact that the “ultimate causes” of physical processes lie in the superphysical.13 People have let themselves be hypnotized by physical matter as the only tangible and valuable, not suspecting that the meaning of existence is consciousness development and that the right use of energy is the only way to realize.14
It certainly is a strange, obscure and sad world view offered as an explanation by physicalist scientists and its other proponents, which states that:
everything that exists is entirely physical, and there exists nothing other or higher than the physical world and physical matter;
human beings on planet Earth are alone in the universe and are supposed to be the crown of the biological evolutionary process on our planet and in the solar system;
there is no evidence of anyone more developed than human beings, no proof of other more evolved beings or "God";
the human being consists of an organism, which is a collection of cells and biochemical processes in and between these cells. There is no evidence for the existence of a human "soul", and consciousness is merely a function of the brain;
living organisms, including human beings, have only one life – what happens after that is not known, but presumably death ends it all;
life has no particular meaning, it is just a competitive coexistence of beings without a specific goal;
all life forms are the result of competitive natural and mechanical selection through biological evolution.
Indeed, it is impossible to deny that physicalism is the curse of mankind.15
It is prevailing in several disciplines and has hindered serious investigation and scientific research in areas, where the present civilization has very little knowledge and understanding of.
In medical science,
physicalism maintains that human being is identified with his organism and is essentially regarded as a biological machine, being a lump of protoplasm, consisting of cells and bodily functions are merely biochemical reactions inside the organism. It has turned medical science mainly into a medicine of sickness, which is dealing with sickness, not health and focuses on symptoms, not reaching the causes of disease.
A symptom is a physical manifestation of a problem far deeper than that which can be seen16, but medical science denies such deeper and holistic causes. It has declared older healing systems – 3000-years old traditional Chinese medicine, 7000-years old Ayurvedic medicine and homeopathy – to be pseudosciences.
Medical science has not examined seriously the knowledge publicly available on the importance of man’s etheric envelope, though it should be the business of medical science to discover man’s etheric envelope, the etheric energies, and the connecting link between the etheric envelope and the organism – disease arise in the etheric envelope before they appear in the organism.17 This dogmatism has also seriously hampered orthodox science or given it a pretext for not researching the powerful effects of homeopathy in restoring human health and resolving serious conditions. Moreover, it has given birth to an ever-growing pharmaceutical industry based on synthetic drugs, produced primarily to suppress the symptoms of diseases with serious side effects, requiring other prescription drugs to treat these newly created side effects. This never-ending vicious circle keeps more and more people heavily dependent on the drug industry and generates huge financial profits for it.
But when doctors see that most causes of disease are to be sought in the physical etheric material envelope of the organism, medical research will enter upon entirely new paths.18
In neuroscience,
physicalists are maintaining that consciousness is a product of the physical brain and brain produces consciousness manifestations. They claim that no mental function can exist outside of or separate from the biological functioning of the brain. Mental function is brain function and even the most sophisticated cognitive processes, such as analytical decision-making, are demonstrably happening in the brain.19
Of course, there are neuroscientists who do not agree with such claims20, asking questions like: How do material brain states correspond to mental states? How could a certain concentration of chemicals in my brain cause me to do calculus? How could a specific electrochemical gradient in my brain make me feel sad? etc
But physicalism still has a firm grip on the neuroscience community.
In natural science,
three states of aggregation of matter are acknowledged: solid, liquid, and gaseous. As far as science can ascertain facts about matter and energies, its concepts of these are correct. The hypotheses and theories that complement the observations are, however, erroneous.
Matter is enormously more composed than the boldest hypotheses have ever dared to assume. In fact, there are seven states of physical matter, and where physical matter ends a new kind of matter begins, which is inaccessible even to scientific instruments. Without the esoteric explanation the composition of matter remains an unsolvable problem.21
Scientific sect of physicalists
Modern-day physicalis represents a sectarian view of the world, which evidently derives from the primitiveness of a prevailing principal mode of thinking in an emotional era, mentally not reaching farther than 47:6 (the second lowest molecular kind of mental matter). For this kind of thinking, polarities (agree-disagree, positive-negative etc) prevail in the realm of attention and the tendency to polarise and categorise holds ground. The insight of perspective and relationship is rarely achieved. It is difficult for such thinking to comprehend that everything in nature and in the cosmos exists in degrees, grades and levels. It is the same with matter, which consists of finer and finer particles of matter, ultimately leading to only indestructible units in existence - primordial atoms or what Pythagoras called monads.
Although nuclear physics experiments show that finer and finer particles of matter are being observed, this is still just physical matter, the lowest kind of matter in existence. Nuclear physisicists, with their “splitting of atoms”, have only reached somewhat to the periphery of physical etheric matter (49:4), which is part of the physical world, but should still be regarded as a different world. The reason for treating it as a different world is mainly that ordinary man is not able to perceive such subtle etheric physical matter with his five senses.
As such, physicalism has contributed to faith by forming in essence a dogmatic sect of scientists, who are emotionally restricted in researching and accepting anything beyond the coarse physical reality. In medieval ages, scientists were considered as heretics by the Catholic Church if they deared to contradict the religious dogmas. Nowadays scientists, who dear to contradict modern orthodox scientific dogmas, are called “pseudoscientists” as has been for instance the case with Dr Michael Denton, Dr Michael Behe and other proponents of the so-called theistic science, neo-creationism and intelligent design, which have questioned the simplistic explanations of Darwinism and evolutionary materialism. Those scientists have pointed out that many molecular systems are “irreducibly complex” – e.g. the build-up of immune systems, bacterial and protozoan flagella, blood clotting mechanism and cellular transport etc. Those systems incorporate elements that interact with each other in such complex ways that it is impossible to describe detailed, testable Darwinian mechanisms for their evolution.22 Such notions coincide with common sense observations.
The physicist Paul Davies has discussed the similarities between science and faith, noting that orthodox science is a "faith-based belief system". He asserts that all science is based on the assumption that nature is ordered in a rational and intelligible way, and that the belief system of science is faith in the laws of physics.
He has been puzzled by the question of why the laws of physics are as they are, and has found that colleagues take these laws as a matter of faith - they just are - without inquiring further for an answer. And he concludes that both religion and science are based on faith - faith in the existence of something outside the universe, such as an unexplained God or an unexplained set of physical laws, perhaps even a vast ensemble of invisible universes. For this reason, both monotheistic religion and orthodox science fail to provide a complete account of physical existence.
Davies suggests that the laws of physics and the universe they govern should be seen as part of a unified system, and that they should be integrated into a common explanatory scheme - meaning that the laws should have an explanation from within the universe, and not involve an appeal to an external agency.23 Paul Davies has stated that the universe must have a purpose24 and that the impression of design is overwhelming.25
Scientists have shown themselves capable of being as dogmatic, fanatical and intolerant as the theologians of old. Bertrant Russell had a clear perception of this striving for power inherent in human nature. He feared that, after the political tyranny that followed the theological, we would experience a scientific tyranny, that the day would come when science would claim the power to regulate everything.26
"Pseudoscience" is a label created for those who research outside the box and beyond the physicalistic sectarian boundaries. The yardstick for declaring something pseudoscience is the so-called scientific method and scientific evidence, although in most cases it is more a matter of belief than of adherence to the scientific method of research.
Of course, the scientific method itself is a narrow, mechanical and rigid method of research that has been used for the last 300 years mainly in the so-called basic sciences, e.g. biology, physics and chemistry. In the scientific method, unexpected results are not trusted, while expected and understood results are immediately trusted.27 In this sense, too, it has become clear how restrictive the orthodox scientific community has become at the beginning of the 21st century.
For example, Giordano Philippo Bruno (1548-1600) is now regarded as a "martyr for science", but one of his basic tenets was the principle of reincarnation, which characterises the whole cycle of life.
Orthodox science still regards the concept of reincarnation as pseudoscience, although several serious scientists have conducted rigorous scientific research on the subject, e.g. Dr Ian Stevenson, Dr Satwant Pasricha, Dr Jim B. Tucker, etc. - see the analysis at Life After Death, part 2.
Science makes its way slowly, advancing step by step, by ascertaining facts. These facts are summed up in theories and are explained by hypotheses. Both theories and hypotheses are continually being changed through newly ascertained facts. Facts, theories, and hypotheses are joined together into a system of thought which is regarded as scientific truth. But there are also several psychological obstacles to modern scientific research. One is the all but insurmountable difficulty of abandoning cherished fictional systems acquired at the cost of much labour. The other is the fact that there is always a considerable risk for the scientist that by being too much ahead of his time he will be declared an unreliable, uncritical, unscientific fantast by believing academic opinion – that irremediable guild-system – lagging behind the times, skeptical, mostly scornful, of everything that is new.28
However, it must said that the physicalists’ conception is immensely superior to many other philosophical theories. They can explore objectively at least one world, the physical world. In so doing they keep their common sense. They do not deny the existence of the external world as the subjectivists do. Whatever conflicts with common sense, that is to say, the ascertainment of facts by sense, cannot agree with reality. Common sense sticks to objective reality.29
Still, the serious obstacle to the emancipation of thought is the dogmatic thinking from the 19th century prevailing, a thinking for which everything superphysical (“metaphysical”) was superstition pure and simple. This thinking in its turn derives from the Greek philosopher Epikuros, the founder of antimetaphysical physicalism. This dogmatic thinking led research astray, and it still wields a powerful influence, which is best seen in Einstein’s unsuccessful attempt at a new theory in connection with the fundamental dogma (the three dimensions), erroneously making time a new “dimension”. It is important that scientists with a philosophical orientation learn to rethink in accord with Pythagorean hylozoics.30
Hylozoics leads out of obscurity
Pythagoras taught a comprehensive world view that he called hylozoics (in Greek "hyle" means "matter" and "zoe" means "life"), or spiritual materialism. According to him, existence consists of 48 ever higher worlds beyond the physical world. This fact alone should clarify how little mankind can know about existence.31
By hylozoics Pythagoras did away with the opposition of spirit and matter, clarifying that spirit is the same as the consciousness of matter. It was the first time that the knowledge was presented in this way. Thereby the foundations were laid for research, for scientific treatment of esoterics. Pythagoras is the first scientist in the Western sense, the founder of exact science.32
Hylozoics is a mental system for the basic outlook of mental consciousness in the physical world and so operates within the framework of human comprehension and the three physical dimensions, the sole conceivable ones in physical matter. That is its strength but also its given, inescapable limitation in an existence of 49 cosmic dimensions. The superiority of hylozoics to other mental systems is due to the fact that it satisfies the mental conception in the mentally most exact manner. It liberates from the systems of ignorance accepted by mankind.33
Hylozoics is not reality, for it must be experienced, and only the causal self can do that. Life alone is reality. The causal self sees, hears, etc. everything in the worlds of man as we see and hear in the physical world. A mental system is a theory, not life, and may become an obstacle to life, if it is turned into an “idée fixe”. The causal self needs no concepts. Causal ideas are intuitions, in which the consciousness aspect, the matter aspect, and the energy aspect are living realities. Mental systems thus are substitutes for life, as life cannot be bound by concepts. They are working hypotheses that can never replace experience.34
The Pythagoreans assert – as the yoga philosophers do – that it is possible for the normal individual, who is willing to undergo the requisite training, to develop organs of apprehension that will enable him to have objective consciousness of higher kinds of matter.35
What is the proof for hylozoics? There are five proofs for that:
the logical proof – it consists in showing that hylozoics constitutes a non-contradictory and irrefutable system of thought and, as such, cannot be constructed by the human intellect nor without a knowledge of reality. It can never come in conflict with facts definitively ascertained by science. All new facts will find their places in it. The more research advances, the more obvious it will be that hylozoics is the only tenable working hypothesis.
the proof by explanation – hylozoics provides the simplest, most unitary, most general, non-contradictory and irrefutable explanation of thousands of facts otherwise completely inexplicable.
the proof by prediction – already a number of verifiable predictions (sufficient in number to fill a volume) of discoveries, inventions, and happenings, in themselves unpredictable by man, have been made.
the proof by clairvoyance – as also Indian raja yogis maintain, anyone who is willing to undergo the requisite training can develop abilities, now dormant in man, which will one day be powers possessed by everybody, that is, the possibility of acquiring objective consciousness in ever higher molecular kinds, or states of aggregation, at present invisible.
the experimental proof (magic) – this proof consists in knowing the pertaining laws of nature and the method of their application and in using physical etheric material energies to bring about changes also in gross physical matter.36
The esoterician learns to tell exoteric and esoteric knowledge apart. Exoteric knowledge is the work of men. The esoteric knowledge is a gift from the planetary hierarchy. Exoteric knowledge is an accumulation of ascertained facts and constructed theories and hypotheses. That knowledge will achieve exactitude only when all the facts have been ascertained, and this is the final goal of research to be reached some time in an imaginary future. The esoteric knowledge is a system that will remain hypothetical until the individual as a causal self is able to ascertain by himself that it is in agreement with reality. What degree of probability man will assign to the system depends on his level of development. Probability will become certainty of the highest degree to a trained logician who has penetrated the system thoroughly. The superficiality in acquisition commonly seen is not sufficient but results in either credulous acceptance or rejection. Wisdom is won through self-realization. That is the one and only path. Without practice, everything will remain theory. No theory, however correct, will help anyone to go forward. Realization requires experimental experience. Through such experience new, undreamt-of faculties are acquired.37
To the esoterician there is basically one single world (the cosmos), one single matter (primordial matter), one single consciousness (the cosmic total consciousness), one single energy (dynamis). Matter as well as energy and consciousness are different sides of one and the same unity inconceivable to man. This unity manifests itself in a countless number of existential forms that appear totally different as seen from those various existential forms. Present-day science is not in a position to afford a rational explanation of the three concepts of reality (matter, energy, and consciousness). Science works with concepts that are quite different from those of esoterics, and so it should be clarified once and for all that science will never be able to make any tenable statements whatsoever about the esoteric world view and life view.38
Physicalism is hindering consciousness development
Physicalism can serve as a firm ground for natural scientists in their gradual exploration of the physical world and natural processes. But nowadays physicalism has spread far beyond this field of research and has become an obstacle to the meaning of life - to the development of our consciousness, even to the understanding that there is such a need for a human being as the development of consciousness.
It is about time that mankind realized first of all that it cannot comprehend superphysical reality and that approximately 99 per cent of all reality remains out of reach of research. If philosophers will not put themselves out so far as to examine the reality content of hylozoics and accept it as the only tenable working hypothesis, they will never be able to offer mankind firm ground to stand on, they will never be able to explain the causes of events. In the long run it will not be sufficient merely to ascertain physical facts and refrain from any attempts at explanation. Man demands an answer to the question of the meaning of life and will never be content with physicalist systems, even though philosophers declare that existence is bereft of meaning.39
Notably, those propagating physicalist world-view and “scientific approach” have secretly their interests in those realms, which physicalists call “pseudoscience” and “quackery”. For instance in the USA, the Rockefeller family, which aggressively invested in the establishment of physicalist medicine based on synthetic pharmaceutical drugs and the eradication of other forms of natural therapies and medical treatments in connection with the Abraham Flexner Report (1910)40, had several family members involved in "pseudo-scientific" interests:
John D. Rockefeller (1839-1937) himself was an active and regular practitioner of religion and considered, for example, making money to be a "God-given gift".
Laurence Rockefeller (1910-2004) had an extensive interest in UFO phenomena (e.g. founded the UFO Disclosure Initiative to the White House in 1993), funded Harvard psychiatrist John E. Mack in his work with alien abductees41 and is said to have owned a collection of UFO-related artefacts.
The Rockefeller Foundation provided substantial funding to the American eugenics movement in the early 20th century - later John D. Rockefeller III (1906-1978) was involved in promoting eugenics ideas and founded the Population Council in 1952, where he employed American Eugenics Society co-founder Frederick Osborn as Council President from 1957-1959.42
David Rockefeller (1915-2017) continued this belief in targeted genetic modification of the human population.43
The leaders of the Communist Russia, who declared their allegiance only to the “materialistic science”, had secretly special affection to astrology, the occult symbolism (red pentagram, masonic sickle and hammer etc) and occult phenomena.44 Vladimir Uljanov-Lenin, Leiba Bronstein-Trotsky, Leiba Rosenfeld-Kamenev, Hirsch Apfelbaum-Zinoviev and others were dedicated and high-level freemasons, according to several archive documents declassified after the collapse of the Soviet communist empire.45
French president and general Charles de Gaulle (1890-1970), the resistance leader and founder of the Fifth Republic, discreetly consulted astrologer Maurice Vasset regularly throughout his presidency.
French president Francois Mitterand (1916-1996), a man of the Left and therefore an inheritor of France’s tradition of philosophical rationalism, had been holding regular meetings (between 1989 to 1995) with the astrologer Élizabeth Teissier at the Élysée Palace. Mitterand asked her to draw up astrological profiles of his prime ministers and senior ministers and sought her advice about the timing of his political initiatives. Also, it was at the astrologer’s explicit behest that a date was chosen for an important referendum: the September 20, 1992, vote ratifying the Maastricht Treaty that created the European Union.46
The most closely guarded domestic secret of the Ronald Reagan (1911-2004) White House was that he used an astrologer – Joan Quigley – for virtually every major move and decision as the US president during his tenure and even before that.47
Scientists researching the superphysical
Many scientists have studied the occult and shown interest in various unexplained phenomena. Isaac Newton (1642-1726) is praised by orthodox physicalistic scientists, but in fact he concentrated more than 30 years of his life and wrote at least as much about the phenomena of the invisible worlds (alchemy, the search for the "philosopher's stone", chronology, religious studies, etc.) as about the physical matter aspect.
Pierre Curie (1859-1906), winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics, Marie Curie (1867-1934) and several other leading scientists were convinced that the visions of the medium Eusapia Palladino were true, after having subjected them to rigorous tests. Pierre Curie wrote to his Marie: "I must admit that I am very interested in these spiritual phenomena. I think they are questions of physics.48
Charles Richet (1850-1935), a Nobel laureate in medicine, studied extrasensory perception intensively and tried to find a physical explanation for paranormal phenomena. He published his Traité de métapsychique (A Treatise on Metapsychics) in 1922, affirming that there could be a science of the supernatural and occult.49
The scientist Thomas Alva Edison (1847-1931) joined the Theosophical Society in New Jersey in 1878, believing not in the God of the theologians but in a Supreme Intelligence50, and in 1920 he announced his intention to build a machine for communication between the physical world and the "spirit world".51
And of course, many of the prominent physicalists - e.g. the scientists Erasmus Darwin52, Edward Jenner53, Sigmund Freud54, Alexander Flemming55 etc. - were secretly freemasons who worshipped their own divinity, the "Great Architect of the Universe", looked for manifestations of the supernatural, practised mystical rituals and divination.
These are just a few examples, and the list could go on and on.
Conclusion
So what could be the reason for the establishment and the leaders of science to suppress and belittle the knowledge and research into non-physical matter, consciousness and the infinitely rich existence around us, which greatly expands physical reality? The motive lies in the effort to prevent the development of consciousness and the awakening of human beings, and to keep humanity in a kind of consensus trance, which serves to control social processes and the immediate future. The psychologist Charles Tart introduced the term 'consensus trance', which refers to an agreement between people as to which of their perceptions should be admitted to consciousness, followed by the training of people to see the world in that way and only in that way.56
Dogmatism is still strong in our present civilisation - the emotional dogmatism of the religious has been replaced by the physicalist dogmatism of the scientists.
Prof Daniel Whiteson (PhD in physics) and Jorge Cham (PhD in robotics) We Have No Idea (2017), p 335-340 and backcover
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Esoteric Philosophy, 9.21.5
Ibid, 9.22.1
Henry T. Laurency The Philosopher’s Stone, 2.5.3
https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/sanjacinto-philosophy/physicalism
https://philosophynow.org/issues/126/Why_Physicalism_is_Wrong
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Hylozoics, 1.7.4
Henry T. Laurency The Philosopher’s Stone, 1.35.21
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.42.1
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Esoteric Philosophy, 9.21.4
Ibid, 9.21.2
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.10.4
Ibid, 5.43.15
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Hylosoics, 1.7.2
Ibid
Dr Guylaine Lanctot Medical Mafia (1995), p 30-31
Henry T. Laurency The Way of Man – The Physical Being of the First Self, 4.19.16
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.43.19
Steven Novella How the Brain Outcomes
Henry T. Laurency The Philosopher’s Stone, 2.3.1-2
P. Davies Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature (1984), p 243
P. Davies The Cosmic Blueprint: New Discoveries in Nature’s Creative Ability To Order the Universe (1988), p 203
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.42.5
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.42.3-4
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.19.4
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Esoteric Philosophy, 9.42.1
Ibid, 9.3.8
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Hylosoics, 1.1.2
Ibid, 1.5.1
Ibid, 1.5.3
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 5.10.5
Henry T. Laurency The Knowledge of Reality, 1.3.5-9
Henry T. Laurency Knowledge of Life, Two – Esoteric Philosophy, 9.43.5-6
Ibid, 9.22.3-4
Ibid, 9.19.2-3
Oleg Platonov The Secret History of Freemasonry (2000), Russian ed.; Viktor Ostretsov Freemasonry, Culture and Russian History (1999), 1562/1863 (epub); Nikolai Svitkov Freemasonry amongst Russian emigrates (1966), Russian ed.
Sudhir Hazareesingh How the French Think: An Affectionate Portrait of an Inttelectual People (2015), pp 39-40
Anna Hurwic Pierre Curie (1995)
Hazareesingh How the French Think: An Affectionate Portrait of an Inttelectual People (2015), p 59
Quoted in the magazine The Freethinker (1970), Volume 90, p 147
https://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/texts/liberal/science.html
Edward Jenner biography, Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon
Peter Gay Freud: A Life for Our Time (1998): In 1897, he joined the lodge Wien of Bnai Brith, founded two years before, and began giving popular lectures to the brethren. (e-pub, 429.0/2550)
https://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/texts/liberal/science.html
Great article thank you!