Brain Versus Being

A current news item concerns three scientists being awarded the Nobel Prize for their research into how the brain works. It is a classic example of the current confusion that is highlighted in the article that heads my web page.

Apart from my own work, nearly all other research into the human condition is based upon the physical rather than the energy component of life.

At the risk of sounding repetitive, the brain is the centre of the nervous system but has no ability to rationalise and make decisions. It is purely the organ that is the interface between the Being and the body. It is powered and activated by our individual energy for which I have coined the expression, “Human Energy Unit”. The brain tissue extends into and down the spinal cord and if that is severed there is paralysis beyond the break. This highlights the fact that fundamentally the brain is purely a communication medium.

I am not aware of any research, which takes this physical fact into consideration. If they did, of course, any researchers would have to go back to square one on so many of the extant theories about life and living.

An objective analysis of human life would have to come to the conclusion that the brain is activated and powered by the Human Energy Unit in exactly the same manner as an electrical circuit in the industry is activated by a source of electrical current, a generator; no generator, no power! Severing the spinal cord has the same effect as a power pole falling in that everything beyond the fallen pole has no power and in the case of the human body, no signals get through to activate the pertinent muscles.

The brain can be also likened to a household or industrial fuse box, which distributes the power to various outlets. In the case of the brain, it distributes all messages regarding bodily functions. However, it must be emphasised that the brain cannot think or make decisions any more than a fuse box can. Closer to home; if your household power is disconnected your lights go out and appliances do not work.

I have written it before but I will do so again, neither the brain nor the mind can think or make decisions; that is the province of the being. Unfortunately, this is too simple an understanding of life for the so-called authorities that are victims of groupthink.

I recently wrote to the West Australian commissioner for mental health, a public servant and not a politician, with a few, in my opinion, powerful testimonials, but after quite a delay got a polite reply indicating no interest in adopting my research so I politely replied that I did not ask him to
adopt my research but to examine it.

I recently wrote to two officials at the United Nations World Health Organisation as did John Avery but have not even had an acknowledgement.

Asking these ‘authorities’ to even look at new thinking on the subject of mental health is so touchy and drowning in the confusion that they cannot even duplicate a simple request in plain English. Behind this is the fear that they are wrong and that there are better or more effective methods
than what they have been trained and indoctrinated with. It takes a lot of courage to admit being wrong and the greater the mistake the more courage is required.

We certainly have a problem in having these simple truths accepted and the main reason appears to be that MEM is light years ahead of current knowledge concerning life, so the solution is apparently a numbers game in the public arena until one of us can influence an “authority” to examine
the research without a jaundiced eye.

If any MEM practitioner has contact with any person who may be of help in influencing some ‘authority’ please make the effort.

As a student of history, I am aware that Copernicus, 1473 –1543 and Gallileo, 1564-1642 were both not only well-educated but also vocal critics of the then church insistence that the earth was centre of the universe. They ran into strident opposition from church authorities defending their own doctrine on this issue and both suffered accordingly at the hands of the Inquisition. In Galileo’s case, his penalty for supporting the theory of Copernicus was house arrest for the remainder of his life, together with the denial of visitors, although it is reported that he did not
comply with this last condition.

Leonardo da Vinci is famous as the painter of the Mona Lisa but he is also famous in scientific circles as an incredible inventor and designer of mechanical appliances. It took hundreds of years to pass before his knowledge and skills were recognised.

I see a direct parallel with the above conflicts and the opposition to Causism theories, although in our case, not overtly from church circles but the mental health regimes of psychology and psychiatry. It took hundreds of years for the ideas of both Copernicus and Galileo to be universally recognised, but I trust our fight will be of much shorter
duration, but it depends on what we do about it.

_____

John Mace, 10 October 2014