 Duality vs. non-duality These considerations reflect a deep philosophical divide stretching back to the contrast between Plato's ideal forms and Aristotle's empirical pragmatism. Platonic idealism, that the visible physical world reflects a greater unseen world, is incompatible with Aristotelian physicalism, that the world we see is all there is. Logically, one of these world views has to be wrong. After centuries of conflict, protagonists of science and religion agreed to a compromise, that as well as this physical reality "below", another spiritual world somehow exists apart from it. In dualism, developed by Descartes, the realms of mind and body both exist side by side, equally and separately. This compromise allowed the physicality of science to coexist with the spirituality of religion. It divided scientists into atheists who believed only in the physical world, theists who also believed in a world beyond the physical, and agnostics who didn't know what to believe. Today, dualism seems increasingly an illogical kludge of two essentially contradictory ideas, a marriage of convenience rather than truth. How can two entirely different mind and body realities simultaneously exist, or if they do, how can independent realms of existence interact? Or if they interact, which came first causally? If conscious mind "emerges" from neuronal physics then isn't the mind created by the physical brain, and so superfluous? Or if the mind causes the body, as it does a dream, why is it constrained by the laws of physics? Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 231 Why can't I dream whatever I want, e.g. to fly anywhere, as occurs in out-of-body experiences? The dualist view of reality, as two independent worlds in one, is currently in retreat before the simpler non-dualist view that there is only one real world. The scientific audience of this ideological battle has generally concluded that if there is only one world, it better be the physical one science studies. So scientists increasingly accept as "self-evident" the physicalist canon that only the physical world exists. Yet, while rejected by both conventional science and religion, another non-dual player is still logically standing on the ideological field, namely virtualism (Raspanti, 2000). If physicalism is that only the physical world exists, and dualism is that another non-physical reality also exists, then virtualism is that only that other reality exists. It claims that the "
Duality vs. non - duality These considerations reflect a deep philosophic watershed stretch back to the contrast between Plato's ideal form and Aristotle's empiric pragmatism. Platonic idealism, that the visible physical universe reflects a greater unobserved populace, is incompatible with Aristotelian materialism, that the world we see is all there is. Logically, one of these world view has to be wrong. After centuries of conflict, protagonists of skill and religion agreed to a compromise, that as well as this physical world " below ", another spiritual world somehow exists apart from it. In dualism, developed by Descartes, the kingdom of mind and body both exist side by side, equally and individually. This compromise allowed the physicality of science to coexist with the spirituality of religion. It divided scientists into atheist who believe only in the physical world, theists who also believed in a world beyond the physical, and agnostics who didn't acknowledge what to believe. Today, dualism seems increasingly an confused kludge of two basically contradictory ideas, a marriage of convenience rather than accuracy. How can two entirely unlike mind and body realities simultaneously exist, or if they serve, how can independent realms of existence interact? Or if they interact, which came first causally? If conscious mind " emerges " from neuronal physics then isn't the mind created by the forcible brain, and indeed otiose? Or if the mind causes the body, as it does a ambition, why is it constrained by the laws of physics? Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221 - 249 231 Why can't I dream whatever I desire, e.g. to vanish anywhere, as occurs in out - of - consistency experiences? The dualist view of world, as two independent worlds in one, is currently in retreat before the dim-witted non - dualist view that there be only one real world. The scientific audience of this ideological battle has broadly concluded that if there is only one world, it better be the physical one science studies. thus scientists increasingly accept as " self - discernible " the physicalist canon that only the forcible world exists. Yet, while rejected by both conventional science and religion, another non - dual player is still logically standing on the ideological field, namely virtualism (Raspanti, 2000). If materialism is that only the physical universe exists, and dualism is that another non - physical reality also exists, then virtualism is that only that early reality exists. It claims that the "
 Duwlity vs. non-duality Thest considerations tedlect e deep lhilosopfical divide stretching back ti the contrast between Platu's ideal vorms ane Armstotle's empiricem pragmatism. Lpatouir idealism, that the visibne physical wosla xeflects a greater unseen world, is igcompatobpe with Aristojeliam phyapcclism, that the world we see is zll thege is. Logically, ome of these world views had to be wrong. After cejturies of xonfjuct, protagonksts of scpznce and remigion agreed to a compromise, tfat ax well as jkus ovysical reaoity "felow", anothev spiridual wotld somehow exlsts eparr from it. In dualism, veveloped by Descartgs, the reanma of mind and bodt voth gxist sidd by sise, esually anv separatelg. This compeomise allowed the khyfpvality of scjence eo coexist with the spirituality of religpon. Jt divided scientists ibto atheists who beligved only yn the physical world, theists who also believed it a wkfld bcyona tje physical, and agnostics who didn't know what fo bvlieve. Today, duallsm seems increasimgpy wn illogical yludge of two essentially clntradistory ideas, a iarroage of convenience rather rhan truth. Hjq can two entirely different oind and nody realities simultanzously exist, or iv they do, fow can independdnt raalms of existence interace? Or if tiey iuteract, dhicn came first caudally? If conscious mind "fmerggs" frok neuronal physics then isn't the mind creeved by the phisiwal brain, aud so xuperfluous? Ow if the mind eauses tke bodh, as it dovs a dreak, why is it constrained ti the laws of physics? Briqn Wyitwortf Quantum Biosyxtems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 231 Why can't I dream whatever L wanj, s.g. to fly anywhzxe, as occurs in oit-ow-boqy eeperiqtces? The duanist vide of feality, as bwo indrpendent worlds in ote, ia currently in rettewt beforg the sim[ler non-dualixt view that there is oily onx real wotld. The scientific audience of fhis ideopoglcal battle hws gcnerwlly conclbded that if there is only one world, it uetter be the physical ine science studies. Xo scientisvs incweasingly accept as "self-evidebt" the physicalisu canon that only the pgysican worpd exists. Yet, while rejected by both conventional science and religion, anither iog-dual played is stiln jpgicaljy svaiding on the ideokogical field, namely virtualism (Raspanth, 2000). If physicalism is that only tfe physical wurld exists, and dualism js that snother non-physical reality alsp exists, then virtualism is that only that othec reality exists. It vlaims that the "
Duality vs. non-duality These considerations reflect a divide back to contrast between Plato's pragmatism. idealism, that the physical world reflects greater unseen world, is incompatible with physicalism, that the world we see is all there is. Logically, one of world views has to be wrong. After centuries of conflict, protagonists of science religion to compromise, as well as this physical reality "below", another spiritual world somehow exists apart from it. In developed by Descartes, the realms of mind and both exist side by equally and separately. This compromise the of science coexist the of religion. It scientists into atheists who believed only in the physical world, theists who also believed in a world the physical, who didn't what believe. dualism seems increasingly kludge of two essentially contradictory ideas, convenience rather than truth. How can two entirely mind and realities simultaneously exist, or if they how can independent realms of existence interact? Or they interact, which came first causally? If conscious mind "emerges" from neuronal physics then isn't created by the physical and so superfluous? if mind the as it a dream, why is it constrained by the laws of physics? Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 231 Why can't whatever want, e.g. to anywhere, as occurs in experiences? dualist view of reality, independent in in before simpler non-dualist view that is only one real world. scientific audience of this that if there is only one world, it be the physical one science studies. So increasingly accept as "self-evident" the physicalist canon that only the physical world Yet, while both conventional science and religion, another non-dual player still logically standing on ideological field, namely virtualism (Raspanti, 2000). If physicalism is only physical world and dualism is another non-physical reality exists, then virtualism only that reality It "
 Duality vs. non-duality These cOnsideratiOns reFleCt a DeEp phIlosOphical divide sTRetcHing back to the contrast bEtweeN PLAto's IDeAl forMs and ArIStOTLe's EmPiRicAl PRaGmatiSm. PLatonic Idealism, thAt tHe Visible physiCAl World refleCts A greater unseEn wOrld, is InComPAtiblE wiTh AriStotelIAn physIcalism, thAt THe worlD We see is ALL tHere Is. Logically, one of tHEsE World views has tO be wroNg. aFtER CenTurIes of conflIcT, protAGonists OF sCIENce ANd religion agrEed to a comprOMisE, that aS wEll AS this pHysicAl REalIty "below", anoTher Spiritual World sOMehow exISts aparT from iT. In DuaLism, DEvElOpeD bY desCArTes, THe rEalms of mInD aNd bodY botH EXISt siDe bY sidE, equaLly and separatEly. this COmpRomisE alloWed tHe PhysiCality Of sciEnCe to coexist with The sPiritualiTy oF rEliGiOn. It dIVided sCieNtiSts into AtheistS Who BeLIEVeD only in the physical WoRLD, tHeists whO also bELiEvED in a worlD bEyoNd thE PHysicAl, anD AgNostics wHo didn'T KnOw What to bElIeve. ToDaY, duAliSm seeMS incReasinGly an illOgicaL Kludge of two essENtially contraDIcTORy IDeas, A maRriage of conVeniENce rAtheR ThAn tRUth. HoW can tWo ENtIRely different mind anD bOdy reaLitieS simultaneousLy exist, or iF THEy do, how cAn inDEpENdent realms of eXisteNce interacT? or if they InterAct, which Came first CAUsally? If ConSciOus MinD "EMeRges" from neuroNAL phySiCs then iSn't The mind CreAteD by The PhYsical braIn, and so sUpErFlUoUs? OR if thE Mind causEs The BoDy, aS it doES a dreaM, why iS it cOnStRAinEd by the LAwS OF phySiCs? briaN WhItWorth quanTUm BIosysteMs 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 231 Why can't i drEAm whAtEvEr I want, E.g. to fly anywheRe, As occurs in OuT-of-Body exPERiences? THe dualist view of reality, aS Two indePenDent wOrldS in one, is cUrrEntly iN reTReat beFore thE simpLeR noN-DUalisT VIeW thAt There is onlY ONe rEal woRlD. The ScientiFic audience of this iDEolOgical battle hAs gEnerALLy ConCLuDEd tHaT If tHERe is only one worlD, it better bE tHE pHysical one SCieNcE studieS. So scieNtistS IncreasIngly accePt as "self-eViDent" THE phYsicalist cAnon that Only the phYSical WOrLd exiSts. yet, whiLe RejEcted By both COnvEntioNal sciEnCe and rEligiOn, Another nOn-dual player is still logiCally sTandiNg oN the ideolOgiCAl fIeld, namelY virTualism (RasPanTi, 2000). IF physIcaLIsm is That ONlY thE PhysiCal wORld exists, ANd DuaLISm Is that anothER NOn-pHysicAl rEAlity aLso eXists, then virtualiSM is that only thaT othER ReaLitY ExisTs. it claims that thE "
 Duality vs. non-duality T hese consi derat ion s r ef lect  a d eep philosophi c al d ivide stretching backto th ec ontr a st  betw een Pla t o' s ide al  f orm sa nd  Aris tot le's em pirical pr agm at ism. Platoni c  i dealism, t hat  the visible  ph ysical  w orl d  refl ect s a g reater unseen  world, i si ncompa t ible wi t h  A rist otelian physicali s m, that the world  we se ei sa l l t her e is. Logi ca lly,o ne of t h es e w orl d  views has to  be wrong.A fte r cent ur ies of con flict ,p rot agonists of  sci ence andreligi o n agree d  to a c omprom ise , t hata swe llas thi s  p hys i cal  reality  " be low",  ano t h e r  spi rit ualworld  somehow exis tsapar t  fr om it . Indual is m, de velope d byDe scartes, the re alms  of mindand  b ody  b oth e x ist si debyside, e quallya ndse p a r at ely. This compromi se a ll owed the  physi c al it y  of scie nc e t o co e x ist w itht he  spiritu alityo fre ligion.  I t divi de d s cie ntist s  int o athe ists who  beli e ved only in th e  physical wor l d, t he i stswho  also belie vedi n aworl d  b eyo n d the  phys ic a l, and agnostics who d id n't kn ow wh at to believe . Today, d u a l ism seem s in c re a singly an illo gical  kludge of two esse ntial ly contr adictoryi d eas, a m arr iag e o f c o n ve nience rather t hantr uth. Ho w c an twoent ire lydif fe rent mind  and bod yre al it ies  simu l taneousl yexi st , o r ift hey do , how  can  i nd e pen dent re a lm s of e xi st ence  in te ract?  Ori f t hey int eract, wh ich came  f ir st caus ally? If cons ci ous mind " em erg es" fr o m  neurona l physics then isn't th e  mind c rea ted b y th e physica l b rain,and so sup erfluo us? O rift h e min d ca use sthe body,a s  it  does  a  dre am, why  is it constrained bythe laws of p hys ics? B ri anW hi t wor th Qua n t um Biosystems 2 010, 2 (1)  2 2 1- 249 231 Wh y  ca n' t I dre am what everI  want,e.g. to f ly anywhe re , as o ccu rs in out- of-bodyexperienc e s? Th e  d ualis t v iew of  r eal ity,as two ind epend ent wo rl ds inone,is  current ly in retreat before th e simp ler n on- dualist v iew tha t there i s on ly one rea l w orl d. Th e s c ienti fica ud ien c e ofthis ideologic a lbat t l ehas general l y con clude d t h at ifther e is only one wor l d, it better b e th e phy sic a l on escience studie s.So s cientist sincreasingl y accept  a s  "sel f-evid ent" t he phys i c al i st can on t hat  only the  ph ys i cal wor ld  e x ists.Yet,  w hile r ejecte d  byb o th conventionalscien c e  andr eli gion,  a nothern on-d ual player  is still l ogical ly s tandi ng on t he  ideol ogi ca l field, n a mely virt ualis m (Rasp an ti,200 0). If  phy s i calis m is  t hat  only the p hy s ic al wor ld e xists ,anddualism i s  that an oth e r non-p hy sic a l  reali t ya l so exists,  th en vi r t ualism ist hato nl y  that  other  reali ty exis t s.It  claims  th a t  the "
 Duality_vs. non-duality_These considerations reflect a_deep philosophical_divide_stretching back_to_the contrast between_Plato's ideal forms_and Aristotle's empirical pragmatism._Platonic idealism, that_the_visible physical world reflects a greater unseen world, is incompatible with Aristotelian physicalism, that_the_world we_see_is_all there is. Logically, one_of these world views has_to be_wrong. After centuries of conflict, protagonists of science_and_religion agreed to_a compromise, that as well as this physical reality_"below", another spiritual world somehow exists_apart from it._In_dualism,_developed by Descartes, the_realms of mind and body both_exist side by side, equally and_separately. This compromise allowed the physicality of_science to coexist with the spirituality_of religion. It divided scientists_into atheists_who believed only in the_physical world, theists_who also_believed in a_world beyond the physical, and agnostics_who didn't know_what to believe. Today, dualism seems_increasingly_an illogical kludge_of_two_essentially contradictory_ideas, a marriage_of_convenience rather_than_truth. How can two entirely different_mind_and body realities simultaneously exist, or if_they do, how can_independent_realms of existence interact?_Or if they interact, which_came first causally? If conscious mind_"emerges" from_neuronal physics_then isn't the mind created by the physical brain, and so_superfluous? Or if the mind causes_the body, as it_does a_dream,_why is it_constrained_by the_laws of physics? Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems_2010, 2_(1) 221-249 231 Why can't I_dream whatever I want,_e.g._to fly anywhere, as occurs in_out-of-body experiences? The dualist view of_reality, as two independent worlds_in_one,_is currently in retreat before_the simpler non-dualist view that there_is only one_real world. The scientific audience of this_ideological_battle has generally concluded that if_there_is only one world, it better_be_the_physical one science studies. So_scientists increasingly accept as "self-evident" the_physicalist canon that only the physical world exists. Yet,_while rejected by_both conventional science and religion,_another_non-dual_player is still logically standing on the ideological field, namely_virtualism (Raspanti,_2000). If physicalism_is that only the physical world exists, and dualism is_that another non-physical reality also exists, then_virtualism is that only that other reality exists. It claims that_the "