Approaches to Consciousness

Abstract

Consciousness, and the relation between mind and brain, is a topic of contentious debate, and increasing interest amongst both academics and students of psychology. In this text, Lancaster takes a refreshingly balanced look at consciousness, bringing in approaches from neuroscience, cognitive science, depth psychology, philosophy and mysticism. With a distinctive ‘transpersonal’ orientation, this text will be an invaluable authoritative overview of this subject, integrating scholarship and research from diverse areas.

Mystical techniques, mental processes, and states of consciousness in Abraham Abulafia’s Kabbalah: A reassessment

“…Moreover, both the Abulafian mystical praxis and some of its effects display significant similarities with certain psychoanalytical practices and ideas, which have been noted by scholars of psychology and of Jewish mysticism alike. In particular, Abulafia’s peculiar techniques of letter permutation have been compared to Freud’s free association method on the grounds that the non-discursive logic that underlies the former calls to mind the Viennese thinker’s logic of the unconscious (Bakan, 1990; Lancaster, 2004). Indeed, from a quasi-Freudian perspective, it is also quite tempting to remark the wealth of phenomenological parallels between sexual intercourse and Abulafia’s mystical praxis: In both, the preparatory context stereotypically involves isolation, cleansing, nighttime, and special clothing; the practice itself concentrates on different and specific body parts, typically progressing from a more external to a more internal focus, and from a slower to a faster pace, which culminates in stillness; and the subject’s experiences often include progressively increasing warmth, initial anxiety or fear, eventually turning into delight, a sense of unification, and pleasurable sensations tied to a viscous fluid.…”

“…In an attempt to bridge the conceptual gap Tart indicated, Lancaster (2004) has tried to integrate a transpersonal approach to mind with a neurological approach to the brain, for the sake of studying consciousness and its states as advocated by Wilber. Unlike his predecessors, however, this British researcher has given more substantial consideration to medieval Jewish Kabbalah in his cognitive-psychological and neuroscientific analysis, with a view to drawing on “mystics’ experiences and the models they use in order to refine our understanding of psychological processes” (Lancaster, 2000, p. 233).…”

The Challenges, Prospects, and Promise of Transpersonal Psychology

“…Some theorists posit the notion of a "Great Chain of Being" as comprising the essential structure of transpersonal development (Wilber, 1977(Wilber, , 1980, while others prefer Whiteheadian process philosophy as a framework for understanding the transpersonal (de Quincey, 2002;Griffin, 1988Griffin, , 1997. Several transpersonal scholars take a purely agnostic position regarding the transpersonal realm (Friedman, 2002;Nelson, 1990), while others accept the ontological reality of the transcendent (Lancaster, 2004). Still others prefer to "leave the field open for surprises and new discoveries" (Grof, 1998, p. 114).…”

“…Its psychological theories are regarded as the most speculative of philosophies and foster an irrational belief in divine beings (Ellis & Yeager, 1989). Transpersonal scholars such as Assagioli (1965), Grof (1985), James (1902/1936), Lancaster (2004 and Wilber (1977) who use metaphysical concepts as a framework for understanding the nature and character of transpersonal experiences, allegedly claim to validate the existence of what cannot be empirically verified. William James (1902/1936, for example, believed that the unseen region in question is not merely ideal, for it produces effects in the world.…”

Detachment: Gateway to the World of Spirituality

“…Here we examine three theoretical perspectives on mystical states: psychoanalytic, cognitive and neurobiological. We can 'explain' spiritual or mystical experience at any of these 'levels' , yet as Lancaster (2000Lancaster ( , 2004 argues, the predominant scientific view would hold that only the neurobiological level has the ring of authenticity about it because it indicates the material cause of the conscious experience. A phenomenon may be explained in two senses.…”