Dr. David Hawkins - free audio recordings

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by ethereal

Suffice it to say, I don't think an enlightened being even cares whether he's a Ph.D. or not. Perhaps he didn't even put the Ph.D. and Sir stuff on there, but his webmasters and editors. In fact, I think that is most likely the case; other people, thinking that it would be helpful to put the Doc in the best possible light, put it on there, and he didn't notice or bother or cares one way or another. Who knows? Who cares?

I don't think a single person bought his books for the reason that he is a Ph.D. or a knight. I also don't think a single person who has read his books and got something out of them would object to him lying about these things, even if he did lie. So why the fuss?

Don't project your own unconscious belief systems onto others and onto the world. I don't mean this as a personal attack or to defend the Doc, but as a possible area for an honest self-inventory. I feel saddened that your insistence on logical proof and "moral righteousness" (according to your own egoic beliefs) is preventing you from getting the immense spiritual benefit provided in his books.

So if I understand you correctly, you have no problem with people BS-ing about their education and professional qualifications?



I'm old school in that I believe that if you lie about one thing you probably lie about a lot of things as well. As a wiseman once said, "You can't compartmentalize ethics."

You also have to ask yourself why no one else on this planet is researching this stuff.

[ethereal]

Lol, if we want to debate this... Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This sucks, derailing such a great thread into petty squabbles over minor incidental things

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by ethereal

Lol, if we want to debate this... Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This sucks, derailing such a great thread into petty squabbles over minor incidental things

You misunderstand what the "straw man" fallacy is.

Here we are dealing with a concrete indisputable fact.

Just saying.

[dor]

Originally Posted by ethereal

Lol, if we want to debate this... Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This sucks, derailing such a great thread into petty squabbles over minor incidental things

i don't think its petty, and i as indicated, I read his book - about half of it when i finally gave up because it was a complete waste of time. But pseudo science can be worse than a waste of time it can be deadly.

If people are going to be here promoting his crap, then expect some scrutiny -just like in real life. He makes scientific claims then refuses peer reveiwed research. when someone criticizes him:


Hawkins replies to most of his critics by calibrating their levels of consciousness, which he finds to be below the level of truth/integrity (200).

Not one of his supporters here have answered the fundemental question: Why does he lie about his qualifications and more bizzarly, knighthood?

He says smoking organic tobbaco is good:
* Hawkins grows and smokes his own tobacco. Based on applied kinesiological testing, he deems the organic tobacco to be positive for him and commercially produced cigarettes to be detrimental due to pesticides included since 1957.

[Simmiah]

I repeat. This is "thread hijacking" which is clearly banned on forum guidelines... & on every other forum I have been on.

I repeat. If you wish to discuss this "Hawkins - valid or not?" discussion. Please do so on another thread. I however am going to open another Hawkins thread. Dor & Antiventurecapital please do not keep at these kinds of attacks. They keep the rest of us from having a normal discussion.

Question: If you were having dinner at a local restaurant with your partner & were discussing the latest Phantom of the Opera movie? Would you enjoy a person interjecting & constantly telling you "Well Minnie Driver didn't really sing! That bothers me & I need to tell you about it until I am satiated." .. I doubt you would. This is what this thread has become for me. I find it unfortunate that mature people would wish to do this kind of boundary infringing behavior on these forums.

[Simmiah]

<<Do not troll - "Trolling," i.e. posting inflammatory, off-topic, or insulting messages just to provoke a reaction from others, is completely unacceptable and will result in your account being promptly banned. However, friendly debate, socializing, and good humor are perfectly welcome here. What crosses the line is when someone behaves in a manner that degrades the quality of the forums for other members. These forums are a resource for your personal growth, not a juvenile stomping ground.

Avoid thread-hijacking - Thread-hijacking is when a member attempts to derail a pre-existing discussion and take it away from its original topic. This behavior can be frustrating to members who want the discussion to proceed on course. If you wish to take a topic in a new direction that would otherwise derail the original thread, simply start a new thread for your own topic. Do not engage in thread-hijacking, as it reduces the quality of the forums for others.>>

snipped from forum guidelines.

[dor]

Originally Posted by Simmiah

<<Do not troll - "Trolling," i.e. posting inflammatory, off-topic, or insulting messages just to provoke a reaction from others, is completely unacceptable and will result in your account being promptly banned. However, friendly debate, socializing, and good humor are perfectly welcome here. What crosses the line is when someone behaves in a manner that degrades the quality of the forums for other members. These forums are a resource for your personal growth, not a juvenile stomping ground.

Avoid thread-hijacking - Thread-hijacking is when a member attempts to derail a pre-existing discussion and take it away from its original topic. This behavior can be frustrating to members who want the discussion to proceed on course. If you wish to take a topic in a new direction that would otherwise derail the original thread, simply start a new thread for your own topic. Do not engage in thread-hijacking, as it reduces the quality of the forums for others.>>

snipped from forum guidelines.

the subject of the thread is "Dr" Hawkins recordings, other people have posts here about his work and books that's okay with you in fact there is extensive discussion of his methods here clearly that has strayed from the topic - free audio recordings ...what shall the thread be, 20 posts of 'wow, they're free - cool!"?

Is that what you want? Just be honest - you want this thread to only discuss the positive aspects of the 'dr'?

If there was a thread here about a surgeon would it be relevent if that surgeon got his degree from a diploma mill - if he was calling himself doctor that would be considered fraud. that's not relevant/??

[ethereal]

You know what, dor and AVC -- I apologize for my comments. I was feeling bad all of yesterday for imposing my beliefs onto others. Everybody's experiences and circumstances are different, so there is no right or wrong, everybody's right

As for the arguments for and against Dr. Hawkins...it will never be settled. Proponents will always find evidence for him, critics will always find evidence against him, our parroting of these arguments doesn't change a thing

Since this thread has already taken this turn, no point lamenting it

As a better idea, I'm hoping we can sticky up a new thread for links/resources pertaining to various spiritual teachers (maybe a post dedicated to each?) where we can all submit useful links or quotes or information. Not sure how it would work, though: perhaps the more technologically-savvy people can help out.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by ethereal

You know what, dor and AVC -- I apologize for my comments. I was feeling bad all of yesterday for imposing my beliefs onto others. Everybody's experiences and circumstances are different, so there is no right or wrong, everybody's right

No worries, just be careful of needing to believe something too much.

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by ethereal

Since this thread has already taken this turn, no point lamenting it

As a better idea, I'm hoping we can sticky up a new thread for links/resources pertaining to various spiritual teachers (maybe a post dedicated to each?) where we can all submit useful links or quotes or information. Not sure how it would work, though: perhaps the more technologically-savvy people can help out.

A good idea, Ethereal. I have an idea of how it could work. I'll bring it up with Adam and see what we can do.

[Simmiah]

Originally Posted by ethereal

As a better idea, I'm hoping we can sticky up a new thread for links/resources pertaining to various spiritual teachers (maybe a post dedicated to each?) where we can all submit useful links or quotes or information. Not sure how it would work, though: perhaps the more technologically-savvy people can help out.

Great idea It would be helpful for me as I am always looking for new ideas to add to mine.

[ethereal]

A post in the yahoo groups, might be interesting for any Dr. Hawkins fans:

August 2005, Sedona Lecture Summary

> > He spoke more on moral relativism and how it denies the absolute.
(
> in
> > the files section there is the handout from the last lecture on
the
> > subject) The subject is truely one of his hot points as of late,
> and
> > he has said that it will be the downfall of our society. When you
> > give everyone single person an equal vote you open the door to
the
> > lunatic fringe.
> >
> > He said we dont need freedom OF speech we need freedom FROM
speech.
> > He spoke about how we hold it as the highest of high RIGHTS to
die
> > for...and that it gets twisted into anything...actions become
free
> > speech...now the KKK is alright, burning crosses is just free
> speech!
> > now murder, rape, and all types of madness are ok, because its
> > freedom of speech...
> >
> > He said the same thing is what destroyed the Roman empire...it
> > withered from within.
> >
> > There were a lot of new people and even a couple of kids...which
I
> > think is pretty cool.
> >
> > When speaking of secrets, he said, (paraphrasing)I will whisper
the
> > secrets of enlightenment to you for 50$!! and then he whispered
> into
> > a mans ear...."you just wasted 50$ dollars" HAHAHAHAA!!! yeaaaah!!
> >
> > funny man...
> >
> > He said people who sell secrets are really glamorizing and
> > controlling. there are no secrets. Why would you keep it a
> > secret? ...control.
> >
> > He spoke more about the ego being just the animal nature, and to
> not
> > condemn it but to really be friendly to it because its
responsible
> > for your survival throughout evolution, but now our job is to
> > transcend it, which is impossible if we are guilty about it or
> condemning of it.
> >
> > He got deep into the heisenberg principle...and this is
important.
> >
> > For those that dont know, the heisenberg principle is basically
> that
> > everything is effected by our observing of it. The popular
example
> that if you puts a cat in the box, and then send a shock into it or
> > something like that, and then the principle comes in...before the
> box
> > is opened, and the cat is observed as being dead or alive....is
it
> > dead or alive? the heisenberg principle is basically that
> the 'death'
> > or 'still alive' does not 'there' until observed
> >
> > I hope I explained that right..but you could look it up on the
web
> > somewhere anyway.
> >
> > The docs realization was that, calibrations are effected by
> > obeservation.
> >
> > he said it was received, as a gift not asked for or sought...but
he
> > said that basically the kitties purr probably didnt calibrate at
> 500
> > all the time, until we observed it as Love. It ties into how
> we 'raise the sea of consciousess' by raising our own. The truth in
> that statement is phenomenal, as is this:
> >
> > "Potentiality becomes actuality thru intention"
> >
> > An example is a dog or cat calibrating 5 points higher when it
> > becomes a family cat or dog...the love and observation of the pet
> in that context actually changes the calibration of the energy
> itself!!
> >
> > So when our fields are strong, our intention could 'make' drastic
> > changes; this is why its important to not worry about the world,
> but
> > to raise our own consciousness, because from a higher
consciousness
> > we observe the world differently, and coming from Power of such
> > immensity, we actually raise the consciousness...however we also
> see
> > that a negative observation also had kept the calibration of man
> low
> > for eons, and it is still only 207, which is great, but there is
a
> > long way to go.
> >
> > it also solidifies the Truth that we only need to see (observe)
it
> > differently, and is the basis of miracles. We invite them through
> the
> > observation that they are there.
> >
> > I dont know what that calibrates at but I know its a lot. HA!
> >
> > He went on to another subject which I loved....the obsessive
> > compulsive realist....HA! or as I have changed to an
> acronym...OCL's
> >
> > He said he gets hit with tons of email asking him 'how come this
> > calibrates at 385 here and 380 there and wah wah wah' so he went
on
> > to make the point that...the calibrations are not absolute, not
> > written in stone and are meant to give you an idea of the field
of
> > energy that it is coming out of. calibrations change all the
time.
> > the calibration of your mother could change drastically if you
are
> > holding her in mind, say, as a mother, as a woman, how you saw
her
> in
> > your teens, or your childhood, Hitler calibrated in the 400s
before
> falling as did Napoleon....all those numbers will be different
> depending on the context in which its being observed.
> >
> > when calibrating gorillas, there are high land and low land and
all
> > types of different ones. So he said look...dont email me about
it!!
> > its just to point you in the field where it comes from.
> >
> > however this was a somewhat valid question when it comes to how
the
> > torah calibrates so drastically different on different
> > recordings...but that is because there is the Torah how the jews
of
> > yesteryear observed it how its observed now, how its observed in
> > different places and peoples....etc etc...
> >
> > k testing itself calibrates at 600 so its not absolute Truth and
> > should not be taken so meticulously literal on the every digit.
> >
> > He spoke again on how we as a group have an extremely high power
> and
> > are effecting the entirety of mankind, which he calibrated as
true.
> > (its really because of me! JUST KIDDING!)
> >
> > We are effecting the evolution of consciousness by virtue of our
> > dedication to it.
> >
> > At the end of the lecture he did something new, which was come
out
> > again into the crowd and give darshan, he was so overcome with
joy
> > for us, which he always reminds us "You are God's gift to me"
with
> > overwhelming Love for us. ..geez, thats deep.

The "raising your own consciousness to help the world" part really helped me understand what the whole consciousness-raising movement is all about

[ethereal]

Another link with free audio recordings:

"H" - Contact Talk Radio Archives of Past Shows

[mary sankus]

Ok. My 1st post ever. Have recently discovered "listening" on the computer while I tend to other matters. Found this site because Google indicated Free David Hawkins audios. Just returned from one of his seminars. Plan to attend a Hawkins discussion group Sunday in Santa Monica. Still have not located where on this site to listen. Next ...

[mary sankus]

Hi, Came to this site because of Hawkins. Attended his Long Beach, CA seminar & will be joining others this sunday in Santa Monica for discussion. There are discussion groups world-wide. Thanks for making these available. His material really resonates. Sincerely, Mary

[joelr]

Originally Posted by ethereal

A post in the yahoo groups, might be interesting for any Dr. Hawkins fans:

August 2005, Sedona Lecture Summary

> > He spoke more on moral relativism and how it denies the absolute.
(
> in
> > the files section there is the handout from the last lecture on
the
> > subject) The subject is truely one of his hot points as of late,
> and
> > he has said that it will be the downfall of our society. When you
> > give everyone single person an equal vote you open the door to
the
> > lunatic fringe.

Sounds like what he is saying here is that his truth should be the only truth - he does claim his work calibrates within 1 point of Jesus and Buddah and that only he is a master at calibration. Not sure why this is a good thing? This sets him up as a possible cult leader. He is the only new age teacher who is claiming to have access to ABSOLUTE truth that only he can provide.

I just finished his 6 CD Highest Level of Enlightenment series. Then I spent some time researching the "calibration" process.
He definitely is familiar with Buddhism and most of the new age teachings and has MANY inspiring and interesting things to say.
Although he often mis-uses science like chaos theory and quantum mechanics in a way that I felt was just there to make him sound more convincing.

The calibration process has been proven by experiments several times to be no greater than random chance but he claims that he is the only reliable person to do this and he proves it with calibration!?
I enjoyed the first few cds but by the end I had the definite feeling that he was being dishonest about something.
My take is that it's his central thesis - the calibration.

He showed that it can calibrate any number between 1-1000 yet the dozens of calibrations he mentioned were all on a 100 - (100, 200 etc..) or a 50 (150, 250..) with maybe 2 exceptions.
If you understand base systems in math (ours is base 10) then there is no way random calibrations in nature would keep hitting such rounded numbers.

Plus if it really worked he could prove incredible things. Also it would be SO easy to test - simply test 2 unmarked bottles, one with spring water or vitamin C and one with something toxic. They would always calibrate the same. When all of the experiments actually did this it worked when the bottles were labeled. Once the labels were taken off and doc/patient did not know which substance it was the tests ALWAYS FAIL.
It's simply not real.

But the doctors who practice this choose to say the phenomenon will not work when you are performing a double blind experiment!? It works fine on the first part of the experiment, but once the labels are removed kinesiology suddenly stops? The body can't tell suddenly? It's a huge scam. Not the spirituality the b.s. snake oil cure. People are getting ripped off by kinesiologists. A girl I dated long ago dropped several $100 on it once to help her diabeties. Didn't help. I was in the doctors office in shock at how silly this all was.

Here is an article on possible problems with his messages:
The Emperor's New Clothers - Dr. David Hawkins' Absolute Calibration of Truth


Keep in mind if you do not believe in evil, if you think reality is subjective, believe in many paths to God and that sometimes things will seem negative but turn out be be important growth experience or one persons blessing may subjectively seem evil to another, then you do not believe in Hawkings theory. He is an absolutist.

AND he just happens to be a conservatist and calibrates George Bush at 460!!! Most of humanity is at 200. So all these new age liberal spiritualists are wrong about Bush!? Remember you cannot have your own opinion since the calibration system is absolute.
Creepy.

[AirBreather]

Originally Posted by joelr

*snip*

He is an absolutist.

*snip*

Correct.

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by dor

I guess when you believe there is no rigth or wrong you can claim to be a doctor and a knight when you're aren't one. In my dualistic world, it's called lying.

Dr. Hawkins practiced psychiatry for 50 YEARS in New York City. If you have read his autobiography, you will know that with the help of the Love of the Presence, his psychiatric ward became the largest in all of NYC, until the point when he decided to stop working in order to seek his spiritual Destiny.

I don't understand why people even care if he is a doctor or knight or not.

"By their fruits you shall know them", and Dr. Hawkins' fruits (his published work) is truly amazing.

[taylor]

Hawkins is an absolutist, but what kind?

Subjective Absolutism is not the same as objective absolutism. The nondual state is absolute truth by definition. Whereas any objective conception of absolute truth is a form of relative truth. You have subjective awareness which is all there is and encompasses everything according to advaita. Within the awareness, there are concepts which are always relative and dependent on duality. So the scale of consciousness basically measures the distance from the absolute SUBJECTIVE state of Reality. Because this is an "internal" subjective awareness, this is a far cry from fundamentalist absolutism. It's not a belief system.

Just thought I'd clear that up.

Btw, I'm more and more skeptical of the whole calibration technique. But more and more convinced that Hawkins and others are well intentioned about it.

You can either believe everything Hawkins says, you can believe none of it, or do what I do and take the true with the questionable. The guy is utterly clear about advanced states of Englightenment and draws upon heavy life experiences to back everything up. He has lived what he's talking about, and from my visit to Sedona, his Presence is quite profound. Almost everyone in the room was walking on air at the end of the day. If you can't find any value from any of that, it's more a reflection of you than him.

[joelr]

But he does use numbers in his system which is objectively absolute.

I'm not going to judge anyone on their ability to find or not find inspiration from Hawkins. His presence is subjective.

Hawkins says many truthful things, or at least things that are currently accepted to be true in some schools of thought.

The only information he gives that I haven't already heard in many other new age and Eastern philosophies are the "new truths" he has discovered through calibration.

I know that he has spent a large amount of energy forcing Wiki to remove the "criticism" section of his wiki page and any links to skeptic or anti-cult articles done on him.

The criticism part of the wikipage is part of many pages and simply said that calibration has not fared well with attempts to test it experimentally. That IS true. Why would he care about that?

The 9 CD set I listened to was very inspirational at first.
The middle and end parts gave me a negative vibe. So I can relate to both sides.

[AirBreather]

Originally Posted by joelr

*snip*

The criticism part of the wikipage is part of many pages and simply said that calibration has not fared well with attempts to test it experimentally. That IS true. Why would he care about that?

*snip*

The earlier (first 3? 1?) books he wrote under the assumption that any & all could correctly use the calibration techniques (as the 'field tests' were solely with ACIM students, various personal developmently focused people, etc).

Later on, he fould that that that is not the case. The significant requirements (detailed in the back/appendix chapters of every release of last titles) for it to work (repeatedly) are:
- The tester(s) need to be above the level of integrity (200 LoC on the chart);
- The intention of the statement, same;
- 'Permission' to ask/get the question answered;
- The thought/statement held in mind the same way (e.g. Visual image of Lisa as a mother... vs Mental recording of Lisa giving a lecture) with NO bias of a specific outcome (!!!)

Those are the basic ones. Some other erratta (like using a thymus thump to clear self prior if required, etc).

For myself, I often (90%+) have a bias on outcome.

The points above rule out a *lot* of people...

Now...

To address "Why would he care about that?", I need to get into more speculation as to the motives. I imagine it would be along the lines of removing partial/imcomplete truths, as the more exposure/repetition anything is given the more it is typically accepted ('programmed') as 'real truth.' To eliminate it, would be to eliminate that process.

*shrug*

[joelr]

Originally Posted by AirBreather

Later on, he fould that that that is not the case. The significant requirements (detailed in the back/appendix chapters of every release of last titles) for it to work (repeatedly) are:
- The tester(s) need to be above the level of integrity (200 LoC on the chart);
- The intention of the statement, same;
- 'Permission' to ask/get the question answered;
- The thought/statement held in mind the same way (e.g. Visual image of Lisa as a mother... vs Mental recording of Lisa giving a lecture) with NO bias of a specific outcome (!!!)

I know, that is disturbing as he has decided to set himself up as he only reliable source of calibration.
Hawkings has violated those rules when he calibrated the authors of some of his most notable publicized critics. He did not have permission yet used their faulty low calibration results (what a surprise, they scored low) against them.

One of his critics is a good writer and is simply looking at outrageous claims in a skeptical way.

Originally Posted by AirBreather

To address "Why would he care about that?", I need to get into more speculation as to the motives. I imagine it would be along the lines of removing partial/imcomplete truths, as the more exposure/repetition anything is given the more it is typically accepted ('programmed') as 'real truth.' To eliminate it, would be to eliminate that process.

Exactly, people should be able to at least read that calibration has been scientifically tested many times and using the leading experts at the time.
Every time it has proved to be no better than random chance. That is the truth but he seems to have a problem with people reading the simple historical facts.

If they continue to only read his material and his bias then they may think that calibration has actually been proven.
It has not.
Hawkins commented on this and came up with the idea "oh it doesn't work when you perform a double blind experiment"


I think Hawkins knows a ton of great stuff. He comes off all wise and guru-y. I was shocked when I started feeling anxiety as I began to get deeper into the material. I didn't really hear what he was saying about his "truth system" at first because I didn't want to believe this great speaker was suddenly telling me that absolute truths not only exist but he has the truth machine.

I don't even think ANYONE here believes in absolute truth? Who thinks that way?
All these new-agers who are proud of the fact that they got away from right wing conservative religions who claim to have the only correct version of the truth are now falling for the same swindle. A modernized version.

George Bush - 460! So sending an army to war over terrorism (oil) and being a liar on a national scale calibrates one as high as Mother Theresa. Heh.

[Reverend Keith]

I had read David Hawkins earlier books, and I was reading I - Reality and Subjectivity, hoping to review it for my site. I got about a quarter in and was absolutely appalled. How does someone so apparently enlightened have such absurd political views? It prompted me to do one of my few negative reviews. I won't repost the whole thing here, but please feel free to leave comments on the post here.

[Curtis2011]

The amount of ignorance displayed by people in this thread is overwhelming. To think, there is a whole world of people who have no spiritual intuition at all.

How unfortunate.

[Reverend Keith]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

The amount of ignorance displayed by people in this thread is overwhelming. To think, there is a whole world of people who have no spiritual intuition at all.

How unfortunate.

To quote from I - Reality and Subjectivity

The Constitution of the United States calibrates as the highest of any nation and stands at 705…If the word “God” were removed from the Constitution, its calibrated level would drop from 705 (Truth) to 485 (Intelligence and Reason)

Now in point of fact, the Constitution doesn't have the word "God" in it in the first place. Setting aside the question of how much better our Constitution is than everyone elses in the world, and just how a document that is basically a set of administrative rules can rise to the level of Enlightened Truth - the more basic question is: how is Hawkins testing?

Did he not perform the test at all, and is simply making the numbers up? If he DID perform the test, then apparently the great universal consciousness with which Hawkins claims kinesiology connects us is easily confused. Either way, it shows us that Hawkins kinesiology calibrations can be dangerously inaccurate.

As for spiritual intuition - my intuition has always been than Hawkins had a profound enlightenment experience, and that his writing about enlightenment is second to none. But my intuition has always given me pause about the whole kinesiology thing. We have to get away from thinking that experiencing enlightenment makes you infallible in every subject.

[Ariel Bravy]

Hawkins seems to be a really polarizing guy. I really used to enjoy his work. I've read most of his books, have listened to many audio and video recordings of his, studied his work pretty extensively with friends, and even seen him live in person. I loved his energy in particular.

That said, my own experience with calibration has been no better than 50/50. Maybe I calibrate below 200, maybe I'm one of the 10% of people who it doesn't work for, or maybe even doing the thymus thump doesn't get my energy back in alignment. I dunno but from what I've seen the results are very mixed. Some people seem to get pretty good results so there seems to be something to it, yes, but I dunno what that secret sauce is...

Earlier in the thread it's been brought up that the calibration results change. Heck, even Hawkins' own results change when calibrating his own books. I've pointed out a number of such discrepancies here.

The conclusion I've come to is that kinesiology is simply not a reliably valid method for determining Truth and I've all but tossed it out, though I'll admit I am still holding out a bit and wishing it'd work which is why I'm writing on this thread. If you let go of all the kinesiologic stuff in Hawkins' teachings, you'll find that his teachings about spirituality, love, enlightenment, and the ego are pretty fantastic. Not everything about the awakening process matches my own personal experience and I've found some other teachers to point closer to what I've seen to be the case in my own life experience and in the many other people I've talked to, but it seems that Hawkins is pointing to a path that is not matching the path I and almost everyone I've met are walking and thus the experiences he talks about are a bit different than what I've seen. So not right or wrong in this sense, just different. Different maps.

So yeah, the whole muscle testing thing... not so much. A funny thing that keeps running through my mind... Hawkins calibrated that neither UFOs nor extraterrestrials are real. (Truth vs. Falsehood, p. 359) Quite honestly I believe in life on other planets from what all I've seen and discovered. Should aliens actually make themselves known sometime within the next couple years, this'll definitely throw a wrench in the whole kinesiology thing as most of the stuff like if Jesus and Mary were actually married or if such-and-such calibrates at whatever level we have to just accept since we have no real way of proving one way or another.

I really wish AK worked. It'd be awesome to have something to rely upon as a sort of Truth-o-meter, but it just really doesn't sit well with me. If you could toss out muscle testing and look at just his teachings on spirituality, and granted much his teachings are supported and backed by kinesiologic testing, that'd be a whole 'nother story. I prefer his teachings without muscle testing thrown into the mix.

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by Reverend Keith

But my intuition has always given me pause about the whole kinesiology thing. We have to get away from thinking that experiencing enlightenment makes you infallible in every subject.

Why?

Are you afraid that someone else might have a definitive answer that proves one of your beliefs is wrong?

Originally Posted by Ariel Bravy

A funny thing that keeps running through my mind... Hawkins calibrated that neither UFOs nor extraterrestrials are real. (Truth vs. Falsehood, p. 359) Quite honestly I believe in life on other planets from what all I've seen and discovered.

Whether you believe something or not does not determine if it is true or false.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by Ariel Bravy

Earlier in the thread it's been brought up that the calibration results change. Heck, even Hawkins' own results change when calibrating his own books. I've pointed out a number of such discrepancies here.

Yeah, that should set alarms ringing for more people IMO.

Originally Posted by Ariel Bravy

The conclusion I've come to is that kinesiology is simply not a reliably valid method for determining Truth [...]

Same here.

Originally Posted by Ariel Bravy

So yeah, the whole muscle testing thing... not so much. A funny thing that keeps running through my mind... Hawkins calibrated that neither UFOs nor extraterrestrials are real. (Truth vs. Falsehood, p. 359) Quite honestly I believe in life on other planets from what all I've seen and discovered. Should aliens actually make themselves known sometime within the next couple years, this'll definitely throw a wrench in the whole kinesiology thing as most of the stuff like if Jesus and Mary were actually married or if such-and-such calibrates at whatever level we have to just accept since we have no real way of proving one way or another.

Yeah, I am overwhelmingly convinced of the existence of extraterrestrial life as well. This is another factor which sets alarms ringing for me.

Originally Posted by Ariel Bravy

I really wish AK worked. It'd be awesome to have something to rely upon as a sort of Truth-o-meter, but it just really doesn't sit well with me.

Yeah, it would be nice to have a truth-o-meter, but somehow I get the overwhelmingly strong impression that the secrets of existence require more than muscle testing to divulge.

Why bother with physical experience to learn truth when we can just bust out the ol-handy dandy muscle testing truth machine?

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

Whether you believe something or not does not determine if it is true or false.

Neither does muscle testing...

[Ariel Bravy]

Just had a personal 'aha'...

It's much easier to just let this all go instead of letting this debate continue within myself.

Thank you very much Hawkins. I really appreciate you and your work, as well as how much I've benefited from your work. It is time for me to move on, say goodbye, and wish everyone well on their Hawkins journeys. I'm glad that people are finding teachers who resonate with them. It's a wonderful feeling. It truly is.

[Holistic Star]

Originally Posted by Mr. Punch

Hawkins is a mystery to me...

Steve actually recommends his book Power vs Force and I got hold of it some time ago. If we are to take Hawkins' claims serious and not just categorize his theories as pure speculation then his method of calibration, applied kinesiology, must be sound.

Does anyone here have any personal experience with applied kinesiology or know of any studies that backs it up? What about you, ethereal?

Just because Steve recommends it, doens't mean it's good! What does your own judgement tell you? Besides which Steve's since resinded that recommendation in a post recently. (Not a big deal, just mentioned in a thread that he didn't find Hawkin's framework very useful anymore).

There's an excellent article here: re Hawkins work. David Hawkins - Power vs Force - A Critique

I have problems with Hawkins scale - it doesn't make sense to me - and they way he applies it even less so. (How can America be at a low vibration, but as people go up the Corporate management scale they start vibrating and love, reason etc. I've met a hell of a lot of managers that don't!) How can there be all these managers vibrating at such wonderfully high levels, and just one person at a higher level raises the consciousness of so many people vibrating at lower levels, and yet he says the US is just over the tipping point. Doesn't make sense!)


However, I have a lot of personal experience with applied kinesiology. I use it extensively and it can be very powerful depending on the clarity of the intention of the practitioner Unclear frames of reference and understanding create unclear results. Incidentally, what I have found is that you can only work with what is 'on your menu'. So when I've been working with a client and I ask what treatment their body wants, their body selects from what I have available. If my friend does the asking and has different treatments 'on her menu', then the body might ask for something different. It doesn't make it wrong - just that you can only ask questions within what you understand. The body goes for the closest thing available to what it needs.

So if the only thing on someone's menu is that there is a scale from 0 - 1000 of consciousness, the body will work within that menu. If you take the view that 'There's more to the heavens and the Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophies.' and you have some clear frames of reference about some of those philosophies, there is more to choose from using applied kinesiology!