Psychoanalysis and the Occult

Please join us in New York next month for this unique event. It has been over 50 years since this material has been presented in public, and it has already generated much interest and controversy. Rather than a conference of papers this symposium will include inspired presentations and group intensives from a broad range of participants covering everything from IPA members and institute presidents to radical Lacanians, Reichians, and Jungians to occult and paranormal scholars and practitioners. It is free and open to the public, but space is limited and first come first served. 


Psychoanalysis and the Occult: Case Material on Psychic Reality - Analytica

April 9, 9am-5pm - NPAP

The purpose of the “Psychoanalysis and the Occult” Project is to return to Freud’s work on the psychic domain - the work on “telepathy” originally left out of the Traumdeutung and his development of “psychic reality” emerging from his analysis of psychosis and the Schreber case - and to compare it with the work of Lacan, Jung, Reich, and others who sought to explore psychic causality and the occult from a logical perspective.

In the 1950s George Devereaux published a compilation of material on Psychoanalysis and the Occult. In this book he collates material from early psychoanalysts regarding occult, paranormal, and psychic phenomena surrounding the clinical practice of psychoanalysis. From the ample material included by Freud we can dispel the myth that Freud was not interested in the occult—rather he sought to approach it in a different way than Jung. Devereux’s book further points the question in the direction of anthropology, ethnography, and comparative psychiatry in general. 

The “Psychoanalysis and the Occult” Project was initiated at Analytica in 2014 which since that time has held a series of events internationally. In this installment we will explore the transpersonal case material of psychoanalysis in intension and extension - that is of practicing analytic (analysand-analyst) dyads as well as of institutional dynamics - in order to demonstrate the necessity of expanding the form of the psychoanalytic school, clinic, and association for the future of analysis. We are inviting those who have a particular interest in this domain to participate in this important topic.


1. Life and Death – Chaosophy


The process of life and death is the story of individuation and the unfolding of the virtual into the actual. Life is division and capture – the striation and stagnation of forms escaping or detaching themselves from the infinite chaos of atemporality. At the quantum level, physicists cannot determine the position of the fundamental particles of matter – they can only map their probability to manifest in a measureable space-time continuum out of the wave form of pure energy. A wave of pure energy is organized into particles of matter which we take for “solid.” Light is warped into photons. Classical physics and mathematics constitute an art and science of life – as do shamanism, magic, and psychoanalysis – which depend first on what can be conceived. The relationship between what we call mind and body – or psyche and matter – cannot be grasped by logico-bivalent thinking alone.


Death puts an end to life. Death is our word for the end of an individuated form which had at one time been born into the actual out of the possible. This concrescence dies when the sovereign singularity of its particular organization ceases to be. Whether a concrescence will return to the entropy of nondifferentiated chaos or recognizably mutate into another organized concrescence through its momentary journey into chaos and thus transmit or communicate transversally something from one form to another depends on a number of factors. The virtual totality outside of time-space configurations is chaos. But neither life nor death exist as essences – and neither do order or chaos. They are rather two poles of a movement of chaosmosis which evokes the being and becoming of all forms living, dying, mutating, and recurring in the actually becoming yet virtually existing.


Subjective and objective are similarly two poles which can be approached asymptotically yet never attained. To experience death as the end of a concrescence and possible mutation is to experience it objectively. But our subjectivity responds differently. Immediately, faced with death, we believe in it. We fear it. We fall prey to the anguish of loss that is the flip side of our joy in this sovereign existence – this life story which is ours. We could through consciousness learn to detach ourselves from this belief which leads to our ecstasy and our anguish. We could recognize that – yes – all desire is illusion. We could – were we capable – cease to glorify our story – cease to identify with the concrescence which we are and view it objectively as a thing which happens. In a sense this consciousness leads toward the destruction of the physical body. As it decontextualizes the momentary traps and territorializations of life forms, it brings about deconstruction, transformation, and change. But infinite questioning is formlessness and the absence of belief itself which – were it possible to attain absolutely – would be nothingness – nirvana. Evidently being also is becoming – the unfolding of limited forms and beliefs unaware – unconscious – of the homogeneous indivisible totality which is nothing and out of which they arise.


The search for knowledge – for absolute consciousness – leads to an impasse. Most often it is only false consciousness which remains propped up by unconscious – unquestioned – beliefs. The true discovery of groundless consciousness can lead to mystical states of ecstasy or to madness depending on the circumstances. Those who do not pass over entropically into the chaos of death or madness bring back a map of the movement of life and death – a map of psyche and matter being and becoming – which forms a pragmatics – an art and science of life. Returning to chaos or mutating into another form may be one’s choice – one’s arbitrary assent – one’s act of faith. If the choice is to live the particular set of concrescences forming humanity and one’s own singular existence, then the art and science of life is a pragmatics of chaosmosis which is both conservative and radical. The deconstruction and reconstruction of new forms of subjectivity – especially those imposed from outside – takes place against the preservation and optimalization of singular subjectivities and organized concrescences which have developed a sovereign richness through time and tradition. Across these isolated sovereign concrescences – each of which invokes infinite possibilities – links of communion or communication can be established transversally – either through the objective pole of consciousness or through the subjective pole of empathy, seduction, and belief – desire, love, and faith.


Paradoxically the realm of cognition and consciousness and the realm of emotion and belief lead – in different ways – to similar transversal linkings – the ultimate of which would be non-differentiation. But the immanent interlinking and omni-communication resulting from belief or consciousness is always offset by the stubborn individuation of isolated concrescences – sovereign forms, beings, events, and processes which – self-organizing and autopoetic – refuse to give up their measure of singularity and dissolve into “the anonymous mass of the irrevocable.”



2. Ecosophy and Sovereignty – A General Economy


In the end, desire and thought do not exist. What exists is our way of organizing or experiencing chaos or the homogeneous indivisible totality. Desire and thought organize order through dividing and mapping – they are part of our subjectivity. Drive, perception, sensation, affect, emotion, cognition, consciousness, and meaning are bound up in complex relations which construct “reality.”


A variety of theories within philosophy, psychoanalysis, psychology, neuroscience, and ethnology add complementary elements to a complex map of the psyche. Transformative practices of a therapeutic, pedagogical, mystical, ecological, or physical nature serve to reorganize our subjectivity – our experience of the world within the complexity of these maps – which is always initially constructed for us through our phylogenetic and ontogenetic development as embodied beings in the world.


An ethics of jouissance advocates an action of sovereignty, autopoesis, and non-intervention. The experience of sovereignty frees one from the need to control others or to manipulate the organization of reality for the purposes of production itself. It recognizes the sovereignty of each entity, system, event, or concrescence to organize its experience of the world according to its own metabolic mutations and limitations. It also however recognizes the mutually-limiting interdependence of all systems and the impossibility in the end of absolute non-intervention. Sovereignty within multiplicity is something to be striven for, but obviously all entities and their subjectivities are interwoven at certain points. Sovereignty within complex ecology – or general economy – is an uncertain process in itself – a pragmatics maintaining awareness of the relations between order and chaos.


Transdisciplinary transformative practices surpass the role of specific indoctrinations in teaching, healing, and sacred experience by offering the very tools for reconstructing and reorganizing meaning and reality. The construction of subjectivities takes place among a multiplicity of possibilities drawn from other space-time configurations in history, mythology, and ethnography, while initiating the invention of new as-yet-inconceived forms. By gathering as many examples of subjectivity as possible, we can avoid the impasse of unity which denies difference. Concrescences emerge, live, and die, but their events can be recuperated in new combinations. Despite the hierarchy of stability, vulnerability, and functional optimization, each form is in itself incomparable – irreducible to any general equivalent. Respect for subjectivity can extract the sovereign essence from each event regardless of its objective limitations in the complex web of nested hierarchies.


The sovereignty of any subjective concrescence denies the larger systems within which it is embedded by seizing its jouissance at the expense of others, yet the broader complexity of structually coupled systems denies sovereignty through the continual movement of chaosmosis. Thus sovereign subjectivity limits ecosophic objectivity just as objective ecosophy limits subjective sovereignty in a circular refrain which mutates eternally while remaining constant in a process which – like imaginary topological forms – cannot be measured or grasped by classical models but nevertheless can be understood by the complex psyche.


Throughout human history individual and collective subjectivities have organized their experience in disparate ways. It is only recently that human science has come to recognize these experiences within their subjectivity rather than evaluating them as if they were objective. Through quantum physics, the most “objective” of sciences have come to recognize the subjective limitations of all objective measurement in which the absolute predictability and determinacy of classical science is only a probability which appears for our practical purposes to be a certainty.


The next step in the recognition of the subjective “state-dependent” knowledge of quantum physics, psychoanalysis, hypnosis, ethnography, ethology, spiritual science, and bioenergetic medicine is the reintegration of transdisciplinary subjective “state-specific” sciences including the science of subjectivity itself in which the complementary objective and subjective poles will become part of a self-reflexive and self-conscious lucidity (Tart 1975, Rossi 1993, Gerber 1996).





3. New Maps of the Psyche – Psychoanalysis and Science


The human psyche is a complex system which has barely begun to be modeled by the many maps of it which currently exist. Scientific knowledge usually has ignored the dynamic temporal nature of systems. Even the human sciences – in which the subjectivity of the observer is paramount in affecting the mapping of knowledge – have focussed primarily on devising static maps of human experience. While psychoanalysis has differed from this by orienting its research and theory on the empirical clinical observation and analysis gained from processes, the subjective differences of human experience are often confined to atemporal categories. The increased understanding of complexity and complementarity within the natural sciences should aid in modeling the dynamic nature of psyche and subjectivity in full recognition of the process-oriented nature of human events.


A time-space oriented “field” theory of the psyche can help us understand human experience more fully – including the many integrated levels of our subjectivity which can be tapped into as well as the symptoms they might give rise to if such psychic systems become paralyzed in a particular area. At the core of subjectivity is an experience of fusion and original unity which evokes and perhaps precedes the biological event of being in the womb, and which can be evoked in religious and group-trance experiences of an “oceanic” type. Becoming “hung up” at this level can result in extremely isolated autism or in various types of narcissism.


Evolving out of this phase and building on it, human subjectivity develops its primary individuation from fusion through splitting, projection, introjection, and other pre-signifying object relations. With any human being, this level of subjectivity continues to operate and form the basis for cathexes with friends, partners, and loved ones as well as for judgments and values. What is termed a paranoid-schizoid phase or position by Klein only demonstrates the degree to which these immediate relations and connections – without the benefit of stable structures of distance and mediation which come from rituals, rules, language, and the symbolic – are experienced with feelings of fear and danger. Paranoia is often described as heightened awareness and indeed the consciousness of multiple connections which plunge one into oceanic unity accompanies reports of both schizophrenic and religious experience. Even at the physical level, those who take large amounts of stimulants to heighten awareness often suffer from “chemically-induced schizophrenia” (Snyder 1996). Psychological or physical traumas can induce a schizophrenic breakdown in those who were seemingly stable before, and subjectivity can become stuck at this level irreversibly.


The depressive position which resolves the primitive schizoid splitting of human subjectivity depends on integrating contradiction and embracing ambivalence. This may be the highest achievement of the human psyche, and it may be that few are able to resolve this ambivalence before entering into the symbolic realm of weaning. Lacking certain rites of passage to adulthood found in communities of the past, the individual of modernity has relied on identification and competition within the family to develop a “normal” or “neurotic” relation to others. But the breakdown of the nuclear family and other social institutions and the increase of communication through the growth of technology and the media has left the symbolic realm as an increasingly uncertain and chaotic experience which is currently in the process of fundamentally altering human subjectivity and its symptoms.


Freud’s “neuroses” were somewhat stable character types, but the symptomatology of today reveals an increase in borderline states of derealization, depression, and delusion. Traditional therapeutic methods are increasingly abandoned as ineffectual in comparison to pharmacology. Yet the current state of the individual and collective psyche may be able to reveal the truly complex nature of human subjectivity poised vulnerably between order and chaos. If we free ourselves from outdated approaches to the psyche, we may be able to grasp the complexity of subjectivity and to develop new methods of teaching and healing which in a generative and preventive mode will decrease the need for ineffectual and time-consuming methods of treating symptoms which are only the outward manifestation of a deeper imbalance.



4. Thinking and Feeling – Abstract Expressionism


The link between emotional and cognitive processes has not been adequately mapped out. Questions of desire, love, and affect are dealt with by psychoanalysts, but they usually steer clear of cognitive concerns. Those who study thought, cognition, and consciousness usually ignore the affective element of such functioning. The separations between emotional and cognitive realms is taken for granted, yet human subjectivity is a complex system in which no fine line can be drawn.


We could consider human subjectivity to be a form of abstract expressionism. All art and language is a re-presentation – an abstraction from immediate action or instinct. But abstraction can reach a level in which the element of desire or affect is no longer embodied. That does not mean that it is not there, and it is this emotional plague or unrecognized unconscious desire which accounts for much confusion in human relationships. Many psychotherapeutic approaches aim to bring to consciousness the unconscious affective or emotional forces which operate in determining human experience. They seek to integrate emotional and cognitive experience – desire and thought – in the way that abstract expressionist art seeks to integrate the immediate drive to act and to create with the abstract conceptual forms which will express, embody, and contain these drives.


Contemporary neuroscientists describe the relationship between emotion and cognition as the juxtaposition and linking of our of perceptual mapping of the world with the somatic states that accompany it. The satisfaction of need and drive which requires cognitive mapping, discrimination, and memory brings about somatic sensorial attraction and repulsion through pleasure and pain which are stored, linked, and recalled through further cognitive reorganization. This is the foundation of conditioned learning. Higher-level learning and consciousness – self-consciousness – in human beings is the result of the robust complexity of its ability to map and reorganize perception/action in the world.


Rather than concentrating on the neurological foundations of emotional-cognitive experience, psychoanalysts have focused on the affective and un-conscious aspects of our subjectivity which elude a purely objective rational approach to understanding the psyche. The ontogenetic development of the individual is interlinked with his social development in the world of meaning and signification. The subject moves through a journey in which he comes to translate or abstract his immediate experience through symbolization. Along this journey any number of aberrations can occur as a result of either differences inphysical bodily processing or differences in the social construction of one’s subjective experience of the world. Physical development is somewhat predetermined by genetic codes, but even this can be altered by physical and environmental conditions of ontogeny. And even given the optimum biological development, the differences in the social construction of the psyche are profound – especially across different cultures.


The primitive secondary proto-semiotic object relations of “mirroring” or “mimetic desire” create an intensely “expressionistic” form of subjectivity which in the contemporary society of rationally mediated behaviour is seen to be aberrant and may or may not cause suffering for the subject depending more on his social relations – the way he is perceived and received by others – than on any internal state. On the other hand, what is accepted as normal behavior in contemporary society through the development of “abstract” tertiary symbol-formation may mask a deeply dissatisfied psyche despite its ability to provide optimum functional survival, success, and even pleasure. An introduction into the symbolic world of others may offer only a false sense of community with no emotional intensity. The evocation of core levels of intensity found in the oceanic-autistic fusion state of amorous and religious rituals are as necessary as the abstract embodiments which we inhabit to function pragmatically. While most civilizations have provided rituals for the integration of emotional-cognitive experience, our society has become so dominated by rationality and abstraction that the emotional core only erupts in the form of murder, abuse, and oppression. Without understanding the larger picture of individual and collective subjectivities integrated within complex systems, clinical and cultural practice cannot hope to transform these processes.



5. The Social Psyche – Subject, Object, and Other


The distinction between subject and object in Lacanian psychoanalysis parallels the distinction between subject and substance in Hegelian philosophy as well as evoking the quantum self-reflexive approach to scientific measurement. The subject is a part of the substance, but in the process of substance removing itself from itself in order to become conscious of itself, it changes itself. The scientist who measures the world is a part of that world. To map the substance through science, language, or any form of “knowing” is to re-present it. Thinking or mapping homogeneous indivisible totality – or substance – carves it up and organizes it in a way which alters it. The act of thinking, knowing, and mapping is a perception/creation.


Both the Hegelian and the Lacanian notions of the subject are profoundly social in that they demonstrate the inseparability of subject, object, and other. Alfred Korzybski’s (1921, 1933) rules of distinction between map and territory apply equally well to the Hegelian-Lacanian notion of the subject divided from the world and from himself. The map is not the territory indicates that the subject is not the substance. Substance is symbolized or expressed by the subject – which is why the subject is always determined by the Other. The map is (some but) not all of the territory expresses the fact that even though every map maps some of the territory, the map can never represent all of the territory. Every subject is a part of the substance, but there will always be some substance left over. This leftover is what drives the subject. Subjectivity is radically social. Even if the subject can free himself from having his subjectivity constructed by the Other of truth, morality, or abstraction – he will never free himself from being determined by the other of desire. Finally, the map is self-reflexive indicates that the mapmaker is included in the map he is making, and thus there will always be a vanishing point or blind spot which cannot be mapped. Similarly the subject will always contain a blind-spot or “unconscious” which cannot be seen by himself – only by another.


Lacan maps out the social construction of the subject by describing how the symbolic social world comes to construct the way in which the subject will experience the world from the beginning. But Lacan goes even further by considering the recognition of this self-reflexive blind spot to be the true nature of the subject. For even when we have freed ourselves from the fundamental construction of our subjectivity by the Other, there remains the fact that our subjectivity is essentially divided, unfullfilled, and unconscious by virtue of the self-reflexive blind spot which only the other can see for us. We need one another. This is the radically social and and radically psychoanalytic nature of human experience.


Psychoanalysis does not concern itself with cure. To analyze is to untie the knots of an autopoetic organism – to listen to that which determines subjectivity. For the analyst, the symptom – and the demand for a cure – contains a message which the desire to cure would eradicate. Freud built the psychoanalytic approach around the fact that the treatment of the symptom would simply convert it into another symptom – the core process would remain out of balance and unconscious. The process of analysis – like various pedagogical and mystical practices – is a journey of transformation toward consciousness of unconscious processes. It gives the subject the pragmatic tools to organize his own psyche and to enjoy his symptoms. The transformative practice of analysis is an art and science of life in which the construction and expression of subjectivities serve as an ongoing ecology of mind which is in itself a generative and preventive therapy. Pathology is no longer judged as lack with respect to a norm – rather difference is celebrated. Desire no longer revolves around lack but becomes desiring production – the active creation of ways of experiencing life – of subjectivities. This is not to say that the request to relieve suffering is ignored. On the contrary, to simply treat a symptom from a predetermined diagnostic category would be to ignore the call from the other which is the subject. Instead this call initiates a pragmatic process of transformation within a general economy of subjectivity composed of biological, social, symbolic, and noetic matrices.


Drawing on the techniques of a variety of analytic practices, we can develop a complex ecosophical approach to analysis in which the questions of desire, jouissance, and sovereignty are confronted by the structural coupling of autopoetic systems. Within a transformative practice of analysis, the reconstruction of subjectivity finally leads to the conciousness of this construction by the Other which has been determining subjectivity all along. A full transformative practice consists of several integrated components:


1. The engagement of desire, cathexis, and communication in the transference


2. The dialectical, dialogical, and narrative process of consciousness.


3. The containing-holding environment of transference and community.


4. The interventions of deconstruction, reframing, and transcontextualization.


All therapeutic and pedagogical practices actively engage in some form of containing and/or intervention, but few consciously integrate elements of both. However, while all such practices serve to transform the psyche in some way, only a full process of consciousness unfolding over time can endow the subject with the ability to practice his own analysis. The elucidation of psychoanalysis as such a total transformative practice in line with ancient techniques of consciousness and the sacred was the essence of Lacan’s project. Bion, Winnicott, and Laing introduced and elucidated the full nature of the holding environment through the care of the practitioner within the collective psychotherapeutic community as an alternative to unwanted treatment. Finally, the recent approach of cybernetic and systems therapists has added a series of interventions and techniques which move beyond traditionally stagnant models of therapy and confront the unconscious assumptions implicit in all transformative practices and within therapists themselves.


The process of transformative pragmatics sets up a multi-dimensional field or grid by which the intersubjective event of intimate dialogical therapy takes place within a complex web of past, present, and future. In this dynamic process, the analyst is a guide within a field of multiple subjectivities balanced tenuously between order and chaos. Interventions are employed to break down stagnant routines and rigidities and to return them to the state of fluid processes, while holding environments act as a sanctuary or shelter within which to engage with such chaos and reorganize new subjectivities.


We never escape from our symptoms – we only transform them and/or embrace them. At the core of our existence is the arbitrary assent upon which all actions, justifications, and symptoms are based: “style is the man.” The ethical and symbolic elements of our life are based on the the aesthetic element of jouissance. The only true ethic is to act in accordance with this sovereign jouissance in full recognition of its implications with and for others. The recognition of consciousness which allows the embracing and enacting of desire requires the passage through a void of chaos in which all truths, morals, and forms which serve to embody drives and maintain order and stability are dissolved. In Rudolph Steiner’s (1911) language, only a passage through the Luciferian realm of ecstasy will lead one out of the neurotic control and repression of the Ahrimanian and into the harmonics of Christ-consciousness through metanoia. In order to pass from breakdown to breakthrough and to transform schizophrenic disintegration into the reorganization of multiple subjectivities of limited finitude, the subject must forgo the neurotic symptoms which provide relative stability and must seize the courage to confront the schizoid core of primal splitting as well as the depressive horizon of the real in which the ambivalence of life and death marks the limits of human experience.



6. Wild Analysis – The Clinic of Everyday Life


Freud’s new practice of psychoanalysis was invented outside of institutional dogma and fueled by a coterie of devoted explorers whom he initiated informally – sometimes in a matter of a few visits. The dogmatic institutionalization of psychoanalysis has betrayed the open exploration of a truly human science as well as the pragmatics of singular clinical events. Innovations which are at first radically rejected eventually become the very rigid norms which rejected such difference in the first place. Lacan’s attempt at experimentation within analysis was met with his excommunication. Through the formation of his own school, he extended analysis beyond the scope of a closed circle. He engaged poets, artists, philosophers, and scientists and extended the boundaries of analysis and its transmission into the culture at large.


Meanwhile the post-war decades saw the initiation of increasing numbers of experimental therapeutic communities both inside and outside official institutional frameworks. “Antipsychiatric” approaches spread through Europe and America, and teaching and healing practices from other civilizations were integrated with modern techniques. While these movements have primarily been abandoned in favor of increasingly rational and efficient methods of symptom treatment – most often through chemicals – there exist more possibilities than ever before for the integration of biological, social, and spiritual elements of mind and body in the understanding, healing, and sacred transformation of the psyche.


“Wild analysis” originally referred to the practice of analysis outside of conventional boundaries – whether it was a case of unwanted application or of open speculation. But to engage in analysis outside of the consulting room is to take the fruits of its lessons and integrate them into the ecology of everyday life. Guattari’s analytic practices in the experimental La Borde clinic included creative, dramatic, political, and material processes and an analytic approach to multiple fields of subjectivity which exist and insist themselves at every moment. His own political and ecological activism extended the analytic enterprise into the cultural, social, and functional subjectivities which are as much a part of the psyche as individual forms.


Grasping the nature of the psyche in emotional-cognitive processing, object relations, projection, introjection, jouissance, splitting, symmetrizing, translating, containing, and other elements of chaosmic dynamism can lead one to approach life in new ways. The rituals and relations of everyday life surround our every move. What is the purpose of transformative practices if not to reinvigorate the lived situation and to reinvent new subjective experiences of the sacred by any means possible? Human life is not a process solely determined by survival. Life is made up of desire and meaning and the shared experience of its communication. The collective communion of a life of meaning within consciousness depends on the transformation of the psyche from within the deepest levels of the individual, just as the possibility of individual and momentary sovereignty depends on the transformation of collective, social, and institutional embodiments of subjectivity.



Baudrillard’s challenge to subjectivity is that psychoanalysis itself has already passed into the cultural psyche. We have already passed the time when the psychoanalytic event with its foundations in the separation between real, imaginary, and symbolic can affect us. There is no real, for the apparent world of the imaginary-symbolic – of virtual reality – has taken over. Baudrillard calls this a return to the primitive form of the sacred – seduction without the delusion of truth. But a part of the seductive nature of any form is its truth – the truth of faith and belief that the one who is seduced experiences.


The return to primitive forms of seduction is not a regression, but Bataille’s “animal night” – the point at which absolute rational thought becomes what it always sought – the return to immanence of the animal in the world like water in water – yet with lucid self-consciousness intact. The practice of “apathy” in Sade is the absolute “objectivity” of the one who places himself at the level of the movement of matter and energy – organic and inorganic – organizing, individuating, transforming, adapting, evolving, dissolving. By this method, the Spinozist sage captures empathic understanding of the complex ecologies of the universe – a practice which is ultimately futile unless the limits of this objectivity in the subjectivity of singular concrescence are recognized. Sade seeks to free the energy of drive itself – before or beyond desire – as it plays through him, but this too is a futile goal in that the real is always organized into matter and its expression through forms which include the imaginary realm of the human psyche. But as Bataille and Blanchot have pointed out, it is only Sade’s plunge into pure jouissance which shows us the impasse of unconscious blockage and leads the way to the objective consciousness of the movement of matter, energy, and form throughout the universe.


This chaosmosis which describes the interplay of the real and the apparent is ineradicable. The real has not disappeared, but we have reached a state in which human subjectivity is split between the real and the virtual in a dual fashion – and where the virtual dominates. The imaginary may be perceived as the realm of the sacred in which the inner experience of affect and concept deepens the subjectivity of humanity in relation to the real. The virtual is not the triumph of the imaginary, but the denial of both imaginary and real in favor of a “spectacle” of hypnotic forms which only obliterates self-reflection and puts us to sleep rather than increasing subjective-objective consciousness of each event-concrescence within a complex ecology.


The symbolic faith or social contract which maintains order among the primal embodiments of sovereign subjectivities reaches an impasse before it is plunged into chaos. We seek a final realm beyond indexical, iconic, and symbolic which maintains lucid consciousness and yet approaches the chaosmic flow of the psyche. This would be the realm of the trace. Beyond index, icon, and symbol, lies the trace – the form which contains its own dissolution. The poetics of the trace constructs a semiotics which immolates itself leaving the ashes of memory free to be reconstructed again and again in the refrain. Free from the prison of exact repetition, we create and recreate within a tradition. Each manifestation will be different – and yet the same. This is Nietzsche’s eternal recurrence in which faith and the will to live are not undercut by the lies of truth but enacted through the truth of lies. Our energy to live is enacted in the faith of each moment free to be and to become in an endless process where the perception/creation/manifestation of each moment of individual and collective subjectivity is sovereign.


Mysticism – inner experience – the sacred – was for Bataille the end of life which the means served to make possible. For Bataille and Lacan the jouissance which already determines our beliefs, words, and actions was but an impoverished mysticism unless it could become consciously and fully embraced. We can – with Bataille – claim that each subjectivity is capable of experiencing the state of the mystic when jouissance reigns free of the calculating mind which fears death and denies immanence. There is in fact no other end than the dissolution of thought in the sovereignty of the lived moment. A restricted economy of survival, rationality, and efficiency eradicates such sovereign experience. A general economy recognizes the interplay between productive survival and the expenditure of excess. If this general economy is not acknowledged it will operate anyway leaving physical, social, and psychic symptoms which are misconstrued and treated as if they had come from outside. Without returning to the myths and rituals of the past, we can seek a communication of sovereignty within a consciousness of general economy – a communion and a community bound by mutual recognition and shared sovereignty – an inner experience in which what is sacrificed is the very calculating conscious mind which submits subjectivity to strategy and production. The experience of the chaosmic psyche which is lived to the fullest in the mystic and which awaits each one who seizes the moment of sovereign subjectivity is that of living desire at the limits of thought.

The Baroque as Infinite Sets

I was overjoyed to discover Badiou because he formalized through pure mathematics something that I had known and tried to express in other ways for so long: that philosophy, science, existence itself is axiomatic – or decisional – not descriptive. There is no truth or God or tao in the sense of the one out there regulating the particular in hierarchical fashion.

Any particular “reality” is a contraction of the infinite – which is why there is no reality – only realities or worlds. And no logic only logics. The logics or rules of the game which found these worlds are axiomatic – they are decided as an event – and thus are not separate from the very foundational existence of these worlds. One can only excavate them after the fact through the micropolitics of analysis – but an analysis submitted to Lacan, Foucault, and Guattari until it is unrecognizable as a church.

What Lacan calls the object a is an excellent example of a founding event inaccessible to the logic of the particular world (in this case a human one) built on this. In category theory mathematics this is called a central object which determines the relational logic of identities and differences of a particular world or neighborhood or set. Badiou removed the transcendental from the ontological absolute outside above and placed it in the absolute inside local where it founds the phenomenological appearance of a world.

An event is the dissolution of solidity of the rules of a particular set which opens this contraction onto the infinite real expansiveness of pure possibility, potential, or power. The infinite is void or nothing because it is no-thing. It is not a thing or set. In a Hegelian sense then, the real or void is spirit or negation of thingness and identity, and to the extent that this remains within the human it is his negating, voiding, spiritual action which continues to open closed sets or things to the real of power (in the Nietzschean sense). Thus with the “end of history” and the “death of God” we have the overman or beyond-human free spirit – for the power to destroy is the power to create.

In fact this is the real meaning of karma. Karma is usually interpreted from the limited point of view of cause and effect in terms of reward and punishment. But one can really only understand the meaning of karma with access to the transpersonal, holographic, or synchronistic world of creative destruction or the will to power. Steiner saw that Hegel and Nietzsche had taken philosophy and human experience as far as it could go to the brink of the true meaning of karma in the free spirit when he wrote his book on the “Philosophy of Freedom.” To move beyond is to become other than human but actually to fulfill the movement of spirit which Hegel could only see as human or the will to power or eternal return by which Nietzsche tried to grasp this inhuman experience. While this experience had always been open to certain fortuitous cases through human history, Hegel and Nietzsche were harbingers of the time when rapid technological evolution would force the species as a whole to confront the dissolution of its world. Deleuze and Guattari simply updated the story of the onset of “Capitalism and Schizophrenia,” but few grasp the true meaning and gravity of the current situation.

While the baroque is a particular historical period or world which demonstrates some of these characteristics, it is also a recurring period in cyclical process which manifests such a creative destruction woven of infinite play. I have often counterposed the baroque to the postmodern as two forms of aftermath to an event (such as modernity). While the postmodern is marked by a cynical nostalgiac cool (cold) defense mechanism, the baroque is marked by ironic acceptance, open pathos and infinite regeneration which looks much like Nietzsche’s concept of the eternal return of history as a playground of myth and mask. For in the end all of these different worlds are only multiple versions of the infinite void which is only experienced as lack or no-thingness in a world of appearance, but which recalls us to the real which – as Deleuze and Guattari would say – is not absence but pure presence, potency, and potential.

The Ends of Man

“The working bourgeois, to become a – “satisfied” – Citizen of the “absolute” State, must become a Warrior – that is , he must introduce death into his existence, by consciously and voluntarily risking his life, while knowing that he is mortal.” (Alexandre Kojeve)

Hegel’s attempt to resolve the subject/object dualism is the same task that Advaita Vedantists, Zen Buddhists and other nondualists have attempted throughout “history.” What is novel is the stress on history and the idea of man as a whole completing this task. Is it necessary for man as whole to complete this task for it to be complete?

The unfolding of Being as objective natural space by means of Negation as subjective historical time so beautifully recapitulates the whole trajectory of philosophy (and of man), we could only wonder what would be left other than Bataille’s “unemployed negativity,” or the “painful tooth in Hegel’s mouth.” If the first is Europe in the 30s or America in the 70s catching a glimpse of this real, then the second is the symptom by means of which we as a species keep avoiding the end.

Enter Freud the scientist discovering this symptomatic state by which the master-slave dialectic is carried on beyond war and even beyond political economy toward (what Hegel and Marx could not foresee) the question of meaning itself – the individual myth of the neurotic and the real-imaginary-symbolic war of a body-mind in turmoil.

Even this individual myth of the neurotic is quaint in comparison to the post-60s emergence of “techonology and nihilism,” the pure war of adult toys trying desperately to outrun the void.

The working bourgeois who is slave to capital is now (also) the castrated subject dialectically revolving around desire and repression in a fashion-oriented society of the spectacle, “Japanized” into petty wars of “snobbery,” hipsterism, and the “art world” filled with anything but artists – pseudo-subjects traded on the market of “objective” beauty, style, and fame in which the stakes change every 15 minutes because of course nothing is true (only cool) even as their biopathic bodies betray them to the false surprise of everyone around.

The question: is this divided subject of the “unconscious” inevitable or is there an end to analysis in which Freud’s Drive and Lacan’s Desire of the Analyst provide an answer to Hegel.

If Man is the negation/subtraction of infinite multiple Being, then Spirit is the self-conscious negation/subtraction of infinite multiple being.

If Man disappears at the end of History, he does not sink back into the natural space of being. Rather he mutates like a butterfly into what he always was (becoming) – Spirit – and the natural world of Being is taken up into this Spirit which is nothing other than the infinite multiple and its other name, the void, as what continues to negate that which appears. The body and its natural environment is taken up into the spirit-man as the voiding animal who has consciously and voluntarily introduced death into his existence.

The Warrior is not (only) the working bourgeois become citizen of the absolute state, but the divided subject become spirit-man living the drive as creative simulacra, the sinthome as desiring production, the sovereign of nothing, the zen samurai without a lord, the overcoming of man in the ubermensch – and its world is neither global psychoanalytic communism, nor animal night, nor the city of god but … the advent.

Alain Badiou “Logics of Worlds”
Georges Bataille “Sovereignty”
Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari “A Thousand Plateaus”
Leonard Cohen “Beautiful Losers”
Philip Dick “Valis”
Marguerite Duras “Destroy She Said”
Pierre Klossowski “Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle”
Rudolph Steiner “Philosophy of Freedom”
Wilhelm Reich “Cosmic Superimposition”

Eternal Return of the Void

“In short, divergence and disjunction as such become the object of affirmation. The true subject of the eternal return is the intensity and singularity; the relation between the eternal return as actualized intentionality and the will to power as open intensity derives from this fact. As soon as the singularity is apprehended as pre-individual, outside of the identity of a self, that is, as fortuitous, it communicates with all the other singularities, without ceasing to form disjunctions with them. It does so, however, by passing through all of the disjoint terms that it simultaneously affirms, rather than by distributing them in exclusions. ‘Thus, all I have to do is to will myself again, no longer as the outcome of previous possibilities, not as one accomplishment out of a thousand, but as a fortuitous moment, the very fortuity of which implies the necessity of the integral return of the whole series.'” (Deleuze)

This refers to Nietzsche’s project of eternal return as affirmation – and creative destruction as affirmation – rather than negation as critical disjunction and separation. “And-and-and” rather than “either-or.” This is a mathematical concept of the continuum as distribution of intensities and affirms the failure of Cantor’s continuum hypothesis to be tamed by discrete countable constructible sets. We are left with the infinite multiple and its various sets which appear as worlds – seemingly discrete components but actually rearrangements of relations of elements. But these elements themselves are only further relations so all that actually appears are relations of relations of…the infinite multiple or void – the empty set. The will to power as open intensity is real or infinite while the intentional singularity or sovereignty is an expression or appearance of this infinite but it is “no thing” – it continues to participate in the infinite intensity even as it appears to have singular existence.

Our ontological error – which becomes moral, scientific, aesthetic, political, clinical error – is to signify – to become slaves to things as meaningful – including self, world, and god – rather than participating in process – expressionism in philosophy: simulacra as creative manifestation of intensity in an eternal return, refrain, or miming of the intensity itself.

The end of dualism shows us that the void is the infinite and only stops at the one, the two, the three, and the many along the way – that being is becoming and that matter is form. The dialogue between Alain Badiou and Gilles Deleuze recapitulates a dialogue initiated by Plato and Aristotle which can now be resolved with reference to the mathematical-poetic biophysics of Wilhelm Reich’s Orgonomy and Rene Thom’s Semiophysics (not to mention the Surrealism of Bataille, Artaud, Breton, and Duchamp).

Along with analytic philosophy, scientific and poetic analysis, we leave behind the theological content of psycho-analysis and follow only the topological diagrammatic formation of schizo-analysis until we are left with analysis itself which subsumes philosophy, psychology, medicine, theology, ethics, politics, physics, metaphysics, mathematics, poetics – and in the place where poetics and analysis meet, the sovereign subject or event invents analysis anew each time, for all analysis is lay analysis and is signed by the proper name: Freudian Analysis, Lacanian Analysis, Joyceian Analysis, Duchampian Analysis, Nietzschean Analysis, Deleuzeian Analysis…

1. From the very beginning no-thing is.

2. There is void – empty set – potential, also known as substance – matter – continuum – the infinite infinite or infinite multiple.

3. Within the continuum of matter, a difference of relations of relations of this matter is what is called form, and form containing matter is an act(ualization) containing potential or an event which creates a set defined only immanently – generically – as what it is.

4. This event installs a set of relations of relations of matter (or empty potential – void) to itself by virtue of form.

5. This act of form-ation or per-form-ance installs a topological analytic object a, central object, or transcendental regime (a=c=t) axiomatically and locally.

6. Thus there is no One but only ones and the void is thus no lack or absence (from some-thing) but a pure affirmation of being becoming.

7. All events – or sets – remain topologically linked to the “ontological” infinite substance-matter-void while appearing as “phenomenological” things.

8. Thus the continuum of Number (or numericity) appears as discrete numbers, the Real appears as Imaginary-Symbolic structure, the ontological appears as the phenomenological.

9. Philosophy has nothing left to do other than analyze the axiomatic appearance and disappearance of sets, forms, worlds, or events – actualizations of the potential – finite numbering of the infinite – topological diagramming.

10. Analysis is.

A Moebius Trip

“I love her. Why do I want to kill her?”

Taking up again the question of sovereignty.

It is the sovereignty of the other which would attract (one like) you in the first place and yet it is exactly this sovereignty which threatens to destroy you if it remains but a distancing device where one follows the other. Who looks for recognition? The sovereign was the King, God, the One – transcendental Other by which all other subjects were determined. It is only in recent history that the radically “individual” subject has posed itself. The history of the human species is from a real biological organizing principle to a symbolic cultural organizing principle – from mass to mass – yet with increasing differentiation or individuation. The symbolic itself inevitably leads to the individual subject. But there is as yet no individual subject – just the phantasm of the egobody and the discourse of the person regulating the theology of the current moment.

Yet in the alchemical transference of the dyad this is questioned. The rules break down and the sovereignty of the subject is revealed. That which escapes in the symptom – break down, crack up, disease, madness, stress, neurosis, crime, violence – so many emergent moments of subjectivity. The sovereign subject either degenerates into a master-slave dialectic in the functional couple or crashes and burns. We would rather start over with another lover than face the real.

Nietzsche posed the question long ago (and yet so recently). God is dead – and now? Bataille pointed out that Nietzsche’s only limitation was not to restitch the end back to the beginning by speaking from the “I” – to reinscribe himself, his moment. Deleuze, Foucault, Baudrillard, and Lyotard have all elaborated a philosophical discourse of the real without managing to reinsert themselves through the axiomatic gesture. Poetics has considered this question, yet only within the safely sealed off domain of art. The issue is made clearest in Thierry de Duve’s brilliant treatise on contemporary art “Kant after Duchamp”: the only imperative is to invent the imperative. Without reinscribing his position into his work either this looks easy. But we can follow this dark night of the soul in something like Leonard Cohen’s “Beautiful Losers” – while relieving ourselves that it is just a novel. Following Freud, Lacan waged war against philosophical closure through the eruption of the real in the contingent placement of the subject only to end analysis with this poetic gesture.

In “Inner Experience” Bataille alone speaks the universe from his limited point of the infinite. Klossowski’s “Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle,” Guattari’s “Chaosmosis,” and Badiou’s “Logics of Worlds” are the first manuals on the production of subjectivity. As such they put the final piece of the puzzle in place. Not only even is it necessary to reinscribe oneself as the moment of creation back into the pure diagram of libidinal economy through the sovereign act of poetics, but this event is all that there ever is. The ontological real of being is the logical diagramming of relations of appearance – the symbolic as contingent symptomatic embrace in the amor fati of an eternal return. A Moebius trip

At the locus where these investigations of philosophy, analysis, and poetics have taken place the appearance of the new awaits itself. The fragments lay around us yet no one dares pick them up. Easier to invent a new theology of nihilism. I for one am seduced by the love of creative destruction. The Moebius strip is already posed in the yin-yang diagram of involution-evolution, intimate-extimate, enstasis-exstasis, thought-matter. I who am but a part of the furniture found this moment.

The New

Philip Dick wrote an 8000 page “Exegesis” in the last decade of his life attempting to understand a series of synchronistic events that had transformed his life. His primary output was to recapitulate the Gnostic vision practiced at the core of Christianity, Sufism, Buddhism, Taoism, and other philosophies. Previous to the events of 1974, Dick knew nothing of these practices although he had used LSD and the I Ching while writing imaginal speculative fiction for many years. And he had suffered in poverty, heartbreak, and near madness. But in one moment all suffering was lifted as he experienced a revelation.

Throughout his philosophical writings Dick wavers between the monist “Spinozist-Deleuzian” pantheism of the one manifesting itself in myriad facets and the more dualistic “Platonist-Badiouian” conception of worlds being created out of an infinite unnameable. Finally Dick links these through a kind of Kantian-Hegelian feedback loop in which the ultimate ground or Urgrund becomes seduced into the games it plays as simulations. The ultimate lesson of these games is not to get caught into believing in the reality of these games – a kind of “objectivist” or “intellectualist” error. The key point is that this is an ontological error not a moral error. What is at stake here is that karma is not retribution but manifestation: you get what you put in. What you believe is true will condition your experience. This is born out in the frame of the modern scientific method which never achieves anything but the results it expected – a hypothesis confirmed or not but nevertheless within the frame predetermined. Thus the act of openess to the new or absolutely other is an act that literally “changes the world” – changes the conditions of the conditioned world.

Of course there is never just one world – or even many worlds – but an infinite multiple of worlds as Badiou describes in his mathematic ontology. Practically there are worlds within worlds overlapping and intersecting. So what is the human world – or the world of one human within that world for that matter. Dick explored alternate and parallel worlds through his science fiction until he began to experience them, and his experience brought forth the following structure. Although humans experience irreversible linear time, Dick believed that time could be made to move backwards or that we could elevate our perspective to the level beyond linear causal time. In this schema every time we experience an event – or “concrescence” as Whitehead would call it – with beginning, progression, and end, and feel unsatisfied with the outcome we relive this experience but with the subtle awareness of the failed event. This is remarkably similar to Freud’s idea of the repetition compulsion and to karma but with the subtle difference that we can tap into the repressed memory through a process of anamnesis – negation of forgetting or re-membering. This process of anamnesis which was practiced by the Gnostic Christians can be found at the source of homeopathy and psychoanalysis but it has already become obscured by the fixation on the past or symptom itself rather than practicing the PROCESS of being in the present which allows the past to reveal itself and free itself toward the future in a new way. This subtle difference was outlined in Nietzsche’s practice of the eternal return and further elaborated by Klossowski and Deleuze. Lacan also moved psychoanalysis in this direction in his late work on the purification of the symptom and the invention of the new signifier.

Dick who wrote a story called “Simulacra” had no knowledge of Nietzsche and Klossowski’s concept of this word, but Baudrillard was familiar with all of them and has popularized the idea with regard to postmodern culture. For Dick, the ultimate simulacrum was the machine-world to which humanity was enslaved by virtue of letting themselves believe in it as God, Truth, Morality, Science. Rather than recognizing ourselves as creator of manifestation, we allow ourselves to be enslaved to our creation. To break free of this, Dick posited a two step process. First, by “groove override” we can break break away from the programed track of repetition compulsion, and second, we then have the opportunity to create a “new free merit deed” by which we can rewrite the past. As Zizek has pointed out this is the radical core of Christianity (and Buddhism) which breaks the chains of the Old Testament slave morality of an eye for an eye and wipes clean the slate with absolute forgiveness or absolution. Deleuze also describes this process as the eternal recurrence of the same yet always new as opposed to the hell of exact exchange dependent on a general equivalent such as money as in capitalism. Each event is a free act in itself, unique but manifesting the one.

An amazing example of this process is demonstrated in Charlie Kaufman’s story for the film “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.” The film takes place in 4 parts.
In the first part we are in Track B of the relationship between Joel and Clementine. It opens just after they have had their memories erased of their relationship so they will no longer suffer and can move on with a “spotless mind.” Paradoxically though they are both immediately drawn to Montauk where they are destined to meet again just like the first time. Although we do not know this at this point in the viewing, this will become significant later when we realize that a “groove override” has occured and that some transpersonal morphic field has brought them together again which operates beyond the somatic-neural program. After two days of the event of falling in love (in the Badiouian sense) Part 1 of the film ends at her front door as she enters her house to get her toothbrush so she can go to his house and they can “sleep” together for the first time.

At this point the film shifts to part two where Joel is also in his car but now weeping to the theme “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime” by the Korgis (but rerecorded by Beck). Part 2 takes place in the Post-Track A period where they have just broken up and Joel is suffering. He finds out through his friends that Clementine has had her memory of the relationship erased, and after first disbelief and then rage, he finally demands the procedure for himself from the doctor. Through pills and computers and talking a kind of neuro-psychotherapeutic erasure begins to take place while he is “unconscious.” We should take note of the collaboration of the medical institution to maintain our enslavement to the repetition compulsion through its powerful technologies now developed far beyond what Foucault could have imagined.

Now we are in Part 3 where we see Track A of their relationship but in reverse order. The paradox is that in order to erase or suppress the memories, an anamnesis must take place. Joel must remember the memories in order to eradicate their “emotional core” which causes the suffering. In the midst of this process he is so overwhelmed with a jouissance beyond suffering that he wants to call off the procedure. The only problem is that he is in his mind and cannot stop the procedure taking place outside on his body which stores this Track A of experience. There is now a dialogue between Joel in the present and his memories and even with some form of Clementine. They try to hide their memories in areas of his brain where she never was such as his childhood. This part has a poignant and overwhelming effect on the viewer especially if he has experienced psychoanalysis or psychedelic/homeopathic substances which create a new dialogue among past and present. Thus although the specific memories of the past ultimately cannot be saved, Joel (and Clementine) is forever changed on a superordinate level. What is this level: the transpersonal, the morphic field, the soul? Dick says that the older time tracks persist as a presence of our own experience or awakening self to guide our present limited self in future actions. As the procedure reaches the end and the anamnesis reaches the begining of their relationship in Track A they both achieve a kind of becalmed tragedy in which the solidity of memories and the physical world begin to collapse and wash into each other – literally as the sea enters the house and the sand buries him in the car. This might remind us of the experience we have when in trying to recall where a relationship went bad, we trace it all the way to the beginning: it was always going bad because we had not yet overriden the groove of repetition and declared a new free merit deed. But now Joel literally rewrites the past by hiding memories of their relationship in other memories. While he cannot save the memories, this causes the procedure to stall long enough that the doctor must be summoned to the procedure and encounter his secretary stoned enough to confess her love for him which forces him to tell her they have a past relationship which has been erase. In her traumatized state she sends all the files to their clients exposing the procedures including those of Joel and Clementine, and this paves the way for the free merit deed.

As Track A washes out she whispers deafeningly for him to “meet me in Montauk” at the beginning again. And now as he awakes from the procedure we are in Part 4 of the film. We now see how all four parts are connected as Part 4 begins where Part 1 opened the beginning of the film. We now know that Joel’s sudden impulse – against his usual behavior – to skip work and jump on a train to Montauk is a groove override and that it was happening as the doctor and his technicians were finishing their own business fresh from his procedure. The event of the encounter with Clementine at the beginning of the film was them meeting again – despite the procedure – for we have already seen in his memory that they met a different way the first time. Now we get to see what happened when Part 1 ended at the point where she went to get her toothbrush upon only knowing each other for two days. When she enters the house she receives her file from her procedure which has been sent by the clinic secretary devastated because she had learned of her own procedure. She does not know what it is and puts the tape into Joel’s car. The tape is her talking about all the memories of what she hated about joel from Track A of their relationship. They are both confused and he feels fearful and paranoid that she is playing a joke on him and she is hurt that he does not trust her so they separate. In a state of desperation though she seeks out his house and finds him – now listening to his own tape of his negative memories of her. Now they have some sense of what is going on. Even as his words insult her for everything he hated about her he denies it in the present saying he loves her for those things. It is too much for her to hear and now she leaves. But he runs after her and tells her to wait. There are no words – no arguments here. The “wait” is the stopping of time and the stopping of the mind. The wait is the moment of openness to the outside – the unknown. The way is now cleared for the new free merit deed. When she recapitulates all his and her patterns and how they will just play them out again he says “OK” and she stunned for a moment before starting to cry and laugh. The present is now suspended and the past bleeds into the future: they are shown playing on the Montauk beach in a repetition of same but different until they fade to white. Is awareness of their symptoms enough to finally allow the new to emerge or is the acceptance, affirmation, and enjoyment of the symptoms themselves the new? Enjoy your symptom in the eternal return.


Philosophy must allow us to think beyond the person as a local construction of worlds. This however does not mean to think dualistically. In the spirit of Deleuze and Badiou we can seek to explain the transcendental as what is local not hierarchical. The transcendental is not what is out there in God or Truth but what locally orders a set of relations or rules of the game of any set, group, topos, or local universe – unconciously setting its foundation of power – propping up signification by means of a primordially repressed fundamental phantasm or master signifier.

The extent to which we can think the real as infinite threatens the local universe of our “sanity” or “health”. From this point of view anxiety and depression are inevitable consequences of being at the edge of consistency with regard to our being-as-appearance here in our local world. The experience of “anxiety” which as Lacan says is the only true emotion, presented by Klein as a primal paranoid-schizoid phase that all human subjects pass through initially, may be seen as the inundation by the real as infinite multiplicity: too much for the locally closed and screened off “human” world to come. Hence the appropriate concept of jouissance as primordial experience of what is left over of the drive to the extent that the drive precedes and exceeds the closed world of the human subject coming to be initiated into a symbolic universe of categorical relations. And the complementary experience of depression can be seen as the experience of the real as void as Badiou echoing Parmenides and Hui Neng proclaims “being as being is one void” or “from the very begining no thing is.” Thus anxiety as the barrier or final phenomenological experience of coming apart or exceding the boundaries of our set – ecstasy or madness by another name. And depression as this feeling of death, loss, isolation – the flat and empty nature of all things – all being as appearance which reveals to us the truth behind appearance – the void is and it is infinite. The modern medical model still conspires to conceal this from us.

To the extent that an event takes places actualizing and axiomatizing any local set, this set is held together by a transcendental regime ordering its relations: what is called the central object in topological category theory and what is similarly described by Lacan as the fundamental phantasm or quilting point of primal repression which bootstraps the subject retrospectively through a kind of autopoetic feedback loop. Mae-Wan Ho and Francisco Varela describe this event in self-organizing biology in a way similar to Freud’s description in the Project of psyche as the function of man that allows him to withdraw from the orgiastic cycle of communicational exchange of consumption and sexuality that determines nature and bind a certain quantity of this energy-matter for a time being. This is before sublimation and repression are differentiated as positive and negative aspects of this binding in the further elaboration of human psychoanalysis. To the extent that something infinite of being, drive, or spirit is insufflated into a human body ever-integrated as it is into its physical and social environment, this being as being is localized in a world of worlds within worlds – sets in which various transcendental phantasms operate to organize the symbolic rules of the sets.

Foucault traced the history of medical-psychiatric-legal systems holding in place transcendental regimes disallowing the emergence of the event as dissolution of the boundaries of local worlds and the reemergence of new worlds. This is but a further elaboration of what Nietzsche and Bataille had described as a long history of the ossification of various transcendental regimes of power maintaining local worlds no longer in flux with being as being or the infinite. Psychoanalysis is a kind of human topology or category theory that allows us to investigate the local worlds of our psyche but tells us nothing ontologically true, whereas analysis itself is but pure process that gives us access to the infinite. Being human is a local event constantly shifting and only an appearance of the infinite which itself can only be thought in an inhuman way through pure analysis, a kind of mathematical set theory of the infinite or ecstatic poetic philosophy of the void.


Perhaps affect could be seen as higher level impulse or lower order consciousness. This is borne out in recent neuroscience demonstrating that affective emotions are assemblages of linking the state of the body and its organs with primitive external perception. Single cell organisms move by simple attraction/repulsion. Fucking and eating/being eaten are part of the same event. More highly complex animals (including humans) differentiate into a community of organs each with its own style/tone/process/form. The limbic system links these organs through the autonomic nervous system to cortical maps of perception of external events. For example we associate “unconsciously” feeling good bodily with being held and fed and all the other details that are neurally recorded with that event. This resonates with Darwin to the extent that the embodied ego wants to maintain its plateau of existence – its particular set – as long as possible before dissolving again into the anonymous mass of the irrevocable. But self-reflective consciousness introduces another level of development which renders Darwin limited.

“The true problem is not (only) how to pass from preorganic matter to life but how life itself can break its autopoietic closure and ex-statically start to relate to its external Other (where this ex-static openness can also turn into the mortifying objectivization of Understanding). The problem is not Life but Death-in-LIfe (“tarrying with the negative”) of the speaking organism.” (Slavoj Zizek)

Freud discovered a self destructive tendency in his patients over and over which he eventually named the death drive. But what if this so called death drive was only the inevitable process of the return to the flow of a greater “life” beyond the limited ego-body. Ecstasy means to leave the stasis of the body – as the mystics of all times have consciously sought. For Lacan the jouissance or ecstasy of the drive remains in each of us as our symptomatic way of relating to the world beyond animal survival. From the beginning we develop in a body in relation to the Other (parents, culture, language) which leaves its particular imprint on us. The ecstatic beyond of the drive remains in us despite being conditioned in particular ways to survive in relative stasis. If the excess of death, spirit, mind, and the beyond is not honored with some cultural ritual (as Bataille showed in his social analysis) then it will manifest unconsciously in the form of physical, psychic, or social symptoms. In the symptom path to enlightenment we don’t suppress them but follow them to the truth – the truth being the unique way in which each one enacts this desiring production – this affective subjectivization which ultimately leads beyond the body and the ego.

Physiological – Incorporation/Expulsion
Affective – Attraction/Repulsion
Mental – Unconscious/Conscious

How do the above continuums take part in a process of the real?

Let us examine the idea (presented by Libet, Penrose and others) that actions begin to take place for the human being – and can be registered neurally – before conscious awareness. What is this conscious awareness? Perhaps some observer watching the automaton. If the observer does not originate the action what does – will, drive, unconscious, God. What kind of veto power does this awareness have to alter the action. When people ask if the mind is in the body or if the body is in the mind I offer that for the human the mind(2) is in the body is in the mind(1). But what is mind(1) and how does it relate to mind(2).

Zizek discusses this in his new book on Deleuze and autopoesis:

“So, with regard to Libet’s experiment, from the Freudian standpoint, the basic underlying problem is that of the status of the Unconscious: are there only conscious thoughts (my belated conscious decision to move a finger) and “blind” neuronal processes (the neuronal activity to move the finger), or is there also an unconscious “mental” process? And, what is the ontological status of this unconscious, if there indeed is one? Is it not that of a purely virtual symbolic order, of a pure logical presupposition (the decision had to be made, although it was never effectively made in real time)?” (Slavoj Zizek)

To take another position…

1. The materialist-nihilist approach sees all things – including consciousness – as an accidental epiphenomena – and challenges the real to exist. (Hysterical discourse of modern science)

2. The constructivist-monist approach presents a great chain of being or evolutionary ladder of becoming in an ordered universe. (University discourse of pagan holism)

3. The theological-dualist approach would posit the Tao, God, or Noumena as the substance and initiator of all things – humans being partial objects only capable of registering part of the phenomena. (Master discourse of cartesian monotheism)

4. Another position: autopoetic (Maturana, Varela), sovereign (Bataille), nondualist (Zen, Advaita), generic (Badiou).

(This position is related to Lacan’s discouse of the analyst and Badiou’s discourse of the mystic.)

Zizek goes to great lengths to push the Hegelian-Lacanian approach over into this position. In fleeting moments he – like Hegel and Lacan – counts to 4 – at which point counting ceases and becomes the zero-void of infinity. You can see it in the above quote. Zizek presents Hegel’s concept of positing the presupositions as a conscious (retroactive) assumption of the creation of the present after the fact. He recognizes that this is what Lacan made of Freud’s practice of analysis. Not the conscious of passive awareness (now I know about my symptom) but the conscious as the decision, the embrace, the autopoetic bootstrapping – the event that dissolves the unconscious set of presuppositions and founds a new set of logics – topologics – or shiftings of the symbolic relations of relations of … (void) – which is the real. This is Badiou’s event and its categorical morphisms. This is Deleuze and Guattari’s fold and its schizoanalytic diagrams. This is the ultimate artistic and political act – a way of recarving the real – the way a set of molecules form a membrane out of differences of speed and solidity and create a cell (Reich, Varela), the way a body holds these cells in symphony apart from the cycle of exchange (Freud, Ho), the way self-reflective consciousness undermines the presuppositions of the body to become more than human (Nietzsche, Steiner). Bataille sought to pick up where Hegel left off – at the point of his becoming mad with the completion of the phenomenology of mind. From seminar 11 on, Lacan stalked the position of the subject at the end of analysis to the point where colleagues proclaimed his symptomatic topological practice “a dialogue of confusion.” Though he looked to Joyce for an example of the new man, he might have looked to Nietzsche had he been of a different inclination.

“Such is the world as it appeared to Nietzsche under the monumental aspect of Turin: a discontinuity of intensities that are given names only through the interpretation of those who receive his messages; the latter still represent the fixity of signs whereas in Nietzsche this fixity no longer exists. That the fluctuations of intensities were able to assume the opposite name to designate themselves – such is the miraculous irony. We must believe that this coincidence of the phantasm and the sign has existed for all time, and that the strength required to follow the detour through the intellect was “superhuman”. Now that the agent “Nietzsche” is destroyed, there is a festival for a few days, a few hours, or a few instants – but it is a sacrificial festival. (Pierre Klossowski)

Alain Badiou “Short Treatise on Philosophy”
Georges Bataille “The Accursed Share”
Gilles Deleuze “The Fold”
Sigmund Freud “Project for a Scientific Psychology”
Felix Guattari “Schizoanalytic Cartographies”
Mae-Wan Ho “The Rainbow and the Worm”
Pierre Klossowski “Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle”
Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela “Autopoesis and Cognition”
Friedrich Nietzsche “The Genealogy of Morals”
Wilhelm Reich “The Cancer Biopathy”
Rudolf Steiner “Fundamental of Therapy”
Francisco Varela “The Emergent Self”
Slavoj Zizek “Organs without Bodies”

Spirit of Energy

This map stretches from yoga psychology to anthroposophy and integral psychology, but there is a particularly detailed philosophical explication and scientific proof of it in Arthur Young’s “The Reflexive Universe” and William Tiller’s “Conscious Acts of Creation.”

| Spiritual (?)
| ———–
| Mental-Egoic (+below=Humans)
| Emotional-Astral (+below=Animals)
| Vital-Etheric (+below=Plants)
| Physical-Dense (+below=Matter)

The question of what energy is comes up a lot in my lectures – does it belong at a certain stage on the integral yoga continuum – or does it encapsulate everything. It depends on what you mean.

I like to think of Prana, Qi or Vital Energy as corresponding to the Etheric or Vital body – the layer between Dense-Physical and Astral-Emotional, Mental-Egoic, and higher Spiritual layers. Of course we could call them all Energy but this is just a matter of semantics. Clinically, scientifically, and experientially, I’ll say why this makes a difference.

The more superordinate levels of mind and emotion affect the vital energy and its physical constituents. Of course a knife can cut your skin or toxic food eat away your insides but the more subtle yet superordinate level of vitality should heal this through the “immune system,” with a little physical help if necessary (emergency medicine). Unfortunately modern allopathic medicine is nihilistic-materialist and intrudes on the healing process and deprives the mind of its power to heal and to be, making it more dependent.

The biochemistry of cells has to be organized by the kind of vital etheric field memories discovered by Burr and Sheldrake. However, the mental and emotional layers of humans affect these for both health and disease – this is the placebo effect, the power of prayer and meditation, and psychosomatic illness and healing demonstrated in hypnosis and analysis in Freud. Much of our illness today depends on the depletion of vital energy and intrusion on the functioning of its fields. We have now seen clinical and scientific proof of how the mind dis-eases and heals matter – we just don’t really believe it enough yet – and that is what “matters”. A positive affirmation or prayer or someone else’s hypnotic suggestion (in therapy) usually is not enough to really change the underlying BELIEF.

Prana “underlies” physical and mental events but as a backdrop or transitional substance for the insubstantial power of mind to translate or manifest in the theatre of physical force. This is important, for while acupuncture, qi gong, hatha yoga, and pranayamic breathing will heal the L-fields of our bodily organs (and this is already a huge step over materialist medicine) we really have to get to the level of mind to make larger longer changes. At present mind is usually controlled from below by materialist belief systems programmed by family, society, media and institutions, but when mind recognizes itself for what it is it turns the tables on the physical. Some psychoanalytic, philosophical and artistic movements of the past century pushed this as far as it would go. Now it’s a matter of crossing the abyss to the other side – actually experiencing the superpositioned wave of the transpersonal infinite and sitting in the sovereign transformer of mind which collapses this beyond into what it chooses.

This is a powerful kind of involution or actually evolution towards involution – transcendence in the service of regression. Playing.

The Psychedelic Era

Like a lot of similar “conspiracy” material it is sometimes hard to see any clarity in sides. Rather a game among the privileged while the population remains pawns in the game. It is interesting that while people like Leary, Lilly, and Grof began amongst class and government hierarchies, their experiences with psychedelics could not help but lead them into a life and transmission of radical freedom – or did it. Self-interest and trickster-guruism are always just around the corner. Fun and games is certainly a superior vibration to war games. But I am not sure how much really changed spiritually. There is a certain narcissistic nihilism involved in the “culture of freedom” which has spawned the hippy, slacker, hipster art and indie rock cultures of today.

I recently read what I felt was a good description of the effect of drugs by a spiritual practitioner, mystic, and scientist. Drugs don’t add anything – they cancel out the lower vibrations on the scale temporarily so that one only experiences the higher ones. My own addition to this is that drugs and practices can alter the semiotic-somatic filters which screen out the infinite multiple real (or “God”). The problem is that when they wear off that taste of elevated joy and consciousness is gone followed by an often deeper depression, disappointment or entrenchment in linear cause-effect, matter-energy space-time existence. Those moments cannot produce lasting change if one returns to the same filters held in place by the cultural symbolic order.

Which is why I see the political-economic institutions and cultural-linguistic media as the prime block to further development and healing. I am a communist of old old fashioned sort. The young Marx’s experience of alienation in the industrial exchange of work and consumption was nothing but the natural development of the spiritual principles of christianity and buddhism. This could never be mandated through enforced state socialism but must develop from the individual experiences like those of the post-sixties generation toward new forms of groups – the communities of radical sovereignty based on nonjudgmental unconditional love, individual desires, and the impossibility of the gift.

Lacan and Psychosis

Although I appreciate any successful attempt to work interpersonally with psychosis, and I would be curious to hear more about Villemoes’ work, I have to say the following:

The idea of “ego-restructuring” would have been anathema to Lacan, who considered the ego to be an alienating function even if it appeared to be the only alternative to psychosis. He worked hard to save the truth of Freud from the creation of ego psychology.

In his early work Lacan discusses the absence of the “name of the father” as a possible factor in psychosis within the particular cultural milieux (patriarchal?) he and Freud were a part of, however he searched his whole life for an alternative to the impasse which psychoanalysis had reached – the either/or choice between a neurotic (“normal”) submission to the law of the Other or psychotic foreclosure of the symbolic. It was amongst the development of a new (modern/postmodern?) milieux that Lacan was able to perceive new directions.

In 1963 Lacan proposed for his yearly seminar “the names of the father.” While this was never given (for political reasons), from this point on he began work on the pluralization of the names as access to the symbolic. By 1975 when he gave his seminar on the “sinthome” (purification of the symptom) he states that we can “do without the name of the father provided we can make use of it.” The process of nomination borrowed from the poetics of James Joyce (and contempary artists in general) provided Lacan with a certain model of practice which is currently being evolved by many of Lacan’s decendants.

In my own work I have come to the conclusion that it is not usually a simple lack of maternal mirroring or paternal name/no/law which leads to psychosis but a direct intrusion – a “soul murder” or “violence of interpretation” (as Aulagnier calls it ) of the experience of the other. While the very existence of the other (mother, father) with its desires provides an inevitable constraining limit for the child, it is in the excessive objectification of the child that his soul or drive is put into the service of the other and nothing remains to be born into the subjective enunciation and transmission of the “I”. But in the everyday life of the current society this objectification and violence of interpretation are simply less complete, making neurosis and much so-called normality subject to a divided subjectivity. Rather than seek to adapt the objectified ego to its milieux of object relations dominated by a particular logos, Lacan sought the emergence of subject relations. In the clinical setting the “desire of the analyst” to listen, witness, play, and create “in relation” and to reveal the truth of bodily and mental”jouissance” and its symbolic transmission maintains a constraining limit, while preventing the objectification of the patient through the violence of interpretation which – for the most part – our families, cultures, and therapies are still dominated by, which can lead to the untying of the knot of the symptom and the production of new signifiers.

For new developments in Lacan’s late work and its application to pre-oedipal and psychotic experience I recommend:

Roberto Harari “How James Joyce Made His Name: A Reading of the Final Lacan”
Felix Guattari “Chaosmosis”
Piera Aulagnier “The Violence of Interpretation”
Bracha Lichtenberg-Ettinger “The Matrixial Gaze”
Julia Kristeva ” Revolution in Poetic Language”
Slavoj Zizek “Organs without Bodies”
Willy Apollon, et al “After Lacan”

Ecstasy of the Void Is a Jouissance of Complexity

“Further on your life is not limited to that ungraspable inner streaming; it streams to the outside as well and opens itself incessantly to what flows out or surges forth towards it. The lasting vortex which constitutes you runs up against similar vortexes with which it forms a vast figure, animated by a measured agitation. Now to live signifies for you not only the flux and fleeting play of light which are united in you, but the passage of warmth or of light form one being to another, from you to your fellow being or from your fellow being to you (even at the moment which you read in me the contagion of my fever which reaches your): words, books, monuments, symbols, laughter are only so many paths of this contagion, of this passage. Individual beings matter little and enclose points of view which cannot be acknowledged, if one considers what is animated, passing form one to the other in love, in tragic scenes, in movements of fervor. Thus we are nothing, neither you nor I, beside burning words which could pass from me to you, imprinted on a page: for I would only have lived in order to write them, and, if it is true that they are addressed to you, you will live from having had the strength to hear them.”

–George Bataille “Communication,” Inner Experience

Bataille was profoundly influenced by Mauss – to the extent that he spent his whole life trying to understand the primitive gift/flow economy from the point of view of the present (which had so lost it) and to reinvent a method. First with political, artistic, and sacred communities – then erotic excess and amour fou – finally to solitary mysticism, philosophy, and poetics.

Never solitary. I am that reader, that other, that communicant who received these words from “Inner Experience” with a passion enabling me to live different against all that is stagnant.

I am attracted to Badiou’s mathematical conceptions – minimalist sharp as a rapier. And to Deleuze’s liquid flows. Though not without his idiocies (partially that’s the point) Bataille alone joins these still all-too-abstract philosophers by throwing himself into the mix.

“The human condition is an affliction resulting from the necessary compulsion to carry out a series of proofs – as demands or impossible goals – producing the deduction that topology cannot be reduced to geometry.” (P. Hill “Using Lacanian Clinical Technique”)

Rather than accepting this human neurotic condition or its psychoanalytic translation into common everyday resignation and malaise as Freud suggested, Bataille attempts to live at the level of this continual movement of jouissance. And yes that is the artist. The sovereign artist living on the margins of historical time and limited economy in the erotic time of the gift.

New Calculus

The continuum can never be tamed by the discrete but Bataille’s concept of sovereignty is a way of living the one-all through your part or set. Each contracted moment as the whole or equal to the whole or the only whole which is. Slightly different from Leibniz’s monadology – more Zen.

How do sovereign moments recognize an other set and aggregate without submitting their sovereignty to some outside truth. This I believe is part of catalysis – the continual encounter with other sovereign sets outside your sovereign set. This encounter can become an event (in Badiou’s sense) which provokes the new within a set which becomes assimilated and transformed, or this encounter can be rejected as when the immune system expels, or this encounter can be repressed and deposited inside as trauma repeating itself continually.

Analysis is the counterpart of catalysis – the undoing of the knots or patterns now stagnant in the set – a release of traumas – a dis-integration or differentiation into sovereign moments. Catalysis is the integration or aggregation of sets in a new calculus. For example how and why to bions become cells become organisms become consciousnesses… Now to explore analysis and catalysis.


Felix Guattari’s process of chaosmosis (from Joyce’s chaosmos) describes eternal flux of contraction/expansion. Badiou’s ontological development of Cantor’s set theory provides another glimpse of an old esoteric cosmology of this nature. A set is a contraction from the infinite. One could say that the real is too full for us (as limited sets) or any other set to grasp and if experienced this fullness would only appear to be meaningless or mad chaos from the point of view (or perspective) of our set.

I believe that the continuum hypothesis is an attempt to grasp the real as one-all which Badiou describes of Deleuze. This position requires something similar to what Christians call faith. In moving from our limited set to the real, one must posit it. It cannot be proved or empirically experienced without a danger of dissolution – horror, fear, madness – as was the case for Cantor, Hegel, Descartes, Einstein, and others who at a certain point instituted a new theory to stop up the void. What I mean by void is but another name for the fullness of the real from another angle. Void for Badiou is the inbetween sets which alone are contracted logoi. What is always outside/inbetween sets could be experienced as void or one-all depending on your perspective. Badiou-Bataille and Deleuze-Guattari take different angles but essentially are on the same track even if the understanding of how fullness and emptiness are the same is one of the final impossible experiences.

Deleuze assumes the one-all and the continuum like a priest of faith.

But similarly Nietzsche and Artaud become the one-all by leaping beyond the closure of the ego-set. Their experience should be celebrated and followed not feared and vilified. The closure of our current set contracts our logos into stifling stagnation suffocating what we are capable of, squeezing us into neurotic decay.

Badiou and Lacan construct political and psychoanalytic practices of resolving this stagnation, whereas Deleuze (and in the end Bataille too) sing how we are already there for “ecstasy scarcely differs from any other state.”


A religious crisis as death of the one who was holding you together could be the advent of the new way to love this one again in and through another: Deleuze with Badiou.

To pick up another thread from my own work on bioenergetic medicine, philosophy, psychosomatics…

On topology and catastrophe theory: when is a difference of degree a difference in kind (Bergson/Deleuze) – this is the difference that makes a difference (Bateson/Pribram) – a question of desire and its politics (Lacan/Badiou)

This eternal debate between continuous and discrete is reflected again in the difference between energy and matter, and for me a matter of perspective – can one hold both simultaneously in the “mind” while not being able to look through both lenses.

This is what I find explicated perfectly between Deleuze and Badiou – the fruit of the history of ontology. It’s “all” there – nothing.

From Deleuze’s perspective the one-all always already is – manifesting as topological shiftings of kaleidoscopic simulacra. This is the fullness of spiritual faith. Very Taoist and Vedic

From Badiou’s perspective we (every multiple) are always part of a set contracted from the void-chaos about which no set has the ability to finally name. The ontological limits of any particular logos dissolves at the border of the event which (now unconsciously) provides the foundational rules of that set. Chaos/nihilism is the truth of the inbetween sets which is also the freedom which allows the advent of the new. Very Zen and Christian.

Wilhelm Reich demonstrated in the laboratory that cells breakdown into smaller life particles called “bions” (which can only be seen by extremely powerful microscopes by studying live people) and that these bions also emerge out of inorganic matter and spontaneously organize into cells.

Bonghan Kim demonstrated in the laboratory that the acupuncture meridians developmentally and evolutionarily precede the nerve, blood, and lymph vessels and that they cary a fluid made of “sanals” – his name for bions. Kim unknowingly replicated Reich’s work while showing exactly how the bions are formed into types of cells in each organ (liver, heart, spleen, etc) and then carried along that organ’s meridian to the specific acupoint on the surface of the body, passing through the vessels and then back again continuously. He also showed that the sanals or bions are actually made up mostly of dna.

The chakra and meridian system is like a software system in the body – an interface between the psychic and etheric energy body manufacturing and organizing its tissues through organs (organic organizing events). It provides a field which grows its physical cells in the outer. While we manifest qi, or light, or life energy from our inner we also constantly absorb it from the surrounding outer in which we are enmeshed from food, water, air, sun… there is no empty space only differences of degree/kind. Deleuze and Guattari’s body-without-organs is this ontological body freed from the particular organ society which ties us to this earth-culture: the body of absolute speed to which sometimes philosophy and psychoanalysis, art and poetry can transport us through a plane of immanence while science and medicine aspire to a plane reference localizing and capturing a territory.

William Tiller and Ernest Rossi have also demonstrated in the laboratory how conscious psychic intent and unconscious emotional intensity directly change living and non living matter even when this intent is merely stored in a carbon chip in one lab and transported thousands of miles to another or performed instantaneously across the globe. Again even time/space is a matter of differences of degree/kind which we have chosen at some level to pay attention to.

Who are we?. What are we? Folding ourselves from an ineffable void-all (0-1) into myriad diagrams and shapes…

A qabalistic narrative states that the ain soph or absolute presence of limitless light folds itself to create void through tzim-tzoum out of which will come the multiple vessels – a womb, a birth, a creation. This is similar to Rene Thom’s topological ideas on prominence and pregnancy in semiophysics…

Badiou “Being and Event” and “Deleuze”
Bateson “Steps to an Ecology of Mind”
De Meo “Heretic’s Notebook” (on Kim and Reich)
Deleuze and Guattari “What is Philosophy” and “A Thousand Plateaus”
Pribram “Brain and Perception”
Reich “The Cancer Biopathy”
Rossi “The Psychobiology of Gene Expression”
Tiller “Conscious Acts of Creation” and “Science and Human Transformation”