About Philip Goddard

Introduction

I have to admit, this page isn't at all something I've wanted to put in public anywhere, for it's effectively a personal CV with a very specific purpose, which really draws attention to me in a way that I consider inappropriate for any of my sites, and is liable to give more people an unhelpfully poor impression of me ('inflated ego', 'self-absorbed', 'trying to tell people what to think of him', and all that!).

What I'm now doing is the best I know how, to respond to a quite urgent issue concerning the catastrophically dwindled traffic for this site, thanks to Google having progressively more severely down-ranked it over the a whole decade despite or even because of its uniqueness and life-changing and quite often life-saving content. I'll charitably assume that it wouldn't be out of actual malicious intent but through simple misinterpretation of the nature of such a unique site in their in many ways commendable attempts to crack down on sites that dish up misinformation or are deemed to be otherwise 'unreliable'.

That misinterpretation may be completely innocent, though my suspicion is that Google is far too readily accepting socially accepted orthodoxies, and therefore penalizing sites that counter those orthodoxies, without proper awareness or insight into what is really going on. It certainly looks like that with regard to this site, anyway. As I remark further below, a lot of unhelpful to downright extremely harmful orthodoxies are being pervasively protected from serious criticism, particularly in the fields of spirituality / religion on the one hand and what is unthinkingly lumped together as 'scientific consensus' on the other.

Whatever the exact reason for this site being so heavily down-ranked, the result of that has been that this site's traffic (average human visits per day) has diminished in stages from the 600s/700s in 2014/15, despite phase after phase of improvements in visitor experience and SEO (all legitimate) that I've continued to make, and is now down to a firmly established level fluctuating in the middle double figures — in other words in round figures now very roughly a tenth of what it had been. Correspondingly, the number of Google.com referrers showing in this site's daily statistics are now down from hundreds into low double figures and indeed now increasingly into single figures.

The other five Western search engines that I monitor (DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Ecosia, Bing, and Yahoo!) all so far continue to have this site's pages highly to very highly ranked (so I must be doing a LOT right), but of course the BIG problem is that Google has a near-monopoly of search engine mediated website traffic. So Google can and does destroy legitimate businesses through their assessment criteria being too blunt an instrument and severely down-ranking some sites that are genuinely high-quality ones with unique and beneficial content. This site, although not being at all a business one, is one of the casualties.

For some years I'd been increasingly tearing my hair about this, when I appeared to be ticking all the right boxes for high page ranking, most importantly including the site having unique high-quality content that benefits many people, but in late December 2020 I finally found some info about how Google is nowadays assessing sites over and beyond all the normal SEO and visitor experience criteria, and the penny dropped for me.

As far as I can see, a particularly troublesome aspect of Google's current attempts to crack down on misinformational and otherwise harmful sites is that it has developed a strong bias in favour of widely respected orthodoxies, tending to penalize sites that contradict those orthodoxies (particularly what Google regards as 'scientific consensus'), assuming that such sites are misinformational or at least 'unreliable' ones. That isn't quite how Google describes the relevant site assessment criteria, but it does describe the likely effect of the relevant criteria being used. Also, if any of the site assessors are religious, they could well seek to down-rate this site because of its so strongly speaking out about the harmfulness of ALL religion and belief-based traditions / organizations / systems, and indeed presenting a rationally-based powerful alternative that is fully benign and thus immensely more benign than any of the religious or other belief-based sites ever could be.

So, without going into all the sordid details here (look up EAT and YMYL regarding SEO), it's become clear that it's necessary for me to make a sort of CV available for search engines to find, which concisely presents info that gives some idea of the nature, quality and integrity of this site and of me myself as its creator and author of all its content, with evidence to back up all claims made. This page focuses primarily on the personal side, and (How This Site Stands Out From the Crowd) focuses primarily on the site considerations.

Also, Philip Goddard's self-actualization methodology — Introduction is a very important page to help give you the correct picture. Truly, anyone who reads that page right through and still reckons that this site is harmful, untrustworthy or misinformational must be a particularly harmful, untrustworthy and misinformational person him/herself, on account of his/her oppressively belief-driven mindset!

Whether Google would 'get the message' from here, I've considerable doubt, but, as they say, 'Nothing ventured, nothing gained' (Remember that! )!

Undoubtedly this will be revised often to start with, till I become more satisfied with it — if indeed I ever could!

There's a lot of highly relevant detail vying for inclusion, so I'll try to keep this to rough notes form in order to keep it as concise as possible.

These notes are intended to facilitate the reader's answering for themselves questions such as the following:

• Is Philip Goddard trustworthy / honest?

• Isn't he just a schizophrenic, out of touch with the real world and full of weird ideas and opinions?

• Does he have less-than-'pure' motivation for creating and running this site? (e.g., does he have a financial motivation to promote particular ideas or theories, or is he being driven by an unhelpful emotional chip on his shoulder?)

• What expertise, if any, does he have in the areas covered by this site?

• Does he have a scientific background / formal qualifications? (And indeed, would formal qualifications (and, from where?) even be relevant to what he writes about on this site?)

• Do his writings have authenticity? — In other words, are they based on sound data and interpretation of that data? (And, are they based in an objective rather than subjective mindset and approach?) — Or are they based in ill-founded or unfounded opinion / belief? — And, again, are they based upon other people's writings and opinions, or upon a mass of first-hand personal experience?

• Is he seeking to undermine genuine scientific consensus, or is he simply blowing the whistle on areas where reductionist scientific method is being misapplied because it simply cannot work in any genuinely beneficial or helpful way in those areas (i.e., they are outside the limited view of the materialist-reductionist belief system)?

• Is he one of those harmful conspiracy theorists?

• Aren't his ideas just another way-out belief system?

• Are his methods evidence-based and validated by testing them out?

• He says his methods worked spectacularly well for himself, but have they really worked significantly for others?

• Are his ideas and methods safe? — What's their potential for harming people?

The brief Bio…

• Early years — signs of a penetrating, scientifically oriented intellect already developing…

  • Night hells — I suffered greatly from them nightly when I was a toddler (in roughly mid 1940s). I never knew what those horrendous and harrowing nocturnal experiences were until later middle age, but they eventually proved to be one HELL of an educational resource!

    I never talked significantly about those experiences except for a few of the more narrative ones (second-level hells) — largely restricting what I did mention to my being chased by sproses and sprouses (animated violin cases), and without letting-on about the electrifying intensity of the fear / terror of it all — at least, no more than mentioning them just as the occasional bad dream.

    In fact, my deepest aspects had been purposefully inhibiting me from saying anything that would get me regarded as having a 'condition', and then being (mis-)'treated' for that supposed 'condition', which would have significantly weakened my chances of fulfilling my underlying life task, which I progressively discovered, and indeed fulfilled, only in old age. One crucial part of that task was going to be to work out (objectively, free from any belief) what those dreadful nightly experiences really were, and what was causing them, and how it was all operating.

  • Religion — Christianity was shoved down my throat by my mother and my schooling — which bewildered me because I could see it was all false and harmful. Why believe, and try to make other people believe, in things and 'holy beings', genuine evidence of which simply isn't there, or believe moralistic stories which, even if loosely based on historical events, were nonetheless clearly to a fair extent fiction (all the stuff about supposed 'miracles' and virgin birth for a start), and pretend that they were true in all material detail? — And why the hell go worshipping anyone or anything — and fail even to acknowledge, let alone open out, our own intrinsic 'goodness'?

    This didn't make sense. I didn't buy that nonsense, and parted company with it in my teens when my mother finally gave up trying to get me to be a stupid, belief-bound religious person.

    In fairness to my mother, she wasn't only intellectual and highly educated, but was more aware and mentally flexible than my father, so she was far from being a standard 'religious person', and, despite some fairly grievous errors originating from her own upbringing and low self-esteem, she really cared for people (including me), in a manner that my father was incapable of because of his emotional rigidity and unawareness.

    Freudians — I can guess what you'd be thinking! — Please drop that absurd and woolgathering psychological fantasy world of yours and get reading thoroughly through this site and get properly learning from it and thus start for the first time getting a proper understanding of the nature of 'mind', and on that basis turn your own lives around!

    However, that did NOT mean I'd become an atheist. I just kept an open mind about what was clearly unknowable, while also being aware that no-one had come up with genuine evidence that some sort of 'god' or 'God' exists. Therefore it made sense to live with a purely practical working assumption that if anything like 'God' did exist, we couldn't know about it, and it simply didn't warrant anyone's attention — at least until such time as genuine evidence contradicting that assumption presented itself. The focus on anything non-physical thus had to be on aspects of consciousness, not anything apparently outside ourselves. (See On the nature of reality and truth — Too simple to believe! :-)

  • The scientific side — my father was a research chemist and then research librarian / information officer at Kodak. He was a rigidly atheistic intellectual. He nurtured my interest in nature, biology, geology and meteorology from the age of four, and this greatly helped save my sanity as I ran into problems with the people around me — particularly, being ridiculed and bullied at school (early nicknames for me included Goggles, Four-eyes, Professor and Beetle-brain), even though, or because, they saw that I had something precious that they were apparently blocked off from. Countryside and 'Mother Nature' was the great balancer for me.

    I never bought my father's atheism (associated with the materialist-reductionist belief system), though, because that again was clearly a belief, and so it blocked him from any possibility of genuinely understanding human experience or the 'mind' or the nature of 'reality'.

  • Books — Those I valued most were NOT children's books at all, nor stories, but books on nature, natural history and eventually meteorology. I had Dickens rammed down my throat (made me feel ever more miserable and lonely — just piles of dysfunctional people), and some Shakespeare. Although I had no idea of it in my youth, at least Shakespeare was to turn out to be a strong 'nudging' influence on me in my eventual literary writing.

    — Not that I ever wrote 'like Shakespeare', but it was his way of filling the narratives and speech with all manner of allusions, little jokes, and implied deep insights that made the writing somehow more meaningful. Basically, it was making the brain function more than a conventional straight story or poem could. Then that distilled further into the way I composed music, so it had a high mental-health cultivation factor (my eventual Nature-Symphonies all being pinnacle works in that regard). — But that was all to come a long time ahead.

    In my early adulthood, feeling lost and immensely lonely, I read a fair amount of 'science fiction', which had a certain superficial appeal, but just made me feel more frustrated and lonely in the scarcity of real humanity that I sensed from the authors and their stories.

  • Psychology — I briefly got a bit interested in it, but rapidly became alienated, for I could see that the various schools of that 'science' (in my considered view nowadays, largely a pseudo-science, apart probably from some fields of applied psychology) were heavily based in believing very crude speculative theories, which, despite some small correspondences with the 'reality' I observed, felt to be disturbingly delusional, in the sense that they were just speculations that were being presented as theories of how things are, and little to do with real issues that people needed to address. — At least, that's how it appeared from my bits of reading at that time.

    Freud's notions in particular appeared to me to be telling me mostly about his own emotional issues and unhealthy preoccupations, and, where applied in therapy sessions, would clearly be strongly demeaning and disempowering for any clients, quite apart from almost always pointing firmly away from addressing the clients' real issues — well, at least any clients who weren't Sigmund Freud and his close followers, perhaps!

  • Philosophy — I was introduced to it in my last years at school, and felt a tentative excitement over it, but rapidly withdrew from that arena because I couldn't see what the point was in writing great tomes and having no end of 'learned' discussions about what you could see perfectly well was unknowable (and what was unknowable didn't need learned discussions anyway)! — And clearly, if you were hanging on the words of supposed 'philosophers' you couldn't be much of a philosopher yourself!

    Speculating about what you could never genuinely understand or have true answers to struck me as a mind-numbingly exhausting and boring thing to be doing — why not use all that time and mental resource to do things that are of real benefit to oneself and everyone else, and bring inspiration and joyfulness into the life experience?

    It seemed to me that to be a philosopher in any genuinely useful way at all would involve simply observing and understanding all life experience to whatever extent it could be understood at all! No learned tomes, no need for the pile of paper elephants that 'official' philosophy represented to me. Just cultivate aware rational thinking and rational living, and disregard the tomes and impressive quotes!

    In far retrospect I can say that to become enlightened is to become an 'ultimate' philosopher — at least potentially — because you've then come to the point where you understand the whole show sufficiently from your own direct perceptions to recognise that the very concept of 'philosophy' is meaningless and best discarded! Things are simply as they are.

  • The natural history interest developed, as I started collecting Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies), but then got into collecting reptiles and small mammals to keep as supposed 'pets'.

• Early adulthood

  • Keeping wild animals as 'pets' soon dropped. Soon came to recognise that my keeping of wild animals at all as supposed pets was very unhealthy for me, both mentally and physically (as well as monumentally unkind to them and often injurious to nature conservation), and so dropped that and turned over to nature photography.

  • My Lepidoptera interest had started delving into the really fascinating arena of the smaller moths, and soon, as a new member of the British Entomological and Natural History Society, I found myself coming to loggerheads with certain revered 'experts' there, for my impertinently identifying certain of the moths I found as things that those 'experts' told me they couldn't be because they don't occur in my area or even in the UK, and my not meekly accepting their assurances. I carried out proper taxonomic examinations that showed that my own identifications were correct and the particular 'experts' had been bullshitting because they'd fallen into various sorts of belief on the matter.
    (Belief is sure a wondrous thing, for it always prevents you from seeing what's really there!)

    However, after just a few years I largely withdrew from really active natural history interest, including photography, at least in my own time, because again I was aware that I was getting way out of balance, and needed to develop in other ways.

  • Biological research jobs, 1963–1972:

    • Technician in Biochemistry department at Royal Veterinary College, London

    • Technician in Parasitology department at National Institute for Medical Research, Mill Hill, London

    • Scientific Officer, promoted to Higher Scientific Officer, at Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Surrey, as an entomologist.

      Note that my entomological and insect taxonomy knowledge and expertise had been sufficiently highly regarded that I was promoted to HSO grade despite my having no degree at that time.

      … But then after a while the senior entomologist's relationship with me was getting strained because he resented my being more accurate in my identification of biting midges (Culicoides spp.) (the subject of our project, associated with research on blue tongue virus of sheep), and my starting to pick up on his own misidentifications — something that was getting him rather hot under the collar at times.

      That was really funny actually, because one of our technicians told me on the quiet that behind my back the senior entomologist consistently urged her and the other technician in our little team always to listen carefully to what I said, because on occasions where he and I differed, I was 99% of the time the one who was correct!

      Also a young vet there started carrying out a campaign against my presence there, claiming that it was wrong that I was graded HSO without a degree — but his defamatory rumour-mongering about me among other staff (making claims about certain misdemeanours of mine (100% fictitious)) — seemingly only I knowing about my very modest number of actual but at least trivial misdemeanours! — showed that his real motivation was more to do with my having 'come out' as homosexually oriented, which he strongly disapproved of!

      (Some learning there, about people's prejudices, pettinesses and personal status issues! )

  • Emotional crisis, forcing a much-needed change of direction. — 'Much needed' because all that research work, despite its interesting aspects, was taking me in a very unbalancing direction and I sensed that I needed to develop in other areas too, especially relating to my creativity — especially the music that was continually improvising and composing itself within my mindspace, but which I couldn't write down owing to an inability to sight-read music notation.

    I started the long and tortuous process of not only clearing that emotional crisis but, crucially importantly, resolving the apparently huge underlying issue, whatever that really was, by means of ongoing use of Re-evaluation Counselling. This brought me into increasing conflict with RC teachers who resented my clearer understanding of RC than theirs and were pressuring me to conform to their very partial and unaware implementation of the procedure. Inevitably there was a parting of ways, though I continued to apply the principles of RC in my life.

  • University — gained BSc Hons in Biological Sciences in 1979 at University of Exeter, UK, (with emphasis on ecology). This much helped widen my interest and understanding to the whole 'natural world'. It also provided me with more experience of people's irrational responses to my own mental acuity — various lecturing staff there not at all liking my presence there because they didn't want other students getting the idea that I understood many relevant things more deeply than the University academics did, and could see through their posturing. I even got maliciously marked down on one of the practical exam questions in my Finals by a particular lecturer who'd become very edgy about me and determined to score points over me in various ways when opportunities arose.

    I don't mean to imply that there wasn't a lot I could and did learn from the lecturing staff, but rather, that they often showed rigidities of outlook, and tended to make dogmatic statements that we mere 'students' were supposed to accept without question. They often spouted little orthodoxies and got on the defensive when they heard me pointing out to fellow students that, no, there was more to it than the lecturer had said — sort-of thing.

    That was a clear reminder that generally people who get into teaching roles do so because they're to varying extents lacking in awareness and deeper understanding, and feel driven to overcompensate by getting into positions where they can pose as being the experts. This is happening all the time with schoolteachers as well as university / college lecturers — and a quite similar thing is happening in the medical and psychiatric professions.

• Middling years

  • Extended nature and scenery photography, associated with hiking in wild places, including mountains.

  • Creativity flowering

    • Literary writing — That started with highly original and exploratory poetry writing from 1973 onwards, then in 1981 I broke out into writing short stories, and finally in 2000 I started writing the most extraordinary and compelling novels, which were composed as though they were each a complex symphony.

    • Music composition — I really baffled some people with my 'Opus 1' in 1995 — my Symphony 1 (Sagarmatha) — because I had no formal musical training and yet had produced such an accomplished and inspiring work for my official 'first'.

      In fact my learning had been primarily through my strongly analytical way of listening to music works that 'clicked' with me, and on the other hand, through my practising composing symphonies initially in symphony-like structuring of certain of my poems, then one of my short stories, and finally all the novels — treating ideas, phrases and even single words as though they were melodic motifs, which could then be worked together in various particularly meaningful ways. So when I composed my first public music works I was already very practised in symphonic composition work, and took to the process like a duck to water.

      — Er, well, except that there actually appears to have been more to it than that, as I explain in Musical Influences on Philip Goddard's Music & Literary Works. See what I have to say there about 'deep-level templates'. It's very likely in fact that even without all the practice in the literary writing, I'd still have composed the music works with pretty-well the same ease, or at least would have picked it up very quickly indeed.

  • Alexander Technique — Towards the end of 1992 I was becoming desperate with back and especially neck pain and dysfunction for which no doctor nor physiotherapist had a useful or well thought-out answer, and then an acquaintance put me onto the AT, which enabled me to start getting dramatic improvements from starting to apply the technique, which I'd learnt from a particular book, even before my first formal AT lesson.

    Indeed I'd learnt it well enough that way, that I quickly recognised that my first AT teacher, despite his prestigious professional training and being widely regarded as a real 'expert', was teaching an abomination that wasn't genuinely AT at all (distorted out of recognition by an 'authority' / 'teacher' pattern), and I then switched to another teacher who was much better. I needed a teacher at all only to assist me in getting my spinal alignment reasonably optimal in particular situations.

    After a month or two, circumstances had led me, on an informal basis, to teach a friend something of the basics of the technique — despite my having no professional qualifications. More details about all that in The Alexander Technique — An Experience-Based Guide.

  • 'Spiritual' enlightenment — This happened to me completely unexpectedly (especially as I'd done no formal meditation in my life) on the first evening of 1997, while I was in the throes of composing my Symphony 6, and about two-thirds through reading my first book ever on Buddhism. This is recounted and explained in depth in 'Spiritual' enlightenment — Personal experience, clarifications, tips.

    That marked the beginning of a process of finding out what a mess all those 'enlightened Masters' are really in, and how harmful even the most revered and 'holy' of their teachings are (as are indeed all other religious or 'spiritual' teachings). The irony is that their teachings, at least from some of those 'masters' do actually contain just about all one needs to know in order to become enlightened and become fairly well self-actualized, but it's all come out distorted, and in ways that routinely cause extremely serious problems for those who live and practice within such traditions.

    So, yes, I am saying that the supposed 'experts' on enlightenment out there in those Eastern traditions have only part of the real picture, and are in pressing need to clear themselves of some major confusions / misunderstandings, including jettisoning the whole of 'spirituality'. — Yes, seriously! What I eventually came to understand was that enlightenment and self actualization (aka self-realization) are in themselves nothing to do with spirituality — which latter is the harmful thing, not least because of its being based in beliefs, however subtle, and is fundamentally about opening up a particular sort of awareness (actually opening up to the astral non-reality), as a grievous divergence away from recognising and progressively clearing one's mass of dysfunctions!
    

    Please see Dissolving the ego — Why one could never achieve that aim for my rationally based, belief-free take on their whole mindset, and the real way forward.

  • Spiritual healing — Circumstances pointed me in that direction in 1998. That was where I really got coming off the rails, because I had yet to find out the hard way just what harmful things spirituality and particularly spiritual 'healing' really do to one. My involvement in that, and becoming a 'spiritual teacher' myself (Ouch!), enabled me to see first-hand and indeed 'from within', what was really going on as I became increasingly gullible and allowed myself to be (mis)directed into deeper and deeper involvement. Please see My own self-actualization process or 'path' for a detailed account — and please also see my real shot across the bows for the 'healing' community, "Am I a healer?" — explaining 'healing' and the problems it causes.

    Little did I realize then that spiritual 'healing' in all its forms, and especially in the more powerful forms that I was taking on, was progressively weakening and distorting my non-physical aspects and rendering me ever increasingly open to the underlying most troublesome unseen influence…

    The final straw was when, in late 2003, I started channelling — which dropped me straightaway deep in the brown stuff…

  • My 'dark' years and intensive learning — from late 2003 to early 2007, when what people misidentify as 'forces of darkness' and related terms, in the guise of 'ascended masters', 'guides', archangels, astral beings, and of course the supposed Creator Consciousness, repeatedly disrupted my life and periodically set up complex psychic attack strategies in attempts to destroy me. I do mean that at times the shenanigans were potentially life-threatening. — Please see The 'forces of darkness' ('astral beings') — My own tough experiences for a detailed account.

    However, my saving grace was my mental acuity, which was of course further enhanced by my being enlightened then. This enabled me to survive the various destruction scenarios and crises that had been set up for me, and indeed very gradually to accumulate small increments of immunity. That mental clarity also enabled me to keep observing what was going on within me — progressively gathering observational data that could be and indeed was used later on to get understanding the whole disgusting show and building up a working model of it and develop methods for me to get clear of those most troublesome interferences and attacks.

    In the course of that I had four brief psychiatric hospitalizations — not for psychiatry / drugs (a complete no-no) but for simply having some supportive people around me briefly to enable me to re-ground my own awareness and so come straight out of each respective big crisis event. This proved to be an amazing educational experience each time, enabling me to see first-hand just what a disaster area psychiatry really is, as I recount in detail in Psychiatry: my personal experience — gaining fundamental insights (both parts), and thus to be able eventually to point to the real, rationally based way.

    It was also educational for the doctors / nurses in the psychiatric hospitals, with whom I had a great relationship both despite and because of my clear and articulate disagreement with the whole psychiatry / 'mental health' mindset. They were pretty taken aback at the way I kept so clearly in command of my situation and came out of each crisis so quickly, even while turning my nose up at almost all medication they were wanting me to take. (What yum-yum treats I denied myself there — ass that I was being! )

• Later years — developing aptitude for more penetrating and objective analysis of my life experiences…

  • The great turnaround! — In spring 2007 the penny finally dropped for me as to the key to starting to get clear of the interferences and attacks from what I'd still been taking to be 'astral beings'. It came to me that those, and indeed maybe all supposed non-physical beings and presences, were possibly illusory and not 'real' in any useful sense, being created by one's own awareness, NOT because one is ill or sick (and needing treatment), as the 'mental health' mindset would have it, but because some underlying troublesome influence was hijacking some of one's brain processes to cause those illusions and give them some partially human-seeming qualities.

    I was able to start testing that immediately, simply by switching-in a whole experimental mindset in which that notion about the 'astral beings' and effectively all non-physical beings being illusory was 'for real', and seeing what difference that made. The change was dramatic in effect, and that marked the very beginning of my progressively clearing out all that nonsense that had plagued me for a few years, and also the beginning of my long and purposeful process of building up a full working model, and a methodology based on it.

    This was NOT a matter of taking on a belief, but rather, of chucking out my actually very superficial belief that the 'astral beings' and whatever were 'real', and substituting a set of open-minded working assumptions — at last getting consistent about recognising that with regard to all matters of what we experience, we cannot absolutely know anything. It was a tremendous liberation to have a fully open mind about what is or might be true, and just stick with working assumptions that are actually useful (rather than being just intriguing, alluring, comforting or 'cool')!

  • Building up the methodology — a new benignity! — There were various phases in my developing the methods based on the working model that I was building up. Of course all this was and still is in the cusp of an ongoing experimentation process.

    Now, if this had been a matter of developing 'treatments' (i.e., drugs and other invasive procedures, or 'therapies' administered by a practitioner), this would be hellishly risky to downright seriously harmful for me to be doing and sharing with others 'on the hoof', so to speak.

    Indeed I'd not only not do that, but might quite possibly (depending on circumstances) be inclined to 'blow the whistle' on anyone I knew was doing it — at least if it appeared that no-one else was going to.

    The reality, however, is that my methods have all been, and still are, very much simple procedures for strengthening the alignment between one's deepest levels of consciousness (based in what I call fundamental consciousness) and one's dualistic 'ordinary mind', and enabling those deeper levels to carry out remedial measures — in particular, stalling internal feedback loops and emotional button-pushing, dissolving illusory realities that one is carrying, and healing the vulnerabilities (distortions) in one's non-physical aspects that the postulated underlying troublesome influence (the garbage, as I call it) has been exploiting to cause the problem(s).

    It's a matter of enabling the most benign and powerful levels of consciousness to push through one's normal awareness blocks to stall and dissolve the harmful mechanisms of the interferences and attacks, and, in the course of that process, to progressively open up one's intrinsic immunity to the garbage.

    What is a complete no-no in my methodology is to attempt to invoke or use any supposed 'energy' or 'power' from outside oneself as one does in nearly all the plethora of 'healing' traditions (extremely harmful, as it's ungrounding and increases one's connections with the garbage), and neither is formal meditation used at all (very harmful — ungrounding and generates covert illusory realities that hide one's more major issues and cultivates a passive, laissez-faire, outlook on one's life experience and relationship with one's surroundings).

    See Dissolving the ego — Why one could never achieve that aim.

    So, I'd dropped the harmful aspects of the 'healing' and 'self-realization' traditions, replacing them with methods that are intrinsically benign because they're all based on increasing one's superficial ordinary mind's openness to and alignment with one's own (totally benign and potentially powerful) deeper aspects of consciousness, and thus being able to tap the remediational power of the latter.

  • Being candid and 'straight' with the reader in my writings — Throughout this process of developing the methods (still ongoing), I have openly mentioned or indeed described my errors, both small and major gaffes — i.e., wherever that would be of assistance to my readers — as well as the successes and improvements. Earlier on, that involved the odd rather hilariously embarrassing public humble-pie eating*, which caused some people to dismiss me as 'broken' and all that, while others understood and saw that I was doing something really strong and pretty-well unheard of for somebody who people look to as any sort of 'spiritual teacher' (not that that would at all be a correct description of me since I dropped spirituality like a hot brick in 2007), and saw me as the real genuine one.

    * Most notably, when I had my 'Great Turnaround' in spring 2007 and dropped spirituality, and at the end of 2009, when I had cause to drop development of the Mk1 version of the Clarity-Sphere.

    Indeed, it's worth pointing out that it's very much the done thing for a teacher (/ guru / supposed 'Master') in the field of supposed life improvement methods, including 'healing', spirituality and 'self-realization', to present to the world and indeed their followers / students a façade of inscrutable perfection, which indeed appears to throw this stumbling monkey-cum-comedian into a very poor light, but really tells one that they themselves are pretending to be other than they really are, and thus are not genuinely reliable, and also that one couldn't learn much of real value from them. They are great teachers, yes — of posturing and deception, with genuine human authenticity and self-actualization nowhere in sight!

    Nobody is or could be anywhere near as 'perfect' or 'infallible' as such individuals make out to be, and it's clear that each of those characters must necessarily be projecting a false image of him/herself, and thus telling those with 'eyes to see' that one would do well to give them all a very wide berth indeed! And virtually always, their methods would be based in belief or some sort of channelled or otherwise 'received' 'information' (which would actually be more belief), which would thus all be misinformation and intrinsically harmful.

    On the other hand, people are able to learn masses of real benefit from my being fully straight with them on this site — using my own life experience and 'process' as a demonstration model —, and learning from my own gaffes and unwitting side-tracks as well as successes.

• Well? — Are my ideas and methods safe?
  

  For a brief consideration of that issue, please see How this site stands out from the crowd….

• …And am I really a conspiracy theorist — just because my working model includes the rationally postulated existence of a troublesome unseen influence that interferes with everyone and does untold harm generally, or because on one page* I discuss the evidence relating to two 'lightworkers' that is highly suggestive of their having had some seriously harmful intentions towards me in my dealings with them?

  * My 'astral beings' — Now the scary bit: What I was really dealing with

  All I've done in those cases has been to come out with the most helpful working hypotheses that explained, in ways that would help point to solutions, a mass of actual physical observations of my own that had previously been crying out for explanation. Indeed, both investigations have actually led to solutions.

  That's more a description of a paranoia / conspiracy theory debunker at work — keeping it all to boringly straight rational appraisals of situations and scenarios, always in the process of seeking to work out actual solutions to the various issues that affect us! Paranoia and conspiracy theorizing isn't interested in solutions, while both the aforementioned investigations of mine have led to genuinely helpful understandings and indeed solutions! Rationally based and truly objective investigations can be incredibly powerful, in the most constructive ways.

• Please also see This site's objectivity in How This Site Stands Out From the Crowd.

Postscript — Just why I'm 'weird' in the way that I am…

I've been motivated to put this explanation here particularly as it looks as though I could possibly come more into the public eye at some point because of my Project 'Fix the Human Condition' — and my 'weirdness' is here for a very specific and crucial reason and indeed purpose.

I've had cause to mention in various places on this site that I'm a no-soul person, which, among other things, is the reason for my having way above-average mental clarity and depth of awareness, freedom from belief, and relatively great freedom from restrictive social conditioning.

However, there's more to it than that. No-soul people are currently very uncommon — a tiny minority of the world population at large, but I myself belong to a minority of those, who are pre-configured with some 'specialist' characteristics for a very special and crucial purpose. So, these 'specialist-configured' people are indeed rare, but I understand there to be a fair scattering of them throughout the world and a few other widely scattered human-type planetary civilizations.

To be so configured is theoretically a violation of the original standard presumption within deepest consciousness that all its incarnations start off with a 'blank slate', with no imposed 'skew' in their characteristics — so that they each start life notionally with a theoretical maximum freedom of choice. The scenario that I've arrived at about this (based on pointers from deeper consciousness, and to be taken as a working hypothesis and NOT a statement of categorical fact or belief, but at least it usefully explains various matters otherwise left crying out for explanation), is as follows:

Please see:

• No-soul and 'specialist' no-soul people — their great significance

• My 'astral beings' — Now the scary bit: What I was really dealing with
  See for yourself how I carried out thoroughly objective retrospective detective work to establish what had really been going on in the bizarre and potentially life-threatening situation that my involvement in various types of 'spiritual healing' eventually dropped me into…
  

• Five inspirational encounters of the REAL human kind

• Further inspirational encounters — Blog
  Continuation from the Five inspirational encounters page, with rather broader remit.

• My 'lights-out' time coming very close, apparently…