Most thoughtful people harbor serious reservations when it comes to employing science as a worldview. But, although there is no particular shortage of criticism of the scientific worldview, there is also no concerted effort to construct an alternative. I believe that the reason for this lack of effort is the fact that the only workable alternative to the scientific view will necessarily be a radical one.

The only rational alternative to a robust materialism is an equally robust immaterialism that, as I have argued elsewhere, will very likely have eschatological implications. It would be practically impossible to pursue such a radical line of inquiry from within any existing social context. The only available context is that of the prophetic tradition, a tradition which by definition cannot be honored in its own time.

The only thing the world owes to a prophet is a hearing. I do and must seek my fifteen minutes of public time, and this is a non-trivial endeavor especially if pursued within the bounds of legality. Hopefully there are such means. Nonetheless, any self-respecting prophet must always be pushing the envelope of propriety.

There is one political recourse. Let us call it the politics of the anomalous. This is a risky undertaking, but if there is going to be a paradigm shift, it will require more than just the words of a prophet. There has to be something more tangible by way of evidence. In dealing with the anomalous, the would-be prophet is caught in a bind. The intrinsically sensational nature of anything anomalous is almost guaranteed to overwhelm the content of the message, particularly in our global tabloid village. There is however a political context that has grown up around the public concerns with anomalous phenomena.

Secular and sectarian authorities are naturally chary of the anomalous appearing in any context other than entertainment. When the miraculous breaks the bounds of propriety it portends an historical shift in the social dynamics. A political tension arises between a public that feels deprived of the numinous and the authorities that feel defensive toward the same. This is the political fodder for the would-be modern messiah.

To proceed further, one makes the assumption that there is a method to the miraculous, that there is an unfolding plan to rekindle in humanity an awareness of the numinous, and that this is necessarily occurring in an apocalyptic context. Furthermore, appropriate human participation is essential and the requisite spiritual guidance must be intrinsic to the cosmic plan. Any prospective guide would then make his or herself available to those in authority who would likely be privy to our scheduled rendezvous with destiny. The alternative would be to stand on the street corner, waiting for lightning to strike.

The ideal outcome is a maximum of awareness and a minimum of apocalypse. Such an outcome puts an emphasis on the intellectual content of the paradigm shift from materialism to immaterialism. Thus do I appeal to those scientists who harbor reservations concerning materialism. To their reservations I add whatever political clout can be mustered from among their own who would have access to sequestered anomalous information.

This is what I can do. It may or may not suffice.

.

rev. 3/3/98