Natural Future, Model, Mode for FUTURLOGICS a system of prospective thinking

FUTURLOGICS a system of prospective thinking:

by james n. hall COPYRIGHT © 1983 BY JAMES NORMAN HALL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatever without express written permission of the publisher ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Printed in the United States of America SELF TEACHING PUBLICATIONS WEST JORDAN, UTAH 84084 USA Previous Next Table of Contents of FUTURLOGICS

Chapter V



     No one is as blind as the person who thinks he sees everything
with his eyes.  We sense such a small part of what is real that it is
doubtful that it represents even a sample of the total extent of
existence.  Dismissing the existence of anything because it is not
observable emphasizes this form of blindness.  There are other ways of
learning and coming to know of things.  Mental blindness is by far the
most serious form, one for which there is often no cure.  If, for some
reason, we insist that everything be observable, then we lay ourselves
open to a special form of blindness.
     We previously explained a cycle by stating that a person tends to
think about what he sees, and tends to see what he thinks about.
Observation of things about us can cause this same cycle, in that we
think about what we observe and observe what we think about.  If our
observational powers only put us in touch with a small portion of
reality, then we only think about them to a commensurate extent.  We
are forced to use only that portion of the mind that promotes further
     If we attempt to learn about the world (and in the special case we
are interested in the future) only through the powers of sense observation,
we then find a limited and perhaps distorted view of things that
the mode generates.  Using the cycle of observation to learn about the
future, we find the modal effects are also present.  When we realize
how little we actually perceive through our senses, we can then
appreciate the process of DMP and the Futurlogics system.
     How much of the mind do we ignore?  Scientist themselves state
that the brain is capable of much more than is ever used.  For them the
last criteria of proof is that phenomena must be observable, and they
set for themselves a limitation that cannot be overcome.  One of the
"phenomena" they will never observe is the operation of their own
mind, and that is not observable except by the most private introspection.


     One of the requirements of science is that all assertions must be
either demonstrable or observable by more than one person.  When
ever anything is proven, it is shown to all.  Objectivity is stressed as
personal input tends to invalidate the proof.  Great care is taken to
show that the finding is real and part of the environment, and not just
the assertion of someone who wishes it to be real.
     Science studies nature, or it studies the nature of a particular
thing.  The natural future, or the natural mode is that  future seen
through the eyes of those who depend solely upon the senses.  Science
sees the future through the observational mode, therefore the future
seen, if other faculties of the mind are not used, is the Natural Future.
     Science cannot study emotions or mental processes, since these
are seen introspectively.  Therefore, what kind of "self" does the
observational mode see in the future?  What is the concept of the
"self"--if any--in the natural future?
     In discussing the absolute mode, we came across the problem of
seeing the self in the concept of the future viewed through the
retrospective cycles.  Our answer here is that the only parts of the self in
the natural future are the parts that are observable through the five
senses.  The self in this future sees himself as the reflection of his body
in a mirror.  Volition, decision, thought, or any introspectively known
aspect of the self will not exist; they are not within the scope of the
observational cycle.  What is not seen does not exist in the pure
application of this form of learning.  The person seen through this
mode is in mental suspension, not thinking, but only observing some
external event.  The strictest use of this mode, then, makes the self
without consciousness, unless it is the consciousness of observing.


     What we now observe was once the future of yesterday.
Everything we see is the result of yesterday and is seen as a logical end
of the causes we attribute to the happenings of the past.  There seems
to be a logical chain of events stretching from the past to the present
and extending into the future.  We need to know where  present 
things are going to predict the future.  Simplistically, this is true:
the present "causes" the future.
     The sense organs put us into contact with nature.   If we ignored
other ways of dealing with reality and rely solely upon the senses which
form the channels of observation, we operate in the cycle which is the
basis for this mode.  One of the rules of unbiased observation is the
careful elimination of mental and emotional inputs into the process of
observing  Observation is a form of non-thinking behavior--a mere
data gathering activity in its best practiced form.  Personal input of
any kind is usually disdained as contaminating the report that a pure
witness of events should produce.  In order for the personal type of
biasing to be canceled, two of the requirements are that there be an 
alternate witness and also that the phenomena is seen simultaneously
by the second observer.  It must be observable to all or the data is not
     Observation can take place only in the present.   We can see 
nothing of the past or the future with the physical organs of perceptions.
Our view is restricted to the narrow band of time which is the
present.  We see only the beginning, or the middle, or the end, but we
can never see them all at the same time.
     Ongoing things are described in terms of cause, effect, and
conditions.  The observational mode must use this breakdown of
events into parts in order to use the logic that is correlative.  The cycle
between seeing and thinking produces strict rules of logic prevalent in
the observational methods of learning that typifies this approach.  The
study of science might be used as an example of the language and
terms that the observational mode might be forced to use if it is to be
successfully applied to the future.
     Concepts in this style of thinking cannot be true and untrue at the
same time.  When we look at things with other means such as DMP,
which looks at the temporal environment all at once, a seeming
contradiction can take place; a thing can be true and not true but at
different times.  Since the mind can hold the past, present, and future
all at once, truth and untruth may be experienced simultaneously.
When we deal with the future and the time continuum of the environment
with all the modes we run contrary to the need to stress the 
requirement that things happen at the same time.  Logic, therefore, is
the bridge between past and future that gives need for memorizing
cause and effect relationships.  Further, logic ties all the moments of
observation together so that they offer continuity to the flow of time.
The observational mode fails without logic because this method considers
only material environment of the present.


     Children first learn through the things that they observe.  What
we see then is what we learn to expect.  Explain to  a child that the
temporary absence of his mother need not be a cause for concern!  The
inexperienced mind of the child sees only that his mother is not
present.  The natural extension of his thought convinces the child that
the absence is permanent--he predicts only from what he sees--and he
will not be convinced that she is soon to return and that there is no
reason to cry.  Simple observation tells the child that she is not there
and there is no reason to believe she is soon to come back unless there
has been ample previous experience that the mother does return.  If
the child is trusting, the fear, subsides and the expectation of the
mother's return supplants his fear, and soon he is playing with a toy.
    By studying the future, the observational mode is put in its proper
place, enhancing the future as one of those real things just beyond
sense observation.  Therefore, if one realized that the future exists,
and is extensive, other means are sought.  DMP is contrasted against this
type of learning and it is a good approach to provide comparison.


     We know the stars assemble the atoms and the particles that make
up the material environment.  Everything in nature centers around the
atom.  There are a hundred different atoms (in actually there are more
but their stability is in such short half-lives that we do not yet see their
role in nature).   In most cases, decay rates and conditions which
accelerate decay are known.  These regularities and rates of permanence
allow us to project that such things will be found in the future.
     Gold will always be gold, no matter where or when it is found.
Though it is burnt, formed, blended, pounded, scattered, mined or
recycled, it will always remain gold.  It was there in the past and it will
be there in the future.  Likewise, the sun will always be a star and will
follow the course of all stars as to birth, life and extinguishment.
knowing the conditions in which things happen and how long  they
exist is the basis of prediction found in the scientific method.  This is an
excellent way of predicting and we do not detract at all from these
techniques, but only stress that there are other ways which apply to the
things that science and observation cannot deal.
     Touching the future by simple observation is good only in cases
where a particular phenomena will endure a known time under given
conditions, or is a direct result of cause and effect relationships.
Knowing  the permanence of matter in given conditions and possible
potential events typifies scientific predictions.  The natural mode is as
good as  our ability to observe and predict by logical process, and
useful as long as we are aware of its limitations.


"The Scenario"

     In the observational mode a point in time must be imagined to be
the present so we can "visualize" the future.  This is a device we use to
avoid the limitations of the senses.  We are utilizing the minds eye to
"see" the future.  All of this is nothing more than the power of
imagination.  By imaginary means we allow ourselves to believe we are
seeing and observing as if we were actually present and perceiving the
future through our senses.  We did this in the absolute mode by
imagining the future has (already) happened and we are looking back
to it.  Such tricks of the imagination compensate for the limitations of
certain cycles used to predict the future.
     A curious feature of the observational mode is found when we
attempt to answer the question, "What happens to the period of time
between the actual present and the imagined present?"  The answer is
that we cannot be conscious of that period of time if we are using the
purely observational mode.  All things become an expanded present,
so the time between the actual now and the imagined now cannot be
realized unless we jump into the use of another mode.  Thus, it is
impossible to consider the continuum of time (i.e., the temporal 
environment) when using the observational mode.  It is characteristic of
the observational mode that awareness is lost for the duration of time
and its continuum.  The consciousness of the actual past and future is
lost also because these things are beyond the senses.  We are left with
an expanded present--or a continuum of present only.  The problem
with the observational mode is it destroys our awareness of the flow of
time from the past into the present and on toward the future.  Using
the observational mode excessively expands the present.  This over
emphasis is the reason it can not be used solely to approach the future.
     The imagination is used in all the modes.  Indeed, if there were
no imaginary content, thinking would be impossible.  As we become
more familiar with the imaginary mode, we realize how we subconsciously
compensate for the inherent limitations of the modes.

Previous Next Table of Contents of FUTURLOGICS