HOW TO EXPLAIN CONSCIOUSNESS SHIFTS

A consciousness shift is an esoteric concept whereby, at times, human consciousness changes significantly and we become a different order of being. At the centre of many New Age philosophies, the idea is usually ridiculed by the ‘rational’.
Indeed, throughout my life I’ve been told by various threads of literature that I’m close to one. It seems that always there is some guru working away at our mind, enforcing the idea that we will soon become more than we were before.

One consciousness shift is said to have happened in 1987.

This is known as Harmonic Convergence, and is based on the idea that many Native American tribes predicted such a shift in this year, way back in the past.
What kind of change would have occurred for this ‘convergence’ to become true? It would contain the knowledge that Earth is a sentient planetary entity, and we will return to the Earth.
Well, guess what, it’s happening. Environmentalism is well advanced, and we are all, now, aware that our future must be in being more eco-friendly. Indeed, many cannot understand the mind-set of the polluter, and even many polluters are beginning to feel guilt.

What are we dealing with here?

Is this a change in consciousness, or just a change in attitude? Is the ‘consciousness shift’ nothing more than a fancy name for a new way of thinking and doing?
Let’s look at the Renaissance. This was a re-discovery of the Classics in the 16th century, fuelling an outpouring of the arts. The outcome of this was a move against Christianity, and the eventual succession of the modern world.

So, big changes there, but again, only in attitude.

Yet consider the discovery of perspective geometry at the same time. This concept identified the existence of distance. Prior to this, paintings were two-dimensional. Afterwards, they were three-dimensional.
This is more than change in attitude. This is change in how we actually see, and represent, the physical world. Of course, I’m not saying that people didn’t ‘see’ in three dimensions beforehand. But they had no way of representing it. So consciousness can be said to have really changed.

There’s an argument concerning Shakespeare that adds to this.

In his plays, human foibles and personality were popularly known for the first time. Some argue that he therefore ‘invented’ the modern emotional personality.
Throughout life we are affected by various outside influences, be they societal or environmental. At various times in our lives, these can fundamentally change who we are. New ideas can also have the same function.
As such, we undergo such consciousness shifts often. However, I’ve argued elsewhere that if a particular idea catches hold of society, it can cause a consensus which radically changes our idea of knowledge, and thus our appreciation of the world.
We actually live in a clash of such consensual understandings. Think religion v science, left v right, etc. And each one sees the world in a radically different way to the point that one cannot understand or identify with the other.
Should any one gain predominance, would a consciousness shift be the result? After all, the only difference between a chaotic world, or one ordained by God, is our appreciation of it. Perhaps consciousness shifts are battling for supremacy all the time, locked in an evolutionary battle for the survival of the fittest.

© Anthony North, August 2008