Can the Mind Influence “Physical Reality”?

It Depends on your Worldview

That is a big question and how we answer it will most likely depend on our worldview.

If you are what philosophy would call a physical monist, basically a materialist, you would likely say our mind can’t affect the physical world, seeing this view as a bunch of New Age, New Thought mumbo jumbo believed by people who can’t handle the “real” world so retreat to a fantasy world.

However, if your worldview is what I would call spiritual monism, then you might believe such a thing is possible.

I know this latter position is difficult for empirically-minded, rational people to accept, but I would remind these people that actually quantum physics has disproved the physicality or materiality of the world.

Quantum Physics View

Quantum physics says there are no isolated physical substances, just relationships. Quantum physics tells us no object has a completely separate identity. Its identity is defined by its relationships to other objects. In short, everything interconnected.

However, while our mind does affect things on the quantum level, that does not mean that it can affect things on the everyday level we live in.

Just a quick example. We have heard of people using their minds to bend spoons or move physical objects across a table.

People like Uri Geller claims to have performed these feats, but these claims are too controversial to accept at face value, so we won’t use those examples as proof it’s possible.

Another example could be my wanting a particular person to call me, and then lo and behold, the phone rings and it’s them.

Is that proof I used my mind to make it happen? Did I really influence physical reality like that? Well, the skeptics would say no. They would dismiss it as a mere coincidence and add that there were no doubt numerous times I had wanted someone to call me and they didn’t. I just conveniently forgot those examples, and instead focused on the one time where it occurred. It’s called confirmation bias.

As the old saying goes, “a broken clock is right twice a day”.

So why am I bringing this up? Well I had an experience other day that brought it to mind.

My Experience

Often on Sunday mornings, my wife and I take walks of three or four miles. We take along a watch that measures the time and distance of our walk. When we reach each mile mark, the watch tells us how many minutes it took us to walk that mile.

When walking with my wife we average about 21 or 22 minute miles.

But today my wife wasn’t able to walk with me so I walked by myself. For the first couple of miles I was averaging about 18 minutes a mile, walking briskly, but at a pace that felt natural.

Then, shortly after I finished the second mile, the watch gave an alert that the battery was running low and would soon shut down. I still had another mile or so to walk before I was finished.

I didn’t think I would make it home before the watch conked out, and I was curious what my time for the third mile would be. My watch had lost power before, but I couldn’t remember how long I had before it would go out again this time, but I didn’t think it would last the rest of my walk.

don Juan: The Man of Knowledge

I remembered reading about the Yaqui sorcerer, don Juan, who was the star of the Carlos Castaneda books that were popular in the 70's.

In it, don Juan said the “Man of Knowledge” could use his power to control his fate for a time. I think he was actually talking about the ability to choose the time and place of one’s pending death.

Well my situation was a little different, so I put it out there that my watch would not lose power before I got home.

I kept that intention in my mind, but I was also aware the watch could cut off at any moment, revealing that I had no such power, and it was crazy to think I did.

But I just kept walking and time passed and the watch kept functioning.

When I got within a block of my house, I thought it might lose power just to show me how silly I was being.

But guess what? It didn’t shut off. I arrived home and maybe two minutes later, the watch shut down.

Did My Mind Influence My Watch?

So, the question becomes did I actually influence my watch not to run out of juice until I got home?

As I said in the beginning of this paper, how you answer this question most likely depends on your worldview, but I would like to take a different approach to this question.

It’s an interesting dilemma because one could argue either way and give good reasons for both perspectives, but the bottom line is we don’t really know.

There is no way to prove one way or the other which view is correct factually. It really comes down to our own prejudices in this matter.

William James’ Approach

In cases like this, I like to take the approach of the American pragmatic philosopher William James.

He said when you can’t prove factually either side of an argument, you then have to look at what he calls, “the cash value” of each position (so American!). In other words, which view gives you the biggest bang for the buck, pays the most dividends, or has the most practical benefits?

Remember, we only take this approach when there isn’t sufficient evidence to support either view.

So to decide one has to focus on the practical benefits of each point of view.

Well, let’s first take the view that our mind can’t influence reality. If we believe this, it would most likely make us more passive toward life, thinking it would be very difficult make a difference in the world. This might lead us to limit our ambitions and desires and give us a more negative and pessimistic view of the world.

At least this how I see it. Perhaps those who subscribe to this view and don’t agree with my take could post their objections in the comments section. I would love to read them.

However, if your reason is you don’t want to believe in a lot of nonsense with no rational or empirical support, I would reply that is the whole reason to use James’ method. There is no rational or empirical evidence to support either side.

What are the Benefits of Each View?

Now what would be the benefit of believing our mind can influence the outside world?

Well it would probably mean we would have a more optimistic and active view, believing we can make changes not only in the world, but in ourselves. The world would respond favorably to our efforts.

James would also ask which belief would be more rational and self-satisfying?

Again we would have to say the second view would. It’s more rational because it encourages us to make bolder plans and take more chances, thus enriching our lives. It is more self-satisfying because those efforts when they do succeed give us a greater sense of well-being.

In addition, we would believe that the universe is a friendly place and means well by us. If we held the alternative view, the universe would take on a colder more indifferent aspect in relation to our efforts. In short it wouldn’t be a friendly world. It wouldn’t inspire us to engage with it as much.

So for these reasons even though I can’t be completely sure that my mind can affect the universe in these ways, I think it behooves me to think it can.

I would love to hear your views on this whether you agree or disagree with my position. What do you think of William James’ method to deal with issues that have no factual basis of support either way?

This is another example of the Magical Universe. For more information onThe Magical Universe. Click this link: The Magical Universe

Originally published at https://www.bruce-mcgraw.com.