Terence McKenna & John Hazard Transcript

 

Terence McKenna’s

Final Earthbound Interview

Director John Hazard http://www.hazarddp.com/ October 1998 TMK: Well, novelty theory is something I’ve been working on o n since the early 70’s inspired by psychedelic plant experiences in the Amazon to attempt to look at time and really deconstruct it and

attempt to understand what it is and this t his has been a wild intellectual ride leading to some pretty easily stated conclusions. One is that novelty - which is my term for complexity or advanced advanced organization novelty increases as we approach the present moment. The universe you and I are living in is a far more novel and complicated place place than the early universe was. Well, some people would say “that’s just a

consequence of the unfolding of developmental processes,” but this asks the question, “What are  developmental processes - why should the universe have a preference for order or der over disorder”? Especially when we have something called the second law of thermodynamics which tells us exactly the opposite? Physicists believe the universe is running running down ultimately into a state of disorder, but what I see is everywhere the emergence of more and more complex forms, languages, organisms, technologies always building on the previously achieved levels of complexity. So that was one of my insights…coming out of that insight was the further understanding that

this process of complexification complexification through time is not proceeding at a steady rate. It actually follows a kind of Asimptotic curve, in other wor ds it’s happening faster and faster… and this was a revelation to me because it allowed me, philosophically, philosophically, to contextualize the human world. And to understand that human technologies, languages, migrations, art movements, ideologies, are not something different from nature, they are the t he same download of process that we see in the movement of continents, the evolution of new species of animals, except that these human novel emergent situations are happening much more quickly. So I see the cosmos, if you will, as a kind of novelty producing producing engine, a kind of  machine which produces complexity in all realms - physical, chemical, social - whatever, and then uses that achieved level of complexity as the platform of further complexity. Well this explains our present circumstance, it explains the rush towards all forms of new technology and social organization in the new millennium, but you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand that if the universe is complexifying faster and faster…an epoch, a time, will come when this

rate of complexification is occurring so rapidly that it will become itself  the overwhelming phenomena in the world of 3-dimensional space and time, and I call this the omega o mega point, or the transcendental object at the end of history - and I believe it is not that far off - that with the emergence of a global internet, a human population of several billions, an electronic noosphere, that we are now within the shadow of  this transcendental object object at the end of time. Our religions sense it, that’s what gives them their apocalyptic intuitions, and I think the ordinary man and woman in the street sense a kind of built in acceleration to time itself. Well rather than dismissing that or treating it as a psychological perception perception or something unique to our society, I took it as a basic perception about physics and have built elaborate mathematical theories around this idea. And then have found to my astonishment astonishment incredible

 

congruencies with other work, I’m thinking of the Mayan calendar and its curious countdown-like quality to an extremely unique event that the Maya felt would occur in the same time frame that my own equations predicted even though at the time I was unaware of the Maya. So what we have here is a new model of time based on a very real intuition that I think most people share, which is that time is speeding up, that human beings are part of o f that process, and that the culmination of that process is now within the vin (?) of historical time. In other words, I believe it will happen in 2012, in December, coincident with the same events that the Mayan’s placed placed at the end of their calendar. Even if I’m wrong, even if its 100 years or 500 years later later,, these are still spans of time, that when compared to the

life of the planet are fractions of a percentage. So whether you believe as I do that we can know the precise moment of the transformation of the world wo rld of time or whether you believe it is simply coming soon and fast really doesn’t make that much difference we are all gathered here at the end game of 

developmental processes on this planet – we are about to become unrecognizable to ourselves as a species. Our technologies, our religions, our science has pu pushed shed us towards this for thousands of years without us awakening to what the dénouement would be. Now, we stand close enough to it, and I think that all but all the most lumpen among us must feel the tug of the t he transcendental and transformative. John Hazard:

I am very perplexed when you say that time is speeding up – as far as I can tell, such

things as crystal oscillators, things which keep time…clocks, the relationship of the Earth turning to the calendar…the full moon, all of the things which are symptoms of our passage through time don’t seem to be throwing themselves out of kilter. So…how, what do you really mean about time speeding up? up?  TMK: Well let me answer in the form of a question. Which lasts longer, a million years in which

nothing happens or ten seconds with fifty thousand thousand events crammed into it? In other words, really time is only experienced by the events which occur within within it. And I maintain that the early universe had very little going on and consequently time moved very, very slowly. The character of time as we approach the present is that there are more and more physical domains and energetic domains in which change could occur. For example the early universe was pure plasma…a pure swarm of unassoc unassociated iated electrons; you didn’t even have atomic systems, lets alone chemistry, molecular chemistry, life, complex speciated

life and dynamically balanced balanced planetary ecosystems. Each one of those more complex phenomena crystallized out or emerged, if you will, from the previous systems that had come into existence. So when I say that time is speeding up, what I mean really is that more and more is happening – more and more is happening. And if you ask the the question, “well what would be the ultimate state of connectivity or of happening?” - it’s when all points are connected to all other points. Somehow this concept of  connectivity is intimately linked linked to the concept of complexity. So really what I’m saying is that the universe is getting its act together, it’s connecting the dots, its bringing everything into co-relationship

with everything else. And somehow it does this through the production of consciousness. Consciousness is this integrative function in biology which takes t akes data which may appear profoundly unrelated and in fact brings it into some kind of o f congruent relationship we say an organism coordinates a point of view. Well in a way what’s happening over time is that the universe is coordinating coordinating a point of 

view and as it does this it becomes somehow more aware, more self-conscious, more being-like and less thing-like. And as I said this process is not proceeding proceeding at a steady pace, its proceeding faster and faster. More connectivity occurs now in a calendar year, than occurred in a million years  – a billion years ago.

 

So somehow as we approach the present we find ourselves in an ever denser realm of activity, interrelationship, connectivity, and the result of this is more of the same - producing a shrinking globe, ever more immersive technologies, dissolution of political, social, gender, and class boundaries of all sorts. So that’s what I mean when I say the universe is speeding up.

You know, before the advent of man - of human beings - the fastest changes on this planet of  any consequence were genetic; changes in the genome of plants and animals. animals. Well, biologists know that for a fruit fly to add a bur to its leg, for a bird to change its plumage, you need hundreds of  thousands, sometimes millions of years of evolutionary evolutionary time. With the advent of human beings using spoken language, a new kind of possibility was born, it’s called epigenetic change, in other words change which is not about genes, but which is about languages, customs, behaviors of human beings. Epigenetic change reaches its dramatic culmination in speech, writing, and communication of all sorts. And so the carriers of epigenetic e pigenetic change, the human beings, are automatically then the carriers of  accelerated novelty. So when you look at evolution on a coral reef and co compare mpare it to the evolution of  political ideas in Modern Europe…obviously Modern Europe’s rate of change in this domain is thousands of times faster. So by moving from the genetic to the epigenetic realm we have vastly accelerated accelerated all kinds of processes. Now we appear to be about to move from the strictly human domain to the humanmachine symbiosis domain. domain. And of course machines processes information information and make connections and do their work at a rate thousands of times faster than any human being can work. So again we see a progressive acceleration at the proce ss of creating and and maintaining varieties of connectivity. And that’s what I mean by time is speeding up. John Hazard:

Your descrip description tion of the process by which which you developed the Time Time Wave theory theory – I

understand, I read True Hallucinations, so I understand it took you some years to work it all out. TMK: Yes in the Amazon all was chaos and mythic revelation, but I knew you that couldn’t bring

that back as a scientific theory and my bias has always always been toward science. Out of these many intuitions and revelations I discerned a thread which was about time, it began with a conversation with this Logos entity where it said to me “did you know every day is composed of four other days?” and I said “no, I not only didn’t know that, its never occurred to me, what a bizarre idea!” idea!” Well so this idea of 

time being a resonance created by other times not immediately before or after it as in scientific causality, but somehow a day, centuries ago, centuries in the future, come together to create an interference pattern that creates the unique moment. So that was one of the basic assumptions and then the structure on which this all was hung was w as the I-Ching - which may seem exotic to American and European audiences but which is of course as familiar to anyone in Chinese society as the Declaration of  Independence is to us. And what is the I-Ching? I-Ching? It a very ancient method of divining divining and predicting the future based on the idea that every moment can be symbolized by a unique ideogram which is somehow its essence…much in the way science believes you can explain all nature with 108 elements.

The ancient Chinese took the position that time itself was made m ade of elements. My style of thinking is scientific enough that if I were to say to somebody - I propose - a revolution in physics based on what I know about an ancient Chinese divinatory system…that would seem foolish to me, it seems occult, it seems unscientific. unscientific. Why should an ancient Chinese book of 

 

divination hold any insight insight whatsoever for modern physics? But the uncanny thing about the I-Ching is that it seems to work, even in the hands of critics it seems to work. So let me try out a metaphor on you which I think makes much more clear what’s going on here. here. Visualize for a moment sand dunes and

notice when you look at these sand dunes in your mind mind that they look like wind. Sand dunes look like wind in some sense. Well analyze the situation. What is wind wind? ? Wind is a pressure pressure variant phenomena phenomena that fluctuates over time. In a way the sand grains moved about by the wind are like like a lower dimensional slice of the wind itself. From photographic analysis of du dunes nes you can calculate the speed and duration of the wind that made them. So the dune is a lower dimensional slice of time, of the wind ebbing and flowing that that made it. Well now let’s change the metaphor a little bit, instead of grains of  sand let’s think of genes, instead of a wind storm, let’s think of a billion years of evo evolution lution – it moves the

genes around in a pattern which is a lower dimensional dimensional slice of the force which created the situation. In other words on every living organism there is an imprint of the higher dimensional force which made it. Somebody might say well that’s God! But in a scientific context we don’t speak like that, but whatever it

is that made blind matter into whales, squirrels, and human beings, it left its calling card inside each human being, each squirrel, squirrel, each whale. That’s the DNA. The DNA codons are are based on a system of 64

exactly like the I-Ching. So my belief is that someone, some group of people thousands of years ago looked into human organism, looked by meditative techniques into the center of their t heir own beings and they were not mystics nor were they empiricists, they were simply curious. But at the center of the meditative experience they saw the ebb e bb and flow, an energy field that was in a constant state of flux. And they asked themselves how many elements are necessary to describe this energy field? And the answer was more than ten less than a thousand; more than 20 less than 500. When they finally got it worked out lo and behold 64 situations are all the possible situations situations there are. Out of 64 subtypes of  time you can create everything from the coronation of Queen Mary to the resignation of Madonna out of 64 types of time. So really what the I-Ching is…is not a book of Ch inese mysticism, it s a book of  molecular dynamics that sees through biology to the physics that allowed biology to come into existence. And I’ll argue this with anybody in the field field regardless of how hardcore an empiricist they

claim themselves to be because I think the coincidence between the structure of the I-Ching and the structure of DNA is staggering. staggering. It’s not a simple correspondence between 64 and 64 - ALL the processes

that occur in DNA can be easily modeled with the six line hexagrams that make up the I-Ching. It’s almost as though Western science was fascinated fascinated by energy. For five thousand years we pursued understanding energy and this process ends with thermonuclear explosions in the deserts of  the American Southwest. We can light the fire that burns burns in the heart of the di distant stant stars – we know how to do that, that’s what the Western mind achieved, political issues aside. aside. The Eastern mind was not

interested in energy it was w as interested in time and they spent five thousand years deconstructing it, looking at it – and you don’t use atom smashers, you don’t use enormous physical pressure; it’s a different problem and you bring different tools to bear. You meditate, you look inside yourself, you study the movement of water around pebbles, you consider the situation, situation, you study history. In any case the bottom line is the people who w ho pursued this understanding of time achieved as sophisticated a relationship to time as the Western relationship to matter expressed through our ability to trigger fusion and fission. So there is a great deal for us to learn in the West, from these Oriental efforts to understand time and it is not necessarily mystical  – what I did was entirely mathematical, it ’s not

 

transparent to a person who has not studied mathematics, but to a professional mathematician its utterly trivial there’s nothing occult about it. I think true understanding can be commu communicated nicated and formally described with mathematics. That’s what we have here, we’re on the brink of a fusion of 

Western science with “Eastern mysticism” – nothing mystical about it except that we call it mysticism. But the fusion of these two viewpoints is going to give us a complete understanding of the universe of  space, time, matter, and energy. John Hazard: I wanna go to the stuff about the strange attractor at the end of history – I’ve never ever

considered that notion that we are being pulled as opposed to simply going on forever and ever and that’s for sure where people are going to go “huh?”.  TMK:

Well you know in the nineteenth century if you spoke of nature as having a purpose you th

were thought to be anti-evolution because in the 19 century there was great pain to eliminate anything like pre-formation or teleology or purpose or God. All these things they were trying to eliminate from evolutionary theory and until very recently in scientific thought the idea has been that t hat events are pushed by the causal necessity embedded in the events which preceded preceded them. In other words if you ask the question what is the most important in terms of or moment in terms of shaping this  moment the answer would be the moment just before this moment because it hands on the energy e nergy the space the time. Recently mathematicians have evolved evolved what they call the notion of attractors or strange attractors in some cases. And these are processes where a dynamic is not pushed by ccausal ausal necessity from behind, but it’s pulled by a point in the future. You could almost say, for exampl example, e, if you

release a ball bearing up near the rim of a bowl that its at attractor tractor is the bottom of the bowl and the ball bearing will roll down to the bottom then the n half way up the side then up the side in shorter and shorter cycles until it finally comes comes to rest in the exact bottom of the bowl. From the point of view of the new mathematics the bottom of the bowl is a basin of attraction and the ball bearing has fallen under its influence. I have always doubted doubted that evolutionary theory without purpose – without teleology – could produce as complex a world as we see around us in as short a time  – 5 billion years – as the life of the Earth. It seemed more as though these processes were not just wandering across a flat genetic genetic landscape, the process of biological evolution was actually being channeled channeled between high walls. In other words it could move with some motion this way and that but its forward direction was inevitable. This is the idea of an attractor. That what the universe universe is doing is – it is under the sway of what I call the transcendental object at the end of time and that tha t is this domain of hyper-connectivity that it would be perfect novelty. All nature aspires for for this state of perfect novelty. You could al almost most say that nature abhors habit. So it seeks the novel by producing various kind kindss of phenomena at every level in biology, chemistry, and society. So there really is a purpose purpose to the universe – its purpose is this state of hyper complexification in which all of its points become related to each other  – what mathematicians call cotangent. It gives the universe the feeling of being imbued with a caring presence, it makes it appear as though nature is tending towards something and it changes our own ethical and moral position in the universe because you know science tells us we are the product of a cosmic accident…we’re at the edge

of an ordinary galaxy in an ordinary star system and we’re damn lucky to be here, that’s it, that’s our place a very existential notion of our place in the cosmos. cosmos. But if you take this other point of view that processes under the influence of an attractor and that the value the attractor is maximizing is novelty … 

 

then suddenly for the first time in five hundred years, human beings are moved back to the center of the stage because we are the most novel thing on this planet. We are everything biology is plus technology language, politics, philosophy, philosophy, art and so on. Suddenly human beings become become important, not mere cosmic witnesses to a meaningless cosmos, but the cutting edge of a cosmos that glories in order and is moving toward higher states of order and at the present moment we are the carriers. Once it was the volcanic processes that shaped this planet, once it was the life of the early oceans, once it was the gr great eat dinosaurs but today humanity represents the cutting edge of complexity and this process of moving towards complexification. So without invoking God or any sort of myth you give meaning to human human life. What is man’s purpose? To advance and pr preserve eserve novelty - this is an ethical position, it means you don’t

replace rain forests with pastures, you don’t censor books, you don’t lean on people who make gender choices different from yours. yours. No, the purpose of bein being g a human is to complexify complexify reality even more. To hand on a more diverse, more complicated, more multi-phasic universe to our children. When this process of complexification reaches the omega point it will fulfill, I believe, the expectations of all these religions – but it will fulfill it in a mature, scientific and universal way that these religions all lack because they all reflect their parochial origins. Its certainly true that we see a limited slice of reality and your example from flat land, yes anything that moves like a gradient through time we will not discern very carefully. carefully. For instance this is why we have the science of Economics, because it keeps track t rack of the behavior of markets, which is something you can’t see or feel but which has become very important to human human institutions. It’s a fourth dimensional factor that we need to coordinate into our planning, so we ’ve created an entire science to study the movement movement and behavior of markets. I’m always trying to visualize what the concrescence would be like even though I know that in principle that it’s probably not possible to

imagine it, but several factors are on the horizon which I think can be brought together to sort of get a picture of what we’re headed towards. One is, for some time now we’ve been involved in building

complex prostheses which we call machines and computers. They are a part of us, us, we don’t perceive them as part of us because be cause we identify with the flesh and exteriorize the fabricated metal, but in fact they are a part of us as much as our political systems, our agricultural productions systems and so on. We, the animal body, has reached the limits of its evolutionary abilities – a cheetah can run 75 miles per hour, an elephant can lift three tons, but to go beyond those capacities of the animal body you have to make a marriage with mechanical thi things. ngs. We are extending ourselves through the machines. machines. One of  the things which these machines do is they’re time compressors. You and I sitting here talking are

operating at about a hundred hertz, if we could be magically downloaded into a top of the line computer we would run at 800 megahertz, me gahertz, that means we could do 800 million more things in this moment than we could do when we’re wearing flesh. So it may be that we will find a way to technologically technologically stretch

time and this will become for us like a false eternity. You may have only ten minutes left in your life, but it may be time enough to pack in all of human history from the Fall of Rome to the present moment. We are finding ways out of the 3dimensional Newtonian prison which says that life is narrow, confined, and ends at the grave. We are doing it by becoming information that is freed from material and somehow this allows us to make this ascent to the next dimensional modality. Information is not time and space constrained the way we are, we talk about the difficulty of moving an object at the speed of  light – our entire planetary technology cannot achieve moving a marble at the speed of light, but we can

 

move information at the speed of light, tetrabytes (terabytes) of it, we do this every day. We see, ahhah! we stand then like children at the edge of the ocean of information and we’re putting our feet in and wondering could we swim in that? What would it be like to to be wet in that? What would it be like like to go into that new medium? A similar dilemma must have confron confronted ted the early amphibians as they stared at the land and said “could we leave the ocean, could we go up into those places, could we breathe br eathe air and actually make the transition to such a hostile hostile and alien environment as the land?” These are major

symmetry breaks, but in every case the answer has been “you bet!” and sooner or later somebody did it and then all succeeding generations have followed suit. suit. What is fascinating about this particular particular transition is that we are conscious of the implications – we who will make the transition will in some sense, some limited sense, understand its implications, where I don’t think that was true for the animals

that left the primordial ocean. They simply were behaving with blind instinct instinct and evolutionarily dic dictated tated behaviors. But the degrees of freedom accessible to us are so multiferous that we can actually appreciate for the first time our circumstance. Our circumstance is awe insp inspiring, iring, we are about to take the step out of matter. The planet is on a collision course course with the most profound event it’s possible to imagine - the freeing of organic life from the chrysalis of matter. For a billion years there’s been life on this planet, but never life that c ould step outside of matter…but this is obviously what’s in the cards and we are privileged to be central at that event. John Hazard: You just said we are moving beyond matter…I just can’t imagine what you mean…can you try to talk a little more about that? TMK: First of all, I can’t quite imagine what we mean either, I think this is the test to imagine “what could that mean?” Maybe the bridge concept is virtual reality, obviously we’re on the brink of  building computer assisted worlds that don’t “really exist” but that which we experience the way we

experience dreams or the imagination. I think this is where psychedelic substan substances ces come in – shamans have always entered into a non-physical realm of information through trance  – in a way there is nothing new here…this is a part of the Archaic Revival!

(edited cut) Hahahaha! Hahahaha! Will you still lov love me, will you still feed me when I’m 64? Ummm are we rolling? I‘ve forgotten th the e thread…what was it…O it…Oh! h! Is it a human thing? Is this ascent into novelty novelty a

human thing? No, part of what I discern here, though we humans are always read ready y to suffer guilt and take blame for everything going on in the universe - I don’t believe this is something we are doing, I think we are as much corks tossed on the ocean of time as are hummingbirds and and prairie dogs. In other words an event of cosmic significance significance and importance is going to occur not far in the future. Are we causing it? No. Can w we e stop it? No. Can we hurry it? it? No! It’s built into the structure structure of matter itself;

one way of thinking of this is that the laws of physics physics are evolving to promote greater freedom. People have said to me, “well, don’t you find it a little strange that such a momentous event would occur in

human history, after all human history is ten thousand years wide, the t he planet is five billion years old, pretty unusual coincidence that human history would be happening when this cosmic event happens”. No, that is completely wrong, human history is being caused by the nearby presence of this event. In other words if you think of the event as something which has shells of influence some of its shells of  influence reach so far back in time that they drag life out of the primitive primitive oceans. Some of its shells of  influence reach so far back in time that they define the emergence of the hominid line out of the higher

 

primates. Some shells reach back to Egypt, some to medieval times, as you approac approach h the present it becomes stronger and stronger but I would argue that the presence of human civilization on this planet is that strongest evidence we have that matter and organizational processes are about to make some kind of leap to a new order of being. What history is, is the 25,000 year transition zone - before you enter the zone you’re an animal, after after you leave the zone you’re a god. But for 25,000 years you’re kind

of an animal and kind of a g od. You’re constantly bei being ng swamped by your ani animal mal nature and then great teachers are appearing and dragging people back to the right li line. ne. We are schizophrenic in history. A friend of mine once said “history is the shockwave which precedes the Eschaton,” and I absolutely believe that. I believe that as historical processes intensify intensify its reasonable to believe that we are ever closer to the Eschaton. If my ideas seem strange to someone, I ask them “can you imagine this planet planet in

500 years, given the propagation of ordinary historical and scientific rates of unfoldment and discovery? Can you imagine this planet in a thousand years? “ No, no one can imagine that because processes are

now in play which so totally rewrite the script that no one can imagine a hundred years or two hundred years in the future, because the discoveries which will be made in that span of time will so totally rewrite the human experience of itself itse lf and the environment that we cannot see deep into the future. This indicates to me that the future is exploding in an asymptotic unfoldment into a kind of cultural super-space. Our own bafflement at the impossibility of conceiving any real future given the political and social and technological forces in play is proof of that. attempt ttempt to give me a definition of  John Hazard: Before we go further I would like for you to a concrescence and Eschaton. Theology, y, it simply TMK: Let’s go backwards, Eschaton first. Eschaton is a good word out of Theolog means “the last thing”. The last thing is the Eschaton and it is everything become one thing. For theologians it’s God, for somebody of a more materialist mate rialist bent it might be something else, but the

Eschaton is the last thing. Eschatology is the the study of the time of the last thing. Now what was the other one? John Hazard: Concrescence. TMK: Concrescence, this is a little trickier concept, I took it from Alfred North Whitehead. Concrescence is the idea of something that grows together, t ogether, it concresces, it becomes more dense, more

connected, more defined in space and time. When I talk about the transcendental object at the end of  time or the coming of the Eschaton or hyper-novelty, I mean that the process of the human and biological concrescence concrescence of intent reaches some kind of maximum. Concrescence is the end of the process of becoming. becoming. Becoming is not not true being. True being exists at at the concresc concrescence. ence. The kind of  being we experience becoming, is a partial part ial state of being, much like history is a partial state of  concrescence. History definitely places us outside outside the world of biological intent, the animal mind mind,, but history does not bring us into the presence pre sence of the Eschaton, it’s a partial process and concrescence is

what waits at the end. The Eschaton Eschaton is the concrescence. John Hazard:  So we really can’t have any way w ay of knowing what the experience of that w will ill be like? 

 

 

like asking a man looking east at TMK: No. The reason why is because asking that question is like

two a.m. to describe the coming sunrise  – he can’t because it is literally over the event eve nt horizon of the future. When we look into the future, we see that the east is streaked with rosy dawn, but we cannot conceive of the day that is about to come, all we can see is the dim glow g low of some kind of Eschatological promise. Ask me this question in 2010 and I will have a different answer. answer. John Hazard: Umm, back to this issue of physics and your description of the two things that are left out

of their models. The way you describe describe it is so self evident and simple…the complexification the further you get away from the big bang and the fact that complexification complexification is speeding up. Can you talk just a little bit about the relationship of those observations to the world wor ld of the physicist and their efforts to define reality and why they’re not using, including in their models these aspects that you’re pointing to.  TMK:  The main reason they aren’t friendly to our model – a progressive concrescent model like

this is because you would have to look at, you yo u would have to give credit to biology for being be ing a stage higher than chemistry and give credit to human history history as a stage higher than biology. Physicists study physics – if you study physics there is no biology – you don’t have to deal with issues of biology when you study physics. I mean there is something called biophysics biophysics but it’s not well received in physics or biology. So physicists are attend to discount biology biology even though life on this planet is 4.83 billion years old, physicists just discount discount it, they call it an epiphenomenon. When you talk to sociologists they give no credit to physics. Science has compartmentalized compartmentalized nature in order to anal analyze yze it – there is no theory of  nature as such. That’s really what I’m offering; I’m offering a theory which covers physics, chemistry,

geology, biology, sociology, linguistics, linguistics, the whole thing. In other words, not saying man is some special category, not saying that we need nee d artificial divisions, but over the entire domain of known phenomena this tendency to complexify through time and be faster and faster can be discerned. discerned. We need a theory of everything. Physics talks about physics physics of everything but none of these theories address biology let alone sociology, linguistics and you know, the phenomenon of human beings. th

The Archaic Revival – there is a way of looking at the entire 20 century beginning with Pablo Picasso binging back masks from Africa and showing them around in French cafes in 1915; beginning with Freud’s discovery of the unconscious and Jung’s elaboration of those discoveries and then every

phenomenon of major importance that you care to mention in the 20 th century: fascism, abstract expressionism, rock n roll, sexual permissiveness, psychedelic drug taking, rave culture, body piercing,  jazz, the list is endless. What do all these things have in common? common? They are reversions to archaic behaviors, they represent rejections to the Edwardian gentleman with his white man’s burden, and

represent instead a realization that for us to survive and live with ourselves we have to re-empower archaic values. As the century unfolded the understanding understanding of what this re-empowering of archaic values might mean has changed. Jung and Freud discovered the unconscious unconscious,, discovered that we are not all ladies and gentlemen, but that there is a cannibal lurking within. Albert Hoffman’s discovery of LSD demonstrated that that inner wilderness is accessible to people through chemistry. chemistry. Then still later it was understood that the key ingredient in active shamanism is psychedelic plants, psychedelic experiences - and in a way that closed the loop between the impulse towards the archaic and tthe he impulses of modern science and medicine. The key is the psychedelic experience, that’s what makes the shaman a shaman, that’s what made the archaic in fact archaic, so people like Freud and Jung and the

 

Surrealists and Dadaists and Abstract expressionists all all of these people were very close to the mark. The shaman is the paradigmatic figure and the psychedelic experience seems to be the anticipatory experience of this Eschaton that we’re headed toward. t oward. 

When psychedelics were first being discussed it was thought that they would prepare people for death, in a sense they probably pr obably do, but in the same way they prepare people for death they prepare people for transformation. It gets you used to the idea that the world is not what it appears to be, it gets you used to the idea that the world is somehow animate, intelligent and proceeding along its own agenda. In a way, shamans have always been anticipations anticipations of some future state of mankind – they are the masters of language, they are the ones who are telepathic with the animals, they are the ones who can see into the future. This archaic nostalgia gets real focus once you realize that it is the shaman and his or her shamanic techniques that confers on them the extra historical dimension. That is how you get out of linear history, that’s how you visit the t he realm of the ancestors, that’s how you travel t ravel into the future, that’s how you break up the tyranny of Newtonian serial time. John Hazard: We have fourteen years until this event measured on the calendar and a really common

ordinary way to describe the times that we’re living in is that they are very very chaotic, filled with acts of unspeakable evil and at the same time there is this buzz and thrust of optimism  – everything from a guy like Peter Schwartz talking about the t he long wave, the big booming economy, breakthroughs in educational levels, and qualities of life, but it’s definitely a dynamic where you’ve got go t extremes of good and evil in that way. Would you talk a little bit about the relationship between that dynamic as we go forward and the novelty continues to climax. TMK:  Well…novelty is not necessarily “good” or “nice”, novelty is complex, that’s what it it is. So I see really a concatenation of tendencies and forces here at the end. It’s only going to get weirder; the

level of contradiction is going to rise excruciatingly even beyond the excruciating present levels of  contradiction. (laughs) So uhh I think it’s just going to get weirder and weirder and weirder and finally it’s going to be so weird that people are going to have to talk about how weird it is. And at that point novelty theory can come come out of the woods. Eventually people are going to say “what the hell is going on?” it’s just too nuts, it’s not enough e nough to say its nuts, you have to explain why it’s so nuts. Between now

and 2012, the next fourteen years, I look for the invention of ar artificial tificial life, the cloning of human beings, possible contact with extraterrestrials, possible human immortality and at the same time, appalling acts of brutality, genocide, race bating, homophobia, famine, starvation, because the systems which are in place to keep the world sane sane are utterly inadequate to the forces that have been unleashed. The collapse of the socialist world, the rise of the internet – these are changes so immense, nobody could ever imagine them happening and now that they t hey have happened nobody even bothers to mention what a big deal it is. The fact that there is no such thing as the Soviet Union, people never talk ab about out it anymore, but when I was a kid the notion that that would ever change was beyond beyond conceiving. The good news is that as primates we are incredibly adaptable to change! Put us in the desert - we survive, put us in the jungle - we survive, put us under Hitler - we survive, under Nixon – we survive. We can put up with about anything and it’s a good thing because because we are going to be tested to the limits. This is why

the right wing is so alarmed, because be cause what they see going on is the t he breakdown of all tradition, all order, all sanctioned norms of behavior and they’re quite right that its happening but they’re quite wrong to

 

conclude that it should be resisted or that its somehow evil. The mushroom said to me once, it said “This is what it’s like when a species prepares to depart for the stars. You don’t depart for the stars under calm and orderly conditions; it’s it’s a fire in a madhouse!” That’s what we have – the fire in the

madhouse at the end of time  – this is what it’s like when a species prepares to move on to the next dimension. The entire destiny of all life on the planet is is tied up in this. We are not acting for ourselves or from ourselves, we happen to be the point species on a transformation that will affect e every very living organism on this planet at its conclusion. John Hazard:  Let’s pause for a second…umm I see how with Jenkin’s calling it galactic cosmology, our home continues to expand…we’ve gone from the village vi llage to the nation state to tthe he planet….  TMK: …Now we’re ready to take on the big picture.  John Hazard: So let’s just talk about the conclusions of the archaic mind – what it reaches. TMK:  Well…the great watershed difference between the archaic understanding and what is

called scientific materialism is the archaic mind understood – in fact perceived – that nature is conscious, nature is alive, nature is an organism full of intent. The goal of the archaic mind is to connect connect with, communicate with, and align itself to this greater Gaian wholism, which is sometimes called nature, the great spirit, the realm of the ancestors…but this is what the archaic mind understood and was comfortable with. In fact it is true! Our own decision to view the universe as dead, as inanimate, as

unintelligent allowed us, permitted us, to dissect it, to use it and to deny its validity outside of human purpose. Now the consequences of living like like that is coming back to haunt us, we have almost destroyed our home, we have almost cut the earth from beneath our own feet. This impulse towards the Gaialanic and the archaic is a survival instinct at this point. We must give reverence and credence to nature and nature’s methods because no other methods met hods will allow us to work our way out of the

e xtraction, comodification, megapresent mess we’re in. High temperature, high energy resource extraction, agriculture…we’re at the end of the rope for these things. So, the archaic holds answers, but it only

holds answers if we are willing to think t hink of the universe as a living, intelligent entity, in which with we are in partnership, not set against, but that in fact we are a part of a morphogenetic intent and an unfolding understanding….  reality that is larger than human human understanding. Imagine! Larger than human understanding…. John Hazard: Sooo, the whole entire Milky Way Galaxy is a being? TMK:  Well, it’s a kind of…it’s an organism, yes. The galaxy is a kind of an organism, you can

think of it as a fractal resonance with a cell. The galaxy has a nucleus of very dense material where very mysterious processes are going on, then it has a cytoplasmic envelope of stars and gas clouds that surround that core, then it is an individual very distinctly defined by the vast emptiness that lies between it and the next ga laxy. Yes…I think nature builds by fractal intent intent and that all organisms have a core and then a deployed surround, whether we are talking about the cell, the t he solar system, the earth, the galaxy. In the process of the conservation of novelty, structures are created with cores that are more complex than their outlying neighborhoods. To my mind, a galaxy hanging in space is a picture of  the time wave. Every star is a data point in an enormous computer simulati simulation on of the novelty wave –  that’s why it has that  spiral structure. You know…scientists are very puzzled that the galaxies don’t don’t fly

 

apart, they don’t seem to have enough mass that their gravitation should hold them together. There’s

been a lot of talk about dark matter or some missing factor, well the missing factor is novelty  the galaxy stays together because the galaxy wants to be a galaxy. In other words, it wants to hold onto the level of novel morphology that it has achieved. It has an actual appetite for expressing itself in tha thatt form –  that’s why the galaxies are spirals and in a sense those spirals are very large pictures of the time wave

where we can at last see it, not confused with its background or foreground. So everything organizes itself fractally, spirally, with a dense center in its spatial domain and a dense center in its temporal domain. We are like this, galaxies are like this, planets, stars, bird flocks, coral reefs, but in the case of  the galaxy it’s particularly easy to observe the t he structure because the thing is so huge that its forces

dominate and damp out other forces which might distort it.

Terence McKenna 1946-2000

Transcribed with love and hope that these insights may never be lost.