“We could say that practically all the problems of the human race are due to the fact that thought is not proprioceptive.” — David Bohm
Bohm’s notion of proprioception of thought is one of his most profound and important contributions. We have put together a page with various quotes and talks of his on this subject: David Bohm on Proprioception of Thought
“So, the idea of thought-proprioception is not so strange as it may sound at first. Thoughts and felts are movements and therefore we suppose that it must be possible to have proprioception of them. Since the body has the ability to sense it’s own movements, which is proprioception in a physical sense, we should also be able to extent this ability in the psychological realm. It is only a natural extension of body-proprioception. In fact, it’s very strange that we haven’t developed it very much, not enough anyway.” — David Bohm
We have released a new (to the internet) talk of David Bohm’s titled: Science, Spirituality, and the Present World Crisis. This talk was presented at the 12th International Transpersonal Association Conference by David Bohm in 1992. It is an excellent presentation that summarizes several key aspects of Bohm’s work in regards to the crises that humanity faces and the possible resolution of them.
On the other hand, it has become evident that because of the general incoherence of society and the individual that I just described the further progress of science along its current lines cannot resolve these crises and may indeed tend to aggravate them. Thus for example it seems clear that science cannot make it possible for us to act together with the coherence and general good will needed to provide everyone with an adequate physical and social basis for life and at the same time to avoid destroying the planet through ecological disasters, climate changes, and so on. Nor can it help us deal with the forces of nationalism and religious divisions so these will no longer prevent us from getting together to meet all these problems which are evidently of a world-wide nature.
Clearly this sort of thing will be possible only if there is wide spread sharing of meaning allowing for the creation of a coherent culture which would eventually be planetary. How can a coherent culture come about? I want to suggest that the essential start is to be able to have a dialogue. This way people in different sub-cultures can come together to dialogue to share their meanings, perhaps to emerge with new meanings that would be common. We have to begin with people who are open enough to start the dialogue. We cannot begin with those who don’t want to. We need a place where people could get together merely to talk without trying to solve any problems. Simply to communicate, to share and to see if they could come to a common understanding.
The David Bohm Papers recently updated their site and added a lot of new documents for download as PDF files than were never previously available on the internet before. In total we have counted 119 scanned documents so far.
Most of these documents pertain to Bohm’s work in physics, but there are also several pertaining to his views on thought, culture, humanity’s crises, and related topics.
As an example here is a sampling from the David Bohm Papers:
We have begun to update our David Bohm Articles and Essays section to reflect this new material.
At the Bohmian-Mechanics.net website there is an email exchange posted between Sheldon Goldstein and Steven Weinberg on Bohmian Mechanics.
A quote from this exchange:
Now all this has assumed the adequacy of the Copenhagen interpretation, so that we could compare two adequate formulations – Bohmian mechanics and the Copenhagen interpretation – with respect to simplicity and other criteria for judging theories. But you seem to agree with me that the Copenhagen interpretation is not adequate. You should therefore appreciate why others who agree with us on this, and who are not aware of any other adequate alternatives to the Copenhagen interpretation, might be attracted to Bohmian mechanics: They want to make sense of quantum mechanics, something that the Copenhagen interpretation manifestly does not do and that Bohmian mechanics manifestly does. — Shelly Goldstein
New material from Paavo Pylkkänen. See Fundamental Physics and the Mind – Is There a Connection?
Maximilian Schlosshauer, Johannes Kofler, and Anton Zeilinger have published a survey they did that is titled A Snapshot of Foundational Attitudes Toward Quantum Mechanics. Their survey involved a total of 33 participants from a a conference on the foundations of quantum mechanics.
This attitude was prevalent in Bohm’s time as well. However, slowly things seem to be getting better despite what this particular survey portrays.
Interestingly, only 21% of the participants stated that Bohr’s view of quantum mechanics is correct.