by Keith Beasley
Not that many years ago 'wireless' was the in-thing. The ability to communicate without wires was heralded as a major breakthrough - the dawn of a new age. Since then the age of IT (Information Technology) has virtually (!) taken over our lives. After telephones we had cordless phones then cellular phones now video phones. Whilst some still hand write letters the vast majority of communication, at least in business, has had some electronic processing somewhere along the way. Word processors, fax, fibre optic cables, microwave links, System X, 'voice mail', E Mail . . . the list gets longer at least annually. I come from this world. My job, since I graduated in '79, has been in the industry that develops the electronic components on which all this IT is based. I no longer believe in it:
My doubts first came to the surface, in the mid 90's, during a meeting to discuss some of the latest technological developments. We were told that what was driving our technology was 'personal communications'. We were told that everybody would want a handheld, take anywhere, gadget that would let them communicate in words or data to anyone, anywhere. This was the market for what we were developing. At the time I thought 'but I don't want to be accessible by anybody at anytime'. I also realised that, to a considerable degree, the IT tail was wagging the IT dog. The electronics industry, like so many others, had become self perpetuating. The market is created. Few people need most of electronic gadgets that now fill our lives. Now I sometimes argue that nobody really needs IT at all!
Let us look at a typical modern communication. Say a fax between two businessmen. - JS in London and DB in France:
JS considers what he wants to say, he subconsciously translates his ideas into words and maybe dictates them to his secretary. He, or his secretary, then presses the appropriate keys at the keyboard of a word processor which translates the words into ASCII or some such computer readable language. The computer then translates it into a slightly different electronic language from which the printer generates a printed page. That page is then 'translated' by the fax machine into yet another slightly different electronic language and transmitted down various cables to DB's office. DB's fax machine decodes the message and turns it into print which DB reads. As he reads DB translates into French and adds his cultural interpretation. After many 'translations' a message has finally been received.
But is it the one that was sent? Even if the actual words received were the same as those sent, was the information with all its nuances actually understood the other side of the channel? And think of all the energy that has been consumed by word processors and fax machines, by the manufacturers of these machines and the ship that laid the cables, etc., etc. For all the hype about modern technology, it's not really efficient or effective, is it?
The table below compares different modes of communication:
| COST | TIME | IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT | TRANSLATIONS | ACCURACY IN CONVEYING MESSAGE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Person to Person (Car/Rail/Air) | £300 | 3 hours | Fuel Pollution | Ideas - words - speech - ideas | Fair, helped by body language |
| £0.25 | 1 day | Some of above | Ideas - words - text - ideas | Poor | |
| E-Mail / Teleconferencing | < £1 | minutes | Electromagnetic pollution | idea - words - 0/1's - display - ideas | Fair if all possibilities used |
| Telepathy, | 0 | 0 | Nil | None | Excellent |
Let us consider an alternative. Suppose both JS and DB have develop their psychic abilities and are both telepathic. They are able, as most of us are if we let ourselves, pick up the thoughts and feelings of others. JS has a message for DB. He brings an image of DB into focus in his mind and thinks the message he wants to send - not in English words but in ideas . .complete with any associated feelings. DB, free of electronic gadgets, has a mind clear and free to receive. An image of JS comes onto his mind and he focuses on his European colleague. Instantly he has the message, complete with nuances and free of errors of translation. Without any energy having been consumed. Efficient and effective. With the comparison between different means of communications as illustrated below, it makes me wonder why we use anything but telepathy!
To say such heresy in IT circles would have me labelled a really nutter and yet, in private, many people now admit to some psychic experience. It may only be with a close friend or relative but telepathic communication is not at all uncommon. To extend its application outside of life-or-death situations involving loved ones is surely only a matter of strengthening our ability to receive weaker signals, of learning to 'tune in' to a wider range of sources. We have the inherent ability to communicate not only without wires but without any electronic assistance . . .so why don't we?
One reason for the poor take up of telepathy is undoubtedly the vested interests of the IT companies themselves. They are going to deny its possibilities purely to retain their jobs. But it is a market driven industry. If we, the intelligent, aware, consumer stop buying what isn't necessary, then they will have to find more useful outlets for their technology. Shortly after I first wrote this piece I started looking for more useful outlets for my skills - and ended up leaving the IT industry to teach Reiki Healing!
A fuller explanation for our refusal to let go of our technological tools of communications lies in the associated fear. Fear of standing up against the tide of convention and 'market forces'. Fear of ridicule. But who is being ridiculous? Those who choose to communicate without cost to ourselves or the environment or those who spend their hard earned cash on the latest technological gadget because they're told they can't do without it?
The deeper fear lies in admitting that telepathy is real. In accepting that we can share the thoughts and feelings of the world. This is a very big issue. Once we know that there is 'One World' and that we are all interconnected, then telepathy naturally follows. What we fear in accepting the holistic world view and its practical consequences such as telepathy is the associated change. The need to let go of old habits and beliefs. This can be a very painful process, but the more we use and rely on 'new thinking' (or 'right' thinking since a large part of the change is getting the right hand, intuitive, part of our brain working) the more we see how 'real' such a world is. My own acceptance of telepathy and its related energies came after considerable struggles, greatly assisted by a range of relaxation techniques. For telepathy to work, the mind needs to be clear of the wants, worries, doubts and dreams with which it is usually full. Any meditational technique can be used to assist in this: Zen, Tao, Yoga, Transcendental Meditation, etc. For me, the breakthrough came after a weekend course of the Alexander Technique. Where conventional talk failed to calm a situation (for example in the work place) I found that by 'sending love' (telepathically) ruffled feathers were soon smoothed and peace was restored.
Many, including researchers into psychic abilities, might argue that we cannot rely on telepathic communication - it is notoriously difficult to communicate telepathically to order. This may be true in the laboratory but my theory, based on personal experience, is that real life telepathic communications is effective . . so long as both parties are clear minded enough to be able to focus on the message ... and the message is actually necessary. It does not surprise me that many lab experiments fail - why should a mind focus itself on sending an irrelevant message such as a symbol on a card? Come to think of it, I'm not so sure it would want to focus on the sort of message that normally occupies a business fax either!
Whilst the power and inherent ability of our own minds provide an alternative to IT, there is no need for IT companies to worry about their market . . at least in the short term. In order to train ourselves in the required skills and compare experiences of telepathic communication, we shall need the conventional tools of communication for a few years yet. The difference will be that at last we acknowledge IT for what it is - merely a tool. One we can do without.
Keith Beasley runs workshops to encourage and enable the development of our psychic abilities - including telepathy.