What do you think?
Rate this book
Radical Knowing: Understanding Consciousness through Relationship
A radical reassessment of what we mean by "consciousness" and how we experience it in relation to others
• Shows the importance of integrating different ways of knowing--such as feeling and intuition, reason and the senses--in our approach to life
• Discusses the technique of Bohmian Dialogue where you can learn not only to "feel your thinking," but also to experience true communion with others
In Radical Knowing Christian de Quincey makes a provocative We are not who we think we are. Instead, we are what we feel. Giving disciplined attention to feelings reveals the most fundamental fact of life and We are our relationships. Most of us think we are individuals first and foremost who then come together to form relationships. De Quincey turns this "obvious fact" on its head and shows that relationship comes first, and that our individual sense of self--our "private" consciousness--actually arises from shared consciousness. This shared, collective consciousness is at the heart of indigenous ways of life and their worldviews.
De Quincey explains that participating in shared consciousness literally builds the fabric of reality, and that understanding this process is key to unlocking our potential for higher consciousness and spiritual evolution. He presents the technique of Bohmian Dialogue, developed by groundbreaking quantum physicist David Bohm, as one method for experiencing this powerful process. He also explores the mystery of synchronicity, offering a new understanding of the relationship between matter and mind and the underlying nature of reality.
• Shows the importance of integrating different ways of knowing--such as feeling and intuition, reason and the senses--in our approach to life
• Discusses the technique of Bohmian Dialogue where you can learn not only to "feel your thinking," but also to experience true communion with others
In Radical Knowing Christian de Quincey makes a provocative We are not who we think we are. Instead, we are what we feel. Giving disciplined attention to feelings reveals the most fundamental fact of life and We are our relationships. Most of us think we are individuals first and foremost who then come together to form relationships. De Quincey turns this "obvious fact" on its head and shows that relationship comes first, and that our individual sense of self--our "private" consciousness--actually arises from shared consciousness. This shared, collective consciousness is at the heart of indigenous ways of life and their worldviews.
De Quincey explains that participating in shared consciousness literally builds the fabric of reality, and that understanding this process is key to unlocking our potential for higher consciousness and spiritual evolution. He presents the technique of Bohmian Dialogue, developed by groundbreaking quantum physicist David Bohm, as one method for experiencing this powerful process. He also explores the mystery of synchronicity, offering a new understanding of the relationship between matter and mind and the underlying nature of reality.
352 pages, Paperback
First published August 16, 2005
12 people are currently reading
73 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
Want to read
June 2, 2009This book discusses synchronicity, quantum physics, Hume, Whitehead, Habermas, Jung, causality, semantics, and many other rather rigorous and/or mind-bending subjects, yet the publisher has chosen to market it as a sort of relationship/new-age/self-help book. Accordingly, the many paragraph-length blurbs on the inside flap and back cover greatly misrepresent, soften, and gloss over the book's real subject - which is, in short, inter-subjectivity: that is, the way in which relations between individuals are truly mutual, co-creating bonds and not mere "interpretations" and "versions" spun-out by one self-conscious mind grappling with the irreconcilable difficulty of another self-conscious mind getting all up in its face. The Other is not necessarily at odds with me, according to this view; human relations are not hopelessly mediated and manipulated by MERE language games and rival interpretations. While that may sound dry and abstract, it is asserting that, quite simply, we are not just fuck-heads walking around in a solipsistic cause-and-effect mechanism playing itself out for no good reason. This is not the first or the only book to present this information, but it is done with extreme clarity, care, and scope (DeQuincey is a teacher, and it is obvious he has had to present these ideas to a variety of audiences with varying attention spans, and much of it has apparently passed that trial by fire). This is a sophisticated and comprehensive book that has been poorly marketed to a niche readership that would be turned-off by anything "intellectual."
October 4, 2007
This book was way too flaky and new age for me. I couldn't get past the basic premise.
October 9, 2012
The several paragraphs comparing and contrasting belief and intention were the highlight for me.
April 11, 2020
Let me start off by saying that this book has touched my heart in all what that means. Explaining consciousness throughout relationships or what Christian calls it inter-subjectivity relation was so articulate and precise. I could read this book more than one time, not only for the purpose of grasping the concepts more but to get the same feeling or experience I felt when I first read it. If you would like to have a completely new way of thinking about consciousness and matter through inter-subjectivity relationship, then this book is your guide.
The author lays down many of the historical theories to establish his thoughts, so for instance for the hard-problem of consciousness he establishes how whitehead philosophy says that the relationship between and body is not a spatial relationship in other words, a relationship that exist in space on the contrary he goes further in explaining that relationship between mind and body is the oscillation between the physical pole that informs the next moment of experience which is in the present which is a mental pole which in turns forms the experience that you have in the present it is a temporal relationship, a process relationship not a relationship between substances.
What really struck me in this book is Christian’s ability to make the conclusion that the limitations and dangers of overreliance on reason, thought, and belief at the expense of feeling and the silent wisdom of direct experience from Jean Liedloff’s Continuum principle which simply is that for millions of years, our ancestors evolved with the expectation that as babies they would be held and carried by their mothers for the first year or so of life, now in recent generations our civilized society has established the norm of separating he baby from constant physical contact with its primary caretaker. Meanwhile, the innate expectation for in arms experience (the ‘’continuum’’) continued to burn in the human baby’s nervous system- unfulfilled. As a result, generations of humans have grown up with a deep sense of something missing, of something wrong.
Christian theory of consciousness can solve the hard-problem by not positing that nonphysical event could get translated into a physical event now this implies that consciousness doesn’t get transformed into energy (say) as it would violates the first law of thermodynamics instead he imagines that consciousness is the innate ability of matter/energy to know and move itself purposively. ‘’consciousness is what knows or fells the flowing of energy, and it doesn’t interact with energy to know it- because consciousness is the innate knowing of energy’’ says Christian.
Christian explains fully in details that the relationship between ‘’his’’ sentient body and the sentience of ‘’his’’ constituent cells, molecules, atoms, etc. is intersubjective-involving a sharing of meaning rather than an exchange of energy(mechanism). He does that by discussing quantum physics and causality and discussing some other historical claims made by previous ancient philosophers like Hume and Whitehead whom he seems to be so affected by.
There was one point in the book where I disagree with Christian, when he was arguing that most of our scientists actually rely a great deal on rumor or faith, he claims that without the scientific ‘’initiation’’ involved in learning how to operate the research equipment and, therefore, being able to ‘’see’’ or experience the data for oneself, the ‘’knowledge’’ remains second-hand and must be taken on trust (or ‘’faith’’)- which is what he meant by a rumor, now I think those one of the cases where you take your worldview to the extreme and where you start confusing your primitive concepts, I couldn’t see what he meant by the student of today should learn the rope for themselves based on reason and logic, isn’t this how the science of today works? Or I might have missed his point.
The author lays down many of the historical theories to establish his thoughts, so for instance for the hard-problem of consciousness he establishes how whitehead philosophy says that the relationship between and body is not a spatial relationship in other words, a relationship that exist in space on the contrary he goes further in explaining that relationship between mind and body is the oscillation between the physical pole that informs the next moment of experience which is in the present which is a mental pole which in turns forms the experience that you have in the present it is a temporal relationship, a process relationship not a relationship between substances.
What really struck me in this book is Christian’s ability to make the conclusion that the limitations and dangers of overreliance on reason, thought, and belief at the expense of feeling and the silent wisdom of direct experience from Jean Liedloff’s Continuum principle which simply is that for millions of years, our ancestors evolved with the expectation that as babies they would be held and carried by their mothers for the first year or so of life, now in recent generations our civilized society has established the norm of separating he baby from constant physical contact with its primary caretaker. Meanwhile, the innate expectation for in arms experience (the ‘’continuum’’) continued to burn in the human baby’s nervous system- unfulfilled. As a result, generations of humans have grown up with a deep sense of something missing, of something wrong.
Christian theory of consciousness can solve the hard-problem by not positing that nonphysical event could get translated into a physical event now this implies that consciousness doesn’t get transformed into energy (say) as it would violates the first law of thermodynamics instead he imagines that consciousness is the innate ability of matter/energy to know and move itself purposively. ‘’consciousness is what knows or fells the flowing of energy, and it doesn’t interact with energy to know it- because consciousness is the innate knowing of energy’’ says Christian.
Christian explains fully in details that the relationship between ‘’his’’ sentient body and the sentience of ‘’his’’ constituent cells, molecules, atoms, etc. is intersubjective-involving a sharing of meaning rather than an exchange of energy(mechanism). He does that by discussing quantum physics and causality and discussing some other historical claims made by previous ancient philosophers like Hume and Whitehead whom he seems to be so affected by.
There was one point in the book where I disagree with Christian, when he was arguing that most of our scientists actually rely a great deal on rumor or faith, he claims that without the scientific ‘’initiation’’ involved in learning how to operate the research equipment and, therefore, being able to ‘’see’’ or experience the data for oneself, the ‘’knowledge’’ remains second-hand and must be taken on trust (or ‘’faith’’)- which is what he meant by a rumor, now I think those one of the cases where you take your worldview to the extreme and where you start confusing your primitive concepts, I couldn’t see what he meant by the student of today should learn the rope for themselves based on reason and logic, isn’t this how the science of today works? Or I might have missed his point.
July 24, 2024
While I get the premise of this book, I struggled with the farther stretches that the author went, especially towards the end. The general conceit—that we are co created by our relationships, such that our individual sense is really a relational conscious—made sense to me, and I think I could follow along the philosophical journeys that the author was going on. But then the author brought up how there may be scientific backing for people seeing spirits based on the way DNA projects energy and consumes it. And that crystals are similar to DNA in structure. Again, I get that this is the point of the book, to challenge these preconceived notions. But I struggled to not have my preconceived challenges front and center. And because of that this book really lost me. I understand it was aiming for seriousness, but I felt that it really became so unserious by the end. I could have just been cherry picking—there’s a lot of thorough philosophical conversation with different philosophers—but clearly it was still important for the author to include these kinds of non materialist insights. And I just couldn’t get into them. Not so terrible that a 1 star felt appropriate, but would not recommend.
October 19, 2021
Even after so many years this is still a refreshing take on things. Talks about how objectivity is an illusion and that science is just one way of knowing something. It's level-headed cogent stuff.
March 9, 2013
Christian de Quincey tackles the subject of consciousness -- what it may mean to some of us, and how we can learn more about it via inter-subjective communication. Ultimately, he promotes the idea that we are our relationships and it is through these relationships that we learn about ourselves by how others see us and how the dynamic between us and those around us affects our consciousness more than anything else. After all, it is our perspective and conception of reality that constitutes this consciousness and these perspectives are mediated by relationships. I recommend this book to anyone interested in exploring the many facets of consciousness.
December 17, 2023
This was found in the philosophy section of my local library. In my opinion, this book does not belong with philosophy. To me it seems to have more to do with psychology, self help, and mysticism. The book has nothing to do with the theory of knowledge, or epistemology as you are led to believe by the title. It seems to be a strange blend of mysticism and psychology, but then again, I didn't finish it.
February 9, 2015
Kept my interest. Dense book but explains his view and concepts in an understandable way
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews