What do you think?
TERTIUM ORGANUM
Tertium Organum, the first of Ouspensky’s major works, was originally published in 1912 in St. Petersburg, and a second revised edition appeared four years later in Petrograd. Nicholas Bessaraboff brought a copy of the second edition with him when he emigrated to the United States before the Russian Revolution of March 1917. The book was translated into English byNicholas Bessaraboff and Claude Bragdon and published by Bragdon’s Manas Press in 1920. The work is concerned with the nature of the universe and cosmic consciousness – anyone who hobbies to struggle with those matters will find this book to be most insightful and helpful.
360 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 30, 1921
About the author
P.D. Ouspensky
140 books438 followersPyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii (known in English as Peter D. Ouspensky, Пётр Демья́нович Успе́нский; was a Russian mathematician and esotericist known for his expositions of the early work of the Greek-Armenian teacher of esoteric doctrine George Gurdjieff, whom he met in Moscow in 1915. He was associated with the ideas and practices originating with Gurdjieff from then on. He shared the (Gurdjieff) "system" for 25 years in England and the United States, having separated from Gurdjieff in 1924 personally, for reasons he explains in the last chapter of his book In Search of the Miraculous.
All in all, Ouspensky studied the Gurdjieff system directly under Gurdjieff's own supervision for a period of ten years, from 1915 to 1924. His book In Search of the Miraculous is a recounting of what he learned from Gurdjieff during those years. While lecturing in London in 1924, he announced that he would continue independently the way he had begun in 1921. Some, including his close pupil Rodney Collin, say that he finally gave up the system in 1947, just before his death, but his own recorded words on the subject ("A Record of Meetings", published posthumously) do not clearly endorse this judgement, nor does Ouspensky's emphasis on "you must make a new beginning" after confessing "I've left the system".
All in all, Ouspensky studied the Gurdjieff system directly under Gurdjieff's own supervision for a period of ten years, from 1915 to 1924. His book In Search of the Miraculous is a recounting of what he learned from Gurdjieff during those years. While lecturing in London in 1924, he announced that he would continue independently the way he had begun in 1921. Some, including his close pupil Rodney Collin, say that he finally gave up the system in 1947, just before his death, but his own recorded words on the subject ("A Record of Meetings", published posthumously) do not clearly endorse this judgement, nor does Ouspensky's emphasis on "you must make a new beginning" after confessing "I've left the system".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
April 22, 2010
A completely mind-blowing dose of non-fiction. Although dated, I cannot find anything more modern online or otherwise that refutes his reasoning. That said, this book involves a lot of reasoning that would be difficult, if not impossible, to support factually. Well grounded though, I can't wait to see how deep he can go...
...finally finished this work. I won't attempt to summarize the depth of what is covered in this book. I will only say that if you are a "thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers.
The most disturbing part of this all is that this work, and this path of thinking, has been left for dead. He almost predicts this possibility in the book itself.
...finally finished this work. I won't attempt to summarize the depth of what is covered in this book. I will only say that if you are a "thinker", constantly searching for more in this world than what is offered at face value, this is a work that will stretch the boundaries of thought for even the most profound thinkers.
The most disturbing part of this all is that this work, and this path of thinking, has been left for dead. He almost predicts this possibility in the book itself.
July 16, 2017
Stunning, Wondrous and Life Transforming
There are no words to describe the real import and content of this book, nor to remotely intuit the many dimensions of reality that its ideas are extended too. Many hidden dimensions of life and connection with the world of true causes, of which we as mankind? are not even dimly aware. It seems mankind (aka consciousness) has settled instead for the world of the finite, the phenomenal and the positivistic and Ouspensky clearly shows in a very limpid and penetrating Tour-de-Force in words that this all ends in a horrible cul-de-sac. There is no 4th of July for science and instead with one fell swoop of his axe, he leaves the world of science, materialism and modern day psychology in ruins - they are seen as ancient Methuselahs, that have overstayed their welcome -perennial chickens that have lost their heads but still wander around tantalizing a few.
He starts out with his statement of what constitutes the world of the "knowns", namely - (I) The outer world of form, perception and conception and (ii) The inner world of consciousness and thought. He then shows and builds through the framework of an advanced multidimensional psychology that these two worlds are not separate from each other. In fact he shows in many elucidating examples that we only experience what we see as a 3-dimensional world because man possesses a 3-dimensional consciousness. That is man is able to think in concepts as well as percepts and sensations and concepts make it possible for him to experience a 3-d world. Lower animals and single celled organisms that are only capable of perception and sensation experience 2-dimensional and 1-dimensional worlds respectively and are therefore of a lower conscious evolution. They possess simple consciousness and do not possess self-consciousness and so are incapable of knowing themselves as a thing apart from their environment and from their perceptions and sensations. He shows how dogs see the world as a 2-dimensional screen of percepts and are incapable of generalizing their percepts under the banner of concepts and so deteriorate much faster mentally than man as they age. This 2-dimensional consciousness also explains why dogs bark at cars - they see them as `alive'.
Ouspensky brings us to the point where we can clearly see that man himself needs to be transformed. It is the consciousness that sees itself as man that is the chief obstacle standing in the way of progress. Until this is fully realized the myriad problems and sufferings appearing to be in the world outside will remain. They are the reflections of a deep fault and split in man, in which he has failed to take on his more divine and encompassing heritage and to grow. And so Ouspensky progresses inducting us into his new multidimensional psychology and he sees the next step-up for man is the development of 4-dimensional consciousness. This is the consciousness of the superman, spoken off by Jesus in the Bible, in which `time is no longer'. But because man, for the most part seems currently incapable of this conscious evolution, he continues to experience this 4th dimension as time and is restricted therefore to seeing the infinite 4th dimensional space as 3-dimensional world slices. This is depicted to him through his delusory sensory profiling network which pictures the inside to the outside in slices and world cuts on par with his learning and consciousness capabilities at that moment. Within the context of this limiting and false 3-dimensional world slices , Ouspensky points out that it is impossible to establish real cause-and-effect relationships. He gives many punishing examples, by making reference to lower dimensional spaces to show that we often establish cause-and-effect relationships to events that are absolutely disconnected from each other just because they seem to follow contiguously in a time progression within our frame of reference. In fact, Ouspensky shows as well that what we can consider effect is often cause and vica-versa and sometimes both are effects arising from a cause unseen and existing within ourselves, or outside 3-dimensional space. He shows by examples that what seems the same can be different and what seems different can be the same, albeit viewed from a different reference. And what seems separated by time and space in the 3-dimensional space need not be so in the greater context afforded in a higher dimensional space. In this higher dimensional space, closeness is based on affinity and essence rather than spatio-temporal closeness.
His higher logic and canon of thought is grounded in mystical understandings but seems perverse when viewed through the blind eyes of logic, rationalism and causal reasoning. This advanced logic follows through from the theory of infinite numbers, in which the part can be equal to the whole. And so the meaning of the part cannot be understood if we first separate it from the whole and then attempt to understand it. By attempting to separate it from the whole to understand it, we have invalidated the context by which it is meaningful and so lost access to meaning. There is no meaning of the part by itself. It is only its unity with the whole that gives it meaning.
Ouspensky clears states his advanced formulation of this understanding when he gives the equation [A = both A and Not A]. This means to truly understand the part, we have to include both the part and everything that seems outside it. In other words we can only understand the part by understanding the whole, or we can understand the whole by truly understanding the part , but we cannot separate the part from the whole and then try to understand. Any separation creates a false formulation of reality that invalidates the context that would make meaning possible. Ouspensky expands on this logic by extending it to words, concepts, symbols, phenomena and indeed to the world of positivism. He shows that because words, concepts, symbols and phenomena attempt first to partition and separate the reality of Oneness and real causes, they are incapable of apprehending it or serving as vehicles for teaching or expressing it. It is like we broke a mirror into a million pieces and then we use the pieces to attempt to teach you that the mirror is whole and complete. There are many more exceptional, and ground breaking teachings in this book. Ouspensky even dedicates a section to describing the features of the world of true causes.
In fact one of Ouspensky's purposes in this book is to bring one to an awareness that words, concepts, symbols and logic always miss reality and true content. Some of these characteristics that he gives for the world of real causes include that (I) It is a world in which time is experienced spatially (ii) A world in which everything is life itself and forever deathless. There is nothing apart from this one life, even the seemingly physical and inorganic (iii) A world without matter or motion (iv) A world without measure, finite quantities or form (v) A world of no separation in which everything is the whole (vi) A world transcending all seeming dualities, including being/non-being, death/life, motion/stillness, objective/subjective, phenomena/noumena. And yet the world of real causes is not separate from the world we appear to live in. It is the world we appear to live in experienced without duality. Experienced instead through the selflessness of the egoless state. This world of real causes echoes the Buddha's teachings that the Samsara and Nirvana or forever one. That the samsara - our world of the relative existence, namely Hell - is just Nirvana seen through the lens of ignorance and therefore darkness. The Samsara is restored to its ever-presence as Nirvana once the self-distortions that we interpose are removed.
Ouspensky spends the last part of this great work correlating the common threads and unity of many of his ideas, arrived through inductive reasoning and intuition with many of the teachings of the mystics including Jacob Boehme, "The voice of the silence", Theosophy, Feckner, and Dr Bucke's `Cosmic Consciousness'.
There are no words to describe the real import and content of this book, nor to remotely intuit the many dimensions of reality that its ideas are extended too. Many hidden dimensions of life and connection with the world of true causes, of which we as mankind? are not even dimly aware. It seems mankind (aka consciousness) has settled instead for the world of the finite, the phenomenal and the positivistic and Ouspensky clearly shows in a very limpid and penetrating Tour-de-Force in words that this all ends in a horrible cul-de-sac. There is no 4th of July for science and instead with one fell swoop of his axe, he leaves the world of science, materialism and modern day psychology in ruins - they are seen as ancient Methuselahs, that have overstayed their welcome -perennial chickens that have lost their heads but still wander around tantalizing a few.
He starts out with his statement of what constitutes the world of the "knowns", namely - (I) The outer world of form, perception and conception and (ii) The inner world of consciousness and thought. He then shows and builds through the framework of an advanced multidimensional psychology that these two worlds are not separate from each other. In fact he shows in many elucidating examples that we only experience what we see as a 3-dimensional world because man possesses a 3-dimensional consciousness. That is man is able to think in concepts as well as percepts and sensations and concepts make it possible for him to experience a 3-d world. Lower animals and single celled organisms that are only capable of perception and sensation experience 2-dimensional and 1-dimensional worlds respectively and are therefore of a lower conscious evolution. They possess simple consciousness and do not possess self-consciousness and so are incapable of knowing themselves as a thing apart from their environment and from their perceptions and sensations. He shows how dogs see the world as a 2-dimensional screen of percepts and are incapable of generalizing their percepts under the banner of concepts and so deteriorate much faster mentally than man as they age. This 2-dimensional consciousness also explains why dogs bark at cars - they see them as `alive'.
Ouspensky brings us to the point where we can clearly see that man himself needs to be transformed. It is the consciousness that sees itself as man that is the chief obstacle standing in the way of progress. Until this is fully realized the myriad problems and sufferings appearing to be in the world outside will remain. They are the reflections of a deep fault and split in man, in which he has failed to take on his more divine and encompassing heritage and to grow. And so Ouspensky progresses inducting us into his new multidimensional psychology and he sees the next step-up for man is the development of 4-dimensional consciousness. This is the consciousness of the superman, spoken off by Jesus in the Bible, in which `time is no longer'. But because man, for the most part seems currently incapable of this conscious evolution, he continues to experience this 4th dimension as time and is restricted therefore to seeing the infinite 4th dimensional space as 3-dimensional world slices. This is depicted to him through his delusory sensory profiling network which pictures the inside to the outside in slices and world cuts on par with his learning and consciousness capabilities at that moment. Within the context of this limiting and false 3-dimensional world slices , Ouspensky points out that it is impossible to establish real cause-and-effect relationships. He gives many punishing examples, by making reference to lower dimensional spaces to show that we often establish cause-and-effect relationships to events that are absolutely disconnected from each other just because they seem to follow contiguously in a time progression within our frame of reference. In fact, Ouspensky shows as well that what we can consider effect is often cause and vica-versa and sometimes both are effects arising from a cause unseen and existing within ourselves, or outside 3-dimensional space. He shows by examples that what seems the same can be different and what seems different can be the same, albeit viewed from a different reference. And what seems separated by time and space in the 3-dimensional space need not be so in the greater context afforded in a higher dimensional space. In this higher dimensional space, closeness is based on affinity and essence rather than spatio-temporal closeness.
His higher logic and canon of thought is grounded in mystical understandings but seems perverse when viewed through the blind eyes of logic, rationalism and causal reasoning. This advanced logic follows through from the theory of infinite numbers, in which the part can be equal to the whole. And so the meaning of the part cannot be understood if we first separate it from the whole and then attempt to understand it. By attempting to separate it from the whole to understand it, we have invalidated the context by which it is meaningful and so lost access to meaning. There is no meaning of the part by itself. It is only its unity with the whole that gives it meaning.
Ouspensky clears states his advanced formulation of this understanding when he gives the equation [A = both A and Not A]. This means to truly understand the part, we have to include both the part and everything that seems outside it. In other words we can only understand the part by understanding the whole, or we can understand the whole by truly understanding the part , but we cannot separate the part from the whole and then try to understand. Any separation creates a false formulation of reality that invalidates the context that would make meaning possible. Ouspensky expands on this logic by extending it to words, concepts, symbols, phenomena and indeed to the world of positivism. He shows that because words, concepts, symbols and phenomena attempt first to partition and separate the reality of Oneness and real causes, they are incapable of apprehending it or serving as vehicles for teaching or expressing it. It is like we broke a mirror into a million pieces and then we use the pieces to attempt to teach you that the mirror is whole and complete. There are many more exceptional, and ground breaking teachings in this book. Ouspensky even dedicates a section to describing the features of the world of true causes.
In fact one of Ouspensky's purposes in this book is to bring one to an awareness that words, concepts, symbols and logic always miss reality and true content. Some of these characteristics that he gives for the world of real causes include that (I) It is a world in which time is experienced spatially (ii) A world in which everything is life itself and forever deathless. There is nothing apart from this one life, even the seemingly physical and inorganic (iii) A world without matter or motion (iv) A world without measure, finite quantities or form (v) A world of no separation in which everything is the whole (vi) A world transcending all seeming dualities, including being/non-being, death/life, motion/stillness, objective/subjective, phenomena/noumena. And yet the world of real causes is not separate from the world we appear to live in. It is the world we appear to live in experienced without duality. Experienced instead through the selflessness of the egoless state. This world of real causes echoes the Buddha's teachings that the Samsara and Nirvana or forever one. That the samsara - our world of the relative existence, namely Hell - is just Nirvana seen through the lens of ignorance and therefore darkness. The Samsara is restored to its ever-presence as Nirvana once the self-distortions that we interpose are removed.
Ouspensky spends the last part of this great work correlating the common threads and unity of many of his ideas, arrived through inductive reasoning and intuition with many of the teachings of the mystics including Jacob Boehme, "The voice of the silence", Theosophy, Feckner, and Dr Bucke's `Cosmic Consciousness'.
October 11, 2017
Mind-blowing!
Reality-altering!
Mentally-stimulating!
This book is all that and so much more. Just a pure dive into metaphysics and paranormality, and what makes them a reality. The logical reasoning the author uses throughout this book is sound, and I cannot refute his arguments. I can only agree in amazement.
The author focuses on space and time, and how they are REALLY related, and all the derivations of such a relationship. Mind you, he looks at them from a purely UN-positivistic point of view, so everything that modern positivistic science has taught you might be shattered before your very eyes.
I remember reading somewhere, someone describing this book as: "The most important book ever written". Now that might sound like a mighty overstatement, and it is certainly an overstatement.
However, this is DEFINITELY one of the most important books ever written. At least from my perspective.
Read this, and open your heart.
Reality-altering!
Mentally-stimulating!
This book is all that and so much more. Just a pure dive into metaphysics and paranormality, and what makes them a reality. The logical reasoning the author uses throughout this book is sound, and I cannot refute his arguments. I can only agree in amazement.
The author focuses on space and time, and how they are REALLY related, and all the derivations of such a relationship. Mind you, he looks at them from a purely UN-positivistic point of view, so everything that modern positivistic science has taught you might be shattered before your very eyes.
I remember reading somewhere, someone describing this book as: "The most important book ever written". Now that might sound like a mighty overstatement, and it is certainly an overstatement.
However, this is DEFINITELY one of the most important books ever written. At least from my perspective.
Read this, and open your heart.
December 21, 2008
Russian Theosophy at it's best. Read It>
Currently Reading
April 1, 2010what i wouldn't give to have been a speck of dust in a room where Ouspensky and Gurdjieff were waxing on...
September 11, 2010
How many times will I allow a Russian Theosophist to break my heart?
I followed his paces so faithfully! He measured his stride so! He spoke to me of his affairs with Kant and with Consciousness.
Ultimately, he believes we are all imperfectly-understanding emanations of the Cosmic Conscious... or of the First Intelligence... call Him what you will.
I still insist that he is the better of Edwin A Abbott (of Flatland acclaim).
I followed his paces so faithfully! He measured his stride so! He spoke to me of his affairs with Kant and with Consciousness.
Ultimately, he believes we are all imperfectly-understanding emanations of the Cosmic Conscious... or of the First Intelligence... call Him what you will.
I still insist that he is the better of Edwin A Abbott (of Flatland acclaim).
October 18, 2017
Brilliant, mind-bending piece about nature of the world and consciousness. It's a must read challenge for all of the materialist science-believers that have fallen into the one-dimensional limited way of thinking and observing the world through the matter only. Ouspensky is succesfully showing the flaws of the positivistic, exact, science and philosophy by offering another, deeper way of thinking outside of the box.
April 2, 2021
Being trained as a scientist, I had to suspend my skepticism to embrace the author's thesis in this book. The fourth dimension was always "time" to me, but Ouspensky takes another tack. Why should there be on three dimensions in reality? Maybe there are more, maybe infinite dimensions that our sensual (dimension 1) and perceptual system (dimension 2) cannot "see". (Dimension 3 is "concepts".) Nor can our instruments. Why should we believe in more dimensions? How is this useful? You will have to read this very interesting and thought provoking book to find out one take on how to think about higher dimensions and how this can lead "cosmic consciousness", a name I do not like. Sounds too new age-y. My mind did not change but had to adapt to new ideas to finish this one. Now I think about it all the time.
August 25, 2009
Here you will find the mind of the 19th and 20th century philisopher/ Realizers like Ralph Waldo Emerson & Richard Bucke.
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947), (Pyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii)a Russian philosopher,who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912; and A New Model of the Universe in 1931. This last work discusses the idea of esotericism. He also wrote the novel Strange Life of Ivan Osokin, which explored the concept of recurrence or eternal return.
Peter D. Ouspensky (March 4, 1878–October 2, 1947), (Pyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii)a Russian philosopher,who invoked euclidean and non-euclidean geometry in his discussions of psychology and higher dimensions of existence. His first book, The Fourth Dimension, appeared in 1909; his second book, Tertium Organum, in 1912; and A New Model of the Universe in 1931. This last work discusses the idea of esotericism. He also wrote the novel Strange Life of Ivan Osokin, which explored the concept of recurrence or eternal return.
September 27, 2023
Interesting read for the exploration of philosophy, mathematics and language, less so for mysticism.
Beyond the Limits of Ordinary Thought: Exploring Higher Dimensions, Time, and Consciousness
P. D. Ouspensky’s Tertium Organum: The Third Canon of Thought is an ambitious and intellectually provocative exploration of the nature of reality, human consciousness, and the limitations of ordinary perception. First published in Russian in 1912, the book challenges readers to reconsider some of their most fundamental assumptions about time, space, logic, and existence. Drawing on mathematics, geometry, philosophy, psychology, and mystical traditions, Ouspensky attempts to construct a new instrument of thought—one capable, he believes, of approaching aspects of reality that conventional reasoning cannot fully comprehend.
The book’s central proposition is both fascinating and unsettling: the world we experience through our senses may represent only a limited expression of a much greater reality. What we perceive as the entirety of existence might be merely a fragment of something more extensive, just as a two-dimensional being would struggle to comprehend a three-dimensional world.
Unlike a conventional philosophical treatise that seeks to explain the world through established principles, Tertium Organum invites readers to question the principles themselves. It is not simply a book about what reality is; it is an inquiry into whether the human mind, operating through its habitual patterns of thought, is adequately equipped to understand reality at all.
1. The Fourth Dimension: Is Time a Form of Space?
One of the most compelling ideas in Tertium Organum is Ouspensky’s argument that time may be understood as a dimension of a higher-dimensional reality. Rather than treating the past, present, and future as fundamentally separate states, he invites readers to consider whether these distinctions arise from the limitations of human perception.
We experience life sequentially. Events unfold, objects change, and moments appear to pass irreversibly from the future into the present and then into the past. Our consciousness seems to move through this succession, creating the familiar experience of time.
Ouspensky proposes a radically different perspective. If a higher-dimensional observer could apprehend the entirety of a four-dimensional structure, what humans experience as a sequence of events might instead be perceived as different aspects of a single, more comprehensive whole.
From this perspective, a human life might be imagined as an extended structure in spacetime rather than merely a succession of disconnected moments. Our ordinary consciousness would encounter this structure one moment at a time, just as a reader encounters the pages of a book sequentially even though the entire book exists at once.
This is a powerful philosophical thought experiment because it challenges our intuitive understanding of change, identity, and causality. It encourages readers to distinguish between the way reality appears to us and the possibility that its underlying structure may be more complex.
However, Ouspensky’s proposal should not be confused with a scientifically established demonstration that time is an illusion or that the future is already accessible to human consciousness. Modern physics does describe time as a dimension within spacetime, but the philosophical interpretation of this fact remains distinct from Ouspensky’s mystical conclusions.
The lasting value of his argument lies in the question it raises: could our experience of time reveal as much about the structure of human consciousness as it does about the structure of the universe?
2. The Two-Dimensional Being: Understanding the Limits of Perception
Ouspensky’s discussion of higher dimensions becomes especially accessible through the analogy of a being confined to a two-dimensional world.
Imagine a creature whose entire universe consists of a perfectly flat surface. It can move forwards, backwards, and sideways, but it has no concept of movement above or below its plane. The possibility of a third spatial dimension lies beyond its direct experience.
Now imagine a sphere passing through this flat world.
The two-dimensional creature would not perceive the sphere in its entirety. Instead, it would encounter a circular cross-section that first appears small, grows larger, reaches a maximum size, and then gradually shrinks before disappearing.
To the creature, this sequence might resemble the appearance, transformation, and disappearance of an object over time. Yet a three-dimensional observer would understand that these apparent changes are different cross-sections of a single object moving through a dimension the creature cannot perceive.
Ouspensky applies this analogy to human existence. Just as the flat creature cannot directly apprehend the third dimension, human beings may be unable to perceive higher-dimensional structures through their ordinary senses. What appears to us as a sequence of events might, from a different perspective, form part of a larger reality.
This analogy is one of the book’s greatest strengths. It turns an abstract philosophical problem into an imaginative exercise that readers can visualise and explore for themselves.
It also encourages intellectual humility. The inability to perceive something directly does not necessarily establish that it does not exist. At the same time, imagining a possible higher dimension does not prove that a particular metaphysical account of it is true.
The analogy is most useful as a demonstration of the limits of perspective, rather than as definitive evidence for a mystical universe.
Its deeper lesson is that our experience may be limited not because reality is necessarily incomplete, but because our means of experiencing it are limited.
3. Beyond Conventional Logic: The Search for a Higher Understanding
Another central theme of Tertium Organum is the possibility that ordinary logical reasoning, while indispensable in everyday life, may be insufficient for understanding certain aspects of existence.
Ouspensky begins from the limitations of conventional thought, particularly the rigid distinctions through which we organise experience. Classical Aristotelian logic includes the principle of identity, commonly expressed as A is A, and the principle of non-contradiction, according to which a proposition and its negation cannot both be true in the same respect at the same time.
These principles are foundational to logical reasoning. Ouspensky, however, argues that the conceptual habits associated with ordinary consciousness can become obstacles when we attempt to understand realities that exceed familiar categories.
He turns towards mystical traditions that emphasise unity beyond apparent oppositions. One expression he explores is the Sanskrit formula Tat tvam asi, commonly translated as “Thou art That,” associated with the Upanishadic philosophical tradition.
The formula suggests a profound relationship between the individual self and ultimate reality. What appears to be a separate individual may, at a deeper level, belong to a more comprehensive unity.
Ouspensky uses such ideas to challenge the assumption that the divisions imposed by ordinary thought necessarily reflect the ultimate structure of existence.
Nevertheless, his approach requires careful interpretation. Mystical language that appears to transcend logical oppositions does not automatically establish that contradictions can be literally true in the same sense and under the same conditions. It may instead express the limitations of language, the relationship between different levels of description, or an experience that resists straightforward conceptual analysis.
This distinction is important because the book sometimes moves between philosophical speculation and claims about the nature of reality without establishing a clear boundary between them.
Even so, its challenge to intellectual complacency remains valuable. Ouspensky encourages readers to recognise that conceptual clarity is essential, but that the concepts through which we understand the world may themselves require examination.
The question is not necessarily whether logic should be abandoned, but whether our understanding of logic, consciousness, and experience can become more sophisticated.
4. Consciousness and the Boundaries of Reality
Perhaps the most ambitious claim in Tertium Organum is that our experience of reality is intimately connected with the development of consciousness.
For Ouspensky, the world is not simply a collection of external objects passively registered by the senses. What we experience depends on the capacities of the observer. A limited consciousness encounters a limited world, while a more developed consciousness may become capable of recognising relationships and dimensions of existence that were previously inaccessible.
This idea invites readers to examine the assumptions through which they interpret their surroundings. Our perceptions are shaped by attention, memory, language, expectation, and the categories we use to organise experience. We do not encounter the world as entirely neutral observers; we interpret it through the structure of our minds.
Ouspensky extends this observation into a mystical vision of expanded or cosmic consciousness, in which the distinction between the subjective self and the objective world becomes less absolute. The individual begins to perceive existence not merely as a collection of separate things but as an interconnected whole.
This vision resonates with philosophical and contemplative traditions that explore the relationship between self-awareness and the experience of unity.
Its practical implication is that developing consciousness involves more than acquiring information. It may require examining habitual reactions, recognising the limitations of one's perspective, and becoming more attentive to the relationship between the observer and the observed.
However, a distinction must be made between the psychological insight that perception is shaped by the mind and the stronger metaphysical claim that changing consciousness reveals higher dimensions of objective reality. The former is compatible with established psychological research; the latter remains a philosophical or mystical proposition rather than a demonstrated scientific fact.
Read in this light, Tertium Organum is most rewarding when it encourages inquiry rather than demanding unquestioning acceptance.
It asks readers to consider whether intellectual development means simply accumulating knowledge—or learning to perceive the familiar world in new ways.
5. Mathematics, Mysticism, and the Nature of Knowledge
A distinctive feature of Ouspensky’s work is his attempt to bring together disciplines that are often treated separately. Mathematics and geometry provide models for thinking about dimensions, while philosophy examines the assumptions underlying knowledge. Mysticism offers accounts of unity and forms of awareness that appear to exceed ordinary conceptual understanding.
This combination gives the book its distinctive character. Ouspensky is neither content with purely abstract philosophical argument nor satisfied with limiting inquiry to the immediately observable. He wants to explore whether different intellectual and spiritual traditions might illuminate a common underlying reality.
The title expresses this ambition. Ouspensky presents Tertium Organum as a third instrument of thought, following Aristotle’s Organon and Francis Bacon’s Novum Organum. Aristotle’s work is associated with the foundations of formal logic, while Bacon’s is associated with an empirical and inductive approach to knowledge. Ouspensky proposes a further development that would move beyond the limitations he perceives in conventional reasoning and scientific observation.
The historical framing is grand, perhaps even excessive. Ouspensky’s book does not establish a new scientific method comparable in demonstrated effectiveness to modern empirical inquiry. Its value is primarily exploratory and philosophical.
Nevertheless, the attempt to connect geometry, consciousness, and metaphysics makes the book intellectually stimulating. It encourages readers to explore relationships between disciplines and to question whether any single mode of thought can adequately address every dimension of human experience.
The difficulty is that the connections Ouspensky proposes are not always equally persuasive. Mathematical analogies can clarify a philosophical possibility, but they cannot, by themselves, prove a mystical conclusion.
Readers who appreciate the book most will likely be those who can enjoy its imaginative reach while maintaining a critical distinction between analogy, hypothesis, and established knowledge.
6. The Book’s Strengths and Limitations
One of the greatest strengths of Tertium Organum is its ability to make familiar assumptions appear strange again. Time, space, identity, and consciousness are so central to everyday experience that we rarely stop to question how we understand them. Ouspensky interrupts this familiarity and invites us to look at existence from an unfamiliar angle.
His thought experiments are often memorable, particularly those involving beings confined to lower dimensions. They offer readers an intuitive introduction to the problem of how a limited observer might misunderstand a more complex reality.
The book also possesses a strong sense of intellectual adventure. Ouspensky writes as someone convinced that the most important questions about existence remain open, and his willingness to explore unconventional ideas gives the work much of its energy.
Its limitations, however, are equally significant.
The writing can be repetitive and demanding, particularly when Ouspensky moves from mathematical analogies to spiritual conclusions. His argument sometimes relies on suggestive comparisons rather than sufficient evidence, and readers unfamiliar with philosophical or mystical traditions may find certain passages difficult to follow.
Furthermore, his use of scientific and mathematical ideas should be approached with discernment. Modern concepts of spacetime and dimensionality can resemble parts of his speculation, but resemblance does not establish that his broader metaphysical system is correct.
The book is therefore best approached neither as a scientific textbook nor as a definitive explanation of the universe. It is an ambitious philosophical experiment that asks readers to reconsider the limits of their own thinking.
Its greatest achievement may be less about proving a particular theory than about making intellectual certainty itself an object of investigation.
Final Verdict
Tertium Organum* by P. D. Ouspensky is a challenging, imaginative, and unconventional work that explores the boundaries between philosophy, mathematics, psychology, and mysticism. Its central proposition—that ordinary consciousness may offer only a partial view of reality—provides the foundation for a series of thought-provoking investigations into time, higher dimensions, logic, and the relationship between the individual and the universe.
The book’s discussion of the fourth dimension challenges readers to reconsider their experience of time. Its two-dimensional analogy illustrates how a limited observer might mistake a larger spatial structure for a sequence of changing events. Its exploration of higher logic questions whether the conceptual distinctions we use in everyday life are sufficient for understanding every aspect of existence. Finally, its emphasis on consciousness encourages readers to investigate how their own assumptions shape the world they experience.
Yet Ouspensky’s ideas are not equally convincing in every respect. His imaginative arguments sometimes extend beyond what mathematics or empirical evidence can establish, and his vision of cosmic consciousness remains a philosophical and mystical aspiration rather than a scientifically verified destination.
These limitations do not make the book unworthy of attention. They make thoughtful, critical reading especially important.
Ultimately, Tertium Organum is less valuable as a final answer to the mysteries of existence than as an invitation to ask better questions. It reminds us that the boundaries of our understanding should not automatically be mistaken for the boundaries of reality, while also challenging us to distinguish genuine insight from attractive speculation.
Beyond the Limits of Ordinary Thought: Exploring Higher Dimensions, Time, and Consciousness
P. D. Ouspensky’s Tertium Organum: The Third Canon of Thought is an ambitious and intellectually provocative exploration of the nature of reality, human consciousness, and the limitations of ordinary perception. First published in Russian in 1912, the book challenges readers to reconsider some of their most fundamental assumptions about time, space, logic, and existence. Drawing on mathematics, geometry, philosophy, psychology, and mystical traditions, Ouspensky attempts to construct a new instrument of thought—one capable, he believes, of approaching aspects of reality that conventional reasoning cannot fully comprehend.
The book’s central proposition is both fascinating and unsettling: the world we experience through our senses may represent only a limited expression of a much greater reality. What we perceive as the entirety of existence might be merely a fragment of something more extensive, just as a two-dimensional being would struggle to comprehend a three-dimensional world.
Unlike a conventional philosophical treatise that seeks to explain the world through established principles, Tertium Organum invites readers to question the principles themselves. It is not simply a book about what reality is; it is an inquiry into whether the human mind, operating through its habitual patterns of thought, is adequately equipped to understand reality at all.
1. The Fourth Dimension: Is Time a Form of Space?
One of the most compelling ideas in Tertium Organum is Ouspensky’s argument that time may be understood as a dimension of a higher-dimensional reality. Rather than treating the past, present, and future as fundamentally separate states, he invites readers to consider whether these distinctions arise from the limitations of human perception.
We experience life sequentially. Events unfold, objects change, and moments appear to pass irreversibly from the future into the present and then into the past. Our consciousness seems to move through this succession, creating the familiar experience of time.
Ouspensky proposes a radically different perspective. If a higher-dimensional observer could apprehend the entirety of a four-dimensional structure, what humans experience as a sequence of events might instead be perceived as different aspects of a single, more comprehensive whole.
From this perspective, a human life might be imagined as an extended structure in spacetime rather than merely a succession of disconnected moments. Our ordinary consciousness would encounter this structure one moment at a time, just as a reader encounters the pages of a book sequentially even though the entire book exists at once.
This is a powerful philosophical thought experiment because it challenges our intuitive understanding of change, identity, and causality. It encourages readers to distinguish between the way reality appears to us and the possibility that its underlying structure may be more complex.
However, Ouspensky’s proposal should not be confused with a scientifically established demonstration that time is an illusion or that the future is already accessible to human consciousness. Modern physics does describe time as a dimension within spacetime, but the philosophical interpretation of this fact remains distinct from Ouspensky’s mystical conclusions.
The lasting value of his argument lies in the question it raises: could our experience of time reveal as much about the structure of human consciousness as it does about the structure of the universe?
2. The Two-Dimensional Being: Understanding the Limits of Perception
Ouspensky’s discussion of higher dimensions becomes especially accessible through the analogy of a being confined to a two-dimensional world.
Imagine a creature whose entire universe consists of a perfectly flat surface. It can move forwards, backwards, and sideways, but it has no concept of movement above or below its plane. The possibility of a third spatial dimension lies beyond its direct experience.
Now imagine a sphere passing through this flat world.
The two-dimensional creature would not perceive the sphere in its entirety. Instead, it would encounter a circular cross-section that first appears small, grows larger, reaches a maximum size, and then gradually shrinks before disappearing.
To the creature, this sequence might resemble the appearance, transformation, and disappearance of an object over time. Yet a three-dimensional observer would understand that these apparent changes are different cross-sections of a single object moving through a dimension the creature cannot perceive.
Ouspensky applies this analogy to human existence. Just as the flat creature cannot directly apprehend the third dimension, human beings may be unable to perceive higher-dimensional structures through their ordinary senses. What appears to us as a sequence of events might, from a different perspective, form part of a larger reality.
This analogy is one of the book’s greatest strengths. It turns an abstract philosophical problem into an imaginative exercise that readers can visualise and explore for themselves.
It also encourages intellectual humility. The inability to perceive something directly does not necessarily establish that it does not exist. At the same time, imagining a possible higher dimension does not prove that a particular metaphysical account of it is true.
The analogy is most useful as a demonstration of the limits of perspective, rather than as definitive evidence for a mystical universe.
Its deeper lesson is that our experience may be limited not because reality is necessarily incomplete, but because our means of experiencing it are limited.
3. Beyond Conventional Logic: The Search for a Higher Understanding
Another central theme of Tertium Organum is the possibility that ordinary logical reasoning, while indispensable in everyday life, may be insufficient for understanding certain aspects of existence.
Ouspensky begins from the limitations of conventional thought, particularly the rigid distinctions through which we organise experience. Classical Aristotelian logic includes the principle of identity, commonly expressed as A is A, and the principle of non-contradiction, according to which a proposition and its negation cannot both be true in the same respect at the same time.
These principles are foundational to logical reasoning. Ouspensky, however, argues that the conceptual habits associated with ordinary consciousness can become obstacles when we attempt to understand realities that exceed familiar categories.
He turns towards mystical traditions that emphasise unity beyond apparent oppositions. One expression he explores is the Sanskrit formula Tat tvam asi, commonly translated as “Thou art That,” associated with the Upanishadic philosophical tradition.
The formula suggests a profound relationship between the individual self and ultimate reality. What appears to be a separate individual may, at a deeper level, belong to a more comprehensive unity.
Ouspensky uses such ideas to challenge the assumption that the divisions imposed by ordinary thought necessarily reflect the ultimate structure of existence.
Nevertheless, his approach requires careful interpretation. Mystical language that appears to transcend logical oppositions does not automatically establish that contradictions can be literally true in the same sense and under the same conditions. It may instead express the limitations of language, the relationship between different levels of description, or an experience that resists straightforward conceptual analysis.
This distinction is important because the book sometimes moves between philosophical speculation and claims about the nature of reality without establishing a clear boundary between them.
Even so, its challenge to intellectual complacency remains valuable. Ouspensky encourages readers to recognise that conceptual clarity is essential, but that the concepts through which we understand the world may themselves require examination.
The question is not necessarily whether logic should be abandoned, but whether our understanding of logic, consciousness, and experience can become more sophisticated.
4. Consciousness and the Boundaries of Reality
Perhaps the most ambitious claim in Tertium Organum is that our experience of reality is intimately connected with the development of consciousness.
For Ouspensky, the world is not simply a collection of external objects passively registered by the senses. What we experience depends on the capacities of the observer. A limited consciousness encounters a limited world, while a more developed consciousness may become capable of recognising relationships and dimensions of existence that were previously inaccessible.
This idea invites readers to examine the assumptions through which they interpret their surroundings. Our perceptions are shaped by attention, memory, language, expectation, and the categories we use to organise experience. We do not encounter the world as entirely neutral observers; we interpret it through the structure of our minds.
Ouspensky extends this observation into a mystical vision of expanded or cosmic consciousness, in which the distinction between the subjective self and the objective world becomes less absolute. The individual begins to perceive existence not merely as a collection of separate things but as an interconnected whole.
This vision resonates with philosophical and contemplative traditions that explore the relationship between self-awareness and the experience of unity.
Its practical implication is that developing consciousness involves more than acquiring information. It may require examining habitual reactions, recognising the limitations of one's perspective, and becoming more attentive to the relationship between the observer and the observed.
However, a distinction must be made between the psychological insight that perception is shaped by the mind and the stronger metaphysical claim that changing consciousness reveals higher dimensions of objective reality. The former is compatible with established psychological research; the latter remains a philosophical or mystical proposition rather than a demonstrated scientific fact.
Read in this light, Tertium Organum is most rewarding when it encourages inquiry rather than demanding unquestioning acceptance.
It asks readers to consider whether intellectual development means simply accumulating knowledge—or learning to perceive the familiar world in new ways.
5. Mathematics, Mysticism, and the Nature of Knowledge
A distinctive feature of Ouspensky’s work is his attempt to bring together disciplines that are often treated separately. Mathematics and geometry provide models for thinking about dimensions, while philosophy examines the assumptions underlying knowledge. Mysticism offers accounts of unity and forms of awareness that appear to exceed ordinary conceptual understanding.
This combination gives the book its distinctive character. Ouspensky is neither content with purely abstract philosophical argument nor satisfied with limiting inquiry to the immediately observable. He wants to explore whether different intellectual and spiritual traditions might illuminate a common underlying reality.
The title expresses this ambition. Ouspensky presents Tertium Organum as a third instrument of thought, following Aristotle’s Organon and Francis Bacon’s Novum Organum. Aristotle’s work is associated with the foundations of formal logic, while Bacon’s is associated with an empirical and inductive approach to knowledge. Ouspensky proposes a further development that would move beyond the limitations he perceives in conventional reasoning and scientific observation.
The historical framing is grand, perhaps even excessive. Ouspensky’s book does not establish a new scientific method comparable in demonstrated effectiveness to modern empirical inquiry. Its value is primarily exploratory and philosophical.
Nevertheless, the attempt to connect geometry, consciousness, and metaphysics makes the book intellectually stimulating. It encourages readers to explore relationships between disciplines and to question whether any single mode of thought can adequately address every dimension of human experience.
The difficulty is that the connections Ouspensky proposes are not always equally persuasive. Mathematical analogies can clarify a philosophical possibility, but they cannot, by themselves, prove a mystical conclusion.
Readers who appreciate the book most will likely be those who can enjoy its imaginative reach while maintaining a critical distinction between analogy, hypothesis, and established knowledge.
6. The Book’s Strengths and Limitations
One of the greatest strengths of Tertium Organum is its ability to make familiar assumptions appear strange again. Time, space, identity, and consciousness are so central to everyday experience that we rarely stop to question how we understand them. Ouspensky interrupts this familiarity and invites us to look at existence from an unfamiliar angle.
His thought experiments are often memorable, particularly those involving beings confined to lower dimensions. They offer readers an intuitive introduction to the problem of how a limited observer might misunderstand a more complex reality.
The book also possesses a strong sense of intellectual adventure. Ouspensky writes as someone convinced that the most important questions about existence remain open, and his willingness to explore unconventional ideas gives the work much of its energy.
Its limitations, however, are equally significant.
The writing can be repetitive and demanding, particularly when Ouspensky moves from mathematical analogies to spiritual conclusions. His argument sometimes relies on suggestive comparisons rather than sufficient evidence, and readers unfamiliar with philosophical or mystical traditions may find certain passages difficult to follow.
Furthermore, his use of scientific and mathematical ideas should be approached with discernment. Modern concepts of spacetime and dimensionality can resemble parts of his speculation, but resemblance does not establish that his broader metaphysical system is correct.
The book is therefore best approached neither as a scientific textbook nor as a definitive explanation of the universe. It is an ambitious philosophical experiment that asks readers to reconsider the limits of their own thinking.
Its greatest achievement may be less about proving a particular theory than about making intellectual certainty itself an object of investigation.
Final Verdict
Tertium Organum* by P. D. Ouspensky is a challenging, imaginative, and unconventional work that explores the boundaries between philosophy, mathematics, psychology, and mysticism. Its central proposition—that ordinary consciousness may offer only a partial view of reality—provides the foundation for a series of thought-provoking investigations into time, higher dimensions, logic, and the relationship between the individual and the universe.
The book’s discussion of the fourth dimension challenges readers to reconsider their experience of time. Its two-dimensional analogy illustrates how a limited observer might mistake a larger spatial structure for a sequence of changing events. Its exploration of higher logic questions whether the conceptual distinctions we use in everyday life are sufficient for understanding every aspect of existence. Finally, its emphasis on consciousness encourages readers to investigate how their own assumptions shape the world they experience.
Yet Ouspensky’s ideas are not equally convincing in every respect. His imaginative arguments sometimes extend beyond what mathematics or empirical evidence can establish, and his vision of cosmic consciousness remains a philosophical and mystical aspiration rather than a scientifically verified destination.
These limitations do not make the book unworthy of attention. They make thoughtful, critical reading especially important.
Ultimately, Tertium Organum is less valuable as a final answer to the mysteries of existence than as an invitation to ask better questions. It reminds us that the boundaries of our understanding should not automatically be mistaken for the boundaries of reality, while also challenging us to distinguish genuine insight from attractive speculation.
March 1, 2024
Mindblown. Ниједна књига која спомиње "димензије" и "знања" ме до сада није овако одувала...Тачно се види разлика између свих осталих и Успенског, јер је он свесност о себи и свету постизао мукотрпним радом и намерним страдањем, које и Гурђијев проповеда као апсолутну иницијацију за просветљење, а што и показује и доказује хиљадугодишња монашка традиција; за разлику од других који су својим мукотрпним радом и случајном патњом освојили само гигантско подручје знања, али не и свет, а камо ли себе. Цела његова прича о 4-ој димензији која уствари није време, него осећај времена, који је наравно лажан услед наше изопаченог и недовољно оштрог виђења, јер је 4-а димензија уствари простор, али кога не видимо, него видимо само његов отисак у овом тродимензионалном свету, као кад би ставили врхове прстију на сто, па кад склонимо прсте остали би они мали кружићи, а бића на тој дводимензионалној површи би то баш тако видела - као кружиће, шта би они знали о целокупној величина људског бића од кога су уствари потекли ти "кружићи"! "Идеја времена није настала из посматрања кретања у природи, већ су осећај и идеја кретања настали из 'осећаја времена' које поседујемо, а које није ништа друго до несавшен осећај простора, или граница осећаја простора"; па онда наше искуство као тродимензионалних бића који живе у тродимензионалном простору полако, јасно, прецизно и постепено пореди са искуством дводимензионалних бића у дводимензионалном простору и једнодимензионалних бића у једнодимензионалном простору, а сви живимо у истом простору, али различитом искуству, што нас доводи до Кантове изреке да ни простор и време не постоје сами по себи, него само у уму...Такав речити, течни и интелектуални стил је ненадмашив, Успенски - свака част...
July 1, 2019
An interesting critique of positivism and the positive philosophy. It is nice to know that some people even back then were aware of its dangers and dogmas. On the downside, I think the positions he gives near the beginning on subjective/objective, and later with the phenomenon/noumenon, are not in any way philosophically original ideas. Appeal to the fourth dimension and to infinity, seem to me to be very vague appeals, certainly not philosophically precise enough concepts. The notion of hidden sides to reality underlying the surface of phenomena, and the ideas he evokes with this, are fascinating and important to consider. This is something, in its great depths of meaning, that for sure the positive philosophy loses touch with. And, important is the idea that if we want to ascribe reason to ourselves, as humans, we must also see reason in all other beings in the universe. It is similar to an important idea in recent philosophy of mind, that argues for panpsychism on the grounds of the absurdity of drawing a demarcation at any point in beings between consciousness and lack of consciousness.
In sum, the spiritual suggestions and critique of positivism are valuable. The philosophical arguments of his own though, are not adequate and to me, don't show nearly enough discernment of the subtleties of philosophical debates. He says how positivism cannot understand the meaning of things, only the how, yet why then does he not point out that past philosophies such as Aristotle had allowance for different kinds of explanations of phenomena, that positivism lost sight of, in favour solely of efficient causation? None of the ideas of past philosophers are raised in any detail. But instead repeated in plain and simplified language as if they are his own new ideas. For the philosophical claims he makes of the work, he has to be criticised on these grounds as making clearly inflated claims. But that does not take away from the importance of some of the concepts he considers, nor of the debates he considers, but there are better sources for more specific and targeted treatments of these problems.
In sum, the spiritual suggestions and critique of positivism are valuable. The philosophical arguments of his own though, are not adequate and to me, don't show nearly enough discernment of the subtleties of philosophical debates. He says how positivism cannot understand the meaning of things, only the how, yet why then does he not point out that past philosophies such as Aristotle had allowance for different kinds of explanations of phenomena, that positivism lost sight of, in favour solely of efficient causation? None of the ideas of past philosophers are raised in any detail. But instead repeated in plain and simplified language as if they are his own new ideas. For the philosophical claims he makes of the work, he has to be criticised on these grounds as making clearly inflated claims. But that does not take away from the importance of some of the concepts he considers, nor of the debates he considers, but there are better sources for more specific and targeted treatments of these problems.
March 7, 2020
I have read this book 5 times already. And with a good reason for that. It can be called the 'Bible of the intellect'. This book shatters positivist philosophy to pieces and proves the necessity of Meditation/Yoga (unity)/Fourth Way or another 'spiritual' practice if one wants to get in touch with Reality in the short life-span that has been given to us on this Earth.
If you don't realize the significance of this book, read a lot of poetry, do some psychedelics, listen to Alan Watts' lectures, and contemplate a lot about the nature of reality through science, philosophy (thought experiments). Then try reading the book again. Repeat the process until you get a connection with this book.
I read it after I started the Work (Fourth Way) so it has added smoothly to my process of 'know thyself'. It is an intellectual proof of the fact that humanity is asleep and subjective, and that it needs to awaken and become objective.
Pardon me if I sounded too arrogant or preachy,
with some love (as much as a sleeping being can feel :) ),
Darko.
If you don't realize the significance of this book, read a lot of poetry, do some psychedelics, listen to Alan Watts' lectures, and contemplate a lot about the nature of reality through science, philosophy (thought experiments). Then try reading the book again. Repeat the process until you get a connection with this book.
I read it after I started the Work (Fourth Way) so it has added smoothly to my process of 'know thyself'. It is an intellectual proof of the fact that humanity is asleep and subjective, and that it needs to awaken and become objective.
Pardon me if I sounded too arrogant or preachy,
with some love (as much as a sleeping being can feel :) ),
Darko.
December 21, 2007
Very hard book to read and comperhend. I am not too sure if I ever understand this book, might finish it in couple of years!
September 16, 2026
Related to "Flatland" & "The Dancing Wu Li Masters"
February 2, 2021
The book is like having a deep philosophical conversation with the author over a cup of coffee. it starts with a phrase 'in the end there will be no more time for man'. And the book takes you on a series of interconnected chapters that explain this phrase and its meaning.
The book does not focus on just one aspect, it covers a lot of areas, math, religion, spirituality, metaphysics, logic.. its like a conversation that seems to shift scope but if you think of it, everything is connected.
its not really a hard read, you just need to keep reading and see if you agree, like all philosophy books, its a point of view.
The book does not focus on just one aspect, it covers a lot of areas, math, religion, spirituality, metaphysics, logic.. its like a conversation that seems to shift scope but if you think of it, everything is connected.
its not really a hard read, you just need to keep reading and see if you agree, like all philosophy books, its a point of view.
Read
January 3, 2010this the real book and i will try to find original book over than 700 pages
February 6, 2024
While there are many problems let's start with what I liked. This book talks about the idea of the fourth dimension and using it to get to some potential transformative way of thinking about things. Where the mind takes you from there can be infinite. At first I thought this was a fairly common way of thinking. Think about overlapping "realms" such as those from the Kaballah as not "higher" or invisible, but an added extra dimension. How about "As above so below" in this context as well? Not that the book indicates such examples, but one can fit this into a range of things. This is about 1/3 of the book and anything after that I wouldn't recommend.
While there are many problems with the text itself I think the biggest is that a large part of the book is shadow boxing Positivism ("A doctrine contending that sense perceptions are the only admissible basis of human knowledge and precise thought") which was probably a big deal at the time. Unfortunately, rather than having things stand on their own or build off of the ideas presented we instead see, what I believe, is too much effort on defense. The book might as well have "anti-positivism" in the title due to how much we read here.
We also include a strange escalation of certain character traits such as artists. While this is common in certain circles I found it a bit aggressive in this book. Looking into the author's past and other books it appears that we are seeing the author's personality shine through. I don't believe it was intentional self-aggrandizing, but instead something that likely shone through. However, I think the context in which this was given made the results a bit blind of others and their own traits making it problematic.
Finally, although there are other issues, the latter book is built off of bricks from the prior. Some of these bricks did not stand well to time nor do they allow much inclusion of falsifiability. Which is a bit ironic considering the initial chapters. Additionally we have what appears to be a bit of theosophy used as the ground bricks which is being built off of rather than the original theory itself. If you don't agree with the initial points it's hard to go much farther than the basic talks of 4th dimension thinking.
While there are many problems with the text itself I think the biggest is that a large part of the book is shadow boxing Positivism ("A doctrine contending that sense perceptions are the only admissible basis of human knowledge and precise thought") which was probably a big deal at the time. Unfortunately, rather than having things stand on their own or build off of the ideas presented we instead see, what I believe, is too much effort on defense. The book might as well have "anti-positivism" in the title due to how much we read here.
We also include a strange escalation of certain character traits such as artists. While this is common in certain circles I found it a bit aggressive in this book. Looking into the author's past and other books it appears that we are seeing the author's personality shine through. I don't believe it was intentional self-aggrandizing, but instead something that likely shone through. However, I think the context in which this was given made the results a bit blind of others and their own traits making it problematic.
Finally, although there are other issues, the latter book is built off of bricks from the prior. Some of these bricks did not stand well to time nor do they allow much inclusion of falsifiability. Which is a bit ironic considering the initial chapters. Additionally we have what appears to be a bit of theosophy used as the ground bricks which is being built off of rather than the original theory itself. If you don't agree with the initial points it's hard to go much farther than the basic talks of 4th dimension thinking.
January 11, 2023
Not the kind of book to be thumbed through flippantly or lightly. Ouspensky, as with all of his works (and Gurdjieff’s as well), demands a high degree of attention, discrimination, and effort from his readers until the gradual realization and assimilation of ideas can take root. Often, Ouspensky’s style is painfully esoteric. However, these are the times most essential for the reader to devote all available attention to the text and overcome the intellectual impasse. Once a sincere effort is made, the words themselves become a conduit to a new and enhanced orientation of one’s place in the universal scheme. Tertium Organum is a very uphill journey for the mind as anything dealing in the subject matter of cosmic evolution should be.
As progress increases, the implications of Tertium Oganum’s ideas are slowly impressed upon the mind of the reader and his/hers insight expands proportionally. In this way, each chapter presents new and groundbreaking (albeit tenuous) concepts for the finite time and space bound mind to grasp.
The sheer erudition of the author is impressive. The depth of his learning is not only extensive but interdisciplinary: mathematics, philosophy, reactionary positivism versus mystical intuition, etc. There is a lot here for one who is willing to dedicate serious time to its discernment, study, and eventual application.
Ouspensky says himself in the conclusion that cosmic consciousness is not inherent in the whole of humankind. Not everyone is capable of transcending to such a state or even approaching it remotely by intellect. Only the serious and dedicated can hope for a glimpse, which in itself is very nearly impossible, and the finishing of this book is its own test of the will towards this end.
As progress increases, the implications of Tertium Oganum’s ideas are slowly impressed upon the mind of the reader and his/hers insight expands proportionally. In this way, each chapter presents new and groundbreaking (albeit tenuous) concepts for the finite time and space bound mind to grasp.
The sheer erudition of the author is impressive. The depth of his learning is not only extensive but interdisciplinary: mathematics, philosophy, reactionary positivism versus mystical intuition, etc. There is a lot here for one who is willing to dedicate serious time to its discernment, study, and eventual application.
Ouspensky says himself in the conclusion that cosmic consciousness is not inherent in the whole of humankind. Not everyone is capable of transcending to such a state or even approaching it remotely by intellect. Only the serious and dedicated can hope for a glimpse, which in itself is very nearly impossible, and the finishing of this book is its own test of the will towards this end.
January 25, 2024
The book falls slightly short of its name, but only just so.
It's a marvelous book, and its shortcomings are more than made up by the book's uncanny prescience. Ouspensky predicted the advances that materialistic science would make within the next century, less the computer.
His observations of the shortcomings of mechanicalism/rationalism/atheism have only been verified by the scientific discoveries we've made in the intervening century, and short of a few tweaks regarding the technology of his time, this could be published today with very little edited out.
His writing is fairly clear, though the first half of the book required a reread of every passage to pass onto a complete understanding of the models he was asking me to build, but Ouspensky shines here because he routinely explains concepts twice quickly, as he's a master of concepts and models and understands the reader needs two frames of reference to build from. Oftentimes with other authors I have to trod on and hope to source out additional context later on in the passage or text to clarify, because I haven't read a specific passage of fucking Kant.
His chapter on love was nothing short of brilliant, and that he somehow could tie it together with spacetime and thought in the end just compounds his argument on the likelihood of the hypothesis of a pantheistic phenomenal reality of consciousness. Or God in all and all in God.
I can't express how much this book gripped me, and will probably sit with me. It ends with a fairly standard pate of spiritualism, but it's still great.
Where I am concerned is Ouspensky and his likes work's being used to create a 5D consciousness movement in 2023 that is, from my jaded perspective, delusional.
It's a marvelous book, and its shortcomings are more than made up by the book's uncanny prescience. Ouspensky predicted the advances that materialistic science would make within the next century, less the computer.
His observations of the shortcomings of mechanicalism/rationalism/atheism have only been verified by the scientific discoveries we've made in the intervening century, and short of a few tweaks regarding the technology of his time, this could be published today with very little edited out.
His writing is fairly clear, though the first half of the book required a reread of every passage to pass onto a complete understanding of the models he was asking me to build, but Ouspensky shines here because he routinely explains concepts twice quickly, as he's a master of concepts and models and understands the reader needs two frames of reference to build from. Oftentimes with other authors I have to trod on and hope to source out additional context later on in the passage or text to clarify, because I haven't read a specific passage of fucking Kant.
His chapter on love was nothing short of brilliant, and that he somehow could tie it together with spacetime and thought in the end just compounds his argument on the likelihood of the hypothesis of a pantheistic phenomenal reality of consciousness. Or God in all and all in God.
I can't express how much this book gripped me, and will probably sit with me. It ends with a fairly standard pate of spiritualism, but it's still great.
Where I am concerned is Ouspensky and his likes work's being used to create a 5D consciousness movement in 2023 that is, from my jaded perspective, delusional.
July 27, 2021
Interesting
Mostly towards the end there is an interesting and useful survey of different traditions and belief systems all supposedly converging on ... well, something.
But as for his own main themes and ideas ... well, honestly, what a turgid pile of adolescent waffle. Supposedly he created a great stir in the UK intelligentsia upon arriving in London in the early 1900s. This is either a simply false claim or hard to credit. Perhaps standards were much lower back then or he was simply the flavour of the month in that particular month.
He claims there are Three fundamental organons of thought. First Aristotle, then Francis Bacon and then ultimately Ouspensky with a few vague and ambiguous formulations of a supposedly higher logic. Gimme a break. What a load of crap.
He has An infatuation with four and higher dimensional geometry as the key to inner mysteries. I suppose it was a bit new back then and used not just by Ouspensky to ‘explain’ the supposedly inexplicable. Much as quantum mechanics is now. But both are really just simple enough pieces of mathematics. Nothing more and nothing less.
Mostly towards the end there is an interesting and useful survey of different traditions and belief systems all supposedly converging on ... well, something.
But as for his own main themes and ideas ... well, honestly, what a turgid pile of adolescent waffle. Supposedly he created a great stir in the UK intelligentsia upon arriving in London in the early 1900s. This is either a simply false claim or hard to credit. Perhaps standards were much lower back then or he was simply the flavour of the month in that particular month.
He claims there are Three fundamental organons of thought. First Aristotle, then Francis Bacon and then ultimately Ouspensky with a few vague and ambiguous formulations of a supposedly higher logic. Gimme a break. What a load of crap.
He has An infatuation with four and higher dimensional geometry as the key to inner mysteries. I suppose it was a bit new back then and used not just by Ouspensky to ‘explain’ the supposedly inexplicable. Much as quantum mechanics is now. But both are really just simple enough pieces of mathematics. Nothing more and nothing less.
May 4, 2020
Love this book, but only a few pages at a time. The ideas are intense and have far reaching implications. You can almost feel the dissatisfaction the man must have had with superficial life.
August 6, 2020
Love Ouspensky generally, a man with an incredible mind and outlook but thought his book A New Model Universe was just that bit better.
January 20, 2021
Incredible!
December 9, 2021
"I have called this system of higher logic Tertium Organum because for us it is the third canon—third instrument—of thought after those of Aristotle and Bacon. The first was Organon, the second, Novum Organum. But the third existed earlier than the first" - P.D. Ouspensky
January 14, 2023
This book stands in a league of its own: A true jewel, a timeless masterpiece.
February 4, 2023
Read this when you don't see a way forward. The path may be outside the realm of our thoughts!
April 14, 2025
4.5/5 -- the first half of this book is seriously fascinating!
October 8, 2025
Simple consciousness, Self consciousness, cosmic consciousness
October 20, 2025
6 stars. Will need to read again. A true gem.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews