I would like to take this time to really ask some questions of you, that I have been asking myself. I know I have been talking about theories, contents, and ideas that are a bit out of the box and sort of out there. I thank those who left comments to my posts to support my ideas. I came across this great article by David N. Aspy that compares the traditional science with “new science of possibilities.” It fed into my thoughts and compelled me to ask you all if I am the only one “out there” or my colleagues understand where I am coming from. The title of article is Beyond Both Traditional Scientist/Humanists and Humanist/Scientists. Please read this article and it will stretch your mind to another level.

One thing that really got me thinking was that science has been used for control purposes. Our society has really adopted Newtonian science as a reality and we all operate accordingly. Hence, the language of miracles, space traveling, jumping time and space, clairvoyance, etc. is considered far-fetched and not accepted. Traditional science has really put us in a box and if we try to think out of the box, it makes us feel like we are the crazy ones. Traditional science has forced people to choose between science and nature. It’s like either I am scientist or humanist. The fields of psychology and counseling are going in the direction of proving that psychology and/or counseling is a science. That it is predictable, measurable, repeatable, and every other promise and guarantee that comes with scientific or empirically based theories, interventions, solutions, etc. Managed care and insurance companies are trying to manipulate our fields in every way they can and not pay us by saying, “It is not empirical.”

Another thing that I want to bring to your attention is Heisenberg’s the Uncertainty Principle and how it affected Einstein’s theory of Relativity. After coming to know about Heisenberg’s the Uncertainty Principle, which is that you cannot measure two positions simultaneously with precision. It further includes that when you go on measuring velocity, you loose position and when you try to determine position of a particle, you loose its velocity. Hence, it leads to observer effect. Heisenberg described how observer’s position influenced the observations, which sort of goes along with Freud’s theory of unconsciousness (that unconsciousness controls a person’s motives). Quantum physics’ experiments have supported these findings beyond the shadow of doubt that there is no reality without the observer or human consciousness. According to quantum mechanics, we all are observers of the reality whether it is in scientific experiment or in our everyday life. If Quantum Physics’ is right in saying that reality is infinite possibilities chosen by the observer, then traditional science is limiting those possibilities. If something is a fact for someone; that does not necessarily mean that it will be a fact for everybody or even someone else? If Quantum Physics says that reality is observer’s perception, then how could one’s perception, opinion, and understanding of even shared experiences be the same? Will the psychology and counseling fields accept and/or adapt to these viewpoints in the near future?

Gurpreet Kaur is a counselor who works at an outpatient clinic and also has a private practice. She is a doctoral student with professional interests in quantum physics, spirituality, self-actualization, and mindfulness practices as they all relate to counseling.