Wolfgang Smith
Born
in Vienna, Austria
February 18, 1930
Died
July 25, 2024
Website
Genre
Influences
|
Cosmos and Transcendence: Breaking Through the Barrier of Scientistic Belief
—
published
1984
—
10 editions
|
|
|
The Quantum Enigma: Finding the Hidden Key
—
published
1995
—
19 editions
|
|
|
The Wisdom of Ancient Cosmology: Contemporary Science in Light of Tradition
—
published
2004
—
11 editions
|
|
|
Science and Myth: What We Are Never Told
—
published
2010
—
7 editions
|
|
|
Physics and Vertical Causation: The End of Quantum Reality
—
published
2019
—
6 editions
|
|
|
Ancient Wisdom and Modern Misconceptions: A Critique of Contemporary Scientism
by
—
published
2013
—
6 editions
|
|
|
The Vertical Ascent: From Particles to the Tripartite Cosmos and Beyond
|
|
|
Christian Gnosis: From Saint Paul to Meister Eckhart
—
published
2008
—
5 editions
|
|
|
Teilhardism And The New Religion
—
published
1988
—
3 editions
|
|
|
Vedanta in Light of Christian Wisdom
|
|
“It is difficult, almost impossible, in fact, for the scientific community to recognize the fact that Cartesian bifurcation is a philosophic postulate, for which there is absolutely no scientific basis [...] It is not that they can conceive or imagine a scientific proof of that hypothesis; it is rather that they are unable to conceive that it might not be true.”
―
―
“Hard science ... is ultimately self-corrective, and wiser, in a way, than the scientists who pursue it; in the end it is apt to lead us to the truth, if only we have 'eyes to see'. But science itself cannot give us this vision: science as such cannot interpret its own findings; and neither, I would add, can modern philosophy. What is called for, I maintain, is a grounding in the traditional metaphysical doctrines of mankind: the very tenets that have been decried since the Enlightenment as primitive, pre-scientific, and puerile. Strange as it may seem to modern minds, these teachings ... derive ultimately 'from above': from the Center of the circle, if you will. Originally formulated in the language of myth, they have served as a catalyst of metaphysical vision down through the ages; neither Plato, nor Aristotle, nor Aquinas invented their own doctrines: all have drunk from this spring—except, of course, for the pundits of modernity, who have rejected that heritage. By now, to be sure, one knows very well to what destination modernity leads: we have, after all, entered the disillusioned and skeptical era of postmodernism. The argument against the traditional wisdom has now run its course, and the way to the perennial springs is open once more. The time is ripe for a new interpretation of scientific findings based upon pre-Cartesian principles; what is called for is a radical change of outlook, a veritable metanoia. Whether the doctrines of science will conduce to human enlightenment or to the blighting of our intellect hangs in the balance.”
―
―
“Interest in alchemy seems to be nowadays on the rise. Whereas the educated public at large remains no doubt skeptical and indeed disdainful of the ancient discipline, there is today a deepening awareness among the better informed that what stands behind many an “exploded superstition” may be in fact a long-forgotten wisdom. Although Carl Jung was obviously exaggerating when ! he suggested that four centuries after being expelled from our universities,- alchemy stands “knocking at the door,” a number of factors have conspired; to render the prospect of re-admission less remote, at least, than it had been ; during the heyday of materialism. In any case, no truly solid grounds for rejecting the ancient doctrine have yet been proposed. Take the case of the so-called four elements: earth, water, air and fire. One can be reasonably certain that these terms were not employed alchemically in their ordinary sense, but were used to designate elements, precisely, out of which substances, as we know them, are constituted. Somewhat like the quarks of modern physics, these elements are not found empirically in isolation, but occur in their multiple combinations, that is to say, as the perceptible substances that constitute what I term the corporeal domain. Now, as I have argued at length in The Quantum Enigma (Peru, Illinois: Sherwood Sugden, 1995), corporeal objects are not in fact mere aggregates of quantum particles; and this clearly suggests that there may indeed be elements of the aforesaid kind. It turns out that our habitual opposition to alchemy is based mainly upon scientistic prejudice: upon a reductionist dogma, namely, for which there is in reality no scientific support at all.”
― The Wisdom of Ancient Cosmology: Contemporary Science in Light of Tradition
― The Wisdom of Ancient Cosmology: Contemporary Science in Light of Tradition






























