FAQ:

Q. Does the "Experience of Hallucinations in Religious Practice" book say that most experiences of ESP, spiritual vision, talking to the deceased, and UFO encounters are merely hallucinations in the brain?

A. No, in fact it doesn't. The book serves many different purposes and is for many different audiances. The book was written in part for the academic establishment to understand that hallucinations are in reality not that uncommon and do not make a person "schizophrenic." When the book was published at the end of 2005, there was still a lot of resistence to the idea that hallucinations can happen in "sane" people. Likewise, it is believed by many that if a spiritual person had a "vision" they were really having an authentic vision of something divine. In fact, the reason why there is so much conflict in spiritual ideas is that when we "come down to our level" we often cloud the experiences we are having with our own thoughts.

The book is definitely pro-spirituality and needs to be read to be understood. The book can even perhaps open one up to spiritual experiences by its frequent descriptions of states of mind that are either hallucinations or real spiritual experience.

Q. Is Robert Pearson primarily a composer or is he really a writer? A person can't be a professional author and a professional composer, right?

A. This question shows a dilemma that has occured to Pearson for most of his adult life. In fact, there are many well-known professional artists who do two arts equally as well. Pearson does not see himself as a better writer than he is a composer. In fact, many professional classical composers consider him an excellent composer. Many professional authors consider him an excellent non-fiction author and poet. These artists who do more than one art are sometimes called polyartists, or sometimes they are called "Renaissance men." Pearson is a bit unique in that he is also a theorist -- he has been actively contributing to world theory since the young age of 22 when he released the first versions of Virtuism and ParaMind Theory in self-published books and journals. An art magazine published in N.Y. called Artitude published the first version in 1986. Such a situation is considered by him more as much a burden as a blessing -- some think such a person is a bit crazy unless they are already well respected by many people. Creativity is seen as a virtue unless a person is too creative! Such people are the inventors Buckminister Fuller and Nicola Tesla, the television celebrity Steve Allen, and rock stars Brian Eno and David Byrne. Even "philosophers" like G.I. Gudjieff and Rudolph Steiner, if they didn't have the strange metaphysical element (which cancel them out academically), would be considered polyartists and poly-theorists. In fact, today interdisciplinary studies are very popular in almost every university and many artists are similar to Pearson in some way of taking their work seriously in the theoretical level.

On this subject, Pearson has said, "It is a great burden to be the kind of person who coins new 'isms.' Many modern artists do it, some do it seriously, and many more artists do it as a type of joke. The fact that there are some people who do it seriously and do not have a type of grandiose delusion about the importance of what they are doing. There are others, the kind who are more the consiracy theory types, who do it and they think they are going to change everyone around them. I am actually writing a book on this type of individual."

Q. Can I get Robert Pearson to speak at my group (college, church, institute)?

A. Yes. Robert Pearson has done professional consulting since 1994, and understands well the professional environment, having owned ParaMind Brainstorming Software since 1992. Pearson currently consults, gives talks and participates in forums on the subject of creativity in business, software related issues such as end-use, and futurism.

Q. The area of religious extremism is in the news today quite often, with the problem with terrorism, cults and lone individuals who in the name of religion commit a crime. How can Pearson's book, "Hyperreligiousity: Identifying and Overcoming Religious Dysfunction" help this situation?

A.

Pearson succeeded in making "hyperreligiousity" a common word. Before the book was published, the word was completely obscure, only used by a handful of psychiatrists. It's not uncommon to see the word today used often on CSPAN, PBS, or on any number of talk radio programs.

Because of various resistences to new ideas, the idea of a book being written in language close to the average person's but using concepts of academic or "Western" psychology was a shock to many. The book was bought by people online, at various bookstores, even put in window and side aisle displays, but there were still some who rejected carrying the book. Many academics have a problem addressing and respecting issues of the "common man's religion," and Pearson saw that theology should be built on issues relating to mental health. His two books on religion and mental health therefor form a type of theological guideline. It's more important for theologians to figure out how religions operate psychologically in people than how they operate purely "theologically."

Like the book on hallucinations in religious practice, the book actually has to be read to be understood. It is like a type of medicine for the person whose religion has caused them little more than pain and dysfunction. The book at once acknowledges the good that religion does and helps prevent dysfunctional religion from doing any more harm. It helps the resistant populations of psychology, those who do not believe in the Western psychological model yet could be greatly helped if they could find a compassionate and sympathetic therapist. Those who are suspectible to the voices in the world that seek for people to become religious extremists. These voices are just as present in North America as they are in Iraq or Pakistan.

Q. Robert Pearson writes about a lot of spiritual subjects, exactly what are his spiritual beliefs?

A. After many years of making himself a personal laboratory for spiritual beliefs, around 1989 at the age of 26 Pearson realized he should center his beliefs on a worldview that had a common acceptance amoung people and helped simplify a lot of abstract concepts. Pearson was raised Christian and at age 15 started reading Eastern philosophy and meditating. By age 18, he felt these ideas were not really helping him and for a while he came back to Christianity. By 23, he picked up the various Eastern and esoteric worldviews again but three years later again rededicated himself to more basic Christian ideas. He believes that religious ideas have hundreds of different subcomponents, and that the simple tend to not see the different subcompents. This is why someone who is a biblical Christian can do something like physical yoga, yet another biblical Christian might thinking doing physical yoga can lead to demonic possession. Pearon still practices self-discipline techniques influenced by studies of Maurice Nicoll's work, Yoga and other influences, but these only focus on psychology and not their worldviews. These latter influences do not influence his basic theology and Christology, which is Judeo-Christian. Pearson sees two basic worldviews of religious people, those that are Messianic (basically, Christian) and those that focus more on the ideas of many teachers whom these people believe to be essentially of equal value to Jesus. Pearson would fall into the former category of believing in the supremecy of Jesus Christ and the Messianic role of Christ's death on the cross for our sins. It's important to recognize that even modern greats like Stravinksy, Dali, Kandinsky, Hugo Ball, Arvo Part, T.S. Elliott, and many others considered themselves Christian. Many others, when you study their biographies, even someone like Eric Satie, had profound reverence for Christ. Pearson finds it interesting that some adherents of atheism, New Age and even Eastern Religions can be as intolerant in their ways as they believe Christianity and Islam are.

Q. You mentioned in an interview in 2005 that you were writing a book critical of the Gurdjieff philosophy. Are you still planning that?

A. "Since that time, there have been other authors who have discussed some of the same things that I have. I see a need for people to be able to develop powers of attention. Simone Weil said that the power of attention can overcome evil. Gurdjieff somehow synthesized many powerful ways to understand attention and will power, but put them in a crazy mixture of esoteric nonsense combined with misanthropy against the common person. Since his reputation is so plagued, one really cannot associate themselves with him without being soiled by association with the cult that surrounds him. For this reason, and the fact that after the completion of the book on Grandiosity, I just wanted to work on music, I probably won't finish that work for some time. It is sad that people cannot take the bad with the good, even when there is something that might help them or others. Too many see everything in white/black terms without being able to think abstractly."