Reality Models

Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, in their article "The (Elusive) Theory of Everything," which appeared in the October 2010 issue of Scientific American, share a valuable insight:

Whenever we develop a model of the world and find it to be successful, we tend to attribute to the model the quality of reality or absolute truth... The same physical situation can be modeled in different ways, each employing different fundamental elements and concepts. It might be that to describe the universe we have to employ different theories in different situations. Each theory may have its own version of reality, but according to model-dependent realism, that diversity is acceptable, and none of the versions can be said to be more real than any other.
Another way to say this is, "The map is not the territory, and any map that works is as good as any other map." To which I would add. "The territory is ultimately unknowable."

In my simple-minded way I always assumed there was "one reality" (otherwise known as the hard physical reality in which our planet is being destroyed), and my alternate "models" (otherwise known as "altered states of consciousness") were somehow less relevant. But recently I’ve come to accept the fact that never the twain shall meet. In my experience, different models seem dominant at different times, and no model is more relevant than any other.

As far as I know, we can’t escape the reality that our planet is being destroyed. But we have the capability within ourselves to transcend the illusion that physical reality is all there is. As Shakespeare said, "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy."