Feb 052010

DavidHawkins200 Hopefully it’s not a bad sign that this is the second somewhat negative piece I’m doing this week. I generally like to focus on positive reviews. I’d rather ignore a bad book or teacher and focus on a good one. But I’ve quoted David Hawkins before. I was in the process of reading I – Reality and Subjectivity, and was hoping to give it a good review on these pages. Then I got part-way through the book and hit a brick wall.

Let me give a brief overview on David Hawkins for those unfamiliar with him. Hawkins is a spiritual teacher who went through a profound enlightenment experience and has written eloquently about it. I quoted him in Four Easy Steps to Enlightenment. His spiritual insight is full of profound depth. I first heard about him from Wayne Dyer, who has quoted from and used his work. He also endorses, as part of his teaching, a practice called “applied kinesiology”. This is basically a muscle testing exercise. Some alternative health practitioners are familiar with it. For example, to test a person’s reaction to a particular food, they hold the food in one hand and hold the other arm straight out. Muscletest1 A tester then tries to push their arm down. The theory is that if the food is bad for you, its vibration will weaken your energy and your arm can be easily pushed down. If the food is good for you, your arm will remain strong and hard to push down. Interesting theory.

Hawkins takes this a step further. He teaches that any true/false statement can be tested with kinesiology just like a food. There is a universal consciousness which knows the answer to all questions. Your own consciousness is directly connected to this universal consciousness. When you hear (or think of) a TRUE statement, you connect with universal consciousness and your arm stays strong. When you hear or think of a FALSE statement, there is a moment of disconnection or dissonance from universal consciousness and your hand can be pushed down. In this way, you can reliably test the truth of any statement.

Using this method, Hawkins has developed a scale of consciousness, and assigns ranks on this scale to everything from books to teachers to historical figures to works of art. I’ve reproduced the scale elsewhere on my site and I still believe it is a very useful system for showing the relative position of various emotions, philosophies and views on a scale.

Now we come to the problem. I’m reading through David’s book I – Reality and Subjectivity. After some really excellent chapters on developing non-dual consciousness and transcending judgments and opposites, he starts to talk about politics and society. And here things start to get weird. In discussing World War II, he says that Hitler “calibrates” (can be placed on the scale using kinesiology) at 125 churchill(“desire”) Neville Chamberlain slightly higher at 185 (somewhere between “pride” and “courage”), and Winston Churchill at an astonishing 510 (between “love” and “joy”).

No doubt that Churchill had many excellent leadership qualities, and that Chamberlain’s attempt to appease Germany was unfortunate. But Churchill could also be an overbearing bigot. He once said “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” According to some, his racial views were little better than Hitler’s. Chamberlain on the other hand was a high-minded progressive reformer, working to reduce child labor, give workers holidays and make peace with Ireland. His fault was in failing to recognize the extent of HItler’s ambitions.

Hawkins goes on to assign high values to several socially conservative ideas and very low ones to “politically correct” ideas. Good –God, patriotism, tobacco.  Bad – welfare, reparations, pacifism, privacy laws, criticizing the president, Then things get more peculiar. Let me quote a section:

The Constitution of the United States calibrates as the highest of any nation and stands at 705…If the word “God” were removed from the Constitution, its calibrated level would drop from 705 (Truth) to 485 (Intelligence and Reason)

Uh… hold on a minute. Surely I’m not the only one who knows that the word “God” doesn’t appear in the Constitution at all. And yet Hawkins claims to have “calibrated” it with and without the word “God” in it?? And as clever as the checks and balances of the Constitution are, does a document that is basically a set of administrative rules really calibrate at the level of Divine Truth? And has he really checked the constitutions of every other country? In the same section, he announces that “The hatred of the United States by others stems solely from envy”, apparently discounting any perceived grievance any country of group may have against the United States as nothing but concealed envy.

All this is so outrageous that I would be tempted to think its some sort of bizarre “test”. If you can get past this chapter without judgment, then you can read the rest of the book. But I’m forced to conclude with Ken Wilber that being highly developed along the lines of spirituality and consciousness doesn’t necessarily mean you are highly developed in all other lines at the same time. For all Hawkins enlightenment, I think he is displaying some massive blind spots, and his “calibration” of the Constitution of the United States destroys ALL credibility in his calibration process.

Hawkins says several times that if people arrive at calibrations different than his, it invariably turns out that either they phrased the question incorrectly, OR that they themselves calibrate at too low a level. At this point, that sounds like a very convenient way of making your theories and methods un-testable and non-falsifiable.

Conclusion? I’m afraid I can’t recommend Hawkins. Whatever use kinesiology may or may not have, it’s obviously that it is useless for testing and calibrating historical figures, political documents, and I suspect anything else.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

  44 Responses to “A Critique of David R. Hawkins and Kinesiology”

  1. […] negative reviews. I won't repost the whole thing here, but please feel free to leave comments on the post here. __________________ Rev Keith Campbell http://www.pathstoknowledge.com Facebook: […]

  2. I've just spent way too much time listening to Hawkins on Youtube.
    Here's what he says about changing the world:
    “The first thing you should do is the do the world a favor and don't try to change it.” He ends by saying “as long as there is pepsi and expresso coffee, there's nothing I want to change.”
    In other words, be complacent. What would Ghandi or MLK say to that?

  3. Yes, I hear similar things from a variety of “spiritual” teachers and sources. Wayne Dyer and the folks at “The Secret” for example. On the one hand, I've known a lot of people so caught up in a particular cause that they become bitter, angry and exhausted. On the other hand, this can all too easily be a nice excuse for people who have a lot of material advantages ignoring any social responsibility. There are plenty of things we can do to make our world better without lowering our spiritual energy.

  4. Hawkins meant the Pledge of Alliegance, not the Constitution. Adding “under God” in 1954 does change its vibration from 485 to 705.

    Regarding Churchill, a vibration above 500 does not mean a person is PERFECT, but he certainly had the skills required to lead his country during the war. He was of course defeated in the postwar election, perhaps due to certain of his personal shortcomings.

    People who vibrate above 700 are in the realm of enlightenment and may be judged by a higher standard.

    Reverend, you see merit in Hawkins, then dismiss it all based on one inaccuracy and one misunderstanding.

    Dr Hawkins presents his world view without sugar-coating and I believe it is a great revelation for people who sincerely seek truth.

  5. First you need to decide what your aim is?
    Do you want to get to Heaven (540) if so continue helping people and trying to change the world.
    Do you want to attain enlightenment?
    If so forget the world and all your positionalities on how You (ego) think it should be.

    As for the trying to guess what peoples calibrations should be it is worthwhile to remember that it is a combination of their intention and the truth they have uncovered about themselves.

    Remember the Pope can calibrate in the high 500’s yet the catholic church’s stance on pedophilia is in the 100’s.
    So Winston Churchill may appear to be quite negative or have bad traits when his Will is on the correct path to bettering mankind – see Perception Vs Essence.

    It serves well to remain humble and accept ones shortcomings – I realize and accept that I am unable to see or understand anyone who calibrates above me – if I could understand and see their position I would be at their level or higher.

    As for the Doc’s calibrations I treat them as interesting and accept they are ballpark figures that are generally true – I get far more out of the the talks on Divinity as source.

    Regards, Jake.

  6. Here is another test: Muscle test while looking at Dr. David Hawkins to see if he tests strong. Then look in the mirror and test your self. Then call to God or say some praise of God and test yourself again, while looking in the mirror. Are you strong yet?

    I did this very same test and Dr. Hawkins always tests strong, I only test strong, while looking in a mirror, when I am saying God’s name or a prayer. Those with Alzheimers test strong…of the two I tested. It is very interesting. Some children test strong and very few adults. All dogs and cats and some birds tested strong. One can just think of a name of a real person or his/her face and test. All or almost all test weak. Thnk maybe the ones testing strong are innocent and loving may be the ones testing strong?

    God bless us all, SS

  7. In regard to comments on the calibration of Chamberlain and Churchill, the writer fails to take ‘context’ into consideration: a rather serious flaw. The calibration results may be due to the overall effect on the greater good of Churchill’s life, and that of Chamberlain. Blessing on your journey brother, Rose

    • It may be that context and net result, rather than individual level, is what’s being calibrated. Of course, it might also be that the technique doesn’t work. It ought to be easy to prove one way or another, but I fear that anyone attempting to validate it who’s results were negative would be accused of being at too low a level to do the calibration.

  8. It my is my understand that Doctor Hawkins refered to the Declaration of Independence when referring to the mention of the word God being included (Truth v Falsehood). Could you please tell me where Doc Hawkins says the word God is included in the constitution?

    • The book, as discussed above, is “I- Reality and Subjectivity”, and the quote is several chapters in. It quite definitely says “The Constitution”, not the Declaration of Independence. I don’t have the book with me, but I believe you’ll find the remark easy to locate in that book.

      • The “word God” versus the “word of God” is an important distinction. The reference material for the Constitution of the USA was in many cases, The Bible. Scholars have pointed out that those who forged the Constitution have written this extensively in memoirs and letters, leaving a very clear trail of their thought processes, so we know that at least 40% of the background references and concepts in that document are quotations from The Bible. If you removed those references you’d have a wholly different set of laws. That is what I believe Hawkins was saying. Hawkins was a man of great heart and energy. Whether he was a “scholar” may be up for debate. Certainly he was a genius.

        Also, muscle testing is taught informally as part of EFT training — both casual and professional levels. It works beautifully if applied correctly, however much you’ve engaged in training. The astuteness of the user certainly matters, their incisiveness and development — which are of course all relative terms and not in the scientific nomenclature.

        I don’t agree with all of Hawkins assertions, but I don’t have to in order to make wonderful use of his insight and legacy.

        • Well there are many contradictions if you really think about his tests on the bible. Jesus certainly believed it was his Father who inspired it, because he says at John 10 vs 35 the scripture cannot be nullified, which clearly indicates his agreement with ALL of the word of God, and if his very being is made up of all that he learned from the Hebrew scriptures and, as he only had the OT to quote from when here on earth, how comes that the OT is lesser than the NT, Christ was born out of the OT and yet he is higher than the bible?
          It doesn’t seem right. I think muscle testing is interesting but full of big flaws and those who believe it want to. I’m ok with that confirmation bias, because were all like that with our beliefs even scientists and evolutionists both are religious zealots,
          which is another subject.

  9. Hawkins use of muscle testing to calibrate people and documents is totally inappropriate and unprofessional.  Hawkings  misrepresents the technique.  Muscle testing as used by kinesiology practitioners is for detecting stress in the patient, be it structural and  physical, nutritional and chemical, mental and emotional stress.  The muscle test is done in a clinical context and used to guide the practitioner and help the patient to wellness. Any other conclusion such as Hawkings conclusions of the vibration of  historical figures and documents are really the stress that person had on the subject when Hawkins did the test. Any thing else is an assumption.   And yes, there actually are practitioners who train in this health modaility.  

    • Note that Dr. Hawkins no longer uses the term ‘kinesiology’ to refer to his practice of muscle testing.

    • Is it inappropriate and unprofessional? Let’s test that statement (smile). I hope we can keep a sense of humor and non-attached attitude along with our perspectives and inquiry. How an why kinesiology practitioners use the technique does not mean it cannot be used in other ways of testing for information and truth gathering, as long as the purpose of the test and the process of enacting the test is done with integrity. It also does not need to be in a clinical setting to be valid. A clinical setting is just that – a clinical setting. I believe Dr. Hawkins is pretty clear on this issue of being in integrity when doing the test (one reason why testing for winning lotto numbers won’t reveal much). In response to several comments from others and the author themselves (1) Kinesiology is more than an interesting theory. I’ve had several persons who spent tons of money to address physical challenges of one kind or another and getting nowhere [even in terms of proper diagnosis] who have been immeasurably helped [and for lack of a better word] cured, through the information kinesiology provided [in terms of how to proceed with what kind of treatment]. (2) In my probable limited understanding of Dr. Hawkins use of it for calibration levels, I believe in terms of calibrating persons there is a lot involved that might be unperceived by our rational, cognitive minds. It is not the Ego that is being calibrated [as far as I am aware] but the total person which includes the spiritual aspects which may have various levels of expression, or limitation of expression, through the personality. (3) re: Jake’s comments: “Do you want to get to Heaven (540) if so continue helping people and trying to change the world. Do you want to attain enlightenment? If so forget the world and all your positionalities on how You (ego) think it should be.” I think this perspective is a bit limited in understanding. I work in the holistic/complementary health field. People I see can have challenges, both physical and emotional. I can often see what changes would benefit their lives and yet my intention is not to “change” them, but to do the work I do in a way that facilitates greater options of realization and choice for others to make themselves, to facilitate their self empowerment. I think a similar principle applies to working in avenues that affect the larger issues and circumstances impacting various populations of the world. If you’re engaged in such activity because you recognize you have a calling to be there, and the intention is to support beneficial change, but you are not attached to how or when that change needs to come about, but ARE aware of your willingness and capacity to continue service in that area because it simply is your truth. Then you are helping to change the world without being attached to having to change the world and the world having to respond in a specific way within a certain time frame. Otherwise you are probably caught up in some form of Ego self-glorified and righteous intentions. The theme or issue of personal spiritual evolution that engages with the world vs unattached awareness that the world is ultimately illusion and basically serves as a seductive form of distraction from ultimate reality – is a deep inquiry for me. It seems to be totally opposite perspectives. Perhaps, as Dr. Hawkins has pointed out in his discussions of polarity, these two seeming extremes of spiritual experience are simply expressions of a larger context. (4) re: the ‘looking in the mirror self test’, Dr. Hawkins remarks in his book ‘I/Reality and Subjectivity’ [which I find awesome] is that it’s best not to do self kinesiology [even if you are calibrated at over 200] because it’s too easy for Ego dynamics to get involved and contaminate the accuracy of the test. (5) The issue of needing to be at the level of 200 [basic integrity] to accurately use kinesiology does have me a little concerned. I understand the vibrational reasoning underlying it. How can you get accurate and truthful information if you are not at a basic level of integrity? But as only 30% of the population registers at this level it bares a few questions. When Dr. Hawkins was lecturing to very large groups of people [apparently hundreds] and had the audience members pair up to test white powder in packets and had like a 99% congruence with the testing [how was this possible if one needs to be at a 200% calibration level? Is it reasonable or probable to assume that out of an audience of hundreds that there would be a sufficient number that were below a 200 calibrated level?] If so, then I don’t understand how there could have been a 99% congruent test outcome. Maybe someone very familiar with his work can explain this to me.

      • I appreciate your great and thoughtful reply to the blog and responses to it . In response to your last question at the end, the possibility that when in the presence of a being that calibrates very high those around calibrate higher as well. So, if Mr. Hawkins calibrates very high his presence could automatically increase the calibration of everyone in his audience. That could then result in overwhelmingly similar responses and ones above integrity. Also, it could be presumed that those in his audience were likely already close to, at, or above integrity. I would surmise that from Rupert Sheldrake’s notion of Morphogenetic Fields also calibrated highly by David Hawkins.

        • Rachel Carson tests very high. Silent Spring. Many million die. Nuff said.

          • Ummm. Silent Spring was a highly influential book on environmentalism that focused on the ill-effects of pesticides on the environment which brought unwanted attention to chemical companies during the 60s. Not really surprising it calibrated high is it, especially when it was reporting truth about pesticides hidden by companies lacking integrity. Seems a perfect candidate for high calibration

  10. It is funny how almost all the critics have never met Dr. Hawkins and always take some quote totally out of context changing the whole meaning. The quote is never referenced and when you do find it you find that the paragraphs preceding or following the quote totally change the context. Dr. Hawkins has also said that only 30%+- of the population in the US can actually do muscle testing. If you are going to quote somebody at least give the references.

  11. it’s false that this method is untestable & non-falsifiable. hawkins said 30% of americans are integrous (above a 200 calibration) & can therefore arrive at the right calibrations. thus, for a proper experiment, gather, say, 1000 people & give each 100 things to calibrate. if the theory is correct, the calibrations of about 700 people will be all over the place, while the calibrations of about 300 people will sync. it should be easy to pick out the 300 integrous people, as their calibrations on every single assigned item should match perfectly to each other.
    (the constitutions doesn’t say “god,” but does say “in the year of our lord” where it’s giving the date. though i’d think other countries’ constitutions say that too. i think, rather, as someone else pointed out, he meant the declaration of independence.)

  12. Hawkin’s work was one of the first that I came across in this type work a few years ago. You have described the exact issue that I have had with him. He seemed to make his work a bit too linear and “cut and dry” when there are a lot more variables at play. Personally, I’ve enjoyed Don Beck’s Spiral Dynamics and Jenny Wade’s work much more, because in those theories people can be a “blend” of various levels and change. However, even within those theories I’ve run into issues to accurately describe a person’s development. That’s where I’ve found Ken Wilber’s lines of development theory extremely helpful in fully describing one’s development of consciousness.

  13. This is a good review. I currently subscribe to the view of Dr. bradley Nelson in his book Emotion Code. He says that muscle testing is a gift which is to be used for healing and to improve health. It would simply not work, for example, to use it to calibrate a winning lotto ticket number.

  14. David Hawkins spent a lifetime helping people, not the least of which me.

    I’m quite familiar with much of his work, and as far as I’m aware, he never claimed to be Jesus Christ, God, Buddha, Allah or any other “perfect being”.In his later years he was sometimes confused and forgetful, but at the same time quite effective.

    In reply to some of the comments above, David recommended many other spiritual teachers and other authors work.

    The argument above regarding helping people and improving the world, what he was trying to convey was to concentrate on improving one self by raising your own level of conciousness and thereby pulling up the average level of the group which does improve the world, without you “doing” anything.

    He certainly did not recommend that people with big plans and big egos should set up big organizations to improve the world. Such as, war on poverty, war on drugs, etc. None of these political solutions have improved anything. Most if not all big plan world improver’s are more motivated by ego than actually improving anything.

    A wise Buddhist once said; If every person sweeps up his own front step, before long the whole world is swept clean.

    Also it is pointless for people to pick apart tiny details of his work, a particular conciseness level he quotes, or some comment about a historical figure. Is there any body of spiritual teaching as voluminous as his that would not contain something that anyone could disagree with? Have a look at the bible or the Koran, etc.

    I fully recommend the works of David R Hawkins.

    Thank you for reading.

    All the best to you all.


    • Thank you Kevin, this is a really valid comment. I am on book 3 of David Hawkins’ books and I am really gaining some awesome spiritual insights. So it’s like everything, just like you said the Bible certainly isn’t infallible. It contains errors. But lots of truth too. so I am re-evaluating my opinion of David Hawkins based on the fact that his work always leaves me with a sense of peace (for the most part.) And I’m not willing to toss out the baby with the bath water! Inner spiritual discernment is always the most important, no matter what you believe or what organization you belong to. I also greatly enjoy his audio seminar on Healing.


  16. Please do not be an all or nothing reviewer. Take the best and leave the rest. Muscle testing is NOT central to calibration – which stands on its own. The former is just a measurement method, which may not have any real importance or not work. In physics that the wave function can not be measured either, except on its collapse, yet it is a pivotal idea.

    Einstein made substantial errors too. In particular he tried to discredit the quantum mechanics, which his work helped build. Hawkins is a teacher with some good stuff and some imperfect ideas. Take the good.

  17. As for the constitution, I checked it. Correct, God is not mentioned. But it, or “Creator” is in the Declaration of Independence, which has many of the same signers. “All men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights” is a powerful idea! It is the basis of the constitution and can hardly be separated.

    So its a trivial point.

  18. I think somehow, even if a system could correctly calibrate everything, God or the Universe wouldn’t let us get away with letting someone else do all our thinking for us, so as a favor to us it would inevitably break down somewhere and cause us to have to face certain morale dilemnas in our own hearts as adults – to have to decide without “knowing” if we are “right” what and whether action should be taken. Churchhill took action, yet some are saying enlightenment means turning your back on such real-life happenings in the world like a Hitler. Someone told me once they heard Shirley MacLaine describe seeing a buddhist couple in Thailand allow their baby to drown which had fallen out of the boat because that was its fate and she thought that was wise. Yikes – take action I say – feel, be alive, risk making mistakes! But save that baby!!

  19. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-2002/pdf/GPO-CONAN-2002.pdf
    here you find the word “God”

  20. Hi Keith,
    I enjoyed reading your article. You were able to clarify for me some of the issues I have with Hawkins attitude of trust me above anything else. I do get a lot out of his work and use his map of consciousness for teaching emotions. Pointing out that he calibrated the constitution and made an error would not be a big deal, except that he claims to have calibrated every word and every sentence in his books. This means his “perfect” system missed an error. Thank you for your very thoughtful critique. I also was unaware of how strongly he went after anyone who challenged him. That is helpful to know in evaluating his claim of having no ego.

  21. I have attended Hawkin’s seminars twice. The first time, he stayed clear of politics and came across as a jovial old man. The second time, he was on the stage with his new younger wife using her to calibrate Fox News (scored very high) and Harvard Law School ( a flunky with a very low score). In an impressive display of circular logic, he calibrated himself and his work higher than any other existing truth/works/books. I left the room shaken to my core shocked by my own ignorance of being conned into reading his books. I was so ashamed of my own non-critical reading of his works.

  22. In his books he states quite emphatically that kinesiology will identify guilty and innocent before the courts. If true, we should be able to find missing persons, bodies etc. So far a blank in any police reports. Lotto results are in the future and there is no expectation of getting rich.

  23. And if one is a serious student of Dr. David R. Hawkins, one would take about two seconds to calibrate this article. The article itself is under 200 and therefore has unconscious non-integrous motives. In other words a bunch of gobble dee gook.

  24. How does David Hawkins calibrate a book or a dead person? As I understand it, one can calibrate a person because of the energies emanating from them, but and its a BIG BUT how do you calibrate a book like the bible or any book?
    The bible writers of the New Testament got there info based on the Old Testament, and Christ said the scripture cannot be annulled [ referring to the OT because the NT had not come into being at the time when he said those words ] its a truth from heaven and a truth is a truth is a truth no matter what the catholic church says. [ the world is flat and death awaits one who deviates from the churches position]
    So the dilemma is….. Why any difference in the calibration of the OT & the NT? The Bible writers of the NT agreed, quoted and applied the lessons from the OT, As did Christ himself Romans 15 v 4.

    To claim to be able calibrate every object and person dead or alive seems so farfetched that maybe we are looking here at the saying… the bigger the lie the more people believe it?

    I have a open mind , I would like an answer please.

  25. Isn’t the elephant in the room that the guy is clearly barmy?

  26. With all due respect to all of you: before criticizing make sure you are familiar with one’s work, meaning that you read it from beginning to end.

  27. From my own experience I believe the technique used tells more about the tester than the tested. If this applied kinesiology has any validity it is more in the area of communication than in the search for absolute Truth.

  28. Hawkins may have attained high states of surrender, and I respect many of his ideas, but according to his chosen biographer and several students, even his most trained students often got different results than he did using his testing method. At which point, they were told they were “doing it wrong” as only Hawkins’ and his wife’s results were to be trusted. The technique also has been double blind tested since, and while kinesiology works okay for testing whether supplements will help a particular body, it does not hold up at all for testing the validity, honesty, or reality of anything else. I tend to think his scale of emotions is about right, but that’s just my impression. As for rating things like politics, news, and ideology, I sense inaccuracies. The inaccuracies red-flagged for me when I learned Hawkins rated Fox News as a higher vibe, more truthful, more honest news source than the other mainstream media sources. Let’s examine just this one assertion.
    Even the origins of Fox News, for anyone looking into its history, are clear: it was started to promote the right wing and its political agendas. Fox “News” is highly biased in its presentation of “facts”, biased against brown-skinned people, women, the LGBTQ community, and even the poor. At the moment they are defending a president whose lying, misogyny, racism, ugliness toward the disabled and toward overweight people, and even promotion of violence is on record. But Fox rates higher vibrationally than other major news outlets? Hawkins also constantly asserted that his method was valid and his results upheld by different people, but that simply was not the case. Checking with my own internal sense of truth, there are numerous other things he rated as high vibe that definitely feel off to me. He simply overgeneralized how applicable his method was to reality and claimed he alone among all humankind had uncovered a way to discern truth from falsehood. As a human being, his own biases crept in, and I think Fuzzy (his ego) in its cunning, kind of had the last laugh, because his ego found it appealing enough to be seen as a kind of unquestioned guru. Enough so he was willing to brush off all the people who got different results. IMHO, wizardofis is correct, the method reveals more about the tester than about reality, it’s a mirror – like the rest of this “reality.” Hawkins’ chosen biographer also, in reviewing the materials given to him by Hawkins, discovered that the period Hawkins said he spent in utter retreat included trips to NY to go dancing, and that according to his own diaries, Hawkins’ awakening was a result of an LSD trip, not 10 years of meditation as claimed. I can see why Hawkins would not want to admit that, as telling groups of people to take LSD may not be not good spiritual advice, but it does introduce the issue of Hawkins’ honesty itself. As do the facts his biographer also uncovered about Hawkins long list of credentials on his site – a couple of the degrees which Hawkins bragged about several times are from diploma mills, basically paper for sale. And it was his analyst had gone to Columbia, not Hawkins; Hawkins claimed the degree from Columbia, apparently, just by virtue of being analyzed by someone who did earn the degree there. The biographer Hawkins chose was so distressed at his discoveries he wrote a book about it, which can be found on Amazon today. My personal takeaway is that Hawkins probably reached some high states at times, and I listen to some of his lectures, but he was a flawed human being like everyone else. And his truth testing method just doesn’t test out as valid except for asking a body whether a particular supplement would be good for it.

    • Yeah, I agree with you. I was quite disappointed myself after I took a look at that list. I’m a little frustrated because I am reading my first book by him and that list made a little confused as to his “reliability” as a spiritual teacher.

  29. I am in the middle of his book Letting Go. Now that I looked up and took a look at his calibration list, I’ll have to make an effort to keep reading the book with the same trust. Madre Teresa at the 500’s? Protestantism (I’ve been there) and catholicism rating high? Hmmmmm I would rather not have read that. Now I am confused about David Hawkins. (Look up the real truth about Mother Teresa, if you have a chance).

  30. Today, I came across Dr Hawkins’ videos for the first time and have downloaded a bunch of them to watch. I also found this Blog. Obviously. And I have been fascinated to read all your comments. Thank you so much for the great discussion.

    Initially, what got my attention in the videos was Dr H’s chart showing the frequencies for various emotions. It struck me as a ‘scientific’ way of substantiating the teachings of all the world’s great religions.

    I am Baha’i, and one of the basic tenets of Baha’i Faith is that religion and science are in complete accord, so this was hugely exciting. The more so, when I found other statements of his which corroborate scriptural teachings.

    However, having read the Blog, I am now wondering: Is Dr H’s work actually regarded as scientific?

    Also, can someone please tell me where to find an explanation of how Dr H is able to give numerical values to the emotions? Are there instruments which give the calibrations?

    Thanks so much!

  31. Your sincere analysis is appreciated

Leave a Reply