Cat. 2, Philosophy 10 – BL-34 – The Best Minds I Could Find

Cat. 2, Philosophy 10 – BL-34 – The Best Minds I Could Find

Ch. 34 –  The best minds I could find

Having consolidated my confidence in the Omniscientific Cosmology, and in myself, I spent 1985 and 1986 writing a new draft of my book, while working as a field geophysicist in the summer and as a driving instructor the rest of the year. I really couldn’t care less what I had to do for a job, as long as it paid my rent and gave me the time and freedom to write.

About writing my book, sounds breezy, right? – invoking images of PCs and Macs and printers and even the internet and auto-correct? The reality was a little different. Just like my having to tolerate snail mail instead of email, I also had to tolerate using a typewriter instead of a word processor, though at that point I didn’t know what I was missing. And a non-electric and portable one at that, since I often did my writing in places without electric power, such as in a deep forest or on a mountain-top.

One might say, “Typing is typing. What’s the problem?” Well, the problem was in me. I admit it, I was a bit of a perfectionist, and could not tolerate any typos, treating each page as one to be submitted to a publisher. Oh, and another problem – I was not a good typist, the odds being astronomical that I would not make a mistake somewhere on any given page. So, what did I do when I made a mistake? I would rip the sheet out of the typewriter, insert another one and retype. And of course make another typo, etc.

And, oh, yet another problem that slowed my progress, which turned out to be beneficial to the quality of the book in the long run. Also in my character, I wouldn’t just retype, I would re-WRITE. But you know what? The rewritten version was always better than the one it replaced.

Anyway, by year-end 1986, I had in my hands a bound typo-free copy of my umpteenth version of OMNI-SCIENCE, and several dozen bound photocopies of same, one for each professor kind enough to devote to me two hours of their precious time.

Finally, I felt equipped to win the intellectual and spiritual world. Following, in chronological order, are some of my victories:



Ecology, Ethology, Sociobiology, Environmental Studies, Professor Gordon H. Orians: “During the past month I have had an opportunity to listen to a lengthy presentation by Anthony Marr of his comprehensive cosmological system. In addition, I have read most of his book-length manuscript titled OMNI-SCIENCE. These encounters have revealed to me that Anthony Marr is a deep thinking and widely read person. In those area of biology where I am competent to judge, Mr. Marr is thorough and accurate in his presentation of fact. He has delved deeply into evolutionary, ecological and behavioral literature. He has also had extensive field experience, upon which he draws repeatedly in his book. / Mr. Marr’s mode of presentation of his ideas deviates strikingly from standard scientific ones, reflecting his philosophical ancestry and his goals. Primarily he is attempting to develop a philosophical scheme that can encompass both modern science and religion in a way that can be acceptable to both. His is also a futuristic perspective, offering hope at a time when so many of us feel a deep sense of despair. This is a daunting task but one which we avoid at considerable peril. Given the religious rejection of science that are so rampant in American culture today, thorough attempts to develop comprehensive cosmologies are badly needed and should receive our serious attention. Mr. Marr has provided one such system. I hope that it can be published and made available to a wide audience so that it can receive serious discussion by persons of many walks of life and varied persuasions.”

Astronomy, Professor Woodruff T. Sullivan III: “… I am very impressed with his dedication, his abilities, and the synthesis he has produced. As an astronomer and historian of science who has long decried the compartmentalization of academia, I applaud all serious efforts such as this to cross disciplinary lines and to synthesize knowledge. We obviously do not know of Mr. Marr’s picture is the ‘correct’ one, but it is well informed, does not appear to be in conflict with the state of knowledge in scientific fields with which I am familiar, and gives promise to lead to further insight… his ideas deserve to be published and, I think, will appeal to a wide audience of both lay-persons and scientists.”

Medicine, Biomedical History, Professor Keith R. Benson: “… I found his presentation to be creative, highly synthetic, scientifically sound and eclectic, and extremely comprehensive. Obviously, Mr. Marr has read and studied extensively; moreover, his new theory reveals his impressive ability to think carefully and critically. / As an historian of biology, I am aware of the reluctance to construct cosmologies at the present time because they inevitably involve major speculative activity. However, I also think that it may be necessary for scientific literati like Mr. Marr to engage in this work. After all, we are bombarded constantly with cosmological schemes with the barest of scientific support. I find many aspects of Mr. Marr’s system compelling. I urge additional support for his work.”

Geology, Professor Stephen C. Porter: “… an interesting and enlightening experience. It quickly became apparent to me that Mr. Marr is an extremely intelligent and knowledgeable person and his devoted a considerable amount of time and thought to the philosophical system he set forth in his manuscript. He is articulate and obviously is widely read in many fields of science. His knowledge, however, is not superficial, but demonstrates a keen sense of scholarship. / He has undertaken a task, indeed a mission, that to many would appear overwhelming – the integration of many fields of knowledge, both scientific and cultural, in a hierarchical scheme that illustrates the place of human beings in the natural and temporal order of the universe. / His thesis is thought provoking and, as far as I know, original in its approach. The subject is one that should interest both professionals and non-professionals, and could elicit considerable discussion. Assuming that the manuscript is engagingly written at the appropriate level, it could command a wide audience.”



Geology, Professor Greg Retallack: “… Although initially skeptical, I found his whole system quite fascinating and thought provoking… I thought that his model was superior to those already available. His proposed books will be important advances in thinking on the origin and evolution of life and society… His presentation was made with the care and rigor of a serious and dedicated scholar. He has a good and up to date understanding of the natural sciences. I could not detect a trace of mysticism or journalistic pseudo-science in his presentation. Mr. Marr is a hard-headed thinker in the best scientific tradition. He deserves serious attention.”

Biology, Professor Stanton A. Cook: “Anthony Marr has explained to me his thoughts on physical hierarchies and evolution of organic hierarchies on earth. He elaborated a novel way of diagramming or organizing these thoughts that should be quite useful to an audience that has not thought much on these matters. I do believe that comprehension and appreciation of levels of organization has been hampered by a want of just such a methodical and visual approach… a well-developed message…”

Biology, Professor Dennis Todd: “Anthony Marr has developed a new theoretical framework that integrates a great deal of scientific information from diverse fields. His thesis deserves your careful attention. / Mr. Marr impressed me with the breadth of his knowledge, the seriousness of his intellectual pursuit, and the keenness of his insight. He is a rare person: one who can understand the findings of specialized branches of various sciences, apply them to other branches, synthesize a meaningful and coherent overview, and present his conclusions in a masterly and cogent fashion. / His philosophy unites the multiplicity of levels of organization, both biotic and abiotic, into a coherent system of analysis. The system that he proposes, with parallels between levels ranging from the atomic to the cosmic, provides a fresh perspective for those who wish to understand the workings of nature. Furthermore, his principles can function as a springboard for leaps into realms that, at least for the present, are purely philosophical – teleology, epistemology and ontology. / “Mr. Marr is a serious and dedicated scholar. I commend him and ask that you grant him an opportunity to present his ideas to you.”

Ecology, John Burket: “This letter is to urge the serious and positive consideration for the work done by Anthony Marr. / I spent an afternoon talking with Anthony and learning the system of thought as set down in his manuscript. That short experience has instilled in me the kind of wondered awe that arises when previously nebulous thoughts, ideas and feelings suddenly crystallized into a framework of order. / It is my opinion that Anthony Marr’s system of Integrative Transcendence is the germ of a new worldview, and that the minds of people today are very fertile ground for this philosophy. The clarity and logical order of this system gives an immediate sense of recognition of ones place in the scheme of existence. / Further, one can see from this philosophy how the future of our planet can be seen in terms of undeniable purpose and hope, a state of mind so lacking in these times. / I urge you to listen to Anthony Marr and publish his work. His is an idea whose time has come.”




Biology, Professor Richard W. Holms: “I have listened to a presentation by Anthony S. Marr. His synthesis of ideas from a remarkable broad perspective of sciences truly deserves the name OMNI-SCIENCE. His presentation was precise and clear, and I believe he would be an effective speaker for groups at varying levels of expertise… This is a person of great depth who speaks and writes both with confidence and ease. I am happy to recommend him as a speaker and a writer.”

Astronomy and Physics, Professor Marc Davis: “… As one who actually specialize in cosmology as a research endeavour, I was at first very skeptical that Mr. Marr would be yet another crackpot of the type that seems to congregate in this field. However, after only a few minutes of listening to his explanation of his viewpoint, my fears were allayed… His ultimate goal appears to be to provide a forward looking moral framework for progress in human social evolution, one that is consistent with empirical science and which is not based on historical writings…an important contribution to society…”

Anthropology, Professor Tim White: “… I have not seen a draft of the book, but I can say that after spending a few hours with Mr. Marr, I am very much looking forward to reading it… Mr. Marr is an exceedingly unique individual – I have never crossed paths with such a person. He is very serious, very dedicated, and very polished in his presentation… The care with which he has proceeded is commendable… his synthesis is formidable…”

Paleontology, Professor Carole S. Hickman: “… deserves the attention of serious scholars… an extraordinary intellectual undertaking… a unique framework… both intellectually and aesthetically stimulating… a bold and eclectic piece of scholarship that is, above all, refreshingly honest… His clarity of expression is exceptional. His logical consistency is a delight. The aesthetic quality of the model, in particular his attention to symmetry, provides a dimension that is appealing but sadly lacking in much of Western thought and tradition. The optimism, concern and compassion for humanity that are expressed in the application of the model to human behavior likewise command attention…”

Zoology, Professor Richard C. Strohman: “… His views and thinking are quite original… a thoroughly logical system… might indeed fill a large gap in the way we think about evolutionary connections between ourselves and our world. I sincerely encourage you to listen to Mr. Marr. And I have one suggestion. His presentation is quite detailed and covers very large areas. My thought is that he and his listeners would all do much better in a small seminar setting so that there would be a symmetry between his own very wide knowledge and the ability for him to obtain meaningful feedback.”

Botany, Professor Herbert G. Baker: “… an extremely interesting experience… worthy of the attention of a wide variety of persons. If he writes as clearly and understandably as his oral communication, the book should be an important contribution towards understanding cosmology.”

Paleontology, Professor Donald E. Savage: “Professors and scientists at the universities of British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and California, to date, have each spent two hours or more listening to the powerful presentation of Anthony Marr of his erudite synthesis of scientific, philosophic and sociologic theory: OMNI-SCIENCE, A New Theory of Cosmology. I can add nothing to the praise that has been heaped upon Mr. Marr and his ideas by these (intellectuals), and I endorse their statements without reservation. Now is the time for Mr. Marr’s ideas to be published, for the scientific world and general public should become aware of his synthesis.”



Sociology, Professor Alex Inkeles: “Recently Mr. Anthony Marr persuaded me to give him an hour of my time, all I could spare in that cycle of my calendar, and at that it had to be at the end of a busy day. This obliged Mr. Marr, as he told me, to adopt a different style of presentation than the one he usually used, one much more compressed and involving a more top-down approach instead of his usual inductive procedure. Despite these handicaps, Mr. Marr managed to impress me not only with the quality of his presentation, but also the quality of his thinking. The range of his knowledge is broad, and for something so broad seems impressively authoritative. At the heart of his approach is a conception of all living and indeed nonliving matter as organized in systems, and this gave him a considerable edge with me since my own propensity is to think in system terms… exceptionally comprehensive…”

Philosophy, Professor John Dupre: “… A few days ago, I had a lengthy discussion with Mr. Anthony Marr about his philosophical ideas. I can certainly confirm the impressions gained by the various other scholars who have written on his behalf. Marr is a highly intelligent, thoughtful man who has evidently acquired a thorough knowledge of the impressively broad range of topics over which his ideas range. As we were talking, I asked him all the difficult questions that occurred to me as he was outlining his ideas. He was always very quick to get the point, and had intelligent and relevant responses. I was very impressed with his various intellectual accomplishments. / Though his ideas are extremely intriguing and provocative, I must confess to having considerable skepticism about his project which he did not altogether dispel. However, I very much doubt whether anyone could dispel this skepticism, and certainly not in two hours. I am not convinced, that is to say, that a systematic view of the scope that Marr attempts is really an intelligible project. However, there is no doubt that such projects will be forthcoming, and such a system informed by Mr. Marr’s deep and thorough understanding of the current state of scientific theory will undoubtedly be incomparably more edifying than the vast majority of such attempts, whether religiously based, or grounded on superficial impressions of science. Indeed, I am open to being convinced that such a project will address a pressing social need: if people insist on adopting comprehensive cosmological systems, then I would certainly encourage them to try his. I certainly share his concern about the dangers of many contemporary religious, especially fundamentalist, cosmologies. / One thing, then I would say without any qualification is that I would strongly encourage any publisher to accept his book. I have not read the manuscript, but assuming, as I have no reason to doubt, that Marr is as articulate, clear and cogent on paper as he is in person, his system would make fascinating reading, and would, I suspect, attract a large audience…”

Applied Physics and Astrophysics, Professor Vahe Petrosian: “… elaborate… clearly well thought out and researched… I was fascinated by his novel ideas in this very ambitious task… a beautiful synthesis… what I heard was captivating and should be of interest not only to experts but to all thinking people of the world… will find a wide and interested audience…”

Anthropology, Professor John W. Rick: “… very thought provoking… an integrative scheme capable of making sense out of a wide variety of natural science knowledge, which at the same time reaches out to philosophy and epistemology… clearly deserves extensive discussion… a serious, well-founded vision, not the product of trivial or eccentric thought. My feeling is that he deserves attention and his ideas should be published. I would recommend that those who have the time listen and argue over his presentation. One should not underestimate the time this may take, however, since his model covers a broad expanse of knowledge. I would think that his presentation would be an ideal forum in an academic department where a group of faculty and graduate students could take time to thoroughly examine his proposition…”

Physics, Professor Leonard Susskind: “… the cosmic significance of life and evolution. Although this is not exactly my ‘meat’, I thoroughly enjoyed the two hours… I found myself stimulated, educated… His ideas are worth listening to, even for those of us who are not of the same philosophical bent…”

Philosophy, Professor John Bogart: “I spent 3.5 hours with Mr. Anthony Marr… held my attention for the entire period… has plainly synthesized a great deal of information in a number of distinct disciplines… organized it into an interesting and coherent whole… compelling… intended to have moral import… can be cast into a form of interest to moral philosophy… would be of interest to a wide audience…”

Geology, Professor W.R. Evitt: “… I agree wholeheartedly… about his  sincerity, imagination, intellectualism and scholarship. This afternoon was for me a unique and stimulating experience. In a highly logical series of simple steps, he developed a comprehensive concept of the interrelations and interdependence of all things… an immensely logical construct… should be accessible and acceptable to persons with a wide range of cultural, social, scientific and philosophical sophistications… meticulously thought out, with great care, to making his thesis externally consistent with the facts of science as currently perceived, and internally consistent in the interrelationships among its arguments… majestic in scope but intrinsically simple, satisfying and optimistic… should have a very broad appeal… These are important ideas with great potential for lessening the conflicts in a troubled world…”

*     *     *

I thank all these professors for their critiques and their time, and Raminothna herself for the Omniscientific Cosmology itself, and for watching over me every step of my journey. If in doing so she may have violated the Interstellar Non-interference Principle in some subtle ways, but I won’t tell.

*     *     *     *     *

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *