Transcendent Mind: Rethinking the Science of Consciousness by Imants Barušs and Julia Mossbridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Imants Barušs, professor of psychology at Kings University College (Western University Canada), and Julia Mossbridge, Visiting Scholar in Psychology at Northwestern University and an experimental psychologist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, have written what can be called a “post-materialist” psychology text. It alleges that consciousness is independent of the brain and that each person, potentially, is in contact with all other people and events in the past, present, and future and cannot only obtain knowledge of these events but can influence them as well. Barušs and Mossbridge see consciousness as “fundamental,” existing “prior to space and time as usually experienced.” Their paradigm is meant to replace “materialism,” which they purport is “on its way out” (p. 20), in part because it has ignored or discounted the acquisition of information outside of the usual sensory channels (p. 29).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".