|
JOURNEY
IN BEING ANIL MITRA
PHD, COPYRIGHT © july 2003—june 2004 HOME | KEY WORDS | LATEST REVISION | CONTENTS | CONTACT | TO THE READER The
discussion in the prologue draws on material from the essay
and the foundation MAIN IDEAS, AIMS AND ARGUMENTS Journey in Being
and its Goal w Nature of The
Journey w Form of the Journey
In Being w An Individual
Journey w What is Being w A Journey
into Being Itself
w Two Pillars w Knowledge w A Revolution w Nothingness: the Void
w The Ultimate
or the Absolute w To the
Reader w Relations Between Our World and the Absolute w Local / Universal w Knowledge and Significance w Experiments in the Transformation of Being w My Inspiration w Mileposts… and Horizons
w Characterizing Being
w The Stumbling w The Journey
Continues… w Recent Developments w Contents: The
Paths of the Journey
w Journey in Being
Website Journey
in Being and its Goal
Journey
in Being refers
to a journey and to its story1 The
Journey begins with an individual life2 and through confluence3
it seeks to become the universal journey of ultimate being. It is a Journey of
Being for explicit transformation of being is sought in addition to knowledge
and learning The
broad purposes are two: realization of ultimate being –of ultimates– and
being in the present …and
of relations –interaction, distinctions, and identities– between the ultimate
and the present Nature
of The Journey
The
ideas of Being and Journey are both important. Being
refers to the true nature and ultimate possibility of individual beings or
entities and of all being and of the universe or cosmos. It also
signifies that the being of the individual is important: thought and
knowledge are not sufficient to the Journey. Realization of true nature and
ultimate possibility do not occur in a moment or as a phase of a life but
are, and require4, the Journey of a life. Journey
in Being is not merely a process of discovery of what is given: it is a
construction, through experiment, action and reflection, of what is potential
or possible The
journey is one into –as far as possible– all being and knowledge, all objects
and ideas that do and could exist: ultimate being and knowledge The nature
of being: the actuality of being or being as it is and as we know or
experience it; and the possibilities of being The history
of being: being in time – origins, life and death of the forms of being and
of the entire universe Journey
in Being is the becoming, being and dissolution of Being within All Being and
of All Being i.e. within and of the entire UNIVERSE. The essence of Being is that
of the Journey… In the
previous paragraph, ‘being’ is used primarily to refer to a thing but also to
a process as in ‘the becoming, being and…’ it is only in a concrete cosmology
that these distinctions are ultimate Dissolution
or un-becoming is also becoming. Becoming, being and dissolution are similar
to creation, preservation and destruction. A distinction is that while the
latter terms are suggestive of the power of an external agent the former
terms are used here to emphasize that that the becoming, the being and the
dissolution are intrinsic to Being. Since there is nothing ‘outside’ All
Being, the intrinsic character of ‘creation’ and so on is essential Journey
in Being, is the Universe in its journeys of being and becoming, its knowing
and coming to know. These, together, are the Journey in Being which includes
all knowing, understanding, discovery, creation, all narratives and stories …for,
properly understood, Mind [Knowing] is coeval and coextensive with being;
Mind is being-in-its-relations or, MIND IS BEING Journey
in Being is, also, the confluence of individual journeys –especially the
author’s and those surrounding and interacting with the author’s; and the
author’s efforts to engage with others, with this world, with All Being, with
the One Universe– in the universal journey that is the being of the entire uni-verse.
‘Journey in Being’ is this journey but refers, also, to this WEBSITE
which includes the narratives for the journey There is
an opportunity, through networking, for the narrative, the history of
philosophy, to become, not only cumulative though otherwise static, but
dynamic in that single narratives may evolve through multiple and ongoing
authorship Form
of the Journey In Being
The
Form of the Journey is a binding among knowing, acting and being… including
the unbound or symbolic forms; JOURNEY IN BEING refers also to my journey, its
narrative, and WEBSITE The form
of ‘Journey in Being’ is a binding –interaction– between understanding and
becoming. Becoming includes action and essential transformation of being.
That understanding has degrees of separation from becoming as in a
traditional concept of knowledge is given; however, at root, there is no
final separation and the assumption that there is a final separation leads to
error –including delusions of unbounded rationality– and incomplete fulfillment.
The ultimate commitment of this Journey is realization and essential
transformation and, except for the dictates of LOGIC, employs but does not wait for
the progress of knowledge in any limited concept Journey
in Being is not a new form –of becoming and knowing– but a reversion to an
original form that includes and employs but is not restricted to newer
forms made possible by the symbolic capabilities and their various
enhancements as in e.g. poetry, art, philosophy, analysis and science An Individual
Journey
Journey
in Being, it was noted, is also my journey, the story of my coming into the
ideas and paths that make up The Journey. My life is a part of the
journey – but this document is not a vehicle to tell an intimate story of my
life. What is significant is how I came to undertake and continue the
journey, especially to the extent that the origins are essential in
understanding and founding the journey These
purposes are consistent with the nature of the Journey My
motivation in undertaking the journey and its narrative include, of course,
expression, realization and enjoyment. Contribution and sharing are also
motives. There is also a mixture of confidence and doubt, of intuition and
reason. Many of the central propositions of the present essay have origin in
intuition and hope – suggested by my own reflections and the thoughts of
others. Without confidence in the intuition, I would not sustain the
propositions as beliefs. Without doubt, the beliefs would not have made the
transition to the status of propositional thought. Without some confidence in
the originality of the ideas, I would not write; without doubt, I could not
create What
is Being
…and
what is the purpose of the focus on being? Here,
being is used in two apparently distinct senses. In the first, being is that
which exists. This leads to a problem ‘How is it known that any alleged being
actually exists?’ In turn, analysis of ‘existence’ is required which leads to
classic difficulties and therefore to the postulation of categories of being.
Thus we may say, a rock exists as matter, an individual mind as mind, a
relationship as relationship, a number as number and so on but what does it
mean that something has unqualified existence? ‘Existence,’ ‘matter,’ ‘mind,’
‘relationship,’ ‘number’ and other mathematical objects and related concepts
are analyzed in the essay and the foundation where common
ground is established for the varieties or categories of being – eliminating
the need for the categories. There, the characters of mind, matter, laws, and
concepts such as number… are clarified and their root identities are shown in
the common ground of e.g. power i.e. the capacity for effect. In consequence,
it is possible to assert, simply, that having being is existing. It is now
possible to ask, with hope of an ontologically sound answer, ‘What is the
character of some compound entity?’ Having placed mind, matter, relationship,
idea on a common plane it is possible to say, simply, that its character is
its set of constituents [or elements – where specification of what are
allowed as elements is intentionally left open.] This leads into the second
sense of being: the being of an entity is what it truly is; the admission of
this sense of ‘being’ is equivalent to the questions ‘What is the nature of
being?’ ‘What is the science or study of being as being?’ i.e. not as any
particular kind of being… As used
here, the being of an individual –of an entity– is what it truly is and that
includes its possibilities and potentials or likely possibilities It
includes what is tangible or sensible and what is real – and what is
potentially real. The sensible includes the body. The real includes the
sensible, and the possible; and mind, and all concepts that correspond to
what is real: examples that could be considered are spirit, soul and
substance. However, while consideration of a wide range of possible forms and
kinds of being from the history of thought is useful in developing an
understanding of the fullness of being – of its nature and possibilities, it
is unnecessary to attempt a review of all forms and kinds The
nature of being, the real, has been approached in many ways: conceptually,
through knowledge and understanding as in the sciences and the tradition of
philosophy; through exploration whose counterpart in science is experiment;
through exploration and construction in of the possibilities of the form of
being, for example the human body and human experience and in art and
technology; through exploration in the world; and, not the least, by
interactions among these modes. Interaction is necessary for the
understanding might start with a concept of being, then an exploration in
science or in the world or in ideas… and then the original concept may be
modified and so on in the approach to improved understanding; and while an
individual or a culture builds on what has come before, the question of being
must be lived in order to have fullness of meaning While
there can be no entity that has no effect i.e. since all being may enter in
some way or manner into awareness there is also a sense in which all being
comes before any particular awareness or study of being. Fullness of being is
lived and not merely thought. This is fundamental That
the being of an entity is ‘what it truly is’ begins as an implicit
characterization. The value of an implicit characterization is its generality
and openness; however, an explicit characterization –taken up later in the
prologue– is also valuable even if we do not know that it will apply to all
being. [It is part of the power of the metaphysics of being developed in the essay
and the foundation that what
would often be thought of as an implicit characterization is also, as noted
above, an explicit characterization] Being
and knowledge of being have both definite [actual] and indefinite
[possible] or unrealized aspects. It would be absurd to claim that
human being has realized or knows all possible kinds or aspects of being or
to claim that there is no knowledge or realization at all The
meaning of the being of an individual or entity –what it truly is– defines
the first purpose of the focus on being. A related, purpose to the focus on
being is that the concept of being includes the indefinite: what is unknown
and unrealized but what is possible; the question of the nature of being is
an invitation to adventure – an ultimate adventure… the
ultimate adventure Because
of the indefiniteness, coming into knowledge and realization is and must be a
Journey into Being A Journey
into Being Itself
… a
journey in understanding of the possibilities or potentials of being;
of knowledge and traditions of knowledge – for all being and
understanding … and in
transformations in being – experiments in realization of
possibilities; of traditions of experiment with being Knowledge or understanding and experiment
are the main paths of the journey. There are two further areas of study and
experiment: the variety of being, intelligent and conscious artifacts
or machines; and action and influence including social action, that round out
the Journey. These four phases or areas of activity are described in and
constitute four main sections of the essay. Each phase is a part of the
journey; additionally the phases complement one another through the following
functions. The approach through knowledge shows what is possible and moral
and, as far as is possible, seeks to provide foundation for all phases and
areas of the journey. The experiments constitute the core of the journey;
additionally knowledge and experiment are mutually interactive in discovery
and in providing confirmation and justification. The studies in the variety
of being round out both knowledge and experiment through investigation of
different kinds of being – there is a specific emphasis on the being of
machines as agents and as additional “data” points in the study of being. The
phase of social action and influence may be seen as sharing of the journey
with others and, through, mutual action a further dimension to understanding
and experiment in being Reflection will show that the
complete journey will encompass more than a personal story, more than the
history of thought, action and transformation; more than the history of
civilization and of life or even of the present phase and epoch of the
physical universe. Journey in Being encompasses all being, that entire
universe whose a priori nature belongs to no physical or other category and
of which there is no before or after, no inside or outside or in between, no
foundation in another element or substance more permanent or more
basic. Journey in Being will be a journey into ultimate or absolute being –
and so, it must be the journey into ultimate being Two
Pillars
The two
pillars, already mentioned, are knowledge of and experiment with
being Knowledge
I first
sought knowledge and understanding of knowledge. Knowledge would show what is
possible, what is desirable – and moral, and how to achieve what is possible;
this statement appears to imply a separation of knowledge and action and the
possibility of an independent foundation of knowledge. However, knowledge is
not ultimately distinct from action and, so, while knowledge and action
remain in interaction i.e. there is no a priori guarantee of a final external
foundation of being, I sought what foundation there may be… this is taken up
in the main essay. An understanding of the nature of knowledge would provide
foundations by showing conditions for the reliability of knowledge and
thought. The problems are stated simply but the task is complex and
difficult. Knowledge as metaphysics, the sciences and the practical arts and
foundations or epistemology are part of the tradition of civilization and
have attracted many minds in an ongoing dialog. My journey traced the same
path, art and beyond I came
to seek to found my understanding of being, of the universe, upon nothingness.
At that depth, deeper than the vacuum of quantum physics, before –or
conceptually prior to– substance, before law and causation, before space and
time and matter, before the existence of actual objects, before manifest mind
and experience, the distinction between entities and qualities disappears and
so one may equivalently say nothing, nothingness or void.
I sought, for example, a foundation in modern physics where the universe
could come into existence from nothing without violation of the principle of
conservation of energy: the positive energy of matter would be balanced by
the negative energy of gravitation. But possibility is not actuality or
necessity. Further, the foundation in physics would yield little about the
range and modes of being even as we know them; and would tell us little about
mind or about our presence in the universe. And to complete the story from
physics and even biology would require speculation A Revolution
A
revolution in my thought came when I turned away from a restriction to only this
world –and knowledge of this world– or even possible worlds as the
source of understanding and made an expansion to include the idea of
nothingness itself Nothingness:
the Void
In a
state of nothingness there will be no law, no causation, and no limits
–except limits of logic– for if there were causation or law or limits there
would not be nothingness: nothingness is not merely the absence of things but
also of laws or patterns [a pattern may be seen as a complex thing.] Within
nothingness even the limits of logic may be questioned since a contradiction
when applied to nothingness involves no material paradox; and, while this
point is minor, the extent and nature of logical limits –including limits on
limits– will be taken up later. Therefore, at once, there are no limits on
nothingness. I.e. nothingness is equivalent to every possible state of being
and therefore every state of being is equivalent to all states of being.
Within our universe or, more accurately, within the domain that may be
labeled our phase-epoch of the one universe and subject to its quantum
mechanical laws, the transition from one state of being to another state of
being will, unless the two states are connected by the patterns or laws of
the phase-epoch, be associated with colossally small probabilities However,
if laws, patterns and objects alien to our phase-epoch are allowed then the
probabilities are no longer small. Instead, the transitions are certain. This
follows since the void or nothingness is a possible intermediate phase in the
transition if there is no restriction to our phase-epoch. Further, as noted
below in the discussion on experiments in transformation and since it is
constitutive of being to want to enter into local transformations, approaches
are sought to find what transformations normally thought to be infeasible
while remaining in the present phase-epoch can be made feasible. Modern
science provides many examples of such transformation such as mechanized
flight and nuclear power and transformations These
conclusions are extremely robust and depend very little on the foundations in
knowledge that I initially sought – the concept of nothingness is further
elaborated in the text where nothingness is found to exist, to be
omni-present and eternal. There are also a number of issues and problems,
some not even alluded to, that I have not addressed in this brief beginning.
One problem concerns the idea of nothingness which –although I can have an
idea and speak of it– might be a fertile ground for paradox since nothing is,
in a sense, the complement of everything and since, as is known from
philosophical logic, an unrestricted use of predicates –descriptive phrases–
allows construction of paradoxes. Since nothingness may be thought of as the
absence of all things, an approach to avoiding paradox may be based in asking
what shall be allowed to count as a “thing.” There is also the problem of the
smallness of the probabilities which is briefly addressed in this prologue,
below. These and other problems and questions are further addressed in the
main text The
general conclusions regarding nothingness and the transformations of being
are also true for any phase-epoch with sufficient form and structure The
Ultimate or the Absolute
Foundation
of being and understanding in nothingness is an end to the search for
substance whose concept is that unchanging, undifferentiated object from
which the universe is made i.e. that constitutes the universe… and an end to
the search for spirit as the substance of the individual The
foundation is, in a sense, an absolute foundation – requiring and needing no
further foundation or infinite regress To the
Reader
The
journey described in this essay, a story of being and of my travels in being,
covers a vast territory. I now see that only some parts of the journey were
logically necessary to where I have arrived. However, in the beginning and during
the process I did not know what was necessary and I could not have fully
articulated the nature of the result. Therefore, in a sense the entire
journey was necessary. Throughout, I was sustained by a sense of wonder and
of trust in the being of the universe I
always seek responses from readers. I am encouraged by and appreciate kind
words and praise but I have learned most by responding to challenges that
have ranged from careful criticism to total and sometimes hurtful if careless
negation of my thought and being. You may learn something by tracing the path
described here. However, the spirit of my journey includes the following. In
addition to wonder, I have also been sustained –especially when the
sacrifices seemed to be a burden– by the thought that I may make a
contribution to our journey. I have always thought that while the
particulars of an individual journey may be erratic or quixotic, the
universal journey is necessary and is built upon individual effort. In that
sense, at least, the distinction between failure and success is thin; to fail
is to have not sought and followed your vision, to have not undertaken
your highest mission – which is already latent within you and which is your
greatest joy and pain Relations
Between Our World and the Absolute
It may
seem to some individuals that this is an invitation to reject our immediate
world. That is not true. It is sometimes necessary –effective– to turn away
from the details to achieve understanding. However, that understanding is an
understanding of the details and how they stand together. The understanding
binds together our common world and the absolute or infinite and illuminates
both i.e. understanding of what is seen is [vastly] enhanced by the admission
of existence of the unseen From the
essay: There are two great sources of meaning: first, experience and
enjoyment of and action in the immediate world – the life and relationships
of the individual and, second, in the process, in arching from
individual being to universal Being It may
sometimes seem that I am asking readers to give up their most firm and sound
beliefs – the system of common belief that is the foundation of our unspoken
concept of the world. That, too, is not true. What I ask is for an extension
of the common system of belief. The normal concept of the world undoubtedly
has validity within a certain domain and we do not appear to be in a position
to extrapolate beyond that domain. How then can I say anything about all
being or the one universe? My response is in the foregoing
discussion. Sustained by wonder and intuition, my search started in the
world-as-I-experience-it and continued there through many avenues and over
many years. Yet, despite many attempts including analysis of belief and
knowledge, I could not give to my intuition the label of knowledge. Finally,
I turned away from extrapolation and examined the concept of nothingness
where I found, as stated above and as detailed in the body of this essay,
that nothingness contains, in a sense, all being the entire one universe. The
journey is a travel through human knowledge and through our world to this
ultimate point that is a foundation to and meshes smoothly with all being and
the system of common belief In some
systems of thought, the world as we experience it is all illusion. Here, we
find that the world of experience, the forms of intuition and the system of
common belief are practical guides to our world, essential to living in that
world, that do not constitute an illusion when not held as absolute. The
world of intuition where we experience time, space and the distinctness of
individuals is embedded in the most inclusive perspective in which
nothingness is the womb of being. Thus it is valid to experience space, time,
individuation, pleasure and pain and the other forms of intuition such as
causation; and it is also valid to know a world that e.g. contains but is not
in time and in which the individual –you or I– is identical to all being that
stands with the ability to be distant from the individual and his or her
singular attributes and experience Local
/ Universal
The
universal is the absolute or the basis in the void. The local is the basis in
the understanding of an actual phase. Thus reference to the quantum theory is
local and, for any actual phase, may be replaced by reference to the best
understanding of that phase. However, the universal understanding and basis
do not change Knowledge
and Significance
If
nothingness is equivalent to every state of being, then nothingness is
equivalent to the entire universe. Starting with this point as a primary
point of information, a foundation for cosmology is derived in the main text This
foundation has consequences for the nature of concepts, matter, mind,
knowledge, logic. Of especial significance is the consequence for the nature
of the idea of substance and, consequently, an –approach to– resolution of
the great divides between the understandings of mind and of matter That
every state of being is equivalent to all states of being implies that, in
contrast to appearances: individuals are not distinct, that there is a sense
in which the history of the one universe repeats itself, that individuals –in
that sense– transcend death and approach the absolute; and that individuals
participate in being whose awareness transcends individual boundaries. The
existence of such being and related arguments in the text resolve the problem
that there appears to be no continuity of identity between identical but
separate individuals or between distinct instances of the same individual
e.g. in another life What
can be said of the practical issue that, in our being in the present phase
and epoch of the universe, the transition between states of being has,
generally, an extremely small likelihood? In the
first place, knowledge of our true nature affects the quality of our
existence in this life. It shows to be mistaken the conclusion made from
science by some writers that we are a lonely accident at the edge of the
universe. Significantly, while the conclusions are mistaken, science itself,
as it applies within the present phase and epoch of the universe is not
discredited: the foundation developed here connects law and what causation
there is in the present phase to the void, it requires stable existence to be
founded in law and pattern. In any case, nihilist conclusions from science
derive their human impact from considerations that are not the
province of science but are, for example, expressions of the emotional tenor
or personality of the individual or of perception of conflict between science
and personal belief. Thus, for example, the idea that we are a lonely
accident is not a factual conclusion since “lonely” as used here is an
emotional quality; further any objective component to the conclusion is a
projection of the science of this world to the ultimate Secondly,
I seek to connect our immediate presence to the absolute in two detailed
ways. One way, already described, is through knowledge and understanding.
Another way that complements and interacts with the way of understanding is
through experiment. Being is founded in being rather than thought alone Experiments
in the Transformation of Being
The
processes of knowledge, science and technology are experiments in
transformation. However, focus is especially on the transformation of being
itself. Examples from the traditions include western mysticism, Yoga,
psychotherapy, meditation, the Shamanic vision-quest, the classic Heroic
Journey-Quest. As described in the body of this essay I have considered these
traditions critically, constructively and experimentally and have often
adapted the traditions to my purposes While I
have taken up and continue to experiment with a number of classical approaches
in transformation of awareness and being, the foundations of my experiments
are in what I call the dynamics of being. A detailed discussion of the
dynamics of being and its use is taken up later The
central and fundamental idea of the dynamics is that an individual can
experiment with, learn about and often overcome what are seen as limits to
his or her own being. The process may be seen as a variation or
generalization of the scientific method or of the Socratic approach to
criticism and ideas. What are the final limits to an individual being? The
argument from nothingness shows that there are no limits except logical
limits e.g. one cannot have property X and not X or be object A
and not A at the same time. However, even this restriction does not have
the force that it is often thought to have. For different objects A
and B, it is usually thought that being A implies being not
B. However, there may exist compound objects C whose state of
being is a compounding [in quantum theory the term is superposition] of A
and B. In general, all objects partake of a compound character similar
to that of C. This follows from the fact that every state of being is
equivalent to all states of being and is not at all dependent on quantum
ideas [Further,
the universe of logical paradoxes is seen as smaller than originally thought
when it is recognized that not every meaningful statement must be either true
or false] The
question of low probabilities is approached by seeking an analog to catalysis
in chemical transformations – the agent of catalysis in the case of being is
mind or intelligence. Two approaches are possible [a] local or short-term –
by discovering the laws and patterns of our phase and [b] global – by
discovering how to go outside our phase-epoch… or, simply, by waiting which
guarantees success. Moral considerations are significant in justifying
a search for perceiving and realizing states with limited likelihood My Inspiration
My
development has many influences and inspirations. Most of all perhaps are the
influence of my mother who listened to my thoughts – even those most
incomprehensible and absurd; and my journeys in nature where I receive
inspiration in ideas and passion and resolve, and experience contact with The
Source Mileposts…
and Horizons
The Journey
continues but has come a long way and some Mileposts are: Human
Knowledge is without necessary limits. Already, we have seen an example in the use of
the idea of nothingness Knowledge
can be seen as having biological and symbolic bases. As an
example, spatial perception is based in neurophysiology; thus the perceived
properties of space are a joint function of the world and the perceptual
system i.e. space is one of Kant’s forms of intuition. However, space can be
described symbolically e.g. through co-ordinate systems and, in that case,
discovery of space and its properties is a scientific enterprise in which the
form of intuition may suggest the symbolic form but the result is subject to
criticism and experimental comparison with the reality of the world. As we
now know, space is not an independent object; rather, a better description is
obtained when space, time and matter are regarded as the object being
described. The symbolic approach allows for description of curved space-times
which means that the simplest description of the world is obtained when
space-time is curved. This is not accessible in human intuition which appears
to be limited to visualizing two-dimensional curved surfaces in
three-dimensional space – this is not an absolute e.g. partial intuition of
higher dimensional spaces may result from consideration of their projection
onto two- or three-dimensional spaces. Additionally, space may turn out to
have more than three dimensions [in some recent theories, space has ten
dimensions of which all but three are so tightly curled up as to be smaller
in extent than is accessible to the finest of direct measurements.] The
geometry or physics of an eleven dimensional space-time is accessible to
symbolic description but not to the forms of intuition Thus it
is possible to know and understand being-as-it-is [Kant’s thing-in-itself]
through the use of symbolic representation as just described. This may be
supplemented by taking individual and object to be a single entity Whereas
limits to intuition were just considered, according to previous discussion
there should be no limits to the forms of intuition. Since there are no
limits to the forms of being accessible to a given being, that conclusion is
true but there is a practical limit – that of finding a catalyst to overcome
extremely small probabilities in the this phase-epoch of the universe.
However, transcendence of the intuition by the symbolic approach is available
and actual here and now Although
a variety of general conclusions from the identity of the world and the void
are robust, detailed and precise description of phenomena within our
phase-epoch is exacting and the questions of its science and its foundations
are real. The quantum theory is one step –or rung in a ladder– toward a
connection between our world and the void. The symbolic way provides one
approach to foundations where, in a spirit of openness, infinite regress of
substance or ideas is replaced by revisability of the intermediate theories.
However, although we learn from the history science and reflection upon its
“method” that the central theories may be subject to revision it does not
follow that the fundamental theory of our phase-epoch is infinitely
revisable. There are excellent though not absolute reasons to think that modern
theoretical physics has already provided the scaffolding of such a final
theory. Some important limitations of such a theory should be noted. It will
not, as discussed in the essay, imply that mind does not exist or is
reducible to matter; rather, as is seen, the mental and the physical are
alternate modes of description… and that the mental is as deep as the
physical or other, hypothetical, modes. The numerous human or animal modes of
experience and description –economics, culture and so on– will not be rendered
trivial, empty or unnecessary. And, finally it does not follow,
automatically, that the trajectory of the physical universe will be
computable A
Characterization of Being: given below A
Resolution of the Issue of Substance Ontology As noted
earlier foundation in nothingness is an end to the search for substance,
there is no need for further foundation or infinite regress: the ontology
based in the void is not an ontology of substance i.e. it is neither a monism
nor a dualism. Alternatively it may be seen as a substance ontology with the
number of substances equal to zero. Locally, with respect to a given
phase-epoch of the universe, and with respect to a system of understanding,
there are practical issues of adequacy of understanding and description that
may be formulated as substance issues. These, however, are not fundamental A
study of mind
with new understanding of the concept and nature of mind;
consequently, resolution of mind-matter questions and a foundation of
a mapping [elements and functions] of mind and treatment of classic
problems such as those of binding problem and of object constancy The
possibility of metaphysics; relation between metaphysics and the possibility of knowledge
and logic Cosmology
as a topic in logic;
and origin of causation, time and physical law… and an
explanation of the paradox of the idea of an origin to time Foundation
of physics and physical cosmology; and of evolution and indeterministic process as
applied to the physical universe and to life Determinism
and causation:
our phase-epoch of the universe is neither deterministic nor causal but there
are realms of deterministic and causal behavior e.g. as described in [large
but not all] parts of classical physics. In the main text it is shown that
[and how] law or pattern, structure, deterministic-like and quasi-causal
behavior may arise out of nothingness and, also, in theory such as quantum
mechanics that is indeterministic at its core and does not support full
causation Time: the text has a discussion of
the origin of multiple times from the void and how, in a phase-epoch of the
one universe, the multiple times may coalesce into a single dominant and
dynamic but local time i.e. every particle in the phase-epoch may be thought
of as having its own time but the times are more or less in coordination
within the phase-epoch. The animal primitive intuition [experience] of time
is that of a limited domain within our phase-epoch of the one universe and
may be modified in various ways. Theoretically, there are modifications to the
idea of universal time that arise within e.g. relativistic physics.
Conceptually, starting from the void it is possible to understand the origin
and end [without end] of times and of local time. The human experience or
psychology of time is fluid in that the passing of time may appear real in
the moment-to-moment, in the days [except in the far North or South] and in
the seasons [except at the equator.] However, individuals may have the
experience of eternity i.e. the suspension of time that may coexist with the
experience of moments. The precise experience of time and timelessness is an
individual phenomenon that is also influenced by context and culture; the
experience [and mythology] of living in a timeless world is common within
“hunter-gatherer” communities Detailed
discussion is in the main text. There it will be seen that although I have
drawn inspiration from ideas from modern science, the reasoning is not
dependent on or founded in science Transcendental
logic, which is
the use of logic to make real conclusions. This sounds paradoxical. However,
a brief explanation has already been given and is elaborated in the main text The concept
of logic receives re-vision; this is spelt out in recent developments which provide background
and detail for the following generalizations of the traditional idea of
logic: first, logic is the understanding of what is possible; here, logic
continues to be understood as mental or symbolic operation; however, in
further generalization, second, logic is the realization of the possible. In
the second generalization logic is no longer a knowledge or mental operation
[as narrowly understood] Fundamental
principles include The Principle of Identity that
the void is equivalent to all being which follows from logic as follows. The
concept of the void is introduced as that of contingent nothingness; it could
not be necessary or eternal nothingness for that would imply the presence of
law which would not be nothing or nothingness. Similarly, void cannot be
barred from transformation into any or all being. It is necessary to
understand that the void and its equivalents include ‘our’ coherent
phase-epoch of the universe as a ‘speck’ and the equivalences in question do
not hold if transformations are required to remain within our phase-epoch.
However, absolute restriction to the phase-epoch is not possible even though
once there, there is a practical sense in which ‘escape’ is unlikely [in the
absolute sense it is certain] The
Principle of Being
that all being is open to every being – practically, the likelihood from
within our phase-epoch is colossally small though transformation to every /
all being is absolutely certain in the absolute sense There
is Exactly One Universe. This follows from the fact that All Entities May Interact
with Every Other Entity which in turn follows from the fact that the void
may interact with every entity What
is Actual is Possible
[important even though trivial] and what is possible must, on account of
recurrence as discussed in foundation, be actual What
is Conceivable –thinkable, describable and so on– is Possible if its existence does not
involve contradiction What
is Possible is Necessary in the sense that it must occur in some phase of the universe.
For the possible to be ruled out would be a law. This is The Law of
Contradiction that in the entire one-universe only the impossible i.e.
what involves contradiction will not occur. From these considerations: What is
possible –thinkable, non-contradictory etc– obtains over and over without
limit –beginning or end or boundary– in space-time. This is eternal
recurrence in time and infinite repetition in extension There
are entities whose beings span the distinct repetitions of a localized
individual; this gives meaning or significance to the recurrence. The
individual is equivalent to all being – the Vedantic Principle; from a
practical perspective from with of a phase-epoch realization of this
equivalence is colossally unlikely but from the actual perspective it is
necessary What has
been called The Fundamental Problem of Metaphysics: ‘Why is there
something rather than nothing?’ is extended to the formulation ‘Why is there
presence or sentience rather than nothing?’ and rendered trivial Original
identity of being, knowledge and ethics or, more accurately, the
ethical nature of being …and analysis
of ethics in relation to origin from nothingness and the elements
of being Dynamics
of being and
its foundations in the metaphysics Foundation
of transformations of being A set
of complete but minimal experiments in the transformations of being Philosophy
and the academic disciplines: in a culture in which there is an academic establishment with a
number of academic divisions or disciplines [and sub-disciplines] there are
likely to be problematic relations including self-relations among the
disciplines regardless whether the divisions are convenient or essential. In
modern and recent philosophy c. 2000 there has been ongoing discussion of the
nature of philosophy and its relations to the other disciplines. Does
philosophy say anything about the world and can it instruct the other
disciplines – or is its role more humble, indeed can it say anything at all?
These questions have been asked and discussed by philosophers and others
including individuals from science. The discussions range from the
illuminating to the merely contentious. I have written on this subject in
greater detail in another essay, the History
of Western Philosophy. Here, I will limit my discussion to two
comments. [1] What is illuminating in the ‘conversation’ often appears to be
limiting but such the rationally basis is necessarily in an underlying world
view or metaphysics – even when strong claims about absence of or
impossibility of metaphysics are made: ‘impossibility of metaphysics’
contains a concealed metaphysics; and the spread of such philosophy is
usually the result of success of some categorically limited but extremely
powerful venture such as ‘science’ or the persuasive power of a ‘master.’ The
origins of crisis and contention include cultural factors: the nihilism of an
era, the insularity of the disciplines which is a negative aspect of
specialization, the professionalization of ‘knowledge’ with its attendant and
fragile premature if implicit claims to completeness – and claims to
ignorance which may be distinguished from doubt as an approach to
understanding, should be viewed with as much suspicion as claims to
knowledge. While education in philosophy does not typically involve exposure
to science, the scientists are often limited in their awareness of the depth
of philosophical concerns. However, it is clear that regardless of the lines
of demarcation, philosophical thought is often enhanced by a broad
understanding that includes academics, science and its foundations; and
scientists do, when occasioned, engage in philosophical thought. [2] The
concept of the void is a topic in transcendental logic rather than in science
–as narrowly understood– and it is clear that an analysis of the void and of
becoming are informative and in some ways foundational to modern physics
which, in turn, informs more complete thought on the nature of the void and
of becoming. This provides a stark and deep example of the potential for
modern and current interaction between philosophy and science Experiments
in the Transformation of Being: the discussion here covers the general experiments of Experiments in the
Transformation of Being and the more particular experiments of The Variety of Being and of Action, Charisma, and History In
Foundation, the dynamics and logic are integrated as part of Logic. This
unifies the foundation of the ‘experiments’ and of ‘metaphysics.’ The general
foundation of ‘A Complete, Minimal Set’ of
experiments is completed. The experiment in ‘Universal Knowledge’ is
essentially complete; and the remaining experiments are in varying stages of
progress which is substantial for all experiments except ‘social influence’
and the full ‘transformation of being’ In the Journey-Quest,
Ideas and Experiments are Integrated Other
developments are described in what follows Characterizing
Being
It is
now possible to give a brief explicit characterization of being. For a more
complete justification of the following account, the reader is referred to
the main essay That
the being of an entity is “what it truly is” is an implicit characterization.
The value of an implicit characterization is its generality and openness;
however, an explicit characterization is also valuable even if we do not know
that it will apply to all being In the
main essay, I take up the idea of concepts and discuss the notion of a
slack concept. A slack concept is one that is not completely definite
–its properties are not specified with complete precision– and for which,
given an object, it is not always possible to tell whether the object falls
under the concept. However, that a concept is slack does not necessarily
imply ignorance in the case that the object of application itself is not [and
need not be] definite. Thus the recognition of conceptual slack is, in some
cases, the recognition of a virtue. An example: if an autonomic nervous
process is intermediate between two clearly mental states or processes, is
the autonomic process itself mental? An adequate response is that, generally,
it is not necessary to label the autonomic process as mental or not mental
for nothing is gained either way… The relevance here is that the following
brief characterization may turn out to be parochial rather than universal Journey: The coming into realization is
a [cumulative] journey. Of course, not every event or phase adds to
the cumulation; and some that are thought to add are later dropped Mind: Being is characterized by mind
which is the instrument of being and becoming. Mind has been said to be too
high level a concept to be characteristic of being. The basic facts of mind
as far as “higher” being is concerned are experience and presence.
Bound and free aspects of mind, discussed in the main essay, are essential in
the process of becoming. For entities that are sufficiently “low,” the free
aspects are not internalized. There is a “high level” mind that animal being
recognizes as such but, as discussed in Journey in Being, mind also occurs at
lowest of levels. It is necessary to refer the reader to the relevant parts
of Journey in Being to understand precisely what is being said and its
foundation and explanation Action: Action is conceived as an
aspect of mind The
Principle of Being:
As developed in this prologue and elaborated in the main essay, all being is
open to every being or all states of being are equivalent to every state
of being [it is necessary to allow states outside any given phase-epoch
of the universe for this to be a logical principle] Dynamics
of Being: The
use of mind, experiment and action in recognizing and overcoming limits –
explained more thoroughly below and in the main division of the essay on
Experiments in the Transformation of Being. The rational base of the dynamics
is the principle of being; a practical basis in the laws of a phase-epoch of
the universe is discussed below The
Principle of Meaning:
There are two great sources of meaning: first, experience and enjoyment
of and action in the immediate world – the life and relationships of the
individual and, second, in the process of arching from individual
being to universal Being. It seems to me that this is trivially obvious Cosmology: Cosmology is not limited to physical
cosmology. Cosmology is the study of entire existence, the one universe as
a whole. The italicized phrase would be a better title for this point but
I use cosmology because it is the title of a section in Journey in Being.
Cosmology includes the following: the equivalence of the one universe and
nothingness and the principle of identity; the necessity and sufficiency of
indeterminism to explain the origin of the actual universe and its structure
from nothing; and physics and physical cosmology. Matter has been held to be
a high level concept but the concept of matter is understood, here, in a more
basic way than the physical stuff of the present phase-epoch of the universe
and not as something distinct from mind – rather mind and matter are different
modes of description Ethics: Being is ethical in nature.
This does not mean that every individual “does the right thing” at all times.
Ethics is possible only when there is choice and the existence of choice
implies that the right thing will not always be done and hence a need for
ethics. Ethics, like mind and matter, occurs at various levels. And there is
an ethics of the human context and an ethics of being-in-the-one-universe
which do not necessarily mesh smoothly; there is no need or sense to a perfectly
smooth mesh Recent developments: the following
aspects of characteristics of being are developed. Selection and Proof for
the Characteristics. Kinds of Characteristics – primary, derivative,
existential, possible, and fundamental. Characteristics of being: existence,
absence, accessibility and identity, extension-duration, indeterminacy,
community and interactivity, meaning, mind, experience, presence, matter or
material nature and other properties, actuality, soul, an infinite number of
attributes – rejection of the ‘attribute theory’, recurrence, fecundity, good
and evil Common
Ground for All Being:
while a variety of kinds and aspects to being has been listed above in the
fashion of categories the variety has not been presented as a system of
categories which is unnecessary due to the common ground in What is Being The
Stumbling
In the
system that follows, those ideas that are original build upon the ideas of
others. Sometimes, as in the developments in cosmology, my ideas have been
suggested by existing theories even when the dependence on those theories is
not logical or formal Especially
when the ideas are original, and even though I have devoted much study and
thought and sought much inspiration, I sometimes feel that I have
accidentally stumbled upon the ideas rather than developed them or found them
as a result of a careful or systematic search. As an example, I have been
thinking about the role of concepts of nothingness for a number of
years. However, the final insight on how to view the relationship between
nothingness and the world occurred without intimation one morning when I
stopped for coffee at a bakery at the foot of the Trinity Mountains, Trinity
County, Northern California The
first intent in this final part of the prologue is to make statements about
the nature of the processes of my discoveries and perhaps about all
discovery. Dependence on the ideas of others is simply a fact. When my ideas
have external influence, the dependence is often unconscious since I am
immersed in a culture of ideas. The feeling of stumbling is this: where I
sought concepts, insight and understanding, I did not expect the actual ideas
or their final form and, and the certainty, magnitude, depth, breadth
of application, and beauty of the ideas significantly exceeded my
expectations in their breadth and in the logic of the foundation. Even what I
hoped for was exceeded: for what is not conceived there cannot be explicit
hope. Thus, the form of the foundation in nothingness –the elucidation of
nothingness, the certainty of the conclusions, and the release from infinite
regress and substance ontology– were, despite earlier hopes and glimmers of
the result, surprising and, of course, exhilarating as a result of the
breadth and crystal clarity. However, even if my discoveries are accidental
or serendipitous in any objective way, that being should make the essence of
the discoveries is necessary The
idea of ‘endless vistas of discovery and knowledge’ has been an ideal, in
Western Civilization, since the end of Medieval Scholarship. Here, in the
equivalence of nothingness –the void– and all being a closure to ‘endless
vistas’ has been realized. Simultaneously, nothingness is the ‘womb of all being’
and in that infinitude contains our –local– universe as a mere speck not only
in size but in variety and possibilities: closure has not eliminated gazing
out upon distant horizons The
Journey Continues…
The
next phase is a return to the focus on the experiments described in the
second section of the main essay As far
as knowledge and ideas are concerned, I must again turn away from what
clarity of vision I have experienced and toward intuition and diffuse light
to sense and seek what further truth there may be Recent Developments
Since completion of this essay in July 2003,
greater clarity has been obtained in foundation and concepts In foundation, the
underlying logic –the nature of the void or nothingness, its use in
understanding the nature of possibility and logic, its use in understanding
being and the relationship between the our cosmological system and the entire
uni-verse– is brought into sharp relief. The new formulation of the concept
of logic, which includes the traditional concept, is an extraction of the
essential logic of the void and is the single law of the entire uni-verse. In
consequence, greater unity, depth and breadth are obtained in the resulting
metaphysics and the topics in Journey in Being. A summary of the improved
and the new results follows General metaphysics and cosmology; includes
physical cosmology and MIND. The theory of the VOID and the LOGIC result in a metaphysics without substance, a
foundation without regress i.e. that ‘terminates in the void.’ The system of
metaphysical problems is resolved into real and artifactual problems – those
that have origin e.g. in a limited world view. The underlying LOGIC enhances the distinction, the
resolution of the real and illumination of all problems and concepts Symbol; language, knowledge, logic, mathematics… the free
symbolic capability makes possible, as distinct from the root, human
knowledge, logic, choice, value… Some thinkers hold that the range from the
root and up but prior to the fully free symbol does not constitute e.g.
knowledge. There is an analogy to the question whether the earth rotates
around the sun or vice versa; either position can be validly held but it, in
classical mechanics, it is the latter that makes for the simplest description
[in fact rotation about the center of mass of the solar system provides the
‘simplest’ description.] Similarly, what is important for knowledge is the
distinction marked by the free symbol. Given the distinction, allowing the
pre-free symbolic adaptation to count as a kind of knowledge is to
acknowledge the fact of continuity of the human with the universal. Epistemology
is defined by the following limits. As the part is less than the whole,
epistemology is secondary to logic and metaphysics; this follows from the LOGIC of the VOID. It is inherent in the nature
of the free symbol that there is no a priori justification of symbolic
knowledge; at the same time, allowing for a transitional field of concepts
opens up the possibility of an end to transition Value: the free symbol makes for the possibility of
creation and recognition of possibilities for action; the concept of value
addresses the resulting freedom and guides action under freedom… and this
implies the underlying unity of all value. Complete rationality in value is
contradictory to the concept of freedom and, while there are guides and
rationality, there is also an essential freedom of choice that cannot be
eliminated In CONCEPTS,
I have recorded new ideas, modifications, elaborations and plans WHAT IS ‘JOURNEY IN BEING’ is a brief
review of the foundation for understanding of being and the nature of the
journey that further improves the results from the document, foundation. The
individual concepts of LOGIC, VOID, UNIVERSE, MIND, BEING, INDETERMINISM, COSMOLOGY, knowledge, process,
relationship, universal, form, fundamental divide, symbol, logics, physical
cosmology, determinism, causation, STRUCTURE OF MIND, nature and history of PHILOSOPHY and METAPHYSICS, PROBLEMS OF METAPHYSICS, THEORY OF VALUE AND CHOICE or ETHICS, and the RELATIONSHIPS among them are clarified. A
greater economy, breadth and depth of thought and approach to action is
obtained. These enhancements together with the synthesis of disciplines of JOURNEY IN
BEING and METAPHYSICS, result in a further
enhancement of the system of thought The working out of the details is planned and it is
anticipated that the result will be a significant improvement in DEPTH, BREADTH and ECONOMY of presentation… and, I hope, a
contribution to the IDEA and the HISTORY OF THOUGHT Contents:
The Paths of the Journey
The
essay is in five divisions. The first division is the Introduction
which goes beyond this prologue in providing details on origins and motives
for the Journey The
interest of this personal part for the universal and for the nature of
discovery includes the following. The significance of belief and intuition in
discovery. The nature of belief. The importance of breadth and of continued
contemplation and refinement over years as complement to –though not a
replacement for– specialization, rigor, immediate publication and judgment in
the process of discovery and understanding. The importance of, having
achieved a peak in understanding, seeking a fresh viewpoint, of starting
again at the ground. The value of assuming a variety of paths or ‘careers.’
The values of non-academic work as a complement to work in a research
establishment, or a university: exposure to what is real in the being of the
individual, loss of occasion to indulge in niceties of detail and
sophistication at the expense of real vision and action, freedom from
academic politics – the pressure to near slave-like adherence to the standard
view of the world but simultaneous freedom to use and be immersed in that
view The
objectives of the journey are understanding [theory] and transformation
– action and experiment. The Metaphysics
focuses on foundation and understanding. Transformation
takes up essential transformations in being focusing on the questions, ‘What
transformations are possible?’ and ‘What transformations are ideal i.e.
desirable and feasible?’ The remaining paths are concerned with specific
areas of transformation or experiment: Variety
addresses the variety of being in general and then on symbolic and machine
realization of being, mind and life; Action
takes up social change and political action focusing on three concerns: the
implications of the theory of being developed in the metaphysics and in
transformation, ideals in political institutions and action, and practical
issues of social change and political action. Together, these four ‘paths’
constitute the content of the Journey For the
core essays, secondary, supporting and other documents that include design
and planning see the Site-Map Journey
in Being Website
The
electronic version is updated at all revisions and is, therefore, more
current than print versions Anil Mitra June
29, 2022 Outline INTRODUCTION: AN ADVENTURE IN BEING 2
EXPERIMENTS IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF BEING 3
THE VARIETY OF BEING: IDEAS, CONCEPTS AND THEORY, AND EXPERIMENTS 4
ACTION, CHARISMA AND INFLUENCE, AND HISTORY TABLE
OF CONTENTS Relations
Between Our World and the Absolute Experiments in
the Transformation of Being Contents: The Paths
of the Journey INTRODUCTION: AN ADVENTURE IN BEING The Significance of the Individual Journey Origins of the Dynamics of Being Reflections on the Principles of Being and of Meaning The origin of the Principle of Identity Experiments with the Variety of Being 1.1
Metaphysics and The Theory of Being 1.1.1.1
The Possibility of Metaphysics 1.1.2
Importance of Metaphysics for the Journey in Being 1.1.2.1
As a Foundational aspect of the Experiments in the Transformation of
Being 1.1.2.2
Every Organism has an Intrinsic Metaphysics 1.1.2.3
Metaphysics and Science 1.1.3.3
Existence and Concepts 1.1.3.8
Being, Process, Cause, Time and Dynamics 1.1.5.1
What is Ultimate Being? 1.1.5.2
The Possibilities of Actual Beings 1.1.5.3
What Possibilities are Good? 1.2.1
Reflections on the Number of Universes 1.2.2
There is Exactly One Universe 1.2.3
Regarding “Something from Nothing” 1.2.4
Regarding the Existence of Consciousness and Presence 1.2.7
Kinds of Process and Cause 1.2.8
Co-origins of Being, Causation, Dynamics and Time 1.2.9
Reflections on the Approach to Co-Origins 1.2.11
Anthropic Principles as Examples of the Transcendental Method 1.2.13
Language, Words and Metaphysics 1.3.1.2
The Fundamental Role of Experience or Feeling 1.3.1.3
Unconscious Mental Processes 1.3.1.4
Unconscious Mental Processes and the Body 1.3.1.7
Mind / body: summary and consolidation of philosophical conclusions 1.3.1.8
Mind / body in science 1.3.1.9
Noumenon and Phenomenon 1.3.2
Characterization of Mind 1.3.2.1
Purpose of this Section 1.3.2.5
Relation to Environment 1.3.2.7
A Unified Theory of the Functions of Mind 1.3.3
Dimensions of Mind / Being: Introduction 1.3.3.1
Indefiniteness of Concepts 1.3.3.2
Example: Humor and Emotion 1.3.3.3
Dimensions of Mind / Being: Outline 1.3.4
Dimensions of Mind / Being: Foundations 1.3.4.2
Criticisms of the Classical Functions of Mind 1.3.4.3
Explanatory / Organizing Principles 1.3.5
A System of the Dimensions of Mind, Being and Action 1.3.5.1
Character of Mind / Being 1.3.5.2
Functions: States and Processes 1.3.6
Metaphysics and the Possibility of Knowledge and Logic 1.3.6.1
Knowledge and Inference 1.3.6.2
Knowledge and Inference in an Organism 1.3.6.3
Metaphysics and the Possibility of Knowledge 1.3.6.4
The Possibility of Logic 1.3.6.5
Analytic and Synthetic Propositions 1.3.6.6
Metaphysics and the Possibility of Implication / Inference 1.3.6.7
Not Every Idea is a Form 1.3.6.8
The Variety of Logical Structures 1.4.1
The importance of language 1.4.2
Analytic or Linguistic Philosophy 1.4.2.2
The Concepts, “Everything” and “Nothing” or “Nothingness” 1.4.3
Meaning and Communication 1.4.4
Kinds of Linguistic Meaning 1.4.5
Formal Systems and Formal Meaning 1.5.3
Intuition and Formal Knowledge 1.5.3.1
Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description 1.5.3.2
Journey in Being is an Adventure in the Forms of Being and Thought 1.5.3.3
Alien world view of Knowledge; Presentationism and Representationism 1.5.4
How is Knowledge Possible 1.5.4.1
The Functions of Knowledge 1.5.5
Knowledge, Belief and Truth 1.5.6
Knowledge, Meaning and Reference 1.5.9
Criticism, Skepticism and their Radical Forms 1.5.9.1
What is the Depth of Knowledge in the Organism? 1.5.10
Justification and Action 1.5.13
Knowledge Used in the Journey in Being 1.5.13.2 Range
of Human Knowledge 1.6
Theory and Approaches to Group Action and Value A Purpose: Constructive, Aesthetic and Global
dimensions of Ethics 1.6.1.1
The Possibility of Moral Conduct 1.6.1.2
What is good is not laid out in advance 1.6.4
Philosophical and Reflective Ethics 1.6.4.1
Constructive vs. Passive and Prescriptive Ethics 1.6.5.1
The tension among imperatives 1.6.5.2
Ethics, Metaphysics and other concerns 1.6.7
Ethics, Being, Knowledge 1.6.8
Ethics and Journey in Being 1.7
Classical and Modern Problems of Metaphysics 1.7.1
The Problems of Metaphysics 1.7.2
Modern Problems in Metaphysics 1.7.3
Types of Metaphysical Theory 1.7.5
Argument and Construction in Metaphysics. Meta-questions 2
EXPERIMENTS IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF BEING Purpose and Nature of the Experiments What is a Transformation of Being? The Value of Transformations of Being The Discipline of Transformation 2.1.1
The Dynamics of the Real and of Being 2.1.1.1
The Principle of Being 2.1.1.2
Introduction to the Dynamics 2.1.1.3
Twenty-One Examples of the Dynamics 2.1.1.4
Cultivation of the Dynamics 2.1.1.5
Dynamics as Bridge between Modes of Knowledge and Being 2.1.1.6
Further Experiments with the Dynamics 2.1.1.7
The Dynamics of Being and its Theory 2.1.1.8
Some General Aspects of Dynamics Distribution of Experiments in this Document 2.2.1
Perception and Vision-Quest 2.2.2.3
The Meaning and Function of Dreams 2.2.3.1
A Short Introduction to Yoga 2.2.3.3
Meditation, Yoga, and Life 2.3.1
Wilderness Journey-Quest: Preparation 2.3.2.2
What I Learned at the Lake 2.3.3
The Journey-Quest: Nature and Process 2.3.3.1
The Nature of the Journey 2.3.3.2
Grounding: Metaphysics 2.3.4.1
Sources of Information 2.4.1
Kinds of Experiment: Principles of Elaboration 2.4.1.2
Polarities and Continua 2.4.2
Experiments in the Character of Mind and Being 2.4.3
Experiments in Function: States and Processes of Being 2.4.3.1
Memory, Attitude – and Concepts 2.4.4
Experiments involving Extension in Time 2.4.4.1
Learning and growth; development of the functions 2.4.4.2
Personality and its Development; commitments 2.4.4.3
The dynamics of being; becoming; local / non-local 2.4.4.4
Arching from the Individual / Here-Now to the Universal 2.4.5.1
Experiments in Metaphysics or Knowledge and Action 2.4.5.2
Transformation of Being: Journey-Quest – Wilderness 2.4.6
A Complete, Minimal Set of Experiments 2.4.6.3
A Complete, Minimal Set 2.4.7
Results, Prospects and Plans 2.4.7.1
Some Additional Experiments 3
THE VARIETY OF BEING: IDEAS, CONCEPTS AND THEORY, AND EXPERIMENTS 3.2.1
The Potential and the Possible 3.5.2
Finite, Discrete and Continuous State Machines 3.6
Machine or Computational Intelligence: Introduction 3.6.3
Useful Features of Computation 3.7
Machine or Computational Intelligence 3.7.1
Analog vs. Symbolic Machines 3.7.1.4
Computational Models of Mind / Cognitivism 3.7.2
Objectives: Machine Intelligence in Journey in Being 3.7.2.1
Understand and Construct Being / Mind 3.7.2.2
Assistants and Independent Tools in Research and Other Tasks 3.7.3
Theoretical and Conceptual Background 3.7.5
Implementation of Objectives 4
ACTION, CHARISMA AND INFLUENCE, AND HISTORY 4.1
Introduction: the function of Action and Influence 4.2
Action, Influence and Change 4.2.3
The Place of Social and Political Theory 4.2.4
Charisma and Patriarchalism: Two Kinds of Influence 4.2.5
The Problem of Significance 4.3.1
Cultivating and Maintaining Charisma 4.3.2
What are the Social Theatres or Platforms of Change? 4.3.3
Sources of Influence – Institutions for Change and Support 4.3.4
Using Institutions: The Importance of Context 4.4.1
Theories of Social Structure 4.4.2
Social Change and Dynamics 4.4.3
The History of Influence 4.5.3
The Origin Theory and Possibility of its Application 4.5.3.3
Origin and Possibility of Action 4.5.3.4
Political and Moral Theory 4.5.4.1
Social Theory, Foundations, Knowledge 4.5.4.2
Application to Other Fields of Endeavor 4.5.5.1
General Purposes of this section 4.5.5.2
Purposes for Journey in Being 4.6
Theatres and Platforms of Influence INTRODUCTION: AN
ADVENTURE IN BEING
This
introduction is a short story of my journey. The account is not an
autobiography – its purpose is to show what aspects of my life have been
important to my journey. For a short account of the main ideas, aims and
arguments, see the Prologue An
Individual Journey5
Journey
in Being began
as my journey – is also my journey, the story of my coming into the ideas and
paths that make up the journey. The story of my life is a part of the journey
– but this document is not intended to be a vehicle to tell an intimate story
of my life. What is significant is how I came to undertake the journey,
especially to the extent that the origins are significant in understanding
and founding the journey In the
beginning, my life –as for all lives– had joy and pain. I enjoyed love,
beauty in the world, the sense of adventure, places, ideas… the world was
full of wonderful potential and, perhaps, if that was all there was, my
journey might have been quite different. It was the beauty and the emptiness6 – from a desire for beauty – that sparked my
journey. Beauty was my light, emptiness my flame… I spent
twenty years in the academic world of study, research and teaching. I found
understanding more satisfying than performance, breadth as important as
specialization and depth. There were low points but it was largely exciting
and enjoyed. Always, I sought life that was broader than the academic
confines7. There remained an incompleteness. I thought, and felt
– and still feel – that knowledge was a path to the center of being but,
still, incomplete. I expressed this later: at the end of knowledge and
insight, the being of the individual is little changed. Therefore, I
sought other experiences in the world and although this was deliberate the
process was also spontaneous; I lived independently for four years; I lived
with many people and families. There was no rejection of knowledge - I
immersed myself in many disciplines8… learning so much from my formal
and my self-education, I traveled, lived in nature – in the wildernesses of
North America and Mexico where I experience connection with nature… with
being and where I received my best inspiration, designed and operated a
restaurant, did work for pay – especially psychiatric care where much was
learned and experienced especially about personality and its mutations and
about the dimensions of mind from some of its extreme manifestations, I lived
and loved, felt and gave much love and much tragedy, became a parent, I
experimented with the transformations and transmutations of personality, the
use and development of my charisma, I wrote and thought much about the nature
of being – evolution, science, philosophy, maintain[ed] a website as a record
of all these experiences and as a presentation the Journey in Being, I felt
success and failure. One meaning, for me, of living in the moment is working
out the details of my vision every day. In that mode of living though not
only in that mode I am in the present. Sometimes I break from that mode and look
back; I sometimes cherish the variety of my experience. It has been essential
to my journey Living
in the academic world has been important – there I learnt much in the way of
ideas and discipline. Living outside that world has also been significant. I
have been kept ‘honest’ for the very pressure of day-to-day living has meant
that I cannot rest upon mere sophistication. More importantly, there is a
truth to everyday living; contact with that truth has informed my thought and
journey… and I have been required to and enjoyed contact with the world and
with real people with real lives. There is here no comparison or judgment of
the two ways of life; I say, simply, that both have contributed and that
there is something vital about each, something lovely… and, sometimes,
something artificial Personal
What is
it about myself that has made me open to the two ways and to perception? Opportunity: I was fortunate to have had an
excellent education and to have lived in a family that had some appreciation
of ideas, beauty, art and education. Whatever intelligence I have, too, was a
gift Openness: I learned to enjoy life in all
its ways, to be tolerant of and to love others, to perceive, to appreciate
beauty. All this is in large measure due to my mother Discipline: from my father I learned to
doubt myself; and from this doubt came, in some measure, self-discipline and
the desire to be better – sublimated as a desire for the universal Seize
the moment: a
combination of the foregoing, a gift from the universe, a sense of the
infinite, tenacity in following my passion The Significance of the Individual Journey
Often,
the academic disciplines emphasize, not without reason or value, impersonal
narrative. However, for the Journey in Being, the personal is crucial
– the universal journey is confluence of individual journeys. Simultaneously,
there is a perspective from which – a place where – the individual recedes
and there is one being, one vision. The individual journey also has
significance in showing where it may meet the universal – in sharing one’s
life, in being part of the great stream – and as an example and in avoiding
self-deception. In an endeavor which is purely scientific personal accounts,
when interesting, may be published in non-scientific literature, and are appropriately
kept separate from formal science. However, the personal approach is
essential to the Experiments
in the Transformation of Being where there is, ultimately, no method.
There, there is a role for the impersonal but the approach to transformation,
in the absence of method, will include idiosyncratic and personal aspects.
Since my journey began with immersion in a science oriented career, the
continuous path from science to the Journey to the Edge of Being –
also a journey to the center – is significant to the question of whether
there may be some methodological elements to the Journey A
significant discovery, relevant to the Dynamics
of Being, has been the way in which the formal and the intuitive
interact. Repeatedly, in the academic sphere, I learned formal approaches and
used them until I would be able to reduce the formal to intuition… and then
build further formal, then intuitive understanding upon the earlier
foundation Origins of the Dynamics of Being
The
origin of the Dynamics of Being was in my
experience and reflection upon how my being and experience became and become
modified. My experiences just described – ambitions, hopes, love, charisma,
academic work, travels, living in nature, restaurant development, psychiatric
work, being a father – above were essential regardless of degree of success
in this development. Some of these paths, rather labyrinthine, were recounted
in a letter
that I wrote to my parents in 1996; it was in that letter, in the process of
subjecting my life to review, I first recognized and named the Dynamics of
Being The
development of the dynamics, initially unplanned, was the product of numerous
elements in interaction. The first element is my experience described above.
I will not labor over details or a comprehensive list of the elements but
give some examples: Dynamics of Being – in this and related sections I
have described some of the classic disciplines [academic thought, science,
yoga, meditation, journey-quest] as being examples of the dynamics; the
dynamics also incorporates the development of an individual over time, as an
element of history and as participating in society Metaphysics – this section includes discussions of Being | Mind | Cosmology | Ethics, Being, Knowledge; the
developments are interactive with one another and in each case I have sought
to bring out the aspects that are dynamic in the sense used here e.g. for
mind in the section Extension in Time The Present
In Metaphysics or Knowledge and
Action_Knowledge_and_Action I have
used reason to verify a concept of the cosmos and ultimate being… and to
analyze the possible transformations of being. Principles and details from Natural
Philosophy 9 may be used to fill in the picture In Experiments in the
Transformation of Being, I outline an approach to transformation – the Dynamics
of Being; and the dynamics is used to weave together some classical and
some personal ways of transformation. Some applications are described in Experiments in the
Transformation of Being. I plan further experiment into transformation –
for the intrinsic interest and as a test for The
Principle of Being. A complete, minimal set of experiments is formulated
and described in Experiments
in the Transformation of Being The Variety of Being and Action
and Influence describe further phases of the Journey and additional
experiments. Further elaboration of the status of the Journey is in The Four Paths or Ways, in the
corresponding sections and secondary essays Ends
Although
I have ambitions, hopes and plans, I do not know my ultimate destination… or,
in my very10 present form, where my journey will take me until I
get there I do
not intend or hope that my ambitions and projects will have continuity even
in this life. That is, there may – and I intend that there will – come
a time where I will turn away from my present path and to another or
come to a place where I will end all designs and be, simply, open Journey into Ultimate Being
Journey
in Being began
as my journey – a personal and unstructured search, a seduction by the world
that, over time, acquired structure, logic, direction and universality. In
the beginning, I found, in the story of cosmos, life, humankind and its
cultures, civilization: friendship and light, a passage to the edge. Journey
in Being is – and became – the universal adventure into ultimate
possibility and being… Journey
in Being began as mine
but, of course, it began much before… Fundamental Principles
Although
I state a number of principles, all follow from The Principle of Identity which
follows from logic The Principle of Being
Consider
the assertion: All Being is open to every being! This is the Principle
of Being The
Principle of Being includes an idea that individual being becomes all being
in the same sense that a fertilized ovum “becomes” the individual We will
consider, later, the meaning of “being” and potential paradoxes contained in
the assertion… especially those associated with “all” and “all Being”; and
ways out of paradox – how to restore meaning Even if
paradoxical or simply untrue, consideration of the assertion will be
extremely useful Is the Principle
of Being true? The following questions arise: What is
all being – ultimate being, the ultimate in being? Is there an ultimate in
being? Is there
a meaning to “ultimate being” outside of the projection of a “finite
individual.” Would not such meaning have to await the arrival of ultimate
being [assuming that the ultimate is not already arrived] To what
range of being[s] is that ultimate accessible? This is the question of truth How is
that possible? What is the likelihood or probability? Are there “catalysts” –
that bring with reach what is otherwise colossally improbable – to
transformation Becoming
the ultimate… is that desirable – good? What is
accessible to any given being or class of beings, specifically to human
being? Focus
on the Principle of Being might seem to imply that the immediate –the
here and now– and the enjoyment of an individual life are unimportant.
Similarly, focus on high ambition might seem to imply not accepting one’s
condition. Such implications are not intended. I said above that the
individual and the universal are interdependent for existence and meaning.
This is: The Principle of
Meaning
There
are two great sources of meaning: first, experience and enjoyment of
and action in the immediate world – the life and relationships of the
individual and, second, in the process, in arching from individual
being to universal Being Here,
of course, meaning refers to significance and not to linguistic meaning A fundamental
choice facing every individual the balance of the two sources of meaning Further,
what is acceptance? If it is in human nature to have ambition then a merely
passive life is acquiescence but not true acceptance. Consider the imperative
“Do not change the order of the world!” If the nature of being includes
changing, then, to be only passive or to exalt flow above active endeavor is
to change the order of the world The
principle of meaning is a foundation of the Hero-Quest Reflections on the Principles of Being and of
Meaning
The
discussion below is interesting because it was written before I had completed
the logical derivation of The Principle
of Identity The Principle
of Meaning has a degree of self-evidence: the individual – the atomic11
– and the universal are mutually dependent in fact – this may be interpreted
in the context of life: the concern of the individual and the concern of the
environment; the desire for wholeness and the enjoyment of the particular;
the experiences and insights of leaders in the world of the sacred and
psychology. This is not offered as “proof” and it may be doubted that a
universal principle of this magnitude, though possessed of truth, could be
proven as a theorem – this question of validity and the next are elaborated
later. What is not evident is the balance and way to the wholeness implied by
the Principle of Meaning. The lack of evidence is evident from the
complexity of individual life, the variety of individuals and inclinations
and the needs of the group, of society, for such a variety The Principle
of Being does not have the self-evidence associated with the Principle
of Meaning but now consider it to be true, that All Being, the
ultimate is open to every being – and, specifically to human being! Temporarily,
regard it as true Why
would one believe that? There is, of course, delusion, defense against
impotence, and the fact that an unjustified or even untrue belief may make an
individual or group stronger. In one way this raises the question of the
meaning of the assertion – of any assertion: that the meaning is not always
the content whether literal or metaphorical. However to argue from this kind
of meaning – the assertion as a sign – is to undermine my intent: I do want
to consider the meaning of the content. I will take up questions of meaning
and the specific question of the validity of the Principle of Being later An
initial commonsense reaction might be that the Principle of Being is
false but reflection would call that into question so a reflective
commonsense might hold that the Principle could be true but, perhaps, it
cannot be known whether it is true or false. The next reflection might hold
not that it cannot be known but that it is unknown; then that it may be known
or have been known but is unknown to the individual in question; then that it
is highly if not staggeringly improbable; and then, perhaps that any estimate
of probabilities is only an estimate. Assume, therefore, that the Principle
of Being has a truth value, that it is either true or false, but that we
do not know whether it is true or false. In that case, what reason is there
to believe it – to act as though it is true? Such a belief is rather counter
to science and philosophy, especially analytic philosophy, or, at least, to
received or putative views of science and philosophy. There the valuable
received and tested paradigm is one of incremental though not infinitesimal
steps of understanding and experiment which is rather analogous to the
evolution of life Here is
a rationale for belief in something that we do not know to be true but that
could be true – or something that is true but extremely unlikely. If the
outcome is of great value then there may be good reasons to hold belief
despite ignorance or to act on belief despite improbability. So, we would not
waste time considering all manner of unlikely possibilities such may be shown
in magic for entertainment There
would be a rational way to hold such a belief. It would not lead one to
irrational acts, to defying clear and simple common sense. It would not lead
one to disregard science and valued institutions. It would not ignore
ignorance and improbability. Oftentimes it would be held as a possibility.
This would be balanced by the thought that belief can affect outcome. I said
above that I will show the truth of the Principle of Being. Thus, the
kind of belief in question would be needed, not to address impossibility or
ignorance but only to address improbability. This approach to belief is
developed, below It may
be thought that I am saying that something may or should be believed, not
because it is true, but because of the value of the belief or the value of
the potential object of belief. Certainly, if a belief has a truth value but
the value is thought to be unknown or unknowable, there may be value to
holding it to be true – to thinking and behaving as though it is true.
Further, there is the question of the meaning of the belief; although the
belief may be taken quite literally its connotation may be something else.
There may be a range of literal and other meanings. And, perhaps, believing
may result in realization; this is clearly true, even on a literal meaning of
realization, for social reality; the possibilities for physical – for the
most basic level – reality are a part of the agenda for discussion in this
essay especially the sections Analytic
Philosophy | Nothingness | Mind / body | and Cosmology.
These are real issues, often discounted by modern secular materialism.
However, as I will show, there is a way to demonstrate the truth of a
number of interwoven principles including the Principle of Being from
logical first principles I will
show that the Principle of Being is meaningful and true and in what
ways it may lead to ethical action. I will also consider probability – even
if the Principle of Being is true, would not action based on such an
unlikely outcome be wasteful? That is not true but, as I show below, it
depends on the way in which the belief is held and on the way in which action
is carried out. Full reflections on the role of probability are, currently,
deferred. However, the following can be said. Talk of probability can be
guided by common sense and by science. Science often appears to contradict
common sense but only when the latter is unreflective. An unreflective common
sense will usually find the Principle of Being to be untrue. But
science, especially the quantum theory and physical cosmology, would appear find
realization of ultimate being by an individual being to be, not untrue, but
improbable In
order to question such probability considerations, consider the following.
Based in the best theoretical considerations and empirical evidence, the
universe is thought to be uniform with regard to direction [isotropic] and
place [homogeneous.] Based on this it has been argued that if the universe is
populated by life then human being and technology are unlikely to be the most
advanced; and, therefore, given the age of the universe, if we are going to
be visited by “aliens” that would have already occurred. However, the
estimate is not unassailable. Consider the question of whether the universe
is uniform; we are completely ignorant of the edge of the universe: it is
entirely possible that the homogeneous solutions of the theory of gravitation
are approximations with wildly non-uniform edge behavior What
are the transformations of being that may result from sources at the edge? Return
to the transformation of being in itself. From quantum mechanics we know that
spontaneous transformation of being is possible but unlikely. The smallness
of the probabilities staggers the imagination. However, such estimates are
not unassailable. It is entirely possible that mind and being may be able to
colossally magnify probabilities, that common creativity is – in, perhaps, a
small way, just such a process; it is entirely possible that the boundaries
of mind and being are not their putative boundaries; and, further, even
though quantum theory penetrates nature closer to the heart of nature further
than previous physics, there remains a gap between the quantum theory and the
nothingness that generates all possibilities… In Co-origins of Being, Causation, Dynamics and
Time, the quantum theory is seen to stand between the determinism of
classical physics and nothingness; The Origin of a
New Idea develops one way in something like quantum mechanics is
necessary for mind One of
the developments of Metaphysics is a way to talk
of absolutes, of the heart of being, in a way that circumvents any dependence
on hard science where I use “hard,” not derogatorily, but positively, in the sense
of being the best development, theoretically sound, penetrating further to
the heart of nature than anything before, in agreement with experiment to the
best available accuracy in all known conditions, in all applications, and the
basis of numerous successful technologies… There is Exactly One Universe
This is
a definition but also more than a definition. See Cosmology The
Principle of Identity
All
being, the universe is equivalent to nothingness The
principle of identity is derived from logic. The first discussion is in the Prologue and then in later sections and other core
essays Explanation
of the significance of the principle of identity. See The Principle of Being Elaboration
and definition of the concept of nothingness and problems and resolutions of
contradictions that are potentially inherent in the concept. See The Principle of Being | The Concepts, “Everything” and “Nothing” or
“Nothingness” | Nothingness The origin of the Principle of Identity
I held
some version of this principle in my mind for many years – often in
irrational form. Factors that contributed were: my desire to believe yet my
need for rationality – for the mere desire to believe in itself would be no
guarantee; my learning and my abilities; and patience or tenacity. The final
insights that led to rational formulation of this principle came without
expectation or warning. It is thus that I feel that I have been a discoverer
rather than a creator The
Four Paths or Ways
The
following illuminates the origin of the paths Knowledge
The
first path is Knowledge. Knowing is about the way the world is, shows
what is possible and how that may occur. The core essay for this path is Metaphysics
whose content has been placed in the section Metaphysics or Knowledge and
Action starting at the section Metaphysics.
Ways to prove or validate knowledge are important for, if validated, there is
confidence in what is claimed to be possible. Ultimately, however, there is
and cannot be a foundation to knowledge outside of the process. Therefore,
knowledge is tied into action. This is similar to the idea that meaning is
tied into use. The ultimate action or transformation must proceed in the
shadows or in the dark. This is the way it was in the beginning The
study of knowledge shows what is possible and begins to address the questions
of value, actualization [how] and realization [probability]: what
transformations are worthwhile, how may they be realized and what approaches
are there to catalyzing, to magnifying the probabilities of transformation.
The study of: knowledge – its nature, processes and range, concepts, symbols
and language, science; of metaphysics: its nature and possibility, the role
of formal knowledge, being, mind / physiology, action, cosmology and ethics
provide the first approach to these questions The
central approach to transformation, value and realization is in Experiments in the
Transformation of Being from the core essay
of the same name which considers, in interaction with knowledge /
metaphysics, the theory and practice of transformation and draws from but
goes beyond the classical foundations and modes. The Transformations of Being
is a design for and narrative of action. Two further approaches, each of
individual value as contributing to knowledge and understanding of being, to
transformation, value and realization are The
Variety of Being and Action and Influence The Bibliographies
record some details of my travels in the dimension of knowledge Being
The
second path is the Transformation of Being itself. The process of
knowing is a transformation of being but, as intrinsically transformational,
it is limited. What are the limits of transformation? The Dynamics of
Being, developed in the core essay Experiments
in the Transformation of Being whose content has been absorbed into the
present document in the section
of the same name, is a way of understanding and entering transformational
possibilities and questions all actual limits and the nature of limits as
absolute Experiments with the Variety of Being
The Variety
of Being is the third way. The focus is experiment with other forms or
modes of being. Three objectives are [1] construction, and transformation of
being, and this includes the transformations of technology [2] understanding
of being that may result from additional modes or data points – see The Variety of Being, and [3]
application. The Variety of Being
includes a focus on machine intelligence and being starting at Machine or Computational Intelligence. The current
core essay for this path The
Variety of Being has the same name and content as the section in this
essay which includes the material on machine intelligence that is also the
content of a secondary essay, Computers
Beings Minds Society
The
fourth way is Action and Influence in which the emphasis is on action
in society. Some objectives are [1] sharing for its own sake and as enhancing
the endeavor, [2] as an example of a mode of being – the objectives of the
previous paragraph are relevant here, [3] a definite group endeavor –
Horizons, dedicated to the Journey in Being and provision of services,
and [4] transformation and influence in the human world. The core essay is Action,
Influence, Charisma and Change whose content is identical to that of the
section Action and Influence The
Stumbling
In the
system that follows, those ideas that are original build upon the ideas of
others. Sometimes, as in the developments in cosmology, my ideas have been
suggested by existing theories even when the dependence on those theories is
not logical or formal Especially
when the ideas are original, and even though I have devoted much study and
thought and sought much inspiration, I sometimes feel that I have
accidentally stumbled upon the ideas rather than developed them or found them
as a result of a careful or systematic search. As an example, I have been
thinking about the role of concepts of nothingness for a number of years.
However, the final insight on how to view the relationship between
nothingness and the world occurred without intimation one morning when I
stopped for coffee at a bakery at the foot of the Trinity Mountains, Trinity
County, Northern California Here, I
want to say something about the nature of the processes of my discoveries and
perhaps about all discovery. Dependence on the ideas of others is simply a
fact. When my ideas have external influence, the dependence is often
unconscious since I am immersed in a culture of ideas. The feeling of
stumbling is this: [1] where I sought concepts, insight and understanding, I
did not expect the actual ideas or their final form and, [2] their certainty,
magnitude, depth, breadth of application and even beauty often significantly
exceeded my hopes and expectations. Thus, the form of the foundation in
nothingness – the elucidation of nothingness, the certainty of the
conclusions, and the release from infinite regress and substance ontology
were – despite earlier hopes and glimmers of the result – surprising and, of
course, exhilarating as a result of the breadth and crystal clarity. However,
even if my discoveries are accidental or serendipitous in any objective way,
that being should make the essence of the discoveries is necessary The Journey Continues…
I wrote
the following after understanding the nature of the void and the absolute.
What is pertinent is the understanding of incompletion, imperfection The
next phase is a return to the focus on the experiments described in the
second section of the main essay. I turn away from knowledge to action and
transformation As far
as knowledge and ideas are concerned, I must again turn away from what
clarity of vision I have experienced and toward intuition and diffuse light
to sense and seek what further truth there may be Where
should a journey into ultimate being begin? The actual journey, as will
unfold, is without beginning or end – and to be is to be in the journey, so
an individual or society may ask, “Where should our conscious journey
into ultimate being start?” It could start with the first step or with an
idea – the idea of the journey and its possibility. Arguments could be made
for action and for thought. The journey will cycle through both and if I look
to the origin of my journey, I might think it began with wonder but it seems
to me that wonder would not arise without the ability to walk In the
originally stated the account with knowledge because it seemed
that an understanding of being and the possibilities might be founded in
knowledge; however, even in the older account, it was be seen that knowledge
and action are essentially bound together and so the choice was one of
convenience and, secondarily, of preference However,
in the Prologue and, later and more definitively in
the Foundation, I have
since shown that the epistemic foundation is unnecessary. It is therefore,
proper to begin with metaphysics; consideration of knowledge and its nature
is retained for its importance and suggestive power. It is necessary to
understand something of epistemology to understand its ultimately secondary
status relative to metaphysics, as demonstrated in the Foundation The
metaphysics lays some foundation for the remaining divisions, Experiments in the
Transformation of Being, The
Variety of Being and Action,
Charisma and Influence, and History. These divisions have experimental
aims; their theoretical foundation is in the metaphysics and the plan for
this document includes placement of all general theoretical concerns in the
first division In the Experiments, I focus on
action and transformations of the core of being itself. The focus is first on
the possible transformations and then on the proper means and desirability of
transformations i.e. on ethics. The interpretation of ethics is broader than
that of morals in its narrow sense. ‘Ethics’ is taken to be whatever guides
choice whether it be aesthetic, moral or practical The
final divisions round out some kinds and possibilities of transformation. In Variety, I am concerned with
hypothetical being and with ‘machine as being.’ In Action, I am concerned with
social action and change Almost
every consideration in the present essay is illuminated and enhanced in Foundation. Often,
considerable simplification is possible. I have not yet decided whether to
implement changes in this essay or to start afresh on a new version 1
METAPHYSICS
The
core essay for this section is Metaphysics
whose full content has been placed here under Metaphysics or Knowledge and
Action. As explained below, knowledge and ethics are metaphysical
objects. Therefore, title of the section could equally well be “Metaphysics,”
but the given title is preferred in relation to the Journey in Being.
Knowledge and language are considered in preliminary sections because of
their importance in evaluating metaphysical content – including what is
possible – and the possibility of metaphysics. Ethics has a role in showing,
out of all possibilities, what endeavors are good. Ethics, being and
knowledge are considered in the final section so as to emphasize their unity My
present concern with metaphysics began in the essay Philosophy
of Mind and Consciousness where the focus was on consciousness.
Subsequently, my concern shifted to mind in general and then to metaphysics
as a framework of understanding. Here, metaphysics stands on its own and as a
coherent framework for understanding a variety of problems including the
concept of existence; the nature of being and knowledge; through modal
concepts as a foundation for cosmology and the nature of the [one] universe,
the necessity of being [why is there something rather than nothing,] and a
general framework for theoretical physics c. 2000; and mind-matter questions 1.1
Metaphysics and The Theory of Being
1.1.1
What is Metaphysics?
In
specifying what is meant, here, by metaphysics, the received concepts and
practices are acknowledged. The meaning should have continuities with the
received meaning but not be governed by it “Metaphysics”
originally referred to the books that came after the books on nature [ta
physica] in the arrangement given by the editors of Aristotle’s works.
The name later came to refer to what is beyond [meta] physical or
sensible nature. Aristotle defined the tasks of metaphysics in three ways:
the science of first principles and causes, the science of being as being,
and theology. Metaphysics is concerned with ultimates; and therefore with
ultimates in knowledge. Though the cultural setting is human, it is valid to
ask “What are the ultimates in knowledge for any being and for all being?” It
is clear that the intention was that metaphysics would be the most basic or
fundamental and most general of disciplines but it is not precisely clear how
this study should be carried out or what topics and objects would fall within
its province In
virtue of the considerations on knowledge above, should metaphysics be a
discipline or action in interaction with a discipline [study]; there is realm
of action that is metaphysics and knowledge in interaction with action that
may be abbreviated metaphysics-action and labeled metaphysics. Then
“metaphysics” has two connotations, metaphysics-action and the discipline and
study. Both connotations are used here; the more inclusive connotation is
taken up specifically in Metaphysics /
Action It
stands to reason, in the fundamental nature of the study, that “What is metaphysics?”
is a valid question that is worthy of study – see, also, Concepts
and the subsequent sections. Further, should the province of metaphysics be
specified by enumeration e.g. traditionally, or conceptually and by reason.
We will find, below, that the latter is necessary and comes after and as part
of doing some preliminary metaphysics. Thus, the nature of metaphysics is not
independent of the study One of
the received disciplines of metaphysics is ontology – the study of
being as being, the study of the conditions of existence: of what is common
to all beings or the characteristics of all beings as a result of their
existence; see Being. The specialized sciences such as
the sciences of matter [physics…] and of life [biology…] are not concerned
with all aspects of being; ontology is concerned with being itself Originally,
metaphysics [ontology] considered all actual beings as its objects; this was
subsequently expanded to all possible beings [beings whose concept entailed
no contradiction] and later to impossible beings Reflections
on Cosmology suggest that there is no distinction
between the possible and the actual The
study of impossible objects, even though such objects do not exist, may [1]
shed light on the nature of the possible, [2] make the study of ontology
simpler, [3] have implications for logic, and [4] make way for understanding
of beings not yet conceived by a reorganization of the underlying constituents
/ logic in which what was impossible becomes possible A
primary division in metaphysics as practiced c. 2000 is general ontology or
the theory of objects; and metaphysics as practiced is ontology and a variety
of Classical and Modern
Problems of Metaphysics A
second traditional division within metaphysics has been Cosmology_Cosmology – the
study of what kind of things there are. Cosmology includes the study of first
principles and causes. The absence of ultimate distinction between what is
possible and what is, demonstrated in Cosmology_Cosmology, opposes a logical division between
ontology and cosmology even if the topics are somewhat different As
noted in Two Roles for Knowledge and subsequent
sections, understanding of the scope and limits of knowledge is essential to
the study of metaphysical possibility and so, from the previous paragraphs,
of metaphysical actuality. In this essay I have taken up, among other issues,
questions of the nature and possibility of knowledge. Additionally, one of
the roles for knowledge is as a metaphysical object itself. Language and
logic are important as instruments of knowledge. Logic and LOGOS as the science of the possible are
particularly important to the actual world, its form and origin through their
connection to the possible Additionally
we will see, in Ethics, Being, Knowledge
that ethics is essentially connected to metaphysics / knowledge; more
generally, axiology, the theory of value whether in action or art or other
activity, has essential connection to metaphysics It is
clear from the foregoing that instruments of ontology and of cosmology
include the study of meaning, logics, modality and modal logics; the rational
and conceptual aspects of the sciences, especially mechanics, the quantum
theory, relativity, biology and evolution, anthropology, and psychology [as
the study of mind and not merely of behavior] as studied, especially, in the
philosophy of science and the philosophy of nature Metaphysics:
an endeavor whose goal is to enumerate whether by description or from first
principles, describe and understand all being in the world; the study the
real nature of things which entails the study of all reality by all means and
at all levels of depth; in view of arguments made below, metaphysics might be
viewed as the science, art and practice of being In
reviewing this discussion I note [1] the reflections say more about
metaphysics than a set of traditional enumerations of the topics of
metaphysics, [2] we might think of metaphysics as “reality as studied
according to first principles” and allow whatever special or general topic
that comes into logical play, [3] the considerations of Cosmology _Cosmologyprovide
a tighter picture of reality than might be anticipated at the outset, and [4]
although, in relation to the Journey in Being, I prefer the title Knowledge
and Action for the present division, it might have been called
Metaphysics [note: the title has been changed to Metaphysics or Knowledge
and Action] The
answer to questions such as “what is metaphysics?” is always an
unfolding – see Concepts. It is essentially
unfolding because the nature of metaphysics itself changes character; it is
necessarily unfolding as understanding of its character goes through changes
that include both advance and change in the “spirit of the time.” There is
also an unfolding as the various elements in the total field of understanding
trade components and shift in their roles. Further, in the section on Metaphysics and Action the concept of
metaphysics is generalized – even to the point where it may be said that
metaphysics is beyond concepts. In the foregoing, result of metaphysical
study is knowledge or knowing. In this further meaning of metaphysics implied
by an ultimate way of acting and being; this meaning includes the
former – at least as an approximation that is good for a restricted human
context – and it is originally motivated by the idea that knowledge and
action are not ultimately separable 1.1.1.1 The Possibility of Metaphysics
The
radical skepticism of Hume applied equally across all knowledge as it did to
ontology Kant’s
resolution was to limit the scope of metaphysics to what is knowable or what
can be experienced. However, some of Hume’s arguments apply to Kant’s
resolution. The problem with any inductive generalization is that it is
always one of many possible generalizations. We do not know that what is now
the knowable world will continue to conform to the forms of intuition. Much
of modern science does not conform to the perceptual forms even though it
does to the formal ones. Of course, Hume’s argument could be applied to being
itself; being is not the rock of definiteness that it appears to be. Hume’s
criticism assumes an ideal of knowledge that is not possible; but that ideal
is neither desirable nor necessary and, if the mind / brain were built to
conform to that ideal and if it were in a universe in which that was possible
there would be no knowledge at all except knowledge that was built in to the
organism: discovery would be impossible. The ideal of knowledge is not only
unattainable, not only not worth attaining, it is not ideal at all – as an
ideal it is a deception A more
traditional response to Hume is as follows. It is a skeptic’s response to the
skeptic Hume. The argument is associated with Karl Popper but similar
arguments have been given by others. The argument occurs as a natural
consequence to anyone who thinks carefully about the so-called
hypothetico-deductive method. The argument proceeds as follows. True, laws
and theories are generalizations. However, at any time an accepted and useful
scientific theory explains a wide array of phenomena and is not contradicted
by any known experiment. When a scientific theory is contradicted by an
experiment, there is, in one standard version, a search for a new theory.
However, the situation can be viewed as follows. Many theories stand in for
not just many observations but many kinds of phenomena. Therefore, the single
contradiction must be rechecked, analyzed to see if the contradiction is
indeed a contradiction, other contradictory experiments of a variety of kinds
may occur or be sought. The greater the bulk of contradictory evidence the
greater is the pressure to seek alternative theories; at the same time the
new data are also useful in formulation of new theories. Of course, the
formulation of new theories is often a largely conceptual process and based
in modifications of older concepts. Meanwhile, in the gap between the old and
new theories, or in the absence of a new theory the old continues to be useful.
Older theories continue to be useful in their domains of validity because
they are conceptually and computationally simpler and because they help
understand and implement newer theories. However, it remains true that the
current theories of an era appear to be, rather than full and positive
knowledge, nothing more than the best of a series of theories. This is
somewhat dismal to anyone who would like to hold a positivist view of
knowledge. However, as noted in the previous paragraph: why would we want science
to be more definite than being itself? Thus the tentativeness of science can
be seen as positive. It does not mean that there is no end to tentativeness.
In the present essay there are a number of positive though general
conclusions from a basis of being in nothingness. Focusing on the here and
now, is there anything to be said about the theories of an era beyond being
the no more than the best available? Yes, for there is a degree of
uncertainty and perhaps confusion associated with the search for new concepts
and new theories; and when the concepts and theories come together as a
unified system there is an order and a clarity that replaces the uncertainty.
A form of nature has been discovered; and this is often experienced as
beautiful. True, the discovered form of nature may not be universal but it
significantly expands the domain of what is understood; there are new
predictions, verifications of predictions and, in some cases, prolific
application. The quantum theory is such a theory. However, the quantum theory
has been associated with paradox and incompleteness from its beginnings. A
major incompleteness is the allegedly essential role of the observer and the
fact that the process of observation is not subsumed under the formalism of
the theory. Recently, however, there have been excellent developments that
argue to unify the evolution of systems and the process of observation,
eliminate the observer dependence of the theory and provide a foundation for
nature and knowledge. I have long found the quantum theory suggestive in
understanding the nature of existence – the origin of the known universe from
nothing is not a violation of quantum theory; it is a violation of classical
physics in the sense that creation / destruction is not a classical phenomenon.
However, conservation of energy is not necessarily violated when mass and
gravitational energy are balanced. In the present essay, I have shown that,
in general terms, based in an analysis of the concept of nothingness, that
the origin of the entire, one universe as well as an outline of modern
physics [the quantum theory and Einstein’s theories of matter, process and
gravitation] may be understood In
other words, nothingness can be seen as a universal ground. The approach from
nothingness will show that being and knowledge are not definite objects.
However, indeterminateness or indeterminism in a universal context at a
microscopic level may [and does] result in determinateness, form, structure
in another context or at a macroscopic level. The criticism of Hume is turned
around in more than one way. First, the criticism itself is based on certain
assumptions. As Europe awoke from its era of dogma, to visions that were
fresh and progressive it may have been natural to think that there could be
no end to that process; and the view of the process was modeled on a concept
of being as an infinite realm of ultimately unfounded facts that were
occasionally found to be in grand patterns understood as theories. The view
from nothingness turns this attitude around; in our phase-epoch of being
there may in fact be an end to understanding [in a general way; of variety
though not of every detail of the variety.] However, that is not an end to
the possibilities of being and its creation and construction. A partial response
to this way of thinking is that the assumption of essential ignorance is the
safest or most secure; this careful assuming of ignorance will not lead being
into error. The critical attitude is one half of the story of science and, in
consequence, rather though not universally pervasive; further, the
cultivation of the attitude is fostered by the fact that criticism is always
easier than construction [creation,] that criticism simulates profundity. In
fact, it is not known that the critical / security based “paradigm” is the
way to ultimates in knowledge or being. The arguments from nothingness, in
fact, show the need for action without foundation. A second, positive way in
which Hume’s attitude is turned around is that what was viewed as essential
and endless ignorance is, in fact, essential opportunity for endless creation
and construction Metaphysics
was hailed as meaningless and impossible in Logical Positivism; however, the
program of scientific positivism failed by its own standards Much of
physics is metaphysics. This is true of classical physics and not just of the
quantum and relativity theories. In the short term, physics may be
independent of metaphysics. In the long term there is no absolute separation Formalism,
and perhaps the education / evolution of the intuition make metaphysics
possible; except according to a false ideal of knowledge The
metaphysics of these essays, of Journey in Being, are testament to the
possibility – the actuality – of metaphysics 1.1.2
Importance of Metaphysics for the Journey in Being
1.1.2.1 As a Foundational aspect of the Experiments in
the Transformation of Being
As
understood here, metaphysics encompasses all knowledge of being and
possibility Specifically,
so far as knowledge can found all transformation of being, metaphysics is
foundational for Experiments
in the Transformation of Being 1.1.2.2 Every Organism has an Intrinsic
Metaphysics
Every
organism has an intrinsic metaphysics – a representation or a being in its
own world, its own environment; every context and society, every science
assumes some metaphysics which may be unspoken and loosely definite; thus,
ask not “whether or why” – as though there is a choice – but “how?” and
“what?” It may be that the metaphysics of an individual human being should be
left unspoken – perhaps this is true for some individuals and there may be
others who choose to leave their metaphysics unspoken but it is also true
that there are others whose lives are bettered and changed by making explicit
and explicitly re-working their metaphysics… and there are phases in the
development of a science – especially the main sciences, the natural
sciences, the study of society and of man – when it is important to review
and, perhaps, to rework the metaphysical ground of that discipline 1.1.2.3 Metaphysics and Science
The 20th
century was a time when philosophy turned inward and it was thought that
general metaphysics – i.e. pure metaphysics, not the metaphysics that results
from consideration of the general features and assumptions of a science – had
nothing original to contribute to science. At the beginning of the 21st
century, we still live in that shadow. There is however a renewed interest in
metaphysics. I believe, and demonstrate that general metaphysics is alive
and may contribute to science and the other specialized disciplines 1.1.2.4 Using the Tradition
Using
the tradition is essential because of [a] its suggestive power, [b] to use
and build upon established ideas and ways – constructive and critical 1.1.3
Being
1.1.3.1
Existence 12
1.1.3.2
[Materialism]
The
purpose of this section is to show that “existence” cannot be fully
elucidated without a complete metaphysics or world view. A complete
metaphysics is one that covers “all the fundamental aspects of reality and
nothing but reality.” Consider, for example, a material object in relation to
a materialist metaphysics and ask, “Does this material object exist?” The
response is, “Yes,” for the existence of matter is constitutive of
materialism. In the same framework, ideas exist if ideas are reducible to
matter; and numbers exist if they are reducible to matter either directly or
indirectly as ideas. As a result, it is possible for a materialist to doubt
the existence of ideas and numbers. We may disagree or find it myopic but,
except for self-doubt, the strict materialist experiences clarity of vision.
For a dualist, matter, ideas and numbers can have existence; however, for a
strict dualist, there is no comparing the different modes of existence. In
the absence of any metaphysics whatsoever, the existence status of all
categories is unclear; however the “anti-metaphysician” can say that matter
exists-as-matter, ideas exist-as-ideas, numbers exist-as-number… “Existence”
is important: [1] as clarifying the nature of the presence of beings in the
world, [2] in clarifying what exists, i.e. given a concept such as mind,
matter, God, is there some actual being to which that concept refers? And [3]
as a necessary part of metaphysics We
understand “God exists” differently than “Mt. Everest exists.” We would
normally ask “Does Mt. Everest exist?” only when being philosophical but
“Does God exist?” could be either philosophical or, simply, factual. “God” is
a concept, Mt. Everest is an object or, more accurately, “Mt. Everest” is a
concept for which the existence of a corresponding object is not controversial
in a factual sense. The question “Does God exist?” means, “Is there an actual
being to which the concept of God refers?” In
light of what has just been said, the meaning of a question “Does X
exist?” is that there is a concept X, and the question asks whether
there is an object that corresponds to the concept. When X is
relatively concrete we ask “Does X exist?” only when being
philosophical i.e. the question is “Does X really exist?” That
question breaks down into two parts – the first a factual part [immediately
upon the discovery of Mt. Everest by Europeans, it may have made sense for a
European to ask whether the discovery was some kind of mistake or illusion.]
The second part is “Does Mt. Everest really exist?” which, given the fact, is
really asking whether anything – or anything material – really exists. As we
will see below, this question is relatively empty. If X is strongly
conceptual e.g. if X is time or nothingness, then the
meaning of question of the existence of X depends on whether it is
speculative or established. In the case of a speculative concept such as
nothingness the question is whether there is anything that corresponds to the
concept [in the present essay, nothingness is raised from the realm of the
speculative to that of the established.] In the case of an established
concept such as time the question is whether there is something that
corresponds precisely to the concept of time [of which the intuition or
perception of time is a special case.] Thus, if we insist that time is
universal we may conclude that time does not exist. On the other hand if we
allow time a less grandiose role or if we allow some vagueness in the concept
or degree of approximation in the correspondence between concept and object,
then we will conclude that time does exist. As is seen in Definiteness of Concepts | Indefiniteness
of Concepts and related discussions, most concepts –
especially high level concepts – have or should be allowed a degree of slack
in precision and this is a virtue rather than a deficiency I
want to first clear up some confusions that I have come across in writings
analyzing existence. An apparent paradox arises from the idea that “everything
exists.” The paradox is that fictional objects do not exist yet “existence is
true of everything” implies that fictional objects do exist. Subtlety can
then be applied in an attempt to resolve the apparent paradox. One approach
is to treat “exists” as a predicate of concepts rather than of objects;
another approach is to allow “non-existent” objects. Such sophistications are
interesting and have useful applications; but, let us not introduce
sophistication where it is not necessary Instead,
focus on the word “everything.” I noted in The importance of language, the potential for difficulties
with the use of quantifiers “exists,” “all,” “nothing,” “everything…” Note,
especially, that “everything” and “every thing” are not at all
the same. Every thing has the meaning every actual or existing
thing. Without qualification, everything, includes things that exist and
things that do not exist and therefore it is not true that, using the term
unreflectively, everything exists However,
“every thing exists” does not tell us anything for it says,
essentially, that “every thing that exists does exist;” or, “every thing
exists” is, as a consequence of the nature of thing-hood, tautological; a
purpose to considering existence, as pointed out above, is to evaluate what
it is to count as a thing… The purpose to considering “everything
exists” was to reflect on existence as a predicate as true of everything. We
just showed that that is paradoxical; further, this idea would reduce
existence to insignificance for the significance of the concept of existence
is that since we can have ideas that do not refer to any actual thing we want
to mark those ideas that do refer to some actual thing or class of things In
the paradoxical but simple and common language, some things exist and some
things do not Often,
etymology is not helpful. The Latin existere is: to emerge. In Greece
and Rome the uses of words may have been closer to their origins. In English
the meanings of words, so many of them imported, have often become unmoored
from their origins. Here, I bypass the classical and phenomenological uses of
the concept of existence and note that in English, “exist” has a use that is
similar to “is” in “Mt. Everest is there” but not in “Mt. Everest is a
mountain.” However, the use of “exist” is not identical to the use of “is” in
“Mt. Everest is there.” The distinction is that “is” focuses on the fact
while “exist” focuses on the very “is-ness,” i.e. to exist is to be:
existence is related to being. In other words, “Mt. Everest exists” is closer
to “Mt. Everest is” than it is to “Mt. Everest is there.” Although somewhat
circular, this is also illuminating; some of the unnecessary mystery is taken
out of existence and the scene is set for further reflection and analysis Here
is another confusion. There are materialists who hold that mind does not exist because the concept of mind does
not refer to anything that can be reduced to or has the form of matter, i.e. mind
is not real. Here is what appears to be the content of a typical
materialist argument including unstated aspects. Vast domains of science
point to the reality of matter; it is then assumed but not proven that matter
is the only real. It is often thought that a proof has been given but the
assumption is based in the success of the science of matter and the
professional rule against talking of things that are held to be
non-scientific. Mind and mental phenomena have not yielded to description in
the usual materialist terms; and, therefore, talk of mind is a mistake What
response can be given? Is mind reducible to matter or is it a form of matter?
It is first necessary to specify what is meant by matter. If “matter” is what
is tangible, then surely some future and transformed understanding of matter
may show that mind is matter. However, that future specification may
not be recognizable as matter from given perspectives. Is mind reducible to
matter as currently described by modern physics? The answer is not known but
may well be “no.” There is, however, no absolute reason to doubt that some
physics could be complete. Explanations in terms of matter could be given, at
least in principle; these would not be reductions or eliminations; rather,
the physical and mental modes of description would be seen as complementary13 Absolute
metaphysical dualism, the co-existence of non-interacting substances is
incoherent. All dualisms are dualisms of understanding; therefore, relative to
finite beings, there may appear to be or effectively be dualisms. A variety
of arguments in this essay show that apparent and effective dualisms of
understanding are, relative to human understanding, unnecessary A
tacit attitude underlying materialism, even when an explicit specification is
given, is that matter is matter-as-I-experience-it. As a result, materialism
is, in its treatment, often an indeterminate idea even in the presence of
apparent precision. If the tacit attitude is combined with a dislike of the
unseen, there often results the incoherent and also tacit attitude that the
universe is reducible to what the individual has experienced Some
materialists are driven, by an unnecessary and unjustified reduction of the
entire universe to science to doubt what they do not doubt in their everyday
activities – that they have minds, that they are conscious Does
the one universe – see Cosmology _Cosmology– exist? We see, below that the
universe does not exist in time so we would not say “the universe is” even
though we might say that, with caution due to the nature of time revealed in
the theories of relativity, our [local or present] phase-epoch of the
universe exists in time I
have an idea of a unicorn. Does the idea exist? Yes, the idea
of the unicorn exists even though “unicorns do not exist.” Not all ideas are
intended to refer to something; and, of those that are intended to refer to
something, only some do so actually refer. However, all actual ideas exist
regardless of the intention to refer or, in the case of an intention to
refer, whether there is a referent. Simply, ideas exist. But, do ideas
exist as material objects – as matter? That depends, as we have seen,
on what is specified by the word “matter.” However, it can be said that: An
idea exists-as an idea; matter exists-as, roughly speaking, something
tangible; the universe exists – not in the time but in the sense of being
without tense From
the point of view of use, everything that has qualified existence may be
said, roughly, to exist. However, from the point of view of metaphysics, the
qualification of existence cannot be avoided unless the metaphysics is
complete. There is a sense in which analysis of thought, ideas, language
through use provides a metaphysics. In the extended view of use-analysis
described in Symbol and Language, this would not be restricted
to a merely local metaphysics but when such analysis proceeds piecewise and
iteratively, concept by concept, the analysis of existence would be
in-process or case by case and qualified 1.1.3.3 Existence and Concepts
Does
a tree exist? Above, I answered this kind of question in the affirmative
because I considered things such as mountains and trees to be objects. I want
to now analyze this a little more I
have an idea of a tree, perhaps a theory or theories regarding trees – how
they thrive and grow, how trees evolved. I have no doubt that my idea or
concept refers quite well, at least for many purposes, to “something out
there.” But how do I know that the idea refers exactly? I cannot know that
except on account of some other idea or theory. I conclude [1] except by
coincidence, my idea of the tree never corresponds precisely to what is out
there. On the usual idea of the world being an infinite manifold, the
probability of precise correspondence is zero. [2] Since every attempt to
evaluate the idea, at any level, is another idea, it follows that the idea of
the tree-in-itself has no meaning. This is not because there is “nothing out
there” but because “tree-hood” is not something that is in itself. To
negotiate the world, however, it is not necessary to have a precise concept
of a tree. Theoretically, the idea of tree-in-itself does not specify
anything that is truly in-itself and is therefore, not a concept that refers
to anything This,
of course, is not against realism and does not say or imply that there is
nothing “out there,” i.e., it does not imply that the world depends on our
minds for its existence; it does imply that the forms of the world as seen
are dependent on the interplay between what is seen [world] and what sees
[individuals through the function of mind.] Does this, however, mean that
there is no thing-in-itself? No, for there is a difference between
“thing-in-itself” and “tree-in-itself.” Here, I am thinking that a “thing” is
a true object while “tree” is a concept. I allow myself to think of “thing”
as an object because I am not being specific as I am in the way that I am
when I think or say “tree.” Thus, it seems, that there may be that there are
things that are absolutely in-themselves Can
the thing-in-itself be known as such? For anything that is known as a form of
intuition what is known is the concept instantiated in the mind and therefore
there is no thing-in-itself. Note that this assumes a representational [see Nature of Being for presentationism] theory of
knowledge. In formal terms, however, the object-in-itself is treated as an
abstract object and we would not say that the object is known; however, there
appears to be no a priori reason that the predictions of theories based in
formal concepts should have any inherent limits to precision and accuracy.
Further, there is no a priori limitation to having a formal theory of a world
which has cognitive beings that have both intuitive and formal knowledge of
the world When
the being of every entity in the universe depends, for its form and being on
the universe as a whole, then the entities would not be in-themselves. In
that case, except for objects taking a temporary holiday from the world, the
only absolute object, the only thing-in-itself would be the one universe This
is a good place to develop the concept of: 1.1.3.4
Nothingness
In
the first place note the potential contradictions in the idea of
“nothingness.” If nothingness is the absence of everything then is it also
the absence of absence? We
saw in Existence that contradiction may arise in
the use of “everything.” [Also see the related discussion in The Concepts, “Everything” and “Nothing” or
“Nothingness.”] Therefore, definition of
nothingness as absence of everything will lead to contradiction. That would
not be true if we were to use “everything” carefully. However, instead, I
take an alternate approach to “nothingness” Before
beginning the positive account, consider the idea that “nothingness is not
merely absences in the world but is an absence of the world.” In Cosmology_Cosmology_1, it is concluded that there is exactly
one universe and that this includes the phase of nothingness. Thus, “absence
of the world” is also somewhat contradictory. Nothingness is not other than
the world, see There is
Exactly One Universe In
the phase of nothingness, there “are” [the tensed verb is somewhat
problematic, as noted elsewhere in this essay, because reference is being
made to a situation that is not in time] no things. However, what constitutes
“thing.” A pattern, a law of nature, causation, deterministic behavior all
require the being of ‘things.’ Therefore, in the absence of things there is
also absence of patterns, laws, causation, and determinism. In some sense,
patterns, laws, causation, determinism are things but this thought is not used
here. However, indeterminism would not be a thing. Or, in another way of
looking at indeterminism it is a kind of absence and therefore absence of
indeterminism is absence of absence and, therefore, incompatible with
nothingness. A positive way of looking at this point is that indeterminism
does not require things: nothing to something is indeterministic. Therefore,
nothingness does not mean absence of indeterminism. Alternatively, absence of
indeterminism would imply presence of determinism and in that case
nothingness, the absence of things, would be eternal; but that would be
causal, would have the character of a law of nature and would, therefore, not
be true nothingness Simply,
law, cause, determinism are instances of “something,” and therefore absent
from nothingness. Indeterminism is not something It
is, therefore, inherent in the concept of nothingness that “it will” become
something If
there is any possible thing that nothingness cannot become that circumstance,
too, would be something, would be a law. Therefore, nothing will become every
possible thing Note,
again that the one universe and that includes the “phase” of nothingness are
not in time [at least in any simple sense.] Therefore, saying that “nothing
will become something” and so on is improper use of the tensed language.
Therefore, I say simply, “Nothingness is equivalent to all – possible –
being.” This is The Principle of Being – again We
will see, in Cosmology_Cosmology_1, how use of the continuation of
these considerations will lead to a pre-quantum and pre-relativistic
framework. Naturally, as far as the quantum and relativistic theories apply
to the local phase-epoch of the universe and not to the entire universe, the
frameworks will be prefixed by “pre.” Consideration will also be given to
ways or circumstances in which the “pre” frameworks, of which the quantum and
relativity theories are instances, may be more specific. There will also be
discussion of how the considerations may unify relativity and quantum theory;
understanding of the nature of phenomena such as the existence and constancy
of the speed of interactions [light speed] may occur in a phase-epoch of the
universe The
present development does not rely on the concept of the given.
However, as an ultimate ground for being, nothingness may assume the role of
the given in a philosophy of the real and the given 1.1.3.5 Possibility
Because
the concept is useful to the discussion, brief reference to possibility
and related modal concepts will be useful; a more complete treatment
is deferred to future developments of Metaphysics. Consider, “It is possible
that the sun will shine here at 10 AM tomorrow.” The speaker might be
thinking that, for example, “It has been cloudy for a few days but there is
no reason to rule out sunshine tomorrow at 10 AM.” However, perhaps unknown
to the speaker, astronomers have predicted a total eclipse of the sun here
tomorrow at 10 AM… but, perhaps the laws of physics upon which the prediction
of the eclipse is based will take a vacation… Possibility is contingent upon
what is known or assumed and this can be made definite by proscribing what is
and is not allowed, that is, by specifying a world or a “universe of
discourse” Consider
X = “The sun will shine…” and Y = “2 + 2 = 4.” X is possibly or contingently
true while Y is necessarily true; alternately, X is true in some world and Y is true in all possible worlds.
Possibly true, contingently true and necessarily true can be abbreviated to possible,
contingent, and necessary. An impossible proposition is
one whose negation is necessary; it is false in all possible worlds In
the w-universe defined as the sum or collection of all possible worlds, not
only Y but X, too, is necessary – in the
way, “All things shall come to pass.” I.e., in the w-universe, so understood,
possibility becomes necessity and so there is only necessity and
impossibility In
the one universe, what is possible is necessary. Relative to nothingness, as
we have seen, nothing is impossible except contradictory states; see Cosmology_Cosmology_1 What
is truly impossible? Is a logical contradiction such as “2 + 2 = 5” true in
an empty w-universe, the w-universe that is the union of no worlds? It
is true in the sense that it applies to all situations that come under its
scope in that w-universe because there are no situations in it Consider
the apparently impossible proposition “The sun will and will not shine
here tomorrow at 10AM.” However, consider a mist that is dense enough that
there is no sunshine. The mist moves in at 9:50 AM; it then begins to clear
somewhat starting at 9:58 AM; at 10 AM a hint of a glimmer is seen and
immediately the mist thickens. At 10 AM, some people judge that the sun is
shining, some that it is not and some are not sure. One person wrote on a
piece of paper “The sun shone,” crossed it out and then wrote, “The sun did
not shine at 10 AM.” Another person was ambivalent and found herself in a
state of mixed belief as described in Knowledge, Belief and Truth. It is realized that “the sun
is shining” is not an objective fact but is the statement of a perception.
However, every judgment about the world is tinged with the ideal, including
reviewed or considered judgments which involve judgment about judgment. There
is no a priori getting out of the ambivalence. Therefore, the idea of an
objective world is also tinged with the ideal even if it is real. What then,
is the value of a definite realistic universe of discourse that does not
correspond to anything that can be experienced? The response is perhaps, even
though it is not directly experienced, the world is always in a definite
state and this affects and constrains experience. Is this known? Yes, but at
each level of “knowing” it is relative to some canvas and we are left with
doubt as to whether anything is absolutely necessary or absolutely impossible 1.1.3.6 Nature of Being
What
is the nature of things – entities – that exist? In our phase-epoch of the
universe, things exist in time. From atoms to individuals there is “birth,
life, and death.” This is not true in all phase-epochs of the universe where
/ when the question of time is more complex. The universe itself does not
exist in time. What is the nature of the approximate boundaries of beings and
of their relations in the universe? The nature of a being is the totality of its possibilities; see The Principle of Being Approaches
to the question of the nature of being: Embedding An
approach from intuition – see intuition and formal knowledge; presence to the world – the
nature of an entity as defined by its system of relations – before talk of
mind, matter, time Construction
of ontology from the present, from being-in-the world; what is the same /
different for all things Meaning
as integral with being; action springs from meaning Temporality
of being; life as historical and as goal oriented Presentational theory of understanding and knowledge [mind is in
perception, at least, directly aware of its object; in some forms the kinds
of knowing may include memory or other types of cognition] Embedding
of human being in civilization, animal being, all being Nothingness
as the ground to being; universal metaphysics or Cosmology Individuals
as elements of this universe Approximate
nature of boundaries – conceptual, spatial and temporal diffusion; death;
groups as being [in a phase of becoming] Bridging Interpretation:
the universal metaphysics provides an understanding of the approach from intuition
or embedding Experiments in the
Transformation of Being, The Variety of Being, and Action and Influence 1.1.3.7 Characterizing Being
It
is possible to give a brief explicit characterization of being. The
characterization given here depends on various developments in the present
document That
the being of an entity is “what it truly is” is an implicit characterization.
The value of an implicit characterization is its generality and openness;
however, an explicit characterization is also valuable even if we do not know
that it will apply to all being In
the main essay, I take up the idea of concepts and discuss the notion
of a slack concept. A slack concept is one that is not completely
definite – its properties are not specified with complete precision – and for
which, given an object, it is not always possible to tell whether the object
falls under the concept. However, that a concept is slack does not
necessarily imply ignorance in the case that the object of application itself
is not [and need not be] definite. Thus the recognition of slackness is, in
some cases, the recognition of a virtue. An example: if an autonomic nervous
process is intermediate between two clearly mental states or processes, is
the autonomic process itself mental? An adequate response is that it is not
necessary to label the autonomic process as mental or not mental for nothing
is gained either way… The relevance here is that the following brief
characterization may turn out to be parochial rather than universal Journey:
The coming into realization is a [cumulative] journey. Of course, not
every event or phase adds to the cumulation; and some that are thought to add
are later dropped Mind:
Being is characterized by mind which is the instrument of being and becoming.
Mind has been said to be too high level a concept to be characteristic of
being. The basic facts of mind as far as “higher” being is concerned are experience
and presence. Bound and free aspects of mind, discussed in the main
essay, are essential in the process of becoming. For entities that are sufficiently
“low,” the free aspects are not internalized. There is a “high level” mind
that animal being recognizes as such but, as discussed in Journey in Being,
mind also occurs at lowest of levels. It is necessary to refer the reader to
the relevant parts of Journey in Being to understand precisely what is being
said and its foundation and explanation Action:
Action is conceived as an aspect of mind The Principle of Being: As developed in this prologue and elaborated in
the main essay, all being is open to every being or all states of being
are equivalent to every state of being [it is necessary to allow states
outside any given phase-epoch of the universe for this to be a logical
principle] Dynamics of Being: The use of mind, experiment and action in recognizing and
overcoming limits – explained more thoroughly below and in the main division
of the essay on Experiments in the Transformation of Being. The rational base
of the dynamics is the principle of being; a practical basis in the laws of a
phase-epoch of the universe is discussed below The Principle of Meaning: There are two great sources of meaning: first,
experience and enjoyment of and action in the immediate world – the life and
relationships of the individual and, second, in the process of arching
from individual being to universal Being. It seems to me that this is
trivially obvious Cosmology:
Cosmology is not limited to physical cosmology. Cosmology is the study of
entire existence, the one universe as a whole. The italicized phrase
would be a better title for this point but I use cosmology because it is the
title of a section in Journey in Being. Cosmology includes the following: the
equivalence of the one universe and nothingness and the principle of identity;
the necessity and sufficiency of indeterminism to explain the origin of the
actual universe and its structure from nothing; and physics and physical
cosmology. Matter has been held to be a high level concept but the concept of
matter is understood, here, in a more basic way than the physical stuff of
the present phase-epoch of the universe and not as something distinct from
mind – rather mind and matter are different modes of description Ethics:
Being is ethical in nature. This does not mean that every individual “does
the right thing” at all times. Ethics is possible only when there is choice
and the existence of choice implies that the right thing will not always be
done and hence a need for ethics. Ethics, like mind and matter, occurs at
various levels. And there is an ethics of the human context and an ethics of
being-in-the-one-universe which do not necessarily mesh smoothly; there is no
need or sense to a perfectly smooth mesh 1.1.3.8 Being, Process, Cause, Time and
Dynamics
See
Co-origins
of Being, Causation, Dynamics and Time 1.1.4 The Principle of Being
Also
see The
Principle of Being follows from considerations of the foregoing type.
The question arises of the equivalence of being –and therefore the being of
the universe– and of nothingness. How can it be shown that being is
equivalent to nothingness? The original argument from science, from quantum
theory, requires subtle considerations and is limited by known and unknown
limits to the quantum theory – assessing the limits of the fundamental
science of an era is always insecure since there is no successor or containing
science. Therefore, turn the question around: to what is nothingness
equivalent? First, in that most primitive state, the adjectival form,
nothingness, is equivalent to the noun: nothing. However, nothing is not
simply no-thing, the absence of things. Nothing or nothingness also require
the absence of condition: the absence of determinism [indeterminism is not a
condition for it allows deterministic process], of causation, of law.
Nothingness is beyond the pale of causation and determinism. In reference to
quantum physics, nothingness comes before the vacuum. It is not in anyway
being said that there is no science, no concepts of time, space – or
space-time, of causality… but that these are always contextual Therefore,
at once, and without the need for intervening logic, nothing is equivalent to
all possible things and states of affairs. That is The Principle of Being:
All Being is open to every being! It
is in the nature of nothingness to have no restriction in its range of
possibility; therefore, nothingness is equivalent to the universe. The
epistemic and the metaphysical coalesce as one in an absolute ontology – an
ontology founded in nothingness. This absolute ontology contains, through the
concept of nothingness, the foundations of all true local ontologies and the
variety of being – of all things 1.1.5 Ultimate Being
The
Principle of Being shows that consideration of ultimate being is not merely
an intellectual exercise 1.1.5.1 What is Ultimate Being?
What
being is possible relative to nothingness? What
being is possible relative to an actual being? …to human being? Also
see LOGOS, the concept of the possible 1.1.5.2 The Possibilities of Actual Beings
…of
human individuals Is
there a distinction between these two “possible degrees of being?” As far as
possibility is concerned, from the Principle of Being, i.e. from the
equivalence of nothingness to all things and possibilities, there is no
distinction. However, there is or seems to be a difference in probabilities
of occurrence! Any
statement of probability is an estimate based on knowledge of context. In the
question of transformations of being one may estimate probabilities based on
common sense and on science. In a basic commonsense view, people do not observe
or experience or include in their world view, spontaneous transformations of
being of the type considered in the section What is a Transformation of Being? Perhaps, however, common sense
would say that most but not all people do not observe such
transformations and that most but not all exceptions are crackpots or
wishful thinkers. The source of the thought not all is common sense
itself for common sense recognizes that it pertains to common observation and
not to universal fact. Where does common sense turn in order to get an
improved estimate? First, to itself; since the types of transformations in
question are rarely reported, the probability would seem to be small. Here,
however, the estimate of common sense is likely to be an underestimate of the
degree of smallness for, turning to science – quantum theory, spontaneous
transformations, e.g. tunneling, of macroscopic bodies – the probability
would be staggeringly small. Now consider how the following, and their
combinations, modify probability estimates Innate
ability of cognition to magnify probabilities as in Characterization of Mind. This is the source of a vague
analogy with catalytic process in chemistry. What other “catalytic” processes
of transformation are there? The
relative nature of boundaries in being in time and space; boundaries between
minds; and so, continuity between “separate” beings – beings at different
times and places by, e.g., participation in “higher” being or awareness that
transcends the physical modes of perception. Further, what is the nature of
the separation that is required for immediate existence but that dissolves in
the equivalence of nothingness to all being? 1.1.5.3 What Possibilities are Good?
And
what would be good? How can human beings project from this world to the
ultimate without that projection being mere reflection? 1.1.5.4 Omniscience
What
is the status of ultimate being regarding omniscience? It would not seem even
desirable… Ultimate
being would know its own condition of ultimacy. Is it possible that there is
a being that cannot be known by any being, even itself? Ultimate
being would experience significance or
meaning 1.2 Cosmology
Cosmology
is not restricted to physical cosmology. This section emphasizes both
physical and general cosmology Physical
cosmology works out features of the origin and large scale characteristics of
the universe from observation and the fundamental theories of physics;
philosophical cosmology is not essentially different except that the universe
is not assumed a priori to be physical in nature and the basis of the
cosmology is in logical necessity rather than in contingent physical truth One
of the objectives here is to work out an outline of physical cosmology from
logical necessity rather than physics. Of course, the ideas from modern
physics and physical cosmology are in the background as a guide and a source
of ideas Sources
of foundation and understanding for philosophical cosmology: the concepts of
nothingness and presence; logic including the use of modality; analogy with
physical cosmology and origin of the physical universe in no-thing; and
analogy with evolution and indeterminism for the variety in the world There
is one universe… we speak of many universes – of multiverses, of universes of
discourse, of “bubble” universes but these, together, constitute the one
universe Worlds on worlds are rolling ever From creation to decay Like the bubbles on a river Sparkling, bursting, borne away 14 1.2.1
Reflections on the Number of Universes
Consider the following: What
does it mean that an object is a universe? It is the whole body of things and
phenomena – seen and unseen, known and unknown… therefore, there is one and
only one However, consider the
possibility: there are two or more bodies of things. Within each body there
are interactions but the bodies are separate in that there is and can be no
interaction between one of the bodies of things and another; there has been
and will be no interaction. Each such body will be called an s-universe; this
use, in which “s” refers to “sub,” is restricted to this section on Reflections
on the Number of Universes. In the present use, a s-universe is not a
“bubble universe,” one of many more or less self-contained causal domains
that are causally interconnected in some way but only weakly so in some phase-epochs
of the universe. For a cognitive being in any of the s-universes, the
other s-universes are unknown and unknowable; and, further, would seem to
have no significance. From the point of view of any cognitive being, what
difference does it make which of the following is held? There is one universe and it is
this interacting body of things in which I live; if there are other
“universes” they have no significance to me and therefore I hold that they do
not exist There is one universe and it is
this s-universe in which I live together with all s-universes with
which there is no interaction; since there is no interaction among
s-universes, I cannot know them through observation or inference from
observation. However, the Principle of Equivalence of nothingness to all
possibilities implies that other s-universes must exist. Use of “exist” in
the previous sentence is somewhat equivocal since there are no common times
or spaces which the idea of existence might imply. I recognize that, although
in some practical sense, the existence of other s-universes has no
significance to me, the concept of other s-universes does, in fact, have
significance because I can imagine and theorize about such possibilities and
thereby learn about my s-universe, about possibility and necessity.
Additionally, I question the possibility s-universes that not only do not
interact, but have not, will not interact; I would even say they can not
interact except that “can not” seems to have no meaning beyond do not, have
not and will not because there is no other manifold in which they could have
interacted. The sub-universes are, in a sense, all bound in nothingness which
is [and is equivalent to] the one universe… thus I have justification
in referring to the “collection” of s-universes as the universe It is, however, possible to go
beyond this. Consider any collection, U, of s-universes. Then the equivalence
of nothingness to all possibilities implies the following. There is another
U’, that is similar to U but in which the “s-universes” interact. In this
sense, the other s-universes are knowable by a cognitive being in some of
that being’s “manifestations.” This gives meaning and significance to the
possibility of s-universes and shows how, practically and not just
theoretically, they are bound into one: in some manifestations, they are
absolutely distinct, but in others they are causally connected and
inter-cognitive Consider beings whose cognition
or being-hood is bounded by birth and death. These include individuals and
s-universes. Such beings will have eternal return that initially appears to
be without significance. There is, however, a collection U’ that gives
significance to the eternal return or to return in a variety of forms The collection U’ also provides
an approach some issues regarding the identity of individuals e.g. two
identical but distinct individuals, the return of an individual in the same
or altered form, or even altogether distinct individuals. These identities
are connected by the existence in some U’, of a being whose awareness
transcends the apparently restricted awareness of the individuals The interval from death to birth
is without significance to the individual as an individual. It is within
thought that this insignificance may be and often is mistakenly seen as an
absolute boundary Conclude from the foregoing
that: 1.2.2
There is Exactly One Universe
“There is exactly one universe”
does not mean “there is now one universe.” It means something like there was,
is, and will be exactly one universe. That, too, is limited because I am
using a tensed language to refer to something that “contains” time but is not
“in” time – although, of course, phase-epochs of the universe may be in
time The one universe includes the
phase of nothingness Since nothingness is equivalent
to all being; since what is possible will, according to that equivalence,
manifest; the one universe includes all possibilities. That inclusion is not
in temporal sequence but is outside of time, i.e. it is outside of the kind
of linear universal-like time of our phase-epoch. Again, since the universe
includes all possibilities, it includes nothingness. One of the reasons for
stressing this is that the idea that the universe includes all possibilities
which equals all actual phase-epochs [again not in time] is not an
idea of a mere collection but one with logical coherence and with positive
implications some of which are derived or explained and used in the
conceptual system of Journey in Being A generic argument concerns what
would otherwise be a case of inductive generalization. If, from the presence
of mind in this universe, we were to extrapolate the presence of mind either
in all universes or some other universes, that would be only a possibility;
if we could then argue that mind is unlikely it would then follow that mind
would be likely in some other universes; or if there were an infinity of
universes we might argue that it is certain that there will be mind in some
other universes – in an infinite number of trials a small probability amounts
to certainty. However, this approach is unnecessary and in that it
misunderstands the nature of the universe it is less than illuminating. Since
there is mind in the one universe, mind is necessary – this argument was
originally made in Regarding
the Existence of Consciousness and Presence 1.2.3
Regarding “Something
from Nothing”
“Why is there something rather
than nothing?” has been called the fundamental problem of metaphysics. The
conclusions of Metaphysics
show that this should not be the fundamental problem – that it is trivial.
Rather, the fundamental problem should be “Why is there presence?” meaning
why is there sentience, i.e. “Why is the universe present to itself?” Or,
“Why, through the existence of sentient beings, is the universe aware of
itself?” or, simply, “Why is there awareness or consciousness?” Consider, then, that there is
“something” and that there is exactly one universe. Suppose we want to build
a theory regarding the necessity of “something.” The theory regards the one
universe and the data point regards one universe. So the theory says every
universe has something – except in the phase of nothingness. However, we have
seen that since nothingness is not just the absence of things but also of
space-time-cause-law, what is possible is also necessary. Therefore, if there
“is” nothingness: there “will be” something. Conclude: there always “is” or
“will be” something. In a sense, the question “why is there something rather
than nothing” had meaning when it was first asked but our reflections and
arguments have rendered it meaningless 1.2.4
Regarding the Existence of Consciousness and Presence
The argument to the necessity of
consciousness or presence is exactly the same as that of the previous section
with “something” replaced by “consciousness” or by “presence.” And,
similarly, the questions “Why is there consciousness?” or “Why is there presence?”
have been rendered meaningless 1.2.5
Principle of Connection
The foregoing arguments are of
the following form: The local is present in the
universal; this connects the universal and the local 1.2.6
Becoming
Although genesis occurs over
time, the understanding that comes from the history and principles of genesis
includes timeless elements The following principles provide
understanding Nothingness is Equivalent to All
Being - see The
Principle of Being Variation and selection;
“usually” but not restrictively incremental Recursion Symmetry and the breaking of
symmetry, especially near symmetry Quantum theory And, for life as we know it Evolution: the history of
evolution and the theory of evolution including the roles of variation and
selection Reproduction; combination and
recombination including sex For thought – used in a
generalized sense to include all functioning of mind Thought Action 1.2.7
Kinds of Process and
Cause
Indeterminism – absence of universal
determinism, universal causation, universal mechanism or universal design.
The following exist in phases Deterministic process Causality Mechanistic Teleologic 1.2.8
Co-origins of Being, Causation, Dynamics and Time
Time and process are inherent in
“origins” but not necessarily the coordinated time of our phase-epoch of the
universe One way for being and dynamics
to have co-origin is – noting the co-origin of structure and change i.e. of
being-form and being-process – is if: The Process of Dynamics ş the Processes of Creation This might occur in the
following way: 1. Some spontaneous eruptions from
nothingness are stable
or near stable; stability requires a structure and thus those eruptions that
are candidates for stability are those where there are elementary eruptions
in relationship or the eruption is non-elementary Those eruptions that are far
from stable go back to nothingness Those that are absolutely stable
are “frozen.” Absolute stability is extremely less likely [probability = 0]
than the near stable; further the absolutely stable eruptions would not be
regenerating 2. Therefore, original creation
from nothingness effectively occurs when near-stable arrangements of
primitive “elements” are randomly generated The near-stable structures are,
from considerations of equilibrium, near-symmetric Absolutely stable structures are
perfectly symmetric while the unstable structures are far from symmetric Group-theory is one algebraic
structure that lends itself to the study and descriptive elaboration of
stability. What other algebras yield similar study? What perturbations of
these algebras are suited to the description of near-symmetry? Would these
algebras be discrete, continuous or both? In what dynamics may the algebraic
structures be embedded? 3. Each non-elementary eruption has
a time associated with it; here, time is used in reference to
being-in or being-with time and not an assigned value such as 12 AM, January
1, 2000 or a linear continuum of such values, i.e. here, time is the concept.
The times of different eruptions “are” different except by chance; without
common origin or common dynamics there is no meaning to common time. The
“time” is essentially due to the process within the eruption that is a
continuation of the occurrence of the eruption. Process, therefore time, is
not possible without structure; and the origin and sustenance of structure is
not possible without process or time. Therefore, for process and form, there
are – can be – no elementary particles: each particle must be constituted of
sub-particles. One seeming way out of this infinity is if the eruptions occur
“in” or as a continuum. Every parcel of the continuum has variation within it
and this variation is the structure. In this case a particle is a
concentration or a singularity – a discontinuity or infinity; and it is
possible that the description based on singularities is approximate but computationally
simpler than that based on the full continuum description The eruptions of item 1 above
may be the eruptions of a non-uniform continuum As we normally perceive things,
objects exist in space; however the idea that objects exist in space is a
metaphor based on intuition. In fact space is a mode of description of the
separation and distinctness among particles. At the stage of spontaneous
eruption and dissolution, “space” is fragmented as is “time.” Such
fragmentation may exist beyond the creation and be always present; if present
at a microscopic level they may, for some purposes, be invisible at
macroscopic levels The existence of a continuum or
manifold will explain that interactions have some “speed of propagation.” The
coordination of clock times is not automatically given; any coordination of
process requires dynamic interaction among separate parts of matter;
therefore, common time, space and speed of propagation is not possible among
different transient eruptions 4. Initially, at least, there would
be inherent “mechanisms” for seeding – generating large numbers of basic structures or
elementary particles – and variety sufficient to the universe or a
phase-epoch thereof By the processes described
above, and by seeding there would be large numbers of each of a number of
elementary particles; the “efficiency” of seeding, once begun, explains the
presence of large numbers of identical particles from among a few basic
types… and homogeneity of a phase-epoch of the universe The “process rate” of these
structures would be identical or sufficiently close to be practically
identical; this would result in universal time and the possibility of clocks The presence of large numbers of
singularities and the presence of “shear” [motion] in the continuum would
result in different processing rates. However, since the shift in rate would
be a function of the density of singularities and shear, the actual process
rate would be the universal rate “multiplied by a shift factor.” This is a
kind of universal time which applies only after seeding and not in infinitely
larger case of nothingness in spontaneous eruption / dissolution Relative to the situation before
the seeding, we can see how the phrases “origin of time” and “origin of
space” make sense. Before the seed, there are many times and spaces all
transient; after the seed there is or may be, at least in a phase-epoch of
the universe, “one time and space” and this is in a state of coordination The interaction of process and
structure may explain the dynamic relation among matter, space and time.
After the seed, there may be a single, universal [local to an phase-epoch]
space-time-matter This universal time and space
[limited of course to the phase-epoch] does not continue down to the
microscopic level since, by the arguments, it depends on that level; thus at
the micro-level space and time remain fragmented. “Universal” time does not
imply numerical identity of the intrinsic process of the elements of matter
or simple 1:1 correlation among clocks 5. After the seeding, it is still possible for other
phase-epochs to evolve in the vicinity of a given phase-epoch. This is
improbable though not impossible… In the previous paragraph,
nothing is implied about the genesis and trajectories of other phase-epochs.
Our phase-epoch, what we sometimes call The Universe, is a speck compared to
the universe – what is sometimes called the multiverse. In the universe – in
the encompassing sense of my use – there are always phase-epochs – we might
call them miniverses – originating, dying and there must be an infinity of
them The present phase-epoch – any
given phase-epoch – may evolve; or there may be multiple seeds In this way, even in the
semi-causal phase-epochs of the universe, there may be multiple times,
multiple spaces, multiple speeds of propagation of interaction But, in a given phase-epoch,
there may be one macroscopic time, one macroscopic space and one macroscopic
speed of propagation of interactions – the “speed of light” In that nothingness is
equivalent to all being and all possibilities are realized it follows that
from any state, nothingness will be realized and all states will be realized15. What, then, is the point to
talking of specific processes and states? Once the trajectory of history has
begun, except for staggeringly improbable fluctuations of various kinds and
the not so improbable possibility of intersection with other phase-epochs, it
continues within certain confines that beings within that trajectory
experience as their history, as causality [quasi], determinism [macro-level,
partially], as the necessities of their world, their [phase-epoch of the]
universe From
the previous paragraphs we may say, metaphorically, that time closes upon
itself, returns to zero. What is the significance? Can history be changed?
No, history is not changed. It is not clear that history has significance
from the perspective of the one infinite universe. However, at least
metaphorically, we may say history begins again or, from indeterminism,
history begins afresh… In virtue of the infinite historical possibility
“starting from nothingness,” the metaphor of thinking that [the same] history
begins again is limited. Consider the extremes: a world in which finite
beings live and die without a memory before birth or that continues beyond
death; and extinction of all being, knowledge and memory in the phase
of nothingness. Between the two memory-less extremes, there is the following
possibility: the emergence of being that encompasses more than one individual
– e.g. as experienced by individuals limited by birth, death and their
immediate existence – and so contains awareness from one being to another or
from one life to another; since this is possible, it is also necessary These
considerations show the identity of two identical individuals in different
places and times to be connected since the identities of all individuals are
connected 6. Certain dynamics would be
selected out.
Zero order “dynamics” would be static and therefore absolutely stable
– there would be no becoming or evolution at all! Second order dynamics seems
adequate to the variety of everyday – e.g. deterministic and causal
phase-epochs; force and mass – processes of this world; first order dynamics
is inadequate. Why, when or how would second order dynamics be generated and
selected. Reflection on the origin of force and mass and other aspects
phase-epochs of the universe similar to ours is needed; reflection on other /
higher order dynamics is needed 7. In this way it can be seen how
the following originate: Quasi-causal
and quasi-deterministic dynamics; these are continuations of the original
myriad ever present eruptions from nothingness to beyond the seeding of a
phase-epoch of the universe Quantum
type dynamics. The word “type” is used because, clearly, the foregoing will
not necessarily set quantum mechanics; and, certainly, it will not set our
universe as it is. However, since there is only one universe and by
equivalence to nothingness it is equivalent – must contain – all possible
universes, the foregoing may set the universal mechanics which will reduce in
special circumstances to quantum mechanics. Note that quantum theory is
neither deterministic nor fully causal but is capable of yielding phase-epochs
of structure, determinism and causation Additionally,
the discussion provides for the original interaction between the basic
processes [indeterministic, a-causal] and relationships [process, structure
or space-time] and, thus, in an phase-epoch of the universe of integration of
quantum, space-time-matter phenomena 8. Mind: considerations on the origin
of “subjective experience.” Given the argument on the equivalence of
nothingness to [all] being, there is no necessity for subjective experience or
even the elements of subjective experience to be present at the same time as
the origin of “matter.” In principle, of course, from the equivalence, the
primitive elements of experience are present; but this is not dynamic or
explanatory; the primitive elements of experience need not be present16. However, practically, given
that the original elements rapidly form and stabilize in explanation of the
origin of our phase-epoch, it follows that the primitive elements of experience
are likely present near origins. Rationally and practically, however, it is
not impossible that further elements necessary for experience originate and
are selected later. Similar comments apply to life and this puts me in the
uncomfortable position of seeming that I am a vitalist. However, I am not an
essential vitalist or an essential “mentalist” or, as I reflect, an essential
materialist. However, I am not an anti-essentialist with regard to vitalism,
mentalism or materialism. While I agree that the modern science relegates
vitalism to the scrap books of history, I am not against the possibility that
some new evidence or conceptual analysis should resuscitate vital elements.
If that happens, I expect that it will occur in the following way: the understanding
of mind or of life will not require some new substance but, rather, will shed
light on the nature of matter Time
/ mind: above, I discussed fundamental time. A variety of conceptual times
[physical and psychological] may be introduced with application that is local
in terms of place, kind of phenomenon, and kind of understanding. However,
all such times are founded in fundamental time. As noted, fundamental time is
not effectively a single time; but in some phase-epochs of the universe [that
may, in everyday use, be referred to as a universe or the universe] there may
be, effectively for some purposes, a single time. In the latter case, all
specialized times are based in, measured or driven by fundamental time; and
thus, in the given case of a specific phase-epoch and the restricted
purposes, there is effectively one time Note:
I have long maintained and written elsewhere that materialism or physicalism,
for example, is not a definite philosophical position. To be a definite
position, the elements of being would have to be reducible to the physics of
the current era. This but this would mean that the materialism of today is
quite a different position than the materialism of the era of classical
physics or of antiquity. Further, it is quite possible that at some future
point there will be no distinction between materialism and mentalism 1.2.9 Reflections on the Approach to
Co-Origins
The
purpose, here, is to provide a set of descriptive principles adequate to
explain the origin, evolution and variety of the universe; repeated
application will show deficiencies, redundancies and hone the set of
principles The
paradigm, variation and selection, may be applied to the origin of the
present phase-epoch of the universe from nothingness, to evolution of
physical sub-universes, to the phase-epoch of the universe as we know it, to
planetary systems, to life… Further, we have seen that in the one universe,
all possibilities “are” actualized; all forms within LOGOS are realized; further,
variation and selection is the efficient but not necessary “mechanism” of
selection – mechanism is not necessary. This could be called The Principle
of Becoming So, the essential elements of the approach are The Principles of
Identity and of Becoming. The actual execution was guided by the quantum and
the relativity theories and an understanding of mind Thought
and action follow the universal paradigm – variation and selection – for
change and with elaboration include hypothesis and test, the scientific
method or approach, the Socratic Method or approach 1.2.10 Structure
The
following additional principles provide understanding Symmetry
and Equilibrium 1.2.11 Anthropic Principles as Examples of the
Transcendental Method
The
anthropic principles are made trivial by the transcendental method applied to
the void or nothingness… to something Quoting
from Barrow and Tipler17 “The Weak Anthropic Principle:
The observed values of all physical and cosmological qualities are not
equally probable but they take on values restricted by the requirement that
there exist sites where carbon-based life can evolve and that the Universe
be old enough for it to have already done so” I.e. there are many phase-epochs
in which the relative probability of supporting life of our kind would be
very small “The Strong Anthropic Principle:
The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it
at some stage in its history” In these quotations, Universe is
used in the sense of phase-epoch The Universe does have those
properties and, since there is only one universe, to say that it must allow
life to develop has no meaning. However, it is false that every phase-epoch
has those properties. And, by the logic developed earlier, there must be
other phase-epochs where our kind of life develops. The foregoing statement
is imprecise in that the universe is not in time; if we view the universe as
a space-time manifold – it will not be connected and though phase-epochs may
have a single dominant time, the universe itself will not – we could say of
that manifold that there are infinitely many phase-epochs that have, not only
our kind of life, but also circumstances infinitesimally close to if not
exactly the same as ours. What is the fraction of phase epochs that have life
at some point in their history? The answer is not known – rather, I should
say that I do not know and not because someone else does but because I do not
know of anyone who is thinking along the present lines of thought. I would
speculate that the fraction is small but all that I can currently say with
any degree of confidence is that it is not 0 or 1 1.2.12 Systematic Metaphysics
The nature and possibility of
systematic metaphysics Different concepts of systematic
metaphysics; the classical concept that culminated with Hegel; analytic /
iterative approach; ground to all being: foundation in nothingness – see Argument
in metaphysics The metaphysics of presence and
the generation of all possibilities from nothingness Minimal metaphysics;
construction and equivalence of systems; specifications that imply and
specifications that may be required by non-equivalence of alternate systems;
families of metaphysics Metaphysics is not itself the
realization of being. A complete metaphysics would not be the realization of
ultimate being. Metaphysics shows what is possible and illuminates the way.
The way itself is taken up in detail and actuality in Experiments in the Transformation of Being 1.2.13 Language, Words and Metaphysics
The meaning of any word depends
on the context. The total context is specified by the metaphysical world view
that may be fully implicit but will usually contain both explicit and implicit
elements in interaction. Metaphysics, on a standard view of progress, is
never complete. In general, therefore, on that view, the meaning of words is
never finally given regardless of rigor and precision These themes are elaborated,
especially, in Language, Words and Metaphysics
which also includes a system of words 1.2.14
Metaphysics / Action
The connection between
metaphysics and action intended here is as follows It is not that there is an
epistemic need to act in order to test the claims of metaphysics or an
ethical imperative to act upon one’s beliefs or knowledge so as to act
properly i.e. in the right way. There is value to the idea of a
discipline “pure metaphysics.” Further, while action may be a part of
evaluation – useful or essential – and while action may be right, even
imperative, this is not what is at issue in this discussion of metaphysics
and action In origins thought / knowledge
and action are fundamentally connected. There is a ground level of becoming
[evolution] at which thought and action are action – in analogy to there
being a level at which gene and organism are identical or, at least, of the
same stuff. The precursor of thought is a simple change in the structure of
the organism. Much later, primitive thought is dream or hallucination-like18; originally, it is likely that
there was no distinction between ‘dreaming’ and ‘thinking.’ Later, still the
organism gained control over “recalled” images; though proper began. However,
like pure action all thought is hypothetical. It is efficient for thought and
action to separate for a period of time; this is the point to planning and to
the institution of knowledge. Thus is built the universe of knowledge and
the, in some ways illusory, notion of a realm of pure thought and knowledge…
but the open loop is always poised for closure; and under the bright light is
the diffuse continuum where awareness and being merge. At ground level,
knowledge and action are inseparable in their nature; it is the organism or
society that dies for the idea The
“loop” is never cut. Metaphysics can be done but not completed without
action. Completing metaphysics, as far as that is possible – and by the Principle
of Being it is possible, requires action. [In a hypothetical realm in
which being is pure thought, all is thought but, equally, all is action] A formal [post-intuitive]
approach may allow a universal metaphysics How
universal? If there is a ground to all being, there is then the possibility
to an end to all explanation. In Cosmology_Cosmology_1, I argue for a ground for all
being and thus a metaphysics that is unconditionally universal This
union of knowledge and action thus far considered is in concept but not in
fact; the metaphysics remains formal; it is not embodied, as is metaphysics
such as Kant’s that is based in intuition. The metaphysics, though true, lacks
full significance for the organism; the being is not fully satisfied,
emotional satisfaction, for example, is derivative. The being is little
changed by the metaphysics Is
there an ultimate way of being and acting that is open to the
individual? This is the content of a metaphysics through being and action. It
is not just a metaphysics of the ultimate – the phrase is redundant but
allowable – but ultimate metaphysics. It begins through knowledge, but it
takes over the whole being. What are its ways? This is the content of the
current division on Metaphysics or Knowledge and Action, and Experiments in Transformation
of the Being. It includes experiment with
the being of the individual – the absence of ultimate criteria for knowledge
implies that actions and assertions and may and sometimes must be simply
imperative; this is based in the lack of ontological alternatives, is not
an epistemological limit. What are the limits of being? Is realization of the
ultimate possible – it must be for it is not any theoretical ultimate of
which we talk but of the ultimate real; and therefore the nature of this
ultimate if a question is an open one; and is it open to the individual or
will it require some evolution of some species? Being
does not live by the products of culture alone The
distinction between the concept of knowledge / metaphysics as pure discipline
and as action-discipline or action-cognition is fundamental to the future of
[human] evolution. However, irrevocable choice among alternatives is not
necessary since metaphysics as pure discipline is a part of metaphysics /
action 1.3
Mind
1.3.1.1
What is Mind?
What
is mind and what is its essence or essential characteristic – and is there
such a characteristic19? Mind appears to be intangible;
mind is often spoken of as though it is something definite even if / though
we do not know precisely what it is. However, is mind given a priori as
concept or object; and is there any gain in a restriction to or aiming toward
a specific concept [characteristic or set of characteristics] and object? There
is, for example, a point of view in which mind is distributed throughout the
body and the common experience of mind that is located, at least primarily,
in the brain is the dominant aspect of mind, the most immediate in
virtue of the brightness of its consciousness; and there is an extension of
this point of view in which mind is everywhere [this is not the same as
saying that it is everything.] Such points of view will not be adopted here a
priori – see Unconscious Mental Processes for a hypothetical point of
view. However, there will be no a priori specification of what mind is, of an
essential characteristic or a set of characteristics. Given the history of
the study of mind, it appears that mind is a slack concept; i.e. there
may be no gain in reality or in function from a precise specification – and
this is precisely because there may be no reality to a precise specification.
I.e., there is no reality in a precise boundary between mind and not-mind;
and there is no real clarity to having a single precise characteristic or set
of characteristics that define mind. This ties in with the considerations in Mind / body The
claim that mind is a slack concept will be further elaborated and justified
in what follows. The concepts of the functions – the classical functions are
cognition, emotion and drive – also have slack; this, too, will be justified
even though, in principle, whereas mind is not limited to the known forms
i.e. life20 on earth, the classical
functions, especially emotion and drive, may be much more specific in the
range of their occurrence. However, it appears probable that any sufficiently
complex life form that is adapted to a limited environment will have some
kind of cognition and something like emotion; a justification of this claim
may be based in the concept of bound and free functions or elements defined
in what follows As
discussed in Existence, matter is also a slack concept
despite the seeming definiteness and concreteness However,
discussion of mind must start at some place; and the discussion itself, if it
is to be as fruitful as possible, should be as precise as the circumstances
permit 1.3.1.2
The Fundamental Role of Experience or Feeling
“Experience”
has more than one meaning but it is being used, here, to refer to
subjectivity, to being aware, to consciousness, to phenomenality, to having feeling.
A rose would reflect light of a certain wavelength and an organism might receive
and react to the light but it is in experience that the rose is red.
Without experience there might be reference but not sense – if reference and
sense could be separate e.g. if the relation between sense and reference is
unlike the relation between the effect of an electron on a proton and
perturbation of the electron whose manifestation is the emanation of the
effect. An individual would only behave as though his or her life
mattered. It is in experience that one has the feeling of being alive,
that life has meaning or is absurd. Through experience we are present to the
universe and, through life, at least, the universe is present to itself. It
is through feeling that I can be in love, enjoy a sunset, thrill to a storm
and not merely behave as though I am in love or having enjoyment or thrill.
Without experience, it would not have mattered whether I had lived; and it is
the experience of anticipation of and hope for later experience that is constitutive
of wanting to live Without
experience, there is no presence to, no significance – the universe
“might as well as have not been.” As discussed in Mind / body, this is not reductionist, not
centered on the being of humankind or of life but is a manifestation at a
high level of the relatedness at the root of being, of those entities that we
think of as most material. Being conscious is: being embedded in – separate
from yet one with, part of the fabric of – a universe of presence [Here,
I am pointing to the fundamental role of experience; further elaboration and
foundation will be given later e.g. in Mind / body] It
would be myopic to say that experience is definitive of mind or that it is
the essential characteristic but, from the section What is Mind? that is not necessary or
helpful. However, experience is essentially mental and fundamental to life
having quality Self-consciousness
or awareness of awareness is sometimes has been thought to be necessary for
true consciousness21.
The absolute character of such claims or their refutations is not clear.
However, consciousness of consciousness – when consciousness became
self-conscious was a significant turning point in the growth of intelligence,
of design, of acuity of awareness, of presence. Self-consciousness marked the
origin of meaning or – at least – new levels and sharpness to meaning, the
ability to deploy mind and intelligence in new ways; ways that include improved
function and ways, in the human case, that are especially human22 Awareness of awareness
[consciousness of consciousness] is, on some accounts, necessary for language
for higher / abstract concepts and makes it possible, therefore, to have
conceptual knowledge that is expressed in language. Additionally, awareness
of awareness is at least a large part of what makes it possible to have a
concept of and talk about mind. And, through use of language and
communication in heightening understanding and awareness of consciousness, it
may contribute indirectly to the fact that consciousness may seem [to some
writers] as though it is a function of language or of society.
Tautologically, awareness of awareness is necessary to be aware of awareness;
and this may be what makes it seem as though consciousness is an on-off
phenomenon. In elaboration, note that for consciousness to be on-off it is
not sufficient that it be either “zero” or “not zero” but “zero” or “one.”
However, it is possible for consciousness to be “zero” or “not-zero” and for
consciousness of consciousness to be “zero” or “one.” The presence or
possibility of awareness of awareness may be one way to distinguish
simulation of awareness from awareness. Resolution of these issues may
require a unified or analytic theory of experience The dimensions of the mental
have been characterized as experience, attitude and action.
However, real attitude and real action are characterized by the ability to be
conscious about those activities. There is another concept of consciousness,
a-consciousness that is contrasted with phenomenal consciousness.
A-consciousness is awareness – whether phenomenal or not – that is available
for action. It is not clear that the two “concepts of consciousness” are
equivalent but there are arguments to that effect. My view regarding
a-consciousness should be clear from what I have written: a-consciousness is
or may be a useful idea but it is not – and should not be referred to as –
consciousness at all Thus, while it is not taken as
defining mind, experience is at the core of what is considered to be mental;
furthermore, it is a good starting place for an exploration of mind. For
example, it has been said that something that is mental is unconscious only
if it could become conscious. There is merit to this idea and its appeal is
enhanced when it is allowed that, in addition to content, forms of perception
– for example the intuition of space and time – are also in consciousness In the materialist paradigm –
materialism and its various manifestations such as physicalism and
behaviorism – the difficulty of reducing mind to matter i.e. to showing how
mind is a manifestation of material processes makes it difficult to see how a
commonsense belief that mind has effects in the material world could be true.
It has therefore been said that consciousness is epiphenomenal i.e. it is
present along with the phenomena but it has no effect on in the [material]
world. This view called epiphenomenalism. The arguments in Mind /
body
void the kind of radical materialism that is the basis of epiphenomenalism.
There it is shown that mind and body are not distinct objects but different
and complementary ways of talking about the same object As a consequence, it is somewhat
inaccurate to talk of the role of consciousness or experience. In the
material mode of description, it may indeed be felt that mind or awareness
are – as in the popular analogy, like the foam at the crest of the wave –
carried along with but without any effect on matter and its processes. In the
other mode of description, the mental, consciousness is both cause and effect
in relation to the world 1.3.1.3
Unconscious Mental Processes 23
It has been claimed that all
mental processes are either conscious or potentially conscious. If true, this
would make consciousness truly central. Here are some reflections that lend
credence to the thought that all unconscious mental processes are accessible
in consciousness even if not actually accessed The structure of consciousness
includes this: multiple objects of experience with some at the center and
others at the edge or periphery. Alternate metaphors to center / edge are
fore / background and bright / dim Something from the edge may come
to central focus in at least two characteristic ways: change in mindset
that is a part of scanning and heightened stimulus from the periphery.
When something from the periphery enters central focus, I often notice that I
had been aware of it. Events at the periphery stay only in volatile
memory and unless they enter into central focus they are, mostly, never
accessed again by consciousness – with the result there is much actually
conscious processing that is effectively unconscious. This raises a
point about the nature of short term memory – whether it is the weakness of
recording of events or whether, instead, it is the weakness of the associations
that make conscious access improbable; in the latter case, though not
accessed they are not inaccessible and some appropriate stimulus to the
associative complex – an event, a heightened state of awareness e.g.
associative flow, a micro-probe – may bring the weakly associated but not
necessarily weakly recorded event into conscious recollection. And example
might be having a dream, recollecting the details upon awakening, later
experiencing the details as ‘forgotten’ because one remembers the contour of
the dream and the fact that there were details but not the details themselves
and then, even later – perhaps much later, recalling the dream and some of
its ‘forgotten’ details in a dream-like reverie… in a state of relaxed
attention in which stream of awareness is allowed to flow… on the border
between dream-sleep and wakening A second reflection arises in
the case of blindsight which is [may be] a result of brain damage and in
which individuals are able to respond to phenomena in the visual field even
though they report being unaware of the phenomena. Visual stimuli are
apparently transmitted by a second pathway which remains available when the
primary pathway is damaged. A question that arises is whether the result of
the stimulus is truly unconscious or whether the subjective phenomena that
result from the second pathway are not in recognizable form – and therefore
not easily reportable form even if conscious. This argument also has
relevance for the way in which an event at the edge of consciousness enters
the center. To what extent is this due to the event becoming more
recognizable rather than, as it may appear in commonsense, due to entering
the center? Finally, on account of the slack
character of the concept of mind, as discussed above, there is arbitrariness
regarding the boundaries between mind and not-mind. Thus, although certain
autonomic processes are commonly thought of as mental even when not
conscious, it is not necessary – even though it is permissible – to consider
these processes to be mental. Which body processes are mental? Literally,
none are; the mental and material are different modes of description: body
process X is mental is a metaphor for “there is a mental process that is
the necessary descriptive correlate of body process X” In considering unconscious
processes, the idea that experience is fundamental to the concept of mind has
been tightened. Experience is mental and anything that can be accessed in
experience is mental. A material description that is the material side of an
experience or potential experience is mental [the use is metaphorical but
that is not a problem.] Consider a non-conscious process that it is tempting
to call mental. An example would be: reflecting on a problem, setting aside
the problem and, later, after a period of “incubation,” having the sketch of
a solution appear in consciousness. Are all of the processes involved in the
incubation mental? It is certainly tempting to say that they are. However,
that cannot be positively asserted because there is no criterion to do so. It
is because, even though the idea of what is mental has been tightened, the
boundaries have become clearer, they are not yet perfectly clear.
Theoretically, this may be uncomfortable but, as pointed out, there is no reason
for discomfort because the idea of mind as an object with a precise boundary
that is waiting to be discovered is an illusion. Practically, also, there is
no issue because the practical side of the theoretical statement is that the
tools to deal with mind are also limited in precision to a degree that
corresponds to the lack of precision to object boundaries. In an attempt to
achieve clarity, other notions are introduced or have been in the picture
from the beginning of even informal thought about mind – an example is
intensionality. Such ideas are practically useful – at least potentially – as
further clarifying boundaries and providing further understanding but a lack
of final precision regarding boundaries and in the mesh of the different
notions remains and, as noted, this is, from the proper perspective, a good
thing It could be said that the brain
and the mental processes are causally connected but the use of cause here
would be somewhat different than in the sense “the force caused the motion.”
In the latter sense the cause causes the effect. But, in the relation
between brain and mind neither is cause24
and neither is effect; therefore, this variant use of cause might be
confusing. The relation sought is close to identity and identity is thought
to be distinct from cause; but it would just be a variant meaning of cause.
This paragraph might be thought to be an unnecessary diversion; the reason
for its inclusion is that cause has been used in just the sense of brain and
mind as mutually causal [actually, the sense used is of brain causing mind
but I think that mutual causation is more rational] but I am not going to use
cause in this sense [I might do so later] because of the possibility of
confusion Consider the question, “Are
there mental processes in the body?” According to the metaphorical use, the
answer is yes for perception and thought are necessarily connected to certain
brain processes. But, now consider an extremity and ask, “Are there mental
processes in a limb?” Well, there are nerves in limbs so would the
transmission of nerve impulses count as mental? The answer has already been
given, “Affirmation or denial is not significant, but if there are necessary
and identifiable mental correlates of nerve transmission it may be said that
there are mental processes in the limb.” But what of the bodily processes
going on in the limb that are not primarily nerve transmission? In order to
reflect on this consider a lower organism. In anticipation of the discussion
in Mind /
body,
note that there are processes in all organisms that are about the
environment. If not acutely mental in the way bright human consciousness has
it, the aboutness of the lower organism is a primitive of experience; just in
the way that particle interactions are primitives of experience. The
assumption behind this is stated in Mind /
body;
it is that the particle description or suitable generalization is complete
from the material side of description. The light of the “consciousness” in
the limbs pales in comparison to bright human consciousness. This “light” is
separate from nerve transmission and is not in contradiction of the fact that
the brain maps the entire body; it is a separate and local occurrence. Thus
the body can be seen as a distribution of mind in various levels of partial
integration. This entire paragraph may be regarded as metaphorical or as
fantasy but it has a purpose. First, the assertions cannot be logically ruled
out; further, the language is sufficiently general to not be un-real.
Second, the idea of separate centers of mind distributed in the body is not
different from the idea of mind in a lower organism. And, finally, these
thoughts are preliminary to the possible development of a theory, or variants
of a theory, to be taken up as an experiment in Experiments in the Transformation of Being,
which shows how to see and / or obtain the state of being in which, as an
individual is an integration of centers of experience, all centers of
experience in the universe are constituent of single being 1.3.1.4
Unconscious Mental Processes and the
Body
From the previous section it is
concluded that: The interaction or relation
between the [conscious] mind and the body is unconscious to a significant
degree. Further, for many body process that do not correspond to conscious
activity the [metaphorical] label mental is optional. There is a
sense, developed below, in which all body processes may be labeled mental
without loss or gain 1.3.1.5
Mind / language
How are we to talk about mind?
In Symbol
and Language,
especially the section Analytic
or Linguistic Philosophy,
it was noted that the choice of language is important. There, it was shown
how use of the word “mind” encourages thinking about mind as an object that
is distinct from matter; perhaps we should not talk of mind but only of
experience, the functions, and the processes of mind Talk of mind as an object also
encourages the idea of separateness and private experience. See the sections
cited for further discussion. The arguments there do not imply that one can
read another’s mind; rather, it is not necessary to read the minds of others’
– there is a phase of common experience that requires no further analysis.
Thus there are inroads into the idea of absolute boundaries between minds –
just as, below, it is seen that the concept of “object” is an approximation 1.3.1.6
Mind / body
If the fundamental science of
matter – physics – were sufficiently complete that a description of objects /
bodies as physical objects would determine all mental aspects of the object in
question, an explanation of the manifestation of mind in matter might go as
in the following It would not be necessary to
explain the phenomenon of behavior which is the description of the organism
as a material entity. This is not to say that the details of behavior would
not be part of a scientific enterprise; the explanation would likely not be
directly from the atomic level but indirectly through intermediate levels of
detail What is necessary is an
explanation of conscious experience. The explanation is, in principle,
simple. From the assumption of the sufficient completeness of physics,
experience must follow from the particle level. Experience has the
characteristic of being about something– the about-ness is also called
intensionality; in the case of attitude it is about the world and for action
it is about the action of the organism; and in the case of pure experience
which does not seem to necessarily be about anything we can say,
metaphorically, that the mind is idling while being potentially about
something, ready to be about something, processing in a way that gives it the
potential to be about something. Particles have interactions. The interaction
emanates [literally in the quantum theory] from the particle. In the complex
organization of the organism the combination of the many interactions,
including feedback, results in the about-ness just discussed. Arguing in the
reverse direction from mind to particle, the interaction is the low level
phenomenon that at the high level is experience. It is quite possible that
although I am taking the particle-field literally, the application to the
discussion of mind should be metaphorical Thus the elements of mind are
present at the particle level. This is not pan-psychism which says that mind
itself pervades all being. It is not being said that the particles do or do
not have experience; rather it may be said that they have the precursors to
experience The position may be put in
another way. The distinctions mind / body or mind / matter as a distinction
between distinct objects or substances are false distinctions. The
distinction does not exist. Rather mind / matter are different modes of
description of the same object; in the material mode one describes a
trajectory, in the subjective mental mode one is describing interaction at a
high level of organization. Mind / matter are complementary modes of
description of the same object which is the being-in-the-world If / when physics is
sufficiently complete it will be a science of mind as much as of matter; not
because mind is reduced to matter but because the elements of mind and of
matter are not ultimately distinct Is current physics sufficiently
complete in the sense used above? Here are some ways in which physics may be
incomplete. Referring forward to Cosmology_Cosmology_1,
the universe may be irreducible to elementary particles and fields; it may be
that as a result of the seeding process described there, that the present
phase-epoch of the universe is atomistic whereas the entire universe is not.
In that case, mind may be fundamentally something that is, though contained
in ultimate physics, not reducible to atomistic terms. However, it appears
reasonable though not certain that mind as it is known to us [human mind,
animal mind] is an expression of atomistic physics – even if current physics
is not quite up to the task perhaps some modification of it that retains the
particle / field description will complete the task. In that case we could
talk of mind at two levels, the higher level as manifested and as experienced
by animals and the elementary level as the elementary material interactions.
This is not problematic so long as the two levels are not confused.
Especially, the low level interactions should not be thought to have high
level properties – it should not be thought that electrons are conscious in
the way that animals experience consciousness and so on. It is convenient to
talk of mind; however, such talk is metaphorical for it is not known that
there is anything better than the mental mode and the material modes of
description. The metaphor may be used as long as it does not lead to error.
Consider some material phenomenon that appears to be a borderline case of
animal mind; by this I mean high level mind and this is the sense in use for
the remainder of this paragraph. An example is the functioning of the
autonomic nervous system. Another example is the process of perception; light
from an object strikes the retina and nerve impulses travel the optic nerve
and are then processed and the animal “sees” the object. The seeing is
clearly mental; but at what stage of the processing, starting with the
photochemical processes in the retina does the material processing become
[also] mental? Well, literally, the material processing is never mental
because the mental is a way of description as is the material. Where – at
what stage, in the metaphorical language, does the material processing become
mental? Or, literally at what stage is a mental description possible? We have
seen that there is an indefiniteness to the answer and that, theoretically,
the indefiniteness is good while, practically it reflects that even if the
instruments of understanding are capable of precision, actual practice does
not exceed the actual precision. This, too, is a good thing: to the extent
that the world is not “tight” as in fantasies of precision, the acknowledged
lack of precision is most realistic; and to the extent that practice falls
short of reality, the path of understanding remains and is acknowledged as
open The discussion of this section
is a resolution of the mind-body problem which does not explain away the idea
of mind and which, in a c. 2000 version is sometimes referred to the
explanatory gap between mind and body and in one specialized version “the
hard problem of consciousness.” The other mind-body problem, that of
the relationships between the structure and function of mind and the
structure and function of the body, remains as a project in psychology and
science. Psychology, the study of the structure and function of mind in
itself, a project in its own right, is a prerequisite to the scientific
aspect of the mind-body problem; see Mind
and subsequent sections. There is a common distinction,
approximately c. 1800 – c. 2000, between the phenomenal or experiential and
the psychological concepts of mind; the latter concept is variously described
as the study of behavior and is about mind, if at all, only in so far as
there is an internal basis of behavior; and as the study of the
representation and processing of information by the organism. Here, while
there are clearly two sides to psychology, I do not make, use or need the
distinction or think that there is any value to a rigid compartmentalization;
and, further, I do not use the term “psychology” much 1.3.1.7
Mind / body: summary and consolidation
of philosophical conclusions
As concepts, mind and matter are
not definite This is true, and the learning
that follows from it, next, and intertransformability and inversion of
meaning of ontologies by, e.g., minor change in wording or shift in emphasis
or interpretation from, e.g., the objective to subjective side of experience
applies, generally speaking, to all of categorial ontology Essentially “mind,” “matter”
refer to distinct modes of description of the same object that become
reified; such reification is permissible when it does not result in error,
primarily – as in Cartesianism – thinking that reference is always to
distinct objects This leads to resolution of the
mind-body problem: mind-as-we-experience-it and matter [the latest version]
do not refer to distinct objects; and at root, elementary mind and elementary
matter are the same mode of description… with a distinction at that
level encouraged by thinking, for example, of matter as essentially comprised
of particles and omitting interactions as essential Lingering doubt may remain about
the mind-body problem. How can matter that has no mental properties manifest
as mind? It has been shown that matter does not have no mental properties
since, at the elementary level, the two modes of description are the same
mode. The problem may sometimes be posed, “there is nothing in physics that
refers to mind so I do not see how physics could give rise to my
consciousness.” There are a number of errors in this formulation. First,
matter does not give rise to consciousness in the sense of consciousness
being something over and above matter. Second, this statement of the problem
includes the problem as stated in the second sentence of this paragraph and
has the same resolution as the earlier statement. Finally, physics does not
give rise to or manifest as anything mental: it is matter that plays that
role while physical theories may result in mental explanation. This point is
not part of the resolution of the mind-body problem; rather I bring it up as
one way in which the mind-body gap may appear to be inflated: it seems to me
that sometimes the transition between description in material terms and
description in mental terms is sometimes inflated to a gap between material
description and mental actuality as in, “How can physical explanation give
rise to my consciousness.” This is analogous to the fact that while water
molecules in interaction manifest in the wetness of water while physics
provides an explanation of wetness but not the wetness itself In consequence of these
arguments, it appears that the terms “mind” and “matter” are sufficient to
the issues at hand and introduction of some additional concept or substance
is unnecessary [the possibility of a third substance was entertained in the Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness;
the present considerations, consolidated in Journey
in Being: Foundation,
show a new substance to be unnecessary] 1.3.1.8
Mind / body in science
The study of mind as such and of
its functions is intrinsically important and is not supplanted by the
material level. Generally, all levels and modes of study are independently
significant and mutually informing The following are valid objects
of study: mind and its elements and functions; brain anatomy at various
levels of detail including biochemistry, cellular and the organs and their
integration; various matter levels – molecular and quantum theoretic… the
co-existence of structure and indeterminism in quantum theory is one reason
for its significance in study of mind 1.3.1.9
Noumenon and Phenomenon
The argument provides one
approach to the issue of the divide between the appearance and the
thing-in-itself The phenomena are
[manifestations of] relationships But, the relationships are
things-in-themselves It is true that the perceived
object is not the thing-in-itself but it is so close as to suggest that a
reconceptualization of the noumenon can render it in perception. An argument
along the lines, “Perception is a phase of the mutually sustaining elements
of world,” is conceivable 1.3.1.10 Origins of Ideas
What is the origin of a new
idea? How does that come about? It will be useful to give an outline
explanation based on the mind / body discussion The explanation follows the
general pattern of the origin of what is essentially new in Becoming Perhaps most ideas are
combinations of old ideas. However, on account of the large number of simple
ideas, mechanical recombination would be an impossible approach to novel
combinations. Additionally, there must be essentially new ideas. This follows
since at the time of the origin of the earth there were no ideas – on earth –
at all. The mechanism of essentially new ideas is similar to the mechanism of
novel combinations. The fundamental particle processes are not deterministic.
It is possible that mind has evolved so that its processes include capture
and magnification of primitive indeterministic events and / or
indeterministic events at higher, say cellular, levels and / or perhaps even
levels up to that of the body [brain] as a whole. Such events enter the
general processing of mind and generate elements of new ideas which are then
selected for in various ways and at various levels The discussion requires
elaboration but is correct in principle The discussion shows the one
reason for the attractiveness of quantum over classical physics in the understanding
of mental processes; and by the same reasoning the attractiveness of quantum
physics in understanding the origins of, at least, the present phase-epoch of
the universe and of life. Of course, the quantum or similar theory will be
one element in the understanding and will not replace cosmology and biology A standard argument against the
generation of new structure by indeterministic processes: randomness can not
lead to structure. The response is that randomness does not lead to structure
by itself. Indeterministic process is change and those changes that lead to
stable structures are selected In the case of biological
evolution, large scale change is brought about incrementally and it is this
that makes change possible. It might still be argued that the outcome
of evolution is unlikely; however, the outcome is not given in advance and it
is only from the original perspective that the outcome is unlikely. However,
given incremental process of variation and selection, while any particular
structure is unlikely the outcome of some structure is not unlikely In the case of knowledge the
outcome is not unlikely because the process of knowledge is guided by reality 1.3.2
Characterization of Mind25
This is a continuation of Mind
and is in a separate section to allow elaboration 1.3.2.1
Purpose of this Section
It is not the initial purpose,
in writing down a set of characteristics, to be definitive or final. The
description of each characteristic and the related analysis and observation
are part of an exploration and the set of characteristics are part of an
in-process and, therefore, indefinite and incomplete geography26 of mind. The process is an interaction
between the individual characteristics, the geography and the in-process conceptualizations of mind 1.3.2.2
A Set of Mental Axes
As
noted earlier, the dimensions of the mental have been characterized as a set
of mental axes: experience, attitude – which includes
intensionality – and action. This set of axes is fundamental in that
[1] it includes subjective and objective aspects – see What is Knowledge; experience is the subjective
side and [2] the objective side is rationally divided as the perceptive,
knowing aspect or attitude and the aspect of affecting the world i.e.
action or agency. These two aspects of the objective side are bound together
in the [helical] interaction that constitutes intelligent being and
intelligent action. The fundamental nature of experience was seen above where
it was noted that experience / attitude-action are not distinct but are
different modes of description of the same object which is the
being-in-the-world 1.3.2.3 Mind / Being
From
the discussion of mental axes, a fundamental description of mind can be given
by understanding its place in being or, more accurately, in
being-in-the-world. We might imagine a separation into being / in-the-world.
The being “side” then corresponds to experience and the “in-the-world” side
to presence and participation i.e. attitude and action. As we have seen,
presence and participation are bound together – in fact, my use of presence
elsewhere implicitly includes participation; and the “being” and
“in-the-world” sides are distinct modes of description of the same “object.”
Experience colors presence and participation; and experience by itself – pure
experience – is an aspect of being at rest, only immediately separated but
not potentially separate from the world. Further, as noted earlier, although
not all cases of pure experience are immediately or actually functional the ability
to have pure experience is materially functional – apart from its role in
regeneration and making possible or, at least enriching an inner life. The
source of material or in-the-world functionality is the role in creation and
imagination that is also enriching 1.3.2.4 Key Characterizations
Subjectivity – having experience, conscious awareness, being present Intensionality – being about the world – this follows from function i.e.
adaptation Adaptability – this may be called an internalization of the processes of
evolution Intelligence, especially formal-symbolic and intuitive
intelligence i.e. mind is a priori / through evolution and a posteriori /
through learning, attuned to certain forms of the world: causality,
continuity, objecthood, time-space, identity of the self Does
the world imprint the mind or does the mind project structure to the world?
Both – the intuition has a priori and a posteriori aspects. Importantly, both
aspects are incomplete, approximate; this is to be expected since both aspects
are based in a limited environment and system of phenomena. Thus intuition
embeds the organism in the world; but not perfectly – just adequately. The
formal or symbolic is able to overcome the limits of intuition – the degree
to which this is possible is open – but, apparently, at a cost: loss of
embedding in the world… it is the story of the forbidden fruit. However, the
symbol is, also, an intuitive capability though at a simpler level 1.3.2.5 Relation to Environment
This
topic occurs earlier through various discussions and through the words:
attitude / intensionality and action, subject / object, adaptation Here,
I want to point out that evolution may be thought of as internalization of
the environment in the organism; replication is a key element in the origin
and the expression of this internalization. Mind, intelligence may be seen as
the internalization of presence and adaptability itself i.e. mind includes
adaptability which is the internalization or adaptation of adaptation. The
process is variation and selection; however, the presence of levels of mind
above the most primitive also conditions the direction of evolution; and
makes it possible for the intelligence of the organism – with anticipation of
experience constituting motivation – to affect its own evolution. It would be
an overstatement to say, in the case of human beings and human society, that
the organism designs its evolution but it is true to say that design becomes
an element in the processes of variation and selection 1.3.2.6 Creation
The
creation of new knowledge: internalization and elaboration of the
creative element of evolution [see Becoming]… and, consequently, creation
and construction of being… through the classic process of variation from
given structure [including the indeterministic, unpredictable element] and
selection and, through repetition, building structure upon structure, and,
so, knowledge upon knowledge and being upon being 1.3.2.7 A Unified Theory of the Functions of
Mind
This
section was originally titled A Unified Theory of the Faculties of Mind
but was changed because “faculties” has the connotation of hermetic
compartments or special organs for each faculty or function such as emotion,
perception and so on The
topic is generalized and taken up next 1.3.3
Dimensions of Mind / Being: Introduction
1.3.3.1
Indefiniteness of Concepts
In
the forward motion of understanding, many ideas may require revision. When
focusing on one idea, it is easy to revert to old habits in relation to
others. Therefore, it will be useful to remember the earlier discussions
regarding concepts in general and, especially, concepts regarding mind This
discussion on the indefiniteness of concepts does not imply that definiteness
and precision does not exist in specific contexts; and the existence of that
precision is not an a priori sign of completeness or of definiteness as the
context opens up as a result of discovery It
is taken as given, from the discussion of form and process, that there are no
absolute elementary objects [particles.] Therefore, there is an
essential indefiniteness to all objects and, consequently, to concepts.
Examples of such indefiniteness noted earlier include mind and matter. I
noted that the boundary mind / not-mind is indefinite and that this was not
[merely] a case of ignorance but of essential – even desirable, from the
point of view of understanding – indefiniteness Further
indefiniteness arises, especially for compound objects or systems, since
object and concept are mutually defining. This includes the case of an
object-concept system where shared boundaries of the constituents are
indefinite. An example that will be used in the development of the dimensions
of mind / being concerns mental functions such as emotion, cognition and
drive27. All that is said in the rest
of this paragraph is approximate but that is inherent in the generic
concept of object-concept; at the same time it is treated, here, as a “toy”
theory that is used primarily to illustrate indefiniteness in concept and
object; the theory is chosen as an example but also because it will be used
later as an approach to a full theory in which, so far as it is possible,
foundation is of concern. An approach to clarification of the mental
functions is to ask whether the functions are interactive combinations of
simpler mental processes and states such as “feeling” which I will use as
follows. I feel simple sadness or joy. Here, simple refers to
the root feeling: even if this is a simplification, the outcome of this
discussion is not affected. I also feel something brush against my
skin. Thus, I am using “feel” to refer to internal and external sensations. I
do not usually say that I feel the color red but, here, I expand the use of
feeling to include all simple sensations – so as to have a single word that
refers to cover all simple internal feelings and external feelings and
sensations; this includes, in their simple form, the emotional feelings –
simple sadness and so on, sensations of body processes and states,
kinesthesia, the “five” senses [five + the senses of heat, cold, pressure,
pain, and equilibrium…] and this implies an extended use for “sensory /
perceptual modalities.” The visual perception of an object is an integrated
combination of a number of primitive feelings: color, extent [size], shape;
and the perception of an object is an integrated combination of the various
perceptual modalities of vision, sound and so on. Simple imagination is
feeling in the absence of an object. The capacity for imagination is the
capacity to have imagination. Imagination occurs through construction and
association [memory.] Thought is imagination – perhaps directed imagination.
Thought is both iconic and symbolic, and includes language that was
originally communicative of simple feeling – probably of more than one kind
e.g. expression, urge to action and so on – but is also capable of being
imagined and thought and thereby gains in power as an expressive,
communicative and constructive instrument. I.e. expressive of experience;
communicative of experience, query, urge to action and so on; and
constructive of representation of the ‘natural’ world and creation of a
cultural world; and then to greater power of experience itself. Language is,
probably, originally contextual; and it is from its contextual nature that
language can be linear and yet powerful; but, in abstraction from context
language derives another power. Thought in language is sometimes experienced,
simply, as language even though it is more accurate to say it is experienced
as an aspect of language. Emotion is a simple feeling such as joy or thrill
or simple sadness whose trajectory continues in interaction with perception
and thought, for which intensity is a significant dimension, and whose
quality is affected by association through memory or through thought with
other emotion [feeling;] thus, emotions can be much more complex than simple
feeling; and even though the formal properties of thought may be considered
in isolation, thought and intensity of feeling do not occur in isolation. A
drive is a feeling or sensation that has a positive / negative polarity and
is associated with knowledge, explicit or tacit, of conditions that alter the
feeling in the direction from negative to positive. Perhaps the definition of
drive could be modified: a continuum of feeling with tacit or explicit
knowledge of the conditions that result in feeling at any point on the
continuum. The object of the drive is normally the presence / absence of a
negative / positive object. Example: for hunger, the positive feeling is
satiation and the positive object is food. Is a drive innate? In so far as
the feeling is not conditioned and the knowledge is not explicit. The natures
of drive and emotion are not perfectly clear – but see the next paragraph. Is
a drive an emotion – is hunger an emotion? No, but there is overlap. What is
the role of concepts in perception? Is thought as characterized, the
integrated combination of simple elements or is it holistic? Is the boundary
between emotion and thought sharp or defined? No; further, knowledge of
underlying physiology helps type and clarify issues but not to the point of
perfect sharpness In
view of the dual indefiniteness of concept and object, how can anything ever
be truly known? This goes back to the observation that knowing has no final
or absolute anchor because that would have to be outside the world – but
there is nothing outside the world. The answer to the question, here, is not
a foundation of knowledge in simpler things such as empirical knowledge – the
purpose here is understanding and not foundation. The answer is in the use of
knowledge, concepts [which necessarily involve how the concepts are
used even if only implicitly; and note that this how is nothing other than,
perhaps informal and implicit, theory] which necessarily involves
prediction, comparison of prediction with actuality, and correction.
Indefiniteness is welcomed in view of the fact that it is essential. However,
since the extent of the indefiniteness itself is not known and since real
knowledge is useful and centering, there is a healthy anxiety for or drive
toward clarification, knowing and understanding 1.3.3.2 Example: Humor and Emotion
This
discussion of humor and emotion further illustrates the indefiniteness of
concepts – especially mental concepts. Additionally, the example will be
useful later. Along the way we encounter a limit to the idea of endless
horizons of knowledge. This supplements the ethical limits, considered later,
to what constitutes knowledge What
is humor? Here are some preliminary observations. Mirth and laughter are
expressions of humor. Laughter and crying are – physiologically – similar.
Intense laughter sometimes merges into crying. Crying may result from
sadness, pain; and from beauty – perhaps beauty is a reminder of what is
absent. Physiologically and conceptually emotions overlap; are not
hermetic compartments. Explanations and kinds of explanation of humor
include, superiority theory, incongruity theory, release
theory, machine theory, biological / evolutionary
explanations, psychodynamic theories [as expression of taboo wishes
etc.,] typological theories [is humor an emotion?] and anecdotal explanation
[by example; and to test the theories…] I have given these examples without
citation of sources as a kind of explanation from which I intend to move
away: the idea that a function has a specific reference or kind of reference
or that some specific biological activity associated with a function defines
the function; I want to avoid the modern academic tendency to call a
correlate or partial mechanism a ‘theory,’ to be impatient in formulating
explanations, to serve the explainer and not the explanation, the
interminable and recursive cataloging of recorded explanations destined to
collapse under its own weight unless checked – I want to match precision of
concept with definitiveness of object and it is easy, under the impetus of
the particular explanation to mistake apparent precision of concept for
definitiveness of object In
seeking a single explanation or theory, it is not necessary to incorporate
everything that has been said. This is not necessary for some suggestions or
associations may be eliminated as unnecessary others incorporated with
another concept in the field of relevant concepts e.g. about mind. Applying
this thought to the history of ideas and knowledge, we see an example of the
non-cumulative nature of knowledge; not every knowledge claim is, even,
information How
might the explanatory system be given unity? The diversity of explanation is
characterized by attempts to be definite. This is a difficulty, given the
variety of situations in which humor is a response. Consider, instead, the
human drive to meaning and coherence; the anticipation and achievement of meaning
is associated with positive emotion – beauty, centeredness. However the drive
is often frustrated – by human limits, by unanticipated events including
accidents, by unrealistic expectations. Responses to this frustration include
anger, grieving and humor. Anger may result in acceptance by first escalating
the tension; grieving may result in acceptance by living with the tension
[sadness.] Anger and grieving may be counterproductive when in excess or when
relief is not obtained. Humor, in concept, is acceptance by direct
de-escalation of tension; laughter, a physical expression of, e.g. mirth,
de-escalates tension; and, perhaps after cultivation, involves the enjoyment
of de-escalation. Humor, too, may be inappropriate if the original drive is
prematurely aborted. Humor may be cultivated; this is the origin of
differences in humor among different cultures; and it is a source of a
variety of situations experienced and considered to be humorous including
jokes and comedy – these are derivative, are cultured variants and more to be
explained by than as contributing to an understanding of humor 1.3.3.3 Dimensions of Mind / Being: Outline
Character
of mind / being; unconscious processes and the body Functions:
states and processes: memory; attitude, action Extension
in time: learning and growth; development of the functions; personality and
its development; commitments; the dynamics of being; becoming; local /
non-local; arching from the individual / here-now to the universal 1.3.4 Dimensions of Mind / Being: Foundations
1.3.4.1 Objectives
Provide
a structured [the dimensions] list of the elements – a map – of mind / being As
far as possible, provide a rationale or foundation for the map rather than
give, merely, a restatement of the classical functions of mind – cognition,
emotion and conation – or a modern version A
convenient place to start is with the classical functions as in the Indefiniteness of Concepts. The approach to foundations
will be through criticism of the classical functions. To this end it is
useful that the functions in Indefiniteness of Concepts are not particularly
structured. Of course, what structure there is to the system of functions –
it will be convenient to start with the classical system; note however, that
even though the classical terms are being used, here, there is significant
re-conceptualization of the ideas – will be considered in the criticism Before
proceeding with actual criticisms, I will mention the common though not
universal criticism that – at least some of – the classical functions are
based in what is sometimes derisively called “folk psychology,” which is the
everyday language – including but not limited to “belief,” “idea,” “hope,”
“know,” “see;” and the idea of a connection between mind and behavior – that
is used to talk about mind. The point of the critics of this common language
is that it has no scientific – neurological or information / computation
theoretic – basis, is without foundation, is often wrong and should be
abandoned in favor of scientific description. The issue has been debated at
much length and, here, I will simply state my view and support it with brief
arguments. A first observation is that it is primarily the states and
processes of mind that affect behavior rather than the language that is used
to describe those states; the primary use of language is in understanding
rather than in affecting behavior although there is some effect as when the
language channels mental processes and when the language is used to
supplement or instead of the mental processes. It is true that the common
language that is used to describe mind and the role of mind is often
wrong. However, when it counts, the folk language is as at least as
right as necessary for survival. An analogy can be made with physics. The
names of many concepts, even in the theoretical physics as practiced today,
have origin in common language and these include particle, field, and force.
In scientific use, however, the meaning of the words is often significantly
different from the common use – this includes shedding of much
anthropomorphic content; additionally there are new words that correspond to
new concepts. The continuity of language corresponds to a continuity of
reality: what is right about common intuitive physics is included in
theoretical physics as well as much more; and the continuity of language
assists in interpretation and understanding of theoretical physics. The
critics of the use of common language have often used examples of discarded
concepts from other areas of science. A much repeated example is that of
phlogiston [a hypothetical fluid that entered a body as it became warmer] as
a discarded concept from physics. However, phlogiston was not a folk concept;
rather, it was a scientific concept introduced by scientists that had some
degree of explanatory success and was discarded when its limitations were
shown up. The implication for psychology is that eliminating common language
in its entirety would be a mistake and would result in muteness or
incoherence – either there would be nothing to say or what would be said
would have no relation to the object of discussion; rather, words and
concepts will be retained or discarded on a case by case basis based on
merit; the words that are retained may have new meanings and new words and
concepts may be introduced. Neurobiology and information / computation theory
will not replace psychology but inform and be informed by psychology Another
possible criticism is that the functions as described in Indefiniteness of Concepts are particularly human and
therefore not the basis of a system of dimensions of mind. This criticism
requires a number of responses. Firstly, the general concept of mind as
presented in the present essay is not at all restricted to human mind and is
as deep and as extensive as existence. Secondly, Indefiniteness of Concepts did not provide an especially
structured view and the elements contained there could be modified according
to organism; by varying “parameters” descriptions of classes of organisms
could be obtained. Finally, it is the purpose of this part of the development
to provide at least some focus on mind as it occurs in animals and human
beings; with this end in view, the treatment includes but is not dependent on
language. In the discussion that follows, various general distinctions are
introduced e.g. bound and free elements of mind; all organisms
should have bound elements and higher organisms will have both; in human and
similar animals the free elements will have overlap e.g. the basic emotions
will be similar but there will be differences due to different social
relations and special developments. Thus we expect that basic emotion and
cognition will be integrated in all higher organisms – these assertions
anticipate arguments that follow – while the variety of subtle emotions will
be specific to the species or even, within humankind, to the culture; and,
for humans, the variety of emotions will depend upon factors that include
culture and language The
criticisms in what follows arose in non-linear fashion but also with
consideration given to rationality, universality and mind as an aspect of
being 1.3.4.2
Criticisms of the Classical Functions of Mind
Note
that three kinds of explanation are given in response to the
criticisms: neurological or biological [including
developmental;] evolutionary or adaptive; and intuitive
i.e. explanation based in the forms of – e.g. Kantian – intuition i.e. in the
forms of feeling-cognition which include emotion, are expressions of the
adaptation of the organism to the world that are ‘written’ in the biology of
the organism and arise, so far as the organism is concerned, in growth and
development and, so far as the species is concerned in selection in the
natural and cultural ‘worlds.’ In summary the kinds of explanation are of the
body and its environment or bio-ecological; of experience
[mind] and its forms [intuition;] and of origins or genesis i.e. of
evolution and adaptation which applies to both ecology and experience Additionally,
the following principles of explanation are manifest: The
organism is the result of development; therefore, what is whole in
the world must, normally, be whole in experience; this is supplemented by
the fact that laying down of memory and processing are not separate
operations and remembering is re-creation of previous processing The kinds of explanation are different aspects of being and
becoming The
development of functionality that is later, complex and possessed of a degree
of independence of the environment – adaptability of the organism including
thought as adaptive or creative – is based in functionality that is earlier,
simple and relatively determined; or, simply, free function is based in
determined or bound function… …integration of experience [mind] The
following linearly stated criticisms arose in non-linear fashion and an
attempt should be made to view them as an organic whole 1. Explanation of the variety of
kinds of feeling was not given. The discussion in Indefiniteness of Concepts provided some foundation in a
unified treatment of feeling and a list of different kinds of feeling but no
explanation of the variety of kinds or of differences among the kinds was
given. Three explanations [kinds of explanation] will be given A
generic neurological explanation of the variety of feeling is
that each kind is associated with different sensors and a different part of
the brain An
evolutionary explanation is that the different kinds of feeling
correspond to [a subset of] the variety of stimuli in the world which
includes the environment and the organism; thus the kinds of feeling
correspond to external and internal stimuli An
explanation based in intuition is that the elementary feelings
are elementary intuitions 9. The integration of the
perceptual attributes
of an object into a whole was left unexplained; this is the classic binding
problem. It was stated that “The visual perception of an object is an
integrated combination of a number of primitive feelings…; and the perception
of an object is an integrated combination of the various perceptual
modalities.” However, no explanation of how the integration occurs was given.
This problem is known as the binding problem for perception. The
outline of a solution is as follows A
neurological explanation is based in the observation that
laying down of memory and processing are not separate operations in the
brain; and remembering is largely re-creation of previous processing. This
entails a solution to the binding problem since the individual sensations
from an object come in integrated modules and therefore are bound in memory
as modules, not as monadic objects but through association. Study of the
neurological details of binding in various cases is an interesting research
endeavor in science. Other phenomena are also entailed: recognition and the
associative nature of memory. Note that these considerations apply not only
to simple objects such as a car but complex objects such as a scene or a
journey. The same approach illuminates the problem of object constancy which
is that, within limits and excepting illusion, an object is not experienced
as changing in size or shape when its distance from or orientation relative
to an observer changes. Consider distance: although the apparent size
becomes less with increasing as the object moves away, distance estimation is
partially intrinsic and partially by proximity – and since systems of objects
also come in modules, all objects are similarly altered in apparent size.
Next, consider orientation: the different views of the object come in modules
of views; this explanation also applies to distance and to conditions of
lighting, and may be extended to color constancy; the explanation applies to
normalization of perception in cases where perception is distorted, for
example, by wearing prisms and / or inverting lenses in front of the eyes.
Also note that abilities are generalized and, therefore, memory is not
overloaded; that abilities are generalized is a form of adaptability that is
an aspect of adaptation Object
perception is one of the forms of intuition. Adaptation
– in evolution and in development – explains the origin of the underlying
neurology and the forms of intuition: the forms of intuition and therefore of
the underlying neurology correspond to [a subset of] the forms in the
environment Note
that evolutionary explanation is no more circular than any scientific
explanation. Some facts lead to generalizations which explain or predict further
facts… and enable understanding of the entire relevant system of facts The
kinds of explanation: from physiology or neurology, from adaptation or
evolution and development, and from intuition are complementary. A pattern to
the kinds of explanation has emerged 10. Understanding of the
applicability and adequacy of the functions was not given. The functions specified were
the classical ones: cognition [with perception,] emotion and conation or
drive. However, no understanding of the nature and choice of the [human]
functions was given Specifically,
understanding and explanations of the following were lacking The
nature and role of the functions: no understanding of each function was
given in itself – as an actual function, i.e. what is the role of each
function No
understanding was provided of the differences and relations among the
functions: the differences among their qualities and intensities – the
feelings when seeing a mountain, when seeing an old friend are both positive
but different: is this difference refractory to analysis or is there any explanation,
not only of intensities but also of qualities in a total ecology of mind; are
the functions distinct entities or are they the poles of a continuum; are the
elements that constitute each function different from the elements that
constitute another or are the functions constituted from a common set of
elements with different ranges of weights corresponding to each function; are
the functions hermetic compartments or is there overlap; and what is the
interaction among the functions and elements in the total functioning of mind No
explanation was given whether the system is complete Additionally,
motor activity and action were omitted; inclusion of motor activity and
action is in keeping with c. 2000 approaches to mind The
response to these criticisms is given in the present and subsequent numbered
items One
source of information is awareness of and in mental states and processes.
This awareness provides data but not understanding. However, the following
information is motivated by subsequent considerations: emotions and drives
have degrees of intensity that are not associated with cognition and a
behavioral correlate of high intensity is an imperative to immediate action…
and one dimension of intensity is on a pleasure-pain continuum; cognition,
the process of knowing, involves perception and thought [judgment] and the
awareness associated with perception is, in a visual metaphor, brighter than
that associated with thought. The data just considered will be used in
understanding How
may the following be understood: the nature of the functions, their
relationships and how or whether the system of functions is complete? One
general approach to understanding is to view mind in its total context: in
terms of being-in-the-world. In the first place, understanding derives
from being-in-the-world as such, before any conceptual / metaphorical [not
actual] split into being and world and this point will be taken up later. In
the second place, understanding derives from examination of the two sides to
being-in-the-world. Note that the results of the split might better be
written as [being-] and [-world] so that the relationship [-in-] is not
suppressed: [Being-]…
experience, the subjective side of being-in-the-world, and [-in-]…
the relationship [-the-world]…
the objective side It
is important that the subjective and objective sides or the experiential and
material sides do not refer to different objects but are different modes of
description of the same object – even though the degree of completeness of
the description is greater according to the mode of description and what
aspect of the object is concerned In
the material description the organism has inside / outside that correspond
only roughly to being / world or mind / world. Stuff [information, matter]
flows two ways across the boundary: input / output. Although the idea of a
boundary is not devoid of reality it is not absolute except as a concept.
“Input” is not passive: first, there is a continuum of seeking / perceiving
and the individual may be seeking with respect to some object of actual
interest but receiving with respect to objects of potential interest; second,
the actual perception is a construction and not “raw data;” and, third the
content of the perception is about the world. Other word pairs similar to
input / output are afferent / efferent and attitude / action. As implied by
the observation that input is not mere reception, attitude is not passive…
attitude involves reception but, as a result of the active aspect of
perception / cognition, attitude is about the world. Is feeling or emotion
about the world? In contrast with a conventional response, the answer given
here is that, yes, emotion – or drive – is about the world and is
therefore characterized as attitude. This response requires explanation but
first note that it is not the cognitive component of emotion [see earlier
discussion] that entails its attitudinal characterization. The first point in
the explanation is that the primary feeling involved in emotion is a
perception of an “internal state” of the organism [in subjective terms the
feeling is a state that the organism as its own.] Note, however, that in this
context, in objective terms, “internal” means “inside the physical boundary
of the organism” and does not refer to mind or state of mind. The organism is
as much part of the world as is the world outside of the organism’s physical
boundary. Thus the feeling component of emotion is a perception of the world
as much as is seeing a tree. An argument against this is that, whereas in
perception there is a period of recognition – for common objects the period
goes unnoticed – and the fact that there is recognition implies that
perception is about the object of perception; on the other hand, for emotion
there is no period of recognition and there is no object which it is about.
However, the counterargument is not valid: when there is a sudden change in
emotion-feeling, there is often a period of recognition where the organism is
not yet aware of what the changed status is; additionally, emotion has an
object, it is the body of the organism but the body is not recognized in
cognitive terms which tend to be taken as the absolute standard but are not
[to take cognition as an absolute standard of recognition is to say that
cognition has a foundation that lies outside the world or to say,
paradoxically, that, in cognition the noumenon is recognized as such.]
Because the emotive-feeling states of the organism are pertinent to the
organism in a way that they are not to another organism it would not be functional
for another organism to be privy to them in the way that the owner of those
states is. But this is not much different from the fact that organisms are
not privy to all states of the world and different kinds of organisms are not
perceptually privy to the same states or kinds of states. One consequence for
emotion, since it involves perception of the physiological state of the
observer – it could not be otherwise – is the possibility of feed back in a
perceptual loop; obviously this does not happen in the case of perception of
the external world. However, it is true that emotion is about the world; but
the way in which it is about the world is not identical to the case of
cognition. As noted, in contrast to cognition, emotion-feeling occurs in an
intensity [pleasure-pain] continuum that does not occur for cognition [note
the blurring of conventional distinctions emotion/pain but note again the
essential fluidity of the concepts that arises not – only – because of
essential fluidity of the objects but because of fluidity of the boundaries.]
On the other hand, perception has an immediacy that matches the immediacy of
emotion without the intensity that is imperative to action. Thought may be
and visual perception is associated with a vividness [contrasted to
intensity] and clarity of detail that emotion does not have. Simple feeling
and emotion merge with cognition to make for complex emotion with shades of
quality and the possibility of experience of emotion detached from its
intensity: an emotional life is largely possible for this reason and the fact
that the degree of intensity can be mild like a faint morning breeze rather
than a gale force storm; the subtlety and complexity of emotion is further
enhanced by “feedback.” Perception and cognition do not directly result in
imperatives to action but do so secondarily as the occasion for
emotion-feeling. As noted earlier, the imagery associated with cognition is
not as bright as that associated with perception; therefore, the path from
perception to action is stronger than that from thought and this appears to
be adaptive The
point regarding fluidity of the boundaries of the various functions fits with
in the slack nature of mental concepts and is important to proper
understanding. When emotion is understood as an “essence” it is thought of as
something distinct from cognition and then questions of the relation between
cognition and emotion may be entertained in an artificial way: the results of
cognition produce emotion produce action; emotion stimulates and centers
cognition. The relation between emotion and cognition, since they have
distinction, is one of cause-effect but since they also have overlap the
relationship is also one in which the nature of the activities is
characterized: that emotion “colors” cognition, so the view of cognition as
detached is inaccurate and, as noted earlier, that complex / subtle emotion
is made possible, in part, through the inclusion of cognition. The point was
made somewhat inaccurately: emotion colors cognition; due to the essential
overlap, cognition is intrinsically colored and individuals with a deficit on
the “color” side, experience cognitive pathology including the cognitive
deficits associated with autism and mood disorders. In the case of autism
with high functioning, pure cognition may be enhanced by being disengaged
from emotional “chatter” and binding. This suggests that there are optimal
degrees of binding / overlap between emotion and cognition [as traditionally
understood] but not that there is one optimum for all occasions and all
individuals; different situations call for different emphases and differences
among individuals make for function and variety These
observations mesh with neurology. There are different centers for different
functions; but at the same time, in a complex organism there is co-adaptation
of and interaction among the centers and, so, integration of the functions Additionally,
the observations confirm the assertion made earlier that the concepts of the
mental functions are slack There
is also a significance for language. Natural language is not a collection of
meaningless signs; the so-called literal meaning is not the meaning.
And “literal” is not being contrasted to “metaphor” [the literal/metaphorical
distinction being merely conventional in at least some aspects] but, as an
example, to “poetic.” That literal meaning is apparently fixed by convention
does not distinguish it from poetic meaning, for one reason, because literal
meaning is not fixed and, also, in so far as literal meaning is given and
constant that is not merely the result of convention: use and function among
communities of users in the world give meaning and determine constancy and
change. Poetic meaning combines sound, metaphor, feeling and suggestion… But
these elements are not absent altogether from literal meaning. There are
distinctions – as there are occasions that are appropriate for applications
of the distinctions. But these distinctions are not absolute The
“output” side to being-in-the-world corresponds to motor activity and action.
Action is not mechanical, not simply an interaction across a boundary but
remains in interaction with function [attitude]; thus, in reality, being /
world are not essentially split; further, through attitude, action springs
from the depth of the organism which, at that depth, is attuned to the
environment. Of course, absolute and moment to moment binding of being-world
does not obtain and is not adaptive; there are degrees of binding according
to function and, at one extreme of cognition, there appears to be freedom of
mental function. There are two kinds of freedom: freedom of play in relation
to an objective [e.g., problem solving] and open play of imagination and
thought. The latter is not absolutely open for imagination and thought are based
in function-in-the-world and, implicitly in the experience of the thinker if
not explicitly in experiment; and the openness, such as it is, corresponds to
the openness of the world [indeterminism] and of the relationship of the
individual to the world [new environments, new contexts, and growth in the
being of the individual.] What is the relation among the kinds of action and
the classical kinds of mental function? Roughly, motor activity correlates
with sensation, need directed behavior with perception, emotion and drive and
[higher] action or choice based goal directed behavior with cognition. And,
just as there is overlap among sensation, perception and cognition so with
motor action, drive behavior and higher action 11. The different qualities of
experience, especially perception, remain unexplained. It should be obvious that there
is a level below which there is no explaining: the redness of red, the odor
of a pure chemical, the sound of middle C, “pure” pleasure and pain and so on
[criticisms of this would be of what is elementary rather than the existence
of a ground to explanation.] However what of some of the distinctions: the
brightness of perception in contrast to the images in thought – whether
images of objects or of symbols and whether visual or auditory and so on; the
intensity of the feeling side of emotions and drives in contrast to the
relative neutrality of cognition… is there an explanation of these distinctions? Thought
has a number of functions and may be subject to distinctions such as
imagination vs. thought but those distinctions are not made in this
paragraph; they are not relevant to the point that follows. One
characteristic of thought is that it is relatively detached from the
immediate context. Sometimes the detachment is cultivated but even when there
is an immediate and pressing problem and thought is directed to a solution of
the problem, the thought must be sufficiently detached to permit creation of
the solution that is not apparent in the problem and that may not have actually
existed before. This is true even though when the process of thought is about
the actual world. Perception, on the other hand, is of the actual world as it
is [even though the phrase “as-it-is” is somewhat metaphorical, use of the
metaphor is valid in the present discussion.] Therefore, perception is
“brighter” than the remembered/reconstructed images of thought. It would not
do, nor should it be physiologically normal for thought to be as bright as
perception; for then there would be difficulty in attending to what is actually
real. It can be said that perception is bound to the world or object and that
the images of thought are free; or, more precisely, the degree of bind-ing
is greater for perception. The degree of binding of perception should, for
function, normally be greater than that of thought. This explains the
brightness of perception as a function of immediacy that is, in turn, a
function of binding. Thought / imagination is not always less bright than
perception; this occurs in dreaming where the brightness of mental images is
not non-functional and in hallucination which is regarded as pathological.
Care is needed in asserting that “hallucinations” are always non-functional
for there are situations in which the brightness of remembered / reconstructed
images may be functional – dreaming is obviously one, see Experiments in the
Transformation of Being for discussion of possible
functions of dreaming; other functions of “bright thought” are in some
applications of remembering, in creative thought, and in some cases of
imperatives to action. The existence of an intensity continuum for
emotion-feeling has a similar explanation in binding; further, it is often
functional for such feeling, e.g. pain, to be more intense than perception or
thought. But, there are also situations involving conflict. Consider, for
example, an individual who has been attacked and is feeling pain from a wound
and fear; normally, the pain might result in favoring the wound and fear
might result in running but the attack continues. Therefore, although strong,
fear and pain are not absolute imperatives and the full response is a result
of the interaction and integration of the functions Bound
functions or elements: Perception
under normal circumstances, drive, primary emotion Perception
that “should” be bound to the environment may become free as in
hallucination; this is does not imply that hallucinatory type experience is
dysfunctional. Functional experience that is hallucinatory in nature occurs
in dreams and visions. Freeing of primary emotion from its object [directly
to body / endocrine states and so on, indirectly to place…] may result in
drive and actualization if the emotion is channeled or counterproductive
emotional lability if it is unbridled Free
functions or elements: Thought
under normal circumstances, secondary and cultivated emotion Thought
that “should” be free may be bound as in delusions; and secondary emotion may
be bound as in depression; however, such binding is not always
non-functional; bound thought may protect individual and community and bound
emotion may be functional when diminished activity is functional – according
to the season or circumstance Interactions
and variations: In
complex organisms, the “binding binds the freedom.” This is another way to
say that freedom of play in mental process is bound or, in this case, related
to need; or that cognition essentially overlaps emotion. When rationality
“shuns” emotion, it shuns the immediate passions. This is not always
functional and, while it characterizes some individuals, it is not and should
not be characteristic of all. However, the word “shun” is rather
inappropriate and when used appropriately it may refer to pathology. Rather,
in functional contexts, the immediate and intense passions are replaced by an
emotion that is in balance with thought and that stands for a commitment to
“being-in-the-world” through understanding; and even, when understanding
takes leave of the immediate as part of its proper function, it is the
emotional component that binds the individual and the understanding to the
world. This picture is somewhat idealistic in that the process of
understanding what has not been understood before may occur in detachment or
rejection of the world; however, it is probable that the emotional component
of understanding must have some degree of integrity for the understanding to
continue Seeing
and thinking interact, perception and conception are not essentially distinct
in actuality and much perception – especially perception in the normal
environment – is also conceptual. One sees a table; that it is seen is
perception, that it is a table is the concept. In contrast, in an unfamiliar
physical environment, perceptions reign and concepts are held back or
flounder – and feeling may be intense in response to the unfamiliar which may
contain unknown hostile elements Further
sources in [explanation of] the variety of experience occur in the
distinctions: nature, society, self; and known / actual vs. unknown /
potential. Some discussion of the distinctions is explicit above: the freedom
of cognition in relation to the unknown, e.g. adaptation to and creation of
new environments. Further discussion is implicit: the pain of human loss
[loss of family] may exceed fear of physical harm in intensity even though
human loss does not result in physical injury or immediate harm to the
individual 12. There is no discussion of
homeostasis
[equilibrium] What
keeps the different functions in equilibrium? This point has already been
addressed; it is the integration of the functions. A neurological explanation
is based in the integration of the systems; and an explanation in adaptation
is the need for some degree of unity of function and integrity of the
organism; these thoughts are satisfying since they indicate unity among modes
of explanation – utility occurs in meshing the details of the different modes Appeal
to equilibrium is another way of seeing that: perception is brighter than
thought; emotion is more intense than cognition; primary emotion is more
intense than secondary or cultivated emotion; the integration of emotion and
cognition is binding of the organism to the world Breakdown
in homeostasis results in aberration: hallucinations as “bright thoughts,”
delusions as thoughts that acquire the intensity of emotion, variations from
the normal range of emotional intensity are aberrations of mood i.e.
depression and mania. As noted earlier, these “aberrations” are sometimes
functional; and there is a question whether it is always an aberration that
is functional or whether the aberrations are relatives or exaggerations of
functional variations 13. There is no explicit discussion
of dynamics or time Dynamics
occurs at various levels and various ways. There is no single dynamics
because of the complexity of organisms, their organization at various levels
and complexity at each level. However, the following dynamics have been
noted: Memory
/ processing Variations
from equilibrium: such variations have two dynamics – inner and in relation
to the environment. The inner dynamics includes compensations and adaptations
among the functions and the disrupting effect of variations of one function
on others such as psychosis that occurs in depression. Environmental dynamics
are responsive [exogenous depression including seasonal depression] and
active where the variation from equilibrium affects the experience and
behavior of the individual The
functions operate at an instant of time; they are elements of a moment to
moment interaction among being-world. Other dynamics include Learning
and growth including development of the functions [and corresponding
physiological growth] Development
of personality Personality
as patterns of cognitive-emotional response to others – to work
[contribution] and relationships, problems, life’s issues and opportunities,
to self-expression including definition / evaluation of the opportunities Disruption
of this system may lead to distortion of the individual’s sense of place,
especially of the sense of social reality The
question of opportunities and their definition leads to: Commitment:
the commitments of the individual and their sustenance and expression The
dynamics of being: see Experiments in the
Transformation of Being and subsequent sections. The
dynamics of being includes an approach to passing limits to being. This
includes a similar dynamics of mind, traces of which are found in a number of
theories of mind: psychoanalysis [the unconscious,] western folk psychology
[“creativity,”] shamanism [travel in other worlds, insight, vision, healing,]
and Yoga [in the reversal of the stages of evolution identified in Samkhya] Problem of identity Theoretically,
the problem of identity is that of solipsism Practically,
knowledge that one is the same individual arises in the structure of memory –
of one’s own life – in combination with recognition – one recognizes the same
individual in others or self despite changes. Such recognition is necessary
due to changes in various circumstances; this is not a philosophical or
neurological but a functional explanation that must underlie neurology 14. The discussion was local but not
universal in time and extension The
following considerations arise. The Principle of Being according to
which all being is accessible to every individual was introduced early in
this essay. Yet, the discussion of dimensions of mind shows the human
individual to be rather determinate in a number of ways. Why is consideration
of the determinate / limited aspect of being important in relation to the Journey
in Being and how can the Principle of Being be compatible with the
limits of the organism? A
beginning to an answer to the question of compatibility has already been
given. The individual is not completely determinate: the functions show
considerable freedom. The completion of this answer has also been given
earlier in various discussions: the limits are only essential on a view of
the organism as having absolute boundaries in extension and time. Further,
there is a pending investigation, suggested by western mysticism and eastern
disciplines such as Yoga, into realization through the agency of awareness
itself The
question of the possibilities for mind and consciousness has been taken up at
a number of places including experimental consideration in Why
is consideration of individual being in its local manifestation important?
First, that is how our presence immediately manifests; perhaps the discussion
of the functions is only an approximation / slanted; but the functions of any
system or culture will be initially slanted. Second, the enjoyment of being
in its “limited” form is significant [the Principle of Meaning] in
itself and as part of the infinite. Finally, the Principle of Being talks
only of possibility / necessity; actual paths, probabilities and ways start
from the being as manifest 15. There was no discussion of the
body See
What is Mind? And subsequent sections,
especially Unconscious Mental Processes and the Body The
body has been introduced in the foregoing systems of explanation in the
appeal to biology Integration
of body functions – food, sleep, relationship – implies further
considerations for experience [mind] 1.3.4.3
Explanatory / Organizing Principles
The
piecewise analysis of the criticisms suggests universal explanatory
principles for founding the functions and so of generating a more complete
and more rational system. The word “universal” includes the meaning that the
principles will be applicable to any organism, especially adapted organisms;
to get specific results for specific organisms will require information specific
to that organism. In other words, the principles, when applied to any
postulated set of functions – whether from experiment, experience or
reflection – will help to yield a more complete, a more coherent and better
founded set The
principles are as follows 1. View the individual as
Being-in-the-World This
view is ontologically prior to the being / world split and is thus relatively
ontologically neutral. In other words, assuming the validity of the splits,
those ontologies are specializations of Being-in-the-World. Note that the
mind / world and the related subject / object splits are specializations on
the classical account of mind and body as distinct substances rather than
different descriptive or conceptual modalities. The labels solipsism, idealism
may be applied to the Being-in-the-World ontology only if the possibility
splitting is denied. Thus conclusions based on the unrealism of the subject /
object split, e.g. Hegelian and related idealisms, may be seen as false but,
in fact, have no implications in the realm of more specific ontologies [or,
perhaps, more specific modes of being The
primary distinctions that lead to detailed understanding are the local /
universal distinctions; on the other hand the subject / object split is
introduced to identify what has been mistakenly recognized as an essential
split so as to identify associated errors 16. Locality in extension: the being of individuals or
objects Locality
in extension leads to the subject / object and distinction; and to input /
output analysis Experience
is characteristic of the subject mode Causation
is a characteristic of the object mode and includes interactions:
individual-environment 17. Locality in time Leads
to the distinctions: function / learning / development and change including
personality / commitment: self and influence / dynamics of being [To
be non-local in extension and in time require one another] 18. Being-over-time; becoming Learning,
development and change including personality, commitment, dynamics of being 19. Locality in context Leads
to the bound / free distinction 20. Modes of explanation The
following are elaborated at the beginning of the previous section Criticisms of the Classical Functions of Mind: Psychology:
the forms of intuition; the following provide foundation and suggestion. The
modes are mutually informing Biology:
physiology; for mind / body relations see What is Mind? And subsequent sections,
especially Unconscious Mental Processes and the Body Origins
/ place in the world: evolution / adaptation Comparison:
similarities and differences among cultures, species and modes of being 1.3.5
A System of the Dimensions of Mind, Being and Action 28
The
“principles of explanation” were applied informally in Criticisms of the Classical Functions of Mind to the originally [relatively]
ad hoc functions of The Functions of Knowledge; the ad hoc character was
eliminated to a significant degree and the nature of the aspects of mind
illuminated; and in so doing, concepts of the functions – emotion, cognition,
drive – were modified and, in keeping with c. 2000 approaches, action was
included. A set Explanatory / Organizing Principles for the study of the dimensions
of mind / being emerged. Even though incomplete, the map of mind provided
here is integrated and dynamic The
application of these considerations results in the following 1.3.5.1 Character of Mind / Being
The
fundamental character of mind and of being is derived from the idea of being
as being-in-the-world or being-present-to-the world. Presence is not
so much a character or characteristic as the condition of being-in-the-world.
Earlier, while I noted that no particular character could be called the
characteristic of mind, I argued for the central character of experience.
Therefore, while experience is close to presence, I will not claim that the
concepts are identical. Presence partakes of the known and the unknown; on
account of the slackness in specification of mind this is not problematic –
rather it has virtue and it may be said, in improvement of the formulation at
the beginning of this sentence, that presence partakes of the known and the
potential. The existence of unconscious mental influences on and
connections between conscious processes has been noted. Reasonable arguments
that unconscious mental processes were those that did not appear in
consciousness but could so appear were developed. It is clear that some
unconscious processes should count as mental processes and some might not but
this appears to leave a grey area. Again, on account of the slack character
of the concept of mind it is not important whether the grey area of the
unconscious is counted; nothing of consequence is altered by the choice and
when, later, consequence is found an adjustment of the grey area results.
Thus unconscious is a somewhat metaphorical term and the unconscious
mental processes fall within presence What
is it that makes an individual present to the world? Examples of
possibilities include awareness, consciousness, intensionality, representation
and processing [intelligence] and so on. A case has been made that experience
[awareness, consciousness…] is fundamental; being present to the world
entails intensionality and representation; and since without action there
is and can be no presence, intelligence is also entailed. Since mind [if mind
is thought of as a thing or substance then such use is metaphorical; mind
refers to whatever it is that is involved in presence] is not definite with
regard to concept or object the fact that only a strong but not an absolute
case has been made regarding characteristics does not present a theoretical
problem. Further, there is no practical problem. In any actual situation
there will be some things that are clearly mental and there may be others
that are not; and there may be borderline cases where it is not clear whether
the object is mind or otherwise; this is not a practical difficulty for the
classification of the object will not prevent the study of all objects of
interest and their interactions regardless of their ontological status In summary, the character of mind is presence which
partakes of the known in being close to experience and in entailing
intensionality, representation and intelligence and which enjoys the virtue
of conceptual openness and thus avoids over-specification of the concept.
Presence includes unconscious mental processes If
mind is “presence” what shall we say of one elementary particle in
interaction with another? Is the presence of the one particle to the other
“mind?” As we have seen earlier the answer is “Yes!” This, however, might
lead to actual and ontological confusion. The resolution is in distinguishing
a higher level of mind or mind-as-we-experience-it and other, lower, levels.
Here, different levels do not refer to the idea of higher and lower being but
to levels, say of organization, that occur in a given being. There is a
parallel with the concept of matter [material concepts and description.] The
first experience of matter is with macroscopic objects; later we recognize
that matter is made up of elementary particles [and fields.] There should be
some, at least minute doubt regarding the phrase “made up of” because
knowledge and therefore the character of the existence of “elementary
particles” cannot be better than the latest physics; however, I pass over
this doubt. The point being made regarding the parallel is as follows.
Although we call water matter and the elementary particles matter, the
elementary particles do not have all the properties of water even though
those properties are a result of the properties of the elementary particles.
For example, water is wet but an elementary particle cannot have the property
of wetness; yet wetness arises from the elementary particles and their
interactions. Similarly, the low level mental properties will not include
those of mind-as-we-know-it. Perhaps it should always be specified what level
of mind is under consideration; however as long the context is kept in sight,
confusion will not arise. We have seen that talk of mind [as-we-know-it] is
one mode of talk; material description is another mode of talk about the same
object. At the particle level the two modes of description are identical For
additional discussion see Mind / body: summary and consolidation of
conclusions 1.3.5.2 Functions: States and Processes
1.3.5.2.1
Memory
1.3.5.2.2
Attitude – and Concepts
Perception Construction
of percepts in experience, from sensations and intuition; conceptual
character of percepts. The following distinction brings out the variety of
perception but is not fundamental Sense
perception Proprioception
– perception of internal state of the organism including posture,
equilibrium, muscular effort… and feeling including pleasure and pain, and
the feeling components of emotion Drives;
continuity with emotion Thought Iconic:
the elements of iconic thought are remembered percepts or fragments of
percepts; i.e. the form of iconic thought is that of intuition Symbolic:
Natural language / formal systems; symbols are elementary forms of intuition
whose structure has no significance in formal systems A
formal system is made of pure symbols and rules; a pure symbol is devoid of
intrinsic meaning – reference is assigned Natural
language is semi-formal in that the symbols have a formal character and a
degree of intrinsic meaning; there are formal rules but these are, to a
degree, a superstructure built upon language; natural language rules have a
degree of innateness and, also, a degree to which they are determined by
context The
following considerations arise: relation of concepts and percepts;
iconic-intuitive and symbolic-formal character of concepts; question of
ultimate distinction between iconic-intuitive thought and thought in language
or symbolic-formal thought. The latter is considered in a number of places,
especially Intuition and Formal Knowledge Mixed
iconic / symbolic Emotions
as complexes of feeling-cognition Earlier
I distinguished between the feel of a sensation or perception and the feel of
an emotion. I said that there was something common to the two kinds of
feeling – they are both perception [or sensation,] one of the external world
and one of states of the perceiver’s body. That there is so much detail and
articulation in visual perception compared to the feeling side of emotion
might leave the impression that there is a fundamental distinction; but much
of this distinction is not intrinsic but, rather, due to visual and auditory
perception being models for thought and analysis. Both [external] perception
and the feeling side of emotion are bound functions; perception is bound to
the environment and feeling to the body. It is natural, therefore, that
perception has greater variety and articulation but emotion has a more
imperative for behavior; the greater articulation of external perception
together its indirect connection to behavior through feeling / drive results
in its being material for reflection; the simplicity and intensity of basic
emotions / drives results in the immediate connection to [an urge to] action While
external perception can be thought of as a map of the world, internal
perception-feeling is the real time sensation of place. Disruption of
feeling-emotion is a disruption of sense of place and belonging – to one’s
self and environment, to the natural environment but especially to the social
environment The
view of emotion adopted here goes beyond any view of emotion as a class of
atomic / monadic entities – joy, sadness, anger and so on; or even as a
continuum of subtly shaded qualities. First, emotion, as viewed here,
includes all the classical qualities. However, there is a need to address a
number of issues in relation to emotion. Emotion comes in stark, simple forms
as well as subtle ones; is the subtlety merely a matter of compounding of
different classical emotions or their shades? How shall we account for the
essential role of emotion, not only in living but also in learning and
thought? One response is that thought and emotion condition and drive one
another. However, it is better to recognize that the classical emotions,
perception and thought are bound together in a complex entity that, in study
and analysis, is seen atomically as the system of functions. However, the
binding is essential; that bound entity, I label emotion. Thus emotion may be
used in two senses: the elementary one of system of discrete emotions; and
the complex one in which the functions are bound together as a compound and
dynamic entity of discretely described elements in interaction For
detailed listing of elements see the document words,
language, metaphysics Humor
is the integration of the functions in the overall potential and limits of
the individual. Laughter is a mechanism of humor. When an individual has
attempted to overcome or find the extremes of all limits and has first hand
experience of the extremes, humor accommodates the individual to the reality
that limits are relative. Humor includes accommodation to existence in an
indefinite world Some
issues: the following questions arise What
is the range of perception i.e. what are the perceivable objects or elements
of the world? What
is the range of thought i.e. what is the range of being covered by the
thinkable… are there modes or kinds of being that are not thinkable? What
is the range of thought in language? Formal
processes may be questioned on the ground that they do not operate in real
time. Does intuition operate in real time? If
an object is in the range of the perceivable or the thinkable… is the
validity of the reference capable of being established? Is all “verification”
merely a survival of criticism? Or is knowledge capable of being positive,
which does not entail certainty, due e.g. to the organism’s
being-in-the-world… including evolution, i.e. is real knowledge possible? If
positive knowledge is possible, would that not imply that knowledge comes
before foundation? It
appears from the foregoing that limits to knowing are limits to being. What
is the significance of the Experiments in the
Transformation of Being to limits of experience, to
what can be experienced and to knowledge? 1.3.5.2.3
Action
Roughly,
motor activity correlates with sensation, need directed behavior with
perception, emotion and drive and [higher] action or choice based goal
directed behavior with cognition. And, just as there is overlap among
sensation, perception and cognition so with motor action, drive behavior and
higher action Action
includes: any motor activity such as reaching and walking toward or away
from. Mental activities such as choosing, inferring and deciding have a
strong action component; generally, action is any process that is at least
partially controlled by the organism – and may have as objective, changes in
the world including the organism itself The
topic of action and those that follow have been discussed above; further
elaboration will be undertaken later. Some aspects of personality, commitment
and the dynamics of being will be taken up experimentally in Experiments in the
Transformation of Being 1.3.5.2.4
The Body
See
What is Mind? And subsequent sections,
especially Unconscious Mental Processes and the Body The
following is taken from the latter section: The interaction or relation between the [conscious] mind and the
body is unconscious to a significant degree. Further, for many body process
that do not correspond to conscious activity the [metaphorical] label mental
is optional. There is a sense, developed below, in which all body processes
may be labeled mental without loss or gain 1.3.5.3
Extension in Time
1.3.5.3.1
Learning and growth; development of the functions
1.3.5.3.2
Personality and its Development
1.3.5.3.3
Commitments
1.3.5.3.4
The dynamics of being; becoming; local / non-local
1.3.5.3.5
Arching from the Individual / Here-Now to the Universal
1.3.6
Metaphysics and the Possibility of Knowledge and Logic
The
purpose of this section is to discuss what the universe must be like –
metaphysical prerequisites for – the possibilities of knowledge and of logic Except
when noted, “logic” refers to deductive logic It
will be useful to first briefly consider the possibility of knowledge in an
organism 1.3.6.1 Knowledge and Inference
In
deductive inference, conclusions follow by the process of deduction, from
premises. If the premises are true and the process or rules of deduction
guarantee “conservation of truth,” then the conclusions are also true That
the “rules” of deduction conserve truth does not strain credulity for, as
noted below, the one essential rule is that inference is transitive: if A
implies B and B implies C, then A implies C In
some systems of logic, the interpretation of this rule may be questioned;
this is not, however, to question the rule itself Thus
logic may be seen in the following light. Logic is an instrument for
generating new knowledge from given knowledge. In a sense the derived
knowledge is not new for deduction may be seen as tautologous. However,
although the conclusions follow tautologically or algorithmically the fact
that they so follow is often extremely far from obvious [to finite minds]
and, therefore, the conclusions effectively constitute new knowledge 1.3.6.2 Knowledge and Inference in an Organism
From
the side of the organism, the requirements for knowledge include the
following: first, sufficient structure and stability so that some effects of
the world upon it are more than transient i.e. the organism will have memory;
and that those effects condition the behavior of the organism to be in some
conformity with the world. No distinction is made, here, between human
knowledge and the knowledge of other animals; in fact the stated requirements
for knowledge do not require the “organism” to be living The
discussion of the previous paragraph serves to remind us that, first,
knowledge need not be mental. Secondly, the distinction of occurrent29
vs. dispositional knowledge is not absolute – at the primitive level
discussed there is no distinction between occurrent and dispositional
knowledge What is the root of logic or
inference? The following discussion is preliminary and will be clarified in
what follows. Inference is the use of a known fact and a pattern to extract
knowledge, without perception, of a further fact. [In the abstract it may be
the extraction of a conclusion from a hypothetical fact and a hypothetical
pattern.] There is no requirement that the process should be conscious,
representational or mental. In the simplest case, the pattern is that of a
uniform environment and conformity to the world at one place and time entails
conformity at other places and times. Perhaps the most elementary case of
inference occurs when the organism is able to perceive and respond
differentially and appropriately in a gradient Logic does not require language
or symbols – where a symbol is understood as a reference whose meaning is
assigned rather than [partially] intrinsic to the literal form. Thus, in
perception, deduction occurs, for example, when an element that is always
part of a picture is inferred from the presence of the picture. Induction
occurs, for example, when the universal presence of an element is inferred
from its presence in all experienced occurrences of the picture.
Communication of symbolic inference is much easier than communication of
iconic inference 1.3.6.3
Metaphysics and the Possibility of Knowledge
From the foregoing discussion,
the following are required for the possibility of knowledge: Cause and effect with sufficient
stability for more than transience of some effects Sufficient uniformity or
patterning including that similar causes result in similar effects The following may be
distinguished: Knowledge of the world [the
world includes patterning and symbols] – first order knowledge Knowledge of form, originally
intuited from patterning – second order knowledge That the world conforms to forms
is prerequisite to knowledge Just as mind was found to be a
symbol whose concept could not be specified for all being, so for knowledge 1.3.6.4
The Possibility of Logic
The possibility of logic rests
upon existence of truth and the possibility of inference Formal logic may be developed
without actual truth but only a symbol for truth. However, for truth to have
actual significance there needs to be knowledge of states of affairs Further, the development of
systematic logic depends on laws of inference There is one essential law
of inference, that inference is transitive: if A implies B and B implies C,
then A implies C Here, omit I consideration of
the laws of logic, the law of contradiction, the law of the excluded
middle, and the principle of identity – except to note that the law of
the excluded middle has been questioned [in Intuitionism] in its application
to infinite sets What is the nature of the
difficulty with infinite chains of derivation? See Mathematics and its Foundations
for some comments on infinities in mathematics Further “laws” required to
implement logical systems are in Kinds of Knowledge What is the rationale behind the
laws of logic? A knowledge domain provides
information as to what forms obtain and, until shown otherwise, it is hoped
[in general it is not proven] that there are no fundamental contradictions In a sense, logic is vacuous.
From the symbolic expression of knowledge, inferences are almost obvious i.e.
they are essentially analytic. The rationale for the formulation of laws of
logic is that all valid inferences must be allowed but the laws themselves
should introduce no contradictions Formal symbolic logic may be
developed without explicit reference to a knowledge context 1.3.6.5
Analytic and Synthetic Propositions 30
The
statement “All ravens are birds,” is called an analytic proposition because
the meaning of raven includes being a bird. On the other hand
“All ravens are black,” is synthetic because blackness [in this account] is
not part of the meaning of being a raven and the statement, if true, is based
on experience. I.e. a synthetic proposition appears to be a generalization
from experience that could be invalidated by observation of an exception 1.3.6.6 Metaphysics and the Possibility of
Implication / Inference
The
inference “Jack is a bird,” follows analytically or tautologically from “Jack
is a raven.” The conclusion follows from the form of the premise The
inference “Jack is black,” from “Jack is a raven,” follows in two stages. In
the first stage it is noted that every raven seen so far is black and from
this the generalization “All ravens are black,” may be made. The inference is
synthetic and not necessary for it may be invalidated. However, given the
inference, the conclusion “Jack is black,” follows analytically from “Jack is
a raven” What
is required for synthetic inference or generalization? It is the existence of
patterns i.e. the manifestation of form. If the specific pattern
obtains, then the synthetic conclusion is analytic Thus,
form or the manifestation of form makes inference possible. This is because
form includes the elimination of possibility The
fact that every universe is the manifestation of some form – from nothingness
– also makes certain kinds of inference possible; a number of arguments in
this essay are based on this idea 1.3.6.7 Not Every Idea is a Form
More
precisely, not every idea of a form corresponds to or represents a form Some
two dimensional drawings of MC Escher correspond to or represent no possible
three dimensional object Similarly,
not every idea, or sentence in the form of a proposition represents a
possible object. This is a source of logical paradox 1.3.6.8 The Variety of Logical Structures
The
following extremely brief sketch receives some elaboration in Kinds of
Knowledge Standard
logic concerns propositions that are true in some world In
standard logics the possible truth values are true and false Examples
of standard logic are immediate inference, the syllogism, the propositional
and predicate calculi Various
non-standard logics correspond to generalizations from or are variants of
standard logic Many
valued logics introduce at least one truth value in addition to true and
false Modal
logics concern propositions that are true in all worlds; modal logic is
concerned about necessary truth or necessity In
fuzzy logic, the distinction between truth and falsity is not sharp Some
logics concern sentence forms [speech acts] other than the proposition 1.3.6.9 Mathematics
Mathematics
is the science of form; abstract relations show up all systems that have
common form 1.3.7
Theories of Action
A
theory of action is a theory of the relation between attitude or mental state
/ function and action. It is clear that a broad and rough idea of the
connections may be had. However, it seems that a detailed and precise but
general theory is impossible in practice and a deterministic theory
impossible in principle. The practical difficulty involves not just
“computation” but getting a complete description; e.g. one could write down
all the general influences that affect whether I will spend the rest of the
evening thinking and writing about the dimensions of mind / being but it
would be impossible to foresee every possibility such as a sudden urge to go
out and buy some ice cream. The theoretical difficulty regarding a
deterministic theory is that the connection between attitude and action is
not deterministic Elaboration
will be taken up as needed. There is some treatment of action below, in Action and Influence 1.4
Symbol and Language
Kinds of
Knowledge has some thoughts on the origin
of language and symbols 1.4.1
The importance of language
Language
is important, simply, as a medium of thought and communication, and as a mode
of expression of states of mind and of knowledge Language
is important as forming a framework or being the prototype of a framework for
logic, mathematics, science Use
of words relating to general and high level concepts such as “mind” and
“matter,” when taken from use and posited as the fundamental concepts of
theory or philosophical analysis may lead to distorted views of reality and
nature and to confusion. Use of the word “matter” encourages the incorrect
view that all levels of being or existence have the concrete character of
experience. Use of “mind” encourages the view of mind as separate from matter
which view is further encouraged by the foregoing concretization of all
being. Unlimited use of “cause” encourages views that all cause is of the
same type and pervades all process e.g. every event has a cause; this is a
universalization of experience and also encourages the view that causes are
unique or singular What
is the scope of what can be expressed in language i.e. thought in terms of
language? Above and below, find various approaches to and estimates of the
question of limits. An outer limit to intuition and to thought based in the
intuition is the limit to experience i.e. of what experiences is the organism
capable. If intuition is the sole way to knowledge – a strong tradition in
Western Philosophy – then this must also form an outer limit to what
knowledge may be expressed in language There
are problems associated with indiscriminate use of the concepts such as
“exist,” “all” or “universal,” “nothing” or “nothingness,” and “everything.”
What kind of care is needed to retain use of the concepts while avoiding the
problems? Concretization or reification of language, the projection of
experience is, in general, problematic. Improper use of words [concepts]
leads to error; and to effort on topics whose existence is based on error 1.4.2
Analytic or Linguistic Philosophy
It
is not the objective here to define or completely characterize this school or
movement but to make brief commentary that is pertinent, here, to its
contributions to “what may be known” In
an earlier phase, linguistic philosophy held that concepts and their valid
use could be clarified by an examination of language alone, that by this
approach every problem of philosophy would be solved or shown to be a
non-problem. The exclusive dependence on examination of language is
objectionable and has been abandoned by most analytic philosophers. Clearly,
examination of language is important in considering the possibilities of
language and potential errors of indiscriminate use One
approach to the examination of language has been to focus on use rather than
meaning31.
The connotation of meaning used here is that of a fixed and specifiable
meaning for each word, that each word corresponds to some definite thing as,
e.g. in a dictionary. Note that this is not the question of shades and
families of meaning and that one word may correspond to more than one symbol
i.e. the same sound or letter combination may have multiple unrelated
meanings – or uses. There are various reasons why the “dictionary theory of
meaning” is untenable. Among these the fact that a word does not always
refer, the evolution of language, and the dependence of meaning or use on
context are primary A question that arises is “what
arena constitutes valid use?” One response was “ordinary language analysis”
or examination of non-technical every day use. The primary problem with
ordinary language analysis is that every day use is an unnatural restriction.
In some smaller communities the every day and experimental uses of language
are clearly not distinct. In times that are removed from rapid linguistic
change – including origins – and in larger societies, e.g. modern society,
the idea of correctness of form and authority that is distinct from use
becomes established and is maintained by various mechanisms including specialization
and standardization. There is, however, no absolute distinction except as a
myth that has origin – in part – in educational institutions and,
subsequently, remains unquestioned There is no question that
analysis of use has led to valuable insights. The insight that meaning has no
anchor outside the environment of use [which I distinguish from use alone]
may seem limiting but is freeing. It is limiting if the goal is purely
objective meaning; however, one of the motivations of analysis of use is that
objective meaning – let alone final meaning – does not always obtain. It is
freeing – in addition to the sense in which the shedding of delusions, even
cherished ones, is always freeing – in that it shows that we are essentially
connected to the world and that the lack of final and objective meaning
systems permits further evolution of language, concepts and discovery: it has
been said that standardization of language – grammar, spelling, style – comes
after the golden age of any language. One example of illumination is in the
problem of the inverted spectrum which, in one form, may be posed “how can
one know that different individuals have the same subjective experience of
the color red?” A primary problem with the problem character is that it is a
form of criticism of meaning that does not go far enough. For example, how
does a given individual know that he or she is having the same experience of
red now as on an earlier occasion? The linguistic solution to the problem is
that “red” arises in a community of stable meaning [use] and the question of
identity of meaning can have no further rational analysis. A similar
argument applies to the successive experiences of the individual. Of course
there is a simple reality based analysis. It is that the similar structures
of organisms imply similarity of experience – when the organs are not
defective as in color blindness. Identity of experience is not expected; an
individual can verify that the experience of the left and the right eyes in
looking at the same red object are slightly different but are both, except in
cases of pathology, a sufficiently similar red. But, this analysis is not
necessary; regarding the possibility of perceptual experiences that were so
idiosyncratic that there was no constancy at all for a given object, there
would arise no system of stable use. Here are two valuable insights from this
example: in some cases words are thought to have meaning where there is none
and the assumption that there is a meaning leads to confusion and erroneous conclusions;
and, the experiences of individuals is not as private in the way that it is
often thought to be simply because conditions for private experience do not
exist. To clarify the point, note that there is no claim that individuals can
read others’ minds but that, in cases of effective communication, there is no
need to read minds Although analysis of use is a
valuable source of insight and understanding of error, exclusive restriction
of analysis to use and restriction of use to what the analysis of use
suggests is unnecessarily limiting. It is also self-contradictory in that the
experimental, imaginative use of words by thinkers and recourse to definition
are not something distinct from use; or that analysis of meaning, although
sometimes rather artificial, is something that only thinkers – but not users
– do. In fact, normal and creative use, reflection on meaning is something
that happens not only in formal settings but also casually – and the
distinction between the formal and the casual, though ritualized, is not at
all absolute. This is most easily seen by recalling the lack of
compartmentalization of the different language activities in some smaller
communities and, also, in larger societies at times of transition The experimental use of language
and the discussion of meaning as reference – and of use – are part of the
evolution of understanding and language 1.4.2.1
Solipsism
The kind of argument of the
previous section has been used consider the problem of solipsism which can be
seen as asserting that experience is essentially private; the inverted
spectrum is a special case of this position The purpose of this section is
neither criticism nor defense of solipsism but to consider and use what may
be motives for it The British idealist F.H. Bradley,
in Appearance and Reality, 1897, characterized the solipsistic view as
follows: “I cannot transcend experience,
and experience is my experience. From this it follows that nothing
beyond myself exists; for what is experience is its [the self’s] states” This statement could be used as
a basis for both epistemological and metaphysical solipsism. The former holds
that the ideas of the individual form the only basis for construction of
knowledge; the latter, a form of subjective idealism, is a position that the
ideas of the individual constitute the whole of reality A motive for solipsism appears
to be to place knowledge on the firmest possible ground by eliminating as
much in the way of assumption as possible. The epistemological solipsist may
think that, in solipsism, no assumptions are being made at all. In
epistemological solipsism, it is not being said that there is no external
world or that there are no other individuals but that the basis for knowing
their existence is the subjective side of the individual’s experience. The
kind criticism of the previous section, due to Wittgenstein, addresses
epistemological solipsism There are a number of other,
related ways of approaching criticisms of epistemological solipsism. In so
far as the urge to it is based in a desire for secure and certain knowledge
its motive is mistaken because the fabric of being is not so definite as to allow
both secure and certain knowledge except in our ideas. Importantly, it is
based in the idea that less is less. In other words, the supposed
foundation is that by stripping away assumption after assumption the thinker
progressively approaches a state in no conditions are being placed on the
possibility of knowledge. However, to the extent that experience is not
private, taking it to be private is an additional assumption and, perhaps,
even one that implies contradictions Metaphysical solipsism may be motivated
by epistemological solipsism “since all that I know is my experience that is
all that I can validly assume to exist.” As we have seen, that statement is
in error. However, as a foundation for metaphysical solipsism the error is
compounded for it is the basis of the jump to “since all that I know is my
experience, that is all that I will use in a theoretical construction
of reality.” Naturally, any such theoretical construction will be and remain
anemic as long as it receives no tacit infusions. However, in an egoistic
jump the metaphysician may be led to think or conclude “since all I know is
my experience, that is all that exists.” This may be seen as assuming more in
an attempt to assume less 1.4.2.2
The Concepts, “Everything” and
“Nothing” or “Nothingness”
This is one place that these
concepts could be properly discussed. However, it was suggested in the
previous section that analysis of use is not merely a process of language
analysis. Further, since these concepts are employed in the development of
the themes of this essay, reference is made to the development: see Existence
and Nothingness A brief comment will be useful
here. In the previous section it was seen that an attempt to assume less may
result in assuming more. Similarly, when viewing nothing as the absence of
all things, if “all things” is considered to be not only all actual objects
but also all concepts, contradictions result. This point, which has received
extensive formal consideration in the foundations of logic in the twentieth
century, is used later to avoid error and to make maximal use of the concept
of nothingness 1.4.3
Meaning and Communication
Here, “meaning” is linguistic
meaning and is not used as similar to “significance” as in the “meaning of
life.” As noted in the previous paragraph, linguistic meaning Language is used to express
understanding and knowledge which are changing and therefore the system of
meaning must change. There is no getting outside of this system and viewing
it from a high point: we are always immersed in it. Therefore any description
of meaning is always an approximation to the system of meaning in
application. Further, even if we somehow came into a possession of a system
of meaning it would have to be continually renewed for language is used to
express the system of knowledge which is changing. Meaning and application
are significantly co-determinate and co-evolutionary Oftentimes, such true claims are
the base of a hidden agenda. Rejection rather than criticism of metaphysics
often reveals such an agenda; and may even contradict the claims regarding
meaning 1.4.4
Kinds of Linguistic Meaning
The kinds of linguistic meaning
include literal and metaphorical meaning. However, the idea of literal
meaning is subject to all the conditions on meaning in the previous section,
i.e., the meaning of that section was literal meaning. Perhaps literal meaning
is nothing more than “first” or “standardized” meaning; and this
consideration applies to words and to sentences. As an association of or way
of associating meaning, metaphor does not imply something other than
“intrinsic” meaning which is a common though untenable idea of literal
meaning Other forms of linguistic
meaning include what is implied by or what may be inferred from what is said.
The speaker may imply something quite unrelated to what is said. For example,
“Jesus rose from the dead” has according to those who are faithful its
literal meaning, according to critics may be a way of mind and behavior
control; but the “original” meaning may be a reminder that any system of
determinate beliefs is suspect. Texts may be used in many ways and, therefore,
the assigned meaning may be, at any time or over time, any combination of
types of meaning. It is in human nature and therefore in the nature of the
use of human language to find politics, abuse, dogma, aesthetics and the
representation of the ultimate in the same endeavor 1.4.5
Formal Systems and Formal Meaning
An approach that complements the
intuitive – and holds promise that it will overcome the limits of intuition.
See Intuition
and Formal Knowledge
and related sections 1.5
Knowledge
1.5.1
Two Roles for Knowledge
The treatment of knowledge in
this essay is motivated by the desire to have a concept of knowledge that
enables a full concept of being. Further, Metaphysics
and the Possibility of Knowledge and Logic
works out some consequences of a full concept of being for knowledge 1. Knowledge as showing the way
through understanding32: what is possible… and how can
the possible be achieved 2. Knowledge as Being The
two roles show the significance of knowledge as the way of understanding and
as a general object. The roles are related: that knowledge is a form of being
means that understanding is an essential part of individual and not something
alien or pasted on; and that knowledge is understanding goes to the core of
the individual being. The use of understanding and its particularly human
connotation does not mean that the two roles and their relation pertains only
to humans; the discussion can be applied to any organism with understanding
replaced by “animal modes of knowing” In
[2] validity or correctness of knowledge is important; and then, knowledge is also viewed as having a process of
discovery. Essential error has been associated with this view The
following will be justified in what follows: As
far as knowledge having essential error is regarded as ultimate or all
pervading, this based in a mistaken understanding of the definiteness of
being; the way out of this abyss from within itself is to accept and use the
indefiniteness of being; even if foundation is important there is and need be
no ultimate foundation The
concept of foundation is not empty but the desire to ultimate foundation in a
progressive view is misplaced because it is self-contradictory; and, there is
a ground to being that is outside the progressive view and this also provides
an ultimate foundation though not directly of all variety in the world Consider: 1.5.2
What is Knowledge?
The
previous section is relevant to the question. Full reflection is deferred to Metaphysics. Important considerations are
as follows There
is a distinction between the concept of knowledge and criteria of validity or
acceptance There
is a subjective or mental side to knowledge – belief, holding something as
true, the experience of knowledge… and meaning i.e. that the mental could
refer to something in the world. There is an objective33 side to knowledge – that it
refers to something in the world, the verification or validation of the
reference. The union of the subjective and objective sides specifies the
concept of knowledge One
essential connection between the two sides is that a knowledge claim is
meaningful if it is capable of being either true or false, i.e. if it is
capable of having a truth value There
are tendencies to regard knowledge as separate from the world. There are
philosophies in which knowledge constitutes a separate world. It is therefore
important to state that there is one actual world. It is permissible to
consider the possible to be a world but that would not be an actual world It
follows that acquisition of knowledge is associated with a change in the body
of the organism. This is true regardless of whether the world is material in
nature. Knowledge is not separate from the organism; knowledge has being. As
adaptation, the distinction between knowledge and structure of the organism
body is not one of fundamental kind 1.5.3
Intuition and Formal Knowledge
This
is a significant distinction. Here, intuition does not refer to sub-conscious
awareness, to heuristic analysis or to feeling one’s way to the solution of a
problem. Rather, the structure of awareness is such that one perceives
certain fundamental forms of the world or underlying the world: space, time,
causality, objecthood and so on. These are the forms of intuition i.e.
in-tuition. Formal knowledge is knowledge that is expressed in
terms of abstract symbols and does not a priori include the forms of
intuition. Intuitive knowledge is held by the individual organism; formal
knowledge may be held by both organism and community and is, therefore, also
the form of communication. Various merits of formal and intuitive knowledge
are discussed below and it is not necessary to pre-view that information here Intuition
is closely related to perception, to what has been called knowledge by
acquaintance, iconic representation, to direct, immediate knowledge, to the
body; it is related to what is called knowledge by immersion in Kinds of Knowledge. Formal knowledge tends to be
conceptual, to be what has been called knowledge by description, symbolic
representation, to inferred knowledge, to thought, especially to thought in
terms of language The
main points here are [1] that the intuitionism / formalism34 distinction is fundamental in
this work and [2] both intuition and formal knowledge hold promise, each in
its own way, for ultimate knowledge. Since the form of intuition is, in part,
a priori to the organism the intuitive approach to ultimate knowledge will
require transformation of the organism. Although all possible Experiments in the
Transformation of Being are considered below,
development and the acquisition of knowledge involves material transformation
and the question “What are the limits to transformation?” arises. This
question is considered below and the issue whether there are absolute limits
is considered. The formal approach may also result in ultimate knowledge and
possible approaches are through science and various renderings of the
transcendental analytic. The latter includes showing that the condition
referred to as nothingness is equivalent, since nothingness is beyond
determinism, causality and law, to all possible worlds; and if what was
possible did not manifest there would be “law,” i.e. what is possible is also
necessary. To claim that the science or thought of today can capture the
ultimate is an unnecessary and unjustified reductionism; but to say that
future thought is limited by the present understanding of thought is,
equally, a reduction. Therefore, formal science or, more generally, formal
thought may capture the ultimate. An issue of formal knowledge is that it
lacks deep embodiment and that, apparently, it does not function in real
time. However, intuition may, also, lag behind the processes of the world;
and the formal approach may appear to promise knowledge that is timeless.
Further, even the most abstract and elementary symbol is a form of intuition
and it is a valid question as to what the limits of formal knowledge are from
this viewpoint It
follows from the foregoing that there are no demonstrable or actual absolute
limits to knowledge including human knowledge. It does not follow that
overcoming the practical limits is easy or likely in a given epoch See
Characterization of Mind for further discussion of
intuitionism and formalism in the theory of knowledge 1.5.3.1 Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge
by Description
The
purpose of this section is to include brief discussion what has become a
conventional distinction – that of knowledge by acquaintance vs. knowledge by
description Intuition
is closely related to perception, to what has been called knowledge by
acquaintance, iconic representation, to direct, immediate knowledge, to the
body; it is related to what is called knowledge by immersion in Kinds of
Knowledge which also has references to
the literature. Formal knowledge tends to be conceptual, to be what has been
called knowledge by description, symbolic representation, to inferred
knowledge, to thought, especially to thought in terms of language35 Knowledge by description may be
regarded as being built up from the objects of acquaintance; and the symbols
of description from the icons of acquaintance. The objects of acquaintance
need not be simple and do not constitute a set of elements of for descriptive
knowledge. In an attempt to construct symbolic description from elements,
such elements might be chosen from among the objects of acquaintance. The
word “object,” here, as elsewhere requires some discussion. Objects need be
neither elementary nor simple. A pattern is an object. Thus patterns that are
perceived allow inference. What is the form of such inference? It can be viewed
as inductive if the inference is directly from the pattern. Alternatively, it
may be viewed as deductive starting from the premise of the pattern and,
perhaps, some actual circumstance. Thus, logic is not the exclusive province
of symbolic knowledge 1.5.3.2
Journey in Being is an Adventure in the Forms of Being and
Thought
Thought or Knowledge: being –
the concept, role of time, of construction and goals, of sentience i.e. what
would be the significance of an existing phase-epoch of the one cosmos, bounded
by non-existence and that was not known or knowable… and would not such a
phase-epoch rightly be called a separate universe [see Reflections
on the Number of Universes]…
and is sentience an integral or an atomic function? Objecthood, process
or changing, space-time, causality and action upon,
continuity, prediction and determinism Being: the possibilities of
being, realization; the paths 1.5.3.3
Alien world view of Knowledge;
Presentationism and Representationism 36
The terms presentationism and
representationism have been used in describing the nature of knowledge have
affinities to intuition and formal knowledge. Additionally, the meanings of
the terms as used in the literature are not uniform and some clarification
will be useful. However, even though the ideas are present, this essay is not
dependent on a significant use of the terms and this section may be regarded
as outside the main development. The purpose of this section is to provide
clarification and to relate the terms to the ideas of intuition and formal
knowledge that are central in this essay The alien world notion of
knowledge is a caricature of some approaches to knowledge: we are placed in
an alien universe, we have no intrinsic knowledge or instruments of knowledge
that are in tune with or of the universe; everything, therefore, requires
justification but even justification does not produce real knowledge for that
is not possible to an alien being… mirage is all that there is and it is by
chance that knowledge is useful The presentational view: there
is an epistemological version in which direct knowledge possible and, in a
more ambitious version, all knowledge is direct knowledge or can be based on
it; in the metaphysical version, the objects in knowledge in the mind are
objects of the world… a species of the view that being and knowing are
continuous. There is a secondary non-uniformity that may arise on account of
the dual use of “object” to refer to the physical object and, e.g. in Kant,
to refer to the concept Representation is in between
presentationism and the alien world view: in an epistemological version
knowledge, is a construction of the mind even if it conforms to the real; in
the metaphysical version, the objects of knowledge in the mind are “copies”
of objects in the world. The metaphysical version is caricatured, above, as
the alien world view 1.5.4
How is Knowledge Possible
The obvious meaning is [a] How
is knowledge possible at all? This question is theoretical but reflections on
it are useful. A second, derivative, but important and practical meaning is
[b] how is it that human beings, on the basis of limited contact with the
world, come to know as much as they do? Of course, these questions beg the
negative skeptical questions which require some answer but not to obsession.
In part, the answer to skepticism is the answer to the questions. The answers
to questions [a] and [b] are similar and here are four approaches. First,
what is the constitution of knowledge – of what elements is it
constructed? This is addressed by the discussion of empiricism, rationalism
and foundations that follows. This, however, does not explain how the
individual acquires the biological and psychological constitution to receive
information – in the empirical mode – and form concepts – in the rational
mode. Second, then, is the constitution of the individual; this
constitution is acquired in evolution and in development. Thus the individual
is rooted in the world. Sensation, perception and the so called a priori
forms of intuition – objecthood, causality, space, and time and so on – have
origin in evolution and development. Of course, this explanation, like the
others here is in principle. Discussion of details and constructions and
their history is deferred. Of course, the individual is not on his or her own
and also learns from the community. Third, human knowledge is a cumulation of
the knowledge of its communities and civilizations over time; even in the
absence of a formal system or separate institutions of education the
development, the individual learns through example, ritual, stories, myth,
and instruction. Communal learning is through communication: ritual acting
out, graphic depiction, drama and art, all of which have a symbolic aspect.
An especially human mode of communication is through abstract symbols,
especially natural language. Language is, of course, not purely abstract
since it has elements of iconic representation even if the iconic significance
is long forgotten. Further, sound, tone, rhythm and so on have significance.
Language may be formalized and the formal symbolic systems may be regarded as
a fourth mode of knowledge. The formal mode may go where intuition – the
innate modes of knowing – do not go and there are hopes for a formal
foundation of knowledge that I discuss elsewhere in the present essay and in Metaphysics
whose content has been absorbed into this section on Metaphysics or
Knowledge and Action. One way in which the formal mode may go beyond the
intuitive is through building concepts – these may start with formalization
of intuition or found the intuition… and through logic or implication.
Concepts, theory and implication also provide for summary representation of
the behavior of large phases of being and for large amounts of information. A
seeming lack of formal knowledge is that it is not personal or intimate
knowledge – it lacks embodiment. A degree of intimacy and intuition regarding
may be developed regarding formal knowledge; even the most abstract symbol is
also a form of intuition. Yet, formal knowledge is lacking in satisfaction;
but beyond that, the individual is little changed by vast systems of formal knowledge37.
Further, formal knowledge does not process in real time. Thus, even the development
and growth of knowledge lead, for their completion, to interest in the Experiments in the Transformation of Being Classical views of the
constitution of knowledge are empiricism and rationalism. In
the following, we refer to [the] two sides of knowledge: meaning and
reference. Empiricism refers to two related views. The first is an empiricist
theory of meaning or of concepts: words can be understood or concepts
be possible only if they are connected [reduced] to experience, i.e. to
things experienced. The second, an empiricist theory of knowledge, is that
justification of knowledge [hypotheses, beliefs] depends,
ultimately, on experience. Empiricism is opposed to authority, intuition,
imaginative conjecture, and rational thought as sources of
belief and justification. The fundamental opposition is with rationalism: in
a rationalist theory of knowledge reasoning is a source of justification; and
in a rationalist theory of meaning concepts are derived from intuition or
posited formally, i.e. in terms of abstract symbols. A strict or strong
rationalism would exclude empiricism while a liberal rationalism would
conjoin empirical with rational meaning and justification Empiricism and rationalism are
in opposition in their radical forms; radical empiricism as the idea that,
ultimately, the modes of expression and of justification of knowledge are
only empirical. Radicalization has the virtue of simplicity but is
unnecessary. Experience is one source, but not the only one, of the capacity
for rational thought. In the individual, the developing brain is conditioned
by experience upon the forming neural connections resulting in a mature
brain. However, it is not experience that produces the capacity of the
individual to have a brain. If we regard the capacities of the brain which
include the ability to develop into an organ that includes the rational
capacity and some degree of innate knowledge as constituting some degree of
original occurrent and dispositional knowledge then neither experience nor
thought nor their combination is the source of all organismic knowledge.
However, experience [experiment] and reason are required in the standard
accounts of the justification of scientific knowledge as practiced c. 2000 There is a form of idealism
according to which the form of the world – the universe – is the form of
human knowledge. The motive for this is, perhaps, that human beings can do no
better [than they can do.] The converse of this form of idealism is that skepticism
that, starting from the same point, holds that knowledge cannot exceed its
innate bounds. This is not a radical skepticism: it allows a degree of
knowledge. The position held here avoids a typology of knowledge. Motivations
for a typology of knowledge include simplicity – or, more generally, an aesthetic
– and foundation of knowledge. The position regarding the aesthetic is
that it is a valuable guide that develops as knowledge and understanding of
knowledge develops. The position regarding foundations or foundationalism
is that the ideal of a foundation is a firm anchor that is outside
knowledge as a whole – outside what is being founded; and that there is no
such absolute anchor. This is limiting if a foundation is seen as securing knowledge
and if such security is seen as desirable. However, it is freeing if the
knowledge agent is then seen as being in the world and, if without an
absolute anchor, also without absolute limits. The position is, then, that
there are modes of knowledge – including the empirical, the ideal and
the formal – and that knowledge is a process. This position is itself not
absolute for there is no saying that the process must continue without end –
if being itself were without end, and there is no saying that the process
will not end; and if it will end there is no saying that that end will be
limited or will be absolute These assertions may be modified
later and the expansion of knowledge and its modes be found in kind and
content to cover all being 1.5.4.1
The Functions of Knowledge
This section was originally
titled The Faculties of Knowledge but was changed because “faculties”
has the connotation of special, distinct, hermetic compartments or special
organs for each faculty or function such as emotion, perception and so on;
there is no reference to any such connotations of “faculty.” The functions
are broad areas that have a variety of sub-kinds and instances, indistinct
boundaries and overlap, and, may have primitive elements in common Details of the functions are
omitted since they parallel those in A System
of the Dimensions of Mind, Being and Action.
Here, the functions, are presented somewhat ad hoc; in the parallel
treatment, some foundation is given, the treatment is broadened in scope and
detail added The functions Thought Iconic: the elements of thought
are percepts. I.e., the form of iconic thought is that of intuition Symbolic: Natural language /
formal systems; symbols are elementary forms of intuition whose structure has
no significance in formal systems The following considerations
arise: relation of concepts and percepts; iconic-intuitive and
symbolic-formal character of concepts; question of ultimate distinction
between iconic-intuitive thought and thought in language or symbolic-formal
thought. The latter is considered in a number of places, especially Intuition
and Formal Knowledge Drives; continuity with emotion Emotion as complexes of
feeling-thought Perception; the following
distinction brings out the variety of perception but is not fundamental Sense perception Proprioception – perception of
internal state… and feeling including pleasure and pain, and the feeling components
of emotion The following questions arise What is the range of perception
i.e. what are the perceivable objects or elements of the world? What is the range of thought
i.e. what is the range of being covered by the thinkable… are there modes or
kinds of being that are not thinkable? What is the range of thought in
language? Formal processes may be
questioned on the ground that they do not operate in real time. Does
intuition operate in real time? If an object is in the range of
the perceivable or the thinkable… is the validity of the reference capable of
being established? Is all “verification” merely a survival of criticism? Or
is knowledge capable of being positive due e.g. to the organism’s
being-in-the-world… including evolution? If positive knowledge is possible,
would that not imply that knowledge comes before foundation? It appears from the foregoing
that limits to knowing are limits to being. What is the significance of the Experiments in the Transformation of Being
to limits of experience, to what can be experienced and to knowledge? 1.5.4.2
Kinds of Knowledge
The following occur above: Fact / pattern… related to
percept / concept Theory, understanding,
explanation Acquaintance / description Logic and implication Intuition / formal knowledge Intuition includes the body
modes 1.5.5
Knowledge, Belief and Truth
Knowledge is related to belief.
If I hold something to be true then, firstly, I believe it and then I think –
or feel – I know it. But belief is not restricted to holding something to be
true. First, distinguish what I believe what I think I believe, what I write
I believe and what I say I believe; these are in a complex interaction.
Belief has been defined as a predisposition to act in a certain way; thinking
I believe something, writing, saying that I believe something are, also,
forms of action. However, belief is related to, partially determinative of
but distinct from the actions and the predisposition. On the way to saying
what I hold to be definitive, here are some preliminary comments. Regarding
some particular issue, I may have held [thought] different beliefs along the
way; each such belief is a result of a complex set of factors – what I have
held before, new information, rational processing, the influence of others
and of the predominant belief system, irrational and chance factors. At a
particular time I may hold [think] some specific belief. Thus my actual
belief is a “superposition” of the memory traces, some so recessed that they
are far from conscious light, of my past held [thought] beliefs; due to
genetic predisposition, to interactivity of beliefs, random factors, the
actual belief may be a more complex combination or superposition. When I know
something, one condition, then would be that the superposition is so nearly a
sharply defined position that my held [consciously thought] belief is [or is
very close to being] fixed. Belief is a state of being; knowledge is true
belief So far, belief has been thought
of in two ways – as related to truth and as related to action; and these two
ways are related. I would not believe something that I know is untrue. But,
apart from the absurd or contradictory, there appears to be little absolute
knowledge; as far as facts are concerned there always appears to be the
possibility of correction. Therefore, all knowledge remains tinged with
belief: there is no anchor for knowledge outside the world. It seems to me, then,
that when I know something, I have a high degree of belief in it – as a
result of various validations. In other words, I have a shade of doubt. When
it comes to action, I would usually be foolish to act on what is more
doubtful. Regarding belief, I can restate this as follows. Consider the
strong belief that a fact is true. I call this |true> and I usually think,
simply, that fact is true. However, there is also a weak belief, the
doubt, that usually does not occur to me that the fact is not true and I call
this |not true>. As I said, I usually think, simply, that fact is true.
However, belief is more complex than that. There is a distinction between
what I believe and what I think I believe… and what I say I believe; and this
does not involve explicit dishonesty. Then my actual belief is something
like: a |true> + b |not true> where, usually, either a
or b will be small and in the conventional attitude toward belief one
of a and b is zero. The actual resolution of belief into a
thought or an action occurs in an actual situation. In a more complex
situation where there are possibilities a, b, c… my belief is |a> + |b>
+ |c> + …38 In general the possibilities a,
b, c… include all possible belief states 1.5.6
Knowledge, Meaning and Reference
There is an intuitive side to
knowledge that refers to the fact that the forms of understanding of which
the organism is capable are forms of the world39;
this intuitive side is part of the idea of meaning and is a necessary
prerequisite for meaning as explained above. This is, of course, somewhat
circular because what are the forms of the world outside understanding. The
circularity is cut by recognizing that there are stages in the development of
the understanding. The intuition often seems as though it is a priori to the
experience of the individual but this a priori resolves to analysis of
experience, to development of the individual from conception which in turn
has resolution in evolution. The analysis of intuition is a large and
incompletely resolved area of epistemology. However, there is a formal side
to the development of knowledge that supplements and complements intuition that
may bypass its specific deficiencies. There is also the problem of embodiment
discussed above / below. However, the formal approach is symbolic in that it
uses language and related symbolic systems. It is not clear that there could
not be a formal system based on an iconic system but this does not change the
point that the formal may bypass the deficiencies to intuition. The basic
symbols are intuitive although at a more primitive level than the categories
of understanding – and this appears to return to embodiment. The most basic
symbol system [0,1] may generate more complex systems and can be seen to be
symbolically basic and also to correspond to the most fundamental distinction
[that of distinction] in nature; thus, at root, intuition, formalism and world
intersect The intuitive side of knowledge
involves embodiment of knowledge. This raises the question whether, in
general, embodiment of the conditions of the environment involves knowledge.
For example, that the digestive tract clearly corresponds to conditions in
the environment has been cited as an example of knowledge. Mythology and
folklore, also, have been claimed as knowledge. All such claims have and can
be denied. A simple resolution is as follows. We can distinguish kinds
of knowledge. There is then no transgression of reason whether forms of
embodiment and culture are called, each, some kind of knowledge or not. There
may, however, be a gain in unity and understanding by admitting the variety
of forms to be kinds of knowledge It has been argued that the
formal approach may lead to absolute knowledge though this is not clear –
problems of verification, at least, would seem to remain. The idea of being
fundamental over a specified universe of discourse is more reasonable; but
this depends, also, on degree of abstraction and we will consider, later, an
approach to an unconditional absolute The ideal of knowledge is that
it is belief that is true. However there are often problems with
verification; then we may say that we have knowledge when we believe
something and the belief has passed all best efforts at verification. In some
cases, if not all, the concept of verification does not apply and we then
replace “has passed our best efforts at verification” by “has passed – or has
not failed – our best efforts at critical testing” When we know something, we have
knowledge. That would be trivial except for its connection to consciousness;
and as a beginning. Knowledge is a trace of the world in the organism.
Knowledge is a representation of the world. Knowledge is an adaptation.
Knowledge is not static, is in process, is dynamic in that, in practice, is
subject to modification and filling in of detail; knowledge is subject to
correction Meaning is further discussed in Analytic
Philosophy 1.5.7
Criteria of Validity
If knowledge, its “methods” and
processes, show what is possible and how that may be achieved, then, we would
like to have confidence in the applicability and validity of the claims of
knowledge. The problem of applicability is harder than that of validity.
Application requires, first, development of the knowledge and, then,
knowledge that it is applicable in the given context. In the Western
tradition, development includes the process of creation for which there are
ways but no sure ways, i.e. no method. In the same tradition, one approach to
validity is the Socratic Method or approach which may be interpreted as
analysis or criticism from as many perspectives and in as many ways as
possible. If it is allowed that creation of new knowledge is also criticism
of established knowledge and that experiment and action are forms of
criticism then the Socratic approach is not other than the scientific, the
philosophical and a host of other approaches to method That is, what are criteria for
validity? One basis from which to discuss
criteria is the notion, from close to the dawn of philosophy, of knowledge as
justified, true, belief. Note that though this is sometimes referred to
as the “standard analysis of propositional knowledge,” since – or insofar as
– propositions are context / theory dependent, it applies equally to all
knowledge. The standard analysis corresponds, roughly, to the specification,
above, of knowledge in terms of subjective and objective sides: belief as
subjective, truth as objective and justification as relating the subjective
and objective A number of criticisms of the
idea of justified, true, belief arise. First, as an interpretation of
the two sided face of knowledge, it is a suggestion or hypothesis – for where
has the interpretation been proved? In this realm, there is no absolute proof
and all that there is hypothesis, application, analysis… and improvement.
This criticism is negative. A positive criticism must rest on analysis of the
concepts involved The notion of justification may
arise as follows. In an established context, we often accept certain core
beliefs as true. However, in a dynamic state, one in which we seek to improve
or expand the state of knowledge, “established truth” is necessarily called
in to question. The process of establishing, or more correctly, of improving
upon the “established” is justification. Since there is no getting out of the
world, justification – pending some greater insight – is always relative and
never absolute; justification a process. Later efforts at assertion and
justification may require assertions that were best justified earlier or
elsewhere to be relinquished. Similarly, although there is an ideal of truth,
for beings that are not omniscient there is no effective truth that is better
than the best established or best justified truth There is a modern criticism, the
basis of an entire industry of argument and publication, of knowledge as
justified, true, belief that allows for a claim to knowledge be untrue yet
justified. This criticism ignores the entanglement, for finite or
non-omniscient beings, of justification and [effective] truth. This point
invalidates the criticism and the literature in question because it shows up
the notion of justified, true, belief as containing the contradiction that
has just been pointed out The following principle may be
introduced: no argument shall be called a [valid] justification if the kind
of argument could be a justification of an untrue proposition. All examples
of which I am aware in which justified, true, belief does not constitute
possession of knowledge use a justification schema that would allow a
justified, untrue belief to also constitute knowledge There is a practical problem
with the analysis of the previous paragraph. It is that all knowledge,
whether propositional or theoretical, is subject to correction and therefore
any justification is the best available, the best to date and so on. This
problem is addressed in the next paragraph An improvement over justified,
true, belief would be, simply, true belief because, effectively, truth
requires justification. Alternatively, we could say that knowledge is the best
justified belief. Practically, according to this notion, claims to
knowledge will always be contentious because, in a given situation, the
available justification will not be the best, different groups will have
different notions, interpretations and applications of the idea of best
justification. However, these contentions will not be contradictions and, the
ideal of true belief remains free of contradiction 1.5.8
Security
Established and secure knowledge
is useful in application and is also reassuring The reassurance is due to the
tacit inclusion of safety and security [certainty] in formulating concepts
and criteria for knowledge. As pointed out above, safety is not always
possible and is not always desirable even when that is what is desired Security is one motive for
skepticism 1.5.9
Criticism, Skepticism and their Radical Forms
Skepticism may be described as
the position that certain knowledge is not possible; and radical skepticism
may be described as the position that knowledge is not possible at all Skepticism is not in
contradiction with the existence of contexts that from a human perspective
are extended and vast, in which knowledge is extremely reliable Criticism is an attitude or
study of the nature and limits of knowledge or a discipline, carried out in a
way to avoid both skepticism and dogmatism A critical attitude shows and
helps remove error; radical or thoroughgoing criticism is similarly useful in
showing what foundation a discipline – or knowledge as a whole – may have Without hypotheses –
imagination, what has been regarded or treated as knowledge – there is
nothing to criticize Therefore, radical criticism is
especially useful when applied to knowledge in its phases of growth As an attitude skepticism may
lead to useful criticism but, especially in its radical form may be
debilitating by discouraging thought In addition to the motive of
security, radical skepticism may also be based in an exalted ideal of
knowledge based in contexts in which the frailty of knowledge can be avoided.
Such contexts include society and life Criteria for the validity of
knowledge are context dependent and related to the concept or idea of
knowledge that is explicitly or tacit; however, the concept of knowledge is
capable of expansion as the context and understanding of knowledge grow 1.5.9.1
What is the Depth of Knowledge in the Organism?
In the ultimate, the distinction
between knowledge and being breaks down; knowledge and action are
inseparable, knowledge remains intertwined with its organic base; the
existence of final and ultimate criteria is not given 1.5.10
Justification and Action
Action was allowed as a way of
criticism or justification, above. The meaning is that action is the test of
a hypothesis: the hypothesis is used as the basis of action and the action fails
or succeeds. In practice, there would be a combination of action and
other approaches including analysis and controlled experiment. Why would one
use the approach of action? Action may be imperative and there may be no
alternative approach to criticism; or the combination of action and other approaches
may be optimal in some sense. What sense? Various formulations could be given
but, note, this is the same issue of criticism taken to a higher [meta]
level. The approach of action without otherwise justified hypotheses could
also be taken by choice because of the promise or possibility of a valuable
outcome Why consider action, for its own
sake, in a discussion of knowledge? It is because knowledge and action are
only approximately separable and there is a level at which and there are
domains where knowledge and action are inseparable 1.5.11 Knowledge and Action
Recall the intent from Two Roles
for Knowledge
“The treatment of knowledge in this essay is motivated by the desire to have
a concept of knowledge that enables a full concept of being” What might be a final foundation
to knowledge? Knowledge is a relation between knower and known – the universe
or a part of it. If by foundation I mean a means of absolute verification of
truth and an actual verification, then a foundation will require getting
outside the system of knower and known for mooring, rock or anchor. For a
final foundation, that would require getting outside the universe itself and
that is impossible. Therefore, in the present sense, a final foundation of
knowledge is impossible This line of thought is one of
the motivations for developing a pragmatic theory of the foundations of
knowledge or a pragmatic theory of truth. However, it is implicit,
ultimately, pragmatism is not a foundation but a tacit statement that there
is no final foundation of knowledge in verification – owing to the ultimate
lack of a Platonic world against which to compare in order to verify It is recognized, therefore,
that knowledge remains in interaction with action and, in a sense – though
not in any sense of verification, this is a final “foundation.” It would be a
foundation in the sense that it is recognized, not only that no anchor or
rock is necessary, but, also, that the search for an anchor is counter to the
nature of being and is, in the end, at least, a serious block to realization … It is desirable to have a
concept of knowledge that is not dependent on human experience of knowledge.
It might seem that this is impossible but the symbolic method complemented by
intuition is one approach, as has been noted, to transcending the limitations
of and anchoring the intuition. The concept of knowledge would be a theory of
the mutual adaptation of the elements of the being of the universe … Development of the more general
concept of knowledge in a process or action framework and related concepts is
deferred to: Theories
of Action
and, especially, Metaphysics
/ Action | Metaphysics
and the Possibility of Knowledge and Logic 1.5.12 Processes of Knowledge
The intent here is to give brief
mention, showing how the processes of conceptual knowledge tie into criteria 1.5.12.1 Discovery
As noted above, without
hypotheses there is nothing to criticize and therefore, one phase is
discovery. Criticism or justification is not the primary concern in this
phase but may be present, for example, in eliminating from consideration
clearly untenable ideas. This heuristic element is efficient because, often
it is not the hypotheses themselves that are tested but conclusions based on
them and the derivation of conclusions may be laborious 1.5.12.1.1
Concepts 40
I use concept in two
related senses. In the first, a concept is an experience of or mental
content corresponding to something real. “Experience of” is more
general and allows for real, approximate and hypothetical
concepts. A percept is a concept. I do not, here, enter into a
discussion whether any concepts are innate. However, a concept can be
constructed and, later, appear to be a priori. Much of the human conceptual
system is constructed from language. Actual concepts are usually layered in
the sense that there are perceptual and linguistic components The first sense of concept is
[similar to] the one used in analytic philosophy in which a concept is
capable of being the constituent of mental or linguistic content and a
related, more specific sense, used also in cognitive science c.2000, in which
a concept is an element of propositional thought. A primary significance of
the analytic sense, discussed by example in Being,
is that it avoids errors that may result from confusing object and concept The second and classical sense
of concept, here, is that of generic idea. In this meaning, a concept
is useful in providing – efficient – general understanding that has
application in particular cases The two senses of concept are
related. A percept, the content of a perception, is a mental content and
therefore a concept in the analytic sense. But all actual perceptions are
organizations of raw data [whether particles or sensations] and therefore,
also, generic ideas; and higher order concepts are generic over lower order
concepts which may include percepts The classical sense of generic
idea defines a family of meaning; elucidation and elaboration would come from
application to a variety of cases 1.5.12.1.2
Articulation of Concepts
One concern of philosophy,
especially philosophy of the analytic variety, is the establishment of the existence,
nature and articulation of various fundamental concepts; the activity is
useful In the absence of a systematic
metaphysics this activity may be seen in rough analogy to astronomy.
Astronomy is the cataloging and mapping of the heavens; and, in analogy,
there is a phase of philosophy that is the cataloging and mapping of ideas.
Later, it may be possible to have theories such as physical cosmology for
astronomy and systematic metaphysics for the analysis of concepts that allow
understanding of the “universes” as dynamic wholes in self-interaction Relative to the goal of global
understanding, any requirement of precision and detailed articulation of
concepts may be an impediment. This arises in two ways. First, and
fundamentally, not all concepts-object pairs are given or necessarily
possessed of or to be possessed of precise articulation and, therefore, the
requirement of precision is anti-realistic; examples of this are seen in the
discussions, below, in the following and other locations: matter
and indefiniteness
of concepts
in the section on the Dimensions
of Mind / Being: Introduction.
Second, even when possible, whether in general or in a restricted context,
precision and detailed articulation may not be necessary to an abstract or
general over-view Although precise articulation is
useful in a number of ways, insistence on it may retard understanding,
may give the impression that we know more [about the context] and less
[in general] than we actually do 1.5.12.1.3
Field of Concepts
The simple objects and phenomena
are interrelated and any system general understanding must, in order to be
effective, usually consider the interacting field of phenomena which includes
objects and phenomena from a variety of classes. The understanding therefore
requires a field of concepts and descriptions of behaviors. The word “field”
signifies that the concepts are interactive through their constitution or
definition or the behaviors and, therefore, do not form a mere collection 1.5.12.1.4
Conception or Concept Formation
I am not referring, primarily,
to concept formation in the development of an individual but to the original
establishment or modification of concepts for understanding The key ideas are: The motive to introducing a
concept arises when similar or repetitive phenomena are noted Concepts evolve and this
evolution includes original motivation, patterns among other concepts; and
there are points of similarity with development in that sufficient
preparation is necessary; the process is iterative as described in Justification It is often necessary to
consider a field of concepts rather than single concepts in isolation;
this, too, may require iteration. Considered from the point of origin of
concept formation each stage of development builds upon earlier stages in a
“bootstrap” or self-generating process, an iteration that is, metaphorically,
both circular and linear and may, therefore be called helical.
Although the process does not follow a rational path, when a system of
concepts comes together in enhanced understanding the situation is recognized
by the elimination of loose ends and unanswered questions and there is often
rapid and revolutionary change in the quality of the understanding or theory 1.5.12.1.5
Definiteness of Concepts
A variety of ways in which
concepts may be indefinite have been shown in this document. One way arises
from the idea of a field of concepts where the field is definite but there is
play in the individual concepts. A second kind of indefiniteness arises from
indefiniteness of reference; which, in turn is inherent in the fact
that reference is always in a process of creation, stabilization and
evolution in use in an environment [which, also, may be changing.] Finally,
objects may be indefinite as discussed in the sections starting with Mind Social objects are those that
are “created” by individuals [in communication.] Such objects, including
language, may become quite definite as a result of adaptation and the
possibilities of form; however, there remains an underlying arbitrariness and
therefore indefiniteness to many social objects Natural objects are not thought
to have the indefiniteness just associated with social objects. There are,
however, philosophies in which natural are social artifacts. That
natural objects are social artifacts is not held here in any essential way,
i.e. it is not held that the “fictional” character of natural concepts is
essential. However, natural objects such as the elementary particles were, it
is assumed, created and, the definiteness of created objects is not an
essential condition of creation 1.5.12.2
Justification
Is the process of subjecting the
hypotheses to various kinds of test that include logical consistency,
agreement with existing data, and making and evaluating predictions Discovery and justification is
not a linear process. As noted, elements of criticism are present in
discovery; similarly imagination is required to develop predictions and
tests. Additionally, the overall process is iterative in that hypotheses may
need to be adjusted as a result of disagreement with data and this occur at a
number of levels of detail 1.5.12.3 Science
The processes of science have
been elaborated as four phases: experimentation, conception, development and
verification. These are elaborations of discovery and justification We often speak of science as
though it were one thing. That is not the case. Often, science is thought of
as its rules and institutional norms… or thought of as its products; in these
senses science is an instrument of a phase of history. The rules or norms are
related to but distinct from the essence which are imagination and
correction. The essence of [1] idea or hypothesis and [2] test and correction
conforms to the variation and selection of universal evolution – see Nothingness.
In this sense, science is eternal 1.5.12.4 Direct Knowledge
Conceptual knowledge is based,
in part on tests, and experimental tests are ultimately reducible to simple
observations or perception which has no further foundation in practice For the organism, perception is
effectively direct knowledge There are disciplines such as
mysticism that make claims to direct knowledge of what might normally be
thought to be conceptual. The present discussion is not based on this kind of
direct knowledge and its treatment is deferred 1.5.13 Knowledge Used in the Journey in Being
For a details and preliminary
definition of needs see Design for a Journey in Being Also see the Bibliographies 1.5.13.1 Topics
Life; the body All cultures and civilizations Self knowledge; introspection Meditation and Yoga Extent, conceptual organization,
divisions of human knowledge Science, humanities, the
practical arts, institutions 1.5.13.2 Range of Human Knowledge
What is the possible range of
human knowledge? How may this question be
approached? The
[Human] Knowledge Project – see Design for a Journey in Being 1.6
Theory and Approaches to Group Action
and Value41
The previous title to this
section was ‘Ethics, Being and Knowledge.’ The new title implies an expanded
scope that will include the political philosophy of Action, Charisma and
Influence, and History It is not the intent, in this
section, to do justice to the literature and history of thought on ethics.
Rather, the purposes include, as far as I can in a brief treatment: Characterizing ethics,
especially in light of the treatment of knowledge, being, mind and cosmology
of the previous sections: this will involve two levels – the
as-we-experience-it level, i.e. what is it for a human being to conduct him
or herself morally and what are the associated mental states and processes…
and the elementary level, the level of fundamental entities. The latter begs
the question, what, if anything, could be or correspond at the elementary
level to ethical behavior as-we-experience-it Characterizing the relationships
between ethics and being and the role of ethics in Journey in Being Toward achieving these purposes,
the discussion of this section includes discussion of: Brief characterization of the
nature of morals and ethics Nature of moral conduct Relationship between morals and
ethics Some problems in the concepts of
ethics and its relation to conduct Relationship between ethics and
being A Purpose: Constructive, Aesthetic and
Global dimensions of Ethics
In asking ‘How should I live my
life?’ I necessarily come to ask ‘What should I do with my life?’ Ethics is necessarily
constructive and not merely prohibitive [Thou shalt not] ‘What should I do?’ has,
clearly, ethical and aesthetic dimensions If ethics concerns choices of
action, aesthetics concerns values and choices in expression, representation
and inspiration – there is essentially no difference In the modern world – and in
modern thought – the social and global dimensions of morals and politics are
significant 1.6.1
Nature of Moral Conduct
1.6.1.1
The Possibility of Moral Conduct
The possibility of moral conduct
is founded on: The existence or possibility of
moral value or the good. The good may take on a number of forms e.g.
good ends, right actions, right thought, right will, right intention; and
have a number of meanings e.g. desirability, happiness, virtue and so on The existence of moral
alternatives and the ability to choose from among these alternatives In moral conduct, there must be
more than one possibility of conduct, some possibilities must be more moral
than others, and the actor must know this and be able to choose from among
the possibilities 1.6.1.2
What is good is not laid out in advance
Moral value evolves – this may
be disputed by Platonic idealists but, at least, knowledge of morals evolves
– and one factor in that evolution is the creation and modification of moral
value. If the reader is disposed to dispute this point he or she may review
the history of morals and human rights or may consider that before the dawn
of life on earth there were no morals or moral values on earth Additionally, choices in conduct
evolve – primarily by creation of new ways of behavior and living and,
secondarily, from new knowledge, new technology… The above does not imply that
all moral conduct is associated with a high degree of self-awareness,
creativity and consciousness of choices. Feeling [emotion,] communication,
and shared conduct are among the bases of behavior, especially moral behavior
that come before reflection and must remain important in morals. Even the
sharpest intellect is inadequate to the valuational and creative tasks for
“rational moral conduct” in many actual situations where there are multiple
moral values that have some degree of conflict. In such situations choice
must be supplemented by [ongoing] judgment and experiment Moral contexts may be narrow,
e.g. is it wrong for a starving person to take food from a shop without
permission or payment – and should such behavior be considered to be
“stealing?” Even in narrow contexts, judgment is necessary in determining
behavior. Judgment is, naturally, essential in determining moral conduct in
the [ongoing] choices in the building of an individual life or a
civilization. To what extent do ethics determine the conduct of the life of
an individual or group e.g. a family, a workplace, a nation? It could be
argued that except for observing moral principles, everything else is open. But,
what else is there? This point is valid because of the following question
“What are the moral principles?” 1.6.2
Free Will
Determinism has a long history
and there have been many motives behind it. These include predetermination by
God, fatalism, and the deterministic science from the time of Isaac Newton
until the advent of the quantum theory in the 1920s Determinism seems to be
incompatible with the ability to make choices; this was the problem of free
will. Therefore, as long as determinism ruled, it was imperative to resolve
this problem In the earlier sections,
especially Nothingness
and Cosmology,
I have shown that being – the universe – cannot be deterministic and that
indeterminism is necessary for being; the problem of free will has lost its
importance The conclusion is no longer
novel either in philosophy or in science. There are, however, novel elements
to the arguments – especially in the arguments about the relation between
nothingness and being The philosophy of indeterminism
is not without problems. It is required to explain how the structure and form
of the world is compatible with indeterminism. The earlier sections provided
the required arguments There is thus no especial
problem with the idea that an individual has a free will. It should be
remembered that free will does not mean an ability to do anything desired. It
means, simply, that sometimes options for choice in action or outcome exist
or may be created. It was specifically argued earlier that the individual has
the ability to create novel choices 1.6.3
Ethics and Morals
We might say that morals are the
actual determinants of behavior and ethics are the descriptions of the
determinants and the process of choice and judgment. However, since choice
and knowledge are necessary for moral behavior, representation already enters
into morals. Therefore, I will not distinguish ethics from morals 1.6.4
Philosophical and Reflective Ethics
The conditions for the
possibility of ethics are the same as those for The
Possibility of Moral Conduct 1.6.4.1
Constructive vs. Passive and Prescriptive Ethics
There is, however, an additional
contribution to the growth of morals and of ethics for any being that has an
ability to reflect and to create ideas. As will be elaborated below, the
ability to distinguish moral acts from physical acts combined with the ability
to create ideas results in the creation of moral value. It is not being said
that moral value is fully the creation of intellect for it is always and
remains with foundation in simple and shared feeling. However, intellect is
responsible for creating, communicating – especially in language – new
possibilities for moral action – especially constructive possibilities – and
subtlety and shades for established areas of moral action. Of course, this
kind of development is not limited to moral value but occurs also in
aesthetics42 and in the creation or
elaboration of social reality and cultural artifacts In
constructive ethics, the entire [life of the] being is taken as a
constructive possibility for moral action Individual
concern with constructive ethics is not the same as constant or obsessive
preoccupation 1.6.4.2 Ethical Traditions
It
is possible to think about how conduct is determined and there are many
traditions of reflective ethics. In the Western tradition, reflective ethics
dates back at least to the major religions of that tradition and includes
Greek, Scholastic and Modern philosophy What
follows are some examples of reflective systems in ethics. There is no intent
at completeness relative to the traditions Kantian
ethics is an example of reflective ethics. In its barest version Kant’s
ethics is the Categorical Imperative “Act only on the principle through which
you can at the same time will that it be a universal law.” Kantian ethics is
a philosophical version of the reflective moral principle of Christianity,
the Golden Rule, as in Mathew [7:12]: “In everything, do to others what you
would have them do to you…” Another
example is deontological ethics which is the ethics of action i.e. certain
acts or kinds of act have intrinsic moral value that is regardless of
consequences whether actual or intended. Examples of acts that are close to
universally regarded as having moral value – positive or negative – are
caring for a dying person, making a sacrifice for another e.g. saving a life,
killing, lying, stealing. A problem arises in that the concepts are not
always clear. For example, should stealing be taking what is not mine or
should it be taking what is not mine when it causes harm; and if the taking
does no harm and I need what is taken to live should that be called stealing?
It will be argued that I am failing to distinguish the act [taking what is
not mine without permission] and the result [no harm, surviving] and that
stealing is the act and the act excludes the consequence. However, the
consequence can be brought back into the act indirectly by asking what
constitutes possession. Or, I can ask, “What is killing?” Some cases are
clear: if I directly cause someone’s death, I have killed him. But, should lack
of action be equivalent to action? Causing the death of a tree is – excepting
some ethical systems – usually not described as “killing the tree.” Taking
life requires that the object be living; but what is the boundary between
life and non-life? If a robot appeared to have the entire range of feeling,
thought, hopes of a human, would it be possible to kill the robot? The burden
of right in relation to killing can be transferred to murder but this does
not eliminate actual indefiniteness despite the possible theoretical promise
e.g. if murder is unjustified and premeditated killing of another human
being, does declaration of war constitute justification? Is an omission of a
fact lying? If I tell a trivial non-truth to avoid the death of a friend, is
that lying? I.e. is lying the telling of a non-truth or is it the telling of
a non-truth in violation of a trust relationship? These
questions can be posed in another way: are moral values and concepts
pre-defined [or should they be] in any sense e.g. Platonically or by being
received or are they in a state of evolution i.e. is lying what I understood
it to be the first time I had some grasp of the concept or may my concept of
lying evolve? There is a related question, should my concept of lying evolve
in the context of conflict between the moral imperative and personal
consequences? The relevance of the question relates to the possibility of
compromise of morality due to the conflict. However, it is a measure of my
moral vision that I can make the distinction and of my moral fiber that my
moral concepts can positively evolve [or, at least, not devolve] in the midst
of action The
ethics of action is related to the ethics of thought – right thought, the
ethics of intention and of will Consequentialism,
or teleologic ethics, is the ethics of consequences or ends, i.e. we ought to
do whatever has the best consequences. As noted above there is a vagueness
about the concept of consequence. A further issue is that there is a
distinction between physical and moral consequence. The physical consequence
of murder is a dead person; the moral consequence is a murdered person, the
abbreviation of a life, the resulting pain and loss to others. The difference
between the physical consequences of a murder and an attempted murder is
significant; however the moral difference is not so significant even though
the responses of others may be significantly different. The lack of
distinction is due to the presence of the intent to harm In
classic utilitarianism, the sole good is pleasure and the sole evil is pain
and the best consequences are the ones with the greatest [net] amount of
pleasure The
imperatives of consequentialism and deontology appear to be in conflict but
need not always be, e.g. when the consequences of different acts are of equal
moral value [good] or when two actions have the same moral value [right] but
the consequences are not equally good While
the ethics of actions and ends may appear to be constraints on actions or
designs, ethics as constraint is narrow. Thus, the living of a life whose aim
is the construction of or contribution to a better world is a moral virtue
and has been argued to be a high virtue Emotion
and feeling do not appear to play a central role in the various ethical
systems beyond such simple statements as pleasure is good or love an ultimate
value. It should be remembered, however, that simple feeling is a driving
force in the imperative to moral conduct. There may be a way, based in the
theory of emotion developed earlier, to an integration of emotion with
reflective ethics43 There
may be relations between the various systems of reflective ethics. For
example, it has been argued that a reflective ethics must have a theory of
the good [ends or outcomes] and a theory of right action or conduct;
however, it is not clear that this is true. Thus, natural law may show that
consequences can be determined only up to a certain degree at a certain time
and that at some point in time differences in actions have no effect in differences
in outcome. Then, Kantian ethics could be invoked to choose between
consequentialism and deontology Even
if Kantian ethics did make such a determination, choice would not necessarily
result in the most moral reflective ethics for what would be the foundation
that set the Kantian system as arbiter? 1.6.4.3 Applied Ethics
The
origin of ethics must include moral concerns in actual situations. In the
modern era there is an explicit concern with the application of ethics
in various areas44
of action and choice Rather than thinking of applied
ethics, I view the field as ethics-in-use. In this field, concrete situations
or kinds of situation and moral concerns come together as one in the mind of
the actor and both morals and action evolve as a result of the interaction.
However, as a result of the development of ethics as a discipline this
activity may be seen as the application of ethics – and this view is not
without merit 1.6.5
Analysis of Judgment
The various ethical systems
above are refinements of actual determinants of moral conduct that may be
seen in practice and may be regarded as different aspects of the moral sense.
While different individuals and societies may emphasize different aspects of
moral sense, it is reasonable to suppose that a number of aspects are present
and the actual determination of conduct requires judgment Emotion and feeling do not play
a central role in the process of determination of ethical or moral conduct.
Of course, in some reflective ethics emotion defines what is of value, e.g.
pleasure, but that does not determine conduct Can there be a rational approach
to judgment? That would seem to require some way to compare the different
systems which would involve including emotion at least implicitly. Before
entering such a discussion it will be good to recall the discussion of mind
and matter as slack concepts. It is possible that in the attempt to be
rational in ethics we may be attempting to specify a concept of ethics or
morals that is over-determined with respect to what is, may and ought to be.
This caution should not prevent attempts at clarifying and rationalizing
moral judgment and may even aid that endeavor by reminding us that, at times,
we may be asking to much of theory – not in the sense that theory would be
inadequate or too difficult but, rather, that, beyond a certain point, the
refinement of theory would correspond to no moral reality. This brings us
back to the difficulty, above, with moral concepts such as killing, murder,
stealing, lying: moral reality is not predetermined for all time and
situations and not because of a limitation in the ability to apprehend that
reality but, rather, because it is always to some extent in a state of coming
to be. The thought that moral reality is laid out in advance for all
situations and times is an appeal to a fictitious and determinate system that
is and cannot be part of this or any world That thought about the
incompleteness of moral reality in relation to concepts and judgments, too,
may enter into the reflections in a way that is liberating just as the same
idea was found to liberate reflection on a variety of topics including mind,
matter, being, space, time and existence 1.6.5.1
The tension among imperatives
While ethics may be univalent in
theory or concept or in reflection, in an actual situation the choice is not
always between good and evil [or between right and wrong.] There may be a
number of good options which may be mutually exclusive or, alternatively,
some constraint such as real economics may limit the full realization of all
options. By real economics I mean e.g. limited resources and not an abstract
economic principle such as “free market” and so on A theorist may choose between
the ethics of actions and the ethics of consequences; however, both theories
are the formal expression of imperatives that predate the formulation of
ethical theory or, perhaps, even the explicit recognition ethics and its
distinction from other modes of valuation and judgment. Thus concerns about
ends and about actions are present in any actual circumstance and not
only because the distinction between actions and consequences is not
absolute. Actions are important but insistence on action alone may preclude
the constructive aspect of human society altogether; insistence on a minor
action principle may lead to disastrous consequences. Consequences, too, are
important; action towards ends or design is not merely something we undertake
but is part of the fabric of being human. It is probably impossible to not
make at least minor sacrifices toward major ends. Additionally, every point
in the future is a consequence but when we talk of consequences in ethics we
are usually talking of designated consequences at some point in the future –
a point that is not so distant that we have no influence over it but
sufficiently removed from the present that there is time and scope for
designing and building; thus the choice is not only from among ends and
actions but from among actions and ends on an axis of time from the present
up to some point in the future where present and planned action would have no
predictable effect 1.6.5.2
Ethics, Metaphysics and other concerns
Here, then, is one place that
ethics and metaphysics interact for it is the province of metaphysics – which
in the sense used here includes physics and the other sciences – to address
the residue of the present Further, the possibility of
ethics, the status of the good, and the possibility of choice are
metaphysical questions. The issue of free will is interesting and showing the
compatibility of freedom of will, i.e. the ability to choose from
alternatives, and determinism may be a useful exercise; however except from
that interest I hold the exercise to be useless since the world is not
deterministic. Showing the possibility of construction, action and choice in
an indeterministic world is also an exercise that is taken up in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action Just as the ethics of actions
and of consequences are the formal expressions of actual cognitive-emotional
forces, so too are the disciplines of metaphysics, of ethics, of aesthetics
and various pragmatic concerns such as the economic and the political The complete and absolute, i.e.
for all purposes and situations, distinction of the various considerations
has not been accomplished and there is no reason to believe that the
distinction exists in principle. Even if a distinction could be made and each
concern formulated precisely the concerns would still compete; and it would
then appear to be beyond the human powers of rationality to compare the
concerns and compute courses of action Therefore, judgment is necessary
in the absence of complete knowledge and unbounded rationality But judgment is not something
that comes after the fact but was there from the beginning together with the
various concerns all as part of being-in-the-midst-of-life and is the shared
inner life of humankind 1.6.6
Meta-ethics
What is the nature of moral
judgment and conduct? What is being done in reflective ethics – in
determining moral conduct or engaging in ethical argument? Are ethical
judgments facts, are they [capable of being] true or false, are they
expressions of feeling, are they prescriptions of conduct? Such questions which are not
part of a system of reflective [normative] ethics but are about ethics
are part of meta-ethics Related issues concern the
origin of ethics; relation between ethics and science and other parts of
philosophy – especially evolution, process vs. state metaphysics e.g. in the
question of consequentialism vs. deontology, determinism and choice, prima
facie non-moral values such as beauty; relation between ethics and religion What is the nature of ethical
imperatives? Are they absolute i.e. binding? Is there a hierarchy of relative
imperatives, and how would it be determined? What is proper conduct when two
imperatives or two concepts of the good are in conflict? Practically, there
appear to be imperatives – at least there is some need for the appearance of
imperatives or, else, anarchy and so on. But despite this, practically there
are always ways in which the imperatives break down 1.6.7
Ethics, Being, Knowledge
Here are some relations that
show that, at root, ethical action, being and knowledge are identical Necessity of sentience,
awareness, consciousness for significance and significance for ethics
[values] Ethics has a role in determining
what knowledge is.
Due to limited resources, choices are made about what knowledge endeavors to
support. This is related but not identical to my meaning which is that there
is a distinction between knowledge that is fundamental in the growth of being
and knowledge that is merely factual or accumulative. This principle is one
to guide choices rather than to impose constraints. It may be said, somewhat
simplistically, that an individual may possess complete knowledge without
having all information. In this sense, the “total amount of knowledge” is not
limitless. Thus, knowledge and ethics are intimately connected Further limits to the extent of
knowledge that are not intrinsically ethical in nature but that also limit
the cumulative aspect of acquisition, in this case from epistemology, were
seen above in Mind The mechanism of the origin
and growth of being, of the acquisition of knowledge and of ethical action
are, at root, identical. The origin of being from nothingness requires
the spontaneous manifestation of structure; only stable or self-sustaining
structures have more than transient being. The spontaneous manifestation is
both possible and necessary since nothingness implies the absence, not only
of objects, but also of determinism, causation and law. Growth of knowledge
requires hypothesis and selection. Ethical action is not merely a selection
from given alternatives but, fundamentally, requires the creation of
alternatives before selection. It would seem that ethical action and growth
of knowledge are guided by the being of the organism and, so, are distinct
from the origin of being. This is true only for the instant of origin and
beyond that the further growth is conditioned by what has come before 1.6.8
Ethics and Journey in Being
The Principle of Being implies
that the individual can realize all possibilities. Not all possibilities are
equally feasible or equally valuable. Choosing the path for the journey is a
function, first, of, creation of the concepts of possible paths, judging
effort and time to be devoted to that creation and to the actual travel, and,
then, in comparing and combining paths, a function of effort / feasibility
and value 1.7
Classical and Modern Problems of
Metaphysics
A review of the problems is
useful in Journey in Being – for ideas and methods, and to avoid unnecessary
labor of rediscovery and error A number of problems are
considered “along the way” in this and other essays. Formal treatment is
deferred to a subsequent version of Metaphysics 1.7.1
The Problems of Metaphysics
The fundamental problem of
metaphysics – often cast as “why is there something rather than nothing?” but
recast in the present metaphysics as “why is there presence, sentience,
awareness or consciousness?” The relation between existence and sentience
touches on the nature of being. The present and other core essays include a
resolution of the fundamental problem and include discussion of the nature of
being What is the meaning of “exist” –
what is predicated of something that is said to exist and what kind of
concept is existence? The existence of forms,
categories and universals, and particulars; the existence and nature [“the
most perfect being” and “the most real of all things” in classical
metaphysics] of God; the soul, mind and body: soul-body, mind-body
relationships; determinism, cause and action, freedom, choice, will,
fatalism; truth, reason and value; nature and the external world: the reality
of material things, the organizing principles of nature; space and time; the
conception of spirit… Additional issues of substance
ontology: monism… anomalous monism, dualism; Heidegger’s being-in-the-world-before-I-theorize-about-it,
and Wittgenstein’s ambivalent shying away from ontology and
metaphysics and later shunning of system altogether. The pragmatic
invariance of substance ontologies: ontological idealism as equivalent
to ontological materialism. Substance and process metaphysics Knowledge is at the heart of
metaphysical possibility: what is knowledge, what are its kinds [e.g. fact
which is analyzed as acquaintance and description and relationship which
includes explanation, theory, and science], how are they “justified” [quotes
to remind that both the term and its meaning are problematic]… and how does
this lead to the possibility of metaphysics. Knowledge is an ontological
object 1.7.2
Modern Problems in Metaphysics
The theory of objects, the study
of possibility and necessity – and the study of possible worlds, the
interaction between general metaphysics and the special problems such as free
will, the interaction between metaphysics [philosophy] and the sciences 1.7.3
Types of Metaphysical Theory
Platonism, Aristotelianism, Thomism;
Cartesianism; idealism; materialism 1.7.4
Criticisms
The divorce of metaphysics and
the empirical; Hume, Kant, Logical Positivism, Moore, Wittgenstein 1.7.5
Argument and Construction in
Metaphysics. Meta-questions
A priori foundations – the
nature of an a priori science; Kantian transcendental analytic; empirical
foundations; logical character of metaphysical statements and logical form of
metaphysical arguments “If there is a ground to all
being, there is an end to explanation,” see Metaphysics
/ Action,
and arguments that nothingness is equivalent to all being in, e.g., Nothingness Facts and theories as
data points; multiple traditions; disciplines [including sciences] and
activities as metaphor and analogy; language, logic, knowledge and their
analyses; essential relationship between the possibility of metaphysics and
the nature of knowledge The result of a whole life;
living at center / edge of knowledge, being, and the real; transformation,
experiment, construction A simple concept of method:
[1] ad hoc mapping of knowledge and being; sources include experience,
imagination, myth, religion, science, literature, life, world / mind / depth,
criticism; [2] necessity of action in knowing and becoming – experience,
transform, construct, learn; and, [3] repeat Metaphysics develops through
analysis of and action in relation to real problems; nothingness, origins,
existence, presence, mind / life / matter, nature and possibility of
knowledge, the concept and use of metaphysics and philosophy… and the
specialized disciplines Meta-questions A number of questions of the
type, “What is X?” where the nature of “X” is not clear have been asked. Examples for X are: mind, matter, metaphysics, being, knowledge, language,
concepts, universe, existence, and so on The approach here has not been
to provide an exhaustive analysis of the questions for that would take up
much more space than I have used or want to use. Nonetheless, there are some
themes to the process of attempting to answer such questions that include: Questions about the object:
what thing or things come under the topic being discussed? Conceptual questions: what kind of
thing or things are under discussion, or what is the concept [that is the
mental construct or content] that corresponds to the object? Analytic and synthetic questions:
of what components and relations can the object be considered to be made;
what more inclusive objects contain the given object as a component [or
relation?] Just as in the case of the original object, all elements in the
hierarchy have an objective and a conceptual side. By allowing the range of
concept / object to be sufficiently general in nature e.g. relations [force
in physics, knowledge in the case of being] whole systems of theory /
metaphysics may result What are the sources of
information and knowledge regarding the topic of discussion: use and
experiment, conceptualization, variety of examples, the [traditions of]
experience and conceptualization of others – through verbal communication and
the literature? How can the assertions made in
responding to the previous questions especially object and concept questions
be justified? Note that, from earlier discussion, unless shown otherwise, all
justification is provisional or in-process Such questions that are not an
immediate and simple answer to the original question but are about that
question may be called meta-questions. Although meta-questions skirt
around the original question they do so in order to be able to understand it
better and to provide a better, more grounded answer without excessive
reification or judgment. Additionally, the same meta-question arises
repeatedly: what is the concept of mind, what is the concept of existence,
what is the concept of concept and so on. Therefore, while the additional
attention to care and detail is useful in understanding the individual
topics, there also results an approach to analysis that is useful in
analyzing many other topics. The application never becomes mechanical for,
with each application, there is potential to create or have further
understanding of both the topic and the approach and to expand and integrate
the tools that constitute it 1.7.6
Recent Metaphysics
… and recent metaphysicians
John Dewey and William James,
US; Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, the Continent; Alfred North Whitehead Donald Davidson, Saul Kripke 2
EXPERIMENTS IN THE TRANSFORMATION OF
BEING
The previous section, Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action,
included an important concern with the possibilities of being. This section
is an account of experiential and experimental approaches to transformation
and construction of being. The experiments are balanced by the ideas –
especially of the previous section The conceptual approaches of Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action,
are also experiments – with ideas; and, since knowledge is a form of being,
understanding is also transformation of being However, the Experiments
emphasize transformation and construction of being itself in all aspects –
physical, mental and potential Purpose and Nature of the Experiments
Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action
introduced the Principle of Being that all being is accessible to
every being. This is the principle that the self is the ultimate or, from
Vedanta philosophy, the true self i.e. the ultimate discovered subjectively
or Atman is Brahman, the ultimate discovered objectively. The Principle
of Being was demonstrated conceptually. It is the purpose of this section
to demonstrate the truth of the Principle of Being through actual
transformation. This will complement the development described next The sources to which I have
appealed include metaphysics, yoga [and meditation,] the journey- or
hero-quest, dreams – their use and analysis, the vision-quest, science and
its methods and generalization in the dynamics of being or of the real. These
topics are elaborated in the core essays. All of these topics draw from at
least one tradition. The breadth and depth of the traditions is much greater
than I anticipated from a casual acquaintance. The variety of yoga systems,
for example, shows that the view of yoga as a system of received concepts and
practices is incomplete even if it is powerful. My emphasis so far is
primarily in metaphysics, the theory of the dynamics of being, and to the
nature, concept and use of dreams. The work in metaphysics forms a
theoretical foundation for the dynamics; however the latter required
experimentation as described in the section on the dynamics, below. Those
experiments include meditation, somatic effects of awareness, journey-quest
in wild places. By bringing together the classical disciplines and binding
them with what I have learnt and discovered in metaphysics and dynamics of
being, there results one fluid system This section is similar in
outline to the corresponding core essay, Experiments in the Transformation of Being Experiments in the Transformation of Being
includes: In this introduction: the nature
and possibilities of being, means and values of transformation. The
discussion is based in the treatment of knowledge, metaphysics, possibility,
being, mind, genesis, cosmology of Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action Dynamics
of Being:
an approach to or means of transformation based in understanding of the
nature of possibility, discovery, limits and experiment The
Discipline of Transformation:
the essential discipline is classified as Becoming and
Journey The
Experiments
contains a discussion of kinds of experiment, a catalog of the variety of
experiments, and a set of experiments that is designed to cover the
possibilities of transformation but takes advantage of the understanding of
the nature of being What is a Transformation of Being?
The following processes count as
transformations of being: The following actual processes
are examples: conception and development of the organism / death /
acquisition of knowledge / development or change of personality / origin of
the universe / origin and evolution of social groups All known or actual
processes. Transformations of the very being itself are
emphasized – it is essential that transformations of being are not restricted
to normal growth All hypothetical changes
or processes that are possible will count as transformations of being. It
follows trivially from the Principle of Being that all hypothetical
transformations with possible initial and end states are possible. What
states are possible? A state is possible, i.e. it may exist if its concept
does not involve contradiction. It is not necessary, for a transformation of
being to be possible, for the being itself to recognize its own identity
through the transformation; it is sufficient that some sentient being could.
Therefore, as examples, the following hypothetical transformations are
possible transformations of being: Water into wine / creation of
the universe from nothing / a bacterium spontaneously transmutes into a zebra
/ Jesus rising from the dead / a man simply ceases to be, becomes
nothingness. The issue that these transformations appear to contradict common
sense / physics is addressed subsequently …and all imagined and unimagined
transformations where the initial and end points may exist If A -> B is possible, i.e. a possible transformation, then B A is
possible; if A -> B and B -> C are possible, then A -> C is a possible As noted above, it follows from
the Principle of Being, that all transformations with possible initial
and end states are possible. That is trivial The following considerations
arise: what is possibility and what is possible; what transformations are
likely, probable or feasible and what are the backgrounds against which
probability and feasibility are or may be evaluated; how may an organism or
being change -magnify- the probability of a transformation from its value
when measured against a background of inert physics or change feasibility
based on a normal view of limits; what transformations are meaningful and
desirable – and are there ways in which transformations that seem to lack
meaning actually have meaning or transformations that actually lack meaning
may be given meaning? The considerations are treated and elaborated in what
follows Possibility
Earlier, especially in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action,
I introduced and elaborated the concepts of the possible 45
and of nothingness. I noted that anything that is possible is
necessary; i.e. will obtain in some phase-epoch of the universe. This is
equivalent to what I called the Principle of Being, that all being is
accessible to every being; in particular, it was seen that the universe is
equivalent to nothingness The Principle of Being is
equivalent to the statement that there are no limits on beings; more
precisely, the only limits are logical e.g. it is not possible for a being to
be a spider and not a spider at the same time46.
In other words, everything that is not logically impossible is possible or,
simply, provided the logical condition is kept in mind, “everything is
possible” The requirement of possibility
eliminates logical contradictions such as a state in which an object is, for
example, both black and not-black. Note that although in traditional logic
that corresponds to the traditional view of reality [objects that are black
and not-black are not possible objects] such logical contradictions are
avoided and although the introduction of any contradiction implies that all
assertions are true, there are reasons to consider non-traditional objects of
the kind in question. One reason is that “impossible” objects lead to
conceptual completeness and true contradiction is avoided by tracking the
consequences of hypothesizing or positing impossible objects. A realistic
reason is that at some level reality may be constituted of such objects; it
is then an exercise to see how traditional being and logic result from the
indefinite level. Such considerations were also taken up in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action Means or Ways
However, possibility and
feasibility are not identical. Thus, what is possible in general may be
impossible in a phase-epoch of the universe in which certain laws of physics
hold – whether exactly or even approximately. “The” laws of physics always
pertain to a phase-epoch of the universe but are not universal in any
absolute sense; this is not the point that the laws are approximate but, rather,
that they have genesis and end that are co-extensive with a phase-epoch.
Further, something that is physically possible may be extremely difficult. In
terms of probabilities, some physical possibilities are colossally improbable
relative to a phase-epoch of the universe and its laws – but, against the
entire universe as background the physical improbability is replaced by
universal necessity Therefore, practically, physical
probability – i.e. for the physics of a phase-epoch of the universe – is significant
though not absolute concern A first practical issue concerns
the question of what possibilities are likely and, when possibilities are
unlikely relative to the physics of an inert universe, how may probabilities
be magnified? The first general answer is that life is a magnification
of probabilities. First, given appropriate conditions, life has its origin in
the magnifying effect of time. In other words, the probability of an
occurrence is a definite quantity when a context and a period of time are
specified. Over many such intervals of time the probability is magnified. It
may be argued that the probability of the origin of life on earth relative to
the original inert planet was small; however, clearly, relative to the
universe – especially in its equivalence to nothingness as shown in the
metaphysics of Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action
– the probability is not small; rather the origin of life over and over
becomes necessary. In our world, once life began it served to magnify
probabilities; perhaps catalyze is a better term than magnification of
probability; life served to catalyze the path from material to new living
forms through the mechanisms of evolution. Thus, the origin of life takes
probability out of its raw physical realm; this kind of transition is
repeated at various turning points. This is not the whole story; the seeming
improbability of the outcome, given even the origin and evolution of life and
of turning points, can be explained away: the actual outcome was not
determined from the outset and is one of a large number of physical
possibilities that were no longer colossally improbable once life began. Each
possibility would still have a small probability but the likelihood of
occurrence of one the possibilities opened up by the origin of life
was no longer microscopic47 A second, general, answer to
magnification of probabilities – of catalysis – is in the origin of
intelligence and mind [as we know it.] The ability of mind to catalyze change
is – at least one aspect of – intelligence. The origin of mind and
intelligence as we know them constitute an evolutionary transition that takes
probability out of one realm and into another; in the case of conscious
intelligence, the organism acquires meaning – as we know it – and
participates in evolution The role of knowledge and action
in interaction is essential: Knowledge or knowing is a form
of being; so the ways of knowledge are ways of transformation of being. Even
the most rational growth involves experiment and hypothesis for otherwise
there would be no new knowledge. In the field of knowledge and knowing, the
extreme contrast to rational process there is the direct in-tuition of
mysticism Knowledge also shows some
possibilities and ways of transformation. Thus, knowledge and action,
separately and in interaction are involved in the transformations. A rational
transformation would be one in which action proceeded from knowledge; the
extreme contrast to rational transformation is direct action which may be
either chosen or, in some situations, necessary. Actual transformations, in
which knowledge and action are iterative but not binding interaction, lie to
the interior of the continuum whose extreme points are rational
transformation and direct action Given the equivalence of
nothingness and all being and the lack of clear boundaries between knowledge
and being, between mind and mind, between individual and individual – there
is no absolute distinction between transformation by knowing and
transformation by becoming Meaning and Value
First, consider meaning
or significance That a transformation is
possible does not make it significant or meaningful. For example, consider
transformation of a being A to a being B. How can that be meaningful if there
is no being C [which could be A or B] which is aware of and into whose life
the transformation enters in some constructive way? The existence of meaning
is guaranteed as follows from Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action:
if the transformation occurs in a phase-epoch U of the universe, there is a
phase-epoch U’ in which beings A’, B’, and C’ exist that are similar to A, B,
C of U and for which C’ has the “desired” awareness and construction. How is
significance introduced? The first step is the introduction of meaning as
just described; there is a variety of examples in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action.
Beyond this the construction of significance requires imagination and
experiment and this is one of the objectives of considering Transformations
of Being. A transformation is significant to the extent that it is a realization
of the ultimate possibilities of being or a construction or pathway to that
realization. Initially, significance is founded in the actual being as
described, for example, in Mind
and subsequent sections on mind and being Meaning and significance are
related to ethics and aesthetics. Human ethics and aesthetics are not
insignificant but it is not assumed that received value is ultimate value or
that being and value are separate realms; see Ethics,
Being, Knowledge Now consider value Not all possibilities are
desirable; and of those that might be desirable some are intrinsically more
desirable. I use the word “intrinsically” in the following way. One outcome
or an endeavor may be intrinsically more valuable than another but may
require so much more in the way of effort and resources as to be practically
less desirable What is desirability or value?
Ethics or morals are one way of representing value. Here, ethics is not
understood in a limited way of judging outcomes [the good] or actions [the
right] but includes the moral value of, for example, a way of living or an
endeavor. Ethics can be discussed in terms of the good [and the right] or
comparatively in terms of “better” or “worse.” If an outcome is good it is
desirable. However how to compare alternative outcomes – some way of deciding
or seeing what is the better of any two of the alternatives is needed The title of this section
includes value but not morals or ethics. That is because morality is not the
only way in which value is seen; beauty and truth are other important
examples of value. Although truth, beauty and morality intersect they are
independent concepts. It is not the purpose here to provide a full account of
value [axiology] but to point out the kinds of value and the possibility of
relationships. In fact, relationships are necessary since all forms of value
must enter into making choices There may be an objection to the
use of the word “value” due to its supposed economic origin. However, as we
have seen in the discussion of language, there is no necessary relation among
the historical uses of a word – not even a family relation; for, when the use
of a word has diverged sufficiently from its original use the one word
becomes two distinct symbols The questions of significance,
meaning and probability are not independent. If two outcomes have equal
significance then, all other things being equal, an attempt at construction
of the more probable outcome will be chosen more often. However, a less
likely but more significant outcome may be chosen over a less significant but
assured outcome. There are situations in which choice can be reduced to a
calculus but there does not appear to be any universal calculus of choice. Rather,
risk is involved; the risk cannot be fully calculated and involves a real
component of danger and potential loss; the whole being is involved; and, to
the extent that choices are not exclusive, a distribution of effort and other
resources is possible; the organism is alive In choosing paths of action,
there is a commonsense relation between effort, likelihood and value: an
outcome may be sought or a path may be undertaken when the likelihood is low
and the effort is high provided that the value is sufficiently high. This
approach may also be used, intuitively or in a formal way based on some kind
of measure, to compare alternative paths or outcomes. Actual efforts,
likelihoods are not known in advance and it is not clear that values can be
made quantitative. Therefore, in general, comparisons are rough and intuitive
and conflictual; as noted above, the organism is alive. In limited
contexts, quantitative assignments and comparisons may be possible; however,
in general, judgment is required in determining actions or desired outcomes.
Imperative values are not exceptions to this description since the value is
then infinitely positive or negative. There is, however, a problem with
imperative values of the form “X is imperative.” Roughly, the
imperative form is rigid: if imperatives are allowed then there may be an
imperative Y that, together with X, results in a contradiction.
Further, the concept of the imperative is undermined by the fact that the
meaning of a value cannot be given for all situations What makes an endeavor
worthwhile, then, is a function of estimates of effort, likelihood and value The Value of
Transformations of Being
Transformation is of intrinsic value. The following are secondary reasons
Incompleteness of knowledge as a
mode of transformation.
We saw earlier that knowledge and the use of technology are incomplete
transformations of being. That is, even if an individual knew everything that
could be known, his or her being would still incomplete relative to what is
possible – except that, perhaps, only the ultimate being can “know
everything” The result of meditation. Meditation reveals layers of
mind; this suggests the arbitrariness of boundaries and the possibility of
transformations The question “What is
Metaphysics?”
shows that it cannot be restricted to activity of the mind; action and being
[becoming] are essential to a full nature of metaphysics and to the process
of metaphysics There is a role for direct
experiment where failure – including death – is loss… but see discussion
of the nature of death below The Discipline of Transformation
The discipline is classified
according to an incomplete distinction: Becoming / Journey 2.1
Dynamics of Being
The Dynamics of Being is
an approach to transformation of being. The problem of transformation may be
stated by saying that there appear to be limits to the possibilities of
being. However, it was seen in the Introduction
that there are no absolute limits. Limits are relative in that certain
transformations are improbable or infeasible. It was also seen that being is
in possession of the means to magnify raw probabilities, to find ways to
enhance feasibility. The dynamics of being is that means; it uses the
faculties of being and is an approach based in the nature and origin of being Dynamics of Being defines a class of experiments
and the concept of experiment 2.1.1
The Dynamics of the Real and of Being
2.1.1.1
The Principle of Being
The principle of being is
that all being is accessible to every being. This follows from the dynamics
but, when recognized, motivates and guides it. The principle is discussed in
the section Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action 2.1.1.2
Introduction to the Dynamics
Being has a sense of the real;
this includes limits to individual being Distinctions between the one
real and the many senses of the real are not ultimate In some settings a disruption of
the sense of the real is pathological; but an excessively firm sense of
reality, too, can be pathological: rigidity, extreme conservatism… often the
sense of the real appears firm but, usually, if the individual examines his
or her history the sense of the real is found to be fluid. In the absence of
ultimate realizations, this is as it should be… That a limit is part of the
sense of the real does not make it real; the only a priori
certain limits on any given being are those that are limits on all being;
this was shown to be true in the section Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action;
and the only limits on all being are logical limits; a limit is a logical
limit if the concept of its transcendence involves a contradiction An approach to discovery of the
nature of limits is through experiment; one becomes aware of the sense of
limits as real limits; there are various experiments with limits including
physical experiment with one’s being and concepts from the history of culture
including science; limits are overcome in individual life and in evolution The distinction between
individual life and evolution – all being – is apparent but not real Individual being is not the
finite sense of the self; even though that sense is tied in with survival and
the sense of the real The dynamics of being is an
approach to transformation – from the everyday to realization of the ultimate 2.1.1.3
Twenty-One Examples of the Dynamics
The examples from my experience
range from specific to general and among elements of the world; and from the
immediate to the remote. Each example involves some issue or context. The
context becomes dynamics as follows: initially the situation is experienced;
then, patterns are noticed; generalizations are made and confirmed; the
process becomes automatic; then a combination of focus and retreat results in
communication between conscious and unconscious processing; at the level of
the unconscious the dynamics enters the being of the individual; at this
point the issue becomes dynamic; further development involves repetition of
the previous steps which may but need not be intentional Common elements among the
different examples are noted; the individual becomes aware of the idea of a
dynamic; the concept of the dynamics is applied to being itself, to what it
experiences as limits and to its transformations 1. The phases and issues of a
life: experience, learning and substance at various levels 2. Interpersonal dynamics and
its reflexive evolution. Self–observation and consciousness; evolution of
reflexivity and agency… Cultivating awareness of consciousness, its contents,
its varieties, its dynamics including relations to events in the “external
world” and to other mental phenomena including the unconscious 3. Dynamics of real choice
and real action. E.g.: dynamics of loss and death. …relation to
self–observation 4. Body awareness and healing.
Learning to see and recognize and healing and its power… Implicit in this
discussion are implications for what is called the medical model. The value
of this model as a framework is acknowledged. However it ignores or tends to
ignore individual ability to learn, individual values, real values, agency,
agency and healing, and individual variations. The process involves dynamics
of healing; entry into the dynamics; dynamics of the autonomic system in
interaction with the central nervous system. Bio-feedback is included;
however the process also requires openness to phenomena, observation and
cultivation of observation of phenomena and relationships between action and
phenomena, observation of relationships by comparison of multiple instances,
cultivation of this process; i.e. the process includes identifying phenomena
that are the variables in a feedback loop and identifies the feedback as one
of the variables. Also see discussion on the art and technique of
observation, below 5. The dynamics of
relationships and the evolution of shared projects. Love, society,
friends, influence 6. Dynamics of relationships 7. Development of body
kinetics. This starts at birth and can be cultivated dynamically 8. Perceptual dynamics in
relation to the real and their development form an example. Example: for
the absolute, eternity is an instant 9. Dynamics of creative acts
and activity: research, art… other creative endeavors. Music – primal and
cultured; dynamic integration of art, emotion, action – individual and
social… My development: pushing modern knowledge to its limits to find
limits, and to find the absolute or non–absolute nature of those limits 10. The elements of my life
and relation to the universal – and their integration. The modes
of being: nature, society, mind and the universal; the modes of process:
action, dynamics, evolution; the modes of relationship: caring, meaning,
force 11. Personality dynamics. The
crux of personality dynamics has to do with fixity and freedom in patterns of
feeling and behavior in relation to self, world and others. In this dynamics,
thought is important but subservient to feeling and potency. The actual
freedom can in a relationship is limited only by its potential; the dynamics
includes discovery of that potential. The following dimensions open up:
[a] approaches to presentation and energy: preparation with openness,
interpretation – individualism vs. mutualism, anticipation and transformation
to advantage, lack of anticipation and use of detachment, use of mood in
general to advantage, flow; [b] risk: what is it, opening to it, contact, and
accepting the unknown and unpredictable consequences; opening to the other
and to failure and success; learning about the potential of the relationship;
[c] catalysts: openness to change, diffusion, disintegration, plasticity of
self; personality as a concept. Sources of vision are important; sources: presentation,
acting, interpretation, attitude, caring, accepting moments, anger; [d]
dynamics: observation and understanding – critical moments; time stretching
and compression – an analogy with geologic and human time, consciousness
amplification – silent inner whispers become voices; observing object
relations; multiple voices; and [e] the world as a personality laboratory 12. Dynamics of experience,
attitude and action 13. Being deep in interaction
with others – this allows but does not cultivate the negative. This is
fundamental to freedom and development of dynamics in groups. Self–focus in
relation to others; motivation of self and others 14. Integration of reality
and perception dynamics in relation to yoga, shamanism, the ideas of
Freud and Jung 15. Dynamics of cognition,
action, evolution and growth. Dynamics of time 16. Reality and perception
dynamics as dynamic elements. Dynamics of limits and laws 17. Immersion in new
environments, worlds, cultures, nature … 18. The unconscious –
conscious and universe – self processes. Dynamics of the entity;
what is the entity I call myself? 19. The dynamics in relation
to threat, physical and [interpersonal] interaction in extreme circumstances:
response to momentum and pace, mind and no–mind, or conscious and sub-conscious
processing and scanning; action and rest; e.g. in typing the fingers move
faster than conscious awareness but conscious awareness enters when a mistake
occurs; consciousness is associated with re–programming, that is, with
adaptability; programming for threat and action in the face of risk and loss;
physical arts 20. Nutrition, taste,
appearance, and health 21. Integration of the mental
functions – and dynamics of the individual functions and their
perception. As an example consider anger. Anger may result from
perception, irritation, inference, valuation, reflex, overload…thus while it
is functional in principle it can be inappropriate, counter–adaptive, and
benefit from revaluation. Due to the prevalence of rage, the nature of anger
can be misunderstood. While the expression of anger is a common topic of
discourse, the potential for the cultivation and use of anger is
underestimated. In this way, anger is not at all rage, and the analogy may be
with a sustained simmer rather than a boil; and there is a distinction, even,
between anger of white heat and of extreme pressure to act out and actual
action out. A “simmer” may be sustained in the presence of an ongoing threat;
or in the need for constructive action; or it may be maintained to act in the
presence of personality deficits; persons with such deficits do need healthy
action; and one of the objects of anger and action may be the personality
deficit and its change. Are the primary processes accurate, is the expression
of anger working and registering, what is mode and way in which anger is
being expressed, is it dominating one’s expressive and emotional life. The
“white heat,” too, can be used; and observation of the critical moment is a
key to choice in acting out; this is preceded by observation of the critical
moment and its existence which is followed by the stretching of psychological
time. Due to the interactions and the processing anger has been called a
secondary emotion but to a degree all mental function is interactive for it
is the whole of the organism that functions in the whole of the environment.
The primary processes – those resulting in the emotion of anger may be
unobserved by the individual. Bringing anger back into a dynamic state so
that it is integrated and functional require observation, analysis and
desensitization. Thus the process of entering and sustaining dynamism
requires the entire range of mental function; gnawing anger yields to quiet
anger; anger yields to the range of emotion for motivation; emotion is
integrated with cognition and motivation is replaced by fluid living. Fixed
patterns and responses become flexible, moments become minutes, massive
inertia becomes fluid; rigidity yields to adaptation and adaptivity; the
following are interactive: experience and experiment, hard and soft, goal and
flow, mind and no–mind, conscious / unconscious, central and autonomic
nervous system The examples range from
particular to general; additionally, as noted above, being and knowledge are
subject to the dynamics 2.1.1.4
Cultivation of the Dynamics
Observation and self–observation
by focus on initially fleeting phenomena, cultivation of observation, control
and cultivation of [desired] behavior; cultivating multiplicity and
multi–modality of experience The following quote is from an
essay I wrote some years ago; it is interesting because what I fumbled toward
intuitively has now been confirmed by the metaphysics of the earlier sections
of this essay “An example of regarding
consciousness: [1] what are its elements; [2] revelation of its levels as in
the peeling of an onion – the analogy of Henri Bergson – including the
transformation: unconscious – conscious and the form of the result of such
transformation; [3] different centers of consciousness within the individual
– a concept that contrasts with the usual idea of there being one center, the
brain or the mind – and known as a result of item 2; [4] the unity or
unities of this multiplicity and, therefore, the possibility [5] if what is
seen as a unity is an interactive multiplicity, then what is seen as an
interactive multiplicity may be a unity the universe of beings – persons,
animals, plants, rocks, planets, the universe may be truly a unity, [6]
seeing what is thus known in [5]... and this involves also accelerating the
mental processes as in the earlier example with analogy to a compression of
geologic time or, in the case of mental events that are below a certain
threshold – amplification and slowing down” The art and technique of
observation: first, one observes what one did not observe before; initially,
this is random. Then through multifaceted experience one learns in stages:
keys to control, the application of those keys, learning efficient
application. Then transformation from passive experience to active
engagement, development of self–understanding and trust, entering into
dynamics...what was immutable becomes fluid. Then coming against limits,
understanding the limits and the extent to which limits are a result of a
lack of understanding and so entering into mutability of self, being,
process, and their categories, e.g. nature, society, mind, universe. These
include the elements of variation and selection and of building upon existing
structures. An essence of such processes is their singularity and, despite
the singularity, the universality of direction. The final principles are that
this process of vision and becoming is a unifying agent for, specifically,
the elements of societies and cultures and, generally, for being; and that
the processes of learning and unification are explicit and actual – and
therefore describable and communicable – manifestations of the agencies of
mind. And, what can be described may be subject to reason and experiment 2.1.1.5
Dynamics as Bridge between Modes of Knowledge and Being
The nature of these examples
notwithstanding, the techniques of vision result in clearly seeing quiet
voices otherwise hidden – whispers – and so in seeing aspects of the nature
of consciousness; and ultimately in mind and consciousness as a direct
windows to being, to the universe 2.1.1.6
Further Experiments with the Dynamics
Examples are distributed
throughout this essay. For experiments that I have done or plan, see Experiments 2.1.1.7
The Dynamics of Being and its Theory
The dynamics are the
interactive, iterative cause-result-reflect-learn processes of a being
negotiating what are thought to be and have been experienced as limits; it is
the dynamics of recognition and realization of possibility The theory of the
dynamics is the understanding of the dynamics that permits
conscious-unconscious use of the dynamics in efficiently choosing limits to
negotiate and in efficiently negotiating those limits 2.1.1.8
Some General Aspects of Dynamics
Boundaries vs. continuities The problem of boundaries mind /
mind… being / death Nature of limits; question of
existence of absolute limits Dynamics and the variety of
mental and physiological states – micro and meso-scales “Savant”
states; are they accessible to all – but suppressed as right hemisphere /
integrated functions by left hemisphere / analytic functioning and emphasis? Amplification of micro-states of
brain – epilepsy, genius 2.1.1.9
Final Thoughts
The dynamics of reality and
being and its use including self–observation satisfies a part of the
objective of the Journey in Being; the examples, above, are real
situations This pertains especially to
vision and the use of vision – in contrast to mere doing. This is an
important point for a number of reasons: first, the accomplishment satisfies
certain objectives – especially entry into a fluid state of being; second,
this allows time for other goals; third, the mode of accomplishment is
continuous from objectives to accomplishment and can, therefore, be
understood and used. Of course, the discontinuous modes of hallucination and
blind action are still of value, may yield essentially new information;
these, too, may be amenable to dynamics What would be the consequences
if the dynamics and the discovery of layers and limits of physical and
mental aspects of being should have the same intensity of focus as that of
natural science? 2.2
Becoming
While the Dynamics of Being
outlines an approach, Becoming defines the modes of transformation Cognition-emotion Includes perception,
vision-quest; dreams and use of hypnotic and meditative states, aspects of
yoga; systems of knowledge In an enhance meaning, perception,
is sometimes used to refer to the entire range of cognition-emotion; this
emphasizes the opening up of mind and being to full potential The principle of
perception is to liberate the normalizing function of the ego in perception48 Action Includes direct transformation
of physical states and indirect effect of action on physical and mental
states; aspects of yoga Construction of being and
society Transformations Involving
Extension in Time Meaning Learning and growth; development
of the functions Personality and its Development Communication, charisma, choice,
will Personality and its
transformations Commitments Development of the dynamics of
being and becoming Arching from the Individual to
the Universal Distribution of
Experiments in this Document
These modes of transformation
and the corresponding experiments are discussed and developed in a variety of
places in this essay. While each section is at least indirectly experimental,
experiments designed as explicit transformations are concentrated in the
section on Experiments 2.2.1
Perception and Vision-Quest
I once wrote, “Regardless of
material outcome or pain, quality of life is related to the quality of its
vision - eidetic, hallucinatory, conceptual, or otherwise - and to living the
truth of the vision” Perception …and vision – is not limited to
the sensory perceptions, to seeing: what is called direct knowledge
and is related to mystic awareness, insight or knowledge is also included
here. The further expanded meaning in which perception includes all of
cognition, especially thought, when used as an instrument of knowledge –
rather than judgment – is not used in this section of this essay except,
however, for the important role of interpretation in perception Vision-Quest Various systems including the
Shamanic vision quest and the mystic systems of Europe and the Middle East,
modern approaches to vision an example of which is Aldous Huxley’s The
Doors of Perception Also included is the kind of
knowledge, awareness and vision that occurs in the vision-quest 2.2.1.1
The Nature of Being
The basic concept for this
article is the identity of [human] being with the ultimate. This is the Principle
of Being of Journey in Being, and the idea Atman = Brahman
of Vedanta and the goal of Mysticism. Mysticism is found in all
religions, in Shamanic and other Ecstatic practices, and in secular
experience The purpose of this section of
the essay is to elaborate and experience ways to see the identity 2.2.1.2
The Quest for Vision
From basics, the approach to
transformation of being is through thought and action. Action is treated The Dynamics of Being,
and the Experiments
below;
more generally the entire Journey in Being is a form of action as is
thought. Here, thought is meant to include all aspects of mind including
perception, feeling, thought –in its restricted meaning– or conception, and
willing. Thought, as conceptual processing is the subject of Phase II of Journey
in Being 2.2.1.2.1
On Mind
There is detailed discussion of
the nature, functioning and elements of mind in a number of places including
primarily, the discussion of mind in the section Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action
and in Dreams
and Hypnosis,
Yoga and
Meditation
and links from those articles. A central point here concerns the function of
perception. The function of perception is commonly held to be observation
of the external world and hallucinations are held to be aberrations
while interpretation or conception is held to be completely distinct
from perception There is a context within which,
certainly, some hallucination is dysfunction However, the idea that all
hallucination is aberration is based on a limited, value laden metaphysics
that is itself – if projected to the whole of human reality – an aberration. Dreams
and Hypnosis,
taken up below, are hallucinations but are not aberrations on any view. An
individual may choose to seek hallucinatory visions as a means of releasing
the normally quite strictly channeled perceptual faculties into the full
content of mental space including the unconscious. Then, hallucination has
meaning and significance in a number of ways. First, there is the intensity,
vividness, and intrusive character of the hallucination; the quality of the
content may suggest its own meaning apart from any possible source or object;
and the intensity etc. may intrude a separate sense of reality that loosens
or dislodges the normal sense with its own possible set of aberrations. The
content of the hallucination may have significance in the following ways: as
an actual symbol of unconscious content that may or may not require
interpretation; and an open symbol seeking an object e.g. the content may be
a representation of an idea that has been sought or may be, with
interpretation, indicate a path of action Since the body / brain is an
expression of individual and evolutionary past, visions / hallucinations and
dreams are, as expressions of the organism, expressions of those dimensions
of the past including the human, animal and material and pre-material levels
which may be in remote unconscious places. There are depths of evolutionary
contact between psyche and the ultimate. These “contacts” are forgotten,
re-perceived and may then be become Just as there is a conventional
function – it is an actual function, the convention is that it is the only
valid function – of perceptual faculties, it is commonly implied that the
function of thought is conception in its limited meaning; and that direct and
immediate knowledge through thought as in contemplation is not possible
through. Again, this is based in limited metaphysics. Such limited schemes of
understanding are not so much mistaken as adapted to a limited physical and
mental context. An issue is the absolute distinction: perception vs.
conception 2.2.1.2.2
Vision, Dream and Hallucination
The so-called hypnagogic and
hypnopompic dreams may be considered to be borderline cases of both dreaming
and of hallucination; these also merge into lucid dreaming i.e. being aware
that one is dreaming but continuing to dream and affecting the dream. The
idea of auto-hallucination is similar to that of lucid dreaming 2.2.1.2.3
Focus: Perception and Vision-Quest
The focus here is on perception
and other direct approaches to vision, including the will as precursor
to perception and action. Thought that is close to perception in its nature
is included. The objects of vision are the external world [Brahman] and the
inner world of the psyche including the unconscious [Atman.] Also
important, are ways of release of the “imprisoned faculties of perception.”
These include the exercises of meditation, yoga, the cultivation of dreams,
the Shamanic vision quest, the use of symbols such as the sacred: sacred
places, rituals and texts While an ultimate objective is
the identity of self and the ultimate, there are intermediate but not lesser
objectives. The continuum ranges from the immersion in the immediate to the
ultimate; which, in final analysis, are identical. This is the Principle
of Meaning of Journey in Being 2.2.1.3
Realms of Application
2.2.1.3.1
Nature: Immersion and Navigation
Navigation includes travel Physical exertion to point of
alteration of mental state... vision quest... fast... immersion...
reflection... defining experiments …intensity and the cusp
of transformation 2.2.1.3.2
Home
Induced vision, sleep
deprivation, exertion, fasting, eliminate caffeine [or alter; other
substances]... meditation 2.2.1.3.3
Work - general
Exhaustive review, experiment; charisma 2.2.1.3.4
Work - specific
Examples from Dynamics
of Being
and A letter Charismatic relations…
individuals; authority… advance Psychological transformation Laboratory / study: personality,
case studies 2.2.1.3.5
Experiments in the Transformation of
Being
There is a class of Experiments
in the Transformation of Being in which vision experiments enhanced by
discovery of limits, their relative nature, overcoming, and discovery of the
nature and a sequence of limits that arch from human being to the ultimate.
Alternatively, the path through depth to the unconscious to all reality
Brahman = Atman 2.2.1.3.6
Arching from Human to Ultimate Being
Examples from Dynamics
of Being… Traditional: Yoga, mysticism… 2.2.1.3.7
Research
Research further ideas;
extensions of the above 2.2.1.4
Vision-Quest
2.2.1.4.1
Objects
2.2.1.4.1.1
The World
Ideal / real... world = nature,
society, psyche, universe... the whole and the sacred... dark, depth, shades
of light, sound… and elemental spirits 2.2.1.4.1.2
Inner World
Mind and mental space… or...
psyche and psychic space... conscious... unconscious... myth, symbol,
literature... body… and world, again 2.2.1.4.1.3
Being
Through being to depth 2.2.1.4.2
Agents or Sources
2.2.1.4.2.1
Perception
Sensing and... seeing... direct
and whole ... knowledge... dreams... hallucinations... self and body...
perception includes feeling, mood, emotion, self-awareness and awareness of
awareness... sensory deprivation 2.2.1.4.2.2
Conception and Thought
Thinking... emotion...
conception as perception... reflection... meditation... contemplation...
belief and magic 2.2.1.4.2.3
Action and Will
Dynamics including body-dynamics...
experiences includes experiment [includes thought]... journey as extended
experience and perception 2.2.1.4.2.4
Learning
2.2.1.4.3
Ways of Release; Catalysts
Also see Dreams, Hallucinations,
Imagery and Thought 2.2.1.4.3.1
Introduction: Induction of
Hallucinations
It is understood, here, that
hallucinations are not necessarily dysfunctional. It could be argued that
although not all hallucinatory contexts are dysfunctional they all lie on an
axis of dysfunction; however, while such use may be appropriate in a clinical
setting, the concept of dysfunction has no connection to phenomenon of
hallucination Factors that induce
hallucination include: Direct brain stimulation; sleep:
dreams and hypnopompic [awakening] and hypnagogic [sleep onset] dreams or
hallucinations; excessive excitation; sensory deprivation; loss of sleep;
hypnosis and trance states; sensory defects; psychological factors; chemical
factors 2.2.1.4.3.2
Vision-Quest
Hero story In one Native American
tradition, under the guidance of the initiated [“elders,”] with preparation:
four days spent in a self-selected “good medicine” area, a ten-foot sacred
circle without outside stimulation, food or friends… “Finally the mind makes
way for confrontation with the true self” 2.2.1.4.3.3
Michael Harner’s Exercises for a
Vision-Quest
I have simulated the following
by focus and dream. The following may be useful for incorporation in a
vision-quest Visualize an opening in the
Earth; go down into the opening Have drum beat 205-220 a minute:
10 min: four sharp beats signal time to return Very rapid beat, half minute for
return Four sharp beats signal end Going Down If there is an obstacle, go
around it or through a crack At the end of the tunnel,
explore the landscape but do not bring anything back this first journey If the journey is not a success
- try again with a different drum speed 2.2.1.4.3.4
Visionary Roles
…visionary and transformational
roles Shaman,
mystic, yogi, hypnotist, priest, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst The charismatic… Jesus,
Mohammed, Buddha 2.2.1.4.3.5
Art and Contact
“Art”… inner vision: inner
poetry; music / drum; natural symbols; atlas of being, relationship, action
and of mind and universe; science Art and vision; looking at,
doing art as a way of seeing and improving ability to see 2.2.1.4.3.6
Cleansing
Fasting - cleansing... alter
basal metabolism, dependence on direct energy... Yoga and
Meditation 2.2.1.4.3.7
Stimulating and Release
Risk, crisis and crisis sense...
passion, anger, “frenzy”, dance... stress, limits of endurance, sweat,
elimination, awe, fear, crisis and release… altered sleep ... sacrifice,
pain, e.g., sun dance ... drugs, poisons, hallucinogens, depressants,
stimulants… synthetic and natural… food and timing... autokinesis... altered
stimulation of senses Hypnosis and dissociation… and
re-integration …the cusp of transformation 2.2.1.4.3.8
Receiving and Tuning
Splitting and psychosis – of
whatever origin… to reintegration... focus, concentration, dedication...
waiting... hypnosis, autosuggestion, rhythm and beat, dance and trance...
animal thinking... isolation, the womb... self knowledge, association and
mindscaping... acting Life, goals, projects 2.2.2
Dreams and Hypnosis
Currently, this section
focuses on dreams. Hypnosis is at least superficially similar to sleep
and it is likely to be conceptually efficient to place dreams and hypnosis
together. This section currently focuses on dreams. Discussion – nature and
uses – and experiments for hypnosis
will be developed later Introduction
The purpose of this section on
dreams is to describe the uses of dreams in the Journey in Being. To this end
it is natural that I attempt a general understanding of dreams – their nature
and origin; dream phenomena; and the functions, uses and significance dreams The biological data given on
dreams and sleep shows the differences between dreams and the vision of the
shaman at a level of detail but also shows their unity in that it is the same
neurological system that gives rise to both in different circumstances Focus for Journey in Being
Here, focus is on the nature,
origin, functions and uses, and significance of dreams. Here, I use the
following meaning of function and no other. Most generally, a function is an
effect. If a dream has a certain effect on the being – including mental and
physiological state and form; the personality life of the being – then the
effect is a function More specifically, focus is on
how dreams affect – and how they may be used to affect – states of being and
lives; and how dreams may be used in the process of effecting transformations
in being. The focus includes effects upon groups – including identified
social groups Personal Focus
How dreams have affected my
life, and how I might use dreams in the future. Dreams and Vision
contains a dream journal, thoughts on the meaning I have seen in my dreams;
and detailed thoughts on the nature and origin of dreams My dreams have shown me and, to
some extent created: A vision of my ambition…
especially, in I Lived
by Mountains;
that dream included my interest in knowledge and in nature for itself and as
a continuing source of inspiration In Animal
Being,
the feeling world of animal being In Musical
Perfection,
intrinsic effects of dreams upon life [regardless of questions of meaning and
interpretation] and the nature of talent such as musical talent and the
capacity for [musical] experience For more on the significance of
the dreams, see Significance What Will a Theory of
Dreams Do?
Although there is no one
objective for a theory of dreams, a central objective of such a theory will
be to show what role dreams do and may have in the life of the individual.
This will include The place of dreaming in the day
to day activity and the life of the individual and the community – especially
psychologically but also physiologically. This issue can be approached in
terms of the psychologically and physiology of the individual and
ecologically or evolutionarily in terms of the mutual adaptation of organism
and environment Although place or role can be
interpreted narrowly as the effects of dreams, the relations / integrations
among dream, sleep, wake, hallucination, vision-quest, various mental states
– meditative / mystic / oceanic / stress or drug induced… are also important The question of the distinction
among the states is reflected in the saying attributed to Chuang Tzu c. 500
BC “I dreamt I was a butterfly, and didn’t know when I awoke if I was a man
who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly who now dreamt he was a
man” or in the following quotes from Bertrand Russell “It is obviously
possible that what we call waking life may be only an unusual and persistent
nightmare,” and further, “I do not believe that I am now dreaming but I
cannot prove I am not.” Although there are clear differences between waking
consciousness and dreaming – waking consciousness is generally coherent,
vivid, and more easily remembered this does not imply an absolute
distinction. As organisms adapted to a certain environment, a general
coherence to awareness to the environment is expected. But as far as
adaptation is incomplete or, on the other hand, as far as adaptation remains
unspecific and therefore to entire being, lack of coherence is also adaptive.
Therefore, the question whether I am a butterfly or a man is somewhat
incoherent since reality itself does not have the solidity of a rock… How dreams affect and may be
used by the individual and the community – how dreams affect the state /
behavior [mental and physical] of the individual and of the community; and
how the individual and community may use dream content. To talk about content
first note that there are formal parallels between waking and dream contents.
In the first place dream content may have a direct effect upon the
state / behavior of the individual e.g. waking up in a cognitive-emotional /
behavioral state that is a direct result of the dream i.e. the connection
between the dream and the state / behavior does not occur at a conscious
level; this occurs within the individual whose state / behavior may then
affect the community. Indirect effect may involve reflection upon the
content and, then, an effect based on the conclusion to the reflection – this
occurs within the individual or within the community if the dreamer shares
the dream content. To ask in what ways this may occur, first note that
contents may present as depictions of reality or fact [assertive / depictive,
or, in the case that the depiction is clearly hypothetical as implied
question] as instruction or command [directive,] as dedication or promise
[commissive,] as free content [expressive,] or as creating – usually social –
reality [declarative.] When the dream is pictorial / sensory content is
restricted to expressive and, perhaps, assertive-hypothetical. Each kind in
its own manner has a kind of literal meaning and thus the dream content may
be taken literally. In the case of assertive or depictive content the literal
meaning is that the dream depicts or reflects reality. In the other cases the
command, promise or declaration may be taken literally. Expression may be
regarded as literal expression of mental content. However, just as in the
case of waking content, there is more than literal content: dreams have been
taken as a source of divination i.e. as predicting the future; as
healing; as extensions of the waking state or as, together with the
waking state, constituting the constituting the complete mental life of the
individual; or as only indirectly reflecting actual or real content
e.g. as evidence of or reflecting unconscious activity and, so, as
source of real meaning [through interpretation] or, since it is in the
unconscious that mind and body / universe merge, of creative knowledge of all
being A theory of dreams would show
what combination of the foregoing is true; this might depend on the kind of
dream. Note, though, that dream content may is also creative and therefore,
rather than regard the dream content be taken as given, the individual /
community may use dream contents to ends of their own design and choosing; on
this account any interpretation of content has validity i.e. dreams may be
taken as divination, as healing, as reflecting reality, as command / promise
/ dedicative… Further, when the dream content is taken given, there is the
further dual task of finding the real content [in the real case the real
content is the actual content] and demonstrating that that content is in fact
the real content In practice, as far as content
is [taken as] given, the content may not yield, fully or at all, to rational
theory and therefore the realization of the content is open to creative
judgment. When the content is taken as an element of the creative life of the
individual, the use of the dream content is an open and creative process in
which the rational and judgmental evaluation may be used 2.2.2.1
The Nature of Dreams
A dream is a perception that has
no external source and that occurs during sleep. Is this specification
adequate? The following considerations arise: Since perception is usually of
an object, it would be more correct to replace “perception” by “experience,”
“perceptual experience,” or “experience as of a perception” Of course, dreams do have
external sources but these are relatively remote or indirect. Therefore it
would be better to say that “A dream is a perceptual experience with no
immediate external source…” It follows that, in one meaning of
“hallucination” a dream is a hallucination49.
It would be correct to say that a dream is a hallucination except that
“hallucination” often has the connotation of aberration or dysfunction;
however, even while awake, not all hallucinations are considered to lie on an
axis of dysfunction. It could be argued that although not all hallucinatory
contexts are dysfunctional they all lie on an axis of dysfunction; however,
while such use may be appropriate in a clinical setting, the concept of
dysfunction has no connection to phenomenon of hallucination. Insistence that
all hallucination is dysfunction involves an at least implicit implication
that the function of perception is to perceive external [physical] data and
not mental states such as memories and memory associations including the
unconscious. This thought gives some rational basis to and a meaning of the
idea that dreams, hallucinations and reality are not completely different
“worlds” Do dreams occur only in sleep? If
dreams are defined as imagery – usually vivid – that occurs in sleep then, of
course dreams occur only in sleep. However, although dreams normally occur in
sleep it is not useful to insist that dreams occur only in sleep. In the
first place there are dreamlike experiences that occur on the boundary
between sleep and wake – hypnopompic [awakening] and hypnagogic
[sleep onset] dreams that lie on the borderline between normal dreaming and
normal hallucination. Further, while sleeping and waking cognition and their
physiologies are normally distinct there is cross over: waking cognition
enters into dreaming in lucid dreaming and relaxation [meditation] can be used
in inducing dreamlike states while awake 2.2.2.1.1
Dreams, Hallucinations, Imagery and
Thought
Dreams, hallucinations and
images are produced by the same system under different circumstances. Whereas
the phenomena and experience of dreams and imagery are produced by the
balance of engrams and sensory perception, hallucinations are often the
result of nervous excitation due to e.g. an excess of or heightened
sensitivity to the neurotransmitter dopamine at certain receptor sites in the
brain It does not follow that there
are no normal hallucinations in waking states Thought is the occurrence of
images – either iconic or symbolic – that are constructed from memory in
relation to ongoing experience and immersion in the world. How is it possible
that thought patterns can correspond to reality? Firstly, physical sequence
and relationship affect neural association. Secondly, thought involves trial
and error or hypothesis, comparison and correction This shows a number of ways in
which realistic thought can break down When the images have an
intensity that matches or exceeds that of sensory perception When immersion in the world is
disrupted as in isolation – social and or physical – and deprivation Neural damage or sensitivity
affects the system of neural associations The system of normal trial and
error breaks down as a result of pressure from heightened affective states
[e.g. mania;] or breakdown is part of an ego-defense… or is underdeveloped
for various reasons including underdevelopment of the ego The system of normal trial and
error is volitionally or semi-volitionally suspended in the face of threats /
opportunities to the individual Since compensation is possible,
the presence of one or more of these factors implies a tendency but not
necessity to the break down of realistic thought Almost every factor can be
precipitated by the various factors in psychosis: deprivation, isolation and
exposure; drugs; brain injury and mental disorders The factors in breakdown of
realistic thought provide an explanation of delusional thinking. It does not
follow that delusion-like thought is invariably non-functional and can be
both protective and creative 2.2.2.1.2
The Dream Mechanism
Here is a simple theory. The
brain / mind constantly receives and processes a much larger amount of data,
both external and internal, than reaches consciousness; what reaches
consciousness is screened and integrated. Integration is the perception of
whole objects as whole: the different shapes and colors of an object are seen
– experienced without reflection being necessary to the experience – as
cohesively constituting the object; screening is the suppression from
consciousness of less important information. What is of lesser importance is
affected by integration and interpretation – a stimulus that does not fit as
part of a whole object or of external reality is suppressed for that reason.
There is also a scanning function so that what has been suppressed may –
slowly or suddenly – come into conscious focus. In hallucinations, and in
dreaming the screening, integration and scanning functions are suppressed or
disrupted. In dreaming the disruption is correlated with certain brain
states; in waking hallucination the disruption is correlated with [altered]
brain structure or chemistry [drugs, mental disorders and disorganization,
brain damage, heightened perception] 2.2.2.1.3
Physiological Correlates of Dreams
Here are some primary
physiological correlates of dreams: In humans, the most vivid,
visual dreams occur during rapid eye movement [REM] sleep during which the
brain is very active as shown by an EEG [electroencephalogram], and the large muscles are
relaxed. REM or D-state [desynchronized or dreaming] sleep occurs every 90 - 100
minutes, 3 to 4 times a night, and lasts longer as the night progresses; the
final REM period is up to 45 minutes. Less vivid dreams occur during non-REM
sleep; these are like thought and waking experience Something about sleep makes it
difficult to remember dreams Sleep and dreams are affected by
a variety of drugs and medications, including alcohol. Stopping certain drugs
suddenly may cause nightmares D-state sleep has been seen in
all mammals studied, for example in monkeys, dogs, cats, rats, elephants,
shrews, and opossums, and in some birds and reptiles The D-state depends on the
pontine tegmentum, a part of the brain stem; and appears to be associated
with norepinephrine in the brain. Other stages of sleep appear to be
associated with serotonin. The D-state is associated with increased
variability in breathing and heart rate, relaxation of skeletal muscles and
increased physiological sexual activity such as blood flow in sex organs Various related phenomena –
lucid dreaming, waking dreams, dreams on the border of sleep, sleep walking
have simple explanations based in the physiology. Lucid dreaming requires
further explanation that is given later 2.2.2.1.4
Sleep
The purpose of this section on
sleep is to provide some information on sleep that may be useful [1] in
thinking about dreams, and [2] for later developments 2.2.2.1.4.1
Neural Theories of Sleep
In some older theories,
sleep-wake alternation was thought to be a function of differences in
individual neurons. Later it was found that the ascending reticular
activating system [ARAS, a group of nerves in the brain] maintains [waking]
cortical arousal and that the action of the ARAS was modulated by sensory
input. Injuries to the ARAS produced sleep thus supporting a passive view of
sleep i.e. that there is no specific organ or center of sleep. However, there
remains the question as to how sensory input affects the function of the ARAS It was found that electrical
stimulation of certain areas of the hypothalamus and other areas of the brain
can induce sleep. Secondly, the discovery of REM sleep which is active in its
nature also supports an active view of sleep. REM sleep can be eliminated in
experimental animals by surgical destruction of a group of nerve cells in the
pons. However, there is an additional question whether REM and NREM or non
rapid eye movement sleep are produced by the same mechanisms. Sleep may have
both active and passive aspects with the active / passive elements
distributed differently according to the different phases of sleep Serotonin and norepinephrine are
associated, respectively, with NREM and REM sleep. Additionally, REM sleep is
eliminated but NREM sleep unaffected, by injuries to the pontine tegmentum;
and NREM sleep is suppressed when the brain stem has been severed at the
midpoint of the pons, indicating a possible NREM mechanism behind the
midpoint of the pons that suppresses the arousal effect of the ARAS 2.2.2.1.4.2
REM Sleep
REM involves continuous
low voltage, mixed frequency EEG that is faster than in stages 2 through 4
NREM sleep; intermittent rapid eye movements; continuous
relaxation of the continuous slight waking tension of facial muscles,
suppression of spinal reflexes and motor inhibition; relatively high rates of
autonomic activity and variability; and high rates of firing of cerebral
neurons that are often comparable to or greater than the rates while awake.
The locus ceruleus, in the pons, has been identified as the likely source of
the inhibition: when it is surgically destroyed in animals, there results
period active, apparently goal-directed behavior in REM sleep while
continuing to have the characteristic REM sleep lack of response to external
stimulation 2.2.2.1.4.3
Sequences of NREM and REM sleep
Stages of NREM sleep are ordered
1-2-3-4-3-2 In adult humans, sleep typically
progresses as follows: first, 70 – 90 minutes of NREM sleep; followed by 5 –
15 minutes of [first period of] REM sleep. This is followed by NREM–REM
cycles each of approximately the same length with the length of the NREM
phases shrinking while the REM phases lengthen. There is approximately three
times as much NREM sleep as there is REM sleep. After the first two or three
cycles, stages 3 and 4 NREM sleep are lost and most of the NREM is stage 2 2.2.2.1.4.4
NREM Sleep
Four conventional stages have
been identified according to EEG patterns The stage 1 EEG tracing is a
low-voltage mixed-frequency tracing with significant θ-wave [4 – 7 Hz]
activity Stage 2: relatively low-voltage EEG
tracing with intermittent, short sequences of 12–14 Hz waves [“sleep
spindles”] and K-complexes – biphase wave forms that can be induced by
stimulation and are spontaneous in sleep Stages 3 and 4: relatively
high-voltage [> 50 μv] EEG tracings primarily δ-wave [1 – 2 Hz]
activity. Stage 4 is associated with greater amounts of δ-wave [1 – 2
Hz] activity 2.2.2.1.4.5
Light and Deep Sleep
On the basis of EEG patterns –
by comparison with he EEG patterns of NREM sleep are those associated in
other circumstances with decreased vigilance – and from the observation that
in NREM sleep that follows being awake most ANS functions decrease activity
and variability, NREM sleep, especially stage 4 and to some extent stage 3,
appears to support the healing / regenerative function that is associated
with sleep. Observations that support this function of stage 4 NREM sleep
are: its increase after physical exercise; its concentration in early sleep;
and its predominance in sleep after extended periods of sleep deprivation In some measures, REM sleep is
lighter while in other measures it is deeper than NREM sleep. Muscle tone is
lowest in REM sleep but ANS and CNS activity in REM are higher than in NREM
sleep and compare with such activity in the waking state. For meaningful
stimuli the arousal threshold from REM sleep compares to the threshold for
light NREM sleep of stages 1 and 2 while for stimuli without significance the
REM threshold is high – perhaps due to shutting out of non-significant
stimuli in REM. Awakened sleepers describe REM as deep and NREM as light but
this may be due the low muscle tone or to the subjective involvement with
dreaming in REM sleep The various data in this and
other sections are consistent with REM sleep being associated with neural
reorganization and repair and association of NREM sleep with general / body
healing and repair 2.2.2.1.5
Dreams as Transitional Between Deep
Sleep and the Waking State
It is reasonable to conclude
that dreams may be seen as transitional between deep sleep and the waking
state. However, it cannot be concluded from this that dreaming has no function.
Perhaps, earlier in evolution, all perception and experience had the
character of a primitive form of dreaming – as perception it would have been
haphazard but still adaptive – and consciousness then bifurcated into the
waking and dreaming modes that continued to evolve. Or, perhaps at some point
in evolution, dreaming had no intrinsic function – perhaps dreaming was
merely transitional between the waking states that included alertness and the
resting state of deep sleep; however, the evolution of an ability to have
rich and varied dream content may have been of adaptive advantage. On the
latter account, it is conceivable that any meaning
and function
of dreams is specific to the species The following possibilities
arise: Dreams are the modification of
an earlier mode of symbolic / iconic processing – as is waking consciousness;
or Dreams are transitional between
waking states and deep sleep but, nonetheless, have an independent function Further, since reality control
[ego] is not needed in deep sleep, the ego is absent or partially in place
during dreaming 2.2.2.1.6
Why Do Animals Dream?
It was noted above that D-state
sleep has been seen in all mammals studied and in some birds and reptiles. It
follows that answers to the question, “Why do human beings dream?” are
embedded in answers to, “Why do animals dream?” What does it mean to ask, “Why
do we dream?” We saw above that this is not the same as asking what are the
functions, uses or adaptations of dreams. Dreaming may have functions that
developed after their origin and that may partially explain the character of
our dreams but not that we have dreams There are two common approaches
to explaining the characters of an organism: proximate and ecological /
evolutionary. Proximate explanations are found in the organism as it is e.g.
in its anatomy, physiology and psychology; evolutionary explanations are
found, for in example, in showing how the character is or may be adaptive or
is related to adaptive developments. Actual explanation may combine the two
approaches and may have causal, correlative and / or idiosyncratic features.
There are various constraints on valid ecological / evolutionary explanation
that I omit here Evolution need not give a full
answer but may provide clues. If dreams are transitional, there need be no
original function. But, there may be – an earlier mode – and, additionally,
given the fact of dreaming, the nature of dreaming may have been subsequently
adapted There are objections to
evolutionary explanations. Such explanations may be regarded as shorthand for
explanation based in adaptation – the relation between the organism and the
environment. The “shorthand,” like many other good theories, makes for
explanations of such efficiency that it is practically essential 2.2.2.2
Dream Phenomena
Cataloging dream phenomena is
essential to a full understanding of dreams and their significance. The
foregoing discussion draws on the common experiences of dreaming. However,
both that discussion and an understanding of significance will benefit from
an elaboration of the phenomena 2.2.2.2.1
Content
Violence, power, powerlessness,
hyper-realistic dreams and dreams of original and exquisite beauty, unusual /
dissociative senses of self and others… Here are some dreams. The full
accounts and other dreams are in Dreams and Vision 2.2.2.2.1.1
Specific Examples of Content
For others, these are, in
themselves, “mere” examples; however, below, they may have significance. For
me, they are part of the Journey in Being: I Lived by Mountains, Lakes,
winters, Snows and Red Sunsets Spring 1978… Earth was invaded
by aliens / who left behind fallout / Humans went to live below / the surface
of earth - / Shutting behind them doors of steel / I sought others / But
found none / I lived by Mountains, Lakes / Winters, Snows and Red Sunsets / I
sought for / and was able to arrive at / Some understanding of Truth / Many
years later when / People came out / I was able to communicate / What I had
learned February 16, 1988. Animal
thinking…I dreamt I was thinking like an animal…without words, with images,
with timeless awareness…it was easy, an enjoyable and enjoyed dream April - May, 1993. I made and
performed exquisite, lovely music. That was the dream experience. Even if it
is all fabrication, the emotional after effect was real and lovely… and is to
this day… there is a place within my mental space that is home and pure
beauty – apparently created in a dream 2.2.2.2.2
Phenomena
Repeated dreams – the
underground labyrinth-like connection of all dreams; continued dreams; dreams
on the border between sleep and wake, between normal dreaming and normal
hallucination [hypnagogic and hypnopompic dreams or dreamlike states]; lucid
dreaming; and suggestion – during and before – in dreaming… 2.2.2.2.2.1
Examples
Power dreams of flying and
ability to control and destroy; anger dreams – often at my father and often
associated with violence, destruction; erotic dreams – the repetition tends
to be with people I have loved and would like to continue to love; green
forest dream – being on a forest road the shape of an inverted ‘U” that
encloses the deep forest, going into the forest, green canopy with lions and
wonder, fording the stream to a mystical place, back to a van on the road;
surging up the river – in a boat or ship, surging at great speed, the gap
between the hull and the banks is very small but this does not impede
progress; being in the navy – many dreams where I am a new officer in the
navy with both potential and anxiety… with stereotypical images of being in an
engine room or a hull that opens out to the river or the sea; land-bridge
dream – a bridge across the ocean to an island, a place of satisfaction and
perfection but continuing on from the island and onward across another bridge
further into the ocean… the second bridge dangles into the water and I
continue on into the water; dreams with just the dangling part into the
water; great bridges crossing rivers – friends and I cross the bridge that is
very rickety and parts fall off and the bridge is about to fall into the
river; at the dam at the river dreams; crossing the ocean in a wooden ship
dreams; am I noticing how many dreams have water in them The following is remarkable. In
a dream, I was in a conference at an oval table of beautifully polished,
stained wood. A committee like group at the table; I am interacting with the
committee who are giving me advice and information and I feel inferior to the
committee who are giving me information and reasoning that I feel I could not
accomplish on my own. In the dream, I say to the people, “You are a part of
my dream. So, I created you. Your intelligence is actually my intelligence
and therefore, I am more intelligent than you – my intelligence includes
yours; anything you think is actually my thought; therefore, even though I
think I need you and am less than you I do not, I do not need you and am more
than you.” There is an obvious message for my life or the life of any
individual 2.2.2.2.3
Dreams and Life
Regardless of conceptual
questions such as significance, meaning, functions and uses of dreams it is a
fact that dreaming affects waking life 2.2.2.2.3.1
Dreams and Life: Examples
Effect on emotional state as in
music dreams; effect on my belief – possibly – in abilities that are not
manifest Emotion is a significant aspect
of dream content and phenomena “I lived by mountains, lakes,
winters, snows and red sunsets” – this dream played some role in
crystallizing my “life design” Dreams have content that did not
occur in the waking state; that does not mean that the content could not have
occurred, simply that it did not occur in the waking state. But now two
things happen. At various levels, including the unconscious, the dream
affects awareness, emotion and behavior. This may also happen at a conscious
level where one may take the dream as a literal message. But, additionally
the dream is data and there are so many things one can do with that data
either directly or by attempting to “understand or interpret” the data Dream and dream content affect
life – regardless of any conscious intention or decision to use dreams or
their meaning – since individuals’ cognitive and emotional states are
affected. Additionally, the individual or group may consciously interpret /
use dreams; the simplest cases of interpretation are [1] allowing or
encouraging a sub / unconscious effect and [2] literal interpretation.
Recognized mythic and interpretive systems for dreams and visions include: Dreamtime of original Australian
people Shamanism of Central Asia and
vision-quest of Native Americans e.g. the accounts of Black Elk Dream interpretation work of
Sigmund Freud Similar thoughts apply to
hallucination and other psychotic content 2.2.2.3
The Meaning and Function of Dreams
It will be useful to discuss the
concepts of function and meaning 2.2.2.3.1
On Function and Meaning
It will be useful to clarify my
use of the words function, meaning and significance;
further, since those words are associated with contention I note that here,
in this section on dreams, I use the following meanings and no other It will first be useful to
consider the word effect which is used here in the following way. If a
dream resulted in the individual waking up afraid it would be said that,
“fear was an effect of the dream.” Dreams – in general and / or particular
dreams or particular kinds of dreams – have effects e.g. primarily on the
mental or physiological state or the personality or life of the dreamer and secondarily
upon others and the world. An effect may be routine or idiosyncratic.
An effect is routine if similar circumstances result in similar effects. The
source of routine-ness may be some identifiable causal factor or, more
generally, a correlation. If an effect is not routine it is idiosyncratic.
The source of idiosyncrasy may be either ignorance or complexity. Ignorance
may be of the causes or of the cause relationships and may involve some
factor that is unique to the situation e.g. a novel or merely idiosyncratic
deployment of dreams or dreaming. In the case of complexity the causal
factors and cause-effect relationships are known but their consequences have
proven impossible to estimate It is now possible to explain function
– a function is an identified effect that plays a role in the being
of the organism; note that not all effects are functions. This specification
is intentionally open. Thus, in this use, there is no unique set of functions
i.e. it is not correct to talk of the function, and a function is not
necessarily a desirable or intended effect or deployment. A “use” is a
deployment or a desirable or desired effect. All uses are functions but not
all functions are uses In talking of the meaning
of a psychological phenomenon, I am asking “What is its place in the total
psychological life of the individual?” In the sense used here, meaning is
identical to psychological function. The significance is the
function assigned [or ascribed; in what follows, in this section on Function
and Meaning, ascription will be understood when I use the word assigned] to
the phenomenon – either by the dreamer or others; and the assignment could be
casual or formal / theoretical. It would appear to be paradoxical to talk of
intrinsic significance however we can talk of intrinsic significance
as follows: the significance is intrinsic if it is also a function that does
not result from the assignment of the significance Thus, meaning, as used here,
includes any psychological significance and function includes all
significance. There are more specific senses in which meaning is equivalent
to psychological significance or use Significance can be generic
or specific. In the generic case significance is assigned to dreaming
in general or to specific kinds of dreams. Specific significance is the
significance of a specific dream. The assignment is and need not be fixed;
multiple assignments are possible; and any meaning or function may or may not
include the significance 2.2.2.3.2
Meaning and Significance of Dreams
In talking of the meaning
or psychological functions of dreams or of a particular dream I am
asking, “What is the place of dreams or of the particular dream in the total
psychological life of the individual?” It is very clear that dreams,
dreaming have meaning and function. Psychologically, just as physiologically,
dreams can be seen as a transition between waking and deep sleep. Regarding
the significance of dreams, there is a an idea – claimed to be a theory –
that dreams are a trash can of waking mental activity thoughts,
emotions and perceptions. The intent of this claim is to assert that dreams
can have no intrinsic significance; clearly this is an assignment and
not a theory as such. However, it is absurd in the sense of being
contradictory since the impossibility of intrinsic significance implies the
impossibility of function and meaning in their general senses. Further, even
if dreams have no intrinsic significance may still have assigned function and
so may be effectual. [Additionally, the trash can theory is not only a
statement about dreams it is also an assignment of function / value to trash
and trash cans. At least some of the contents of trash cans are useful to
some individuals and, through re-cycling, what was trash in one context is a
commodity in a new context.] Of course, even if dreaming and some dreams do
have significance, it does not follow that every dream does. Some
dreams could be the cleansing of the mind / brain of excess images and
associations in memory – or, perhaps, the strengthening of memories and
associations. Dreams are multivalent in their effectuality: cleansing /
strengthening as well as significant at the same time – each in varied
degrees; reality is multivalent relative to our assignments and
understanding. The significance could be intrinsic – dreams have definite
meaning that does not depend on reflection on the dream; and / or dreams
could have significance such as an interpretation or a significance that is
invented. Significance becomes meaning and there could be an evolutionary
interaction between dreams, dreaming and invented meaning The psychological function of
dreams and dreaming are what dreams do for us – routinely, accidentally,
necessarily, intentionally and unintentionally, how are they useful
psychologically and adaptively. In a neutral language, the function of dreams
is “Their place in the total psychological life of the individual.”
Therefore, “trash can” and meaning theories are not exclusive. Just as for
meaning, there can be intrinsic and assigned functions; both can occur at the
same time; that something is assigned does not mean it is not at all
intrinsic. There is a school of thought that all function is assigned.
However – and this is not so much a fact as a particular meaning of function,
when it comes to function and evolution and the relation of the organism to
the environment, the intrinsic properties of the organism may be regarded as
given and the functions may be thought of as the relation to the environment;
thus function is not purely assigned. At the level of organisms what is a
property of organism and environment may be thought of as a function
of the organism. At the same time, since the individual may influence itself,
properties are not purely given – just as functions are not purely assigned.
There is no absolute boundary between properties and functions What kind of functions can
dreams have? There can be functions that are properties of organism and
environment – these are adaptive functions. At the physiological level,
dreams may be a cleaning out of memory or a strengthening of memory, i.e.,
memories and associations. At the psychological level, dreams have, also,
correlates of the physiological – clearing and strengthening. Then there can
be assigned functions: over and above the intrinsic functions, an individual
or a culture can choose, decide or simply come to use dreams in some way. The
divide between intrinsic and assigned function is not absolute; the faculties
used to make and process the assignment may have intrinsic basis and a
pure assignment may evolve into an adaptive function. An example of
psychological function that is on the border between intrinsic and assigned
are the relation to action; in this way dream is similar to waking thought;
and intrinsic psychological function may be the exercise of the shadow
faculties and, specifically, access to savant ability – see, for example, Musical
Perfection 2.2.2.3.3
Significance
2.2.2.3.3.1
The Nature of Significance
Let us suppose that dreams lie
between fact and fiction. Dreams have basis in memory [fact] but there is
significant distortion and spontaneous association or “fiction.” Further, the
result of the association may be remembered but what was being associated
forgotten. If the “reality grid” is partially asleep [dreams as the
transition state] distortion and spontaneous association are imagination.
Some schemes of interpretation are rigid; a snake [penis like] means sex and
so on. A snake may have many associations: fear, or for someone who loves the
wild the association may be adventure on one occasion and fear on another… or
gliding through life or experience. Since associations are multiple and fluid
no given [by some system of interpretation] or fixed [always the same] system
of interpretation is possible. That a dream is a multi-dimensional flow of
imagery makes interpretation even more fluid. Not all images need have an
association or given meaning. How can one then come up with an interpretation?
Systems of interpretation are suggestive; and one can analyze one’s waking
memory for associations [the unconscious]. Further, since dreams are
transitional states, all kinds of play are possible: cultivation of dreams by
“messages” to oneself – reminders – maintaining a dream record [when did I
have this kind of dream, repeated dreams…] and lucid dreaming on the boundary
between waking control of imagery [thought] and absence of control.
Interpretation is often thought of as a conscious activity or resulting in a
conscious meaning; however, in addition to fluidity, meaning may occur
altogether at an unconscious level; and, interpretation is not merely read or
given but may be written or creative. The creation may be in the act of
interpretation and / or assignment This does not mean that there
are no archetypal dreams or symbols. It does not mean that a system of
interpretation cannot be powerfully suggestive. Such symbols, when they
exist, may be identified by flexible interpretation, from repeated dreams,
and from common dream and story [myth…] themes among groups of peoples. The
symbols will not be rigid; and individual variations will be imposed upon the
group symbols The “unconscious” need not be
understood literally; it can be understood as remote. Dreams are useful in
learning about one’s feelings, thoughts, behavior, motives, and values.
Dreams can be sources of creative ideas. This is due to the relation to the
unconscious place where reflections, e.g. on a problem, are stored and the novel
elements and combinations of dreams That different sensory
modalities “go to sleep” or “wake up” earlier or later [hearing wakes up
before vision] makes for additional variations. On the border between wake
and sleep the individual is or may be more receptive to suggestion as in
hypnosis. Different aspects of cognition go to sleep / wake up earlier or
later… an aspect of cognition is not necessarily in a dream or waking state
of mental imagery but may lie in between; this is responsible for a number of
phenomena – lucid dreaming or dreaming in which one is aware that one is
dreaming So far we have more or less been
discussing interpretation. But, dreams have intrinsic meaning. Some dreams
have direct meaning: the dream is clearly about one’s life, hopes and so on.
Or, the result of the dream upon waking may be a particular emotional state
[“good” or “bad” and so on] or a cognitive state [heightened or dulled] and
these states may have definite consequences regardless of interpretation or
assignment of meaning A particular case of intrinsic
meaning is when the dream is about the future or possible futures. This then
may lead to action with or without further reflection. The same may be
accomplished by thought; whereas thought may be more rational, dreams may be
more true [and more imaginative] since there is a connection to the
unconscious – the real psychological state of the individual before defenses
and interpretation… 2.2.2.3.3.2
Significance of Content
“Dream affects life.” Cultivate
dreams? Or, cultivate a life that lives out “dream.” 2.2.2.3.3.3
Examples of Significance
The dreams of Dream
Phenomena
are used as examples of significance. They are part of my personal journey I lived by mountains, lakes, winters, snows and red
sunsets My ambition… Animal being What is the significance for
human being? That human being is and or joins with animal being on the way to
all being? Musical perfection What does this say for capacity
for creation, the capacity for experience and for the effect of dream upon
life? If it’s a dream experience, it’s a possible waking experience… and if
that, a possible shared experience. What is the source? I did not create music
or the ability to appreciate it. But, I am a part of the creation? This is
true for everyone? 2.2.2.4
Summary
The purpose of this section has
been to outline the features of theories
of dreams – elaborated in the next paragraph, dream phenomena, the
significance and use of dreams – especially in the Journey in Being, a
framework to integrate dreams / sleep along with hallucination, vision-quest
and other states of mind [“altered”] into a general map of mind / being The theory presented is not
detailed e.g. there is no account of interpretation. What is presented may be
used as a framework and includes a value-centered or teleologic
account [significance] embedded in a natural or relatively value-free
foundation in a value-free concept of function. An account of meaning
is also given: a special concept of meaning is equated to significance
and is embedded in a general concept that is equated to psychological
function 2.2.2.5
Hypnosis
In hypnosis, awareness is
heightened and inner experience is given as much significance as is generally
given to external reality while awake. Hypnosis is also marked by increased
receptiveness and responsiveness Self-hypnosis, also called
autohypnosis, is possible but often sterile since the effort to produce
hypnosis nullifies the intended result. A form of self-hypnosis occurs when
individuals are deeply absorbed to the point where orientation to the
environment is lost; individuals susceptible to this experience are also
susceptible to hypnosis. Self-hypnosis may be effective if the individual
makes a prerecording on tape 2.2.3
Yoga and Meditation
The purposes of this section are To provide a brief account and
foundation of Yoga and meditation and the theoretical foundation in Samkhya
and Vedanta To show similarities between
Yoga and the Journey and Being – and to synthesize Yoga with the Experiments
in the Transformation of Being 2.2.3.1
A Short Introduction to Yoga
The purposes of this account are Show how Yoga can be a unifying
theme for the Experiments in the Transformation in Being Re-write the central concepts of
Yoga in English. Sanskrit terms and English equivalents are in a separate
document, Yoga 2.2.3.1.1
Samkhya
Samkhya: enumerating knowledge,
one of the six orthodox systems of Indian philosophy, a dualistic theory of
human nature describing the theoretical dynamics of bandha [bondage] and
release while Yoga describes and prescribes the practical dynamics of release Prakriti, the orders of matter
and purusha, the self constitute the universe [and, so, God is not
hypothesized.] Purusha is pure consciousness, pervasive, unchangeable,
immaterial, and ego-less or without desire. Prakriti is the universal and
un-manifest matter in time and space Materialization begins when
purusha, which is pure consciousness, manifests as prakriti. Out of this is
evolved buddhi or spiritual awareness and then, as the condition of existence,
the ego consciousness [ahankara, “I-maker”] and so purusha mistakenly thinks
that ego is the foundation of its existence Ahankara further divides into
five gross elements – space, air, fire, water, earth; and five fine elements
– sound, touch, sight, taste, smell; five organs of perception –
corresponding to the five senses; five organs of activity – for speaking,
grasping, moving, procreation, evacuation and thinking. The universe results
from combination and recombination of purusha together with these elements 2.2.3.1.2
Patanjali Yoga
Yoga means yoke or union… citta
vrtti nirodha: disciplining the activity of consciousness. In the original
writings of Patanjali, Yoga was a way to attain union with the ultimate
or union with the real. Patanjali’s system had eight stages [astanga
yoga.] The first five were external and preparatory. The first two of restraint
[yama] and observance [niyama] are “moral,” followed by two stages of
physical preparation, the physical postures [asana] and breath
control [pranayama.] The fifth stage is the redirection
[pratyahara] and training of attention from the immediate world
and direction to the self or mind. The final, internal stages are focusing
[dharana] attention on a fixed object, uninterrupted ego-less meditation
[dhyana] on an object of focus, and union [samadhi] with the
object of awareness. The goal is the complete union, identity of the
self, with the ultimate, the state of liberation [moksa, kaivalya]
from finite existence There is a great variety of
shades of meaning of the terms and ways in which they are combined into
similar systems. Yoga can be thought of as received or [and] as fluid,
experimental 2.2.3.1.3
Hatha Yoga
The system of purification yama
[restraint] and [observances] with the physical preparation asana
[physical postures] and pranayama [breath
control] became an end in itself. Hatha Yoga, the union of force [ha =
sun, tha = moon], is a system of purification, breath control and
postural exercises. When part of Patanjali’s system these exercises result in
a healthy, open and alert or receptive person Patanjali’s complete system has
been called Raja Yoga – self-rule. “Raja and Hatha Yoga
are both empty without the other.” 2.2.3.1.4
Related systems: Physical Arts
Hatha Yoga is a physical art.
There are numerous others such as T’ai Chi Ch’uan and various martial arts. A
martial art is not intrinsically violent but is a dynamics of intense
physical and mental interactions [see threatening situations.]
Immersion in the various arts may, I assume, lead to Yoga in action and I may
undertake some forms later. For now, I omit focus on the variety of
physical-mental arts 2.2.3.1.5
The Yoga of the Bhagavad-Gita
The epic poem, Bhagavad-Gita
elaborates four paths or ways to the union. These are meditation [Raja
Yoga,] thought, wisdom or knowledge [Gyana Yoga], action
or work [Karma Yoga] and attitude or devotion [Bhakti
Yoga] The Gita has suggestions
for balance among these elements – among meditation, thought, action and
attitude, especially attitudes toward ends or outcomes 2.2.3.1.6
Other Yogic Systems
The following information is
provided for completeness, i.e. for possible future use in completing the
chain of ideas Kriya Yoga: yoga of purification – tapas,
svadhyaya, Isvara pranidhana Kundalini Yoga: an approach to the ascent of
the kundalini up the spine through the six padmas [lotuses] or cakras
[centers] to the final ajna [command] padma between the
eyebrows at which Isvara is seen. The kundalini is the sleeping
serpent at the base of the spine and is a metaphor for sakti - the divine
power 2.2.3.1.7
Yoga, Vedanta and the Journey in
Being
Two aspects of Yoga are the aim
– union with the ultimate; and the means, the system of practices that
are “designed” to achieve the aim In Yoga, the aim and the means
come as one; they can and have been treated separately For example the aim of Yoga is
at the center of the philosophical system of the Vedanta – the
source of the concept of the identity of the self [Atman] and the
ultimate [Brahman.] The realization of this identity is the final object of
the Yogas as it is of Middle Eastern and European Mysticism Hatha Yoga is the system of
purification, physical postures and breath control The final aims of Yoga and of
the Journey in Being are identical. Journey in Being also
emphasizes here-now 2.2.3.1.8
Experiments with the Yoga systems and
Transformations of Being
Experiment with the elements of
the Yoga systems. I want to use the aspects of the Yoga systems in the
Journey, especially the Experiments in Being. These aspects are the
elements of Patanjali’s system that include Hatha Yoga; the underlying
philosophy of the Yoga Texts, the Samkhya and the related philosophy of Vedanta When the various approaches to
Illumination, Awareness are considered: physical exercises, Vision,
meditation, the Dynamics
of Being,
and other experiments in being [from, e.g., Bhagavad-Gita]… these are
all integrated within the Patanjala system and its derivatives 2.2.3.2
Meditation
2.2.3.2.1
What is Meditation?
Meditation is a phase of Yoga,
the union with the ultimate In the dhyana phase of
Yoga – the phase of concentrated meditation can be used for the same
end. Meditation involves quieting the usual attention to the myriad details
of the immediate world, especially the noise of an un-trained mind. The end
of the quieting is union with the ultimate by becoming aware, through
experience of the depths or layers of mind and self, of the identity of the
self with Brahman… Meditation is mental exercise,
including devotion and prayer, to achieve heightened awareness or somatic
calm. There are many techniques of concentration, contemplation, and
abstraction. Yoga synthesizes mental and physical exercise In some form, meditation has
been formalized and institutionalized by most great religions. The Yoga
practice, dhyana [“concentrated meditation”], became the focus of a distinct
school among the Buddhists - Ch’an in China, then Zen in Japan 2.2.3.2.1.1
Meditation as Release
Meditation can be thought of as
release of imprisoned functions of awareness, presence, attention and focus –
especially awareness of the self, the depths and dimensions of mind… and
through the self to awareness of the ultimate Dreams and the vision-quest also
involve release at the level of sensory perception. However, because of
connections through the unconscious, there are similarities in way of
insight. Additionally, all such approaches fall under cognitive release 2.2.3.2.1.2
Neuro-physiological Correlates of
Meditation
β waves – 13-40 Hz: peak
concentration, visual acuity; 40 Hz = cognition / visual consciousness –
Francis Crick α waves – 7-12 Hz: deep
relaxation, the gateway to deeper consciousness, meditation δ waves – 4-7 Hz:
“twilight” between θ and α / β; waking dreams, creativity,
learning, memory, meditation. Rest for the tired brain θ waves – 0-4 Hz: deep
sleep; release of growth hormone for healing, regeneration Meditation is somatically
effective as in the control of heart and breathing rates, symptoms of
migraine, hypertension, hemophilia… meditation [and Yoga] brings awareness
and control of the autonomous nervous system 2.2.3.2.2
Sitting Meditation
2.2.3.2.2.1
Preparation, Minimizing Distraction
Preparation: stretching,
relaxation, Hatha-yoga Fixed time: 20 – 60 min; regular Nature / altar Letting go: suspend judgment,
accept, let go, unmask [true nature], surrender 2.2.3.2.2.2
Quieting, Cleaning, Emptying of Mind
…of chaos, voices and static Sound: mantra, prayer, music,
drum and rhythm Vision: focusing on a visual
image Touch: rosary Body: breath, sitting, accepting
discomfort Achieving a single point of pure
focus, pre-conceptual mind; expansion of awareness, stay with
awareness-in-the-present, exploration of mind exploration, mindlessness… and
mindfulness, dimensions for expansion – body, mind, world 2.2.3.2.3
Walking Meditation
Walking:
immersion, being-in-the-world … Cultivated and in balance with
sitting meditation, reminders for each day, a day or event… Includes Staying in the present despite
discomfort, anxiety, fear but avoiding – by allowing them without resistance,
even to the image of the other’s image of the self, i.e. object relations – a
cascade of negative associations and cycle of self-judgment, waiting for and
knowing there will be “no-mind” and positive acceptance, feeling, thought and
action Being one’s full self in
the presence of others and in all situations: work and difficult
relationships, avoiding entry into negative cycles of self-judgment, meeting
people, automating this response Practice leads to no-mind and
meditation-in-action, the “Zen of…” extraordinary and mundane activities Auras, vision, being Mindfulness: “We are the result
of all that we have thought,” and “Work out your salvation with diligence” Separation / immersion and
creative process Shared meditation 2.2.3.3
Meditation, Yoga, and Life
The techniques of Yoga and
Meditation can be applied to objectives that are more immediate than union
with the ultimate Withdrawal and quietism, e.g., of some
reclusive mystics; psychic and physical renewal and health; heightened
awareness focus, attitude, presence – material, of the self, spiritual; preparation
for and presence in performance strenuous activity such as war and
other threat, theatric or musical performance… The following derive from a
variety of sources 2.2.3.3.1
Openness to Life, Others
Kindness, forgiveness, love: be
pro-active Receive tenderness and caring –
what is the place in the body where this happens: nurture it Letting go of what closes the
heart: fear, resentment, old grief / anger, jealousy, attachment,
self-clinging – see walking
meditation,
above 2.2.3.3.2
Changing Negative Emotions and Patterns
Meditate upon the emotions and
behaviors. Accept the feeling; suspend judgment and behavior based on the
feeling – especially avoid entering a negative cycle of feeling and judgment
or feeling and behavior. The immediately following indented paragraphs are an
appended detail Being uncomfortable with one’s
feelings – what this means: it is not that one feels or does not feel acute
or even dull discomfort; rather one has difficulty dealing with the feelings
and, perhaps, one seeks to avoid the feelings and situations that cause them.
It may be pervasive and the effect cumulative: it may affect enjoyment of the
moment in many situations, affect performance and affect one’s history of
relationships both love and work The origins of such discomfort
may include: an innate biological tendency to extremes of emotion; growing up
in an environment where feelings are suppressed and so on – and so,
self-judgment in relation to the emotion and a negative feed back loop of
escalating emotion; lack of social learning opportunity, history of choosing
avoidance and a resulting developmental negative feedback Solutions: accepting the
feelings and living with them in the moment – not avoiding them, holding them
in a pattern of learning to co-exist with them and perform despite them… with
others / and by self; seeking out situations and a pattern of learning by
abreaction [see Psychotherapies;]
cultivate health and energy – exercise, food and drink, sleep, place /
meditation, recitation, affirmation, cultivation, learning and other
enhancements / social learning and environment Explore, do not avoid, and find
the ground of: anger, fear, anxiety, sadness, grief, depression, jealousy… Patterns: walking meditation
including awareness and pro-action; act out in feeling-imagination 2.2.3.3.3
Intuition
The use here is similar to the
Kantian concept of intuition; the assumption is that there is an intuition of
ultimates …and spirituality Direct awareness of, the sense
of being and identity with all things; direct intuitive knowledge and
identity with of ultimate reality – the ground of being Passive in the sense of the
awareness not being experienced as controlled or controlling 2.2.3.3.4
Healing
Awareness of the body, mind…
response to action, environment, persons, food and herbs, positive, healing
images and thoughts… see the Dynamics
of Being Everyday
life, healing, doing your best 2.2.3.3.5
Threat
Many situations are threatening
or seen as threatening: sports, acting, career and competition, danger Accept loss and the presence of
loss, rehearse and imagine performance, no mind, conscious-unconscious dialog 2.3
Journey
…or The Journey-Quest Most of all the Apache go where
the best fight is. It’s a morality once you understand it; Lt. Gatewood to
2nd Lt. Davis in Geronimo My travels in nature are:
journeys to the source – of myself and of all things; real – in
the immediate enjoyment of open sky and sunlight, in the sometime risk I am
alive; inspiration for ideas and images of the real; metaphor for all
journeys – the Journey in Being The
Journey is a source… and the source Purpose
Contact | being | inspiration
in being | real living | being-in | symbolic
experiences – the meaning of the perceptual and being-in experiences | inspirations
and extended reflection, meditation for my life, metaphysics and other
primary interests Documents
Journey planning: Short List | Objectives-Itinerary | 40 Wild Places in the World | Humboldt
Wild Places | Barranca del Cobre | Journals.
The most current version of the first three of those items is in design for a journey in being The nature of the Journals
for the Journey-Quest is this. The Journals are a record of my
experiences in wilderness hiking, travel and living. The experiences include
the primary perceptual and being-in experience of the places, animals,
plants, geological features and people. Of course, these are colored by my
expectation and view of the world. Then there are the symbolic experiences –
the meaning of the perceptual and being-in experiences. This merges with my
concepts and metaphysics or world view – in the meaning I am using here
metaphysics is the description [study of, conceptualizing, theorizing…] of
all of being and existence and this implies, of course, non-existence. The
journeys are inspirations for my life and metaphysics. The journeys are also
inspiration and occasion for extended reflection on my primary interests and
an array of minor ones. The original accounts were rambling and uneven in the
recording of the kinds of experience. The earlier records emphasized the
beauty and mystery of the world and the wild. Later, I wrote more about the
symbolic and the ideas; the beauty and mystery and the meditation that
results from aloneness continued to inspire. I have edited the journals,
eliminating much of the rambling but not the uneven character. The documents
are maintained for their interest to me but all relevant content, primarily
conceptual, has been entered in modified form to Journey in Being. The
more recent journals – starting 1999 – may still contain some useful material
that has not been entered; however, much of that material has been entered in
different and much improved form during the exceptionally creative period
from October 2002 to March 20003. Except Barranca del Cobre,
journals written before 1992 have been absorbed elsewhere and no longer
exist. I have retained the Barranca del Cobre journals because of the supreme
wonder I experienced and as introduction to my use of Journey as inspiration
that I later worked out in detail This excision of the details of
the accounts has extended to other writings. Friends have wondered why. They
feel valuable material has been lost. I feel differently. Much of the
material, so keen at the time of writing turned out to be on the way… so
that, even where the details are forever lost, the essence has been absorbed.
Second, this mirrors evolution: despite the variety of the present an even
greater variety of branched journeys is permanently “lost.” Great in their
prime, the branches are fragments in the story of being. Finally, in order to
continue to grow and to not let a few discoveries characterize my entire
life, I have made a conscious and ongoing decision to travel light 2.3.1
Wilderness Journey-Quest: Preparation
See Documents,
especially Short List and Objectives-Itinerary;
combine with the following 2.3.1.1
Planning
Be open What – not too many objectives;
sequence: learning: Being, knowledge Light and sun Immersion in nature, attunement,
dynamics and health Where? Who? 2.3.1.2
Preparation
Minimize | storage | family,
friends | website, domain name paid for two years | base
– place, truck, storage | cash | insurance | job
on return People Conditioning and preparation Out – trial, shake down trips,
heat factor; keep healthy, attuned and fit; fine tune gear needs and amounts
of supplies Mental preparation: keep out of
ruts 2.3.2
Inspiration
2.3.2.1
The River
… a symbol for a state of mind…
a style of living… river as metaphor for life… the river can be tranquil or
turbulent… I may be floating and swimming… or submerged… in control… the
river may be in control, controlling me… I may not know… I may forget what
control means… I may be disoriented… if there is sharp pain in my lungs as
they fill with water I may not know why… I may not know what is water, what
are lungs, what is pain, what am I… I may become pain… and pain may become
the universe… the river is a symbol for the primal present… an inner place
where pleasure and pain are not distant from each other or from “me”… a place
of tranquility within turbulence… turbulence in tranquility 2.3.2.2
What I Learned at the Lake
…contact – presence and motion…
the name of the lake: the lake has a name waiting to be experienced… there
are light, gloom and dark; each is an inspiration… the Universal: – always
present, available… Being is present; being-in the lake-cliff-green-motion-cloud-swirl-storm
is being… there are answers to all questions 2.3.2.3
Barranca del Cobre
I undertake this trip because I
want to reflect on meaning and purpose; also to become more familiar with
Barranca del Cobre – Tarahumar Indian country This is where, in December, I
thought “here is home”. Now I sit, overlooking the Urique Canyon: there is the winding
river, the great Urique – the source of life, the center of this universe.
This afternoon Jim and I will walk and ride down into that sunlit, hazy barranca Enjoyment of the moment… what tender shades of deep and
light blues this morning… this is earth at her sweetest and most tender What is real, beautiful and
true! Imagine
the beauty of this scene. A valley some 6000 feet deep has been carved out of
the rocky soil of the mountain range, Sierra Madre Occidental, Chihuahua,
Mexico by the Urique Rive Description of Barranca Del
Cobre… Barranca
Del Cobre is the canyon of the Rio Urique which the river has cut through the
Sierra Madre Occidental of Chihuahua, Mexico. The path of the Urique is
shaped somewhat like a horseshoe with the nose pointing north. The canyon is
accessible by primitive, unmarked trails from the Ferrocarril
Chihuahua-al-Pacifico Wild places: Barranca Del Cobre is the source of things 2.3.3
The Journey-Quest: Nature and Process
The following is identical to
the list in Purpose Contact | being | inspiration
in being | real living | being-in | symbolic
experiences – the meaning of the perceptual and being-in experiences | inspirations
and extended reflection, meditation for my life, metaphysics and other
primary interests 2.3.3.1
The Nature of the Journey
To stop, to not journey is death 2.3.3.2
Grounding: Metaphysics
… it is symbol, motivation, interwoven
with my life and discoveries in the real and [my] self; central cause … quests to sacred places and
ideas for the whole… experiments in [my] life … dark: contact with the depth,
pre-language, pre-individual contact with the unconscious; nature cosmology … charisma and empowerment 2.3.3.3
Nature Vision
Relaxing, ignoring discomfort,
defocus, play. Decrease preconception. Wide-angle vision; splatter-vision:
focus cycles with defocus... dart and sweep. All senses Spiritual connection to life is
a natural capacity which only waits to be awakened. Those who express this
spiritual connection are empowered not so much by “their genius as their
joyful awareness of life and their ability to see nature as it is...” from
Tom Brown 2.3.3.4
Animal Signs
Tracks and Gaits; Trails and
Runs; Scents and Musk; Push Downs, Escapes, Hides; Beds; Feeding Areas.
Medium: rubs, nicks, scratches, gnawings and bitings, breaks and abrasions in
twigs, sticks and logs. Small: hairs, stone and leaf disturbances,
compressions and side heading; shinings and dullings. Pressure releases 2.3.4
Detailed Information
Resource locations and
development: Northwestern California, Western US, N America, Continents and
Oceans of the World 2.3.4.1
Sources of Information
General Regional, reference maps, land,
weather, terrain, social, historical, resource, biota Faculty and research staff: geographers
and regional resource experts; chroniclers of the journey: physical,
universal; forest, lake, river, sea, ocean, desert, wetlands, rainforest,
arctic, mountain Federal: USDA / USFS; Department
of the Interior: BIA, BLM, Fish and Wildlife, National Parks; Department of
Commerce: NOAA - general, fisheries, weather; Army Corp of Engineers; United
States Geographical Survey: topographic maps - 1:24,000, and 1:62,500,
photographs - 1:24,000, Regional topographic maps -1:100,000 and 1:500,000;
Department of Defense, service and intelligence holdings Private Holdings Lumber, fisheries, utilities,
mining, ranching; farming, resort, residential, native Guides, outfitters, explorers,
hunters, trackers, packers, climbers National organizations: Sierra
Club, Audubon, National Geographic, Nature Conservancy Outdoor Schools: National
Outdoor Leadership School, Leander WY 82520; local schools - private and
university-based Local Humboldt State University:
library, geography, natural resources, biological sciences, Campus Center for
Appropriate Technology, fisheries, forestry, geology, oceanography, range
management, watershed management, wildlife management Government: NOAA Regional Office
[213] 514-6197; Six Rivers National Forest, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of
Land Management, Redwood National Park, California Department of Forestry,
California Department of Fish and Game, Mad River Hatchery, Marine Resources
Lab, Patrick’s Point State Park, Prairie Creek State Park, Grizzly Creek
State Park, Humboldt Redwoods State Park, Sink one Wilderness State Park;
Redwood National Park Lumber: Eel River Sawmills,
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, Simpson Timber Company, Simpson Paper Company Guides - Arcata and Eureka:
Sierra Wilderness Seminars: backcountry skiing, mountaineering, survival,
rock climbing, backpacking, ice / snow climbing, guided climbs, international
treks; River Guide Training: Bill Holliday; Time Flies Tackle and Guide Service;
Wolfe’s Guide Service Clubs and Organizations: Sierra
Club, Audubon, Friends of the Dunes / Nature Conservancy, Friends of Manila
Dunes; Meetings, Exhibits: California Native Plant Society, Humboldt Bay
Mycological Society 2.3.4.2
Resource Locations
Development Land: continents, islands /
volcanic islands, isthmus. Submerged: reefs, continental shelf, deep ocean
floor, submerged mountains and volcanoes, trenches Water: oceans, seas, lakes,
rivers, straits; bays, lagoons; rivers to white water; lake; sea: wind, wave,
swell, current...equatorial, temperate, northern, arctic and polar; ice Mixed: wetlands, deltas, floods,
coastal region; micro: swamps, marshes, bogs, beaches, lake and river banks Ice: ice cover; permafrost and
seasonal soil frost; glacier, icebergs; ice pack, solid pack Climate: poles / polar, sub
polar, northern, temperate, southern, tropical, equatorial; temperate western
coastal zones, continental; rainforest to desert Valleys, canyons and gorges;
plains and foothills; high plains; rifts; volcanic regions: volcanic peaks,
craters and micro-environments, lava beds and ash, thermals and hot springs Land cover: Taiga and tundra,
boreal of northern forest, temperate forest: western, eastern, southern;
temperate rain forest, tropical-equatorial-coastal forest: sundarbans,
jungles; grasslands; Deserts: tropical, temperate, northern and high /
mountain: vegetation and water Polar and sub-polar regions:
Boreal forest: taiga - the coniferous continental forests of North America
and North Eurasia. Tundra: flat, boggy treeless plains of the arctic region,
with grasses, mosses, lichens, shrubs; polar ice caps / ice masses; Arctic
and Antarctic coastal and island environments Types of route and trail – land:
cross-country, game and primitive trail, constructed, mapped and marked
trails, roads. Water: waterways and rivers, river deltas, systems and
expanses; lakes and seas: open; navigation, plant cover, land form, ice cover Special features – poles:
midnight sun: north of arctic circle; Peary Land [84°N]; Vinson Massif;
Vostok Station; borealis; eclipse; Southern constellations; migrations There was much detail here; the
essentials have been absorbed to Design for a Journey in Being
[40 places,] Humboldt
Wild Places,
Barranca del Cobre 2.3.4.3
Wildlife
Refer to any wildlife guide for
details Bears – grizzly, Alaskan brown,
polar, black Mustelidae – fur bearing with
anal scent glands; fisher, marten; weasels, least, short-tail, long-tail;
mink; ferret, otter, wolverine, badger; skunk, spotted, striped, hooded,
hognose Dogs – coyote; wolves, red and
gray; foxes, swift, kit, red, arctic and gray Cats – mountain lion; jaguar;
ocelot; margay; jaguarundi; bobcat; Canadian lynx Rodents – beaver; chickaree;
chipmunk; mountain beaver; prairie dog; squirrel; tree squirrel; woodchuck Artiodactyls – peccaries [true
wild pigs of the New World] Cervidae – deer, whitetail,
blacktail, mule; elk; moose; caribou: green-land, woodland, barren ground;
pronghorn antelope Bovidae – bison; muskox;
mountain goat; sheep: bighorn, Dall 2.3.4.4
References
Arctic Dreams, Barry Lopez, 1986 Backpacking Guide to the
Weminuche Wilderness in the San Juan Mountains of Colorado, 1976 Beyond the Tetons: A Backpacking
Guide to Wyoming’s Teton Wilderness, Ralph Maugham, 1981 Complete Walker III, Colin
Fletcher, 1984 Guide to Adirondack Trails: High
Peak Region and Northville-Placid Trail, 8th Ed, Adirondack Mountain Club,
1975 Hiker’s Hip Pocket Guide to the
Humboldt Coast, Bob Lorentzen, 1988 Hiking the Bigfoot Country: The
Wildlands of Northern California and Southern Oregon, John Hart, 1985 Hiking Wyoming’s Wind River
Range, Ron Adkison, 1996 Inuit, Ulli Steltzer, 1982 Know-It-All Guide to the Trinity
Alps, Wayne F. Moss, 1981 Make Prayers to the Raven: A
Koyukon View of the Northern Forest, Richard K. Nelson, 1983 Mammals of North America North
of Mexico, Peterson Field Guides, William H. Burt and Richard P.
Grossenheider, 3rd Ed, 1980 Mammals, Simon and Schuster’s
Guide to, Luigi Boitani and Stefania Bartoli, 1983 Marble Mountain Wilderness:
Hiking and backpacking in Far Northern California, 1981 Medicine for Mountaineering and
other Wilderness Adventures, 5th Ed, James A. Wilkerson, 2001 Mountaineering: the Freedom of
the Hills, 5th Ed, the Mountaineers, Don
Graydon, Ed, 1992 Plants of the Gods: their
Sacred, Healing and Hallucinogenic Powers, Richard Evans Schultes and Albert
Hoffmann, 1992 Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of
Ecstasy, Mircae Eliade, 1972 Snowshoeing, 2nd Ed, Gene Prater, 1974 Tarahumar of Mexico, Campbell W.
Pennington, 1963 Tarahumara of the Sierra Madre,
John G. Kennedy, 1978 Times Atlas of the Oceans,
Alastair Couper, 1983 Weathering the Wilderness: The
Sierra Club Guide to Practical Meteorology, William F. Reif Snyder, 1980 Wild Rivers of North America,
New Ed, Michael Jenkinson, 1981 Wilderness Cabin, Calvin
Rutstrum, revised Ed, 1982 2.3.5
Journey: Other Aspects
Other aspects are described in
the following locations Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action The Variety of Being
/ The Variety of Being 2.4
The Experiments
Introduction
First, the experiments are
cataloged. Then, a complete but minimal set of experiments is laid out
Outline
The topics of this section on
the experiments are Kinds of experiment: Principles
of Elaboration The system of experiments By referring to the system, I
imply that the system of transformations is complete with respect to the
possibilities of being; the system includes experiments suggested by the
developments in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action,
the present section, The Variety of Being,
and Action
and Influence The system is a synthesis of
classic and personal experiment organized according to kind and integrated
around the dynamics of being and a core system of [personal] experiment A minimal set of experiments The goal is to design – close to
– the smallest set of experiments that covers the possible transformations of
being. Extrapolation from the results by necessary truth [theory] will be
permissible Results of experiment to date,
prospects and plans 2.4.1
Kinds of Experiment: Principles of Elaboration
The classic ways or paths of
transformation are a starting point for elaboration and are taken up below.
Here, I consider principles for elaboration of the ways The objective of the experiments
is to effect a full range of transformations of being. Emphasis is
placed on transformation since the process and results include the
possibility that the being may be changed to the extent that it is possible.
Being – in its various aspects, in action – is also means of experimentation
and transformation. Thus the objective is the transformation of being by the
means of being itself and, therefore, the first approach to elaboration of
the possible kinds of transformation is based in the dimensions of being 2.4.1.1
Dimensions of Being
In A System of the Dimensions of Mind, Being and
Action,
the following aspects of being were laid out States and processes: memory and the unconscious;
experience or consciousness; attitude and the classic functions – cognition,
emotion and drive; and action which is any process that is at least partially
controlled by the organism – and may have as objective, changes in the world
including the organism itself. A change is a change in state which includes
external aspects such as shape, size and position and internal aspects both
mental and physical which include both properties and constitution50 Extension in time: growth, development of the functions
including learning; personality and its development; commitments; becoming
and the dynamics of being – local and non-local In the foregoing, in order to
emphasize being as the integrated object that it is, mind / body distinctions
are de-emphasized. The elaboration of kinds of experiment requires
consideration of distinctions or polarities in the dimensions of being,
especially the mind / body distinction. Use of “polarity” is metaphorical and
represents a continuum rather than a simple opposition. The polarities or
continua form the basis of the elaboration of the kinds of experiment 2.4.1.2
Polarities and Continua
As noted above, the objective is
the transformation of being by the means of being itself Being includes world as
peripheral element The variety of kinds of
experiment arises from polarities in being; note, however, that use of
“polarity” is metaphorical and the following polarities may also be continua Polarity 1: experiments based in mind vs.
those based in action or a combination of mind and action; both kinds may
result in transformation of the being [mind / body;] all kinds may be
iterative rather than simply 1 -> 2 Those based in mind
include the use of cognition, knowledge [content] and exploration of
the dimensions and depths of mind; and both mental approaches [may] result in
transformation of being by realization through understanding, knowing,
seeing, vision, perception e.g. Atman = Brahman e.g. seeing Brahman as
an extension of the being to the universal and transformation of the
being e.g. Atman -> Brahman Those based in pure action
include experiment and the transforming effect of action on the being [body /
sub-conscious mind;] more generally, mind and action are used in interaction
and the results [may] include physical, sub-conscious and conscious
transformation of being In summary,
transformations based in mind include knowledge [gńana yoga] and
exploration of mind [raja yoga;] and the transformations based in
action or action and mind include action itself [includes karma yoga] and
sustained commitment [includes bhakti yoga;] thus the ways of transformation
include those of the Bhagavad-Gita Polarity 2: immersion, random, waiting,
incubating, sub/unconscious vs. discrete, active, searching, constructing,
conscious experiment. Example: animal-being can be known / experienced by
immersion; observation, interaction and empathy; and discrete simulation… Polarity 3: this polarity is roughly based
on the distinction journey / centered-approach or journey-quest /
vision-quest [or inner quest;] obviously, the distinction is not absolute,
e.g. the journey is centering and there are combinations; and whereas “quest”
is [or sounds] discrete-like, the journey / centered distinction can also apply
to immersion experiments The different though not
absolutely distinct, the polarities are the basis of a general division of
kinds of experiments A combination of
transformational modalities [some traditional, others that I have at least
partly conceptualized … all experimental] and a real dynamics of being
requires [1] integration with dynamics of being [2] a complete practical set
of experiments For completeness it is
sufficient that the experiments cover the range of being representatively 2.4.2
Experiments in the Character of Mind and Being
The character of mind is presence
which partakes of the known in being close to experience and in entailing
intensionality, representation and intelligence and which enjoys the virtue
of conceptual openness and thus avoids over-specification of the concept.
Presence includes unconscious mental processes
2.4.3
Experiments in Function: States and Processes of Being
The states and processes of
being are primarily the mental functions 2.4.3.1
Memory, Attitude – and Concepts
Cognition: perception –
sensation and sense perception, proprioception – perception of internal
state; construction of percepts in experience, from sensations and
intuition. Thought – iconic, symbolic and mixed… Conceptual character of
cognition Conventional and actual function
of cognition-emotion e.g. “What is psychosis?” Emotions as complexes of
feeling-cognition include the classic concept of emotion as feeling e.g. joy;
humor is the integration of the functions in the overall potential limits,
and existence in an indefinite world. Drives; continuity with emotion Some issues: what is the range
of perception, thought, and thought in language, i.e. what are the limits of
knowledge? Are there modes of being beyond cognition? Does knowledge pertain
to objects or is all knowledge hypothetical?
Kinds of mental state: meditative – stilling
of mind to internal and external noise or chatter and, so, ability to direct
attention to internal and or external data or phenomena of choice in an
explorative, experimental way; tantric – heightening of feeling and
emotion; Jaynesian: the production of vivid cognitive experience
through altering object and memory data reaching consciousness and the
[relative] intensities. The meditative and Jaynesian states clearly involve
communication with the unconscious; this can be cultivated by specific means
discussed in the sections on perception and, generally, by an intent to
cultivate, related instrumental activity – reminders, recording, waking /
hypnagogic / hypnotic search and dynamic process [dynamics of being] Means of access: see the sections on perception,
journey, and dynamics of being; specific examples include: stilling and
focusing – meditation, physical activity; alteration of object and memory
data reaching consciousness and the [relative] intensities – intense physical
exertion, deprivation and exposure, risk, pain, altering patterns and amount
of sleep, fasting, drugs, sensory deprivation, rhythmic activity and stimulus
e.g. drum beat, a number of these come together in the vision-quest e.g.
isolation, deprivation, rhythm and the various yogic systems; transforming
quality of action Kinds of content… one approach to kinds of
content is to classify according to some over-criterion such as [from the
example of dreams] literal meaning, prediction of the future, healing,
extension of the usual mental state, reflecting real content as in
unconscious content which has interpretive [what does it mean] and creative
content. Recall that, in the unconscious, mind and body [universe] merge and,
so the creative content is that of the real and, the potential content
awareness of all being; layers of mind / being; dimensions of world – nature,
social world: relations and work, mind, and universe Places: nature, home, work [vision,
psychological and charismatic transformation] Further information: Dimensions of perception – level
and content of awareness: Perception
and Vision:
Ways of
Release; Catalysts
/ Agents or
Sources;
vision-quest / Dreams
and Hypnosis.
Characteristics of dreams and vision: Function / connection to
unconscious i.e., real potential and desire / creative content shows
capabilities and potential often suppressed, unrealized and unknown /
regardless of assigned function have effect on mental – cognitive and
emotional – and physiological state and so on action / regardless of function
creative vision, that can be used as desired for the entire range of
involvements of organism Union of Yoga and
Meditation
/ Patanjali
Yoga
/ Raja and Karma Yoga of The Yoga
of the Bhagavad-Gita
// Meditation
/ Sitting
Meditation
/ Walking
Meditation:
being-in-the-world; includes: staying in the present despite discomfort;
being my full self in the presence of others and in all situations;
automating this response / Healing / Threat Sources Huxley, Eckhart; the Shamans;
Zarathustra, Buddha, Christ; the mystics and the yogis
Experiments have shown and dream
analysis suggests that individuals who have not been exceptional can be
induced into extraordinary ability Some factors in the induction of
such ability have been elaborated at various places and under various guises
in this essay and include alteration and or use of: the neurological basis
of mind, the cognitive expression of ability, the personality
characteristics and personal dynamics involved in persevering
in developing and using talent, factors of cognitive self-discovery and
liberation, domains of knowledge and expertise, and the social
context or field in which abilities are [or are not] tolerated and fostered and
the access and use of affiliations and networks Here are some considerations –
see www.savantsyndrome.com
– that support a conclusion that normal individuals i.e. individuals with no
history of special skill or mental disorder, may have and be able to tap
extraordinary abilities. There are documented cases where savant skills
emerged in such individuals following a head injury or onset and progress of
fronto-temporal dementia; sometimes such talents emerge, not after injury or
dementia but after release from normal ego-tracking e.g. in a retreat to the
wilderness or after resigning from Humboldt County… often such emergence is a
return to forgotten or suppressed childhood abilities. Secondly, hypnosis,
sodium amytal interviews, surface electrode exploration show that there are
normally non-accessed but huge stores of memory in all individuals;
surprising memories and capacities for artistic reproduction, e.g. music, are
revealed in dreams and related hypnotic like states including meditative
states but that are not accessed in the everyday waking state. Finally, there
are experiments in which the objective has been to seed the temporary
emergence of savant abilities by temporarily disabling some brain function,
e.g. by using large magnetic circuits, in individuals with no history of
special skill or mental disorder Very briefly, see the above
site, Darold Treffert has given some hypothetical but reasonable explanations
of these phenomena and suggestions how savant type abilities can be accessed
without injury or special circumstance. Mechanisms for the seeding of savant
abilities include the use of magnetic circuits referred to above, the use of
various techniques to alter mental state including not just altering methods
such as meditation but also the cultivation of ability and, finally,
isolation from the normalizing influence of day to day life as in wilderness
living and in special communities. It is that while all individuals have the
lower level memory circuitry the savant uses, it is suppressed by reliance on
higher level, broader, general purpose and therefore more versatile cognitive
or semantic memory circuits because that particular memory function serves us
well, and better – especially in our world where analytic, sequential,
linguistic, logical, general purpose – left brain hemisphere – abilities are
cultivated and rewarded. When the higher level functions or circuits are
disturbed or destroyed the more primitive, lower level circuits of right
brain hemisphere function may come to the fore, thus enabling savant
function. This explanation is supported by the fact that savant ability is so
often found in individuals who are developmentally disordered or autistic and
by the experiments with magnetic circuits Finally, the relation between
savant ability and genius in general may be that the genius has or has
cultivate general talent and ability, perseveres and has learnt – perhaps
unconsciously – savant abilities; the full expression of genius then involves
the interaction of general ability and savant function
2.4.3.2
Action
Physical action Need directed behavior –
survival, security, and belonging Goal directed, choice based
behavior 2.4.3.2.1
The Body
See What is
Mind?
and subsequent sections, especially Unconscious Mental Processes and the Body The following is taken from the
latter section: The interaction or relation
between the [conscious] mind and the body is unconscious to a significant
degree. Further, for many body process that do not correspond to conscious
activity the [metaphorical] label mental is optional. There is a
sense, developed below, in which all body processes may be labeled mental
without loss or gain
2.4.4
Experiments involving Extension in Time
Aspects of being that involve
extension in time include but are not limited to the intension and
development of the functions
2.4.4.1
Learning and growth; development of the functions
2.4.4.2
Personality and its Development; commitments
2.4.4.2.1
Commitments
…and construction
2.4.4.3
The dynamics of being; becoming; local / non-local
From Final
Thoughts
“The dynamics of reality and being including self–observation satisfies a
part of the objective of the Journey in Being; the examples, above,
are actual examples and not mere ideas…” Journey
– experiments in my life; emphasizing nature, ideas and being… including the
social realm; details of experiments below
Overcoming Limits: arching from
human to ultimate being through awareness [Raja and Gyana Yoga…],
limits, understanding, and change [overcoming] Dynamics as Bridge between Modes
of Knowledge and Being
Thinking
without language;
dreams in which I had no language and visions of the limited nature of
language; comparison of the modes The animal mode is
being-in-the-present; the human mode is reflexive and contained within the
animal, i.e. the human is not in opposition to or separate from the animal.
There is no intended comparison, human and animal are labels for modes of
being of the same organism In the animal mode what one sees
is what one knows, one is always centered, and no matter how far one travels
or what one fears, one is always at home. In the human mode fragmentation can
and does occur; but this is the root of the familiar story of fragmentation
and overcoming. The experiment is to experience and live the animal mode as a
basis for being real 2.4.4.3.1
Location
Journey
and Journey-Quest Local experiments – Immediate
Possibilities 2.4.4.3.2
Elaboration of Examples of the Dynamics
The Phases And Issues Of A Life;
Interpersonal And Its Reflexive Evolution; Relationships; Deep Interaction;
Choice And Action; Body Awareness, Kinetics And Healing; Perceptual; Creative
And Dreaming; Personality; Experience, Attitude And Action; Conscious And
Unconscious: Of The Being; Threat; Integration Of The Mental Functions 2.4.4.4
Arching from the Individual / Here-Now to the Universal
2.4.5
Journey-Quest
In this section, focus is on the
Journey itself and its phases – rather than on the approaches 2.4.5.1
Experiments in Metaphysics or Knowledge
and Action
All use of language is
experimental in that it never gets out of the loop of practice – even
occasional withdrawal is useful Sections on Kinds of
Linguistic Meaning; varieties of linguistic meaning Relation between language,
logic, mathematics
Concept itself, knowledge, value
/ ethics, object, noumenon, percept, intuition, formal representation,
communication, symbol, language, meaning, science, metaphor, metaphysics,
being, existence, nothingness, possibility, necessity, matter, process,
extension, cause, ultimate being / God, mind, experience / consciousness,
attitude, action, will and choice, function, dynamics, memory, the
unconscious, cognition, feeling-sensation, humor, emotion, drive,
idea-creation, personality, commitments, dynamics of being, cosmology,
universe, phase-epoch, origins, symmetry, stability, monad / elementary
particle, continuum / anti-monadism, mechanism, teleology, determinism /
indeterminism, space-time, metaphysics – again, argument, method, presence,
forms, categories, universals and particulars Especially: mind, life, being and their
nature and origins; cosmology: the interaction of all being and phase-epochs
of the one universe: the over-being that knows an individual in all its
incarnations and all individual in this incarnation; cosmology and the
origins of physical nature and its laws
The work on the concepts is
preliminary to instrumental developments such as foundation of quantum
theories of space-time-matter, dynamic development and use of mind Mathematics, Platonic idealism,
axiomatic systems as experimental Human knowledge project – all
human knowledge: phase II of Journey in Being
2.4.5.2
Transformation of Being: Journey-Quest – Wilderness
Foregoing sections
2.4.5.2.1
Objectives-Itinerary: outline
[Modify the section in this
document on the Journey-Quest accordingly] Immersion: Being in wild places Simply: endurance, and health;
body-dynamics and nature-sense – this nature sense is, to a point,
self-knowledge; hikes… the following detail is useful Details: 2.4.5.2.2
Perception: Awareness, Attention,
Attunement, and Nature Sense
2.4.5.2.3
Dynamics
Relax; enjoy sun, sky, clouds…
nature, and health
Physical Objectives: Specific
hikes and places, climbs, and routes; duration 2.4.5.2.4
Union
2.4.5.3
Variety of Being
Objectives Construction, transformation Understanding from construction,
theory… i.e. from concepts and additional data points Application
Concept / theory / experiments /
computation
Possible / hypothetical Myth / religion / god / logos Experience
The present / life without
language / immersion
The possibilities of technology Machines, machine being and
intelligence; machine as tool and machine as independent agent – being / mind General; in Journey in Being Simulate / augment agency,
being, mind, consciousness, intelligence, life: construction / design and
co-evolution; Metaphysics,
theory
Synthesis with society, life 2.4.5.4
Action and Influence
From the section, “Society as
Being,” the sum of individuals is greater than the individual collective
consciousness Journey in Being project; shared aspects –
Horizons Enterprises… phase IV of the Journey in Being
Self, home, relationships, work,
society / world
Understanding, developing and
using theatres / platforms of influence Synthesis Significance
Action
2.4.5.4.1
Related Experiments
2.4.6
A Complete, Minimal Set of Experiments
The set of experiments will be
minimal in that, combined with theory / intuitive extrapolation, the range of
being [objectives] will be covered. Further, consistent with the coverage
requirement, the set of experiments will be simple and achievable 2.4.6.1
Desirable Conditions
For a set of experiments to be
complete and – reasonably close to – minimal the following are desirable and,
roughly, necessary: The set will span the elements
of mind and being including the unconscious and so, through mind, the body /
universe. It is essential that the experiments span both function – state /
process or being at an instant of time – and becoming over time. However, not
all possible experiments and transformations need be considered; at most a
representative or maximal instance of each dimension need be undertaken The set will be minimal with
respect to experimental approaches and catalysts of transformation. However
[a] the minimum need not be the precise minimum even if there is one but
reasonably close or, at least, feasible, [b] the choices of approach /
catalyst may depend on my abilities – or, in general upon the abilities of
the individual or group – and upon the dimension of being selected for
transformation Spanning will use extrapolation
by dynamics of being including concepts and theory and will be over both
elements or dimensions of being and over approaches to transformation The set will be open in allowing
for later developments and insight to modify it; action clarifies and
generates momentum 2.4.6.2
Adequate Conditions
Sufficient or adequate
conditions are similar to the desirable ones except that the following are
emphasized: Openness Dynamics over modes of being Universal knowledge through both
analysis i.e. hypothesis and deduction or thought, and perception Atman = Brahman as a special case
of the previous point, again through both analysis and perception Natural emphasis on the mental
and potential aspects of being will not suppress direct and indirect
transformation of physical aspects i.e. the material world including the body Arching from the present to the
ultimate: spontaneously as well as through dynamic, considered, designed
incremental transformation; the dynamic element implies that design will be
in interaction with action and construction 2.4.6.3
A Complete, Minimal Set
Knowledge and experiment:
experiment with a variety of indirect and transcendental or direct approaches
and styles in knowledge, action and experiment – numerous examples in this
essay – including embracing while questioning over radical rejection /
skepticism and radical liberalism
2.4.7
Results, Prospects and Plans
Universal knowledge including Atman
= Brahman The analysis is complete;
refinement and elaboration may be useful – review the Knowledge Foci for the
Journey in design for a journey in being;
introduction of simplicity will improve accessibility; perseverance with
contacts will enhance communication, use, recognition I have had some success with the
approach through perception e.g. identity of self-world at times, especially
when hiking; this success was not explicitly sought and normalization and
expansion of the perception is a natural next step Approach through the physical
dimension / body: this is not completely separate from perception;
stress-type experiences and pain are a first step and body alteration in its
varieties is the next step Influence in society: assessment This is my weakest area thus far
with minimal results in general influence, significant but not complete
failure in relationships, and falling short of my expectations in work However, there has been some
general influence e.g. teaching excellence at the University of Texas,
reaching a world-wide audience with technical publications, the Journey in
Being website
is beginning to receive positive academic response; and “failure in
relationships” is a relative term – much of it due to my focus on the Journey
which is my greatest contribution rather than due to deficits especially
after I grew out of my earlier immaturity… I have left recent relationships
on good to excellent terms but this is in some ways a failure of passion i.e.
not enough passion for both relationships and the journey; and, there are
some small work successes Influence in society: plans So far as is reasonable and
consistent with the journey, rectify the deficits above; but carefully
evaluate the idea of deficit and undertake what is positive rather than
filling in holes just for completeness A family Work 1: analysis of the
workplace; campaigning for change; risk; dynamics and various approaches to
focus from e.g. A
Complete, Minimal Set
of experiments Work 2: choice of place; see design for a journey in being Horizons Enterprises: for
research, the phases of the journey General action and influence Variety of Being: assessment An initial estimate of the
variety is complete Theoretical foundations of
machine being are begun… Some initial projects have been done and are listed
in The
Variety of Being Variety of Being: plans Complete the tasks from the
assessment Machine being: carefully define
and execute projects of design and construction; the primary consideration is
establishment of the possibility of machine – theoretically or by building –
being and use in the theory of the journey and the journey itself Mind and Perception Some work has been done in
perception / cognition as noted above; further experimentation is needed in
perception and personality Walking meditation as an
approach to presence and accomplishment Body Catalysts… pain, stress and so
on: create will, presence, and overcome the retarding influence of negative
self-judgment / object [in the sense of Hans Kohut] interaction loops; note
that many of my accomplishments have been when sick, in pain, or as a result
of fear – evaluate and use this Experimental possibilities
including influence on being are open; numerous possibilities are outlined
above Arching from the immediate to
the ultimate Assessment: the foregoing includes an
implicit assessment and plans; the goal is known, the territory is partially
laid out in the ideas above and especially in Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action Plans: Thus there are two open doors
to the ultimate: being-in [knowledge] and death; the task: discover,
open other doors; undertake the journey as continuation of the above and
through spontaneous transformation; the approach: any but especially
the dynamics of being 2.4.7.1
Some Additional Experiments
A variety of experiments –
accomplished, begun, planned and mentioned – is distributed throughout this
essay and other documents in this website 3
THE VARIETY OF BEING: IDEAS, CONCEPTS
AND THEORY, AND EXPERIMENTS
This division is of intrinsic
interest, contributes to knowledge and understanding of being, to
transformation, value and realization in the Journey in Being… and starts
with being as we know it most intimately 3.1
Life
3.1.1
Human Being
For humankind, human being is,
in an important way, the prototype of all being I do not intend this to mean
that human being is the ultimate substance and that the study of humankind
should replace ontology or physics. I do not mean that humans are at the apex
of being, that humans are superior to other living being Humankind has a material nature,
a living and an animal nature. What sets humankind apart, for the purpose of
study, is that the writer and readers of these words are human. I sometimes
wish I would integrate with my awareness, the consciousness of a variety
non-human animals – from grand and small. How wonderful it would be to
integrate these consciousnesses with my own. However, it seems that
there is a divide. Through communication, I identify with other human beings
in a way that that I do not – seem to – identify with other animals or
plants. I am not sure how real that that divide is. The empathy when I see a
field mouse nervously dart around my camp and I remember my own fears, or the
thrill when I see an antlered deer on a high cliff against the setting sun –
I wonder how true is the convention that my feelings are distinct in nature
from those of the animal. For me, this casts doubt on the distinctness of
human and other kinds of experience. However, in the ways that human beings
are unique – especially culture, learning and technology, the kinds of
experience are different. There, it seems, I must depend on my own experience
and upon the narrative of other human beings. And, in the ways in which human
beings are not unique, I have, perhaps, the most direct awareness through
being human; however, other living being cannot be ignored Thus, for humankind, human being
is, in an important but not exclusive way, the prototype of all being 3.1.2
Experience
3.1.3
Animal Being
I should have been a pair of
ragged claws 51 Scuttling across the floors of
silent seas … … an intrusion into logic and
philosophy. He, who sees where logic does not see, sees ragged claws are most
present. We would think that human adventure and human intellect are the
key… One might be a pair of eyes in the dark in a mountain cave rather than a
fierce conquering brain The animal is a foundation of
human being Beyond that, the presence of
non-detached animal being, sometimes forgotten but not non-human… must be a
way to all being 3.1.4
Nature
3.1.5
Matter
3.2
Possible and Hypothetical
3.2.1
The Potential and the Possible
3.2.2
Sources
Mythology and Religion Literature and stories There are more things in heaven
and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy 52 Imagination
and reason What is a Transformation of Being? The
logic and philosophy of possibility and necessity 3.2.3 God / religion
The
subject “God” although not dead, e.g. in Christian theology, is taboo in some
circles and passé in others; it is something to be avoided. Here are some
possible reasons. The discussion focuses on general and academic sentiments
c. 2000 in the English speaking world. The first is the idea of separation of
Church and State and its practical interpretation of the separation of
religious and secular life; this is founded in the idea of freedom of
religious practice from politics but also in freedom from rational
constraint. The actual social, political and academic scene is complex with a
variety of emotions, reasons and sentiments and, here, I do not want to
undertake an analysis of the variety. However, as a result of the context
there are circles where publicly subjecting “God” to rational scrutiny is
improper; and there circles where the very mention of God creates discomfort On
the other hand, God / religion is influential in politics everywhere in the
world especially in America where politicians have to recognize large blocks
of Christian voters; and this influence has a significant effect upon the
quality of life and freedoms of many. Whereas there is, in the United States,
a constitutional separation of Church and State, there is in fact a
significant effect of the religion upon politics. The position, here, is not
constitutional; were it so, it would be pointed out that, in the United
States, the First Amendment, guarantees both freedom of religious practice
and of speech. Rather, I hold that despite the common respect that is due to
issues of faith, the influence of faith upon common life opens it up to
public discussion I
cannot avoid mentioning academic fashion and norms; these are powerful
institutions and to break the norms is to risk ruining one’s reputation.
However, even the fashion is loosely based in substance – even if there is no
solid basis. The concept or idea of God inherited from religion – Supreme
Being, creator of the universe… – runs counter to the prevailing scientific
and analytic spirit. There has developed a tradition that there is no room in
this spirit or world view for religious sentiment. The concept of God
inherited from religion is so invested, on the one hand with institution,
sentiment and tradition and, on the other with Scholastic Philosophy as to
make the neutral and piecewise discussion favored in analytic circles
difficult However,
the study of being, of the real requires consideration of all being. That
which we have not seen, and that which we do not know clearly cannot be
studied by empirical means alone; a concept is required to be investigated
rationally and held in open view without prejudice. Many general concepts of
thought have evolved especially those of matter, being, and mind – there is
no reason based in analysis to adhere to a concept as received. Further, the
foregoing inherited idea was from Christianity; ideas from other cultures or
religions are much more capable of rational or analytic treatment. Such
topics cannot be adequately discussed without a field of concepts; and that
entails system. Further, while science and analysis chart large territories
of our world, the arguments of this essay show those territories to be a
fragment of the universe [this observation is not new or unobvious.] The
metaphysics of this essay is or includes a language, significantly by
abstraction, for description of the vast areas not accessed so far by science
and reason – or by religion. As for the fact that the idea of God is
significant to and cherished by so many believers, I believe that that is
good reason to take up the idea of God and subject it to the scrutiny of
reason, to find what place there may be for it – in evolved or transformed
form – in the universal metaphysics which may well show what transformation
of the idea may be necessary for realism Does
God exist? Is there – or will there be, or has there been – an actual being
corresponding to the concept of God; or may God exist in our
phase-epoch of the universe? The latter question regarding the possibility of
God arises due to the indeterminacy of process – evolution. The restriction
to a phase-epoch of the universe is because in the one universe, without
restriction, what is not simply a contradiction is possible and what is
possible is necessary. The real question concerns the nature of God and the
concepts of God; this approach allows for a “conversation” between ideas,
tradition and reality What
is the meaning of “God” in the context of use? There is no one such meaning;
however, one use is in reference to the highest potential of being. Is there
an actual referent corresponding to this use? Just as the concepts of natural
philosophy are allowed to evolve so should the concepts of theology One
approach is as follows. Think of the relation of the individual to the one
universe. From the Principle of Being, the individual is the
universe; this is ultimately true though not immediately within experience.
This is a principle of the Vedanta i.e. Atman = Brahman or Self =
Ultimate Being. God, as being, is part of the one universe and, the
interpretation of the idea of God from the traditions is that of a being that
is intermediate between the individual and Brahman, the universe. From the
ultimate perspective there is good and evil but these are neither sought nor
avoided. From the immediate human perspective, immediate good and evil are
moral issues but there are also occasions to take a neutral attitude toward
good and evil. The ultimate and individual meanings are related but not
identical. At the ultimate level good and evil are forces e.g. of creation and
destruction and morality is applicable only in so far as there is an agency
involved. For the human individual they relate to human values. Actions and
outcomes are right, good and so on; the terms are not properly applied to
individuals. The foregoing defines a field within which the great variation
in traditions and theologies find interpretation and placement. The purpose
of this paragraph has been to show a direction of understanding from the
perspective developed in the present essay but not to elaborate the reality,
the symbols or the human psychology I
take it up as a sign to future evolution – without final commitment to
preservation or rejection of the idea …
as the potential of being …
as ultimate Being: the ultimate in all beings …as
the creative principle from nothingness… none other than LOGOS In
surveying religion, it is possible to be turned away by the arrest.
Traditional religion holds to the past – for which liberal religion
substitutes denial, agnosticism, and atheism and, in modern times, activism Much
of religion, especially of the texts and rituals, even where meaningful to
adherents i.e. locally meaningful, is of accidental origin – does not furnish
universal or “large” ideas worthy of consideration as metaphysics, as part of
the entire human tradition. There is however a core of significant
ideas and oppositions. These include the ultimate – God, origins vs. eternal
being or return, human ethics and meaning and their relations to the total
cosmos, the nature of death and the destiny of the individual, continuation
of the chain of being beyond the visible world… 3.2.4
LOGOS
LOGOS, simply, is the concept of the possible. This simple formulation
hides the infinite complexity of the idea; the universe – our phase-epoch of
it – is only a small phase of the possible. LOGOS may be referred to as the world
of the possible but this is metaphorical even though the LOGOS “world” is sometimes thought to
be an actual but distinct world and sometimes thought to be an actual part of
this world. LOGOS is, however, contained in the
womb of nothingness The
sum of all forms The
form of form Second
and higher order form We
saw that symmetry or form is required for more than transient existence LOGOS includes chaos and randomness Does
LOGOS exist? In view of the
discussion of existence, LOGOS exists. Is LOGOS part of the real? In view of
the same discussion LOGOS may be considered to be real 3.3 Society
3.4 Technology
3.4.1 Tools and Machines
Tools
extend function for an individual or society and are discovered in play /
observation of cause-effect in play Here,
play is not divorced from actual living but requires only that actions are
not governed by necessity. Thus, in addition to design, adaptation
[co-evolution] is also involved in the development of tools [and machines and
technology] whose origins are beyond the pale of history Therefore,
understanding and application [action] occur in interaction and there is no
essential separation of hierarchy of understanding and action, i.e. of techniques
and the use of tools. These comments are an example of the observations in Justification and Action and related sections and apply
also to machines and technology Machines
are tools that have a degree of independent function. For example, the driver
handles a car with respect to starting, accelerating, steering, breaking and
stopping; however, much of the functioning “under the hood” while under the
general control of the driver functions independently of the driver’s input
and without regard to the driver’s knowledge 3.4.2 Technology
Technology
is the system of deployment of the world to ends; or Technology
is the entire system of knowledge, technique, production, delivery and use of
tools and machines in interaction with individuals in the deployment of the
world to the ends of individuals and society; the interaction occurs in
varying degrees of independence of the mechanical or machine elements, from
extension to assistance to independent function. By design, the independence
is usually not complete although it may be significant e.g. a robot that,
after design and input, functions without further input throughout the
performance of its function. In evolution, the degree of independence is not
under complete control of the designer and builder of machines and
technologies; consider, however, self-designing machines The
phrase “deployment of the world” is important and is preferred over
“deployment of the environment” since the world includes individuals,
technology itself and knowledge. Thus technology includes the interface
between individual and machine, production systems, machine or computational
intelligence and the design of such systems 3.5 Theory of Machines
3.5.1 Types
Electromechanical,
and electronic; thermal and chemical; biological… 3.5.2 Finite, Discrete and Continuous State
Machines
3.5.3 Functions
Simulation Tasks:
fabrication, transportation… 3.5.4 Fabrication
3.6
Machine or Computational Intelligence: Introduction
From
this point to the end of this section on the Variety of Being, the content is
that of Computers
Beings Minds Details
for the origins and objectives are in Objectives 3.6.1 Origins
My
interest in machine intelligence has two broad, interactive sources, machines
as objects and as tools: In
understanding mind and being Use,
application 3.6.2 Objectives
This
document is a specification and design of related uses of intelligent
machines [machine intelligence] in Journey in Being 3.6.3 Useful Features of Computation
Memory
and storage capacity Processing
speed Sending
/ receiving information; communication, Internet Automation,
visual interface Programmability
for mundane and intelligent task Document
production, maintenance 3.7 Machine or Computational Intelligence
A
machine does not intrinsically model anything …except
in the senses not used at this point that everything models itself and, if
adapted and everything in the universe is adapted in some way in so far as
there are co-origins, models the world sufficiently well. One important point
to note is that if there is modeling it is, generally, of the world which
includes the machine itself and the designer and builder… However,
a machine that assists in function or functions through having, copying or
simulating understanding or function [adaptation] models or
partakes of a model and is an intelligent machine 3.7.1
Analog vs. Symbolic Machines
An
intelligent machine that functions by having, copying or simulating
structure, functioning or adaptation is analog, while one that codes
the symbols of understanding is also symbolic. A typical digital
machine is symbolic – its states are combinations of binary [e.g. 0, 1]
states and symbols are assigned combinations that can vary according to
application [program.] A typical analog machine models neural structure and,
by analogy, is connectionist or associative Roughly,
the operation of a symbolic machine corresponds to formal understanding as
discussed in the division on Metaphysics or Knowledge and Action and operation of an analog
machine corresponds to the Kantian intuition… and, as was seen in the earlier
division, formal and intuitive understanding are identical at root Symbolic
machines are not associative in any direct way and vice versa but according
to the Church-Turing Thesis all sufficiently powerful computational devices
[with sufficient memory] are universal, i.e. any machine can emulate
any other53 3.7.1.1
Terminology
The analog / symbolic
distinction also has the following characterizations Algorithmic computation / signal
processing Classical artificial
intelligence / connectionism AI modeling / neural net
modeling The analog approach is more
“bottom-up” and based on a neurobiological metaphor i.e. what are thought to
be the essential properties that determine the firing of neurons are built
into the model or approach. The symbolic approach is more “top-down” and
relies on the science and mathematics of computation 3.7.1.2
Agents
An agent54 is understood as: Perceiving
the world [which is the environment and the agent]; perception is
thought of as seeking / receiving information about or representation of the
environment Judging;
judging is a composite and dynamic activity of processing information to
decide actions achieve desirable outcomes; mechanization of judgment includes
computation and therefore agency includes computation The
activity is dynamic: in that complete processing of all information is not
always possible or necessary or done before acting; what is desirable is
contextual and revisable; the processes toward outcomes may be explicitly
incremental; processes toward outcomes may be dynamically incremental in that
information available before achievement of an outcome may be used to modify
decisions regarding actions and what are desirable outcomes The
concept of desirable outcome has the following distinctions: positive outcome
sought / negative outcome avoided; intrinsically desirable / rational. An
intrinsically desirable outcome would correspond to emotions or drives and
for machines they might be “hardwired;” that a goal be associated with a
drive or that its satisfaction be hardwired does not make it imperative, for
exclusive goals may enter into some kind of competition such as “weighting”
or be part of an intrinsic / rational hierarchy. Rational outcomes are
explicitly chosen according to some criteria of success including the
satisfaction of intrinsic outcomes Action
upon the world An
agent has been defined as rational to the extent that its actions can
be expected to achieve its goals or desirable outcomes, from the data given
by its perceptual processes. Assuming that an agent might desire [or that the
designer, if there is one, might aspire to rational design] to be rational a
number of problems arise: there is no a priori reason to suppose that a
mechanical agent with fixed goals is a model of being, mind or intelligence
or that such an agent will yield the most useful practical devices; there is
no a priori guarantee that, even given an infinite amount of time, an agent
can determine appropriate actions and this is compounded by the fact that
agents in dynamic worlds must operate in real time. In practice, “successful”
agents need only be sufficiently successful; where success is context
dependent. [Note that the idea of optimality was not even introduced since
the concept has significance only in environments that are very simple or
definite criteria can be successfully imposed; in such cases the use of
single or multiple criteria of optimality may be useful.] Two ontological
problems with the concept of rational agency may be identified: the sharp
division of activity into perception, judgment and action; and the concept of
a being as defined by an interest in goals or desirable outcomes, especially
specifiable ones. Nonetheless, the idea of agent as involved in its
input-output is an advance over the classical artificial intelligence idea of
machine intelligence as performance of isolated reasoning tasks Any
such judgment is value laden for reasoning tasks are useful; the values in
question, then, include: From
the point of view of utility: having intelligent machines that operate more
or less independently of designers and operators From
the point of view of embedding in the world; having intelligent machines that
are less flat from the point of view of organization and so, at the lower
levels of organization, tied into the world And
so having machines that approach having mind / being in the senses that
animals and humans have mind and being 3.7.1.3
Computation
So
far the concept of computation has received some implicit specification. In
order to better perform the following tasks it will be useful to define or
specify what computation is Use
the concept of machine intelligence in understanding being / mind This
becomes restrictive on the conjunction of two conditions: first, cognitivism,
the idea that the brain is a computer i.e. that at an abstract level the mind
is a computer; and, second, on some conceptual or theoretical account of the
nature / concept of computation Developing
and simulating machine intelligence for the following purposes: to advance
the use and capabilities of machine intelligence; to develop specific
applications for use in the projects of the Journey in Being – these are
specified in Objectives and include the understanding
of being / mind by developing models In
order to develop the concept of computation the following will be useful Discuss
existing concepts of computation, their rationale. Analyze these concepts,
understanding how [if] they mesh and what they have in common Keep
in mind that machine intelligence falls under the topic of machines which in
turn falls under technology Remember
that the concept of agent is not an alternative to the classical concept of
machine intelligence as performance of isolated reasoning tasks but
incorporates the classical function into a more independent,
“self-sufficient” concept. This independence is not a complete independence –
individual beings have degrees of independence and interdependence; in order
to take steps to machine being and steps toward more capable intelligent
machines it will be useful to examine the kinds and degrees of independence
and structure of organisms and individuals. Since the goal of intelligent
machine as independent agent / being is only one goal and the use of machines
remains important, the performance of tasks remains important Following
are some existing concepts of computation as used in cognitive / computer
science c. 200055: Formal symbol manipulation – here, a symbol is a
token for anything that could be a mental content or information such as a
concept, representation or word; a symbol is formal to the extent that
it is independent of meaning but that the system of symbols belong to
a grammar; and there is manipulation to the extent that
computation involves a transformation [in time] of the syntactic structures
stored in computer memory. Independence from meaning is independence from semantic
properties such as reference or truth; the meaning is assigned by the builder
/ programmer / user Computation theory based on Alan Turing’s
construction of the Turing machine and the related Church-Turing Thesis,
above, that all machines [with appropriate conditions] can emulate every
machine and so [1] the Church-Turing Thesis is not architecturally limited
and, [2] the cognitivist [hypo-] thesis that the mind is a digital computer.
The idea of a concept / theory driven notion of computation is [has been]
exciting because of the universality of computation [on the Turing notion]
and, since – the argument goes – the brain appears to be a machine, the
applicability of any theory that may be computed including formal logic and
computability theory; the argument breaks down if brain processes are
indeterministic which they must be The concept of computation as the process of digital
state machines which except for continuity appear to be equivalent to the
Turing conception of a computing machine. Infinite state Turing machines
including continuous machines can compute [solve] problems unsolvable by
finite state machines. However, the concept of a digital state machine is
interesting and useful since modern computers are [almost always] digital
state machines Information processing: that comes in semantic,
syntactic and practical [Internet…] versions Classic symbolic architectures: serial, fixed, symbolic,
explicit, discrete, high level representations, exemplified by axiomatic
inference systems56 Connectionist architectures: see comments above, in Analog vs. Symbolic Machines Practical computation and architecture: the actual projects,
commercial, research and theoretical that have driven developments in
technology including the consumer technologies and conceptual including AI
and quantum computing. Most actual projects are implemented in high-level
programming languages such as C++, Java, and FORTRAN. The interaction between
this technological richness and cognitive science is rather loose and the
future is rather open and unpredictable The
theory driven approach is useful in that theories provide impetus to
direction and coherence; as far as theories are reductions the reducibility
must be remain in interaction with more basic theories [logic,
computability...,] and with actual developments. Actual development will be
an amalgam of theory [concept] driven ideas and actual systems – both
academic and research on the one hand and commercial and application oriented
on the other hand. Actual developments vary from the theory driven, to
practical architecture driven, to the deployment of developed software to
theoretical and utilitarian ends One
approach to the nature of computation is as follows List
and describe actual physical architectures; generalize to a system of
possible architectures List
and describe actual interpretation based and interpretation free
implementations of “mental” function; generalize, using the theory of mental
function that includes attitude and action as functions, to a system of
possible implementations Quantum-computation
holds the following potential: due to the nature of quantum states, ability
to solve otherwise intractable problems [by infinite orders of magnitude;]
massively parallel architecture; miniaturization; due to its physical basis,
more faithful modeling of brain processing. The following questions are
raised: to what extent is the brain a “quantum-computer,” and, to the extent
that it is, what is the contribution of the essentially quantum phenomena
such as indeterminism and the indefiniteness [or, rather, multiple-definiteness]
of quantum states, what is the contribution of the power of quantum
computation and what is the contribution of the number of neurons and the
massively parallel and connected but classical [non-quantum] structure
of the brain 3.7.1.4 Computational Models of Mind /
Cognitivism
From
the Church-Turing Thesis the following hypothesis seemed to be a small though
exciting leap: human cognition could be emulated by computers A
variety of views have been held Cognitivism:
the brain is a digital computer. On account of the thesis of cognitivism
there is, in cognitivism, a parallel between models of mind and concepts or
models of computation Strong
Artificial Intelligence: the mind is a computer program Weak
Artificial Intelligence: the operations of the brain can be simulated on a
digital computer These
views have been criticized e.g. John Searle, The Rediscovery of Mind,
1992. Searle held that Weak Artificial Intelligence is trivial and argued
against Cognitivism and Strong Artificial Intelligence on the ground that
digital computation is syntactic, i.e. it is symbol manipulation which is
assigned but not intrinsic to the physics. It follows that digital computers,
in so far as they are digital computers but not on account of their intrinsic
physics, do not have minds and are not conscious, i.e. on the classical or
non-quantum account the human mind functions as a digital computer but that is
not the source of human consciousness The
view, here, is that a computer can be interpreted as a symbol manipulating
system but also, especially on the connectionist model, as a physical
machine. Or, a posteriori interpretations are at least as significant as a
priori ones. Insofar as a computer manipulates symbols, reference,
intensionality, meaning, truth are assigned; therefore, as a physical object,
without further physical properties, the assignment of semantic properties
makes for mind not significantly more than the minimal [if any] mental
qualities possessed by a rock. Here, talk of mind refers to high-level mind
and not to the mental properties, whatever they may be, possessed by matter
merely in virtue of being matter. Therefore, associative machines, on account
of their physical properties may come closer to being mental than do serial
machines. However, without further development such as low level integration
and high level interpretation, the mental properties of associative machines
must be small In so far as mind and
consciousness in machines is concerned the symbolic view may yet have some
promise; however the view of a computer as a co-evolving machine with a
posteriori interpretation holds more promise; probably, both the source and
recognition of machine mind and consciousness will occur by transference /
empathy though Theory of Mind [the theory of how individuals recognize
mind – the empathy module of the brain – in other entities] may also have a
contribution Additionally,
there are implications of the introduction of the concept of agent in or as
defining machine intelligence. Note that the idea of agent corresponds to the
inclusion of action as an aspect of mind – and to the fact that mind is
embodied 3.7.2
Objectives: Machine Intelligence in Journey in Being
This
document is a specification and design of related uses of intelligent
machines [machine intelligence] in Journey in Being: 3.7.2.1 Understand and Construct Being / Mind
Design,
experiment and construction of a machine, likely an [intelligent] agent, to
simulate or have being / mind contribute in a number of ways: As
an entity in the Journey itself; in the division Metaphysics or Knowledge and Action, the questions of possibility,
probability and value of transformations were considered. Computation and
machine agency are regarded as one approach to magnifying the probabilities
of transformation. The full implementation is a future and ambitious project.
However, even as a tool, there is some contribution to “being.” As
a data point: if human and animal intelligence / being is one data point,
machine intelligence is an additional one The
design and construction requires understanding of being / mind. Use of the
understanding in a design and experimental setting will contribute to the
understanding Artificial
life 3.7.2.2 Assistants and Independent Tools in
Research and Other Tasks
Conceptual
representation, understanding and research: as an example, I compared database
representations of two formulations [one based in subjective idealism and the
other in materialism] of Evolution
and Design to determine which topics were
of fundamental importance. I have used standard software to develop a number
of minor applications e.g. to assist in determining the main topics of
Journey in Being Technical
applications Text
and website production Management 3.7.2.3 Design Principles
These
design principles are for design / use of computation in the objectives, above The
first set of design principles for the use of machine intelligence in Journey
in Being are stated as a set of oppositions. In the following each side of
the opposition has importance Theory
and actual objectives Machine
as assistive and independent tool Use
as tool leads to independent deployment Reasoning
tasks and machine as agent Design
and [co-]evolution Assigned
and intrinsic reference Flat
and or multi-leveled with regard to organization Lowest
levels designed or lowest level integral with nature Human
/ machine interaction will include dynamic interaction; i.e. machines are
designed but, additionally, may interact in co-evolution in which [1] both
human and machine may change and, [2] through design and selection [rational
and evolutionary] change may occur by transference of properties /
characteristics. The dynamic loop is: model – performance – redesign – new
model Non-design
effects Experiment Hardware
and software Software
description assigned or interpreted Digital
and or connectionist architecture Design Formulate
an integrated configuration of system/software tools Use
standard proprietary, shareware, and freeware tools; focus on integrated
systems Develop
software / tools as needed. In the planning phase conceive a system Although
the goal is an emulation system: first focus on assist / tool modes; second
focus emulation as model / tool; finally, substitute / partial substitute The
following are also important Foundation
in mind / body and knowledge / being considerations of the earlier division Metaphysics or Knowledge and Action Knowledge
representation [concepts] dynamics and foundation in the earlier division Integrating
the digital and associative architectural models of cognition In
so far as machine mind [and consciousness] is concerned the symbolic view may
yet have some promise; however the view of a computer as a co-evolving
machine with a posteriori interpretation holds more promise; probably, both
the source and recognition of machine mind and consciousness will occur by
transference / empathy though Theory of Mind [the theory of how
individuals recognize mind in other entities] may also have a contribution On
account of the parallel between mind and computation in cognitivism, computer
architecture, outlined in detail in Computation, provides models of mind i.e.
of cognitive architecture. Roughly cognitive architectures come under two
classes: serial or von Neumann and connectionist or associative
architectures. The main idea of the von Neumann architecture is for programs
and data to be stored together i.e. from an abstract point of view, there is
no distinction between program and data. The idea of the multipurpose
programmable machine is implicit in the idea of storing programs. The
main units of the von Neumann architecture are processing, memory, input and
output. Cognitive architectures inspired by the von Neumann architecture of
computation begin with the early idea of the production system of Herbert
Simon and Alan Newell; the first general model of a production system was the
General Problem Solver in which the “structures” represented are primarily
resident, in principle, in the program. Input / output information processing
theory is another class of cognitive architectures derived from the von
Neumann concept. In representational models, the structure that is modeled is
put in explicitly in the data rather than implicitly in the program. In
associative architectures, processing is done by many sub-processors
operating at the same time – in parallel; these date back, at least, to
Aristotle’s theory of memory and include the work of McCullough and Pitts in
building models of neural networks and Donald O. Hebb in explaining
psychological phenomena from global neurophysiological models. Since the work
of McCullough and Pitts and of Hebb in the 1940s, various theoretical
developments, see Cognitive Architecture57,
a variety of theoretical developments has provided a foundation for and
introduced tools for application of associative architectures. And, finally
there is a variety of hybrid von Neumann / associative architectures that
combine the strengths of the two approaches – the ability of von Neumann architectures
to match human level competence and the ability of associative architectures
to model the context specific and multi-tasking aspects of human
intelligence. Finally, the fact that, in the brain, there is no intrinsic
distinction or separation of architectures and that high level architecture /
processing is built from the low level points to a limitation and opportunity
for progress in the concepts of cognitive architectures The von Neumann architecture
inspired the concept of the programmable computer as a general purpose
machine. The introduction of compilers that translate a program written in a
high level language that is not machine specific in to a machine specific low
level program significantly enhanced the use of the computer as a general
purpose machine. Specifically, not only is it possible to program machine
intelligence [as part of the performance of agents,] it is also possible to
model agent and environment, i.e. to model agents and there actions and
performance 3.7.3
Theoretical and Conceptual Background
A significant degree of useful
theory has been covered in the present and other divisions. Therefore, the
following treatment will be brief; it will primarily make reference to the
locations of the developments. The primary locations are the discussions of
knowledge, concepts, language, metaphysics, mind, mind / body and cosmology,
especially the theory of origins and evolution in the division Metaphysics
or Knowledge and Action;
and the discussions of being and of technology and machines of the present
division 3.7.3.1
Ontology
The following topics are useful: Can a machine have life, mind or
being? Here, it is implicit that the terms life, mind or being refer to life,
mind and being as we know them and not “primal” mental elements or being. The
primary reason for this specification is that due to the nature of life,
mind, and being as slack concepts the answer without such specification must
be “yes.” It is further implicit that a machine is something that is built
from any natural elements and is not restricted to the classical idea of a
deterministic machine. One answer to the restricted question is that, since
the brain or body is a machine, it is obvious that a machine can have mind,
life, being! However, if by machine we mean something designed and built by
agents that have mind, life and being to perform a specified function, the
answer is not clear. Specifically, it is not clear that the performance of
the function is the equivalent of having mind and so on What is it about living beings
that makes for possession of mind? Note the following possibilities: multiple
layers of organization from atoms / particles up; deep grounding and
adaptation of all layers; every cell in an organism is a variation of a
single cell; every cell, with exceptions, contains the entire genetic code What is the nature of tools and
machines; tools and machines as dynamic extensions vs. independent agents The question of how to recognize
mind is important One approach is theoretical: to
use the nature of mind and its characteristics to determine whether a
machine, in virtue of its function, possesses the specified characteristics.
Note, that since there is mental content input-output replication does note
make for mind; therefore, function must be interpreted to include description
of internal elements and processes. Problems with this approach include that
mind is not a definite concept as noted in Dimensions
of Mind / Being: Introduction;
this, however, enhance recognition Another, related, theoretical
approach is what is called Theory of Mind i.e. understanding of how
individuals recognize the presence of mind, life or being in other
individuals. The so-called Turing test is a sort of primitive test; there is
no reason that the “machine” should be hidden from the “observer” who only sees
output from the machine; at the same time the observer need not be exposed to
all internal details. The Turing test may be interpreted to rely on
perceptual similarity: comparison, empathy and intuition. It may be argued,
with some validity, that recognition of mental phenomena in others is
automatic; however, this is not true for all mental phenomena: some mental
phenomena are invisible and some may be purposely concealed. Thus, a machine
that had the qualities and degree of human mind ought to be able to deceive
individuals and machines into thinking that the machine does not have those
qualities. There is also the issue of recognition in the case of other kinds
of organism and in machines. When the idea of recognition is extended to
conceptual similarity, the test may be interpreted as the theoretical
approaches mentioned earlier When organisms and machines
co-evolve, recognition will probably be automatic and not require theory. At
the same time, theory will be useful 3.7.3.2
Knowledge
The following topics are useful: Concepts58 In
concepts, the idea of concept was
introduced. It was noted there that concepts may receive over-articulation;
however, it was also noted that the proper degree of articulation is relative
to the purpose. Here, it is appropriate to further analyze the idea of
concept. The purpose of the analysis is for use in machine intelligence and,
since machine intelligence occurs in interaction with and is modeled on
organic intelligence, the study of concepts as they occur in both organisms
and machine / computational systems is important Concepts
have narrow content in an individual’s representation of the world and
broad content as a symbolic element of interaction among individuals
and the world The
intension of a concept is its meaning and the extension is the
set of objects to which the concept may refer. These are rough definitions
that may be improved along a number of dimensions. I say that intension and extension
are mutually determining over time; as a result a specific intension and
extension is, in general, never arrived despite the feeling that concepts are
innate. Concepts are constructed; use becomes automatic; the origins of a
linguistic concept may be in the phase of pre-language; what is a construct
functions, within limits, as and feels as though it is a priori In
machine intelligence, one use of concepts is as symbolic elements from which
representations of knowledge or an area of expertise is constructed; in a
connectionist machine a concept would be identified [rather than defined] as
an internal pattern that frequently arises in a variety of situations In
psychology, three main traditions of research are cognitive development
originating with Piaget, classifying the world into categories in
behaviorism, and lexical semantics the study of concepts through words that
are commonly used in their expression. For further information see the
references cited in the footnotes. Further information will be included in
the present document dynamically as need arises in connection with
development of research tools and other applications Knowledge
representation59 Knowledge representation arises
in the coding and use of areas of knowledge, sometimes expertise, for the
purposes of use. Practical uses are expert systems and theoretical, later,
research uses include conceptual synthesis and concept recognition. I have
developed some applications of the latter type as described below in the applications Knowledge representation
requires: a vocabulary or set of terms and the related concepts that define
the field covered; this system is called the ontology. Both philosophical and
practical aspects of the ontology are important; however, the development of
practical systems may require at least temporary suppression of philosophical
concerns such as faithfulness, consistency, completeness. To a degree such
concerns are introduced via defined syntax and interpretation or semantics.
The use of knowledge representation involves input / output computation such
as: initial / final conditions; problem statement / solution. The computation
requires modeling. Depending on the context models may be more or less
realistic and general: logical, diagrammatic, dynamic in the sense of physics
and so on. The greater the variety and realism or expressive power, the
greater is the deductive complexity and computational resources are limiting
in this regard. One problem of expression is the distinction of dynamic from
contextual elements that is automatic for an organism but not at all for a
machine. Such problems of knowledge representation may be addressed by the
introduction of realism in the cognitive process of the knowledge
representation and dynamics; and by synthesis of such realism with knowledge
representation. One approach is the use of connectionist models that use
connectionist architectures to model cognition. “Situated theories” use
models of emergence of behavior as a consequence of interaction with the
world Knowledge and concept
representation and transformation: hierarchies, lists and matrices Transformation of representation
and organization Linear and non-linear growth
models In commercial applications,
database technology is used as the basis of knowledge representation; the
ontology can be incorporated as data e.g. as a set of propositions and or as
code e.g. as methods of inference translated into algorithms 3.7.4
Tools and Tasks
Basis and definition e.g. the
forms of information correspond to the forms of human intuition, formal
representation and perception 3.7.4.1
Tools
Topics in Computer Science60 and Artificial Intelligence61;
knowledge and conceptual tools: networks and libraries; dictionaries and
encyclopedias; texts; knowledge bases and representation – trees / databases,
question and answer; reference systems – informal through tertiary and search
tools Hardware and environment issues 62 3.7.4.2 Tasks
A
System of Tasks63 Document management: storage,
production, editing, publication: Internet, paper. Text system management:
production, edit, update, multiple concept representation and translation,
index and contents; general symbolic processors Intelligent assistance:
assistant, interactive or dynamic, independent. Research: group process,
communication, projects; funding, support; management and administration;
communication Management: personal, enterprise 3.7.5
Implementation of
Objectives
The present implementation of
the objectives is: 3.7.5.1 Applications
Applications so far The computer as environment: comparison with books and
writing, leafing through electronic documents and search; learning and
intuition; use of massive computational storage, processing and
representational capabilities; graphic interfaces: interactive, intelligent,
customizable; an interface for communication; file systems, their intuitive /
logical structure; ubiquitous presence; automation; number codes and
concepts; screen presence – large / multiple screens and workspaces,
partitioning, cut and paste; draft vs. production formats; document
navigation; standard software as meaning processors Text / concept system:
production, update and maintenance and publication; complex documents,
propagating effects of changes; linking; generic outlines and connectivity;
text production and knowledge base templates – see links to the applications general,
knowledge base and text production templates; specific systems:
journey in being, core curricula for science, engineering, and humanities;
knowledge applications, encyclopedia, encyclopedia as database, articles
listing, conceptual and coded listing; human knowledge project; idealism /
materialism databases of Evolution and Design – see a link [Databases and Concepts] to the application; scratchpad
and conceptual experimentation 3.7.5.2
Plan
Plans are classed according to
the Objectives: Machine Intelligence in Journey in
Being
[construction, transformation; the understanding that comes from
consideration of and actual construction and transformation; and application]
and Theoretical and Conceptual Background Plans include Human Knowledge Project; see the
document, Design for a Journey in Being Use or deploy existing and
commercial applications, then develop; exception: learning Research management: personnel,
projects, administration Treatment planning Managed care planning Psychiatric management Texts on CD/DVD: interactive
pace, level, focus Services: research, education –
university, publication / online reference, knowledge Professional services: planning,
design, consulting; global – local Application areas: politics,
government, economics, social, technical, professional Assistants, then interactive
systems, then emulators and agents Intelligent capability for
defined application, then imitation and simulation of intelligent life Knowledge systems, encyclopaedia
[dynamic, link to literature, search;] informal, primary, secondary and
tertiary literature Assistant / dynamic element in
knowledge Knowledge and concept
representation / transformation tools; hierarchies, lists, matrices Machine as life, as being, as
having mind, as conscious Evolution and life; life design
- a concept 4
ACTION, CHARISMA AND
INFLUENCE, AND HISTORY
The emphasis is action and
influence in society or societies The connotation of “action,”
here, is somewhat different than earlier in discussing mind [see A Set of
Mental Axes.]
The use here is rather like “agency” in the sense of sustained action toward
a purpose, advocating values and objectives, action and fostering action at
the level of a being in a world of beings… This division is of intrinsic
interest, contributes to knowledge and understanding of being, to
transformation, value and realization in the Journey in Being. The other
divisions contribute indirectly in the sense that the objectives are
understanding, transformation and so on; and while all engagement in the
world is a contribution, the instrumental aspects of the contribution are
by-products. In this division, instrumental contribution is one concern.
However, the instrumental contribution also enhances engagement and this
points out a degree of artificiality to the distinction between being engaged
and being instrumental or between pure and applied activity Significance of History
The inclusion of historical
concerns is in process. These concerns include: What can be learned from
history? This raises the theoretical question ‘What is History?’ which is
significant in addressing the former question and is also important in Journey
in Being. The foregoing concerns are
significant in attempting change toward objectives: in what ways and degrees
is this possible and desirable e.g. what kind of objectives – material,
political, ethical and so on; and what manner of change – incremental or
otherwise…? For a history of influence, see Thinkers and Actors, History of Western Philosophy and History 4.1 Introduction: the function of Action and Influence
There is no need, in general, to
motivate social action, the participation of the individual in society.
Specifically, however, what is the role of society and social action in Journey
in Being? 4.1.1 Society as Being
The sum of individuals is
greater than any given individual… Collective conscious… Society as organism 4.1.2 Co-action
The function of the individual
is enhanced in interaction… [Sharing is not mere giving and
receiving or taking…] 4.2 Action, Influence and Change
4.2.1 The Problem
…to bring about change, that is
the issue Equilibrium and change 4.2.2 Questions
What kind of change? I am
thinking mainly of social change and, then, of other kinds of change that
affect society – how conditions of living are felt and perceived from within
a society. What kind of social change? Political structure and responsivity,
social conditions…? Far reaching change or incremental change in the “right”
direction? A complete answer to the question about kinds of social change
requires a complete description of social structure… and that is the subject
of sociological narrative. It is relevant but not my main interest of this
essay Why change? Change for the
better or in order to avoid harm, change in order to have influence, change
because one is at the helm – or because one is affected by circumstances.
There are somewhat less immediate reasons – one might want to “influence
history” to “realize the good.” …these motives are, perhaps,
best worked out in the context of the practical ones. Many idealistic
experiments have failed while others have lead to tyranny. Such negative
outcomes are not universal. Democracy had origins as an idea in Greece.
Actual “democracies” may fall short of the ideal; it is not even clear what
that ideal may be or what is its best expression – or what is the meaning and
significance of such relatively theoretical questions; the “judgment of
history” is not over – and it never is until after the era While answers to these questions
are relevant to the means and approach to change, change and the need for it
does not wait for the answers 4.2.3 The Place of Social and Political Theory
Detail of elements and
institutions of society in Concepts and Categories and other articles The use of theory faces
difficulties due to the social “atoms” [individuals, groups, institutions]
being complex and experiments not repeatable in isolation. Difficulty does
not mean impossibility. I am interested in social theory and its uses but
that is not the motive here. In this essay I seek to balance a tendency to
understanding and to define theatres of action. I note here my attitude that
all theory has a corresponding theatre of real action where institutions and
individuals – rather than ideas – live and die in the process of transformation …and information… information is
extremely useful and important in gaining and using influence effectively.
Over and above social theory, social geography and history are of extreme
importance… as is the geography of natural resources 4.2.4
Charisma and
Patriarchalism: Two Kinds of Influence
I am referring to the following
meanings and not to any other. Charisma is influence or authority based in
the person – and may include intelligence, individual magnetism, energy,
ruthlessness and other characteristics. Patriarchalism and the related
bureaucracy are influence or authority based in established institutions and
norms The bases of charisma and of
patriarchalism are in needs or perceived needs. Patriarchalism is based in
established and therefore routine, continuing needs – especially the economy
of stable needs and wants. Extraordinary needs are not satisfied on an
established or routine basis – if they were they would not be extraordinary;
they are, therefore, met always on an individualized, charismatic basis Clearly, the two interact in
various ways. Charisma is one factor that may affect selection or election to
an institutionalized position of influence There are however other ways of
selection such as formal or informal inheritance; buying influence; using a
position as a military official in a military government 4.2.5 The Problem of Significance
The problem is feeling of
insignificance felt by individuals and groups – and consequent lack or
impotence of action – regarding their self-concept including lack of
influence in the world, especially society Many feel insignificant – “I am
so small, have so little influence.” In a system where power resides or seems
to reside in established seats of power, the individual may well feel
insignificant – especially in the face of actual / felt injustice Realism is an internal approach
to this problem: Realize that placement in a seat
of power is significantly based in external factors. Determine to use one’s
own charisma and abilities; and remember that an effective measure of
significance is measured by individual potential – that include circumstances
– rather by than comparison with others. This by itself will not remedy the
actual or seen lack of effect in bringing about desired external change. But
the objective was to change the attitude to oneself in face of the lack of
guarantees. One does not demand individual success; the efforts of many lead
to the success of the few. This is an importance of attitude and individual
effort in the face of insignificance These issues are addressed in Metaphysics and Power The practical concerns, next,
address external aspects 4.3
Practical Concerns
The following guide and
emphasizes charismatic and patriarchal aspects of influence and leadership [Practical concerns are those
factors the proper cultivation of which may lead to potency of influence. I
am not, here, interested in extensive lists or elaboration or “proof.” The
interest is concerned with where and how to act. The following is a guide] 4.3.1
Cultivating and
Maintaining Charisma
Retreat Belief [ethics, values,
commitment]… action Repetition; learn from error Support Risk The following topics address
patriarchal influence 4.3.2 What are the Social Theatres or Platforms of Change?
Theatres
and Platforms of Influence 4.3.3 Sources of Influence – Institutions for Change and Support
Personal to global Information resources; social
and natural resources geographies; social history / world today Cultivate contact selectively 4.3.4 Using Institutions: The Importance of Context
Is the society industrialized, a
democracy, what are the local customs that influence receptiveness to change? The importance of context is
that it is a factor, at least, in deciding who or what approach to influence
will be effective 4.4 Social Theory
4.4.1 Theories of Social Structure
Structural functionalism – the individual social
structures are not individually but mutually sustaining; the sustaining
relations being the functions Theories of class and power – the former in which
importance is attached to power, wealth… In Marxism, economics is the engine
that determines other cultural structures Structuralism – the word refers to “deep
structure” which is explanatory but, casually, invisible Detail of elements and
institutions of society in Concepts and Categories and other articles 4.4.2 Social Change and Dynamics
Social change is ever present,
more specifically it refers to change of structure… Ideologies of change: decline, progress, cyclic Patterns of change: linear, nonlinear – cyclic or
combined cyclic and linear Kinds of cause: conflict, competition, and
cooperation; tension and adaptation; diffusion of innovations; planning and
institutionalization of change; for linear change – accumulation, selection,
and differentiation; for nonlinear change – saturation and exhaustion Examples of causes: nature or environment,
demographic pressure, established and new technology, economics, ideas,
social movements, politics 4.4.3 The History of Influence
4.5
Concepts in Politics
This section could be titled Political
Theory or Political Science The purpose of the section is to
state some issues that need address regarding the application and
applicability of concepts in politics The philosophical development
should not shun the most esoteric development, intuition, reason, or the most
minute and practical details. Note, first that my work is philosophical and
uses philosophy but its primary focus is the Journey in Being and not
any particular discipline or set of disciplines. Also, the esoteric and the
mundane should be essential to the development and, so far as possible, be
part of the glue that binds thought and action to reality64 4.5.1 What is Politics?
Within society, consider that
there is a common sphere of activity or interest and a private sphere… Determining the boundary between
the two spheres is part of the common The process of determining the
state of and path of action in the common sphere is politics There may be institutions that
are directly concerned with or explicitly dedicated to politics – such
institutions are political Institutions that are not
designated as political or not primarily political may have a political
component Institutions designated as
political may have other than political components Politics and other social
functions e.g. economics are not categorically exclusive Regardless of formal and other
designation, institutions cannot be forced to be categorically and usually will
not be actually mono-functional in social kind; however, an institution may
have its actual function as close to its formal or designated function A group or institution may be
considered in itself and we may speak of the politics of that group; such special
politics will, in general, have areas of intersection without being fully
contained in the general politics However, the general politics
may be considered to contain not only the general communal process of
determination but also the sum of the more particular processes regardless of
the degree of isolation – which is, in general, not constant 4.5.2 Issues
Regarding the description of
political systems – what is the purpose? Intrinsic interest e.g. as in
the case of natural science; however can interest said to be intrinsic – what
is the origin of interest and curiosity Application Meta-description: e.g., the
label democracy does not define actuality because of [1] the problem of
accuracy and deception including delusion and self-deception, [2] axes of
variation and variation within the concept of democracy, [3] co-existence of
more than one political structure despite the applied label, and [4] the
application of a label is an exercise in mutual influence that includes
influence of others, self-influence and synergy. Items [1] and [4] are
related. As another example, consider republicanism: the issue of whom and
what [corporations etc.] participate in public affairs – and who / what
should participate and to what extent. A version of republicanism, one that
is considered to be a response to the issue, is that not all agents should be
equal in politics. Regardless of values and theory, democratic and republican
[special kind] forms co-exist in many societies lacking the explicit
designations if not in all societies and social structures An implication of the foregoing
considerations is that despite the depth and appeal of ideas, political
actuality has a life of its own. However, ideas and their influence are a
part of political actuality – more at some times than at others – and a
source of novelty and influence The difficulties of application
include perception, description and computation Some issues of power are taken
up in Metaphysics and Power What comes first, theory or
practice? When is theory possible and actual? What ways are there to justify
theory given that a major component of the scientific method is missing? A [political] state of being
might be possible, desirable, good and desired and yet not achievable – a
lesson from complexity and chaos theory Is there significance to power
and choice in politics without ethics? What? And, what is the relation
between ethics and power and choice in politics? 4.5.3 The Origin Theory and Possibility of its Application
4.5.3.1 What is Theory?
Theory concerns the description
and evaluation of political arrangements, systems and institutions 4.5.3.2 Meta-theory
Meta-theory concerns the nature
of theory: The statement of the previous
section is a meta-theoretical statement The relationships between theory
or ideas and practice: ideas and actuality influenced one another before the
recognition of ideas or theory as an independent enterprise; therefore, it is
a given that there is an interaction. What is the interaction and what should
it be? Under what circumstances should
decision makers operating under some system of values modify – drastically or
otherwise – existing political systems? In referring to decision makers, I am
not thinking exclusively of situations where there are formally designated
decision makers; and if there are formally designated decision makers then I
am not referring exclusively to them. For example, a the idea of power
includes that the decisions of a powerful individual is a significant factor
in political process in any society; that individual’s values may be entirely
self-centered and he or she may consider what arrangements further their
personal goals and ambitions. In general, however, some political
arrangements may be held to be intrinsically, morally or practically superior
– according, of course, to intrinsic political values or to moral or
practical concerns. Even the in the case of the self-centered, powerful
individual value concerns are present: they may be implicit and
unconscious rather than explicit. Decision makers face two concerns: what
arrangements further their values and what arrangements are practical in that
they can be actually implemented and will function 4.5.3.3 Origin and Possibility of Action
Circumstances of origin have
been described above Once theory or ideas have
originated, they may always be – and often are – applied Such application does not
necessarily have justification Societies originate, live and
die. Among the causal factors in this process are the interactions of each
society with the world and among societies These factors result in an
overall selection that favors growth / decline This selection acts not only
upon actual social arrangements but also upon the ideas – especially those
that define and affect social arrangement – extant in societies 4.5.3.4 Political and Moral Theory
Moral and political theory do
not appear to a priori determine one another A political arrangement does not
intrinsically determine all actions of a moral agent And, a number of political
arrangements may be consistent with a moral system 4.5.4 Justification of Theory
Given the deficit of social
theory mentioned above, what justification other than selection may be
possible? The question appears to imply
that justification is necessary but that is not the case. It is necessary
only in ideas or according to some system of value Justification may occur in the
following way Just as in the more primitive
sciences where there is repeatability and therefore repetition among
instances, in the social sphere there is a possible extrapolation over levels
of social autonomy as described above… and over other variables such as
social arrangement measured with respect to e.g. moral and economic factors 4.5.4.1 Social Theory, Foundations, Knowledge
Clearly there is a role for
foundational questions We have just seen how
extrapolation may be possible in the absence of “laboratory repeatability” There are also issues of
practical application Some issues are discussed
elsewhere in this section on political theory; they include the degree of
relationship between theory and practice Further, the question of
extrapolation is also practical Acknowledged success / failure
of a political system is a point of information. However, a single instance –
or a few instances – is not an argument for / against such a system: since
other factors are invariably involved and since the actuality of a system is
not identical to its designation; however, learning from even single cases,
in general, confers selectational advantage. Generally, theory of
institutions and theory of application may supplement instances 4.5.4.2 Application to Other Fields of Endeavor
The approach to analysis and
application outlined above may be applied to other spheres of social action There are also various ways in
which application to the more primitive sciences is possible with profit. The
present essay includes examples of which the primary paradigm is the transcendental
method 4.5.5 Political Systems
The history of human ideas
includes identification of actual systems and description of a number of
possible political systems 4.5.5.1 General Purposes of this section
To consider accurate description
of such systems and the relation of description to actuality To review the purposes to
description of systems Is there an intrinsic value?
What is the function? Intrinsic value has an obvious meaning: the
object has value to an agent or subject with reference to the agent but
without reference to anything else. An object has a function in
relation to a third object – an object other than the agent or the primary
object The possibility and nature of
application of theory: In the stages of human society – we could call it
evolution – there comes a point of development and of awareness when it
becomes possible to describe political systems. What is this point? And when
that point has arrived, is theory applicable, what is the relation to the
actual i.e. what are the relations between theory and politics? And, are
there justifications of the application of theory? What are they? How are the
justifications justified? And how is theory applied or how do ideas and
systems interact… and how may that interaction be enhanced? The parameters that affect the
possibility of description include – as noted – the possibility of awareness
and the development of autonomy. The two factors evolve together.
Additionally there is a co-evolution with application One factor of awareness is
distinction. Distinction arises when there has come about a variety of social
/ political arrangements. Dimensions of arrangement are numerous but
fundamental are tradition / individual autonomy, generalism / specialism, and
small-closed / large-open … 4.5.5.2 Purposes for Journey in Being
The general purposes are a part
of the Journey in so far as it is a journey in ideas Additionally, political ideas
may be useful in some of the material / practical ends of Journey in Being: Action
and Influence as described in the general section of the same name. Hence
inclusion of the following section 4.5.5.3 Political Systems
Before mentioning political
ideologies and systems, I want to restate an assertion. Reading about
anarchism, I found talk of how and when to make a transition to an anarchic
arrangement of political action. However, it should be recognized that
regardless of designation, every political arrangement must contain organized
and anarchic elements. The assertion is that actual politics is always
pluralistic and is not equal to what is designated. Of course, it is obvious
that there are different actualities and that designation does have
descriptive power Systems and change: anarchism,
conservatism, constitutionalism, democracy, federalism, feminism,
fundamentalism, idealism, incrementalism, liberalism, Marxism, monarchism,
nationalism, realism, republicanism, revolutionism, socialism, syndicalism,
totalitarianism, utopianism, welfare state I have not included all
classical forms e.g. oligarchy which falls under republicanism and
aristocracy which is a variant of monarchism I have not included fine or even
gross distinctions or systems of classification: I may take these up later;
clearly there is potential for much further development. As noted above, the
principle of inclusion here is what is relevant to the broad canvas of the
Journey and what is applicable to its special practical concerns. I may
return to the canvas later as the inspiration and opportunity occur.
Practical issues will be taken up as the occasion arises 4.5.5.4 Optimal Systems
An example of the idea of
optimal systems is that, under appropriate conditions, democratic
determination of the good is self-stabilizing and in the common interest.
Another analysis is that of Karl Popper65
of a superiority of democracy in that the distribution of decision making is
a source of new ideas and solutions to problems that is absent in other forms
of government Another application of optimal
analysis concerns size of societies that act as single political entities.
Size allows for specialization and therefore strength that is more than the
direct result of size itself. This results in ability to solve arrays
problems that were otherwise insoluble, and to ensure unprecedented standards
and quality of living – in general and according to some measures. It also
results in destruction – environmental degradation – and the ability to
destroy – the military and frightful weapons of destruction; further, the
process of expansion is in some ways self-perpetuating. Optimal analysis
sheds light on the values of size e.g. upon economies of scale and the
stability and values of nations; however, computation alone – even if there were
no limitations – does not enable or empower change There is an entire literature on
optimal analysis and game theory that it is useful to mention but that is not
included in the present version of this work. The following comments are
useful Optimal systems analysis can be
carried out at a number of levels of sophistication; see Brief Comments on Herbert Simon’s Models of
Thought.
The problems of such analysis include those of perception, description and
computation. Therefore, it is useful to have simple models – including
simplicity in what constitutes optimality Another area where optimal
analysis has application and that also has application to social systems is
Sociobiology66. The latter
exists in more than one variety. In one variant it is held that biology
determines society at least in principle. In others, biological systems may
be used as an analogy or the information from biology may be used to inform
social understanding and decision making I have included a brief
discussion of optimal systems for completeness and not, e.g., as endorsement
for application or applicability of optimization or optimal control theory
or, specifically, of sociobiology. However, the ideas concerned have
potential utility – conceptually and practically; and, I may elaborate on
them in other essays or future versions of the present essay 4.6
Theatres and
Platforms of Influence
Focus is on theatres of
influence, platforms of influence and agents of influence and
change; these are not fully distinct. Agents of change include
stabilizing influences and “forces.” Additional
details of the following are developed in use 4.6.1
Concepts and
Categories
Theatres of influence are broad arenas of influence
such as politics, trade and so on; these correspond, mainly, to the
institutions of society Social institutions and
groups – family [or, more generally, kinship67 groups through alliance and
descent,] and other groups; morals, [ethics,] religion; knowledge
– symbols, language and ideas, sciences, humanities and art, professions,
education, research [knowledge production]. Politics and law, government
– legislation, executive and judicial elements and other arrangements; media
and journalism; legal institutions and law enforcement; jails and prisons;
military – role of force. Economics, enterprise, trade; technology and
natural resources – industry and agriculture; service –
transportation, medicine. Theatre of the self – the individual carries
his or her own charisma and influence; the work of the individual is to enter
and understand these theatres, to approach with charisma, to act – and to
learn from action A platform
of influence is an existing environment or medium of influence that
is permanently or convenes according to set criteria such as periodicity in
time or when a sufficient number of persons request it. In a given context
such as a nation, one or more natural platform is associated with each
theatre. Details are best developed in use; examples
follow Social
groups – the family is, itself, a platform of change Government
– political rallies and conventions, the branches and agencies of government Agents
of influence and change are actual mechanisms of change. Functions include design,
planning, knowledge; consultants; management… at the following levels:
global, national, regional, city, rural, community, individual Knowledge,
e.g. Universities, education – science, mathematics, humanities, professions,
trades – classroom and research. Research organizations and laboratories,
policy research institutes [think tanks]. Design and implementation of
technology including appropriate technology Professions:
engineering, law, medicine and psychiatry Manufacture,
production, services: industry, agriculture, transportation, medical
facilities including hospitals, universities Government:
legislation – lawyers and lawmakers; executive branch and agencies [e.g.
Department of Treasury provides economic controls;] judiciary and enforcing
bodies, armed forces 4.6.2
Developing Contacts
Contacts
can be developed and maintained according to the following scheme Classes
– theatres, platforms, agents Individuals
and organizations Process
– information, persistence and contact, repetition 4.6.3
Details of Contacts
[Under
development] See Action
Links 4.6.4
Applications
[So
far] Journey in Being website Evolution
and Design and related documents have a variety of design and planning
topics including education and social planning Engineering
Education | Modern
Engineering For
further details see the Site-Map under Action,
Influence, Charisma and Change then Topics 4.6.5
Plans
Details
of planning is in the following documents The Present Document Home page for
Journey in Being A Proposal for
Horizons Enterprises™ Structure
and Finance Horizons Enterprises™ LATEST
REVISION AND COPYRIGHT
ANIL
MITRA PHD, © Wednesday, June 29, 2022 4:53:54 AM Version
as of 7.3.03: Journey in Being
7.3.03.html Plans
As of
June 2022, this document stands complete with regard to thought and concept
until the next cycle of reflection and revision The
essay realizes the search for the timeless and the real behind the temporal
and material emphasis of Evolution
and Design Numerous
technical, conceptual and stylistic improvements are no doubt possible. Such
revisions become evident upon reading the document and therefore no list of
revisions is necessary I do
want to make the choice of personal versus impersonal language appropriate to
the various parts of the document SOURCES
Even if
it were desirable, I would not be able to cite all my sources. I absorbed
many ideas in general reading, years ago, when I did not have the present in
mind and I cannot recall all sources. I often made notes, sometimes
paraphrases, for personal use and I may occasionally use such a paraphrase
without recollecting the source or even that the words are not mine. To have
a source cited, please write to me at anilmitra@horizons-2000.org I am
immersed in a culture of ideas that I absorb without complete awareness. I
did not create the ability to have ideas, or the notion of idea at the
foundation of the tradition. I did not create the language in which I write.
Similarly there is a general system of thought that we do not cite even
though we are dependent on it. Thus I am not consciously aware of these
diffuse sources If I thought my writing were not original at all
there would be no reason to write. In comparison to the foundation –
the culture of ideas, the ability to have ideas which are not the pure
creation of the individual – the originality of the individual is not much.
In comparison with others my originality may be modest. In view of the
equivalence of being and the void, there is, in a sense, no originality at
all Yet I would like to think of myself as original; to
think otherwise would be a denial. However, as I have noted earlier, I feel
that I have been a discoverer rather than a creator – as though I have been a
traveler in a world of already given ideas through which I have found a few
paths and trails including one trail leading back to the source FOOTNOTES
1 http: / / www.horizons-2000.org 2 The life could be any life; here, in so far as concrete example
is essential to the development, I refer to the author’s life. There is, of
course, one way in which every individual is special i.e. in the singular
concern with his or her own being. However, I do not intend to promote my
experience over the experiences of others – a Journey in Being is open
to all and my story serves, also, as an invitation. My story is necessarily
personal until, through experience, it acquires universality in scope. At
this stage the story is the story of every individual – in the join or
identity of the individual with the universal even while the details are
different. Similarly, although I appeal to humankind, the Journey is not
founded on a special status of the species Of
course, I depend on others, upon the world in many ways – especially, for
this journey, upon the accumulated knowledge and experience of civilization.
However, I do not passively use that knowledge: I must make it mine in the
sense of absorption and immersion though not of possession 3 Of a personal journey – the individual journey – with the
universal. Every individual is necessarily ‘on a Journey’ and there is also
necessarily confluence with the universal even when this is not sought.
However, I explicitly seek both journey and confluence and the confluence
includes sharing with others 4 Occur incrementally in breadth and depth over the exploration
and searching of a life… and of life… 5 Why the personal? As I state below, the universal is a
confluence, a meshing of individual journeys. Although there is definitely
and absolutely a role for the impersonal, the personal is the individual’s
path to the universal, to the impersonal or super-personal, to sharing, and,
through acknowledgment, to overcoming neurotic defenses and expression of
individual and group power The
personal and the universal, the immediate and the ultimate, the part and the
whole do not exist without one another. The fundamental values in the life of
an individual are the experience of the immediate – the individual, the
present, the details of a life, of love and work – and the experience of the
ultimate; these “opposites” give significance to each other. In this way the
union that is wholeness in fact also makes for wholeness in meaning and
significance When
I talk of the personal aspects of my journey I do not mean to compare myself
with others; rather, I am interested in the way in which my inner life led to
my specific path of action Following
is a personal value. Often, I have noted the simple beauty of a green field
and the blue sky as an example of the elegance of perception over thought 6 I might use “shame” but I would be referring to the feeling of a
difference between actual and potential and not to guilt over actions. It
seems important, for me, to state this feeling as acknowledgement and so as
to avoid covering up i.e. to be open to expression and development 7 Travel, different people and cultures, nature, love, group
psychology that was loosely connected to the human potential movement,
parties, clubs, friends, being a father, consulting work in engineering 8 Especially philosophy, literature and poetry, language, logic
and mathematics, the sciences of matter, cosmos, earth and of life, design,
machine intelligence and computation, psychology, history, anthropology
including shamanism, ethnobiology and human institutions. For some details
and information see the Bibliographies
for my studies 9 Natural Philosophy is a phrase that has fallen out of
use; historically it referred to disciplines that were precursors to science
as practiced today and to science itself. The latter use declined over the
period c.1700 – c.1900. I use the term to include science and what results
when science is used – though not exclusively – to guide careful thought
about the world; and to include the conceptual foundations of science and an
understanding of nature. This way of thought achieves precision through
various means, especially criticism, abstraction, interpretation, and the
concepts of possibility and necessity In
this sense, natural philosophy is an amalgam of science, especially, the
concepts of science, the philosophy of science and philosophy of nature Review
of the history of science and civilization shows that the general features of
the scientific paradigms cannot, in virtue of being most current, validly be
taken as the “way of all being,” i.e. as the foundation or core idea of
metaphysics. However, science can be used, e.g., in the following ways Critically;
examination of detail, of argument and of interpretation – in addition to
conclusions – is necessary. As examples consider the immediate reaction that
indeterminism cannot lead to structure and chance cannot explain the
phenomenon of life. I have given explanations of the origin of structure and
even phases of causation and apparent determinism in indeterminism; it is
interesting that it is indeterminism that makes structure possible while
determinism is sterile: these conclusions may be counter-intuitive. It is not
true that chance alone is the mechanism of evolution and explanation of
evolution is a standard topic in evolutionary biology on which I have made
some comments in the core essays of the Journey in Being and extensive
discussion elsewhere e.g. Evolution
and Design Metaphorically
and suggestively: the more inclusive paradigms provide better metaphors; the
history of paradigms is also instructive in showing the need to use the
paradigms critically and for critical extrapolation from the historical
trajectory 10 I mean not only my human form but my mixture of knowledge and
ignorance, realization and non-realization 11 There is a mistaken view with a long tradition that sets atomism
and holism as standing in opposition. In this view, atoms are conceived
rather as Leibnizian Monads that have no interactions with one another but
are harmonized by God. However, as understood today the atoms of physics are
not Monads at all: they have structure, internal dynamics and interact with
one another. Through the interactions, collections of atoms have properties
that are not manifestly the properties of individual atoms. However, this is
not a holism that stands in opposition to atomism since the manifest
properties of the collections are the expression of the properties of the
atoms. This does not prove that atomism and holism are equivalent for there
may be properties of collections that are not in any way the result or
expression of the atoms. How can one even approach this issue, given that the
ultimate structure and properties of the elementary particles is not known?
It is not even known whether the elementary particles are in fact elementary.
One approach is to look at the kinds of properties possessed by “wholes.”
Organisms possess mind; could mind be the expression of myriad elementary
particles in interaction in the organ called the brain? In the present essay,
with caveats and interpretation, the answer to this question is found to be
“yes.” But, the case is not proven by listing examples – even if the examples
are of the most general categories known: the argument could also be applied
to the foundation of being-as-we-know-it. Another approach is through
consideration of origins. Such an approach has also been considered in this
essay in Cosmology; in this approach the manifest
universe and its particles come out of nothingness. In our phase-epoch, there
is the known universe and the known particles; and, despite the success of
science, consideration of this success as proof of equivalence of atomism and
holism is subject to the criticism given earlier; physically, the question is
open. However, nothingness is equivalent to all being and at this level of
consideration there can be no ultimate distinction between representations
that are not regarded as closed 12 Existence: The purpose of this section is to discuss existence.
A second heading is due to the inclusion of discussion of materialism. It is
shown that materialism is not a definite concept and has no definite use. The
discussion in this and other sections shows that if [when] physics is
complete it will in-principle explain the processes of mind but will not
replace the idea of mind. Rather the physical and experiential modes of
description will be complementary; and should it be thought that physics is
more fundamental because it is physics that explains… there are two
responses: a fundamental one in which it is seen that mental and physical
elements are bound together at the most fundamental level and a value-laden
one – materialism itself is at least covertly value-laden – the observation
that if physics explains, it is mind that created physics and executes the
explanation 13 See previous footnote on existence 14 P. B. Shelley 15 It has been suggested that experiments in high energy physics
may result in catastrophes including, for example, a transition of space-time
that could annihilate the entire universe. In reality it seems that such
annihilation would be restricted to phase-epochs of the universe. The
probabilities of such events are thought to be extremely small. Given the
considerations on nothingness in this essay, the possibility exists that the
present phase-epoch of the universe might spontaneously transform into
an inhospitable state or self-annihilate. There is [a universe of]
nothingness associated with every element of being that may annihilate, at
the least, entire phase-epochs of the universe. The probabilities of such
events are, again, staggeringly small. An ecological disaster is much more
likely in the near future and, as far as life on earth is concerned, may be
just as disastrous as the physical catastrophes described. In a recent book, The
Earth’s Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics, and Change, 2002, Vaclav Smil
writes that so little is understood about the various ecological and climatic
factors and balances that it is impossible to estimate whether the effect of
human technology is pushing the planet toward or away from disaster 16 Note made January 14, 2003: this section was conceived and
written today and is contrary to what I have been thinking since about
September, 2001 17 John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic
Cosmological Principle, 1986 18 This thought is superficially similar to Julian Jaynes’ idea in
The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, 1976.
However Jaynes posits a time a few thousand years ago when hallucinatory
experience gave way to consciousness; obviously Jaynes concept of
‘consciousness’ must be other than that of experience. Here, in contrast, I
am identifying a stage in the development of thought in the remote past when
consciousness was already present 19 The question of whether there is or can be an essential
characteristic is taken up in what follows. The more general question of what
it means to ask whether there are or can be essences or characteristics for
concepts or ideas such as mind, being, existence – and what are essences is
taken up below 20 I am not claiming that machines do not or cannot have mind 21 Reference to and discussion of the ‘representational theory of
consciousness’ is appropriate here; see the development of this topic in Journey
in Being - New Ideas, Forms and Developments 22 I wish to say that inclusion of a focus on the human aspects
arises from the special interest of the subject. However, it is not implied
that this focus is a priori definitive of or essential to mind. Further,
there is no implication at all that to be human is to be superior to what is
not human; or even that superiority has any ontological meaning. I suspect
but am not sure that such claims are ontologically meaningless. Naturally,
human beings are most intelligent in the human ways of intelligence but the
other animal species are most intelligent in their own ways 23 Meanings and modes of the unconscious: distant
memory; repressed consciousness; seen but not recognized; pre-communication
or pre-language; phylogenetic; the form of awareness or consciousness;
a metaphor for a mode or form of consciousness; dim, vague, boundary
consciousness…in contrast to the bright, the clear, and the focus of
attention; the body's own experience; the intrinsic content of art; the condition
of knowledge; the condition of language; latent consciousness; dimensions of
cognition and feeling; universal consciousness; window into reality, the
whole being and the whole universe; the idea that nothing in the unconscious
is inaccessible to consciousness… there are arguments to this effect and some
are given in this document… there is also the point, made here, that if
something is not accessible to consciousness then there is no experiential
description of it and therefore nothing is lost by not labeling it “mental;”
the deep unconscious – what is not accessible in consciousness… if the
previous point is correct there is no deep unconscious… even if the deep
unconscious does not exist in principle it may exist in practice as the seen
but not recognized and its various manifestations; seen but not recognized
because: what is seen does not connect with every-day experience; not among
the normal modes of subject-object; fostered by the delusions and illusions
of culture… not among the normally accepted and approved instruments of
perception; related to the conditions of existence and survival; lack of
education; pre-linguistic; poetry; the esoteric and the mystic; body, family,
race…being and existence – the unconscious and the boundaries of the individual;
fluidity of personality; examples of unconscious processing – telling time
accurate to the minute, learning by transference, the origin of ideas,
becoming aware of the fact and content of what someone said a few seconds
after the fact; post-recognition; defenses; incompleteness of conscious
control. On the difficulty of knowing oneself: in addition to defenses, there
is only one self but many others The
nature of dreams: dreams as a mode of processing corresponding
to an earlier stage in evolution; or an earlier stage in the development of
the individual; the previous statement as metaphorical; and as a partial
factor; access to the unconscious in dreams as due to the turning off of
conscious control – of thought and action. Relationship to the thesis of
Julian Jaynes 24 The relation between brain and mind being discussed here is
different from the causal relation involved in “his intention to go was the
cause of his leaving.” The latter relation, often referred to as the causal
efficacy of mind, is causal in just the sense that force causes motion 25 The following have been suggested as characteristics, correlates
or identities; inclusion here is not endorsement. For mind: mental
content; adaptability; choice; action; will; behavior; consciousness; meaning
or significance; information processing; intensionality; locomotion;
originality, the ability to create; design; knowledge; mind as presence to
the universe; society; power; mind as the incarnation of evolution or nature;
life. For consciousness: awareness; phenomenal experience;
availability for action; awareness of awareness; competitive advantage;
indeterminism; plenitude; being; presence; intelligence; language; self-reference;
self-awareness; first person perspective; on-off vs. continuum; having a
definite vs. dynamic / distributed location or locus; distribution in the
brain / body / not limited to the body; specific to vs. shared among
individuals; consciousness and the self; social self; evolutionary
adaptation; ineffable; mystery; ontologically objective / epistemically
subjective; the condition or essential mode of being / existence 26 Since geology is both deep and dynamic it might provide a better
metaphor; other metaphor-terms are map, atlas, model, picture, theory 27 Since the discussion is preliminary nothing final is being said
about the nature of these functions, whether they will be among the actual
functions, whether they constitute a complete set of functions and so on;
further, nothing final is being said about function and its nature 28 Here are some additional details that I did not feel necessary
to currently incorporate in the main text. A much greater variety and level
of detail is in words,
language, metaphysics Elementary
experiences and their physical location or seat... modularity of mind and
brain; localization and distributed functions; variety of states, conscious
and otherwise, awake, altered, sleep and dreaming... ; α, β,
δ, θ states; mapping the unconscious, psychoanalytic theory,
Searle's connection principle; innateness of language, Fodor, Chomsky and
poverty of stimulus; spirit, vision; belief, reasoning; writing, speaking;
acting; design, motivation, choice, will; attention, arousal, sleep;
representation; associative and indexed aspects of memory; neural, endocrine,
immune and other biological bases of psychology; mind, reality, aberrations –
in physical and social realities and in meaning, tone and mood… disease;
human abilities and their complex – fractal – nature, exceptional abilities
and performances – exceptional processes, states, acts and lives… see Philosophy
of Mind and Consciousness for details on exceptional abilities and
disease 29 Occurrent knowledge is knowledge that is currently “in
mind,” of which the organism is conscious – in the case of an organism capable
of consciousness – and to which the organism is attending. Dispositional
knowledge is knowledge of which the organism need not be consciously aware or
represented in images or symbols but which affects behavior. Dispositional
knowledge includes knowing how to do something at e.g. an instinctive level
that does not require explicit knowledge of how to perform the task or
even that the task is being performed. Dispositional knowledge includes but
is not at all limited to knowledge of a fact – or a theory or anything that
has symbolic or iconic representation – when the fact is in memory but not
currently a mental content. Occurrent knowledge is close if not identical to
knowledge of facts, theories i.e. to knowing that something is true
and is often also dispositional 30 A number of related distinctions are important but out of the
main line of development: A
priori versus a posteriori knowledge: Consider “All ravens are birds” and “All ravens
are black” the first is a priori to empirical study and requires none
while the truth of the second would require empirical study and is,
therefore, a posteriori Analytic versus synthetic propositions: A proposition
is analytic if the meaning of the predicate is
contained in the meaning of the subject. “All ravens are birds” is analytic
because “raven” includes as part of its meaning “being a bird.” A proposition
is synthetic when the analyticity condition is not satisfied i.e. the
predicate is not contained in the subject. Therefore, “All ravens are black”
is synthetic since “blackness” is not included in the meaning of “Raven.”
Some analytic propositions such as “All ravens are black” are a priori, and
most synthetic propositions are a posteriori. These concepts were used by Kant
in one of the most significant issues in the development of epistemology –
whether a priori synthetic judgments are possible. Some synthetic
propositions are simply matters of empirical fact e.g. “it is raining.”
However, “4 + 4 = 8” is synthetic since “4 + 4” is not part of the meaning
of “8” but it is a priori Necessary
versus contingent propositions: A proposition is necessary if it
is true in all possible worlds e.g. “All ravens are
birds.” In contrast, “All ravens are black” is contingent holds in
some circumstances [a world in which all ravens are black], but it is easy to
imagine circumstances in which it would not be true e.g. in case of a
mutation. A contingent proposition is one that is not true in all possible
worlds i.e. its truth is contingent upon the world under consideration. Some
necessary propositions, such as “All ravens are birds” are a priori [though
not all are] and most contingent propositions are a posteriori Tautological versus significant propositions: A proposition is tautological if its constituent terms repeat
themselves or if they can be reduced to such terms. Thus “a = a” is
tautological; not all tautological propositions are trivial since the
reduction to tautological form might be not at all transparent. A proposition
is significant if it does provide new
information about the world. It is generally agreed that no significant
propositions can be derived from tautologies. Tautologies are to be true a
priori, are necessary, and are analytic; and significant statements are generally
a posteriori, contingent, and synthetic Logical versus factual propositions: A proposition is logical
if analysis of its terms can reduce it to a logical truth, e.g., to A
and B implies A. If A = x is black, and B = x is a bird with certain
additional characteristics then x is a raven is equivalent to A and B which
implies A i.e. x is black; thus “All ravens are birds” is logical. In
contrast “All ravens are black” is not logical but, rather, factual.
The theorems of logic are often, though not always, a priori, are always
necessary, and are typically analytic. Factual propositions are generally a
posteriori, contingent, and synthetic Kripke,
Naming and Necessity, 1972, used these concepts to analyze the problem
of how a true identity sentence, which says of some object that it is
identical to itself, could be non-trivial. The significance of the problem
may be seen from “Scott is Scott” and “Scott is the author of Waverley,”
which are both true identity sentences but only the latter is non-trivial. Kripke’s
analysis is that all true identity sentences are necessary but that the
trivial ones are a priori while others such as “Scott is the author of Waverley”
are a posteriori and it is the investigation that is required to establish
the truth of an a posteriori proposition that makes such propositions
non-trivial 31 The sense of meaning here is what is the reference or, where
there is no reference, what is the use i.e. what is the intention of the
speaker / writer and what is the effect upon the listener / reader. Issues in
meaning that I list as a guide to possible further analysis include: Meaning
in small versus large / complex communities, closed versus open communities,
evolving versus stagnant communities Sentence
versus speaker meaning Sense
and reference or sense, connotation, intension versus reference, denotation,
extension Sense
and family resemblance Kinds of
resemblance: coincidental i.e. one sign for two symbols, Meaning
or reference and use i.e. dictionary theory of meaning versus open meaning
whose ultimate determination is in use The role
of leaders, specialists and authorities Meaning,
knowing / cognition, language Meaning,
metaphysics and potential meaning Interpretation
and assignment of meaning or hermeneutic analysis of spoken messages and
written texts 32 One of the original motivations for the study of the concept and
nature of knowledge was to justify the principle of being. I felt that the
principle of being was true and had many good reasons to believe in its
plausibility. I also took the position that belief in the principle could be
partially justified on the ground that the belief might result in an extremely
valuable and ultimate outcome. That position motivated the treatment of
belief in later sections. However, the position was not unequivocal and I
continued to seek a foundation even while I used the principle of being in a
variety of instrumental ways. Thus I proceeded in various directions some of
which were subject to the equivocation mentioned I
therefore continued to seek foundation for the principle of being in a theory
of knowledge and in specific disciplines such as physics where it is known,
for example, that origin of the universe from nothing need not violate the
principle of conservation of energy. This is the case since the positive
energy of matter and the negative energy of gravitation can balance each
other. This did not satisfy me since possibility does not imply actuality or
necessity and because any foundation in physics would apply only if the
universe is physical in the sense of satisfying the current fundamental laws
of physics The
development in the present essay is independent of physics and relatively
independent of a theory of knowledge and the turn came when I stopped looking
only at the universe and began to focus on the concept and properties of
nothingness However,
knowledge – its concept, nature and theory – remains of fundamental interest
as an object in itself and, for later, in elaboration and possible defense of
the present developments 33 Here, “objective” means, simply, that there is reference to an
object 34 These ideas are related but not identical to or derived from
formalism and intuitionism as foundations of mathematics 35 This paragraphs is a repetition of a paragraph of the previous
section 36 This section is not part of the main development of the essay 37 There is the possibility that formal knowledge may lead directly
or indirectly through technology to a changed organism – through design or
through co-evolution. There is also the possibility, held by mystics and
others, of transformation through insight 38 The use of Dirac’s quantum mechanical <bra| and |ket>
notation is intentional. However, the use of the notation to discuss belief
is, at present, an analogy and not a correspondence or an example of the
quantum mechanics 39 This, and no other, is the concept of intuition being used here 40 Some concepts used in this document are: concept itself,
knowledge, value / ethics, object, noumenon, percept, intuition, formal
representation, communication, symbol, language, meaning, science, metaphor,
metaphysics, being, existence, nothingness, possibility, necessity, matter,
process, extension, cause, ultimate being / God, mind, experience /
consciousness, attitude, action, will and choice, function, dynamics, memory,
the unconscious, cognition, feeling-sensation, humor, emotion, drive,
idea-creation, personality, commitments, dynamics of being, cosmology,
universe, phase-epoch, origins, symmetry, stability, monad / elementary particle,
continuum / anti-monadism, mechanism, teleology, determinism / indeterminism,
space-time, metaphysics – again, argument, method, presence, forms,
categories, universals and particulars 41 This section is in preliminary form. It is not meant to be a
comprehensive treatment of ethics or ethical systems. Rather, it emphasizes
[1] the role of ethics in the Journey – of course this is not distinct from
the role of ethics in general, [2] some distinctive and foundational views of
ethics including the root unity of ethics, being and knowledge, [3] that
ethics is not something that is imposed upon something that came before but
is organic with origins; this follows from the previous point, [4] that the
study of ethics which is sometimes conflated with ethics – morals – is
distinct from ethics and may be used to understand or for application, and
[5] there is a distinction between ethics-as-we-know-it [actual ethics] and
what is at the root and whereas a text on ethics would be incomplete without
actual ethics, in this section it is the root that is emphasized The
following is needed: [1] an in principle treatment of actual ethics and its
principles, [2] perhaps an integration into the foregoing section on
metaphysics, [3] integration into the Journey – the integration of actual
ethics exists, it is the integration of the treatment of ethics that is to be
integrated, [4] links to the places that ethics arises, and [5] perhaps
later, a comprehensive and foundational though brief treatment of ethics; the
way ethics is woven into life – intrinsically and reflexively – will be
treated but what is sought, rather than an extensive examination of
meta-ethics, normative ethics and the fabric of life and ethics –
application, is the crux of ethics and its living presence 42 … and more generally in the general field of value. The theory
of value is sometimes called axiology, the study of the good in its widest
sense and may include ethics, aesthetics, and economic, political and even
logical value. See further comments, in the main text, in Ethics, Metaphysics and other
concerns and in Meaning and Value 43 I want to emphasize that this is an idea for possible later
development as is the idea below, of using Kantian ethics to choose between
consequentialism and deontology 44 Some areas include: equality; sex; animals; business ethics;
crime and punishment; environmental ethics; war and peace; abortion,
euthanasia and the value of human life; and bioethics Constructive
possibilities for applied ethics include the following interests: design of a
life; social design and choice; and a design for humankind, life and being 45 It is not being claimed that the ideas are novel; any claim to
novelty pertains to their distinction and use 46 The following is an interesting aside – can a being be a spider
and a hippopotamus at the same time? If being a spider entails not being a
hippopotamus then the answer is “no.” I.e. we usually think that there are no
hippopotami in the set of entities that corresponds to the concept “spider.”
But, what of the possibility of an actual being that is both spider and
hippopotamus e.g. a quantum state that is a superposition of spider and
hippopotamus? If such a being is possible in quantum theory, then it must
also be possible in a universe that is equivalent to or “generated from”
nothingness i.e. in our universe. This approach allows for an entity to be
possessed of spider-hood and hippopotamus-hood but without contradiction since
it is not either pure spider or pure hippopotamus. I.e., at root, being does
not have the classical qualities of definiteness and exclusivity of kind and
therefore there is no contradiction, at that level, of a being that has both
spider- and hippopotamus-hood 47 Of the responses to various criticisms of evolution, I mention a
few. The alleged improbability of the origin of life has already been
addressed in principle; it may be further noted that of all the places in our
phase-epoch of the universe that may have been hospitable to the origin of
life, actual origins may have occurred only in one and, further, that of all
phase-epochs of the universe – there is an infinity of them – hospitability
to origins of life must occur infinitely often and so actual origin is
necessary not once but over and over. The question of the alleged
improbability the history of life has been addressed. Another conceptual
difficulty is the origin of complex organs for which it is alleged that
intermediate stages would have had no function. The response to this is, in
general, that there is a co-evolution of structure and function. A classic
example is the eye which evolves through various stages that are originally
very simple in structure where each stage is functional and there is evidence
of the existence now or in the past of a number and variety of stages such
that interpolation is at least reasonable. A further alleged difficulty is
the paucity of the fossil record; the response is first, that invertebrates
are not generally likely to leave fossil evidence and even when the
likelihood of fossil evidence is strong, e.g. for vertebrates, preservation
of the record requires appropriate geological circumstances; second, that the
geological record, though incomplete, is quite rich; and, third, that there
are numerous other forms of evidence that may be used to support and do
support the fact and theories of evolution 48 There are various forces that tend to limit or normalize
perception that can be thought of as keeping perception on track; these
forces include the reality of an individual’s immediate environment and
social world, the distinction between bound and free perception, normal
defense mechanisms. These can be functional or, as in excessive rigidity or
neuroses, non-functional; however, the functional / non-functional
distinction is somewhat relative to context or objective – neurosis may be
associated with creativity, what is functional in activity, profession or way
of life may be non-functional in another e.g. the charisma vs. patriarchy.
Roughly, with liberal interpretation, the normalizing of perception is the
function of the ego; the reference to psychoanalytic meaning is loose
and suggestive rather than essential: here, ego refers to the goal oriented
but constructive aspect of being. The principle of perception, then, is to
modify and liberate the function of the ego while avoiding descent into mere
license or permanent chaos. The following characterizations are rough: in
meditation, the ego is suspended; in dreams it is turned off; in stress it is
weakened; in the vision-quest, as in meditation, it is suspended but the
means and the locus of suspension is somewhat different than in dreams and,
perhaps, culturally / genetically conditioned; in the case of exceptional
talent there may be, in addition to the positive factors of talent, an
exceptionally flexible or, in some cases, an underdeveloped ego and, perhaps,
combined with opportunity and motivation; while talent appears to be real,
the underdeveloped ego may be the primary factor in some cases such as the
savant phenomena. This gives rise to the interesting question to what extent
latent talent exists and can be tapped by modulation of the ego 49 It is useful to ask whether the neurophysiologies of dreaming
and of hallucinating are related. A theory of hallucinations depends on two
assumptions. First, that experience is associated with physiological
processes that leave enduring physical changes [variously called neural
traces, templates, or engrams in complex circuits] in the brain; ideas and
images derive from activation of these engrams. Such circuits in the cortex
underlie the neurophysiology of memory, thought, imagination, and fantasy;
and the associated emotions are mediated through cortex connections with the
deeper parts of the brain, thus resulting in dynamic interaction between
perception and emotion through neural interactions largely at unconscious
levels. Conscious awareness is regulated through an arousal process the
influence of which is mediated by the ascending midbrain reticular activating
system. Analyses of hallucinations have shown an important role of the
temporal lobes in auditory hallucinations, for example, and of other parts of
the brain in hallucinations in general. The second assumption is that
experience and personality are products of constant interplay of causes
continually emanating from inside [physiological activity] and outside the
[sensory stimuli.] These transactions exert an integrating and organizing
influence upon the engrams underlying the activation of experiences – images
and hallucinations – and the associated emotions; as a result, physiological,
cultural, and experiential factors are among determinants of the content and
meaning of the experiences Sensory
impulses are constantly received, but most do not achieve the level of
conscious experience in dynamic [scanning] and selective [screening] way in
which integrative mechanisms that survey stored information and adaptively
select parts of potential experience for awareness and, then, clear focus.
These mechanisms simultaneously survey previously stored information within
the brain and select samples that give adaptive
significance to incoming information from the environment, and bring a few
items for actual recall from memory. The content of awareness is an ongoing
combination of perceptions of objects and associated interpretive imagery and
emotion that are normally in a state of integration; and normally, sensory
input maintains both the awareness functions and a balance in the relative
vividness of object perception and imagination. Some information can be
brought deliberately into awareness and many children and some adults can
screen memory traces with eidetic clarity. Normally, however, sensory input
inhibits quiescent perceptual traces When
sensory input is diminished, the functions of awareness [screening, scanning]
and, as a rule, stimulation the ascending midbrain reticular activating
system diminish and, as a result, arousal and awareness diminish. Sensory
input no longer inhibits ordinarily quiescent perceptual traces. Such
released perceptions may become conscious with hallucinatory vividness if there
must be a sufficient general level of arousal of awareness and of
perception-engrams; this happens in dreaming. Alternately, hallucinations may
occur even in the presence of sensory input if the brain is stimulated
directly by mechanical or chemical means or if the mechanism of inhibition is
disrupted or damaged 50 Change in state is sometimes taken to mean change in
properties but not in constitution. Inclusion of the possibility of a change
in constitution is necessary in light of the meaning of transformation used
here 51 T.S. Elliot 52 An often quoted line of William Shakespeare 53 There is an issue of whether semantics is realized in
computation. In proof theory, within limits, the semantic relations between
propositions are isomorphic to syntactic relations between sentences; thus if
the syntax is intrinsic so is semantic 54 I have referred to the article Computation by Brian
Cantwell Smith in the MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 2nd
edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson and Frank C. Keil, Eds. However, in the
present essay, there are a number of differences in treatment and emphasis 55 Computation by Brian Cantwell Smith in the MIT
Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 2nd edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson
and Frank C. Keil, eds. 56 Computation by Brian Cantwell Smith in the MIT
Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 2nd edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson
and Frank C. Keil, eds. 57 Steven Sloman in the MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences,
2nd edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson and Frank C. Keil,
eds. 58 Concepts by James A. Hampton in the MIT Encyclopedia of
the Cognitive Sciences, 2nd edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson
and Frank C. Keil, eds. 59 Knowledge Representation by Patrick Hayes in the MIT
Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 2nd edition, 1999, Robert A. Wilson
and Frank C. Keil, eds. 60 Topics in computer science: hardware systems, artificial
intelligence , numerical analysis, software systems, mathematical foundations
of computing, analysis of algorithms, typography and computational models of
language, general interest 61 Topics in artificial intelligence: General: production
systems, neural networks, genetic algorithms and programming, computer
vision, search including heuristic search, planning, logic, knowledge
representation and reasoning, managing / reasoning under uncertainty, common
sense reasoning in logic, Bayes networks, automatic planning and multi-agent
communication, robotics and computer vision, machine learning, intelligent
architectures - connectionist or associative vs. von Neumann, and natural
language understanding and processing, interactivity, narrative, and
artificial intelligence. Knowledge Representation: declarative
knowledge representation methods. Time and action, non-monotonic logics, causality,
inheritance and description logics, ontologies, contexts, knowledge
acquisition and reformulation, multiple views, abstraction, deduction vs.
abduction, knowledge and other mental attitudes. History: knowledge
(declarative) vs. procedure based systems. Knowledge-based systems and
applications: knowledge-based (expert) system technology is the most
widely-used application technology to emerge from AI. Topics: basics of
knowledge based systems (KBS) and expert systems (ES); technology transfer
from research to industry; knowledge engineering, KB programming, knowledge
acquisition methodology; evolution of the technology as applied to business
and government problems, current and future impact. Robotics and computer
vision: manipulator kinematics and inverse kinematics; manipulator
dynamics, motion, and force control; motion planning and robot programming.
Robot programming topics include: basics of motor control and sensor
characteristics; sensor fusion, model construction, and robust estimation;
control regimes (fuzzy control and potential fields); active perception;
reactive planning architectures; various topics in sensor-based control,
including vision-guided navigation. Some increasingly complex behaviors for
mobile robots: simple dead reckoning and reactivity, planning and map
building, communication and cooperation. Issues and techniques of computer
vision: image formation, edge detection and image segmentation, stereo,
motion, shape representation, recognition 62 Hardware classes and environment issues: hardware.
Computation: processors, memory; storage; input / capture: keyboard,
connectors, microphone / audio, camera, video; output / display: monitor,
projectors, speakers, printers; environment issues. Conditions:
humidity and wetness, marine and submerged; temperature... polar, desert;
atmospheric: caustic, corrosive, dust and particulates, pressure extremes;
space; industrial; acceleration and shock. Mobile vs. stationary factors:
size, area, weight; mounting and carriage; modularity – auto install; power –
internal / external, local / imported; durability; communications 63 Software classes: systems and communication. Systems
Software: 1. Applications development system: development: languages,
compilers, visual environments, cross compilers, debugging and testing; 2.
Operating systems: processor control, memory management, file management and
linking; user interface – GUI; network interface; device drivers. 3.
Utilities. Communication Software: 1. Data communication: network
management and operating systems; data compression; Internet; 2.
Telecommunications E-mail, fax, message center, video/teleconference; 3
Security and encryption; applications software. Production Level
Data Processing these have basis in human modes of perception, meaning
and communication: word / text / font processors – general, scientific,
other; document management and linking; publishing, desktop publishing,
typesetting; numeric, array and spreadsheet; database management; graphic –
draw, paint and photo, converters, general / scientific presentation, flow
sheet / art libraries; CAD; video, sound, music and speech – voice
recognition, scanning and handwriting software, video and digital camera… and
synthesis, musical instrument digital interface; multimedia - playback,
production and development. Knowledge and Knowledge Systems, Artificial
Intelligence: Data / knowledge bases; AI / expert system, AI based design
and planning tools: genetic algorithms, neural nets. Specialized
applications: Design, decision, planning and government. Science:
mathematics and statistics; science and engineering; arts and humanities.
Education: interactive classroom simulation, computer based training, text
and media development. Law. Medicine: medical, psychiatric and management -
managed care planning. Commerce: Business and finance, industry and
agriculture, service and service industries, and trade. Grants 64 Thus neither the esoteric nor the practical are cultivated for
their intrinsic value as esoteric or as minute and practical. I
do not want to be exclusively soaring or crawling 65 Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, 1945 66 E. O. Wilson, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, 1975 is a
classic work in defining the doctrine of sociobiology Although
the focus of this essay is on the universal, I do not seek to avoid the
particular. While sociobiology, especially in its doctrinaire forms, may be
parochial, I include it out of interest and as a link to future research and
written work. I want to repeat that inclusion, here, of a body of thought is
not endorsement and to add that I have no a priori position – pro or con –
regarding optimal analysis and sociobiology. However, it seems eminently
reasonable to seek to connect the study of society with that of biology 67 Kinship groups have been considered to be groups related by blood or marriage or other alliance; various theories exist regarding the origin and nature of such groups which, for humankind, have a degree of variability that appears to be unusual in the animal world. Groups may be “defined” by what they share and, thus a definition of kinship could be given that is continuous with all other kinds of group. The idea that the notion of kinship is to be preserved at all cost is a kind of reification even though it is clear that there is something to the idea of a kinship bond that is special, if not unique, to human groups. An improved approach would be to use the kind of definition suggested and to see what kinds of group fell out of that definition – it is inherent in the definition that all actual groups would be included since the concept of a group is that of something being shared – and what continuities and conceptual relationships there are among the kinds of group and how they might vary from one society to another |
