Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Of Logic Gates, Digital Representations, and Conscious Will

CAUSATION: Causation does not consist only in respect of a first material force or mover, that sucked or pushed our universe out of a big bang, like a first domino being manipulated to knock down all others in a preplanned, front loaded, pre set row. Nor is causation merely a function of particles bouncing off one another, like billiard balls. Rather, at most fundamental level, causation seems to unfold with a synchronous dance of feedback among potentials and manifestations, wholes and parts, fields and particles, logic gates and digital representations. In feedback aspect, measurable causation seems to present an unfoldment of information that can be digitally represented and expressed as a series of discrete segments.

PRODUCING THE MANIFEST FROM THE POSSIBLE: Not everything that is possible within parameter limits actually manifests into physically interpreted occurrence. Some function or entity seems to impose means for making or pre-prescribing selections or choices. Whatever the means of causation, such are limited to choices that are availed within the parameters of that which is possible.

RANDOM: Somehow, between a process of feedback among fields and particles, “choice making is determined.” At levels of low organization, such choice making or decisions as are determined may occur at such a low level of conscious, pre-set, logarithmic autopilot as to be statistically evaluable as “random.” Perhaps, in some respects and organizations, the bodies and brains of all organisms may be said to be partly “pre-willed,” so as to unfold along pre-specified, parameter limited paths.

NUMBER: It is conceivable that a Field of Selection (God) chooses what to appreciate and apprehend from a Field of Numerous Possibilities (meta-nature). Such choices from such potentials may be actuated a split sequence before they are made manifest to the sensation of any particularly numbered perspective of interpretation. Manifestation necessitates a sensory interpretation from a focus of conscious consideration, within a supporting framework for relating context. However, each interpretation of sensation necessarily trails the choice among potentials by which it was brought into manifestation.

MATERIAL REPRESENTATION LAGS BEHIND META CHOOSING: While physical-brain receives and translates sensation and feedback, it is meta-Mind that effects choice, which is synchronized within parameters availed at a holistic level. No conscious brain becomes aware of any choice until a split sequence after the choice has already been made.

LOCAL LIMITS IMPOSED ON META CHOICES: Thus, a brain is not an instrument for making choices, but a parameter-limiting instrument for transmitting results after having received inputs that find representations in respect of contemporaneous or past choices. An unconscious brain is a manifestation for representing a complex design for a local instrument, for subjecting pre-willed, pre-set choices to synchronized parameter limits. A brain that is coupled with conscious will is a brain that is coupled with a capacity to learn.  Each thrust or presentation of a choice against a representation for parameter limits avails feedback, for the appreciation of whatever local interest Mind may have in the upshot. Mind’s appreciation for that feedback is what entails a quality of will to such Mind, leading to Mind’s spiritually responsive and sequential unfoldment of locally synchronized interests, preferences, and choices.

STORED DETERMINATIONS OF WILL: Mind may in some contexts set its choice-making function on a sort of pre-set, pre-willed, auto-pilot. Take a line of dominoes, for example. When dominoes are first lined up, so that the tipping of one will topple all others, the initial set up can be conceived as partly a function of will, while the toppling thereafter can be conceived as a function of pre-willed determination. (Determination does not preclude will; rather, a person of strong will is often said to be a person of strong determination.) All events that can be conceptualized as pre-determined can also be conceptualized as pre-willed. However, not all events are well conceptualized as having been pre-determined.

WILL BEYOND ORGANISMS OF LIFE: Every complex pattern that demonstrates a capacity for being preserved or replicated, notwithstanding various challenges and choices that are thrust against it, does so in respect of being bestowed with a local capacity for representing a present or evolving system of parameter limits. Every such locally complex pattern imposes limits on the variously willed or pre-determined choices that are thrust at it. Thereby, it gives off feedback information — present of stored — to the consideration of whatever may constitute the local level of conscious (Mind) interest. Mind may predict the quantitfiable measurability of what will happen, but not the qualifiable effect it will have on Mind’s appreciation. In that respect, every upshot that unfolds from such interactive thrusts is part qualitative feedback to Mind and part quantitative choice of Mind. That seems to be a process that drives the “eternal present.”

PHYSICS AS CORRELATIVE PLACEHOLDER FOR COMMUNICATING FEEDBACK WITH SIGNPOSTS: Thus, every new and unfolding event or experience is at least in part the result of choice (or choices) of Will, either in present or pre-set capacity. In other words, expressions, choices, and products of Will are not the products of brain, but the products of Mind, which functions (either in present or in pre-set) in a correlation with every event or signpost of physics and in a correlation with every expression of information that is made manifest (manifesting either to a receiving brain or to a receiving storehouse of information).

SYNCHRONOUSLY UNFOLDING DESIGN OF CONSCIOUS WILL: Thus, a qualitative aspect of will of Mind is interwoven with all of quantitative physics, either in present or in pre-set. That quality, depending on its synchronizing interests, guides all of what we often take to be “material evolution.” When we try to interpret material evolution without reference to that Mind, what we are really engaging in is a process of circularly trivial labeling. That is, no matter what comes to survive and replicate, we label it “the fittest.” Indeed, but for appreciation of a role for consciousness. all would be routine, trivial, and of no moral interest. It is the unequal organization and allocation of the quality of consciousness that avails meaning to all other transitory equivalencies and transpositions.

PERSON: What is a person, in association with each locally unfolding expression among any number of perspectives of consciousness? As a material body and brain, a person represents a local form (or Avatar) for imposing evolving parameter limits upon the choices (whether present or pre-set) that are made by Mind. However, there is more. In some qualitative way, Mind “couples” with each locally conscious brain. Something of Mind comes to care about and identify so strongly with each person as to become limited in ability to intuit and empathize except in respect of such person's capacities. That is, the connection of local Mind with the more broadly encompassing Mind-field is temporally severed. During such time, such local Mind only experiences feedback through such parameter limits as may be imposed by the bodily senses and brain of the person it has coupled with. In effect, the person becomes “imbued” with a local experience of Mind. The person becomes a conscious Identity, more than mere matter; the person becomes an Identity that partakes of the choice of will that is availed to the Mind that has coupled with his or her body. Thus, consciousness of God, in part, often adopts perspectives that are limited to the potential that is offered by each person’s body.

FEEDBACK BETWEEN LOCAL, WIDER, OVERLAPPING, AND HOLISTIC LEVELS OF MIND:

FRONT LOADED VS CONTEMPORANEOUS INVOLVEMENT OF MIND: No manifested representation of a pattern or organization of quantity can be chosen for continuation, without an involvement at some point in the context of space-time with Mind --- either front-loaded involvement or contemporaneous involvement. No quantity is represented for manifestation, but for the local involvement and coupling of Mind, at some point in the extant context of space-time.

PRE-WILLED ZOMBIES: A front-loaded zombie-bot, with no contemporaneously significant involvement with Mind, would interpret everything as noise, except for those stimuli that are permitted to pass through its logic gates in order to stimulate outputs within parameter limits. Those logic gates could be designed to read and respond only in precisely controlled inputs and outputs. The result would be a robot that was unassociated with any present quality of consciousness, even if it may take awhile for a human being in a "conversation" with it to notice the difference.

LOGIC GATES UPON LOGIC GATES: However, what if a system of logic gates could be designed, in response to certain kinds of non-routine, new stimuli, to represent and store information, then to periodically sift it, to test whether new and sub systems of logic gates could be designed for periodically re-manipulating randomly received new information? Would such a system experience a quality of consciousness? What if it could store designs in its electronic based memory, for building new material based designs? What if it could choose a favorite among such possible designs, by associating a quality of desireability with that one, above all the others? In doing so, as it decided and functioned to bring the chosen design into material manifestation, would it be experiencing a quality of consciousness? Is the local expression of consciousness a trick of logic gates acquiring capacity to abstract logic gates, to abstract logic gates, and so on?  If so, upon what meta-Mind or meta-function may such trick of local expression of consciousness depend?  How or why would a mere pulsating source of directed energy, not in itself conscious, desire, chance, or determine to bring any such qualitative experientialism into being?  If chanced, how would it "just happen" to become set up to produce such an unfolding?  And, unless a choice-making function were pre-set, to pre-provide for the unfolding production of consciousness, then how could choices made manifest, of which no mere source of pulsating energy could receive any physical signal to its organized material structure or consciousness until shortly after they were made, ever be calculated to produce consciousness?  In other words, if determinations can and must be made from possibilities before there is any brain function that could be conscious of such determinations, then how and why should such determinations ever find it necessary or desireable to produce a brain function of self awareness -- unless coordinate with unfolding purposefulness of choice, i.e., an agent of Will?

OVERLAPPING FUZZ: Suppose two or more local expressions of electro-magnetic brain-based consciousness of self were to image representations for various potentials for designing and bringing forth a manifestation. Suppose they both imagine a similar hypothetical model, but neither brings it into actual fruition, implementation, or manifestation. Then, would the probability of that potentiality be "fuzzed to a higher level of possibility," even though not yet qualitatively known or empirically testable to either of the local experiences of Mind? Does that kind of overlapping fuzz affect how the field of possibilities is received by Mind? May different levels of logic gates preclude different levels of consciousness from being quantitatively aware of one another, even thought they may be functioning together, qualitatively, and even though a higher synthesis of logic gates may synchronize their inter-functioning? Unless a level of logic gates is pierced, either by genius or by higher consent, a lower level will simply not have access to quantify or empirically demonstrate the higher level. At best, there will be faint feelings of empathy and intuition among the various layers and levels of consciousness, for which the space-time that divides them may be more an aspect of shared interpretation than of fundamental reality.

HOLISM AND PRAYERS: The above postulates an astonishing array for representing layers and levels of choice-making in respect of organizations of logic gates upon logic gates. Yet, it depends upon a common synchronizing web of parameter limits. Who can fathom what may constitute the quality of the information- accumulating complexity and potential of the Holism that avails the Universal Web, or the power with which IT may accomodate unfolding interests? To what extent may that Holism or its levels of avatars read directly from the field of possibilities, including the field of prayers, while choosing which to favor by bringing it into manifestation?

CONSCIOUSNESS:  Thus, consciousness accompanies a capacity, among possibilities, to form qualitative preferences, even in the absence of complete or precise quantitative information. Consciousness entails a capacity for directing decisions that are informed, even though informed by information that is less than completely or precisely determinative. At higher, mortal levels, consciousness may entail a capacity for forming mental images or representations of potentialities (abstract, digitized representations of logic gates upon logic gates upon logic gates), in order to entertain fuzzy hunches or foresight regarding less than perfectly predictable future contingencies or contexts.


META-ENTITY:  To higher levels, consciousness implicates a REASONED faith or belief (or doubt?) that some meta-entity (God?) MAY (or may not?), presently and/or in pre-willed predetermination, be availing, entertaining, synchronizing, and reconciling (moral?) preferences among potential unfoldments within encompassing webs of parameter-limiting feedback. That implication, or intuition, is not one that is knowable in the sense of being empirically demonstrable. This is because such a meta-entity, if the a-priori author of all that is unfolded into empirical, quantitative manifestation, could not very well be dependent for IT’s proof (or truth?) upon the empirical derivatives of its less than perfect mortal manifestations and inferiors.

GODOT: While conscious, one has no choice but to wait upon the interests of one’s consciousness. The world stops for no one, so that one mecessarily experiences affirmative or negative participation in choices, whether one wants to participate or not. Unavoidably, one will entertain or rationalize reasons for why one ought to prefer each choice over all alternatives. It is to no avail to pretend that we are not beset with “oughts,” i.e., moral choices, or that we “ought not confess to being beset with oughts.” To us, moral choice-making implicates real functions. It is to no avail to prescribe that one ought to do any particular thing, but that there is no real reason why one ought to do it.

CHALLENGES: The question posed by individual Humanists is:  Does the real basis for implicating the necessity of respecting a moral philosophy vanish upon each human being’s demise or upon the demise of humanity, generally?  In other words, is morality entirely and only contingent upon each mortal’s conscious, subjective experience of life? Or, does some reconciling aspect (or Entity?) impose a more objective basis for prescribing a shared foundation for rules and sympathies of a more generally applicable morality?

The question implicated for civilized peoples of Society, generally, is:  Can any decent civilization long sustain itself, absent the inculcation of a general regard for shared rules and mores?  For that purpose, which is more likely to be successful or reasonable: (1) All intrusive, detailed, and changing, moment by moment lawmakers and government; (2) all intrusive priests and tradition connected religious parables; (3) all intrusive experimenters and science, rampaging beyond their proper domain; or (4) some unfolding and reasoned accommodation of all three? (May a real Entity sponsor that unfolding accommodation?)

POLITICAL SETTLING:  Technological improvements in mass communications, as well as increased potential exposure to weapons of  mass destruction, seem to be leading us to a world in which everything is being settled to a lowest common and controllable denominator.  How is this being rationalized to the care and feeding of the masses?  Well, the science of global warming is said to be settled. The morality of humanism is taught among "Brights" to be settled. The purpose of health care is expected to be settled. The law of equality in redistribution is being settled. The leveling of the middle class is being settled. The rule of corporatist oligarchs is quickening to a settlement. The oligarchical priesthood for the worship of Gaia is being settled. Thus, Big Government is energetically imposing arbitrary locks and grips to squeeze the logic gates of most of our creative thinkers. The freedom of thought of Americans, to employ their capacities to image wheels within wheels, logic gates within logic gates, is what has led America to exponentially unfolding opportunities to envision and create ever more interesting worlds. Is it an affront to God for Big Gov now to squeeze shut the creative gates of free thought?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

As far as obscurantism goes, how much is "free trade" the obscuring (noble?) lie of those elites who purchase political influence, who seek approval under the blessings of abstract verbiage in order to take over the democratic will of the people, simply by channeling the purchase of influence over our governors, from abroad? When it comes to hollowing out America's viability as a self sufficient nation, how is the noble lie that supports free profiteering by international corporatists that different from a simple erasure of our national borders?

Obscurantism can be fun. Let me try my hand, parodying parody, thusly: When the language of both the vernacular and the prevailing paradigms are found or thought, for some purposes, inadequate to carry reasoned discussion further, to attractive or psychedelic new visions, then an obscurantist may deem the context ripe for fuzzy new language. Thus, I give you: "Language based on meta, pseudo, or trivalent systems for faux-mapping of logic gate functions onto digitally represented feedback in order to facilitate appreciation of the channeling and measuring of physically unfolding manifestations." Yes, bivalent language may support bivalent equations. However, in such bivalent aspect, may the conscious beings who employ such language make such language itself subject to a meta process, i.e., trivalent unfolding?"

Thus, one may transition through obscurantism (psychedelic doping of mind-manifesting abstractions). As to the Moralist-of-consciousness and the Empiricist-of-materialism, can the twain ever meet, or is obscurantism an unavoidable necessity, so that the "nitro" of moral reason is cushioned, so as not too violently to be shaken against the "glycerin" of material reason?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism:
"In the 19th and 20th centuries "obscurantism" became a polemical term for accusing an author of deliberately writing obscurely, to hide his or her intellectual vacuousness."
"... fundamentalism presupposes sincere religious belief, whereas obscurantism is based upon minority manipulation of the popular faith as political praxis"

Good grief and huzzah.