Free Will
[Warning. Rampant Philosophical Speculation]
This article discusses, in part, a curious research finding in psychology that I've puzzled with off and on for several years. In the 70's a physiologist at the University of California named Benjamin Libet conducted one of those experiments that seems to be the norm in quantum physics these days; the kind that directly violates some of our most entrenched beliefs about the nature of reality. In this case however, it was the role our conscious mind plays in our behavior that's brought into question.
A quote from the article will give you a flavor of the conundrum:
"A bevy of experiments in recent years suggest that the conscious mind is like a monkey riding a tiger of subconscious decisions and actions in progress, frantically making up stories about being in control."
One thing you should probably know about me, and the recommendation of this article, is that I'm pretty critical about ways most "experiments" are set-up and the "conclusions" derived from them; and I'm a bit of a geek on the methodology (I took graduate philosophy of science for recreation.) But I have to admit, his experiments are ingenious. The observation, that the conscious mind may play little role in our day to day behavior, decisions or even thoughts is intriguing, and echoes what some spiritual teachers have been saying for eons, that people live their lives asleep. The conclusions made in this article, however: that this makes human will mechanical, are complete rubbish. Dr. Silberstein, "who noted that every physical system that has been investigated has turned out to be either deterministic or random" must not have been paying attention the last, oh decade or so, when the sciences of chaos and complexity theory demonstrated that *most* physical systems in nature are neither deterministic, nor random.
But that's nit-picking, the essential fallacy lies in a basic disconnect. Most of modern culture, picking up steam with Sigmund Freud, believes the unconscious can influence the conscious mind but there is very little emphasis on the reverse: that the conscious mind can also shape and program the unconscious. The effect of this "reversed" influence is usually discounted (e.g. placebo effect) or treated with suspicion (e.g. hypnosis.) Bilateral communication with this larger mind is suppressed early in our socialization, "Stop Daydreaming Johnny!" "It's *just* your imagination", etc. The unconscious is strictly off limits to the modern mind.
In The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, Julian Jaynes makes an interesting case for how the basic attribute of "consciousness" arose in humans; it was once experienced as voices outside of themselves, in their brains, which compelled them to actions. As they evolved to possess this faculty within their own mind, it created a shift in evolution. It would be hard to predict, or even conceive, what type of shift was coming from this pre-conscious state looking forward. Looking back, we may have a chance to dissect it.
And I think a similar shift is in the works. What the aborigines prophesize as "entering the dreamtime." They believe the dreamtime runs in "parallel" with our current reality and is actually the more real dimension, and that human consciousness is evolving towards a path where it will switch tracks at a certain point. Kind of like Jayne's pre-conscious humans may have dramatically switched paths with the advent of consciousness. And it's curious, that the findings of Libet, share some of the same characteristics (parts of the mind compelling other parts into action and the nature of will) of Jayne's Bicameral mind. What happens when they both combine into a new form of awareness. Hyper-consciousness? Is this punctuated equilibrium part of our eschatological intuitions as a species about the end of "time"?
I dunno. But it's fun poking around the perimeter of this interface, the possibilities seems vast.
This article discusses, in part, a curious research finding in psychology that I've puzzled with off and on for several years. In the 70's a physiologist at the University of California named Benjamin Libet conducted one of those experiments that seems to be the norm in quantum physics these days; the kind that directly violates some of our most entrenched beliefs about the nature of reality. In this case however, it was the role our conscious mind plays in our behavior that's brought into question.
A quote from the article will give you a flavor of the conundrum:
"A bevy of experiments in recent years suggest that the conscious mind is like a monkey riding a tiger of subconscious decisions and actions in progress, frantically making up stories about being in control."
One thing you should probably know about me, and the recommendation of this article, is that I'm pretty critical about ways most "experiments" are set-up and the "conclusions" derived from them; and I'm a bit of a geek on the methodology (I took graduate philosophy of science for recreation.) But I have to admit, his experiments are ingenious. The observation, that the conscious mind may play little role in our day to day behavior, decisions or even thoughts is intriguing, and echoes what some spiritual teachers have been saying for eons, that people live their lives asleep. The conclusions made in this article, however: that this makes human will mechanical, are complete rubbish. Dr. Silberstein, "who noted that every physical system that has been investigated has turned out to be either deterministic or random" must not have been paying attention the last, oh decade or so, when the sciences of chaos and complexity theory demonstrated that *most* physical systems in nature are neither deterministic, nor random.
But that's nit-picking, the essential fallacy lies in a basic disconnect. Most of modern culture, picking up steam with Sigmund Freud, believes the unconscious can influence the conscious mind but there is very little emphasis on the reverse: that the conscious mind can also shape and program the unconscious. The effect of this "reversed" influence is usually discounted (e.g. placebo effect) or treated with suspicion (e.g. hypnosis.) Bilateral communication with this larger mind is suppressed early in our socialization, "Stop Daydreaming Johnny!" "It's *just* your imagination", etc. The unconscious is strictly off limits to the modern mind.
In The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, Julian Jaynes makes an interesting case for how the basic attribute of "consciousness" arose in humans; it was once experienced as voices outside of themselves, in their brains, which compelled them to actions. As they evolved to possess this faculty within their own mind, it created a shift in evolution. It would be hard to predict, or even conceive, what type of shift was coming from this pre-conscious state looking forward. Looking back, we may have a chance to dissect it.
And I think a similar shift is in the works. What the aborigines prophesize as "entering the dreamtime." They believe the dreamtime runs in "parallel" with our current reality and is actually the more real dimension, and that human consciousness is evolving towards a path where it will switch tracks at a certain point. Kind of like Jayne's pre-conscious humans may have dramatically switched paths with the advent of consciousness. And it's curious, that the findings of Libet, share some of the same characteristics (parts of the mind compelling other parts into action and the nature of will) of Jayne's Bicameral mind. What happens when they both combine into a new form of awareness. Hyper-consciousness? Is this punctuated equilibrium part of our eschatological intuitions as a species about the end of "time"?
I dunno. But it's fun poking around the perimeter of this interface, the possibilities seems vast.
Too far above this Raggedy Ann's head.
ReplyDeleteThe Scriptures teach that the fruit reveals the tree...and that which proceeds out of man come from "the heart"...and yet it also proceeds to deal with where a person sets their mind, and many other factors and learnings wherein "the inner man" is changed. So I think that definite interest should be placed on using the conscious mind to shape and train and tool the unconscious/inner/heart.
ReplyDeleteTo glue oranges on a Pear tree is not the answer to getting Oranges...to get Oranges you need to plant an Orange tree there instead of the Pear tree..Pluck it up , fill in the dirt, plant the seed, nourish it..and grow the oranges from the inside out...yet all the functional changes (plucking, uprooting, planting, nourishing)...is predominately from the outside in.
Goodness gracious, There are two cubs that make me dizzy!!
ReplyDelete