Emergence

In the previous blog, I gave reference to a presentation which Peter Russell has given on ‘the reality of consciousness’ whereby he said, “Our senses respond to patterns of information. Corresponding patterns of information arise in the brain. Information is experienced as forms in the mind. Experience is an ‘in-forming’ of consciousness; all that is ‘out there’ is information.”

A conundrum of experiencing a dual aspect of consciousness is that it is with consciousness that we create a map or a representation of the world, but we don’t see that the map itself is a representation in consciousness. 

As is indicative of this predicament, science and a prevailing world view has given greater merit to contemplation of an objective reality than to a subjective and inner world; reality emerging through quantum mechanics suggests that this has inadvertently distorted the lens by which science is able to see clearly. 

A new paradigm of the primacy of consciousness suggests that if all relationships are taking place in a medium of consciousness, then just as if I were polishing the lens of some spectacles, to be able to know you or the world around me, I have to be willing to know who I am or else any content is illusory.

A path of self-reflection is in progress by which an eye of the beholder is turned back upon itself to comprehend that it in turn is being observed; symbolically there is a multitude of eyes as can be seen with the depictions of the ‘many-eyed deities’ of our religious and spiritual texts; representative of the transcendent into absolute. So too is a representation of Ptah, an ancient Egyptian deity of creativity with a symbol of a djed pillar and a bull, said to have ‘thought the world into being’. 

Interestingly, the Wikipedia website states that the word for ‘eye’ in Egyptian, jrt, resembles another word meaning ‘do’ or ‘act’.  The present of the feminine suffic –t in jrt may explain why these independent eyes were thought of as female. The Eye of Ra, in particular, is deeply involved in the sun god’s creativity. 

My suggestion is that the concept of the ‘I’ is an experience of free will. Free will allows for the body mind to experience its perception of self as primary and as existing as separate from its environment. It also brings about a state of incoherence and lessens the potency by which it can intentionally create in a universal field of being without effort. This is a facet of a paradox that is being revealed through what has been conceived as Eros and Thanatos, order and chaos or life and death. 

‘On the Origin of the World’ is the name given to a particular Gnostic manuscript considered to have been written near the end of the 3^rd Century. It was found among the texts in the Nag Hammadi Library and it deals with creation and the end time. 

A copy of the text as translated by Hans-Gebhard Bethge and Bentley Layton can be found online. The text points out that a popular and mistaken view has been that nothing existed prior to chaos; furthermore that chaos has been labelled as darkness, but in fact chaos comes from or is projected from the shadow of something else which has existed prior to chaos and since the beginning. 

The Gnostic text informs that after the natural structure of immortal beings had been developed out of an infinite, a likeness emanated from Pistis (Faith) which was called Sophia (Wisdom). Sophia had volition (free will) and became an abyss or a product resembling the primeval light of great magnitude and functioned as a veil between immortal beings of the infinite and those beings (including humanity) which came afterwards.

In his book ‘The Way of the Explorer’ Dr Edgar Mitchell communicates the widely held scientific view that evolution takes place in accordance with increasing complexity and order. He points out that in nature there is one direction, defined by the irreversible processes of entropy (decay) and negentropy (creation). The MIT mathematician and philosopher Norbert Wiener observed that nature accomplishes these processes simultaneously.

Dr Mitchell suggests that an origin of the direction is illusory, but given the instant at which the Big Bang occurred at a tiny point represented the highest temperature and greatest pressure the universe has ever experienced, it is said by physicists to be the point of greatest order. The universe is considered to have entered into an entropic phase as it began to cool and expand and into a negentropic process as it began to build ever more complex molecules and physical reality.

Why I am bringing together the Gnostic view of creation and end time and a prevailing scientific perspective of entropy, negentropy and emergence is that I see them as essentially similar; however they differ with regards to their perspective of an origin of intelligence and of how this is interwoven by an experience of and concept of time.

To give some insight into how time is perceived, Dr Mitchell says “The arrow of time therefore, proceeds from the Big Bang forward. Its direction is defined by the irreversible macroscale processes of decay and creation, both of which proceed in one direction – forward to the future. We must emphasize the macroscale because energy whether we observe it as wave or particle interacts with other energy reversibly and without loss at the microscale. Subatomic particles combine, separate, and otherwise interact in a manner that may proceed in either direction. At that level of nature the arrow of time is not defined; it has no meaning.”

He says, “Perhaps the most powerful discovery in chaos theory was the finding that a feedback process with mathematics simulates the way nature creates certain forms … the significance of this fact is not that nature knows mathematics but that nature uses feedback loops, in particular positive feedback loops, in literally thousands of its creative processes.”

He adds “Mathematicians use the results of a calculation and feed the result back into the next calculation to map the process of nature. But nature uses energy, a molecule, or a group of molecules to feed energy back into a new cycle of process which results in ‘form’” And he says, “Perhaps the most striking idea that comes from this observation is that learning is also a feedback process. In very much the same manner, we human beings observe the results of an action, then correct the input to the action in order to improve the result … likewise, the mapping of nature’s nonlinear feedback processes is suggestive of learning at the most fundamental levels.”

And he says, “The universal process … is viewed as one of transforming unstructured potential (chaos) in the aftermath of the Big Bang into a structured macroscale reality (order); a process which has resulted in human beings who are able to observe and ask questions about that process.”

A remarkable accomplishment perhaps, but an observation of the macroscale or ‘exoteric’ process of nature has also given rise to a widely held perspective that consciousness is created from and emerges through increasing complexity; this in turn has suggested that an accumulation of information and intelligence is exemplary and to be highly prized.

An observation of an exoteric or ‘outer appearance’ of nature reveals cycles; an appearance of life and death has given rise to the fabrication of meaning and of a perception of what is ‘good or bad’. This is something which human beings have been in conflict over and for centuries. An alternative model would be for science and theology to work together (particularly in view of what is being revealed through the quantum and the mapping of nature’s nonlinear feedback processes), to explore any impeding or ingrained ideas about an origin of and how intelligence emerges.

An implication of being able to move beyond an exoteric or macroscale perspective of an evolving universe and to embrace that intelligence ‘is and has always been’ is that it relinquishes a tight grip of time, effort, judgment and a fear of death. It would not be nihilistic or entropic, as there is an implicit invitation (in allowing the pre-existing intelligence of the universe to inform) to discern patterns of information and to be capable of perceiving interconnectedness at an increasingly complex level. This is not simply about ‘illuminating the shadow’ and allowing for conditions of intelligence to emerge but is also about allowing for an integration of wisdom.

Peter Russell had said in his presentation, “The representations being created by the brain are inferences of reality but the map is not the territory.” 

Dr Mitchell conveys a similar message, “The arrow of time is only knowable at the level of macroscale processes where energy is lost into the larger environment, or organizes into more complex structures through irreversible processes. The measure of time in which we humans place such great store is only an arbitrary convention we’ve adopted to help measure process from our level of observation. Time is about maps (clocks) and knowing, not about actual territories (reality) … in the Newtonian world, time is both absolute and reversible, and considered a fundamental attribute of existence. This error still clouds the larger picture.”

What this implies is that reality is synchronous with intelligence and an experience of time. The more integrated that an individual or collective is with an experience of reality, the less that they would be conscious of time and the less that they would experience conflict (in those ways by which we are currently familiar) with one another. Similarly, an ability to perceive increasingly complex patterns of information and interconnectedness allows for an exponential increase in wisdom and creativity.

Peter Russell informs that “consciousness is a fundamental quality of the cosmos; there is a dynamic structured field of being/is-ness that is aware; and all that is out there is information and what we can do is analyse and find out how the information is interacting with itself.”

Dr Mitchell says that “… simple organisms like the amoebae, which possess no brain at all, may still have awareness. Clearly they receive information from the environment. But do they perceive information? … Here lies a critical detail: the difference between perceiving information and receiving information without awareness.” 

And, “I believe undifferentiated awareness exists at simple levels of organizational complexity. The true primordial state of awareness is undifferentiated before the idea of “I/thou” has arisen. We cannot, however, discover awareness directly, as awareness is a subjective attribute unique to the particular organism. The approach to awareness in objects requires inference from other observations.”

He adds, “It is much easier to deduce intent by observing organisms in nature than it is to deduce awareness. Intent is suggested when movement is neither random nor deterministic, but rather appears to be with purpose. However, from chaos and complexity theory we know that complex processes in nature are only successfully mapped with nonlinear equations and feedback loops that are very suggestive of learning. And learning requires a feedback loop involving awareness and intention. If there is intention in the behaviours than an organism exhibits, then there is likely awareness as well. Learning requires both.”

He says “Awareness is the perception of energy (or patterns of energy: information), while intention is the volitional propagation of energy. Learning must take place in order to effect the utilisation of awareness. Awareness without intention is immobile, and intention without awareness is blind. Both without memory are chaotic. Awareness and intention are like two faces of the same coin, they are always found together and in the presence of a feedback loop they lead to learning.”

 

Dr Mitchell suggests that in the first chapter of Genesis, the ancients recognised this fundamental principle whereby “after each creative act, ‘God saw that it was good’”. 

He concludes with “The process is quite simply one of intention, awareness and evaluation (meaning). But if simple organisms learn, as do more evolved ones, then nature itself is a learning process.”

In a similar manner to Genesis, the Gnostic text ‘on the origin of the world’  communicates information which relates to the creation of the world, by suggesting that ‘the infinite arranged itself into natural or coherent order, into Pistis (Faith), into the primordial light and volition of Sophia (Wisdom) and into shadow’. 

A modern interpretation of such a narrative might be that ‘awareness of self/being which is infused with intention creates a state of coherence and order; with self-reflection and evaluation (feedback loop) emerges faith (we could say reason); and with furthering opportunities for interaction, relationship and information can an intelligent field of awareness be capable of experiencing and knowing itself with increasing complexity (wisdom). 

Awareness is therefore fundamental, as if there is incoherence at any stage, the process will bring about entropy. Such might be why the Gnostic text incorporated an inclusion of the demiurge and of why Christian texts give reference to an adversary and a fall from grace.