Technological Unemployment

 

Anecdote: When I was around the age of seven or eight years old I watched a sci-fi fantasy film that entirely changed my worldview, both frightening and exhilarating at once, it has been responsible for shaping my personal philosophy and outlook towards at least one possible future for Humanity – a technological future of abundance, which later ground breaking TV series such as Star Trek helped to concretise as my philosophy for the future.

That movie was “Forbidden Planet” which portrayed an already techno-savvy intergalactic Human civilisation discovering a distant planet of an even more advanced technological civilisation called the Krell who had literally innovated them-selves beyond any mortal needs or even physical form, and with all of their technological dreams apparently accomplished and realised simply disappeared? As a teen I also remember specifically contemplating what Humans would do in such a technological civilisation, with no longer any needs of work or money, what would be left for Humans to accomplish and aspire to? – more on this later.

Technology, market innovation and increasing industrial automation has been replacing manual jobs for much of the last century through the displacement of Agricultural workers into factory workers, and now, with the increasing power and sophistication of computers as highlighted by Moore’s Law is also posing a real threat and paradigm shift for the future employment of academic, clerical and “white collar” workers.

This argument is now being echoed in the discussions of academia across the globe and at first impressions sounds like rather a brash forecast, yet is this fact of fiction? Well I am afraid to say that all of the statistical evidence circulating proves that growing technological unemployment is indeed reality and fact, and that the power of computation combined with the manipulation of Big Data is well positioned to now displace even jobs that Humans believed and reasoned were beyond the capabilities of any machine algorithm.

These jobs at risk would include the legal and health sectors, widespread clerical, management and administration, journalism, (as already used for articles and reports on sports pages), logistics and transport, and moreover, any work or job where mundane or even complex duties and tasks can be effectively reduced to mechanism and process, such as monitoring and management of employees production, clerical filing, referencing and scanning/movement of documents to retrieve information and etc. In fact it is the challenge to speculate on employment sectors where technology will not be able to compete for the jobs of Humans – perhaps you may wish to contemplate this for yourself, (key word is creativity)?

IBM Watson, the computer now well known for decimating the best of competitors on US TV Show “Jeopardy” is now being “employed” towards market Big data and especially for provision of an idealised “global Healthcare oracle” and knowledge base, for the use by physicians and academia around the world – just imagine the market potential and uses for a machine such as Watson, and IBM is not resting on it’s innovative laurels either. Big Blue really does think Big!

The prospect for technology and automation to provide for all of the basic needs for Humanity such as food, water, clothing, housing and even healthcare is not science fiction but is fact and is possible even right here, right now, and today? It is not a technological/engineering or logistical problem and dilemma to overcome but is rather the systematic economic model of thought and ultimately the political obstacles constructed entirely by Humans themselves which oppose real progress?

So even though it may be easy and first impulse to be pessimistic regarding technology, increasing automation and growing mass unemployment, and such like history repeats may inspire a tendency towards, “Luddite” sensibilities and emotions, (which ultimately proved short lived and unfounded despite the best of virtues and social concerns by the Luddites), it should also be noted that Humanity is swiftly approaching, (Moore’s Law), a new technological era where work, employment and wage servitude is redundant and is no longer necessary?

Thus there is naturally a dichotomy and dissonance between these positive and negative attitudes and aspirations for/towards technology, automation, progress and for growing mass unemployment. However, the real danger is in failure to contemplate and face the facts regarding increasing technological unemployment, and the possible consequences for increasing poverty, suffering and hardship for citizens and society.

This is manifest today as a failure by politicians to forward think and contemplate the consequences of growing mass unemployment that will affect our future and society, in favour of upholding and perpetuating the status quo of Capitalism and the interests of a global economic model based on the proliferation of world-wide debt that benefits the few and which is further establishing growing inequality, suffering and poverty – As is often said, a politician cannot serve two masters, yet as to which and who’s ideals should a politician really be serving anyhow?

In the past, employment of the masses by the Capitalism economic model of wage servitude has been creative in providing new jobs in administrative white collar management and the service industry, (think call-sweat centres where numbers of calls and toilet breaks are closely monitored for those serfs lucky enough to be “monitor” as opposed to being monitored). Yet these jobs are precisely the sectors now at threat by automated call centres, and where there are no employees there is no need for a management hierarchy to manage them?

It should be clear enough that we ALL need to think about the future, about the positives of technology to provide for the needs of all of us, the entire world, and especially to contemplate a future without work, employment and jobs, whether you actually want to keep this system or not. For this contemplation we need to re-evaluate the present economic model based on the proliferation of debt for the sake of profit and growth and burdened by the shoulders of those without work and subjugated by a systematic poverty trap – and especially as this may well be YOU and me in the very near future?

Links

Could a big data-crunching machine be your boss one day?

The Future of Employment – Oxford Martin School

Will Automation Lead to Economic Collapse?

IBM big data and information management

IBM Watson Solutions

Robo-boss: there’s no escape from your manager

Second machine age: Will robots put us all out of work?

Free will, and Libet’s veto function

The background argument for atomic Hard determinism

Humans are made from Star stuff. And despite of our superior intellects/intelligence and spiritual philosophies we are fundamentally biological machines which comprise living cellular, genetic and biological material, which in its turn is comprised of a more fundamental physical matter of elements created from exploding novae in the Universe. Elements such as Carbon, Oxygen, Calcium, Potassium, Sodium, Lithium, Copper, Iron, (to name but a few), which form the planets, rocks, asteroids as well as the biological material for living things are all produced entirely from exploding stars and these elements gradually, under the forces of gravity, accumulate, coalesce and combine to create further compounds. Each element and compound in turn is itself comprised of atoms, constituting electrons, protons, neutrons all of these co-operatively exchanging energies and interacting using packets of energy termed as quanta and derived as the commutation of energy of electrons by way of the absorption of photons, (bosons), within the atoms.

This is the scientific view and physical explanation for what you are and of what you comprise, and this can be proven scientifically. The form and materials of your biological body can be reduced to exactly this fundamental atomic matter through the exchange of energy, namely using heat or fire. This is not news, and almost all Humans now acknowledge this through a shared education and understanding that even biological life itself is comprised fundamentally of these atoms and energies.

At this fundamental physical level, atoms and matter and their exchange of energies exhibit deterministic interaction, actions determined entirely by impartial physical processes by way of causation, (as supported by our linear experience and comprehension of a forward direction in time and motion through space). The case and argument here for determinism and determined processes acting at this elemental level is not just strong, it must appear to be fundamentally true and fact? Wherefore the behaviours, (behaviourism), of atoms is determined by cause and effect, and taking into consideration the immense complexities of diverse material forms, we may thus extrapolate that this deterministic behaviour/process is not limited and is to coin a phrase, turtles all the way up? Determinism thus lies at the heart and explanation for all interaction of matter and exchange of energy in all things?

So if determinism describes objective physical reality and truth, where does this leave room for the manifestation and realisation of Free will in the minds of Humans and other animals? Where does this leave us with regards to the choices that we make and our actions, and through which our own experiences convince us these are both reality and have validity?

This objective and scientific understanding of the interactions of material forms and determinism does not however dispel the realisation or illusion of free will for us Humans. If free will is no more than illusion, then Humans could not then possibly select voluntarily between any options presented to their minds, or make any voluntary choices to act upon the predicament they may find themselves in? And furthermore, could Humans in fact even strive to understand the Universe or collate data and knowledge without the use of free will and the ability to choose and make choices towards experiments and their results? This total rejection of free will appears counterintuitive to our physical experiences and moreover is wholly unacceptable?

A dilemma yes? Well, not exactly. The problem is easily reconciled if we take into consideration the complexity of nature derived from the very small, (atomic and even sub-atomic, quantum level), through the formation of elemental compounds and cellular biological interaction up to the macroscopic realisation of choices presented to the Human mind. Layers upon layers of complexity which, although supported by determinism and determined processes at the heart and kernel, never the less have given rise to the evolution of a biological brain and an emergent mind which is able to reflect upon it-Self and present it-Self with options. Yet even here, we must also acknowledge that this reflective and reflexive nature of the mind’s processes is still fundamentally determined and most likely has its root and reason, motive and necessity predominantly with evolutionary biological motivations and survival instincts? Free will therefore has validity and is real but it’s function and form are limited – and despite what we believe, we have merely limited control of our thoughts and actions.

Choices are real

Free will : the ability to choose “yes” or “no” limited to current conditions and circumstance.

It is objectively true that the choices we make are limited to our current circumstance. We cannot possibly reach for any object beyond our grasp, yet we can rationalise that we may perhaps move closer to an object to grasp it, this movement again and in turn determined by our current circumstance. Our choices are limited, but our choices are real none-the-less.

Our choices not only make our Human achievements, (and failures), a reality and make them possible, our choices actually define our personal histories and who we are and who we have ultimately matured to become? And although our views, opinions and ethical values may change and most likely do over the period of our lives, and are also affected by our mental states and stability, we can still yet claim that our present ethical values help to support and to substantiate who we are, or who we think we are right here, and right now?

These personal ethical values are both affected and are continually effecting societies and communities at the greater macroscopic level. What was once deemed as unethical and immorally decadent in the past, is now accepted and tolerated by contemporary societies, and the reverse is also true. At this greater macroscopic level, determinism and chaos afforded by the complexity of nature is still agent in affecting the direction of contemporary morality and ethics within modern society, yet it is important to understand that individual choices are real and do make a difference – hence, the truth in wise words such as “Be the change you want to see in the world“, (Mohandas Gandhi).

In reflection, We are all an inclusive part and component of the sea of (Human) consciousness which ebbs and flows in this way and that, our ethical choices determined and affected and influenced by this ebb and flow and by each other. Yet for each of us, minds are as fluid and have opportunity and ability to influence the direction of flow and of those we interact and contact with, such like a flock of swirling starlings is affected and influenced collectively by the movement of individuals?

Yet it is perhaps not so important what we may choose to do, as compared to what we choose not to do!

Ultimately, we may rationalise that each choice presented to our formal consciousness, (awareness), is really a binary choice of selecting either yes or no? The notion or idea presented by the mind may be imaginative or creative which steps beyond merely the discussion of free will, yet the choice to act offered to the mind at any instance may either be sanctioned or denied, vetoed?

Thus, with a little foresight or rather mindfulness, we may choose not to do the thing or action we feel and know to be bad or wrong, and veto! And sanction the choices we know instinctively and feel to be good and beneficial? Does this sound like Rocket science?

Now the science..

Libet Experiments

“The neurologist Benjamin Libet performed a sequence of remarkable experiments in the early 1980’s that were enthusiastically, if mistakenly, adopted by determinists and compatibilists to show that human free will does not exist.

His measurements of the time before a subject is aware of self-initiated actions have had a enormous, mostly negative, impact on the case for human free will, despite Libet’s view that his work does nothing to deny human freedom.

Since free will is best understood as a complex idea combining two antagonistic concepts – freedom and determination, “free” and “will,” in a temporal sequence, Libet’s work on the timing of events can also be interpreted as supporting our “two-stage model” of free will.

Indeed, Libet himself argued that there was still room for a veto over a decision that may have been made unconsciously over 300 milliseconds before the agent is consciously aware of the decision to flex a finger, but before the action of muscles flexing. In his 2004 book, Mind Time: The Temporal Factor in Consciousness, he presented a diagram of his work.”

“Libet says the diagram shows room for a “conscious veto.”

The finding that the volitional process is initiated unconsciously leads to the question: Is there then any role for conscious will in the performance of a voluntary act (Libet, 1985)? The conscious will does appear 150 msec before the motor act, even though it follows the onset of the cerebral action (1W) by at least 400 msec. That allows it, potentially, to affect or control the final outcome of the volitional process. An interval msec before a muscle is activated is the time for the primary motor cortex to activate the spinal motor nerve cells, and through them, the muscles. During this final 5o msec, the act goes to completion with no possibility of its being stopped by the rest of the cerebral cortex.)

The conscious will could decide to allow the volitional process to go to completion, resulting in the motor act itself. Or, the conscious will could block or “veto” the process, so that no motor act occurs”　

http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/libet_experiments.html

In short, Libet deduced that an impulsive volition instigated by the subconscious mind and presented to the formal conscious mind may be vetoed in time enough to prevent the action, be this speech or other muscle movement. If we reflect on this for ourselves, we know this to be true? How often do we hesitate when we appear to have an instant second thought or gut feeling an instinctual impulse to not do something?

In fact our own internal moral compass has a great deal of influence in promoting this veto function, and more than merely instinctual, it may be honed and practised with frequency with only a little mindfulness contemplation. If we are watchful and vigilant, then we can train ourselves, (our mind), to avoid impulsiveness and also help nurture others to also be mindful?

Obviously some subconscious volition, reactions and motivations may be understood as reflex, and like nervous muscle reaction, may be beyond the control of our formal consciousness, or at least very difficult to control, (presently, this may all be down to speed of processing in the brain which may possibly be enhanced and improved upon using future technologies?) Yet the impulsiveness that results from emotions such as fear and anger may be tamed quite easily with some practice. We need not react immediately with violence and aggression when faced with confusing or difficult circumstances? And with reflection we already know this to be true deep down don’t we?

Final note regarding evolutionary determinism..

Complexity is the key word, giving rise to innumerable probabilities, possibilities and chance. Yet I still ask myself why?

OK, you didn’t get it.. let me run that by you again… “yet I still ask myself why?”

This momentary use of mindful reflection, (although driven by determinism ultimately, and determinedly practiced), gives rise to the “macro realisation” of free will and opportunity for selection of options, (yes/no), purely limited in light of current circumstance? But we don’t always use it impulsively, (ie: reflex actions which are non-reflexive by our formal consciousness)?

Is this propensity towards “veto” impulse and compulsion an evolved and “evolutionary” tool for survival? An attribute and property of complex and higher brain functions, and that serves us humans well to ask “why” at every notion, reflect, and learn by mistake? And in turn, leads us to contemplate ontological meaning, existence, causality, past, present and yet onwards and upwards towards the future – potential and possibilities? Do you want a Star Trek future technocracy yes/no?

　

More..

Reaching Heaven: How and Why to Perpetuate the Myth of Free Will

The Matrix, Wiliam James, and the Will to Believe

Benjamin Libet – wikipedia

Neuroscience and Free Will – Libet’s Experiment

Consciousness

Determinism – wikipedia

Free will – wikipedia

“Free will” – Rush

Thank you for reading..

Guns, Glamour and the burden of society

The recent tragic events leading to the slaughter of 20 children and 6 adult teachers at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, have shocked the world and shaken the US. Americans are now faced with an ethical dilemma concerning personal freedom, their constitutional right to bear arms, and a need to re-evaluate the need for legislation and actions to prevent further heinous crimes perpetrated upon innocents.

I have previously written some comments on my first instinctual reaction to the events which I will not repeat further here, if you are interested you may find them at the link below..

Today’s Tragic Events in Connecticut, U.S.

The Burden of Society

However, here I would like to explore the moral direction in which modern society is possibly heading and of what solutions we may all reflect upon to steer moral ethics and Universal values in the more progressive direction?

It intrigues me to strive to understand what makes Humans flip, lose their rationality of mind, and finally submit to Self destruction, and normally at this point there is also much anger and confusion in the mind that also then sets task to destroy others also, and specifically innocents and victims readily available nearby? There are many cases also in the UK, tragic cases, of fathers killing their whole families, mothers killing their children, sometimes over no more than financial and monetary problems and dilemmas afforded by bad luck or imposed by failings in society and social care.

What was going through the mind of this young man, that made him decide he would purposefully go to a school and kill innocent young children? I would hazard some guess that his mental state and situation may have been festering for some time, and there must surely also be reason for him to firstly shoot his mother? Existential angst, shame, fear, anxiety, Self hatred, anger, lack of love, despair? Any or all of these psychological factors may have played a part in these tragic circumstances?

Society and Humans are quick to dismiss these acts as evil, the individual as evil, and moreover, some theists would propose even that evil is an entity and some force unto itself – I would say poppycock. Different circumstances, lead to different mental states. For Humans, happiness leads to joy, elation and empowerment, sharing and goodness, whilst physical and mental suffering leads to pain, stress, pressure, confusion, fear, anger and etc (dukkha).

Is society at fault and to blame, for encouraging gun culture and entertainment violence, or for its unmotivated indifference to these kinds of tragic events? Are mental stresses and illness on the increase in contemporary society? Is secularism and decline in theism and religious memes leading to a more decadent, Self-ish and immoral society? It most likely is a chemistry of all of the above?

Yet what concerns the most is what mechanism makes a Human finally lose control and submit, (sanction), to this total loss of rational control of mind? Without factual knowledge, all we have to go on are our perceptions, apperception, our empathy and the use of mirror neurons in our own minds, especially without the evidence and contemplation’s of the protagonist, and knowledge as to what was going through his mind at the time?

I would prefer to rationalise that there must still be opportunity to stop to think about what we are doing at any moment, even when emotionally disturbed? Or else there must be some total disjunction and dysfunction of rationality in process, with the individual no longer susceptible to any moral compass, such like those images of an emotionless great white shark as it coldly and indifferently attacks its victims? Primal and some prime-evil motivation and violence of the amygdala perhaps, powerful enough to overcome the rational processes of mind?

Note, mine is not to be morbid, but to perceive to uncover where the Human mind, psyche and rationality is at failure here, and of what processes switch off during extreme emotional duress. Perhaps I have it reversed? Perhaps it is the final overwhelming torrid of emotion that leads to all emotions being disconnected, the individual now oblivious to all emotions, (the only thing that perhaps would make one stop and hesitate), a temporary cessation of all emotion? Is this what soldiers suffer in battle at breaking points of extreme duress? The glassy eyed killer instinct that is deeply hidden and inherent in all Humans, (and many other predatory animals?)

 

Guns..

The US argument over guns is facing a tipping point concerning the proliferation of personal weapons, especially weapons including the semiautomatic Bushmaster .223 rifle, now at the focus of attention and at the root of blame culture. Many US retailers have now removed this weapon from their stocks and banned its sale. Yet this is hardly a viable solution, these weapons are still in circulation and ownership, albeit any positive action here is beneficial.

The US National Rifle Association (NRA) is strongly in opposition against president Obama’s intention to instigate legislation to oppose sales and ownership of these kinds of weapons. And it would be very difficult, impossible in fact, to impose the same legislation against pistols and hand guns. Guns are a part of the American heritage and culture, from the early days of the pioneers, to the establishment of the colonies and with the founding fathers that incorporated the freedom of “right to bear arms” within the US constitution, (this at a time where state independence was still a reality and militia was still a necessity?)

Is it time to review and re-evaluate this antiquated amendment to the US constitution, or moreover, perhaps append with an updated 21^st century constitutional amendment regarding use of personal weapons? Even so this does not provide any viable forward-thinking solutions regarding the violence and indifference manifest in rest of the world, (although I do personally feel that there is much to be argued over, concerning the promotion of American ideology in movies, entertainment, and games. Nowadays, even more than ever it seems there are too many guns and weapons used in violence in blockbuster movies, and this has become an addiction and norm for all of us?)

Gun sales inspire more gun sales. A gun will last a lifetime, (no pun intended), it is not an electronic device with a limited life before breakdown, its mechanical parts can be cleaned, cared for and replaced. The only way to support gun manufacture is to sell more guns, with many Americans now owning multiple weapons. What use is a gun without ammunition? And of what use is ammunition sitting on store shelves? Market supply and demand is at the root of gun and ammunition manufacture and sales. Such is the same with all weapons, even Tomahawk cruise missiles and military attack drones.

Is it any wonder that gun sales and gun culture is promoted where there is profit to be had?

 

Glamour..

Glamour is also at the root of gun sales and promotion. And lest we get too smug, we as a world society are collectively to blame for our acceptance and support of guns and personal weapons, and for our love of Hollywood blockbuster shoot ’em up movies. Even where guns are a total distraction from any plot and storyline, guns are still incorporated somehow, someplace and in some manner, (not merely knives and swords). The trilogy of movies The Matrix are a prime example, of excessive promotion of glamour associated with guns and weapons. The movie Inception also could not resist the intrusion of guns and weapons. In fact, I cannot think of any futurism movie that does not incorporate weapons and the use of guns, thereby substantiating and promoting the memes of the future of Humanity with its association with violence and guns and personal weapons? What have weapons to do with the future ideal of Humanity, it’s philosophy, peace, politics, unity, and freedoms afforded to the individual? The argument is always that you need a gun to convince another of your right to practice personal freedom – based on past violent Human history and the prevalent world political status quo?

If we are striving to find real solutions to social problems, mental stresses and associated use of guns, then this must be the first place to start, to seek to disassociate this glamour afforded to guns and weapons and to warfare? Whether in movies, computer games, or concerning real violence, we should make effort to guide the education and understanding of Humans, our history and it’s association with weapons and violence as necessary only as last resort, but not to be glorified for recreation and status seeking?

The problems that society faces today concerning gun crimes may be no more widespread than it has been in past decades, the only difference today are the targets have now become innocent children. Immediately following World war II there was demand to watch movies about the war, why? Had the world not seen enough real war and death? Was there a need to be informed and educated as to what went on during the battles? Were we glorifying the heroes, the conquest of freedom over oppression, the vanquish of worldly evil? Are Humans simply curious about death and destruction? Let’s not forget that these world war movies were produced well into the sixties, and then the Vietnam war captivated interest resurgent during the late seventies and eighties with academy awards for Apocalypse now, Platoon, Full metal jacket and etc.

The US and Soviet war machine never really stopped manufacturing after world war II had ceased, and nor too the proliferation and promotion of weapons. Fear and paranoia or purposeful extension of military power and might? Attack drones and AI weapons are now evolving beyond smart missile capabilities, yet Human memes are just as dangerous today and as already hinted, we should not point fingers. We Humans are all to blame for present predicaments and need to take responsibility for the world that we live in, and for the future we want to make a reality?

More concerning control of minds and fingers in the next article

Thank you for reading

　

More..

President Obama at Prayer Vigil for Connecticut Shooting Victims

White House says Obama will move swiftly on gun control after Newtown

Obama: ‘We can’t tolerate this anymore, these tragedies must end’

Small Machines, Big Power, Dangerous Minds

American Psychological Association – Military

Quantum consciousness – part 1

 

Is Consciousness purely phenomenological and merely an apparition of the emergent mind and intellect, a natural materialisation and consequence, arising from the complexity of brains in both humans and other intelligent animals?

 

Quantum consciousness – part 1

 Many may now recognise this contemporary terminology being used in scientific circles and new age spiritual movements called  “Quantum Consciousness“? A subtle terminology, combining and linking reference to both “Quantum mechanics” and “Consciousness”, and exploring the possibilities that both of these phenomena may be inextricable linked at a fundamental level? And yet still, the nature of both of these phenomena are mostly little understood? Indeed, it has taken many centuries of ontological investigations and philosophical contemplation’s, debate, and scientific studies, to reveal yet little as to the nature and origins of Consciousness.

Quantum mechanics and it’s probabilistic scientific philosophy is nowadays utilised to great practical benefit in the field of physical science, and moreover, it is now even suggested and implied that this is an agent/catalyst in the very nature of biological interactions between neurons in the brain and in utilising a phenomenon termed  “quantum tunnelling“.  The usefulness, understanding, and practical applications of this phenomenon will also certainly provide for the next generation of quantum super computers currently being constructed and devised by human minds?

 

Consciousness proposed as “natural phenomenon”

The contemplation that Consciousness is a “natural phenomenon”, (and of Universal nature), is not purely a new or contemporary philosophical viewpoint at all. In fact, this view that Consciousness is ubiquitous and omnipresent is a centuries old philosophical tenet and basic foundation within the Hinduism belief. Buddhism also recognises that Consciousness is a fundamental property and attribute within the philosophical contemplation of  Anatta, (no Self), and within the ontological explanation of “the five aggregates” of mind as comprising “body, sensations, apperception, volition and consciousness”.

So there may indeed be very good reason to contemplate an association between quantum mechanics and the phenomenon of Consciousness? At very least, any possible connection between these phenomena should be investigated further and by using the scientific method.

I must admit that this view comprises my own belief, and moreover, this subject is key to the direction in my own ontological search for existential meaning and in writing these blogs. My personal belief is that “Consciousness is a natural phenomenon” which is both ubiquitous and omnipresent throughout nature and the entire Cosmos/Universe, and which serves as a fundamental attribute for all energy-matter transformations and manifestations, from the sub-atomic and particle/wave/ and/or string, to expression and realisation as the self-reflexive nature of phenomenological consciousness which we experience at the macro level, through the emergent complexity of brain and mind, (Self-reflexivity expressed and implied here simply as consciousness of Consciousness or moreover, “awareness of Awareness“)?

 

Are we now entering a new paradigm in scientific studies concerning the understanding of Consciousness described as a fundamental attribute and natural phenomenon?

Well we may just be, and if we resolve to “obsolete the dilemma” and the “hard problem” by contemplating the possibility that Consciousness may not in fact be an emergent attribute or phenomena due solely to the complexity of the mind, (phenomenological), but is rather a “natural phenomenon” that pervades all of nature, then this would also help us solve a great many technological difficulties and engineering problems concerning the future of robotics and Artificial Intelligence – and also the higher aspirations towards the engineering of Artificial General intelligence, (A.G.I)

How would this help? – more on that to come in future blogs.

—

There are many articles on Quantum consciousness on the internet, yet this article attracted my attention.. and it concludes nicely and in alignment with my own philosophical view and position on the nature of Consciousness.

So I will leave you to mull over this for a while – back with more on this subject later!

“A Materialistic Theory of Consciousness”

“But “what” is consciousness? What substance is it made of? ..

Many attempts have been made at explaining consciousness by reducing it to something else. To no avail. There is no way that our sensations can be explained in terms of particles. So, how does consciousness arise in matter? Maybe it doesn’t arise, it is always there.”

“From a logical standpoint, the only way out of this dead-end is to accept that consciousness must be a physical property.”

“The main problem is the lack of an empirical test for consciousness. We cannot know whether a being is conscious or not. We cannot “measure” its consciousness. We cannot rule out that every object in the universe, including each elementary particle, has consciousness: we just cannot detect it. Even when I accept that other human beings are conscious a) I base my assumption on similarity of behavior, not on an actual “observation” of their consciousness; and b) I somehow sense that some people (poets and philosophers, for example) may be more conscious than other people (lawyers and doctors, for example).

The trouble is that our mind is capable only of observing conscious phenomena at its own level and within itself. Our mind is capable of observing only one conscious phenomenon: itself.”

Quantum consciousness
http://www.scaruffi.com/science/qc.html

Studies on Consciousness, Cognition and Life
http://www.scaruffi.com/cogn.html

 

Thank you for reading!

What is Consciousness?

What is? .. Consciousness

What better way to start the new year than with a little Self reflection, and where better to begin, than with the exploration of the fundamental question, ontological meaning, and exploration of this phenomenon termed Consciousness?

Always a tough subject and topic, yet we have to begin to progress from some place?

The unresolved explanation for this phenomenon termed “Consciousness” will most likely endure for many more decades yet, maybe even centuries, and this is despite the impressive new breakthroughs within neuroscience using state of the art scientific tools and techniques such as fMRI. Yet even today, there is still no concrete evidence or explanation as to what Consciousness really is? Although there are many progressive scientific theories.

Is Consciousness an emergent phenomenon of mind and the biological complexity of the brain, (phenomenological)? Is it a natural phenomenon of the Universe, such as akin to the also yet unexplained nature of gravity? Are both these phenomenon dissimilar yet non-exclusive, do they constitute some common attribute and purpose? Does Consciousness pervade and imbue the entire Cosmos, and perhaps yet still, exist beyond this dimensional Universe and permeate a multi-verse? Is it boundless and inter-dimensional like some kind of superstring or some manner of external “natural phenomenon” that is catalyst and which gives rise to the manifestations of energy-matter, or is it even a contributing agent for these transformations at all?

I must admit freely now and state my position clearly from the first, that my own personal views pertaining to the nature of Consciousness, are that it most likely is a “natural phenomenon” that may or may not transcend our Universe and Cosmos, yet most definitely exists beyond the restrictions of time and space, (space-time), as is generally understood now with the science of quantum mechanics.

I also align myself with a spiritual tendency towards Consciousness phenomenon as “all inclusive”, interconnected, omnipresent and ubiquitous, yet totally impartial. A phenomenon that imbues the very nature of all things and entities, be they particles, strings, waves or even other?

For this reason I will always highlight the phenomenon of Consciousness as a noun, using the capital letter, (apart from where I imply consciousness described as phenomenological or emergent), not merely for the sake of respect and to imply it’s nature as impartial and ubiquitous, but also to emphasise my position on Consciousness as “natural phenomenon”.

Despite my bias, I still aim to keep an open mind as to the nature and methodologies used to investigate this phenomenon, and to also add regularly on any major breakthroughs or interesting thesis that I find which may progress towards a clearer understanding of both the nature and attributes of this phenomenon.

Disclaimer

Because the subject matter is so all encompassing and the philosophical discussion and debate so widespread across the history of human knowledge, I make no effort to catalogue any lineage or history in the investigation of this subject. Although I will refer to great thinkers and philosophies and providing links where I deem important, and in no particular historical order. Which should hopefully add to the interest in the subject?

Please note also, that this is a simple blog which comprises merely a personal reference, and that views and articles highlighted cannot possibly cover the entire subject matter, and thus can only be selective in it’s nature to provide some brief and concise interest in the subject.

Thank you for reading

CygnusX1

—

Further articles and information

Quantum consciousness – part 1

Quantum consciousness – part 2

—

External links

http://http://www.quantumconsciousness.org : penrose-hameroff

—