http://cosmosandhistory.org/in
Sunday, October 16, 2016
Saturday, May 28, 2016
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Sunday, November 29, 2015
proceedings fom 2/ first cfp FOM 3
http://www.cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/issue/current
Yes, new age as well as hard science.......
==============================
(c) 2015 Seán ó Nualláin
The Foundations of Mind II Conference:
Science as if Being Mattered
==============================
FOM 3
Sproul Room, International House at UC Berkeley
May 18-20, 2016
==============================
This conference explores the issue of whether a “Being first!”
approach will not yield a better, more veridical science with the
possibility of a dramatic reparse of nature.
==============================
Deadlines:
Feb 14, 2016 3,000 word summary of papers
Feb 29, 2016 500 word abstract for posters
==============================
Deadlines:
Feb 14, 2016 3,000 word summary of papers
Feb 29, 2016 500 word abstract for posters
Mar 1 notification of acceptance
==============================
FOUNDATIONS OF MIND III
Reparsing Nature: Science as if Being Mattered
This
conference explores the issue of whether a “Being first!” approach will
not yield a better, more veridical science. It asks the attendees to
consider whether there are not different types of causal explanation at
each level of nature including occasionally none at the quantum level,
teleology in biology, and that nexus we invoke to explain each other
termed “folk psychology” at the intentional/intersubjective level. While
we began our project with the insight that reduction of mind to current
theories of psychology has always been what Frege dubbed
“psychologism,” we now extend the argument.
In
particular, we argue that $ billions are being lost in inefficient,
often unethical “science” research whose lack of attention to ontology
makes it doomed to failure. The premature application of this to human
affairs, be it drugs that do not take account of the intricate interplay
of genes and metabolism, meditation “techniques” that do not take
account of 21st century Being-in-the-word, or simplistic
accounts of how politics are processed in the brain, are engineered for
failure. Conversely, appropriate use of robust dynamical systems
techniques have already proven insightful and low-cost in neuroscience
and elsewhere; constraining the search space by using syntax is already
being used in genomics; homoiconic programming languages model DNA well;
and so on
While its
mythic poverty IS necessarily an ultimate constraint on science,as
distinct from the equally valid exploration of reality in the arts,
much can be done to improve science education and research. As things
stand, physicists search for a theory of everything that
makes
other sciences redundant, Cognitivists implore us to couch our theories
in the cognitive schemata they see as fundamental; neuroscientists up
the ante on greedy reductionism by asserting the primacy of their
findings - be they genetic, algorithmic or chaotic - over all other
Sciences.
Several
alternatives are also gaining traction. One, that of non-dualism,
refuses to budge from the Inalienable fact of the primacy of conscious
experience. Another, that of class warfare, surely due a comeback as the
2016 Democratic race shows, argues for the bourgeois nature of such
speculation. Finally, an eschatological attempt to roll science,
society, and culture into One Magisterium/Caliphate now brutally
occupies vast swathes of the Middle East.
This
Conference is a search for alternatives. The premise underpinning this
conference, a premise with which participants should feel free to
disagree, is that once one has moved beyond solipsism/non-dualism,there
now exists the possibility of a dramatic reparse of nature. Papers are
invited which address these and other themes;
1.
Theories of everything (TOEs); in what sense would a set of equations
comprehensible only to an extreme minority comprise a TOE to be taught
as Hawking recommends to schoolchildren?
2.
Information; is the quantum information described by Bousso the same
thing/process as Susskind’s “entropy”, information in Shannon, the deus
ex machina that generates the universe of Seth Lloyd and the correlates
in the biological work of Deacon and Tononi?
3.
Computation; in the 1990’s, Brian Smith argued that it was impossible
to isolate a computational system to allow it perform algorithms and
simultaneously to align it with the real world on which it was
operating. In order to achieve “Computation in the wild”, he argued, it
was necessary to identify computational systems as pure intentionality
in the Brentano sense, precisely the position that the Chinese room
thought-experiment rejects. Can we rescue the concept in a way that
does justice to all its manifestations from the quantum and classical
Fourier transforms to using a spreadsheet?
4.
The psychological/intentional realm; Advaita Vedanta was brought into
the West partly, if not largely, by George Harrison’s invocation of a
transcendent reality “within you, without you.” Contrariwise,
Gurdjieff’s fragment of a system, as expounded by Ouspensky, is full of
clunky mechanical metaphors for the human psyche, the amoeba and indeed
the Absolute. Can we do better than this in the face of the spectacular
and burgeoning success of 21st century AI and robotics, and the dismal
failure of psychology?
5
Science’s dark period: ”Dark energy” and “dark matter” are too
well-known to be rehearsed here, and are suggestive of a stage of
crisis in science, but are mirrored in other areas. Examples are the
fact that the “dark energy”/default network of the brain is currently
suggested as absorbing metabolic process even when no cognition is
taking place; linear models of the neuron are clearly too simple; the
“dark nucleotides” result in non-coding rmas that actually code by any
computing definition; and so on.
6.
Quantum mind; Internal FOM private discussion has benefitted from
the input of the great Henry Stapp. Publicly, Henry has recently stated
that the Orch OR model would generate creatures that would become
conscious with no memory and thus no cognition. Yet he considers the
Gödel incompleteness argument sound, with the proviso that its is the
unfolding of the cosmos that is implicated in humans’ ability to “see”
the truth of the Gödel sentence. This is of course compatible with the
pre-Hameroff Penrose, and may be the start of a fusion of
computationalist cognitive science and physics in a suitably extended
notion of observer status. That in turn through the frames of reference
argument in SR would give us a route into a treatment of selfhood
compatible with science. Can we follow the path blazed by this physicist
and mathematician to a formal theory?
7. Consciousness; there is a remarkable consensus that this has not yet been solved. Yet, in the rush to “solve’ the “hard problem’ with gazebos like Terahertx oscillations and a word salad of half-understood biology, many useful concepts have been lost and we welcome papers on them. Examples are; the Locke/Leibniz debate on the relation between subjective state and neural event; Levine’s explanatory gap; Block’s a- and p -; Marxist class consciousness and its relation to emanationist systems; neural synchrony; Pribram’s Gabor transform; Global workspace theories; Crick’s comment that he came into the area 20 years too early for the neuroscience and his resulting idée fixee about a neural correlate in a specific location.
8.
Neuroscience; as predicted in FOM, the Markram/EC project has
become a debacle. What are the technical and organizational desiderata
to prevent a recurrence in the USA?
9. Activism; In what increasingly looks like a fragile pause in hostilities, the neoconservative “shock doctrine” has given way to a neoliberalism that exploits distracters like gender or an African-American president. How long can this last in an era which has seen major terrorist attacks in the EU?
10. The academy; we tend to forget that the academy is meant to produce truths to be acted on. Instead, just as the state rescued an extreme version of financialized capitalism post-2008, neglecting to pursue thousands of criminals, so the academy sees its role as providing drones for an ever more economized life. At the elite level, may post-docs find themselves 30, $100k + in debt, and with career prospects the same as if they had never gone to elementary school, let alone college. How long can this last in an are where all necessary research and educational resources are free on the web, and it is clear to the lab drones that most PI’s are hopelessly out of date?
11.
Science set free; famously, Rupert Sheldrake has invoked “morphic
fields” to explain everything from crystallization to biological
morphology. Can this be extended to the human level to explain
simultaneous discovery like non-Euclidean geometry in Lobachevski,
Bolyai and Gauss as well as the more famous Newton/Leibniz bother? What
entities might carry these “Nuons” and what are the implications for
ESP and indeed all conversation?
Poster presentation; 500 word abstract by Feb 29
Spoken presentation; 3,000 word summary by Feb 14. Notification of acceptance; Mar 1 2016
______________________________
ABOUT FOUNDATIONS OF MIND
We
study Science as if Being mattered. Speakers at the “Mind” conferences
in the past, initially run in Ireland and England in the 1990’s, have
included two of America’s greatest neuroscientists, Walter Freeman and
the late Karl Pribram, who reject simplistic neural models for a
dynamical systems approach to the brain. Incidentally, we produced the
only software implementation of Pribram’s work. Quantum mechanics was
graced by Henry Stapp, an ex-colleague both of Heisenberg and Pauli, who
has proposed not only an intellectually defensible dualism, but a view
in which individual mental acts can be viewed as instances of the
self-expression of universal mind.
At
this point, we have verged on the spiritual; and fortunately we have
not only had the honor of hosting Fr. Robert Spitzer of EWTN, but the
philosopher and author Jacob Needleman. Our scientific bar has been
raised by the presence of several associates of the late, great Pat
Suppes of Stanford. In 2014-15 we verged into biology, and were assisted
by Terry Deacon, Fritjof Capra and Stuart Kauffman in this endeavour.
Our next conference will be our 7th and we will continue our
emphases on human freedom, the notion that mind must be viewed in the
context of a transcendent reality, and the necessity of attending to
ontological divisions in nature even to do computation. In short, we
promote a salutary reparse of nature, one that does not make any
assumptions outside best practice in science.
______________________________
Friday, November 20, 2015
The bionoetics manifesto
Aside from massive student
debt and risible employment prospects for Ph D’s, the early 21st
Century University has other profound problems. The disciplinary structure is a
mess of different geological strata, excluding the 21st century and its
urgent need for focused departments dealing with hitherto “interdisciplinary”
subjects like Cognitive Science.
In the age of the ubiquitous
smartphone, students are asked to perform an acting job in pretending that
their professors are more competent than those available through a single click
on a browser. In the age of readily available neatly archived knowledge , a
mafioso level scam is implemented with “anonymous” review , cartels of
professors introducing their students to the fleshpots of the conference
circuit , and interlocking boards of capi – sorry, journal editors. Of course,
this feeds into the “tenure “ scam, where a historical deal between the state
and scholar to secure academic freedom for the latter is now a dead letter.
The solutions are blindingly
simple. All basic courses are now available for minimum charge of the web.
Academic articles can transparently be posted for equally transparent peer
review and appropriately edited by the original writer. , who might
alternatively agree to disagree or ignore. Cui bono the present system?
The corporation-dominated university and immensely profitable journals to start
with.
Yet there is a darker agenda
at work. The demonic social forces unleashed by the attempted neoconservative
coup of 2000-2008 have been transmuted into a paralysis of political will. It
suits purveyors of neoliberalism that students of political science can be
indoctrinated to look away from the Wiki leaks revelations of how diplomacy
actually works. It suits them also that psychology students are not taught the
elements of objective math models of reality and the real political order.
All this can easily be
changed, and this is but a short foray into the area .Apart from the crisis in
replicability of results and consequent retraction of papers that characterizes
21st century science, there are vast swathes of potential knowledge that remain unexplored as a result of the
idiot savant microfocus of current science. “Dark energy” and “dark matter” are
too well-known to be rehearsed here, are suggestive of a stage of crisis in
science, but are mirrored in other areas. Examples are the fact that the “dark
energy”/default network of the brain is currently suggested as absorbing
metabolic process even when no cognition is taking place; linear models of the
neuron are clearly too simple; the “dark nucleotides” result in non-coding rmas
that actually code by any computing definition; and so on.
The recent accidental
(sorry, “serendipitous”) discovery of CRISPR mechanisms now means that
gene-editing is at the stage that Monsanto assured us a generation ago they had
achieved. This opens a Pandora’s box of speculation about corporate influence
on science, already accepted in medicine to the extreme that corporations have
gotten so concerned about academics whoring themselves that they have started
to do their own replication studies.
. Contemptible as such influence is, the problem is deeper
still. It is clear, after the bail-outs post-2008, that the number one value in our society is the right
of quants to fiddle with numbers and, by financializing the economy, introduce
what has become a neo-feudal system. The state pays for this economized status
quo - using taxpayers’ money against
them – and then requires that the universities produce graduates to work in
this Procrustean Uber/taskrabbit dystopia in the name of “competitiveness” in a
market that has been carefully jury-rigged.
The result is that talented artists are being removed from the gene line
as it becomes too expensive for them even to afford the white picket fence, let alone
the house. It should be the duty of universities to ensure that humanities and
arts graduates assert the transcendence of the realities to which great art
points, be that transcendence achieved through language (like Mallarme) or conceived
of as contact with an objective reality (like Beethoven). Nothing of the sort
happens; indeed. this writer has sat at
seminars with classical music students forced to endure disquisitions about
Beyonce videos. If it is all about feelings – as distinct, say, from exploring
the stack depth in Beethoven’s recursive motif in the fifth - why bother with reality and value judgement?
Similarly, the social sciences feature instruction in
Atheism 101 (using the Dover
trial as a straw man) and – more subtly – an injunction to the students to
regard political facts only insofar as they are relative to psychology.
Famously, the Kerry 2004 campaign was ill-advised along these lines. Of course,
you may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you, and such
weak epistemological fences are easily breached later in life.
So what can be done? It is clear that we cannot proceed
further without looking at the goals of the larger society, which should
include human beings living healthily in safe communities and free to explore
their relation with a reality conceived of as wonderful. Tertiary education is
a critical part of this, and has become subverted. So we can insist on total
transparency in all research and pedagogy as a first step. We do not have to
resort to new age woo-woo whose only virtue is a radical assertion of the
reality of subjectivity; the current structure of the academy leaves unexplored
many fertile areas of research on things
meaningful to people. We can in fact build a structure of research and teaching
built on a set of ineluctable propositions about humanity’s relation to reality
that cannot, even in principle, ever contradict best practice in science
One is to insist – the central
Bionoetics propositions - that we humans
are a process in which the universe has come to know itself, and that math
exemplifies this. Before the acceleration of mathematical knowledge in the
renaissance, we built sophisticated societies based on co-operation through
language; since then there has been a vast acceleration Mathematics is neither
more nor less than the most elliptical and precise expression of the cosmos
knowing itself through us. This is irrefutable (as distinct from true, a
slippier concept); the index of access to an objective reality through all the
travails of constructivism, psychologism etc is the litmus test of math models
working in areas like QM. Math contains access to entities historically
conceived of as Platonic (cosine, pi, e,….etc) as well as reflections of
our cognitive and social systems. Indeed, math may be illogical as anyone who
struggled with infinities knows; it may work in contexts it shouldn’t with “bad”
methods like non-converging infinities and QFT; underlying its success is
surely something deeper than “cognitive” operations.
In the social sciences,
students should indeed be taught the techniques of graph traversal that
constitute modern literacy. Yet it should be done in a context in which it is
made clear to them that in the political sphere they are objects more than
subjects, not to believe everything they think as our century has witnessed development
of expertise in implanting narratives. In the arts it should be insisted that artists
are often consumed by a vision of a reality transcendent to them, and the
formal techniques they use (like Beethoven’s stack, and his innovation of the diminished chord) should be explicated in properly respectful
fashion.
Medicine should indeed focus
on health rather than illness and preventive rather than cure or (the other
extreme) “prospective medicine, with Prozac being introduced to countries newly
told they’re depressed. Biology is in such crisis that it is the poster child
for new explanatory schemas in science. Psychology does not yet exist, 150 +
years after its initial replicabilty crisis. For the moment, we might insist on “psychological’ concepts like simultaneity
copying their correlates in physics…..
Now, of course, we have to make money. Or do we? For it is clear that the current model involves
burdening students with debt so they will later be dutiful consumers. If there is a revenue
stream, it will be in interdisciplinary degrees with max $1k a year fees and
astutely chosen research topics like those mentioned above. That may never make much money, but presenting
it as an alternative is a radical and salutary acy.
However, there is another possibility; introducing the
scheme to students of science and the arts as an entrée into a vast, numinous,
transcendent reality unavailable to them in the other colleges they are
contemplating. For social scientist aspirants, we might point out that the
activism that most of them are drawn to requires intimate knowledge of the
forces in our complex society, and being told it is all relative to their minds
is useless. For performing artists, we can stress that sophisticated performance
is likewise a profoundly revolutionary political
act and one for which they should demand
respect
Sunday, June 14, 2015
Foundations of Mind II: A Dialogue Among World Views - current schedule
If there are images in this attachment, they will not be displayed. Download the original attachment
Foundations
of Mind II: A Dialogue
Among World Views
https://cynthiasuelarson.wordpress.com/2015/08/30/reparsing-nature-at-foundations-of-mind-ii/
is a good review of the event
Conference August 13-15 3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
(watch for announcement of larger venue)
Thursday August 13: Metaphysics
Living
the Quantum Paradigm
Thursday, Aug 13 2015, 9:00-1:00 (Break 10:45 - 11:15)
Chair: Cynthia Sue Larson
Panelists/speakers include Wolganag Baer (Nascent), James
Johnson (LBL),and Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
Thursday, Aug 13 2015, 9:00-1:00 (Break 10:45 - 11:15)
Chair: Cynthia Sue Larson
Panelists/speakers include Wolganag Baer (Nascent), James
Johnson (LBL),and Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
Henrt Stapp, colleague of Heisenberg, and cell-phone addiction
This session invites interdisciplinary dialogue and exercises addressing the underlying philosophy and logic of quantum physics, and approaches to living in accordance with quantum principles. Questions about the nature of reality require inclusion of quantum physics beyond the historical “shut up and calculate” approach, which
has provided multiple interpretations of quantum physics without agreement on the philosophical quantum paradigm foundation. Whereas quantum physics challenges scientists to comprehend whether, how, or where a boundary between classical and quantum physics may exist, philosophy promotes critical thinking and clarity about arguments, terminology, and ideas. Scientific philosophy can lead the way toward development of new theoretical approaches and alternate interpretations, while finding conceptual weak points in theories and
arguments.
Experiential approaches to living in accordance with quantum principles provide unique opportunities for appreciating the feeling of levels of consciousness and the dream-like nature of reality. In Vedanta, the body is a synonym for sensations and the mind for thoughts; both are presented to consciousness, the fundamental eternal reality. Yet exercises are also proposed to maintain this insight, which otherwise does not persist.
10:00 Submitted papers
Judy B. Gardiner
Cynthia Sue Larson
Frank Heile
Leanne Whitney
Julia Bystrova
Jonathan W Schooler
Maria Syldona
Session
on Ontology
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 1:00 - 3:30
Chair: Sean O'Nuallain
Panelists/speakers include Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley) , Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
(keynotes), Len Talmy ( U Buffalo) Kevin Padian (UC Berkeley)
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 1:00 - 3:30
Chair: Sean O'Nuallain
Panelists/speakers include Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley) , Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
(keynotes), Len Talmy ( U Buffalo) Kevin Padian (UC Berkeley)
It
is our belief that much grief, and waste of taxpayers' money, could
be avoided with an appropriate re-parse of nature that acknowledges
there are rifts between the quantum and classical physical
realities,
and further ontological discontinuities at the biological and intentional thresholds. It is further our belief that the relative failure of the HGP, and imminent debacle of both the Obama and “Blue brain” neuro initiatives, are due to precisely this unwillingness to cater to ontology. Moreover, even incessant crawling of the web has
failed to yield anything other than at best mediocre results in machine translation.
Finally, this tendency manifests itself in the social sciences with psychologism, the reduction of exigent social dynamics to cognitive and other psychological theories of how these forces are processed. This has led on the one hand to the non-engaged intellectual; on the other, to bewildering interpretations of postmodern thinkers geared mainly to giving instructors a free pass.
This session invites papers that address technical issues in science and the arts under this rubric. Consider the question of authentic political engagement. In particular, the latter category of papers may explore the fact that reality is related to consciousness and yet transcends it, As we act, we become aware of being objects in
a social space that yet can be magicked away in a classroom.
and further ontological discontinuities at the biological and intentional thresholds. It is further our belief that the relative failure of the HGP, and imminent debacle of both the Obama and “Blue brain” neuro initiatives, are due to precisely this unwillingness to cater to ontology. Moreover, even incessant crawling of the web has
failed to yield anything other than at best mediocre results in machine translation.
Finally, this tendency manifests itself in the social sciences with psychologism, the reduction of exigent social dynamics to cognitive and other psychological theories of how these forces are processed. This has led on the one hand to the non-engaged intellectual; on the other, to bewildering interpretations of postmodern thinkers geared mainly to giving instructors a free pass.
This session invites papers that address technical issues in science and the arts under this rubric. Consider the question of authentic political engagement. In particular, the latter category of papers may explore the fact that reality is related to consciousness and yet transcends it, As we act, we become aware of being objects in
a social space that yet can be magicked away in a classroom.
Submitted
papers
Sean O Nuallain
Jonathan SchoolerIn the absence of theory, return to Villa Serbelloni?
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 3:45 to 5:30
Chair: Marcin Joachimiak (Physical Biosciences, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)
Panel includes , Kevin Padin (Integrative Biology, UC Berkeley), Stuart Kauffman
(Systems Biology,Seattle), Howard Pattee (Binghamton University),
Beverly Rubik (FAIM)
Several decades before the HGP was initiated, a diverse group of scientists convened at Villa Serbelloni to tackle the troubling lack of theory in biology. The solutions they proposed were various, from
an untroubling emphasis on hierarchy to a reinstatement of Aristotelian material and final causality to a network-based approach to the interaction of metabolism and genetic code. It is fair to say
that the HGP to its cost – and that of the public who paid for it – ignores these guidelines. Is it time for a fresh period of reflection?
Sean O Nuallain
Jonathan SchoolerIn the absence of theory, return to Villa Serbelloni?
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 3:45 to 5:30
Chair: Marcin Joachimiak (Physical Biosciences, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)
Panel includes , Kevin Padin (Integrative Biology, UC Berkeley), Stuart Kauffman
(Systems Biology,Seattle), Howard Pattee (Binghamton University),
Beverly Rubik (FAIM)
Several decades before the HGP was initiated, a diverse group of scientists convened at Villa Serbelloni to tackle the troubling lack of theory in biology. The solutions they proposed were various, from
an untroubling emphasis on hierarchy to a reinstatement of Aristotelian material and final causality to a network-based approach to the interaction of metabolism and genetic code. It is fair to say
that the HGP to its cost – and that of the public who paid for it – ignores these guidelines. Is it time for a fresh period of reflection?
Submitted
papers
Madza Vierges (Ph.D candiate, Cal)
Beverly Rubik (Faim)Friday, August 14: Science
Madza Vierges (Ph.D candiate, Cal)
Beverly Rubik (Faim)Friday, August 14: Science
Session
on Probing subjectivity with neuroscience;
non-invasive probes into subjectivity
Friday, Aug 14 2015 9 am - 1 pm
Chair; Justin Riddle (Ph.D. candidate, UC Berkeley)
Panel includes Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley),
Jeffrey Martin, Chris Tyler, Saher Yousef
While a century ago dreams were regarded as revelatory of true psychic dynamics, a later generation took to drugs for that same purpose. A new ethos is stressing invasive methods that essentially involve
consent forms being signed by patients already stressed by imminent surgery.
While the results have been mixed, the fact remains that there already exists an array of tools that can shape experience without the risks of drugs or surgery. This session will investigate these tools, like TMS and EEG, and their results. It will feature discussion of synchronized gamma and whether it indeed is the signature of
consciousness that many claim it is.
9:00 Keynote: Walter Freeman
9:45 Chris Tyler
10:30 Q+A
10:45 break
11:00 Panel/papers
Papers
Juan Acosta-Urquidi
Justin Riddle
1:00 breakThe Real Madrid Model for universities; superstar academics, free transfers
Friday, Aug 14 2015 2 pm - 3 pm
Chair Brian Barsky (UC Berkeley)
Panellists/speakers include Ignacio Chapela (UC Berkeley)
Friday, Aug 14 2015 9 am - 1 pm
Chair; Justin Riddle (Ph.D. candidate, UC Berkeley)
Panel includes Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley),
Jeffrey Martin, Chris Tyler, Saher Yousef
While a century ago dreams were regarded as revelatory of true psychic dynamics, a later generation took to drugs for that same purpose. A new ethos is stressing invasive methods that essentially involve
consent forms being signed by patients already stressed by imminent surgery.
While the results have been mixed, the fact remains that there already exists an array of tools that can shape experience without the risks of drugs or surgery. This session will investigate these tools, like TMS and EEG, and their results. It will feature discussion of synchronized gamma and whether it indeed is the signature of
consciousness that many claim it is.
9:00 Keynote: Walter Freeman
9:45 Chris Tyler
10:30 Q+A
10:45 break
11:00 Panel/papers
Papers
Juan Acosta-Urquidi
Justin Riddle
1:00 breakThe Real Madrid Model for universities; superstar academics, free transfers
Friday, Aug 14 2015 2 pm - 3 pm
Chair Brian Barsky (UC Berkeley)
Panellists/speakers include Ignacio Chapela (UC Berkeley)
A
new model on the university is being developed in Europe and Russia;
superstar academics are to be flown in as adjunct profs, if only for
a few months a year, and tenure is to be excised along the
lines
successfully implemented by Thatcher and Major. An executive is to be created that removes power from the academic community to centralize it into fewer and less accountable hands. While this model reached its nadir in Ireland in the aughts, other countries are now emulating
it. This panel attempts to dissect it and propose alternatives.
This is particularly relevant as the 50the anniversary of the free speech movement at Berkeley comes to a close. In keeping with the themes of this conference, Mario Savio was “interested in the
connection between quantum mechanics and free will” (Cohen, 2009 P 275)
As a high school student on a summer programme at the NSF summer institute “One day I made an observation ….which convinced me – and still does - that this essential connection between macrophysics and microphysics also precludes strict determinism… we have once again coupled a a sub microscopic event with macroscopic human behavior. The physical indeterminism of human behavior constitutes a necessary
condition for human freedom” (Savio from Cohen, 2009, Pp 17-18)
Cohen, R (2009) Freedom’s Orator . NY: OUP
Submitted papers
Sebastian Benthall, (I-school UC Berkeley)
successfully implemented by Thatcher and Major. An executive is to be created that removes power from the academic community to centralize it into fewer and less accountable hands. While this model reached its nadir in Ireland in the aughts, other countries are now emulating
it. This panel attempts to dissect it and propose alternatives.
This is particularly relevant as the 50the anniversary of the free speech movement at Berkeley comes to a close. In keeping with the themes of this conference, Mario Savio was “interested in the
connection between quantum mechanics and free will” (Cohen, 2009 P 275)
As a high school student on a summer programme at the NSF summer institute “One day I made an observation ….which convinced me – and still does - that this essential connection between macrophysics and microphysics also precludes strict determinism… we have once again coupled a a sub microscopic event with macroscopic human behavior. The physical indeterminism of human behavior constitutes a necessary
condition for human freedom” (Savio from Cohen, 2009, Pp 17-18)
Cohen, R (2009) Freedom’s Orator . NY: OUP
Submitted papers
Sebastian Benthall, (I-school UC Berkeley)
Quantum
entanglement, negative probabilities and neural oscillations;
the sublime final achievement of the great American polymath Patrick
Suppes
Friday, Aug 14 2015 3:30 to close
Participants include members of the final Suppes group including
Acacio de Barros and Gary Oas. They will be joined by,
others with empirical results
Like his fellow-American Frank Lloyd Wright, Pat Suppes experienced a breathtaking burst of creativity in the ninth decade of his life. While Pat’s earlier work on economics, psychology and the philosophy of science achieved justified world renown, it is the sustained attack on problems of mind and world that occupied his later energies that we will celebrate in this panel. This work, which is being continued at Stanford, features the highly technical and competent researchers on this panel bringing a wide artillery of techniques to bear on issues of mind, brain, cognition, and epistemology. It is their work which will indicate whether what was being hinted at in Pat’s autumn years until his passing in late 2014 is an entirely new language for describing
humanity’s relationship to reality itself
4:30 Submitted papers
R. P Bajpai
Karla Gadamez (LBL)
the sublime final achievement of the great American polymath Patrick
Suppes
Friday, Aug 14 2015 3:30 to close
Participants include members of the final Suppes group including
Acacio de Barros and Gary Oas. They will be joined by,
others with empirical results
Like his fellow-American Frank Lloyd Wright, Pat Suppes experienced a breathtaking burst of creativity in the ninth decade of his life. While Pat’s earlier work on economics, psychology and the philosophy of science achieved justified world renown, it is the sustained attack on problems of mind and world that occupied his later energies that we will celebrate in this panel. This work, which is being continued at Stanford, features the highly technical and competent researchers on this panel bringing a wide artillery of techniques to bear on issues of mind, brain, cognition, and epistemology. It is their work which will indicate whether what was being hinted at in Pat’s autumn years until his passing in late 2014 is an entirely new language for describing
humanity’s relationship to reality itself
4:30 Submitted papers
R. P Bajpai
Karla Gadamez (LBL)
Saturday,
August 15: Ecological consciousness, environmental technology
9 am to 12-30
9 am to 12-30
9
am
Stuart
Kauffman: Conference Keynote "Humanity
In A Creative Universe”
10-15
Miguel
Altieri
Agroecology Scaling Up for Food Sovereignty
and Resiliency
Agroecology Scaling Up for Food Sovereignty
and Resiliency
11
am
Fritjof
CapraThe Systems View of Life: A Unified Conception of Mind,
Matter, and Life
1:30-2-30 session continues
Confirmed speakers include Glenn Aparicio Parry, Katja Pettinen, Tania Re
3:00 pm
Mindfulness : meditation, presence in
daily life and high performance in sports and the arts
While
the beneficial effects of meditation to health can perhaps most
economically be explained in terms of its measured decrease in brain
metabolism, the issue of how to elicit high performance perhaps
needs to be re-opened in the context of modern neuroscience. Artists,
meditators and athletes will talk about their experience of presence
and flow
, Sperry Andrews, Yoshio Nakamura, Melanie O'Reilly, Sean O Nuallain, Saher Yousef
Sunday, May 3, 2015
FOM 2 3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley Aug 13-15 2015
The Foundations of Mind II Conference: Dialogues between worldviews
First call for papers/panels
You're invited to attend and participate in
this year's Foundations of Mind Conference, happening at
UC Berkeley, August 13-15th, 2015
==============================
The Foundations of Mind II Conference
This conference attempts to create interdisciplinary dialogue about Mind/Nous in a way that transcends a reduction of Mind to psychological process.
This conference attempts to create interdisciplinary dialogue about Mind/Nous in a way that transcends a reduction of Mind to psychological process.
==============================
FOM 2
3105 Tolman Hall
UC Berkeley
Aug 13-15, 2015
==============================
Confirmed plenary speakers/panelists include;
Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology, Seattle)
Terrence W. Deacon (UC Berkeley)
Kevin Padian (UC Berkeley)
Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley)
Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley)
Howard Pattee (Binghamton University')
Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
Menas Kafatos
Wolfgang Baer (Nascent)
Len Talmy ( U Buffalo)
Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
Seán Ó Nualláin (UOI)
Beverly Stokes (Amazing babies moving)
Cynthia Sue Larson (Reality shifters)
More speakers will be added – we are also pleased to host members of
the Biohackers and consciousness hackers communities in the Bay area.
==============================
Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology, Seattle)
Terrence W. Deacon (UC Berkeley)
Kevin Padian (UC Berkeley)
Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley)
Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley)
Howard Pattee (Binghamton University')
Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
Menas Kafatos
Wolfgang Baer (Nascent)
Len Talmy ( U Buffalo)
Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
Seán Ó Nualláin (UOI)
Beverly Stokes (Amazing babies moving)
Cynthia Sue Larson (Reality shifters)
More speakers will be added – we are also pleased to host members of
the Biohackers and consciousness hackers communities in the Bay area.
==============================
president@universityofireland.
June 28; notification of acceptance
June 30; Early bird payment of $200 at http://www.
The fee thereafter is $300, with $50 for individual panel sessions.
The conference is free for Cal students.
==============================
SESSIONS:
______________________________
Living the Quantum Paradigm
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 10 am to noon
Chair: Cynthia Sue Larson
Panel includes Menas Kafatos (Chapman University), Wolfgang Baer
(Nascent) and Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
This session invites interdisciplinary dialogue and exercises
addressing the underlying philosophy and logic of quantum physics, and
approaches to living in accordance with quantum principles.
Questions about the nature of reality require inclusion of quantum
physics beyond the historical “shut up and calculate” approach, which
has provided multiple interpretations of quantum physics without
agreement on the philosophical quantum paradigm foundation. Whereas
quantum physics challenges scientists to comprehend whether, how, or
where a boundary between classical and quantum physics may exist,
philosophy promotes critical thinking and clarity about arguments,
terminology, and ideas. Scientific philosophy can lead the way toward
development of new theoretical approaches and alternate
interpretations, while finding conceptual weak points in theories and
arguments.
Chair: Cynthia Sue Larson
Panel includes Menas Kafatos (Chapman University), Wolfgang Baer
(Nascent) and Swami Prasannatmananda (Vedanta society)
This session invites interdisciplinary dialogue and exercises
addressing the underlying philosophy and logic of quantum physics, and
approaches to living in accordance with quantum principles.
Questions about the nature of reality require inclusion of quantum
physics beyond the historical “shut up and calculate” approach, which
has provided multiple interpretations of quantum physics without
agreement on the philosophical quantum paradigm foundation. Whereas
quantum physics challenges scientists to comprehend whether, how, or
where a boundary between classical and quantum physics may exist,
philosophy promotes critical thinking and clarity about arguments,
terminology, and ideas. Scientific philosophy can lead the way toward
development of new theoretical approaches and alternate
interpretations, while finding conceptual weak points in theories and
arguments.
Experiential approaches to living in accordance with quantum
principles provide unique opportunities for appreciating the feeling
of levels of consciousness and the dream-like nature of reality. In
Vedanta, the body is a synonym for sensations and the mind for
thoughts; both are presented to consciousness, the fundamental eternal
reality. Yet exercises are also proposed to maintain this insight,
which otherwise does not persist.
______________________________
Session on Ontology
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 1pm to 3pm
Chair: Michael Ranney (TBC)
Panel includes Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley) , Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
(keynotes), Len Talmy ( U Buffalo), Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology,
Seattle)
It is our belief that much grief, and waste of taxpayers' money, could
be avoided with an appropriate reparse of nature that acknowledges
there are rifts between the quantum and classical physical realities,
and further ontological discontinuities at the biological and
intentional thresholds. It is further our belief that the relative
failure of the HGP, and imminent debacle of both the Obama and “Blue
brain” neuro initiatives, are dues to precisely this unwillingness to
cater to ontology. Moreover, even incessant crawling of the web has
failed to yield anything other than at best mediocre results in
machine translation.
Finally, this tendency manifests itself in the social sciences with
psychologism, the reduction of exigent social dynamics to cognitive
and other psychological theories of how these forces are processed.
This has led on the one hand to the non-engaged intellectual; on the
other, to bewildering interpretations of postmodern thinkers geared
mainly to giving instructors a free pass.
This session invites papers that address technical issues in science
and the arts under this rubric and/or consider the question of
authentic political engagement. In particular, the latter category of
papers may explore the fact that reality is relative to consciousness
and yet transcends it, As we act, we become aware of being objects in
a social space that yet can be magicked away in a classroom...........
______________________________
In the absence of theory; return to Villa Serbelloni?
Chair: Michael Ranney (TBC)
Panel includes Henry Stapp (LBL, Berkeley) , Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
(keynotes), Len Talmy ( U Buffalo), Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology,
Seattle)
It is our belief that much grief, and waste of taxpayers' money, could
be avoided with an appropriate reparse of nature that acknowledges
there are rifts between the quantum and classical physical realities,
and further ontological discontinuities at the biological and
intentional thresholds. It is further our belief that the relative
failure of the HGP, and imminent debacle of both the Obama and “Blue
brain” neuro initiatives, are dues to precisely this unwillingness to
cater to ontology. Moreover, even incessant crawling of the web has
failed to yield anything other than at best mediocre results in
machine translation.
Finally, this tendency manifests itself in the social sciences with
psychologism, the reduction of exigent social dynamics to cognitive
and other psychological theories of how these forces are processed.
This has led on the one hand to the non-engaged intellectual; on the
other, to bewildering interpretations of postmodern thinkers geared
mainly to giving instructors a free pass.
This session invites papers that address technical issues in science
and the arts under this rubric and/or consider the question of
authentic political engagement. In particular, the latter category of
papers may explore the fact that reality is relative to consciousness
and yet transcends it, As we act, we become aware of being objects in
a social space that yet can be magicked away in a classroom...........
______________________________
In the absence of theory; return to Villa Serbelloni?
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Thursday, Aug 13 2015 3-30 to 5-30
Chair: Seán Ó Nualláin
Panel includes Terrence W. DEACON (anthropology, UC Berkeley (, Kevin Padian (Integrative Biology, UC Berkeley) .Marcin Joachimiak (Physical Biosciences, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology,Seattle), Howard Pattee (Binghamton University)
Several decades before the HGP was initiated, a diverse group of
scientists convened at Villa Serbelloni to tackle the troubling lack
of theory in biology. The solutions they proposed were various, from
an untroubling emphasis on hierarchy to a reinstatement of
Aristotelian material and final causality to a network-based approach
to the interaction of metabolism and genetic code. It is fair to say
that the HGP to its cost – and that of the public who paid for it –
ignores these guidelines. Is it time for a fresh period of reflection?
______________________________
Session on Hacking consciousness; non-invasive probes into subjectivity
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Chair: Seán Ó Nualláin
Panel includes Terrence W. DEACON (anthropology, UC Berkeley (, Kevin Padian (Integrative Biology, UC Berkeley) .Marcin Joachimiak (Physical Biosciences, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), Stuart Kauffman (Systems Biology,Seattle), Howard Pattee (Binghamton University)
Several decades before the HGP was initiated, a diverse group of
scientists convened at Villa Serbelloni to tackle the troubling lack
of theory in biology. The solutions they proposed were various, from
an untroubling emphasis on hierarchy to a reinstatement of
Aristotelian material and final causality to a network-based approach
to the interaction of metabolism and genetic code. It is fair to say
that the HGP to its cost – and that of the public who paid for it –
ignores these guidelines. Is it time for a fresh period of reflection?
______________________________
Session on Hacking consciousness; non-invasive probes into subjectivity
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Friday, Aug 14 2015 9 am to 1pm
Chair; Justin Riddle (Ph.D. candidate, UC Berkeley)
Panel includes Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley), Seán Ó Nualláin and others TBC
While a century ago dreams were regarded as revelatory of true psychic
dynamics, a later generation took to drugs for that same purpose. A
new ethos is stressing invasive methods that essentially involve
consent forms being signed by patients already stressed by imminent
surgery.
While the results of this has been mixed, the fact remains that there
already exists an array of tools that can shape experience without the
risks of drugs or surgery. This session will investigate these tools,
like TMS and EEG, and their results. It will feature discussion of
synchronized gamma and whether it indeed is the signature of
consciousness that many claim it is.
9 am Keynote: Walter Freeman
______________________________
The Real Madrid Model for universities; superstar academics, free transfers
Chair; Justin Riddle (Ph.D. candidate, UC Berkeley)
Panel includes Walter Freeman (UC Berkeley), Seán Ó Nualláin and others TBC
While a century ago dreams were regarded as revelatory of true psychic
dynamics, a later generation took to drugs for that same purpose. A
new ethos is stressing invasive methods that essentially involve
consent forms being signed by patients already stressed by imminent
surgery.
While the results of this has been mixed, the fact remains that there
already exists an array of tools that can shape experience without the
risks of drugs or surgery. This session will investigate these tools,
like TMS and EEG, and their results. It will feature discussion of
synchronized gamma and whether it indeed is the signature of
consciousness that many claim it is.
9 am Keynote: Walter Freeman
______________________________
The Real Madrid Model for universities; superstar academics, free transfers
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Friday, Aug 14 2015 1pm - 3pm
Chair Brian Barsky (UC Berkeley)
A new model on the university is being developed in Europe and Russia;
superstar academics are to be flown in as adjunct profs, if only for a
few months a year, and tenure is to be excised along the lines
successfully implemented by Thatcher and Major. An executive is to be
created that removes power from the academic community to centralize
it into fewer and less accountable hands. While this model reached
its nadir in Ireland in the aughts, other countries are now emulating
it. This panel attempts to dissect it and propose alternatives
This is particularly relevant as the 50the anniversary of the free
speech movement at Berkeley comes to a close. In keeping with the
themes of this conference, Mario Savio was “interested in the
connection between quantum mechanics and free will” (Cohen, 2009 P
275)
As a high school student on a summer programme at the NSF summer
institute “One day I made an observation ….which convinced me – and
still does - that this essential connection between macrophysics and
microphysics also precludes strict determinism… we have once again
coupled a a sub microscopic event with macroscopic human behaviour.
The physical indeterminism of human behavior constitutes a necessary
condition for human freedom” (Savio from Cohen, 2009, Pp 17-18)
Cohen, R (2009) Freedom’s Orator . NY: OUP
______________________________
Chair Brian Barsky (UC Berkeley)
A new model on the university is being developed in Europe and Russia;
superstar academics are to be flown in as adjunct profs, if only for a
few months a year, and tenure is to be excised along the lines
successfully implemented by Thatcher and Major. An executive is to be
created that removes power from the academic community to centralize
it into fewer and less accountable hands. While this model reached
its nadir in Ireland in the aughts, other countries are now emulating
it. This panel attempts to dissect it and propose alternatives
This is particularly relevant as the 50the anniversary of the free
speech movement at Berkeley comes to a close. In keeping with the
themes of this conference, Mario Savio was “interested in the
connection between quantum mechanics and free will” (Cohen, 2009 P
275)
As a high school student on a summer programme at the NSF summer
institute “One day I made an observation ….which convinced me – and
still does - that this essential connection between macrophysics and
microphysics also precludes strict determinism… we have once again
coupled a a sub microscopic event with macroscopic human behaviour.
The physical indeterminism of human behavior constitutes a necessary
condition for human freedom” (Savio from Cohen, 2009, Pp 17-18)
Cohen, R (2009) Freedom’s Orator . NY: OUP
______________________________
3105 Tolman Hall UC Berkeley
Friday, Aug 14 2015 4pm – close
Quantum entanglement, negative probabilities and neural
oscillations; the sublime final
achievement of the great American
polymath Patrick Suppes
Participants include members of the final Suppes group including
Acacio de Barros and Gary Oas
Like his fellow-American Frank Lloyd Wright, Pat Suppes experienced a breathtaking burst of
creativity in the ninth decade of his life. While Pat’s earlier work on
economics, psychology and the philosophy of science achieved justified world
renown, it is the sustained attack on problems of mind and world that occupied
his later energies that we will celebrate in this panel. This work, which is
being continued at Stanford, features the highly technical competent
researchers on this panel bringing a wide artillery of techniques to bear on
issues of mind, brain, cognition, and epistemology. It is their work which will
indicate whether what was being hinted at in Pat’s autumn years until his
passing in late 2014 is an entirely new language for describing humanity’s
relationship to reality itself
______________________________
Saturday, Aug 15 2015 10 am to noon
Conference Keynote ; Stuart Kauffman
"Humanity In A Creative Universe:
Saturday, Aug 15 2015 1 pm to 3pm
Saturday, Aug 15 2015 10 am to noon
Conference Keynote ; Stuart Kauffman
"Humanity In A Creative Universe:
Saturday, Aug 15 2015 1 pm to 3pm
Ecological consciousness, environmental technology
Confirmed speakers include Mary Thompson, Sperry Andrews
______________________________
Submitted papers
Saturday, Aug 15 2015 3-30pm - close
==============================
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:
==============================
The following is intended as a non-coercive guideline for themes for
paper submissions, ie: other themes are welcome;
Title; "One Magisterium; a new science-religion dialogue"
Themes
A Magisterium is an area of teaching authority. As we celebrate the
450th anniversary of Galileo's birth, it seems clear that science has
prevailed over superstition. The “new atheists" claim that there is
indeed one Magisterium, that of science.
At first glance, it seems that science will continue its march to
victory over the epistemological claims of religion, eventually
reducing them to the null set. More consequentially, it is
increasingly accepted among religious “thinkers” as among scientific
such that the magisterium, the teaching authority, of science trumps
that of religion. The result is a consensus that state power, based as
it should be on natural law, itself a reflection of the natural order
of things, will increasingly base itself on science.
The evidence seems overwhelming; on the positive side there are
physical theories accurate in their predictions to a part in a
trillion, print-outs of one's genome for a few dollars, a steadfast
adherence to the notion that the mind IS the brain and that the brain
is being mapped. On the negative side there is in the epistemological
domain the clear absurdities of the biblical account of creation and
the notion of transubstantiation, let alone reincarnation, and in the
social domain the horrors of religious terrorism and institutional
child abuse.
Yet things are now not quite so simple. It would be a pity if
citizenship was reduced to following the dictates of scientists we
cannot understand; yet its mythic poverty is not the only limitation
of science. For a start, “science” itself means knowledge and that
gives little clue that science reflects a set of practices based on a
set of logico-mathematical insights and related physical observations,
from which it takes its impetus; most of its practitioners are not
versed in the philosophy of science and are not aware of the
controversial status of theory.
However, that type of brake put on the progress of “science” may only
be the beginning. The Victorian universe was eternal; the modern one
features creation from a single point, rough-hew this how we may.
Indeed, the cosmos shows fine-tuning of physical constants in a manner
that leads to complex conscious creatures driven to understand said
cosmos, all the while debating furiously how these constants came to
be just so. The Darwinian biosphere was atomistic chance and
biological necessity; ours features far-from equilibrium conditions
like the gaseous contents of the atmosphere that facilitate our
existence. In fact, man is right back at the center of things in a way
no-one dared to predict.
There are many other issues that beg explanation along these lines; in
fact, it could be argued that we have gotten good enough t science to
become aware of its limitations. For example, Goedel DID point out
paradoxes about cognition in mathematical systems and the puzzling
ontological status of infinite sets that indeed suggest access to
processes that are outside the Turing/Church realm. It also is
arguable that the observer is still enmeshed in state-vector
reduction, with attempts to dispense with him still highly
controversial
Indeed, the hitherto “subjective” notion of information is now
immanent in third-person physics, as the idea of code is in biology.
As we explore in mathematical physics, we find that concepts like
symmetry, far from being psychological mechanisms, seem almost to have
a deus ex machina status, guiding us to ever deeper insights into
nature. Conversely, in areas like quantum field theory, we sometimes
do “bad math”, with non-converging infinite series, where any number
could be obtained, and yet it works. Both subtle and devious is the
Lord.
This is not an attempt to re-introduce creationism; it is rather an
attempt at broadening the debate. We can continue along the lines
above. Folk psychology, rather than eliminative materialism, will
prevail precisely because it is a more effective algorithmic
compression for most people than eliminative materialism and it is
attested in its strengths and weaknesses by tens of millennia of human
societies. People striving for self-development will passionately,
head and heart together, seek through the intellect the ground of
Being, and/or attempt to eviscerate the self through compassionate
action/observing it to death, and/or attempt to change the world, if
necessary through artistic creation.
We can call such activities attempts at “ontological
self-transformation”, in the manner that James Carroll characterizes
his training for the priesthood as requiring that he “ontologically”
transform himself. We can then speculate how this this notion of
“ontological self-transformation” might map onto evolutionary as onto
scholastic thought.
All these activities exist in the broader society outside the academy
– indeed several of them, like the arts arguably work better outside
it. This allows us to introduce a critical distinction between
different movements in society, of which the academic is just one. In
fact, as of the early 21st century, the academic sphere is mutating
its role in society so quickly that it behooves us to attempt a
prediction of its role; the academic sphere will fall to whoever can
attract the brightest and most free-spirited young adults to spend 3-4
years under their discipline. The web means we no longer need a
physical premises; the paralysis of science in controversies about the
status of the “gene”, “dark matter and energy”, the “central dogma”
and so on means that the truth-seeking passion of these kids can
better be satisfied without state funding that turns them into idiot
savants.
So much for the academic “magisterium”; it is in fact mainly an
environment for the pedagogical process. According to thinkers like
Drummond, there is but one magisterium in society; it unifies the
movements misread as “science” and “religion”; it invokes as its
highest value the further evolution of man singular, and humanity as a
whole; it accepts the political and scientific progress made since the
renaissance, and embraces scientific discovery; it does not accept
greedy reductionism aka scientism. While its community, culture and
ceremonies are yet to be formed, the notion that something must be
considered as sacred, be it the organic psychological development of
our kids or the integrity of the biosphere, is accepted. It is also
clear that the corporate destruction of our higher nature requires a
reply, and that the political space still exists for both an activist
and a quietist response, with much of the tools still available free
in western societies.
______________________________
Papers are invited which
- address any of the themes suggested above, whether agreeing or
disagreeing – even if strongly – with the implicit and explicit
contentions
• address the issue of overlapping, singular, or no magisteria
• address the issue of reductionism, failed or successful;
• consider the issue of ontology;
• contrast approaches to the fine-tuning problem
• Address such controversies as the horizon problem
• comment of the appropriateness in science of biology's “central dogma”
• Propose mechanisms for macro-evolution, if necessary through code biology
• Propose appropriate types of reduction, for example from Biology to
physics/chemistry and from psychology to neuroscience
• Consider the issue of truth, state power and authority in the space
initially opened up by thinkers like Hobbes;
• Consider the ontology of Buddhism as expressed in the Pali canon vis
a vis its psychology
- Quantum fluctuations and God of the gaps for example what are the
implications of the quantum mind hypothesis if true?
- Lost and esoteric Christianities - for example, does Exodus 17:7
refer to an experience transcending Yahweh?
paper submissions, ie: other themes are welcome;
Title; "One Magisterium; a new science-religion dialogue"
Themes
A Magisterium is an area of teaching authority. As we celebrate the
450th anniversary of Galileo's birth, it seems clear that science has
prevailed over superstition. The “new atheists" claim that there is
indeed one Magisterium, that of science.
At first glance, it seems that science will continue its march to
victory over the epistemological claims of religion, eventually
reducing them to the null set. More consequentially, it is
increasingly accepted among religious “thinkers” as among scientific
such that the magisterium, the teaching authority, of science trumps
that of religion. The result is a consensus that state power, based as
it should be on natural law, itself a reflection of the natural order
of things, will increasingly base itself on science.
The evidence seems overwhelming; on the positive side there are
physical theories accurate in their predictions to a part in a
trillion, print-outs of one's genome for a few dollars, a steadfast
adherence to the notion that the mind IS the brain and that the brain
is being mapped. On the negative side there is in the epistemological
domain the clear absurdities of the biblical account of creation and
the notion of transubstantiation, let alone reincarnation, and in the
social domain the horrors of religious terrorism and institutional
child abuse.
Yet things are now not quite so simple. It would be a pity if
citizenship was reduced to following the dictates of scientists we
cannot understand; yet its mythic poverty is not the only limitation
of science. For a start, “science” itself means knowledge and that
gives little clue that science reflects a set of practices based on a
set of logico-mathematical insights and related physical observations,
from which it takes its impetus; most of its practitioners are not
versed in the philosophy of science and are not aware of the
controversial status of theory.
However, that type of brake put on the progress of “science” may only
be the beginning. The Victorian universe was eternal; the modern one
features creation from a single point, rough-hew this how we may.
Indeed, the cosmos shows fine-tuning of physical constants in a manner
that leads to complex conscious creatures driven to understand said
cosmos, all the while debating furiously how these constants came to
be just so. The Darwinian biosphere was atomistic chance and
biological necessity; ours features far-from equilibrium conditions
like the gaseous contents of the atmosphere that facilitate our
existence. In fact, man is right back at the center of things in a way
no-one dared to predict.
There are many other issues that beg explanation along these lines; in
fact, it could be argued that we have gotten good enough t science to
become aware of its limitations. For example, Goedel DID point out
paradoxes about cognition in mathematical systems and the puzzling
ontological status of infinite sets that indeed suggest access to
processes that are outside the Turing/Church realm. It also is
arguable that the observer is still enmeshed in state-vector
reduction, with attempts to dispense with him still highly
controversial
Indeed, the hitherto “subjective” notion of information is now
immanent in third-person physics, as the idea of code is in biology.
As we explore in mathematical physics, we find that concepts like
symmetry, far from being psychological mechanisms, seem almost to have
a deus ex machina status, guiding us to ever deeper insights into
nature. Conversely, in areas like quantum field theory, we sometimes
do “bad math”, with non-converging infinite series, where any number
could be obtained, and yet it works. Both subtle and devious is the
Lord.
This is not an attempt to re-introduce creationism; it is rather an
attempt at broadening the debate. We can continue along the lines
above. Folk psychology, rather than eliminative materialism, will
prevail precisely because it is a more effective algorithmic
compression for most people than eliminative materialism and it is
attested in its strengths and weaknesses by tens of millennia of human
societies. People striving for self-development will passionately,
head and heart together, seek through the intellect the ground of
Being, and/or attempt to eviscerate the self through compassionate
action/observing it to death, and/or attempt to change the world, if
necessary through artistic creation.
We can call such activities attempts at “ontological
self-transformation”, in the manner that James Carroll characterizes
his training for the priesthood as requiring that he “ontologically”
transform himself. We can then speculate how this this notion of
“ontological self-transformation” might map onto evolutionary as onto
scholastic thought.
All these activities exist in the broader society outside the academy
– indeed several of them, like the arts arguably work better outside
it. This allows us to introduce a critical distinction between
different movements in society, of which the academic is just one. In
fact, as of the early 21st century, the academic sphere is mutating
its role in society so quickly that it behooves us to attempt a
prediction of its role; the academic sphere will fall to whoever can
attract the brightest and most free-spirited young adults to spend 3-4
years under their discipline. The web means we no longer need a
physical premises; the paralysis of science in controversies about the
status of the “gene”, “dark matter and energy”, the “central dogma”
and so on means that the truth-seeking passion of these kids can
better be satisfied without state funding that turns them into idiot
savants.
So much for the academic “magisterium”; it is in fact mainly an
environment for the pedagogical process. According to thinkers like
Drummond, there is but one magisterium in society; it unifies the
movements misread as “science” and “religion”; it invokes as its
highest value the further evolution of man singular, and humanity as a
whole; it accepts the political and scientific progress made since the
renaissance, and embraces scientific discovery; it does not accept
greedy reductionism aka scientism. While its community, culture and
ceremonies are yet to be formed, the notion that something must be
considered as sacred, be it the organic psychological development of
our kids or the integrity of the biosphere, is accepted. It is also
clear that the corporate destruction of our higher nature requires a
reply, and that the political space still exists for both an activist
and a quietist response, with much of the tools still available free
in western societies.
______________________________
Papers are invited which
- address any of the themes suggested above, whether agreeing or
disagreeing – even if strongly – with the implicit and explicit
contentions
• address the issue of overlapping, singular, or no magisteria
• address the issue of reductionism, failed or successful;
• consider the issue of ontology;
• contrast approaches to the fine-tuning problem
• Address such controversies as the horizon problem
• comment of the appropriateness in science of biology's “central dogma”
• Propose mechanisms for macro-evolution, if necessary through code biology
• Propose appropriate types of reduction, for example from Biology to
physics/chemistry and from psychology to neuroscience
• Consider the issue of truth, state power and authority in the space
initially opened up by thinkers like Hobbes;
• Consider the ontology of Buddhism as expressed in the Pali canon vis
a vis its psychology
- Quantum fluctuations and God of the gaps for example what are the
implications of the quantum mind hypothesis if true?
- Lost and esoteric Christianities - for example, does Exodus 17:7
refer to an experience transcending Yahweh?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)