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)

This is a humorous introduction to this section;

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


Shiva Meucci 
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)


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.
Submitted papers
Sean O Nuallain
Jonathan Schooler
In 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
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 break
The 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)




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)


Saturday, August 15: Ecological consciousness, environmental technology
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
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.
================================================


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.

================================================

Deadlines; June 16 2015; 500 word abstract and/or panel suggestion to
president@universityofireland.com

June 28; notification of acceptance

June 30; Early bird payment of $200 at http://www.foundationsofmind.org/donate/

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 
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.

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?

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 
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

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
_________________________________________________Submitted papers

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



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?

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Interview announcing ""One Magisterium" book with review by Stuart Kauffman and consciousness course;



see: http://consciousnesscourse.blogspot.com/  for course details and to register online at: http://foundationsofmind.org/register.html




 Stuart Kauffman’s review of One Magisterium is now online at http://www.interaliamag.org/imagining-possibilities/one-magisterium-review-by-stuart-kauffman/

Stuart calls the book a "masterpiece"



I think this paper might be of interest as a prologue to the book as it explores emanation and eschatology from a standpoint that I realize only now is neoplatonic;

http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/262

So is this more technical article;

 http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/403

All these are free as is this extract;

 http://www.cambridgescholars.com/download/sample/61898




INTERVIEW is at http://consciouslifenews.com/search-consciousness-cynthia-sue-larson-interviews-sean-o-nuallain/


Cynthia: First, I'd love to thank you for organizing the Foundations of Mind conference and seminars that I've so greatly enjoyed attending this year. There's something truly extraordinary happening at this time in history, that I most keenly sense when reading your books and attending the Foundations of Mind events you've sponsored. I get a sense that we're on the verge of a great intellectual revolution having to do with a whole new way of comprehending consciousness. What most inspires you to explore the subject of consciousness, and how do you feel this subject is important at this time?




Seán:  About the times we live in, Jacob Needleman put it very well in his blurb for my new book, "one Magisterium" (CSP, Sept 2014); "From first page to the last, a sustained and dazzling burst of light illuminating the fundamental questions and the presumed “answers” within the scientific, philosophical and spiritual world now radically changing before our eyes." Consciousness is one way into this phenomenon of the "scientific, philosophical and spiritual world now radically changing before our eyes." Scientists in general are naturally uncomfortable with the subjective world; there is indeed a case that it is best left to artists and spiritual guides. Yet we can say some coherent and responsible things while remaining responsible scientifically.

Cynthia: You raise an important point that many scientists are reticent to publicly discuss subjective experience, even though their own subjective experiences are primary motivators behind the scientific research they do. There seems to be a difference of opinion by many people that if there is to be but "one Magisterium," or primary way of comprehending reality, it will be based on science, while others feel it should be primarily spiritual. Do you sense humanity is on the verge of finding a way to reconcile these differences, perhaps starting with saying some coherent, responsible things about consciousness?


Seán:Great question!

Of course, historically the magisterium is church teaching. The
Galileo incident put paid to that; not so much Galileo’s  contemporary
clerical opponents, who were actually quite sophisticated, but the
retards who were pushing biblical geocentrism well into the 19th
century.

After SJ Gould, there is a consensus that Galileo’s  contemporary
clerical opponents are correct; the magisterium of the Church is faith
and morals (“how to go to heaven”), and that of science external
reality (“how the heavens go”). As an Irish recovering Catholic, I was
particularly engaged in this debate; the fact that it still goes on is
attested by the recent movie “Cavalry” with Brendan Gleeson as a rural
Irish priest with nothing to offer eventually except his willingness
to die as an expiation for the rape of children by his church.

Ironically, it was a Belgian Priest (George le Maitre) who invented
modern cosmology with his notion of the singularity/ “primeval atom”.
Yet he vociferously protested against the Vatican’s adopting this as
proving the biblical account of creation………

On  the other side, we have “thinkers” like Dawkins and Harris who
argue that science has advanced enough to come to moral conclusions.
Dawkins’ autobiography is interesting; it looks like he had the
makings of a decent computational biologist before the “selfish gene”.
On the other hand, there are too many kludges in his early
experimental apparatus for his results to be credible. The Harris case
is simpler; after Ed Vul, who spoke at foM, we frankly do not have to
believe any fmri results of the kind Harris adduces.


I leave this answer with a few more trends the book addresses;

-       Why is it that the people who believe in a religious basis (from
Mother Teresa to Matthieu Richard to Fr Greg Boyle (G-Dog) toyes, Michelle Bachman) tend to
work hardest for others? The notion of an objective realm of morality
seems vital
-       What of subjectivism in the arts? Currently, young  Americans are
deserting the only sophisticated arts form created here ie jazz
-       What of the mess Google and others are making of natural language processing?


The book and course put a lot of these issues together

Cynthia: I am very much looking forward to reading your new book, "One Magisterium"! What I find personally most significant about your previous books, including "The Search for Mind" and "Being Human: The Search for Order" is the apparent ease with which you bring ideas together from a multitude of disciplines to create a cohesive holistic presentation of consciousness at a level that I've seen few other authors match. There appears to be a larger picture view of "how the heavens go" than some more narrowly focused scientists and authors recognize. How would you advise those interested in getting caught up to speed with new findings about the nature of consciousness to begin?


Seán Cognitive Science and the circle of explanation in the sciences

Cognitive Science completes the circle of explanation in the sciences.
It can also hint at solutions to moral and aesthetic dilemmas, often
explained away through postmodernism/subjectivism. It must obey laws
of inheritance of facts and constraints; just as biology inherits
facts and constraints from physics, so must Cognitive Science inherits
facts and constraints from biology. These include conservation laws
(physics), chaotic dynamics (both biology and physics); it is likely
therefore that concepts like harmonic oscillators and bifurcations
should be pervasive in Cognitive Science.

Yet the situation is more complex. For example, the concept
“information” in physics has an energetic dimension (Landauer), a
spatial dimension (Susskind) and, as quantum theory teaches us, it
determines to some extent what we considered objective reality.
Likewise, it is arguably impossible to continue discourse about
biology without granting that codes/syntax are intrinsic to the
subject. Cognitive Science also inherits these constraints.

We must go deeper still. We find that mathematics, the most elliptical
and precise language with which we describe reality, constrains us in
certain ways. Tensors of various orders, from scalars through vectors
to the Riemann and Ricci tensors, are distinct with the latter two not
describable in terms of the former. Our explanation patterns in
Cognitive Science must honour this. So fmri, which specifies a scalar,
cannot be an explanation of mind, nor can vectors; it is a category
error to suggest they can.

Our explanation patterns in Cognitive Science  must also honour what
we learned in the 20th century from Gödel, Church et al about the
limits of formal systems. This can paradoxically leave us open to
non-deterministic thought. So we can indeed, following Gödel,
Schrodinger and other greats, assert the existence of the spiritual
while remaining completely scientifically responsible. However, we are
not going to get a “solution” to the so-called “hard problem”, an
algorithm mapping all neural data to experience; that is also a
category error. We are going to be able to argue for a substratum of
subjectivity and indeed free will  in conscious experience while
remaining scientific.  The job of eliciting subjective states belongs
to great artists and spiritual leaders, of whom we have a decreasing
number.

Cynthia: I can see that you've accurately identified some rather serious shortcomings currently being made by many researchers and authors--that they are making category errors at critical junctures. I love the work you've been doing with your Foundations of Mind conference series and your new book, "One Magisterium" to help people realize the importance of building upon sturdy foundations of knowledge in philosophy, math, physics, biology, linguistics, and computer science. Clearly there is no need for a high-tech new-fangled version of phrenology to provide a solution to the so-called "hard problem" of why people have subjective experiences of consciousness using fMRI. And clearly there is a need to create and test scientific hypotheses for how free will and other cognitive functions operate. How important do you feel it to be that cognitive science and consciousness researchers adopt a common language, and how would you envision such a shared common language being formed?

Seán:  

In 1997 I published  the book "Two Sciences of Mind" (it precedes
Shambala's use of this phrase) to indicate the necessaity for a
distinction between what Needleman called "inner" and "outer"
(cognitive science ) empiricism

In my course, you'll find certain intersections; the
Noe/O'Regan/Freeman work on sensorimotor behavior, which is common to
cognitive science and
 consciousness research. Yet that does not extend into domains like
the arts, where artists are using a much larger palette precisely to
specify inner states.

Cognitive science  can tell us that jazz uses much more complex
computations than rap; in fact we can specify the stack in say
Beethoven's 5th, whose opening has a fractal structure. That may lead
us to suspect there is something more going on, the opening to
objective  reality that Beethoven felt he was doing. And at that note
of opening to reality of I'd like to end this interview; it is
precisely this sense of an objective world to which we must conform
and which can edify us that we in the west have lost. To regain the
respect of fundamentalists like ISIS, we might consider this instead
of just bombs

Cynthia: Thank you, Seán, for making time for this interview, and for sharing news of your new book and your course on consciousness, Neuroscience and Philosophy of Mind.  I’m glad to announce that this online course is available to students anywhere in the world, and it starts this September 2nd. For a cost of $75 US, this course is a bargain, since this is the same course taught for credit at Stanford University by the same instructor, and students who complete this course will receive certificates of completion. It includes video presentations from the entire proceedings of the 2014 Foundations of Mind conference, and  I encourage all interested to learn more at: http://consciousnesscourse.blogspot.com/  and to register online at: http://foundationsofmind.org/register.html

Friday, March 14, 2014

Welcome and conclusions; announcement nest year's conference


Themes for next year can be found at


http://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/announcement/view/11

Thanks and welcome 

The theme of this year’s conference is “Foundations of Mind: Cognition & Consciousness”. There is a clear implication that these two can be distinguished, an implication that puts clear blue water between this conference and others apparently on the same theme.



This distinction can be found as far back as 200 AD with Alexander's interpretation of Aristotle's “common sense” as “that which perceives”, an interpretation echoed in Plotinus with his theory of the “inner sense”. While this move at first sight might seem to remove the magic from mental function, in fact it seems to me to be salutary. In particular, splitting the act of awareness from the contents presented to awareness allows a more detailed examination of these contents per se.



And so the panels we have examine this. We will learn in the first panel about the reconstruction of this distinction in thinkers such as Gurdjieff; we will also hear about the notion of “fine tuning” in modern cosmology, an area in many ways invented by the Belgian priest and physicist Georges Le Maitre. We then go on to examine which neuroscience methods can in fact characterize content in ways that are formally sufficient. This leads to the issue of whether there is not a propoer way to “reduce” one discipline to an other.



The dichotomy between content and perception continues in language, where clearly attention has a valuable information-processing role to play. At the ultimate metaphysical and indeed ontological level of analysis, we find that there is an as yet unresolved issue about how the act of observation can affect an apparently objective state of affairs.



Of course, decoherence theory has established that observation may not be necessary, and the epistemological interpretation of QM withholds belief in our ability cognitively to penetrate nature at this level. Yet that interpretation of QM is precisely the “weasel words” with which Osiander introduced “De Revoltionibis” by Copernicus.



Consequently, among the many fine submissions we got for review, we will include in the program here speculative interpretations of Q entanglement and the links with subjective experience.



We have an extremely diverse group of presenters, diverse not just in the range of subjects in which they are expert but in their ethnic and political affiliation. I am glad to say that we have Irish people from both sides of the main religious divide there.(1) In the old story, at the summit of the mountain we are all wearing the same kit, and we are all mountaineers as we scale the highest heights. I wish everybody here a great conference.
(1) The person from the unionist tradition was the only speaker who failed to show up; three of those who did are over 75 years of age


Conclusions

1.Neuroscience has fared at least as badly as philosophy in explaining
the mind. We have no credible account of any symbols emerging from
neural impulse; we have not developed tools to monitor electrical
junctions; indeed the current gargantuan Markram/Koch efforts are
doomed as they look at chemical synapses in the absence of theory
2.There is a way out here; dynamical systems theory, modulation of
carrier waves, the harmonic oscillator as central, honouring the
in-principle arguments that exist about tensors
3.Von Neumann's arguments in his "Grundlagen" still hold up.
4.Linguistics and other symbol systems need to be honoured
5.We need physicists!
6.Absent any input from extravagantly-funded Neuroscience, it is
intellectually responsible to attend to psychological and indeed
spiritual accounts that are rooted in best practise from other
sciences
7.The so-called "hard problem" (considered as linking neural event and
subjective experience a la John Locke) is simply nonsense and has
retarded the area
8.Finally, we must find a way of funding and organizing courses and
research away from the current PI model. As it happens, I paid for
this conference myself (and, given the reaction, do not regret doing
so). 

Sean O Nuallain

Friday, February 7, 2014

Foundations of Mind, UC Berkeley mar 6-7 2014; call for participation

Foundations of Mind: Cognition & Consciousness

Conference
The world’s top scholars and neuroscientists discuss cutting-edge issues related to cognition and consciousness

At
Sproul Room, International house at UC Berkeley, 2299 Piedmont Ave ,  Berkeley
March 6 – 7 ,  2014


Preliminary schedule


 Registration details for "Foundations of mind"  are at
http://foundationsofmind.org/

It also includes details of *Free* on-line courses in  consciousness
studies and cognitive science for suitably qualified applicants

Early bird rate for conference lasts until Feb 15 2014

 
We already have offers to publish the
proceedings both from a peer-reviewed journal and an academic book
publisher.



Confirmed plenary speakers/panelists include:-

Stuart Kauffman (U Vermont)
Terry Deacon (UC Berkeley)
Henry Stapp (LBNL, UC Berkeley)
Ed Vul (UCSD)
Jacob Needleman (SFSU)
Jerome Feldman (ICSI, UC Berkeley)
Kathryn Blackmun Laskey (George Mason)
Robert Campbell (Clemson U)
Mike Cole (UCSD)
José Acacio de Barros (SFSU/Stanford)
Mike Cole ( UCSD)
Ellen Thompson (FIU)
Sean O Nuallain (UoI)
Fr. Robert Spitzer (Magis institute)
Tony Bell (UC Berkeley)
Len Talmy (U Buffalo)






Conference chair; Sean O Nuallain (UoI)
Inquiries/ further suggestions for panellists to 
president@universityofireland.com




Thursday 6 March; schedule for “cognition” day
8-30 am registration
9am  Jacob Needleman and Robert Spitzer will give 30-minute keynotes,
followed by a discussion

It is now accepted that the Abrahamic religions, focused as they are
on community solidarity based on the sacred and with it the
supernatural, are inappropriate for environmental preservation even
without their licensing of exploitation of the earth. Yet spiritual
expressions based on emphasizing the unity of subject and object, self
and environment, fail to give an adequate account of acts of mind that
stress this difference. The ideal would be a spiritual system wherein
both the extraordinarily unlikely nature of life and earth as well as
the moral imperative to protect it would emerge as consequences from
its ontology and metaphysics. Does  such a system exist or can it be
created?

10-45 tea/coffee

Panel 1  for Mar 6
In general, each panelist will speak for 15 minutes; then the panel
as a whole will discuss the issues for 30 minutes before opening
matters up to the audience

11 am - 1pm Panel 1 Linearity, psychologism, and voodoo correlations

Speakers/panelists; Ed Vul (UCSD - session chair), James Blackmun,Tony Bell (UC Berkeley) Sean O Nuallain (UoI), Robert Campbell (respondent - Clemson)

Gottlieb Frege famously excoriated the attempt to reduce
logico-mathematical reasoning to a description of the psychological
processes underpinning it as " psychologism". But, the response goes,
these logico-mathematical entities are indeed processed in the brain,
so surely it is neither quixotic nor formally incorrect to seek an
appropriate psychological explanation for them. One such candidate
explanation is a faculty psychology based on assignment of these
faculties to the cerebral locations that fmri has been celebrated for
finding.


Neo-Fregeans might have two responses. In the first place, the fmri
results perhaps evince premature closure in their statistical
analysis. Secondly, fmri's localizations are scalar entities in a
cerebral system clearly capable of operating with vectors and even
higher-order tensors .In fact, neo-Fregeans might argue, fmri
implicitly makes extraordinary claims about the nature of scientific
explanation, claims that are hard to justify.

Where does all this leave us?

Lunch Break
Panel 2  for Mar 6
2-3-45pm Cognitive science and neuroscience

Speakers/panelists; Jerome Feldman  (ICSI, Berkeley), Robert Campbell
(Clemson - chair), Ed Vul. (Respondent) Mike Cole ( UCSD), Terry Deacon (UC Berkeley)

Science is a reductionist enterprise - we look for explanations of
phenomena at more basic levels. This does not entail "eliminative
reduction" where only the lowest level has explanatory power. Theory,
modelling, and experiment at multiple levels is important and these
should be consistent. For Cognitive Science, the ancient formulation
of knowledge as truth may be a serious barrier to understanding the
mapping of thought to neurobiology and beyond.

 3-45 tea/coffee


4pm
Symbols, thought and attention

Chair: Len Talmy
Moderator ; Ellen Thompson



Panel Olga Shurygina, Vittorio Tantucci

Two burgeoning trends in 21st century cognitive science appear at
first sight to pull in opposite directions. One is the re-emergence of
Whorfian linguistic determinism; another is the insistence that
bilingualism can retard the development of prion diseases like
Alzheimer's. One might assume that the same holds for music and other
symbolic systems. Yet a commonality is arguably to be found in the
concept of attention; can it be the case that operating between two
linguistic codes forces improved cerebral function simply because of
the monitoring necessary? If so, surely it is appropriate to survey
immigrants using languages like English which seem at first sight the
same on both sides of the Atlantic?

4-30 "Embedded I to C in Spanish-Influenced English: An Experimental
View " Ellen Thompson

5 pm  "The inner life of a joyful human being"
Olga Shurygina


  5-30 "Immediate and extended intersubjectification:
A cognitive usage-based study of the presuppositional
construction [you don't want X]" Vittorio Tantucci


6pm Keynote; Stanley Klein



6-30 pm Poster session with wine and cheese. Each poster presenter gets 5
minutes to address the plenary session before an hour of informal
conversation at a reception based around the posters

Posters are
"Nonviolent Movements As Applied Consciousness"

Jack DuVall

. "Quantum Hamiltonian MCMC: A Hypothesis  for the Mind/Brain Connection"
Kathryn Blackmond Laskey

"A grace of sense: Poetry and the architecture of consciousness" Matt Langione

."On the Relativity of Program Implementation" James Blackmun
Can Conscious Intention Bring About Meaningful Coincidence? Sky Nelson

"AN ETHICAL MODEL OF THE MORAL MIND BASED UPON A META-HIERARCHY OF
THE TRADITIONAL
GROUPINGS OF VIRTUES, VALUES, AND IDEALS"
by John E.  LaMuth


7-30pm Concert of celtic jazz to celebrate women's day; free for
conference attendees

Friday Mar 7, 2014, Sproul Room.  2nd floor, International house, UC Berkeley

Friday's schedule; consciousness, neuroscience and quantum mechanics

Keynote speakers Henry Stapp (LBNL), Tony Bell (UC Berkeley). Stuart Kauffman

9-15am  Stuart Kauffman: Answering Descartes; beyond Turing
Respondent and session chair; Terrence Deacon

10-15 "Figure-ground perception and early visual cortical processing"
Karl Zipser

10-45 am break

11am "Is the Universe a Vast, Consciousness-created Virtual Reality
Simulation?"
BERNARD HAISCH

11-30 2 "Evidence of Macroscopic Quantum Behavior andConscious Reality
Selection in a Holographic Multiverse "
Cynthia Sue Larson

noon Break

1pm Keynote; Tony Bell
1-30 "The emergence of information in mesoscopic measures of brain activity"
Gautam Agarwal, Antal Berenyi, Ian Stevenson, Kenji Mizuseki, Gyorgy
Buzsaki, Friedrich Sommer


2 pm  Panel - Quantum mind and its critics

Discussants: Henry Stapp, José Acacio de Barros (session chair),
Stanley Klein   Carlos Montemayor and others

The Quantum mind  hypothesis essentially states that quantum effects
are causative in will and cognitions, leading to an assertion of free
will. It is no longer in doubt that there is a deep mystery associated
with information, the mind, and reality, a mystery that results in
paradoxical findings with observer status in quantum mechanics. It may
be the case that our current concept of information is too
coarse-grained; it may also be the case that conscious will is
actually causative in the cosmos. Recently, the standard objections to
Quantum mind on the basis of decoherence in biological systems have
been refuted by discoveries that photosynthesis involves  quantum
superposition.  Likewise, cognition shows effects readily explicable
by quantum formalisms.  However, these effects may also be looked at
in terms of neural systems as harmonic oscillators; or is this
objection even relevant?

3-45pm Break

4-00 pm Complexity Biology-based Information Structures can explain Subjectivity,
Objective Reduction of Wave Packets, and Non-Computability
by Alex Hankey

 4-30pm 1.     "Mind/Body/Spirit Complex in Quantum Mechanics"
Author: Justin Riddle


5 Mapping The Whole in EveryOne
(An Essay on: Non-existence as the engine and axis of existence)
by  Sperry Andrews

5-30 pm "Science and Subjectivity:A Fresh Look at Phenomenology and
Deconstruction Enabling Meaning in Cognitive Studies"
 Keith Whittingslow


Final discussion and close