Will, Attitude, Awareness, Self Control, Causality, Karma, Cosmic
Will, Computation and Consciousness (#1428)
The Computational Paradigm
(#1367) Process Metaphysics and Computational Paradigm
(#1406) Computational Metaphysics
(#1415) SMN, Free Will and Unification of Paradigms
(#1418) SMN, Computational Metaphysics, Free Will and Duality
(#1427) Labels, Essence, Awareness, Computation, SMN
(#1430) Metaphysics of Virtual Reality
Mathematics of Intension
(#1437) The Chinese Room, Experience, Knowledge and Communication
Computational Processes (proof)
(#1470) Religion/Spirituality, Energy/Information and the Unification of Material and Spiritual Science
(#1663) System Theoretic Metaphysics and the Unification of the Transcendent and Empirical Sciences
Also see other excerpts from my discussions with the Society for Scientific Exploration.
> The place of free will is significant in co-creative
> and intention or equally free will action in two respects,
> one set of action involves the receiver of the thought and
> intent and one set of action involves the sender but in one
> of two possible ways under Spiritual Law. <I assume the
> intention is to model both>.
I don't see the need to divide free will into two separate components related to sender and receiver. There is simply an interaction event and all such events involve both a sender and receiver. The only free will that I can conceive of is the freedom of inner attitude or internal response, everything else unfolds according to its nature. So one has the freedom to choose how one interprets a situation or what attitude one holds toward it but beyond that we operate through the world and utilise causal chains that we can control to some degree but which ultimately operate according to deterministic causal principles.
For example, one may have an attitude of healing (or harm) toward another person, this initiates a chain of events on subtle as well as gross levels. These levels are not ontologically separate, they just appear that way. I see a need for only the one causal level, not two as you suggest. Its just that parts of it can be perceived by the senses and parts cannot, thus people sometimes think there are two, i.e. a material level and a spirit (or pure information) level. But what people call matter is simply a conceptualisation of those aspects of spirit that are apparent to the senses. There is nothing but spirit and spiritual dynamics - hence I use the analogy of virtual reality where the entire manifest universe is just information in motion (spirit) but the beings therein conceive of a world of matter, but that exists only within the context of their cultural objectivist mythology. The same goes for the Energy Universe and Material Universe, there is really only the one universe but many people experience only a small part of it and call that the material universe. They are not separate universes, they are just different perspectives on the one unified existential context. Although it is often useful to separate them for the purposes of discussion.
Back to free will, one may have an attitude of healing (or harm) toward another person and this initiates a chain of events. This may unfold on subtle levels due to pure intention and it also gives rise to modifications within the mind that lead to actions of the body which initiate a chain of external events which may influence the perceptual state of another being, as well as countless other side effects. One cannot have free will over how the modifications of the mind are expressed as actions, these are based on learnt behaviours or cognitive habits. Furthermore one cannot have free will over how the actions propagate through the world and influence the other person. Nor can one have free will over how the other person perceives, interprets and thereby experiences the actions. Hence one may have good intentions but ones actions actually cause harm, or the other person perceives it as interference or antagonism. One can only have free choice over ones inner awareness, that is the only aspect of reality that possesses free will. Hence ones inner attitude can be freely chosen and the other person is free to choose their inner attitude as well.
In vedic terms, purusha (person) is the inner most awareness that dwells deep within all manifest forms, it is the animating spark of consciousness or the thread of the cosmic computational process. Then the actual structure of reality, both form and behaviour is called prakriti (nature). The prakriti is programmed and deterministic. When animated by purusha it simply acts out its nature. In computational terms purusha is the computational thread and prakriti is the information constructs such as program and data structures. Purusha is the seat of free will and the prakriti is programmed. The body and mind are constructs of prakriti and have no free will of their own, it is only the inner awareness that has any free will. Thus the actions of the body and mind are not free, but the inner attitude or cognitive state of the inner awareness is free.
The prakriti or 'nature' is like a range of potential programmed behaviours that can be activated by awareness. Which programs are activated depends upon the inner attitude, one may have an attitude of egoic isolation leading one to operate through the lens of separatist mechanistic concepts or one may have an attitude of mystic union with the cosmos leading one to operate through the lens of transcendent spiritual concepts. One attitude may lead to one set of actions, responses, interpretations and so on and thereby draw one into one world, whereas a different attitude will draw one into another world. Note: I define the concept 'world' as an experiential context, not as an objective reality.
Regarding your example of the person playing loud music...
In their inner most awareness they are free to choose between a considerate attitude or an inconsiderate attitude. Although most people are not in touch with their inner most awareness and thus have virtually no free will at all. They are not in control of their inner attitude. This attitude is expressed through the mind and body in a deterministic manner so the person had no choice over their experienced need to play loud music, that is just how their psyche expressed their inner attitude of inconsiderateness. Thus if one has no control over ones inner awareness then one is at the mercy of whatever attitudes one picks up and how these manifest through ones psyche. In such a case one lacks self-control. If one does have self- control one can choose the inner attitude (mode of purusha) and this then determines which programs are activated (prakriti).
As for the discussion of karma or the feedback of effects...
If ones attitude is of surrender to the cosmic flow and to move in harmony with the cosmic dance of existence, then one is a graceful gesture in that dance and as one moves through the world the world moves harmoniously about oneself and there is no tension or disharmony - hence no karma. In Daoism this is described as 'wuwei' or the way of inaction that leaves nothing undone. They say in vedic tradition that one who has renounced all action and the doer as well, who is a transparent channel for the will of the cosmos, such a person, although they may be stirred into great activity by the cosmos, such a person acquires no karma at all. This is the central point of the Bhagavad Gita.
However if ones attitude is of egoic dualistic separation then one operates according to a conceptual framework that is centered upon a belief in the objects of the senses and the interpretations of the mind. One conceives of only a small slice of reality and then assumes that it is the whole of reality. One seeks ones 'own' agenda and moves according to ones own separate rhythm, hence there is innevitable discord and disharmony as one comes into conflict with the surrounding cosmic dance. This creates ripples or disturbances that propagate throughout the network of systems. Ultimately the cosmos is a closed balanced system (symmetry) so these disturbances propagate so as to rebalance to holistic system, just as in thermodynamics. However the original disturbance is the egoic attitude so in order for the cosmos to regain true balance this attitude needs to be realigned with the cosmic will. Hence all the karmic influences tend to feed back to that attitude and serve as lessons to try and realign it with reality.
These propagating effects due to cosmic rebalancing spread out through the network of systems and create many effects in the world. The exact manner in which the effects come back to the originator and how long the delay is depends upon the complexities of the exact situation.
Regarding mathematical modelling
I too remain to be convinced that mathematical modelling can handle it all, but it can shed a lot of light on aspects of the situation, even though there are serious limitations to the approach - e.g. computation is not identical to consciousness, it is just used as an analogy for the existential essence. However the manner in which the essence is woven to produce coherent existential contexts can be modelled in the manner suggested by SMN. However SMN is at present a primarily algorithmic paradigm and not a strictly mathematical one - although it is a subtle issue as to exactly what is the difference. In SMN there is essentially a general algorithm that transforms a computational stream and an information space into an existential context that has compelling similarities to our own. This work is only in its early stages but it suggests some promising directions of enquiry. It could provide a theoretical context in which many of the assertions of spirituality are testable and thereby amenable to coherent rational exploration.