” True Nonlinearity. It’s incredible ! “
Rev. RANT – comment to “ Dasein in broad
The main Heideggerian work “ Being and Time ” has been probably interrupted due to some methodological reasons ( its author suggesting in a Note to “ On the Essence of Truth ” just that it was deliberately left undeveloped ); from the analysis of Heideggerian texts, my dominant impression is that the author was methodologically halted somewhere between linear and nonlinear without being able to clearly conceive what and especially how to further develop. The appearance of some unusual difficulties of nonlinear type, would be absolutely normal taking in consideration that Dasein represents par excellence an open, hyper-articulated, nonlinear entity, and the world as living thing was / is unconceivable in the absence of physis situation also centered on nonlinearity.
Two more benchmarks in supporting this viewpoint:
- Hardly, contextually overcome difficulties concerning the meaning differentiation ( “ spatial and non-spatial ” ) of preposition “in”, differentiation which normally aims not toward spatial but rather toward linear / analytical / cartesian signification and ( in relation to the human Dasein ) toward nonlinear / synthetical /non-cartesian signification; shortly: in / separability versus in / inseparability.
- The conceiving of Being’s temporality as a transcendental horizon (with three ecstasies: future, past, present) into a historical moment in which the nonlinear time penetrates living being as a living, fluctuant pulsation controlled not by duration (the above mentioned ecstasies remaining under the sign of duration) but rather by potential / real ratio ( see “ Time in Broad Sense ” ). To mention that in the non-cartesian horizon characterized as “ distinct, inseparable ” any transcendental changes its traditional nature, opening toward other entities, a good example being provided by Plato’s Eidos (Forms, Ideas) which presently function as a “ potential self ”, controlling things / beings (the “ real self ”). Interesting enough, the last interpretation (time as living pulsation or non-duration) allows the consideration of the temporality of every Dasein not as a quality / category deriving from personal experience but rather as an existentialia or “ a possible way of living being ” respectively as a fundamental temporal characteristic a priori contained into originary, potential essence of each and every living being (design, Entwurf ); a new duration? not at all, this ” potential duration ” being not a parameter but rather a function under your non-univocal control: you are co-author ( to better or to worse ) of your own design!
In this elaboration of my detachment from Heidegger, concerning the widening of human Dasein extension / connotation, I have relied on a series of very interesting methodological suggestions such as:
- Considering the choice / selection as a fundamental characteristic of future physics ( Russian physicist N.A. UMOV, 1900);
- The non-traditional idea expressed by D. BOHM ( in an interview with F.D. Peat ) according to which the future quantum physics must have the characteristic of a quantum organism (rather than quantum mechanics );
- The suggestion of J. MARSHALL that the wave function ( from quantum mechanics ) has such mathematical characteristics that favor the emergence / evolution of life and consciousness : the universe has an innate tendency toward life and consciousness: they are ultimately due to the mathematical properties of quantum wave function which favors the evolution of life and consciousness.
- The exceptional inter-disciplinary works by Dr. Mae-Wan HO ( elaborated when still active at The open University, UK ), particularly “The Rainbow and the Worm – the Physics of Organism, 2nd Ed. , 1998, centered on…the simple question formulated with many decades before by E. Schrodinger: What is Life?
- J. JEANS: the universe is a great thinking (through this Jeans does not move away from the living being but rather, as underlined by Heidegger himself with reference to a Parmenide’s thesis, “ here the heterogeneous is thought, thinking and living being as Same (das Selbe).”
- A.N. WHITEHEAD: we cannot understand nature except as an organism…
- Last but not least:M. Heidegger himself underlined several times the necessity of broadening of Dasein (extension and content) – the world of Dasein existing only as a world / living thing. As I will show in the following the human Dasein has been preceded by the …new Dasein, in other words “ cogito ergo sum ” was preceded by “ allego ergo sum ” = I choose therefore I am ). Indeed the Nature (“ World ”) has been in detail prepared for the emergence of the human phenomenon ( in any case the human being did not get thrown, from the beginning, in a hostile world defined by crime, wars, cancers ). Darwinism, co-evolution ( system / environment ), etc. appear more and more as being the final, exterior touches of a much more elaborated process / program, codified somewhere into the existence’s depth, eventually on Planck scale (10 – 33 cm.), as suggested by Roger PENROSE in a highly speculative , highly controversial – and why not? – equally genial manner. Let’s wish Roger 20 more years of physical well being and spiritual youth to efficiently guide us through the mysteries of the Dasein file.
1. The Nonlinear Revolution and the New Dasein
The traditional science and knowledge in general were based on the linear methodology according to which the outcome is always directly proportional with the stimulus; in the summative condition involved by linearity the genuine Whole ( “ World ” in the case of Heideggerian thinking ) cannot be achieved or even maintained. In the nonlinear situation which revolutionized the modern knowledge, the proportionality stimulus / outcome is breached; without altering the essential data of the linear world, the nonlinear approach provides a new conceptual frame, efficient methods and patterns to achieve / maintain the Whole, as well as understanding and controlling of the complex systems of the Dasein type and equally the far from equilibrium processes (the case of becoming and / or genuine being). In the far from equilibrium states, the systems have totally different behaviors in comparison with the equilibrium or near to equilibrium states, since through nonlinearity the system comes to a totally different space of possibilities, drastically raising the number of accessible states and correlatively the system’s ability to make alternative choices / selections (organizational instability, see Fig. 6 ). Moreover, the potential barrier between actualized / realized states on one side and the potential / possible ones on the other side significantly diminishes, the system becoming very sensitive to small variations ( fluctuations ) of the internal or external parameters; this sui generis situation has been previously presented on this blog under the name of “ activation of possible ”.
In the very special area of the bifurcation point P (Fig. 6) the usual ratio between necessity and chaos is changing in favor of stochasticity: this time
Fig. 6 Prigogine Point: the psychic ( spirituality ) insertion
selection / actualization of a certain state out of the entire repertoire of potential / possible states of the systems (repertoire delimited by the kinetical equations) is decisively controlled by the stochastic factors ( fluctuations ). The point P named by me as “ point Prigogine ” has a special methodological significance because it marks the entrance of the system into the “ genuine historicity ” or in other words, the moment in which the system becomes alive in broad sense. Moreover this point is critical in the substantiation of continuity between physical / psychical because exactly here (as a consequence of non-univocal selection = ontological premise of subjectivity: allego ergo sum = I choose therefore I am) the new non-biological Dasein is generated, this ( Prigogine ) point being the alpha point of any psychology interested by its genuine genealogy!
For the Western thinking, the connection between the genuine being and historicity is a defining one. In this context becomes essential to be able to pinpoint the mechanism through which the new Dasein has access to genuine historicity. The following schema illustrates this mechanism concomitantly showing the necessary physical premise ( nonlinearity and instability ) as well as the constitutive moment of genuine historicity – non-univocal selection:
Equilibrium ↔ Non-Equilibrium ↔ Nonlinearity ↔ Instability ↔ Non-univocal selection → Irreversibility → Historicity
The introduction of the new Dasein into contemporary knowledge comes with some distinct methodological consequences:
- The Heideggerian category Dasein as human reality is sensibly extended trough taking over from Vorhandenheit of some active / activated systems susceptible to new, non-traditional manifestations which bring them close (without identifying them) to the human Dasein: subjectivity in broad sense, inseparability, becoming…
- Traditional contradiction between “ to exist ” (without “ to be ”) and “ to be ” is losing its fundamental character becoming empirical; rather, we will have to consider a genuine complementarity relationship between the two verbs / states since from now there are beings concomitantly and in different grades presenting existence and genuine being.
- Nonlinear revolution, respectively the new methodological situation indicated on this blog through the term “ physis situation ” is clearly and for the first time showing which conditions the Nature as living being would have to fulfill.
2. From “ World as Machine ” (Descartes, Newton) Toward “ World as Living Being / Potentiality “
In the following I will discuss some key-moments:
- What is the meaning of model / metaphor “ world as machine ”? What are the actual implications of this model, which for centuries has marked in a univocal manner ( without any alternatives ) the anti-ecological consciousness of numerous generations?
- Which factors put under question the validity of this model, still used, although not exclusively, in Western societies in which separability and Cartesianism are still deeply rooted?
- What did Heidegger need to elaborate the minimal methodological status of category “World as living being”?
- How can the living in broad, non-biological sense be correctly introduced in contemporary science / knowledge?
- What is the methodological status ( still controversial, but could it be any different? ) of Attunement in its complementary versions – intrinsic and extrinsic ?
World as Machine – Descartes’ Materialist / anti-Vitalist Option
Traditionally the problem of living being has been raised as early as the Greek antiquity and as far as Heidegger without finding some correct methodological criteria for delimitation in regards to “thing” especially without uncovering that “ quid proprium ” of the genuine living being. For instance, Aristotle has considered , from a vitalist platform, that souls of different type (vegetative, sensitive) would govern the organic processes of living beings, whilst the passive things ( ta onta for Greeks, das Seinde for Heidegger, beings in modern English are not ). Descartes follows the Copernican heliocentric model (considered by science historians as a “ huge step toward world as machine model ”) and according to his mechanist, anti-scholastic program, rejects the Aristotelian vitalism, asserting that plants, animals and human body are nothing else but machines, with two possible exceptions: in the human body it may exist a soul with limited activity ( Descartes rejects any soul / mind for animals whose behavior is exhaustively explained by mechanical means ) and, the second exception - the Universe as a whole, where the total amount of motion would be managed by Divinity.
In Meditation VI, he conceives, in a truly craftsmanship manner, the human organism as a type of machine made from bones, nerves, muscles, veins, blood and skin… which works due to a “ fire without light ”, burning inside the heart. The Universe itself is described by Descartes as a machine that works on the basis of mechanical laws, being exclusively constituted from passive matter or from moving atoms, therefore from inanimate parts. This mechanist, qualitative model has been later reformulated in a rigorous mathematical manner by I. Newton to whom the Universe was an automaton whose functioning (programmed in detail) was removing God from equation, so reserving divinity a janitorial role at most. This way the Cartesian – Newtonian mechanist model has directly fueled the materialist atheism, concomitantly leaving the entire knowledge without the Whole category. Interestingly, after more than three centuries of mechanist thinking, the required methodological reference to Whole (“ see the whole picture ”) is even presently treated (with some exceptions, of course) in the Western world as a mystic reflex of Eastern origin (Taoism).
We need to emphasize the decisive contribution of the Cartesianism in the promotion of an anti-ecological attitude: not just the nature but even the living beings (plants, animals = devoid of any soul, and even the other peers especially the women) were and, within certain limits, still are treated in a simplistic, reductionist manner as means or means systems.
World as Living Being / Potentiality. The Introduction of Genuine Living in Contemporary Knowledge
To note: the mechanist description of the world due to Descartes / Newton does not represent the ultimate reality but only its mathematical (hypothetical, parallel) version which to become a physical reality would have to withstand the measurement operation – a quantum operation of great ontological subtlety within which the measured properties (and to some extent the systems themselves) are created during this process. Einstein himself fell into this ontological trap when he formulated the well-known “ EPR paradox ” to demonstrate the incompleteness of quantum mechanics. Under an accurate methodological analysis of mathematical / physical rapport it can be concluded that the mentioned paradox does not even exist. In conclusion Descartes’ / Newton’s machine was not a physical one but a mathematical one at most!
The inconsistency of the “ world as machine ” model has become more and more evident due to some scientific advances of great methodological relevance accomplished during 19th and 20th centuries:
- The discovery of radiation / electro-magnetic field due to M. Faraday (1791 – 1867) and J.C. Maxwell (1831 – 1879) has established the empirical, non-fundamental character of Newtonian physics centered on solid, stable systems rigorously localized in space, leading to the elaboration of a new non-mechanist, electro-magnetic model of nature ( vibrating universe );
- The rise of Darwinism: mutations, natural selection, evolution / Ch. Darwin (1809-1882) had a similar effect over the mechanist model of living systems, highlighting their unlimited evolutive resources;
- The appearance of quantum mechanics (1900 and after) and especially its recent development (after 1990) of the so-called new quantum mechanics – open toward non-traditional technical – engineering applications centered on quantum information, the emergence of decoherence theory and correlatively of general theory of genesis as well as the introduction of complex dynamic systems into scientific contemporary knowledge has clearly shown the coarse character of Cartesian metaphor “ world as machine ” shedding light on potential continuity between physical / psychic – premise for a general theory of genuine living. Years ago Dr. Mae-Wan HO was describing the new created situation in the following terms:
“Quantum theory demanded that we stop seeing things as separate, solid objects with definite locations in space and time. Instead they are de-localized, indefinite, mutually entangled entities that change and develop like organisms.”
- Last but not least, the activation of possible, physis situation (to note: physis is not the Way in Taoism sense but rather my way of the individual being), the “ genuine historicity ” concept (presented above ) would have greatly helped Heidegger in his elaborations, “ deliberately ” stopped ; the three concepts / models just mentioned has clearly shown the optimal (maybe unique) way to efficiently model the alive in broad sense and “ world as potentiality ”:
- The minimal existential premise of selection: nonlinearity / organizational instability / high sensitivity of the system;
- The introduction of living in a physical context – non-univocal selection counting as an opening of physics toward consciousness eventually even bypassing the biological realm (see Fig. 6 above);
- The shift from living to genuine living (tuned becoming or Heideggerian mediation). The new (non-tautological) identity principle. The interchange between things / livings within Dasein in broad sense: some things are activated (becoming “alive in broad sense”) whilst a part of livings remains in tautology, rejecting for any reason the tuned becoming / mediation.
3. Inseparability and Attunement
The modern science and knowledge have been characterized through the absence of some genuine Wholes (because linearity has impeded everywhere the formation and functioning of these Wholes, thus blocking the elaboration and promotion of inseparability); in the last decades the situation has radically changed to the point that it can be asserted the contemporary comprehension is indeed centered on inseparability. This extraordinary perspective change it is marked by some particular methodological landmarks:
- Fuzzy logic – the collapse of dualism and recognizing of onto-logic legitimation of T states ( tertium states );
- Attractors ( Strange attractors ) – a mathematical premise of introducing a generalized morphogenesis into the non-Cartesian model “ world as potentiality ”;
- Non-univocal selection – universal property of non-linear systems allowing the surprising insertion of a psychic moment (spirituality) in full physicalism;
- The recognizing of universal applicability of quantum mechanics, beyond micro-limits, making possible the elaboration of genesis in broad sense as well as the extension of quantum inseparability (entanglement) over all systems including the World as Living Being (see Fig. 1, a fundamental aspect that should not be omitted is the appearance of real from… nothing – Fig. 1 a, b – a very special nothing such as the quantum vacuum; to mention that the fluctuations of this vacuum constitute the source of all potentialities and therefore of the model “ World as potentiality ”);
- Synthesis with harmonizator based on genuine complementarity between contradictories which overtakes the binary models of Cartesian / Hegelian inspiration providing for the first time a coherent pattern to effectively harmonize a world intrinsic diversified;
- Dasein in broad (generalized) sense, centered on the principle “ allego ergo sum ” having a peculiar integrative signification since it promotes inseparability between the Heideggerian Dasein and the new Dasein.
Inseparability designated by Heidegger by the key-term “ Being-in-the-World ” constitutes an existential frame offering to genuine living the unique chance of control by the Whole (Attunement) in two complementary versions: intrinsic one (through existentialia – fundamental term introduced by Heidegger conferring authenticity to the living being through das Er-eignis ) as well as an extrinsic one (through intentionality = vibratory processes aiming to salvation involving communication in broad sense through synchronization, resonance, coherence (see chapter Attunement and Distant Healing below)
Fig. 1 Genesis in broad sense of the real: from pre-history (a) to quantum inseparability / entanglement (d). R = real horizon, P = potentiality
Inseparability and Dasein
Some details: even though the Heideggerian Dasein represents a fundamental phenomenon, the elaboration of a Dasein in broad sense comes with some conceptual reconsiderations of great interest. For example, now we are constrained to clearly differentiate between Heideggerian “ world as living being ” and methodological category “ World as living being ”. Since the Heideggerian Dasein (my own Dasein) is distinguished by an extreme individuation ( specification ) both as real ( I am X ) and potential possible ( I can be Y ), the world as living being attached to this Dasein will necessarily be a unique, personal one, even though opened to other similar (unique) worlds. Therefore, the world as living being in Heideggerian sense represents a subsystem of the World as living being; the latter one that I will specify in the following with capital letter, results as an integral of all unique, finite subsystems. It is worth to underline some temporal peculiarities: the Heideggerian relationship between man and time is radically changed when we consider the extended category Dasein; world as living being is situated not in /separability time (the case of traditional metaphysics) but in / inseparability time: the man exists as time ( sich zeitigt), when there is no man there is no time. This last aspect – inaccurate if we refer to World as living being – I had it in mind when I have elaborated “time in broad sense” – a time of spiritual essence, centered on potentiality (Ip) directly related to real (Ir), detaching myself from the human essence of Heideggerian time, centered on Sorge / Care. It is also necessary to distinguish between time in objective sense and the concept of time ( subjective sense ) which from Aristotle to Kant, and from Hegel to Heidegger has sometimes radically changed its connotation, while the fundamental temporality has remained – and will remain – undissociated from potentiality Ip.
Results that spirituality, consciousness, temporality, nature, genesis all considered in broad sense cannot be reduced to the human presence in the World, their antecedence becoming more and more evident in rapport with the emergence of human phenomenon: in order for Heidegger to assert at a given moment “ human existence is fundamentally poetic ” it was necessary a concertate mobilization of the non-poetical resources (poiesis being par excellence a human referential ) of the World as living being, in other words, of the new Dasein.
Attunement and Distant Healing
A special attention deserves the methodological status of original essence which prefigures the development of the living being as a design (Entwurf) situated not in real but in potential possible from where it confers the system authenticity and / or salvation. We are dealing here with the special relationship between potential self and real self, the last being non-univocally determined by the first one. In his conference dedicated to Identity Principle, Heidegger asserts the decisive role of das Er-eignis in reaching of the essential living (Wesende) by man. Heidegger makes a principial distinction between contingent possibilities, of empirical nature, applicable only to passive things (in which case a certain possible state may be realized or not) and potential possibilities applicable to living beings. Traditionally, the contingent possibility has been considered net inferior in comparison with actuality and necessity; Heidegger denounces this arbitrary existential hierarchy considering possible, especially in his potential version ( when for example a seed prefigures almost doubtless the plant / tree ), as being above any actuality ( see Sein und Zeit, pp 143-144 ); here it is formulated and rightly resolved the key-problem of relation between essence / existence, opposite than J.P. Sartre whose methodological inconsistency is well known: to promote his own ideological options ( his preference for atheism ) Sartre was not reluctant to put the cart before the horse, considering that the essence is derived from existence. For Sartre – and his followers – the Ralph Waldo EMERSON’s adagio is properly suited: “ Most people would rather die than think. In fact they do. ”
Preeminence of the essence (design) toward existence is more and more clearly asserted in contemporary non-Cartesian knowledge, such in the case of Stuart KAUFFMAN who considers that orthodox Darwinism and its correlative “ accidental machine ” are insufficient to explain the appearance of high order complex systems from nature and society, pointing to the special role of their intrinsic self-organization:
“ There is an order in nature waiting to unfold – a natural direction to evolution pulling evolved forms toward complexity. Morphogenesis, or the growth of form, may be at least partially a consequence of inherent self-organization.”
The idea of inherent self-organization, can and it should be extended over all chemical systems ( see Chapter “ Original Situation in Chemistry: is Atomism Fundamental ? ” , section Alive (the Living Thing) in Broad Sense on this blog) as well as in a generalized form to World as living being.
In several postings on this blog I have tried to combine the generous Heideggerian suggestions concerning Attunement by the Whole ( by the means of original essence, respectively of the fundamental characteristics – existentialia ) with the inspired contribution of Roger PENROSE, who postulates the key-role played by Plato’s Eidos, in edification and functioning of the genuine living consciousness; in this context ( controversial of course, but a lot less controversial than promoting Cartesianism in a non-Cartesian world!), Fig. 9 is a geometrized representation of the physical rapports between the original essence (Penrose-Heidegger track), the electric being – one that receives through resonance / synchronization messages from potential / possible and which guides the generation / regeneration of the solid being through specific electro-magnetic currents. Even in some limit situations, when the contribution of the counterfeit real self ( aiming toward uncoupling from original essence ) becomes predominant, the Nature as living being – which promote Wholes, not allowing their destruction or even their excessive disturbance – offers to the individual being (” my own Dasein” ) a last chance: salvation / healing / re-harmonization with original essence or …disappearance. This way, our surrounding reality, a lasting reality, is not a random one but rather a tuned reality, brain, organism, society, Earth (see Gaia model, shortly presented on this blog), universe itself being predominant coherent Wholes.
The vibratory paradigm, valid as a model in real as well as in potential possible, considers World as living being constituted not from solid bodies (such as Newtonian world) but rather from fields, the living beings being represented as some damped oscillators susceptible to communication in the largest possible sense through resonance / synchronization / coherence, resulting the possibility of bringing back of these oscillators from sub optimal situations ( such as uncoupling of the two essences, Fig. 9), to a re-coupling state – process of a spiritual / wavy nature usually designated as salvation / healing. For the purpose of essences re-coupling, salvation / healing utilize(s ) intentions / intentionality and prayer to promote the distant healing – form of extrinsic attunement whose therapeutic efficiency has already and repeatedly established in a scientific manner. Dr. Larry DOSSEY has seriously and courageously approached this phenomena, named by him “ nonlocal mind ” presenting it in conferences/ articles as well as in his book “ Reinventing Medicine – Beyond mind- body, to a new era of healing ”, Harper, San Francisco, 1999. Dr. Dossey follows without any refrains the force lines of non-conventional thinking of some well known scientists, opened toward the spiritual horizon such as: physicist Henry MARGENAU ( having important contributions in modern physics ) and biologist George WALD ( Nobel prize for biology ) who textually declared: “ MIND rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always…the SOURCE AND CONDITION OF PHYSICAL REALITY.” (my underline FF). In regards to the skeptics’ reaction toward the nonlocal mind phenomena, Dr. Dossey ( page 84, on the above mentioned book ) has a …historical reference:
“Skeptics may moan, bellow, howl, and whine, as they did against gravity, but nonlocal mind is an idea whose time has come.”