TA107 (Rosen)


Commentary 1




by Joseph McCard

23 May 2008, posted 31 May 2008




I find Rosen's dialogical approach to consciousness parallels my own. This is particularly evident on page [15] when he distinguishes between a topology that places a thing in the world, situated in the world and Euclidean geometry, disembodied monological consciousness.



Rosen's discussion of Cezanne's space reminded me of a visit to the Fogg art museum, 38 years ago. What I experienced was a feeling. I became aware of the Cezanne experience as (what I can call now) embodied subjectivity, new and inexplicable at the time. In Rosen's discussion of depth, not as space but as an invisible cycle of action in which the contained and the uncontained object and subject are integrally incorporated, he summarized my attempts to present consciousness as action.



If the author is indeed capable of the dialogical perspective then he might be able to understand and identify with the following account of consciousness:



Identity is action conscious of itself, action within action, an unfolding of action within and upon itself. The energy of action, the working of action, within and upon itself forms identity. Consciousness is not a thing in itself, it is a dimension of action and is thus invisible. Acquiescence to any stimuli becomes a basic part of the nature of consciousness brought about through action and identity. Acquiescence has a stimulating effect, it is an action. Action accepts all stimuli. Thus sensation is a method by which consciousness knows itself. Conscious energy is a dimension of action. Certainly a 'non-objectivist ontology'.



This action of energy upon itself produced an incomprehensibly large number of units. These units can replace the strings Rosen talks about. These consciousness units are not cuttable because they are not matter, they, as aware pure energy, have no physical content but can transform themselves by agglutination through the allingment of their polaries into electromagnetic energy units and consequently into matter particles. These units are not 'ambiguous things in themselves', they are not things, they are a way of being.



What are called 'unmanageable infinities' are not to be disposed of but are a critical component. True order and organization can only be achieved by granting a basic unpredictability. The universe has to surprise itself, constantly, through freely granting itself it's own freedom, or forever repeat itself, resulting in stagnation. Basic unpredictability follows through on all levels. The motion of any wave, particle or entity is unpredictable- freewheeling and undetermined. An unpredictable nature must be basic to all energy.



Rosen says [11] about the equations of String theory, that 'theorists must be able to solve these highly abstract equations in a manner that produces a specific description of the world as we know it. As things stand now, the equations yield a vast array of possible solutions with no guiding principle by means of which the field can be narrowed in unique correspondence with known physical reality.'



Some have suggested there are parallel worlds, parallel lives (Hugh Everett, Max Tegmark, Michio Kaku) and possible worlds (David Lewis). In such a proliferation of universes, free will is a choice, a guiding principle.



The impossibility of testing shows the significance of Rosen's suggestion to utilize the phenomenological approach.



In his Nobel lecture of 1920, Max Plank made some remarks about quantum physics that could be relevant here as well: 'In this case the quantum of action must play a fundamental role in physics, and here was [is] something entirely new, never before heard of, which seemed called upon to basically revise all our physical thinking, built as this was, since the establishment of the infinitesimal calculus of Leibniz and Newton upon the acceptance of the continuity of all causal connectives.' 




Joseph McCard

     e-mail <shamantics (at) hotmail.com>