Panaware Emergence Anand Rangarajan anandcise ufl edu Dept

Pan-aware Emergence Anand Rangarajan anand@cise. ufl. edu Dept. of Computer & Information Science and Engineering Univ. of Florida

Overview l Phenomenology – l Meditative phenomenology Pan-aware emergence ontology Ontology of subjects – The combination problem – l Representation: A probabilistic model Hierarchical frames – Constraints – l Conclusions

Meditative Phenomenology l Mindfulness: Awareness completely focused at center of phenomenon. – l One pointedness, no split mind. Non-referential awareness: Awareness zooms out and is radically decentered. – Pure consciousness event (PCE), nirvikalpa samadhi. Controversial. l Hindu and Buddhist philosophical schools: longstanding debate over interpretation. l

Ontology Agree with Strawson (JCS, 6: 4, 1999): When awareness present, a subject exists. l When I am aware, I am. l Fundamental level: l Subjects. – Intersubjective phenomenal content. – Awareness NOT cognitive. l Reminiscent of pan proto-psychism. l

Representation Subjects and intersubjective network modeled as directed graph Phenomenology rides on topology. Connection directions indicate propagation of influence.

The Combination Problem l How does phenomenology add up? What about awareness of “mid-level subjects” [James 1890, Seager - JCS 2: 3]? – Intersubjective phenomenal content at midlevel? – l Quantum coherence etc. suggested as objective criteria. l Look at awareness very carefully.

Structure of awareness One-pointedness mode Decentered mode Phenomenological clue to combination problem.

Combination principle? l Awareness binds configuration of lower level subjects l Binding can range from one-pointed focus to a decentered zoomed out focus. l Binding is dynamic: Tacit spacetime assumptions [Rosenberg thesis, 1997]. l Basic idea: Weighted configuration of subjects == Higher-level subject.

Representation Topology connects higher level subject with lower level subjects – possibility space [Rosenberg 1997]. Momentary awareness – weighted combination of lower-level subjects.

Awareness Operator l Awareness operator in configuration space. Example: Low-level subjects – Example: Compound subject. – One very simple example shown above. l Higher-level subject: Weighted combination in configuration space. l Phenomenal qualities not present in definition. l

Pan-aware emergence l l l Lower levels have to be probabilistic in order for higher levels to exist. Emergent properties/laws at higher levels as long as lower levels allow it. Modeled as a probabilistic (Bayesian? ) network [Pearl 2001]. Higher level imposes further constraints not present at lower levels [Wilber, SES 1995]. Spacetime issues?

Probabilistic model Interior: compound subjects and intersubjective content. Exterior: probabilistic network, constraints. Higher level subjects are momentary binding via configuration space awareness operator.

Emergent Constraints Higher-level constraints must be compatible with lower-level constraints. l Emergent laws/properties. l Rule: Coyotes hunt and eat roadrunners. l Cheers: Season 2, #14, Overall episode #84. Cliff to Woody, “He wants that particular Roadrunner. ”

Why Pan-aware Emergence? l Panpsychism: Biased toward cognition, consciousness. l Pan-experientialism [Griffin]: Problem with language – events, processes, occasions. l Awareness: Somewhat neutral and differentiated from self-awareness. l Emergence: Higher level constraints crucial. l Probabilistic model is basic.

Conclusions l l l When I am aware, I am. Combination problem: Clues from phenomenology. Awareness operator - higher-level subjects. Distinction between ontology and representation. No a priori commitment to dual-aspect theory. Probabilistic hierarchical model with emergent constraints.

Phenomenology l Migraine headaches: Reliable and repeatable phenomena. l Two distinct modes of awareness: Awareness concentrated at center of migraine. – Awareness detaches and is decentered. – l Oscillation between modes. l Loss of awareness.

Intersubjectivity Hargens’s [JCS, 8: 12 (2001)] taxonomy: l – – – Intersubjectivity as spirit. Transcendental. Intersubjectivity as context: Mesh. Intersubjectivity as resonance: Worldspace. Ontological: Empathy, Zelig. 2. Worldview: Epistemological: Culture. 1. – Intersubjectivity as relationship: l It-It, I-I.

Representation Taking van Gulick’s [JCS, 8: 9 -10] distinction between ontology and representation seriously. l Different from most standard ontologies. l Ontology Representation Subjects Intersubjectivity Phenomenal content Compound subject Momentary awareness Objects Relations Properties Part/whole relation Processes