Natural science is founded on materialism.We treat the independent relationship between inner experience and outer physical reality as an axiom.This cognitive paradigm has successfully explained many natural phenomena; however, certain phenomena, such as those in quantum mechanics and psychological experiments, challenge this view, suggesting the inseparability of the inner and outer.Yet, the inner and outer appear to be distinct categories of existence, and experimental models demonstrating their transformative relationship remain lacking.This has led to issues like the explanatory gap.We propose that adopting holism is a potential solution to reconcile this dilemma: the inner experience can be objectively described and possesses objective causal efficacy.According to holism, objective reality and a causal relationship are not absolute but inseparable from the cognitive perspective.Materialism's view that the inner and outer exist as independent relations is an underlying assumption based on the third-person perspective rather than an axiom.From the third-person perspective, the physical properties of things are described, and we establish a causal relationship confined to spacetime, where things interact through physical medium.This cognitive perspective excels at describing the laws of motion governing simple systems but simultaneously introduces limitations, such as the explanatory gap.From the first-person perspective, the holistic attributes of things can also be objectively described."Inner" and "outer" can be seen as different states of experience, and things here interact holistically without a physical medium, forming causality unrestricted by spacetime.This perspective excels at revealing the laws governing complex systems/phenomena and can reconcile the explanatory gap.These two cognitive perspectives, although superficially opposed, are functionally complementary.Therefore, the generalized Complementarity Principle based on holism can reconcile the contradiction between quantum theory and relativity, providing a falsifiable research pathway for the "subjective" interpretation of quantum theory.Holism also offers a solution for reconciling divergent viewpoints among consciousness theories, enabling phenomena related to consciousness across multiple disciplines to be explained within a unified theoretical framework.To test these hypotheses, we propose an experimental model to demonstrate that, similar to the role of force that we revealed in the third-person perspective, holistic interaction without a physical medium from the first-person perspective is also an objective way of interaction between things.Under holistic interaction, the inner experience, as a holistic feature of things, can also produce observable and objective causal efficacy on reality.
Natural science is founded on materialism.We treat the independent relationship between inner experience and outer physical reality as an axiom.This cognitive paradigm has successfully explained many natural phenomena; however, certain phenomena, such as those in quantum mechanics and psychological experiments, challenge this view, suggesting the inseparability of the inner and outer.Yet, the inner and outer appear to be distinct categories of existence, and experimental models demonstrating their transformative relationship remain lacking.This has led to issues like the explanatory gap.We propose that adopting holism is a potential solution to reconcile this dilemma: the inner experience can be objectively described and possesses objective causal efficacy.According to holism, objective reality and a causal relationship are not absolute but inseparable from the cognitive perspective.Materialism's view that the inner and outer exist as independent relations is an underlying assumption based on the third-person perspective rather than an axiom.From the third-person perspective, the physical properties of things are described, and we establish a causal relationship confined to spacetime, where things interact through physical medium.This cognitive perspective excels at describing the laws of motion governing simple systems but simultaneously introduces limitations, such as the explanatory gap.From the first-person perspective, the holistic attributes of things can also be objectively described."Inner" and "outer" can be seen as different states of experience, and things here interact holistically without a physical medium, forming causality unrestricted by spacetime.This perspective excels at revealing the laws governing complex systems/phenomena and can reconcile the explanatory gap.These two cognitive perspectives, although superficially opposed, are functionally complementary.Therefore, the generalized Complementarity Principle based on holism can reconcile the contradiction between quantum theory and relativity, providing a falsifiable research pathway for the "subjective" interpretation of quantum theory.Holism also offers a solution for reconciling divergent viewpoints among consciousness theories, enabling phenomena related to consciousness across multiple disciplines to be explained within a unified theoretical framework.To test these hypotheses, we propose an experimental model to demonstrate that, similar to the role of force that we revealed in the third-person perspective, holistic interaction without a physical medium from the first-person perspective is also an objective way of interaction between things.Under holistic interaction, the inner experience, as a holistic feature of things, can also produce observable and objective causal efficacy on reality.
Natural science is founded on materialism. We treat the independent relationship between inner experience and outer physical entities as an axiom. This cognitive paradigm has successfully explained many natural phenomena; however, certain phenomena, such as those in quantum mechanics and psychological experiments, challenge this view, suggesting the inseparability of the inner and outer. Yet, the inner and outer appear to be distinct categories of existence, and experimental models demonstrating their transformative relationship remain lacking. This has led to issues like the explanatory gap. We propose that adopting holism is a potential solution to reconcile this dilemma: the inner experience can be objectively described and possesses objective causal efficacy. According to holism, objective reality and a causal relationship are not absolute but inseparable from the cognitive perspective. Materialism's view that the inner and outer exist as independent relations is an underlying assumption based on the third-person perspective rather than an axiom. From the third-person perspective, the physical properties of things are described, and we establish a causal relationship confined to spacetime, where things interact through physical medium. This cognitive perspective excels at describing the laws of motion governing simple systems but simultaneously introduces limitations, such as the explanatory gap. From the first-person perspective, the holistic attributes of things can also be objectively described. "Inner" and "outer" can be seen as two different states of experience, and things here interact holistically without a physical medium, forming causality unrestricted by spacetime. This perspective excels at revealing the laws governing complex systems/phenomena and can reconcile the explanatory gap. These two cognitive perspectives, although superficially opposed, are functionally complementary. Therefore, the generalized complementarity principle based on holism provides a falsifiable research approach for the "subjective" interpretation of quantum theory, potentially reconciling the contradictions between quantum theory and relativity. Holism also offers a solution for reconciling divergent viewpoints among consciousness theories, enabling phenomena related to consciousness across multiple disciplines to be explained within a unified theoretical framework. To test these hypotheses, we propose an experimental model to demonstrate that, similar to the role of force that we revealed in the third-person perspective, holistic interaction without a physical medium from the first-person perspective is also an objective way of interaction between things. Under holistic interaction, the inner experience, as a holistic attributes of things, can also produce observable and objective causal efficacy.
Based on a material view and reductionism, science has achieved great success. These cognitive paradigms treat the external as an objective existence and ignore internal consciousness. However, this cognitive paradigm, which we take for granted, has also led to some dilemmas related to consciousness in biology and physics. Together, these phenomena reveal the interaction and inseparable side of matter and consciousness (or body and mind) rather than the absolute opposition. However, a material view that describes matter and consciousness in opposition cannot explain the underlying principle, which causes a gap in interpretation. For example, consciousness is believed to be the key to influencing wave function collapse (reality), but there is a lack of a scientific model to study how this happens. In this study, we reveal that the theory of scientific cognition exhibits a paradigm shift in terms of perception. This tendency implies that reconciling the relationship between matter and consciousness requires an abstract theoretical model that is not based on physical forms. We propose that the holistic cognitive paradigm offers a potential solution to reconcile the dilemmas and can be scientifically proven. In contrast to the material view, the holistic cognitive paradigm is based on the objective contradictory nature of perception rather than the external physical characteristics. This cognitive paradigm relies on perception and experience (not observation) and summarizes all existence into two abstract contradictory perceptual states (Yin-Yang). Matter and consciousness can be seen as two different statesof perception, unified in perception rather than in opposition. This abstract perspective offers a distinction from the material view, which is also the key to falsification, and the occurrence of an event is inseparable from the irrational state of the observer’s conscious perception. Alternatively, from the material view, the event is random and has nothing to do with perception. We hope that this study can provide some new enlightenment for the scientific coordination of the opposing relationship between matter and consciousness.
Based on a material view and reductionism, science has achieved great success. These cognitive paradigms treat the external as an objective existence and ignore internal consciousness. However, this cognitive paradigm, which we take for granted, has also led to some dilemmas related to consciousness in biology and physics. Together, these phenomena reveal the interaction and inseparable side of matter and consciousness (or body and mind) rather than the absolute opposition. However, a material view that describes matter and consciousness in opposition cannot explain the underlying principle, which causes a gap in interpretation. For example, consciousness is believed to be the key to influencing wave function collapse (reality), but there is a lack of a scientific model to study how this happens. In this study, we reveal that the theory of scientific cognition exhibits a paradigm shift in terms of perception. This tendency implies that reconciling the relationship between matter and consciousness requires an abstract theoretical model that is not based on physical forms. We propose that the holistic cognitive paradigm offers a potential solution to reconcile the dilemmas and can be scientifically proven. In contrast to the material view, the holistic cognitive paradigm is based on the objective contradictory nature of perception rather than the external physical characteristics. This cognitive paradigm relies on perception and experience (not observation) and summarizes all existence into two abstract contradictory perceptual states (Yin-Yang). Matter and consciousness can be seen as two different states of perception, unified in perception rather than in opposition. This abstract perspective offers a distinction from the material view, which is also the key to falsification, and the occurrence of an event is inseparable from the irrational state of the observer's conscious perception. Alternatively, from the material view, the event is random and has nothing to do with perception. We hope that this study can provide some new enlightenment for the scientific coordination of the opposing relationship between matter and consciousness.
Based on a material view and reductionism, science has achieved great success. These cognitive paradigms treat the external as an objective existence and ignore internal consciousness. However, this cognitive paradigm, which we take for granted, has also led to some dilemmas related to consciousness in biology and physics. Together, these phenomena reveal the interaction and inseparable side of matter and consciousness (or body and mind) rather than the absolute opposition. However, a material view that describes matter and consciousness in opposition cannot explain the underlying principle, which causes a gap in interpretation. For example, consciousness is believed to be the key to influencing wave function collapse (reality), but there is a lack of a scientific model to study how this happens. In this study, we reveal that the theory of scientific cognition exhibits a paradigm shift in terms of perception. This tendency implies that reconciling the relationship between matter and consciousness requires an abstract theoretical model that is not based on physical forms. We propose that the holistic cognitive paradigm offers a potential solution to reconcile the dilemmas and can be scientifically proven. In contrast to the material view, the holistic cognitive paradigm is based on the objective contradictory nature of perception rather than the external physical characteristics. This cognitive paradigm relies on perception and experience (not observation) and summarizes all existence into two abstract contradictory perceptual states (Yin-Yang). Matter and consciousness can be seen as two different statesof perception, unified in perception rather than in opposition. This abstract perspective offers a distinction from the material view, which is also the key to falsification, and the occurrence of an event is inseparable from the irrational state of the observer’s conscious perception. Alternatively, from the material view, the event is random and has nothing to do with perception. We hope that this study can provide some new enlightenment for the scientific coordination of the opposing relationship between matter and consciousness.
Physics Within Nondual Consciousness Amit Goswami Introduction A basic problem of philosophy is to establish monism underlying all the apparent dualisms that exist around and about us. Some of these dualisms are consciousness/matter transcendent/immanent conscious/unconscious subject/object life/nonlife mind/brain exteriority/inferiority subject/person The straightforward approach, of course, is to consider all these as real dualities—this is the philosophy of dualism. However, the philosophy of dualism is not considered tenable if we take a scientific, explanatory, and verifiable approach. Take the dualism of consciousness and matter, for example. If consciousness and matter are truly dualistic, that is, made of two entirely different substances, then how do they interact? Their interaction requires a mediator. The obvious absence of a mediator speaks in favor of a monism. According to many physicists, scientists, and philosophers, physics must be carried out on the basis of the philosophy of material or scientific realism—the philosophy that only matter is real; all else, including consciousness, is an epiphenomenon of matter. It is assumed that such an approach serves to establish monism, based on material supremacy, over dualism. But material monism is a pseudomonism. In truth, material-realistic models of consciousness are unable to explain the hard questions of consciousness such as the subject/object split nature of experience (Chalmers 1995). Similarly, there are holistic approaches within the basic materialist ontology (Capra 1996) that try to resolve the consciousness/matter and transcendent/immanent dualisms by regarding consciousness as a holistic aspect of matter (the whole is greater than the parts), but this completely ignores the transcendent aspect of consciousness (Wilber 1996). The philosopher Daniel Dennet (1991) agrees that materialist cognitive-science models of consciousness in the brain do succumb to an underlying dualism, the implicit idea that a homunculus is looking at the computer output that the brain [End Page 535] generates. Dennet's own answer is operationalism (also called logical positivism). Consciousness is a purely operational concept; there is no substance to it and no causal efficacy, and thus no explanation is needed for the hard questions of consciousness. Operationalism does not work because consciousness does have causal efficacy as exhibited in such phenomena as creativity, ethics, and spirituality. But how does one include a causally potent consciousness in material-realist science, in which there is only upward causation—cause rising upwards in the hierarchical structures of matter? Elementary particles and their interactions cause all phenomena of the atoms; atoms and their interactions cause all phenomena of the molecules; molecules and their interactions cause all phenomena of the neurons; neurons are responsible for all phenomena of the brain; and the brain is the causal basis for consciousness. The physicist Henry Stapp (1995) has shown that in classical physics there are only two ways that consciousness can be treated: epiphenomenalism and dualism. But quantum physics has opened a way to introduce a causally efficacious consciousness in physics, and thus in all science (Goswami 1993; Herbert 1993; Stapp 1993; Eccles 1994). In particular, I have shown (Goswami 1989, 1990, 1993) that if quantum physics is interpreted on the basis of the primacy of consciousness as according to the philosophy of monistic idealism, then all the well-known paradoxes of quantum physics can be resolved satisfactorily. Like material realism, the philosophy of monistic idealism is also very old. The oldest known version is probably the Indian Vedānta, but the esoteric traditions behind all great religions are based on this philosophy. In the Western academy, Plato is perhaps the most easily identified monistic idealist. In monistic idealism, consciousness is the ground of all being and is transcendent. What we see as the immanent reality lies transcendent within consciousness until consciousness creates it by a power that Easterners call maya and that Plato identified as projection. The transcendent and the immanent are complementary aspects of one and the same thing; nama (name) and rupa (form) in Vedānta, yang and yin in Taoism, heaven and earth in Christianity, and the archetypes and the shadow show in the allegory of Plato's cave (Plato 1980) are some examples of such complementary pairs. This pair, along with consciousness (which transcends them both), makes up the trinity...
Abstract Incorporating a conscious 1st person observer in scientific theories has been hampered by the lack of physically viable mind/body models. I will present a Cognitive Action Theory (CAT) model of an integrated mind/body system and identify the process of creating conscious experience as the basic building block of reality. This building block is a cyclic process in time, connecting the 1st-person experience with its 3rd-person physical models so that conscious phenomena are possible. We therefore propose a fundamental shift to consider what we do to be conscious as an a-priory activity that must be happening for us to be able to ask the question, “How can conscious beings exist in our physical world?” This activity contains both qualia and an explanation to produce what Archibald Wheeler described as a self measuring explanatory cycle. At this level of definition such a cycle of activity can accommodate any belief system defining physical reality as an explanation for personal experience and therefore provides a framework which accommodates most scientific and spiritual traditions. However visualizing abstract activity as the motion of masses and charges that together compose matter allows us to couple what we do to the formalism of classic physics thus describing a Reality of interacting events. Such a theory integrates the subjective and objective aspect of our experience in a single physical framework, reducing to the linear quantum formalism when the motions involved are small enough to be reversible.