Re: 'In Our Own Image: Humanity's Quest for Divinity via Technology,' by Debashis Chowdhury by Debashis-C on Tue 05 Jun 2007 03:03 AM PDT Profile Permanent Link
It is useful to have a model of the human mind (in a technological environment) from two standpoints in the above discussion. The first standpoint is, what are the progressive layers of ‘functions’ around our consciousness, much like the sheaths (koshas) around the ultimate consciousness, that can be amplified and extended via technology. A good understanding of the sheathing helps us define a robust connection at each level, which then helps our consciousness to be much more effective in doing what it is we decide to do. No distinction is made at this stage as to the moral usefulness of the activities pursued, or even if it makes for a peaceful society. The IOOI book defines four categories of interfaces that progressively move from the physical to the mental. The second standpoint is, if we were to grow into a supra-human organism with a much higher level of consciousness than we currently enjoy – what are the attributes of technology that would connect and amplify our individual capabilities. At this stage, roles and responsibilities become important, and a mechanism must be found for the collective organism to have a brain, a nervous system, an energy handling system, a sensory envelope etc. The organizational model now becomes the human body – and individual humans would be like individual cells in the human body, each with it own limited consciousness – but together able to aspire to a heightened consciousness. The Noosphere concept does hint at this developing intelligence. Yet, we must understand that this is only a first step. Going by the scale of the Universe, the amplification that we achieve from a single cell to a human organism, can be repeated a minimum of five times before we can reach the scale of the Universe! Another way to look at it is, in terms of information capacity, our human capability to absorb knowledge about the entire Universe is a big stretch. How much of a stretch, you might ask? Consider that the universe has about 10exp79 atoms. Our human information content is about one atom’s worth, when compared to the Universe’s Information Baseline**. Hence, it would be good if the principles that we use to scale up our existence to the next level could be continued a few more times at higher and higher levels if organization. The principle that connects us from the smallest to the biggest is Yoga. By rising above the apparent contradictions, IY allows the yogic principles to be integrated into our aspirational existence. My attempt to ‘Integrate’ the conflicting notions of competition and cooperation, of spirituality and materiality, of individualism and empathy, all under a Yogic Umbrella – is expressed as the Mahashrama Cycle. The central questions before us, whether we use just the ‘kosha’ approach to technology, or we qualitatively transform ourselves in the process; comes down to two key questions:
1. Can anthropocentric man come to grips with the ‘reality’ of a composite existence far greater than our individual existence?
2. The cells in the human body gave up certain liberties (say, compared to free living bacteria) to create an organism like us. They also get a lot of benefits. Can we humans overcome the specter of the ‘Borg’ and collectively aspire to a higher level of existence? If yes, what are the safeguards that we need to put in place…
If we agree to be qualitatively transformed, even while living a material existence, the same koshas can now be applied to bring out the capabilities that help us be effective as a brain cell, a white blood cell, etc. Yet, our goal is now profoundly different…** For further info on the Universal Information Baseline please check out the following url:
It is right to be suspicious of any organized entity that subsumes the independence of the individuals within it, and leaves their freedom and individuality somehow diminished. Yet, we all know that organization is important for us to live in modern society. We would like our mail delivered, our food grown, the earth to turn on its axis, and the Sun to provide us with energy – all as part of a greater material organization. The more important questions to ask about organization are two fold:
1. What do I give up, or how must I constrain my Individuality in order to be part of the organization?
2. What are the benefits of such an organization, and what potentials does it open up for me individually, and for those I care for, collectively. The ideal organization is minimally constraining, highly individualized, and opens up great vistas of possibilities for the individuals to explore. A high degree of internal joy and self-determination motives the individuals, who share a unifying identity and purpose. They also share (with some diversity of opinion) a vision for future success that instills a direction to their efforts. The society runs not on inflexible laws and blind enforcement, but on a deeply held consideration for the ‘needs’ of others. Sounds impossible? Utopian? A sure recipe for failure? So what is unique about Mahashrama that makes it less prone to the ambitions of empire builders and the consequent marginalization of the individual? The cycle is based on a 2x2 Yogic concept. The first two segments (Brahmacharya and Grihastha) are already working reasonably well in the world today. The last one (Sanyas) is the domain of the visionaries, the ‘Gnostics’ who have a heightened awareness of the nature of human existence, and the potential that surrounds us. What is missing now, at a civilizational level, is the role of the Vanaprasthi - the organizer, the distiller of the Wisdom from Sanyas, the glue that will connect the individual to the purpose that beckons us. This is less than the role of the Guru from the Ashrama system, as the Vanaprasthi do not themselves need to be spiritually as developed as the Sanyasi. Yet, in some ways it is more, because the Vanaprasthi will need to network and connect with other Vanaprasthi, and a vast web of other relevant and timely information, to come up with the equivalent of a civilization nerve center for humanity. The first yogic divide that Mahashrama unites is the Yin and the Yang; the creation and the dissolution; the emergence of a material reality, and its eventual dissolution into disembodied thoughts, ideas and information. The typical human physical life is a great example of how we can envision this aspect of the cycle. We start off as a very tiny information carrier, mostly in the DNA of our cells, during conception. We grow steadily in physical and mental capability through our childhood and youth. As a young adult we grow economically, as well as bring up our own family- and the growth continues. Somewhere around middle age, our children become independent, our ability to work decreases, and our economic footprint begins to shrink again. The core pursuits in the last years of our life tend to be spiritual, determining what parts of our existence are key, and what learning we can carry forth to our next existence. With death, our economic footprint becomes close to zero, but the difference from zero is important. What we carry with us is our life’s learnings stripped down to its very essentials. The second yogic divide that we bridge is the one between competitiveness and cooperation. There is a high degree of competitiveness built in to the material existence today – especially in the Brahmacharya and Grihastha segments. By contrast Vanaprastha and Sanyas are more about cooperation and finding a common basis for existence. Defined in this way, Vanaprastha is all about service, and finding the common threads that can pull the Mahashrama experience holders together. Empires cannot be built in Vanaprastha, because, when the time comes, the next segment, Sanyas, with its Ego dissolution goals, awaits even the most veteran organizer. The purpose of the Vanaprastha network is to connect to every individual in the organization, just as a Guru would in the Ashrama context, and yet be able to escalate issues to a global level when the need arises. In this manner, Mahashrama is different – because Ashrama allows for many Gurus or Prophets, each with their own following; but Mahashrama seeks to unite all humans. Hence, by necessity it will need to be a secular organization. It will also need to be good at personalization, because, as Debashish pointed out, everybody’s Ashrama segment needs are not the same, or even linear in their sequence. Hence, this is much less a prescription (one size fits all), but a yogic construct we must master in our collective road to self development. Thus, a highly developed Sanyasi could operate equally well on all four segments. Our nature of existence today will necessitate that the Vanaprastha Network operate in the physical plane, where technology can be of assistance. It is possible that the Sanyasi may decide to create a much ‘looser’ Sanyas network at a higher plane, whose guidance we will surely need to ultimately connect us to the universal core of existence. The entire rationale for working on a higher level of existence may be lost if we cannot reflect on what kinds of capabilities might emerge at our next level of organization. Interestingly enough, some of these experiences will be similar to what would be considered deeply spiritual today. The rationale also needs to expand on what unpleasant scenarios (Crash, the future does no need us, Unabomber Manifesto) it can deliver us from. I probably have exceeded the limits for a single response, so I must reluctantly leave that discussion for later…For further details, check out the following url: www.iooi.org
No comments:
Post a Comment