Diana and others,
The freewill issue continues to be mentioned and Diana raised it again in her "Problems with
Pirsig" post. I followed the debate a month ago with interest and some pained surprise that I
had so little grasp on the topic. Though I wasn't much convinced by arguments over locked
doors, etc, feeling they missed the point, when it came to explaining what the point was I was
flummoxed.
Following some reflection, it now seems to me that the issue of freewill ramifies in two
directions, one rather broad and general, the other rather specific. The broad one is the
significance for decision making of being able to predict future outcomes. While such
predictions are often incorrect, from an evolutionary perspective it is only necessary that
such predictions are right more often than chance would dictate for this ability to become
selected for. While the very word 'predict' assumes language, and while it seems likely that
only human beings have full blown 'freewill', in the sense of being able to explore the likely
consequences of planned actions in advance, and thereby incorporate the outcomes of such
exploration in the making of any decision, it is at least feasible that other animals have a
more rudimentary form of incorporating possible outcomes into present planning. How else
do we explain the supposed ability of a chimp to join two sticks together to reach bananas
placed out of reach? (I believe this has been observed: actually any use of tools would seem
to imply this rudimentary form of will.)
The problem with this broad ramification is that it is easy to suggest that there really is no
'free' choice involved. The chimp will go after the bananas with whatever is at his disposal,
unless he is already sated with food. I think I have a choice, but really I just follow the
dictates of whatever drive is dominant at the time. The sensation of choosing 'freely' is
therefore just an epiphenomenon. (There are also argumants about infinite regress which do
not much concern me since it appears they are artifacts of logic and language, which seem
to pop up whenever we strive too hard to pin down concepts.)
It has occurred to me that a more focussed and perhaps more rewarding explanation of
freewill relates to my ability to attend. If I can choose what I shall attend to, irrespective
whether it is reading my insurance contract or focussing on the space between my nostrils,
the self emerges, if not as an 'editor', as the locus of focus.
While it is hard to conceive of any experiment that can unequivocally test this hypothesis, I
have been fascinated by some simple observations I have been able to make recently while
engaged in Alpha Theta training in neuroprocessing. The Alpha state, which correlates with
rather slow brain wave patterns, is generally considered to be linked to relaxation; sort of like
having our brains in neutral. The Theta state, with even slower patterns, is associated with
the state just prior to or following sleep when hypnogogic imagery occurs. It is also the state
achieved in deep meditation. Neuroprocessing allows immediate monitoring of the brain
wave patterns, usually with audible tones generated by a computer monitoring the output of
the brain via scalp electrodes.
What interested me was the observation that when I was in Alpha mode, and wishing to
move into Theta, attending to any internal sensory modality had the effect of inducing Theta.
So whether I attended to the breathing process beloved by meditators, or the tickle in my
nose, or the pressure of my arm on the chair, Theta was induced. (Sight inhibits Theta, and
sound seems more likely to inhibit it than induce it.) When I thought about what I was doing,
or what was happening, Theta was inhibited. (Mentation interferes with other brain states,
including Beta, linked with focussed attention, where the immediate result of thinking is a
diminution in the amplitude of the desired frequencies.)
What is germane to the freewill argument is the ability to experiment with attending, with
immediate feedback as to the result of this experimentation (moving between brain wave
states.) It is perhaps necessary to point out that it is not possible for me, or most people
without lengthy meditation experience, to move into Theta at will. One reason traditional
meditation techniques take so long to master is that checking my mental state against the
verbal descriptions I have been given of the state I am seeking is almost guaranteed to jolt
me out of the state I seek. (To my surprise, it is possible to maintain a low level attention and
thought process while in the Theta state, but any active thinking has the effect of immediately
terminating Theta.) So while normally my thoughts are unconstrained, 'I' seem able to
'choose' to attend to a variety of sensations rather than think, and the neuroprocessing
format allows me feedback on the outcome of that choice.
For a broad-brush theoretical basis for what is happening, and why it is important, I
recommend R. Adam Crane's article 'Slow waves, profound attention, a compass for the
gifted thinker', which is on the internet. Crane was a friend of David Bohm, (who was a friend
of Krishnamurti's), so the exploration here is germane to the debate on mysticism that recurs
constantly on this forum. Bohm saw thinking as falling into three types. The first is the
condition where the person is not aware he is thinking, and cannot observe himself think, and
so loses contact with 'what is'. This 'psychothenia' is a condition in which the person is lost,
and disaster usually follows. The second kind of thinking occurs when the person begins to
watch himself think. Discrimination (of quality?) now becomes possible. The third kind of
thought is of an extremely high order, in which a kind of quickening occurs as thought
becomes aware of its own structure. The person becomes aware that his self image or ego is
constructed of images based on memory and that he is not who he thought he was. The
'profound attention' facilitated by neurofeedback allows some people to watch thought more
clearly, and the general quieting of the brain also cuts off fear.
While this may seem to be getting a long way from Pirsig, I think it may well be the
breakthrough needed in the exploration of consciousness that has to be done if the
inadequacies of Pirsig's understanding of freewill and the self are to be addressed.
John B
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:39 BST