Software And Reality Construction
Jay
Mon Oct 07 2024 05:19:41 PM PDT
Computers via software have granted us many personal freedoms and creative outlets that did not exist before. With a personal computer, it is possible to manifest our imagination through this electronic viewport. In doing so we begin to merge our reality with the computer’s projected reality. However, it consequently also creates a sense of power and control, “In this world we play the role traditionally assigned to God. We have complete power and our aim is to control everything that happens in this world.” (Bustall 47). We need a new method to get below the surface of what’s happening in these human/computer shared worlds. Joseph Goguen reminds us of another tool, "Hermeneutics is the study of interpretation, particularly the interpretation of linguistic texts, but also the human experience in general" (Goguen). This insight lays the foundation for our exploration into the intricate relationship between computers and humanity. Goguen further asserts that "to be a good interpreter, I believe that it helps to be a 'good person' in roughly the same sense expressed in Buddhism by the 'six paramitas'" (Goguen). In essence, he refers to actions devoid of selfishness. Our comprehension deepens as we delve into the exploration of each paramita. Inevitably, this will lead us to the eternal question, “what is the nature of existence, and how we can know it?” This philosophical inquiry beckons us to explore the profound intersections of human consciousness and technological realms, inviting a continual quest for deeper insights into our existence within the evolving landscapes of computer-mediated reality.
The computer monitor, the viewport into the digital world. Using the monitor I have a great degree of constructive precision, I can organize electrons into meaningful patterns on my screen, and build logical data structures that persist inside the memory of the computer hardware. Through this constructive availability, the potential as a creative outlet is boundless. This is analogous to the Buddhist traditional view, “that our reality is constructed, as opposed to the commonly held opinion that it is given or uncovered. From the standpoint of Computer Science or Artificial Intelligence the idea that we construct our reality makes a lot of sense. ” (Bustall 46). The computer; however, is a modeled reality projected into a 2D display, and the programmer has full reign of dictating what happens next:
We have complete power and our aim is to control everything that happens in this world. The better we are at programming the more nearly we approach total control over what happens. Bugs are an unfortunate accident which further perseverance and skill will eliminate. Everything in this world is open to our inspection, and in principle we can have complete knowledge. We can strip away levels of complexity, expanding macros, looking at object code, at the very bit-patterns. There is some bottom level, the hardware level as a programmer sees it, at which we have complete information about the whole situation (Bustall 47).
While at first impression this amount of power is enticing (being the god of a digital world), it begins to stray one from the Buddhist path of reaching Nirvana. Bustall continues by sharing how the above is a caricature of the basic attitude of Western science. The computer gives its user (we’ll now refer to as “god-user”)—especially a programmer—a simulated taste of this god-like power, but this in turn inflates the ego, and the god-user becomes further lost in their growing attachment. As the god-user becomes more absorbed into this computer world, they lose their grounding, the outside world starts to fade away, and a sort of tunnel vision forms linking the god-user into the emerging digital world. “One way in which this manifests is the kind of intent absorption which we can experience working at a terminal. Outer stimuli are shut off, as we hunch over the keyboard. Gaps rarely occur and it may be hard for us to find the space to restructure our thinking.” (Bustall 47) In a suspicious sense, this is an insight into the innerworkings of external physical reality. This nature of external reality will be further explored later in the paper.
Before we can begin to bridge the nature of the external world to the computer world, we must first understand what it is we are trying to interpret. Earlier in the text we make a reference to Buddhism, to follow Joseph Goguen’s suggestion, I’m going to use the six paramitas as our interpretive lens, and how each relate to the god-user. We will also utilize the philosophers, Martin Heidegger and Alan Watts, to reinforce this explorative looking glass.
The first paramita, Dana:
Which means generosity in Sanskrit, is the joy of discovering that you don't have to impose your own conceptions on the text, that you can afford to be open to it, that you can give up your conceptual (and preconceptual) territory (Goguen 40).
It reminds us to be open, and to allow the world to show us the path instead of always forcing our way, like using the wind to glide and sail instead of resisting and cutting through it with our grinding motors and engines. The programmer using a computer can form a sort of blindness to this reality when being the god-user. They no longer feel bound to the winds of resistance and lose touch with their being in the external world.
The second paramita, Sila:
Which means discipline or morality, is that you don't have to make any special effort, you already have (what is called in ethnomethodology) "member's competence": you are sufficiently grounded in your own tradition and in that of the text to begin work on it, and you are inspired to do so. There is no need for dogma, and you can work with what is actually there (Goguen 40).
Getting in touch with this interpretive means is not through any special method, it is inherent and reminds us to let go of the need to impose external ideas, but rather work with what’s in front of us. A god-user may impose their views of the external reality being like the inner-workings of a computer (e.g., hardware and logical framework), when really all they need to do is step back and see the computer as the machine as it is, and it does not imply that reality must also be structured the same way.
The third paramita, Ksanti,
Or patience, is that you don't have to "succeed," i.e, to satisfy your own, or anybody else's, expectations about the interpretation; you can therefore go at the speed which is proper to the task, and not worry about whether what you discover will be "acceptable". (Goguen 40).
This is where the god-user can really get stumped in the external reality. The god-user gets used to a certain outcome expectance when operating a machine that guarantees an output based on the algorithm being used. The god-user forgets that they don’t always have to that “SUCCESS” return value, that’s they’re so used in their input/output operations. This gives a false sense of acceptance, everything is perfect in its own doing, and is happening exactly as it should. As Alan Watts would say, “the world and everything in it is just I-ing.”
The fourth paramita,Virya:
Or energy, is to work with what is given, with what you are and what the text is (including the whole context of the text and of yourself); you completely accept the tradition of the text, and then you work from there, without, however, being bound by 'conventional wisdom.' You can actually take delight and inspiration in whatever contradictions and difficulties may arise (Goguen 40).
The god-user can create whatever circumstances or attributes that suites their liking in the computer world. This can introduce a false sense of identity in the external world, where their personal attributes are static and unchanging. Heidegger referred to this quality as thrownness (or Geworfenheit), where individuals find themselves existing in a particular situation or context without having chosen it. Virya serves as a reminder to embrace the inherent nature of the world and navigate it with openness and adaptability.
The fifth paramita, Dyana:
Or meditative awareness, is to be completely absorbed in the text, without distinguishing between yourself and it, but being fully aware of the environment of the text and of yourself. Your horizon merges with that of the text; or perhaps there is no horizon, that is, no center and no fringe (Goguen 40).
In this case the god-user does get one slight edge in this particular paramita. The god-user is likely well honed in their ability to be absorbed in their programming, but more so in their internal world created by the computer itself. If the god-user channels this super focus into meditation, they may start to become aware of their external world and escape the clutches of their own imposed god-ego. Unfortunately, if the god-user is unaware of these Eastern methods of meditation, they will only me absorbed into the digital world that digs them deeper into the blindness of the external world.
The sixth paramita, Prajna:
Or transcendental knowledge, is the precision of discriminating awareness, which is willing and able to recognize and to cut through your preconceptions, as well as those in the text; you can learn from mistakes without worrying about ability or inability, superiority or inferiority. This is "stable awareness" rather than confused awareness.
In this context, reductive reasoning can potentially favor the god-user if skillfully utilized. However, objective reasoning proves to be a sharp double-edged blade. While enhancing the ability to reason, it simultaneously poses a formidable obstacle for the god-user seeking to challenge their own preconceptions. This marks the final hurdle to transcend not only the pit they create within the digital realm but also to rise above the constraints of the external world they seek refuge from within their computer reality.
If the god-user utilizes these interpretive methods they may stand a chance to realize they have only been shelling deeper in the abstract, rather than transcending the realized. “It is important to note that non-confused mind arises by transcending confused mind; clarity does not come to us from some separate pure realm of its own. It arises from accepting what actually happens to us, and working with it as it is, rather than as we wish it were” (Goguen 41).
When the god-user finally transcends their state of ignorance, they become the seer, in the sense that they begin to see reality in its true state. Some questions may arise pondering the true nature of reality. This is only natural given that the god-user just left their eyes from the world of computing: “computing teaches us excessive respect for data and conceptual thought at the expense of awareness, we lose the ability to accomplish our computational goals” (Bustall 49). An ability has returned to the seer, they now can discern their surroundings, the awareness is back. “The space of awareness allows insight to arise. Not deductive reasoning, but the sort of sudden flash with which we are all familiar when we are working on some mathematical or computational problem, or even choosing a birthday present” (Bustall 50).
Now with the seer in their revived awareness, they may begin to peek deeper into external reality. In this finally exploration I will utilize a couple sources starting with Douglas Ross, then I will use Bernardo Kastrup, outside of Software Development and Reality Construction to dig deeper into the topic. Ross starts off with his Plex theory (i.e., Only that which is known-by-definition is known -- by definition):
We are included in nature as we do "our understanding", both scientific and informal, so we must understand ourselves, as well - not just what we think we are, but as we really are, as integral, natural beings of nature. How one "understand"s and even who "we" are as we do "our understanding" necessarily is left completely open, for all that must arise naturally from the very nature of nature (Ross 60).
This might delve into esoteric territory. Plex, unfortunately, ceased to evolve with Ross; nonetheless, I managed to retrieve some of his remaining MIT notes on the theory. I would like to concentrate on the primary definition of Plex:
Nothing doesn’t exist.
where "existence" is BEing and is that which is defined by the First Definition -- as purenon-Nothing-ness -- i.e. IS itself. [Notice that the First Definition does not define
Nothing, which has no definition at all -- for <it> ISN’T -- having no self-definition.]
By the Plex Epistemology -- without any definition, Nothing is known.
I.e. < > = <Nothing> = <"Nothing"> = <that which is known without definition>
so Nothing is <The Ultimate Knowledge> by means of which all else is known (Ross "The
Plex Tract").
Ross made a profoundly fundamental discovery. He illustrated, both symbolically and linguistically, that everything originates from the void, using our definition of the word "nothing." Ross, a visionary, perceives the outermost abstract layer of the linguistic game we all engage in. Despite his proximity to the core, his philosophy, "Plex," was ultimately labeled a pseudophilosophy.
Another seer, Bernardo Kastrup, digs into this question of external reality. Bernardo argues that, “matter outside of mind is not an empirical fact, but an explanatory model instead.” To grasp Bernardo's assertion, we must first acknowledge, in his model of reality, that consciousness is not merely a phenomenal byproduct of the brain. Instead, it serves as a foundational medium from which everything originates, implying that the brain emerges from consciousness or the mind. Bernardo suggests that mind does not imply matter and vice versa, so it’s a false dichotomy to reason them in such a way: “Now notice that the epistemic symmetry can only hold for concepts residing in the same level of explanatory abstraction…for then we cannot acquire knowledge of the ontological status of both concepts with a single test” (Bernardo 33). Bernardo is likely referring to brain scans that are claimed to indicate whether one is producing consciousness or not, where the assumption is coming from the materialist, that consciousness is the doing of the person being scanned. Bernardo explorations go beyond the scope of this paper, but his philosophical exercises are a beautiful example of Prajna.
In conclusion, the exploration of the intricate relationship between computers and humanity delves into profound philosophical inquiries and psychological landscapes. The god-like power experienced by users, particularly programmers, within the digital realm bears the risk of detachment from the external world and the inflation of the ego. By drawing insights from Joseph Goguen's hermeneutics and Buddhism's six paramitas, we find a path towards reconnecting with the external reality and fostering a balanced interaction with computer-mediated worlds. The journey from god-user to seer involves transcending ignorance and embracing a holistic understanding of existence. As we venture into the external world guided by the wisdom of philosophers like Douglas Ross and Bernardo Kastrup, we are prompted to question the very nature of reality and consciousness. This exploration opens doors to a continual quest for deeper insights into the evolving landscapes where human consciousness intersects with technological realms.
Works Cited
Bustall, Rodney M. "Computing: Yet Another Reality Construction." Software Development and Reality Construction.
Goguen, Joseph A. "Hermeneutics and Path." Software Development and Reality Construction.
Kastrup, Bernardo The Idea of the World: A multi-disciplinary argument for the mental nature of reality
Ross, Douglass T. “From Scientific Practice to Epistemological Discovery” Software Development and Reality Construction.
Ross, Douglas T. "The Plex Tract." Auton Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, n.d. https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/dougross/autwebsite/The%20Plex%20Tract.htm