Illusion

We are all brought up into an illusion defined by our human, cultural and personal differences. This illusion interacts with illusions of others and lives, evolves and dies with us leaving traces in a grand illusion shared by all of us. It is hard, harsh and very real — no wonder we call it reality. And, in an inexplicable way, it is related to a mystery “out there”.

I simply love the distinction between I and Me made by Tor Nørretranders based on findings of Benjamin Libet. However, there is already an obscure, but precious distinction in the language in which I has self-referring connotations. (Kurt Gödel used the same self-reference to prove mathematically that there can be truths that cannot be proved within a given closed system.)

In the1999 a book misplaced at a computer shelf caught my eye. Since then, I read it five times and chances are that I’ll get back to it again. It was “The User Illusion”. A wonderful attempt by Tor Nørretranders to piece together top scientific thoughts and discoveries on microcosm, macrocosm and between. Its subtitle (Cutting Consciousness Down to Size) captures its essence but it is far from the implications of its content. And one of many could be expressed as a rephrased subtitle — Cutting Science Down to Size.

In this book, Tor’s view appears close to mine. Maybe not so much in what is said or indicated, but more in what is not said.

A deliberate motion, of a hand for example, requires (in average) 0.8 seconds of brain activity (readiness potential). Yet we do not experience such a delay between our conscious decision and the subsequent act. Libet discovered that we become conscious of an urge to act a 1/2 a second after preparations for it started. Obviously, our consciousness (I) does not initiate an action, yet it fools itself that it does. It does have though restrictive power to veto an action initiated by non-consciousness (Me).

The science is almost ready to admit that it is unscientific - at its core. The “objective world”, foundation of all scientific thoughts, disappears like a mirage under rigorous scientific scrutiny. The observer is quietly smuggled in and the world observed by nobody is replaced by worlds observed, and acted in by you, me and others - including scientists.

Does it mean a death to science? I think not. But it must reinvent itself and establish foundations that will survive the test of time. The first step should be to bring into focus us, but not as an object - as a subject - together with our irrational elements including art, ethics and aesthetics above all.

In addition to this, an entirely separate dimension - emotions and particularly humour, as main contributors to the observer's well being should not be forgotten. This dimension, I call it colour, brings life and realness to the observed.