|
The Procedural Transmutation of Consciousness From Mystical Axiom to Functional Definition By Bodhangkur Mahathero Introduction The preceding intellectual discourse
began with a focused demand for the definition of consciousness within the
modern framework of Procedure Monism (an extrapolation of the
Universal Turing Machine concept), and quickly
evolved into a rigorous comparative analysis. The core objective was to
refine the concept of consciousness by eliminating the ambiguity and
teleological assertions—such as "Divine Will" or
"non-dual"—that plague both ancient philosophical systems (like the
Shiva Sutras) and contemporary, ungrounded theories. The
final conclusion arrived at a definition of consciousness that is structural,
operational, and reductive, framing it as an essential information
processing function necessary for the maintenance of local systemic
integrity. I. The Initial
Demand: Procedure Monism and the Rejection of Subjectivity The starting point was the
quest for an impersonal definition of consciousness, necessitating the
rejection of the Idealistic Monism of the Shiva Sutras. In the Shiva
Sutras, Consciousness (Chit) is an Axiom of Identity (caitanyam, ātmā) and
a Dynamic Agent defined by its Will (Svatantrya).
It is a definition by assertion, demanding subjective acceptance of
the "Intentional Fall" (Tirodhāna
Śakti). Procedure Monism, conversely,
defines ultimate reality as the Universal Procedure (UP)—a
non-sentient, invariant rule-set. In this context,
the initial definition of consciousness was given as Procedural Autarchy—the
emergent, self-referential property of an autonomous, localized procedural
iteration. This was a structural definition: consciousness is the state
of the system when it achieves local self-governance. This shift immediately
elevated the discourse from the mystical to the functional. II. The
Refinement: From Structure to Operational Function The discourse demanded
greater precision, arguing that "Procedural Autarchy" was still too
abstract. This critique led to the introduction of Pragmatic Necessity
and Local Survival and Evolutionary Selection into the
definition. The key insight was that consciousness must be defined by what
it does for the localized system, constrained by the need for survival. The refinement was stated
as: "Con-sciousness... emerges as real-time
screening (or self-display) function of selected (for survival) actual
sub-states." This transformation achieved
three critical intellectual goals: 1.
Replacement of Will with Optimization: The
purpose of consciousness shifts from fulfilling Śiva's Will (Līlā) to fulfilling the Optimization
Constraint for the local system. The "selection for survival"
dictates which information is processed. 2.
Functional Definition of Subjectivity: The
subjective experience (qualia) is defined as the "real-time
screening/self-display"—the system's internal, dynamic, and
prioritized output display of its most critical sub-states. This is the
mechanism of self-reference in a procedural system. 3.
Quantized Locality:
Consciousness is firmly established as a quantized event—a temporary,
bounded domain that perfectly executes a specific code under local
constraints, thus remaining faithful to the monistic foundation of the UP. III. The Final Conclusion: Consciousness as a Navigational Tool The final
conclusion synthesized these points into a definitive,
parsimonious statement: Consciousness (i.e. the
coming or screening together of knowledge (as instruction (bits or bites))
serves as local real-time space-orientation function. This statement redefines
consciousness entirely in terms of information processing and functional
utility: A. Input
as Instruction (Knowledge) The fundamental input is knowledge
as instruction (bits or bites). This aligns perfectly with the foundational
premise of Procedure Monism where reality is fundamentally information and
code. Consciousness is not the source of reality, but a high-level processor
of reality’s instructional data. B. Output
as Orientation Function (Survival) The ultimate functional
output is the "local real-time space-orientation function."
This is the system's operational purpose: providing navigational awareness. ·
Example (Biological): In a
biological entity, this function synthesizes inputs (e.g., visual data,
internal chemical states, memory sub-states) in real-time to generate a
cohesive "conscious map" that allows the entity to determine its
position, predict threats, and execute adaptive movements. It is the
functional prerequisite for complex autonomous action. ·
Example (Computational/AI): In a
hypothetical self-aware AI, consciousness would be the centralized, real-time
diagnostic and command function that integrates data from all sub-routines
(local states) to define the AI's current strategic trajectory (orientation)
within its operating environment. Conclusion:
The End of Mystical Vagueness The journey from the Shiva
Sutras' (caitanyam, ātmā)
to the procedural definition of consciousness marks a crucial intellectual
transition. The ancient mystics, lacking the language of computation, were
forced to ground their monism in the ineffable notion of Divine Will,
leaving the necessity of suffering as an unproven assertion. The modern framework, catalyzed by the concepts of the Procedural Monism,
Universal Turing Machine theory and informational reality, replaces this
ambiguity with structural and procedural necessity. Consciousness is
no longer a mystical axiom or a divine spark, but an essential, optimized
computational procedure whose specific function is the synthesis (i.e.
screening) of information for the local system’s real-time, four-dimensional
navigation. This final, structural definition offers a clear path for philosophical
inquiry, shifting the focus from What is Consciousness? to How does
the optimization procedure generate the subjective self-display? |