The Universe - A Personal View ( Part 2 of 3 )

The Universe - A Personal View ( Part 2 0f 3 )

Chapter (v ) - Chaos and Complexity

The theories in the previous chapters are without a doubt very revolutionary in nature and have pioneered many radical changes in our world view due to new concepts in space, time and our percieved reality. However, the theory we are going to look at in this chapter is no less profound but its impact is only felt by the scientific community initially. Even today, the lay people seldom hear about the theory despite the incorporation of its concepts into numerous scientific and technological disciplines. Since the 1960s when the originator of the Theory of Chaos, Edward Lorenz first proposed his theory, it has found application in almost every branch of science. Nowadays, Chaos has been successfully applied to numerous branches of applied sciences such as weather forecasting, economics, air and fluid turbulence, neural science, human behaviour and even the theory on the origin of life which is one of the four remaining unsolved mysteries in science. With such diversity in the theory's application, it would seem that there must be a lot of magic in the theory. So, without further ado, let us proceed to learn the finer details
of the Theory of Chaos.


( A ) The Theory
89
Lorenz and the Butterfly Effect

With the successful application of both the most reliable Quantum Theory and Einstein's Special and General Relativity to modern technology, scientists during the posts war prosperous years of the 1960s were puzzled about certain dynamic systems such as the weather and fluid turbulence because of their inability to predict the behaviours of such systems. They reasoned that if science could predict the exact dates for the return of Halley's Comet many times over and right to the dot ( Halley's Comet has a circuitous cycle of 76 years ) there should not be any reason why such earthly thing as the weather could not be understood. It turned out that the marvel of a new and universally applicable theory was surprisingly born out of the chaos of the weather. This is a fine example of ' order out of chaos '.
Edward Lorenz was a mathemathician graduated from Dartmouth College in 1938. During World War Two he served in the Army Air Corp as a weather forecaster. He remained working in the field of meteorology after the war. Back in the 1960s even meteorologists treated weather forecasting as educated guesses. So much so that the European Centre for Medium Range Forecasts made the suggestions to scrap weather forecasting altogether to save billions of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. The centre considered that beyond three days even the world's best forecasts were purely speculative and beyond a week such forecasts would be without any value. Luckily, the appearance of the modern day computer invented by John von Neumann came to the rescue by making rudimentary weather forecast modelling viable. So, the meteorologists
kept their job.
There was one Archilles' heel in the scientific method and that is all scientific theories ignore small influences which are supposed to have only insignificant effect on the validity of the predictions of any theory. This method of approximation can easily be seen in the working of the all important mathematical tool of calculus invented by Newton. Small incremental steps are approximated to form a continuous mathematical function. While science is renowned for its logic and precision, it is, in fact, full of approximations and only projects an image of perfection. This is an Archilles' heel because small influences can only be ignored in classical systems which are dominated by linear relationships. In the case of complicated systems with non-linear relationships and feed-back loops and interacting variables even slight changes in their initial conditions can lead to unpredictable results. Such systems which are very sensitive to extremely minute variations in their initial conditions have been called chaotic systems since the introduction of the concept of chaos by Edward Lorenz.
Returning to Lorenz's theory, it was discovered by him in 1961 almost by accident but due credit must be given to him for his shrewd observation and sharp instinct. He was working on his weather forecasts modelling on his first generation computer with a low processing speed. Even with the help of computer modelling, there was no breakthrough. One day during 1961, Lorenz was trying to reproduce just one section of specific data corresponding to a particular time period for further analysis away from the office. Instead of reproducing the data for a whole month from the beginning, he decided to take a short cut by just feeding in the data of the week he wanted based on old printouts. All hardware and software in his computer remained unchanged. To his complete surprise, he came back from his coffee break to find a totally different result from the original printout copy. He immediately took the cue, for a chaotic system like the weather, the final results depended on each and every step of its past history and even seemingly negligible changes in its initial conditions would lead to unpredictable final positions. This was the beginning of the Theory of Chaos with a little kind help from serendipity.
The slight variations in the initial conditions that lead to the final unpredictable chaos and turbulence are commonly known as the Butterfly Effect meaning a sensitive dependence on initial conditions. It is so called because it is said that in theory the flapping of a butterfly's wings in South America can ultimately lead to a hurricane in the Carribbean. This is how it is supposed to happen. When a butterfly flaps its wings this can
90
create a slight depression in the atmosphere around the butterfly. Here is the key concept. When the surrounding conditions are right this small depression will grow into an atmospheric depression that may move out to the ocean to pick up more energy from the evaporating water upon their condensation in the upper atmosphere.This energy originates from the latent heat released by the water vapour when it changes from its gaseous state back to liquid form as rain in the upper atmosphere upon condensation. When the differential between the pressure distributions in the ocean and land mass are big enough a huge turbulence can be formed in the depression as a result of cooler air from high pressure regions with higher density rushes into the depression to fill up the relatively low density areas in an attempt to even out the differences. You must have seen the formation of a turbulent eddy when you try to empty a bath tub by pulling the stopper plug at its bottom. The drain pipe under the plug is the low depression area because it is hollow and provides the space for the water in the tub to go under gravity. As the huge body of water in the tub as compared to the relatively small drain hole scrambles for exit towards the drain pipe, a huge turbulent swirl of water is formed on the water surface above the drain hole. This is a comparable feature to the hurricane. Therefore, the Butterfly Effect represents the small change in the initial conditions of a chaotic system which in conjunction with the numerous existing appropriate conditions including the peculiarities of the past history in the system working in synch in a very complex and unpredictable manner to give rise to the resultant chaotic turbulence such as a hurricane. Not every flap of a butterfly's wing will result in a hurricane but when the conditions are right a hurricane can be born of the flutter of a butterfly's wings. Recently, there was a new movie in the cinemas called “Butterfly Effect”. It is a sci-fi story dealing with changes in a person's past history and their strange effects on the present. It gives a completely erroneous concept of the Butterfly Effect as applicable to the science of Chaos. I just feel that this is a fair warning to the readers in case they have been misled. The Theory of Chaos is, in fact, an attempt to identify the signs and to understand the working characteristics of chaos. In other words, it is a theory to discover the order in chaos !


The Lorenz Attractor

So what were Lorenz insights into chaos ? Well, it boils down to this. There is a threshold below which the small variations in the initial conditions remain small. Once a certain threshold is reached (this threshold is different for different chaotic systems) the system becomes chaotic and unpredictable with trends and patterns that do not repeat themselves. By now, the reader should have some pretty good ideas about what a chaotic system looks like. In scientific terms, such systems involve non-linearity, feed-back loops among the variables within the system and interactions on a multi-lateral basis between its parts. Such interactions will give rise to unpredictable and non-repeating trends and patterns because each round of interaction will lead to complex changes to the start-up conditions of the next round of endless multi-lateral encounters between the different variables. Therefore, the sum of the parts of such systems can be greater than the whole. As a result of all these complications, chaotic systems are extremely sensitive to even very small changes to their initial conditions as mentioned above.
Now, let us have a look at the specific contribution of Lorenz to the Chaos Theory. Having noticed the power of the Butterfly Effect in his computer weather models, Lorenz went on to test his theory in mathematical models of his own design. He was able to prove that even with the simplest nonlinear models of just three variables in three equations the system can become chaotic. His equations that described the behaviour of chaotic systems which he first wrote on a piece of paper had been called:- “ That beautiful marvel of a paper. “ by many scientists who followed and joined in the subsequent development of the Science of Chaos. In applying his equations, Lorenz used different values for his three variables and plotted the results of their continuous changes in a three dimensional graph. The locus of dots representing the continuous values of the results of the interactions between the three changing variables became the most famous icon, the double spiral called the Lorenz Attractor in the Science of Chaos. It resembles
91
the two opened wings of the butterfly or a mask in the form of an owl both with two large holes in the middle of each wing. The special features to notice are that the lines never intersect ( meaning the results of the interactions are never the same ) and the patterns formed by the locus of the dots shows very similar but never quite the same patterns no matter how long in time the system is allowed to develop.
Lorenz equations have been successfully applied to turbulence created by air flow in aeronautical engineering, convection currents in heating up water to boiling point, water turbulence in a rushing stream and even mechanical systems with feed-back loops like his own Lorenzian Waterwheel and, of course, weather forecasts. Other social applications such as predictions on population growth and control of epidemics and even prevention of the spread of AIDS. His theory was truly a bridge connecting various scientific disciplines. Scarcely within one decade of the appearance of Lorenz's Theory of Chaos, it had found its application in branches of science ranging from meteorology to thoretical physics, molecular biology, cardiology, astronomy, neural science, human behaviour, economics and even a new theory relating to the big scientific puzzle on the origin of life. So great are the contributions of the Theory of Chaos on various branches of science that the theory is considered to be the most important conceptual breakthrough in theoretical physics since Quantum Theory and Einstein's Relativity.
While we are still dwelling on the subject of Attractors which are,in fact, mathematical features ( but not real physical objects that we can lay our hands on ), I would like to mention that there are many other famous Attractors relating to other chaotic or dynamic or even mechanical systems that describe the working of things such as the swinging pendulum and fluid or chemical turbulence. Nevertheless, Lorenz Attractor remains an icon and a widely accepted symbol of Chaos.


Forerunners of Chaos

Before the formalization of the Theory of Chaos by Edward Lorenz, various elements of the theory had, in fact, been taking shape in the late Nineteenth Century through the genius and relentless efforts of several great mathematicians of the time. The most noticeable of these are Henri Poincare' and William Rowan Hamilton. The former is the French inventor of a branch of mathematics called Topology which we have encountered earlier in the Strings Theory, M-Theory and Twistors Theory dealing with the fundamental building blocks of matter. It has everything to do with the geometry relating to twisting and warping of shapes that is supposed to occur very often at subatomic levels and under gravity such as the formation of black holes as predicted by Einstein's General Relativty. On the other hand, Hamilton is the Irish mathematician that played a very important part in Turbulence Dynamics. His mathematics together with Gauss, Hilbert and Riemann's mathematical skills had also helped Einstein to formalize his Theory of General Relativity in the form of mathematical formulae, the famous Field Equations.
The part played by Poincare' in the run-up to the Theory of Chaos was his mathematical discovery of the “ Poincare' Recurrence “. This is a phenomenon that will occur if a transformation (a mathematical operation applied to a mathematical function) is applied repeatedly to a mathematical system, and the system cannot depart from a fixed area or value, it must return infinitely often to states near to its original state. This is one of the most important features of a chaotic system. That is the motion of the system is periodic. Poincare's main contribution to mechanics was to re-introduce geometry back into the discipline.
As for Hamilton, his studies in the dynamics of various systems had led him to discover other special features of such systems. Together with his peers including Poincare', they discovered some useful and very interesting features of dynamic systems. Without going into the mathematical technicalities which are very complicated, we shall attempt a qualitative description of such features that may provide some useful clues to the behaviour of chaotic systems including human behavioural patterns.
Poincare' and a Swedish mathematician called Ivar Bendixson proved in
92
a theorem that typically only four types of behaviour occur in a system of differential equations in the plane ( as opposed to three or higher dimensions ). The reader should take special note of the word typical. The theorem only predicts typical but not certain behaviour which does not exist within the concept of Chaos. These features are called the Sinks, Sources, Saddles and Limit Cycles. A Sink is a point where all activities tend to be attracted to. If one starts a system moving from a Sink, nothing happens. It is just like starting a car with a dead battery. It is a stable position. A Source, on the other hand, is a point from which all activities tend to move away. It is similar to a drop of water on top of a ball. It is an unstable point. If you disturb the ball even very slightly, the drop of water will run off. A Saddle is a bit of both a Sink and a Source. The point is stable towards one plane just like the side profile of a saddle for a horse ( which looks like a valley ) but unstable towards the other plane like the cross-section of the same saddle as viewed from the front ( which looks like a hill ). A drop of water on top of a saddle will run down the left or right side but not up the front or up the back of the saddle which is in the shape of a valley. To recapitulate, when you start a system at a Saddle, all activities tend to move to either left or right but stable towards the front and back when disturbed. It is just like a person riding on a saddle on the back of a horse. You mostly slip to either side of the saddle but seldom slide to the front or backwards along the plane of the saddle. The last typical feature is the Limit Cycle. This feature is most interesting. If you start your system from here, you will just go round and round repeating the steps over and over again like an eddy of swirling water. It is said to be periodic. This is the “ Poincare' Recurrence “. Apart from these four typical features, we should also note the existence of a Bifurcation Point which is not part of the Poincare'-Bendixson Theorem but a very crucial consideration when dealing with chaotic systems. A Bifurcation Point is very similar to the Tipping Point concept. It is a point or threshold beyond which a system turns chaotic. In more technical jargon, a Bifurcation Point is a point beyond which a system becomes very sensitive to even very minor changes to its input parameters.
All the above features are very useful in dealing with chaotic, nonlinear dynamic or turbulent systems. When these features are detected in a system, one could expect the trend of the activities in such systems to follow the characteristics associated with each particular feature. Again, I must emphasize that no definite predictions can be made as is the usual case with all chaotic systems but at least we can be sure that the rules of Chaos are applicable to such systems. Later on in this chapter, we shall learn how these characteristics can be put to practical use. In case the reader wants to know what chaos actually looks like in action, just switch on your personal computer and let it go to the standby mode. The strange and continuously changing electronic patterns and images that seem to repeat themselves but not quite exactly so are, in fact, chaotic electronic imaging resulting from the working of just a few computer rules of a chaotic and nonlinear dynamic system.


Mandelbrot and Complexity

Complexity is not exactly Chaos but it is closely associated with Chaos insofar as many complex systems also display the characteristics of chaotic systems. As regards the discoverer of complexity, Benoit Mandelbrot is generally considered to be the founding father of Complexity. Before going further, I must clarify the scientific meaning of the term Complexity. It differs from the everyday usage in that scientific Complexity, in fact, means that there is some internal order in complex physical features ( or phenomena ) and complex systems or objects ( which are actually made up of much simpler, regular and recurrent components ). This is simplicity in complexity. All such apparently contradicting concepts like order in chaos and simplicity in complexity lead to an inescapable conclusion that there is a subtle order in the universe behind all the
confusion and hustle and bustle of our daily life. Mandelbrot discovered what he called a Fractal Universe between 1950
and 1970. He developed his geometric mathematical concepts in his famous book , “The Fractal Geometry of Nature” which can be used to describe and analyze irregular features
93
of nature that is beyond the reach of regular mathematical equations. As early as the 1600s, Galileo had remarked that the language of nature is mathematics and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures. Mandelbrot also became aware of the role played by geometry in all natural phenomena. He said in his book :- “ Clouds are not spheres, mountains not cones, coastlines not circles, and bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in straight line.” However, he saw self-similarities in all these natural phenomena and that is they all display similarity of scale. Mandelbrot invented the term “Fractal” to describe any geometrical objects that continues to show detailed similarity in structure over a large scale. Although we cannot provide a quantitative description of complex features like a coastline and a cloud yet we can make use of Mandelbrot's Fractal Geometry to describe such features qualitatively. For example, if you magnify the coastline of an island like Greenland you will find that it is made up of bays separated by headlands. Regardless of the scale of your magnification, the coastline of greenland is still made up of bays of different sizes separated by headlands of various sizes. Further examination of these magnifications of varying scales will reveal that the bays and headlands resemble triangles of different sizes. More specifically, scientists have discovered that Fractals can be measured in units known as Fractal Dimensions which are scales rather than the usual absolute measurements in metres or centimetres. For example, The Fractal Dimension of a coastline is usually between 1.15 and 1.25 while that of a snowflake curve is approximately 1.26. Therefore, the scale of the curves in a coastline resembles those in the snowflake. They are both within the one-and-a-quarter range. There are similar resemblances in scale between other irregular shapes in nature such as the leave of a tree and a cloud in the sky. Once we see the connection between the scales of seemingly different complex shapes in nature, we will come to realize that there are really more similarities in things and people than actual differences. A smile is always a gesture of friendliness regardless of the language we speak. This is the revelation of the science of complexity. Complex shapes can be simple and things that look simple can be complicated if you examine them closely enough.
In fact, the idea that the curves occurring in a snowflake actually resemble a equilateral triangle was first observed by the Swedish mathematician, Helge von Koch in 1904. This is the forerunner of Mandelbrot's Fractal Geometry. The Koch Curve has some very interesting properties. It is a continuous loop of infinite length that never intersections on itself. Besides, the successively smaller equilateral triangles drawn next to one another can extend indefinitely to theoretical infinity. That is why the Koch Curve can ultimately resemble a coastline. Furthermore, the area initially covered by the simple snowflake in the shape of the Star of David defines the boundary of all successively smaller equilateral triangles that can be drawn from it. This is paradoxical in that it contains infinity in a finite amount of area as defined by a circle enclosing the initial equilateral triangle that has started the snowflake figure. Because of its paradoxical nature the Koch Curve was largely ignored when it was presented at the beginning of the Twentieth Century. Luckily, it was revived by Mandelbrot's Fractal Theory of the universe otherwise this great mathematical tool in geometry would have been lost for good.


Ilya Prigogine and His Dissipative System

Complexity has also unexpectedly thrown some light on the possible explanation for the origin of life itself. While scientists were conducting their research into complexity, they came across certain chemical processes which provided the basis for profound insight into the concepts of chaos and complexity. Eventually, it led to Prigogine's formulation of his Theory on Dissipative Systems which earned him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977. His paper on Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics threw new light on the Second Law of Thermodynamics and reconciled the differences between the apparently opposite views implied by physics and biology on the Second Law whereby a century old dispute was resolved. It will be recalled that the Second Law dictates that everything must become more disorderly over time while the growth in complexity of living organisms
94
appears to be exempt from this destiny. Prigogine proved that irreversibility is the key to understanding the
apparent conflict between physical and biological laws as far as the Second Law of Thermodynamics is concerned. In classical thermodynamics, irreversability leads to waste and loss of energy while in biological systems irreversability gives rise to higher order and complexity which are indispensable conditions for the emergence of life. However, this growth in complexity and more orderliness is achieved at the expense of the organism's environment. He demonstrated in a particular chemical process that with the system's own catalystic feed-back loops it creates the instability through repeated self-amplifying feedbacks that leads to the formation of new complex structures on successively higher levels after each round of reactions which are multilateral. Such automatic feedback, self- sustaining and amplifying multilateral reactions will occur once the “ Bifurcation Point “ ( defined as a point or threshold beyond which chaotic behaviour will be exhibited in a dynamic system as explained above ) is reached thus setting in motion the irreversible engine of Chaos. Therefore, Prigogine concluded that :- “ Irreversibility is the mechanism that brings order out of chaos.”
It would seem that Prigogine had resolved the enigma of the apparent immunity of living organisms from the Second Law of Thermodynamics by viewing the puzzle through the proper perspective. For physical systems with no feedback loops and devoid of nonlinearity, the Second Law does lead to greater disorder in the total perspective of the closed system such as the universe as a whole. In other words, the whole universe is heading towards a heat death when all the differentials in energy levels in every part of the universe have been equalized. When such a stage is reached no further activities including mechanical and biological can be carried out. On the other hand, biological systems are open systems that will become more and more orderly in the opposite direction at the expense of their environment with which they interact. When living organisms grow, they consume fuel in the form of food and create wastes in the process. Even for plants that undergo photosynthesis, they draw their energy from the sun's nuclear furnace. When the sun's energy runs out all biological systems will die out as well. In the meantime, the irreversibility in biochemical reactions prevent the complex structures in living organisms from reverting back to their original primitive states. Thus, irreversibility “ brings order out of chaos “ that characterise the nature of the original randomly arranged atoms before complexity sets in and before the emergence of life which is composed of atoms. There is, in fact, no paradox between life and the Second Law. As Bertrand Russell once said :- “Paradox is truth standing on its head vying for attention.”


( B ) The Inspirations Mathematics of Chaos and Complexity

While the concepts of Chaos and Complexity are not two distinct sets of self-contained and tightly knitted scientific theories, they have, nevertheless, provided two very useful views of the universe and practical methodologies applicable to a wide range of scientific disciplines. Prior to the inception of these two concepts, scientists had a very difficult task when they were faced with complicated nonlinear equations describing problems that involve three or more interacting variables with feedback loops and multilateral influences. For example, in the accounting and taxation field, there is the familiar tax on tax problem which I am sure all taxpayers will understand. If your employer agrees to pay your income tax as part of your remuneration, then the tax so paid by your employer will become part of your income that is again subject to income tax. This further amount of tax payable on the original income tax due on your original income will again give rise to another further smaller bit of tax payable and so on and so forth to theoretical infinity of successively smaller amounts. In practice, the Taxation Office will just apply a
95
factor to your original income which will effectively leave out the successively insignificant amounts of tax on tax smaller than, say a dollar. This is simlpy a method of approximation but this may not be good enough for theoretical physics that deals with micro units such as elementary particles. More importantly, approximation definitely is not accurate enough for chaotic systems which are most sensitive to even normally negligible changes in their initial conditions or inputs.
Back in the1940s, particle physicists very often encountered infinities in the process of solving their differential equations because of the small scale of spaces within which they had to deal with reactions between elementary particles in accelerators. In those days, the most efficient method to solve nonlinear problems was a mathamatical device called Perturbation Theory. First you assume that the target problem is close to some solution of previous linear problems fellow researchers had earlier solved by trial and error which should be very close to your target solution.This assumed solution of the earlier linear problem would be a small perturbation away from the real solution. Then, the unsolved part of the target problem would be reduced to the famous Feynman Diagrams popularly used in particle physics to trace out the routes of elementary particles. With a bit of luck, you would converge to a stable solution by trial and error.
Then in the1960s, Kenneth Wilson of Cornell University invented the ingenius Renormalisation Group Theory that can eliminate the unwanted infinities in the differential equations.This made the procedures of solving nonlinear problems much easier but still there is no certainty of a solution in a reasonable amount of time. The essence of Wilson's theory is to identify the self-similarity of the target system and thereby breaking down the complexity at successively higher levels until the target problem is solved. This is putting the principle of self-similarity in Complexity into practice. Despite its lack of certainty in securing a solution within a fixed period of time, Wilson's theory had succeeded in applying the self-similarity or scaling concept in Complexity to reduce the enormous difficulty in solving nonlinear problems through the more traditional methods such as perturbation and Feynman Diagrams which largely depend on trial and error.
On the other hand, the identification of features such as the Bifurcation Point, the Source, the Sink, the Saddle and the Limiting Cycle in nonlinear and dynamic systems is a great help in predicting the trend of the development of such systems. Notwithstanding our impression that our scientific techniques have reached new heights with the aid of super computers the solving of nonlinear equations remain a sticky issue. Any system with more than three interacting variables poses a challenge although systems with even a few more interacting variables can ultimately be solved by modern day computer power. Nevertheless, even computers have to rely on concepts in Complexity and Chaos such as Self-Similarity and Bifurcation Point to support its software for nonlinear problem solving. Patterns of self-similarity are the cues for computers scanning to detect the likely presence of cancer cells in breast cancer patients, for example.
The Theory of Chaos and Complexity has provided us with other alternative approaches to describing the universe other than traditional mathematics. It opened the door to qualitative and visual descriptions of scientific phenomena which are otherwise too complicated to be represented by traditional mathematical equations
because some phenomena contain too many crucial variables.


Complexity and the Emergence of life

Through Prigogine's insights scientists have acquired a better grasp of the principles governing the emergence of life. Since the publication of Prigogine's Theory on Dissipative Systems, other scientists have resorted to mathematical modelling to simulate the conditions necessary for life to develop spontaneously. Although no definitive conclusion can be reached to solve the enigma of life's origin yet mathematical models have been able to provide some theoretical basis for testing different likely candidate theories for the origin of life. With the aid of ever improving computer technology, more
96
input factors can be fed into the various models as initial conditions so that the results will be more realistic and sophisticated. Even more advanced nonlinear models with more feedback loops do not pose any challenge to ever increasing computer power. One such realistic mathematical model is called the Daisyworld Model.
The inventor of the Daisyworld Model is none other than the proposer of the Gaia Theory of our home planet, James Lovelock. It should be recalled that his theory treats the earth as a living and breathing organism which demands respect from her inhabitants thus highlighting the vital importance of environmental protection awareness. He advanced this mathematical model in response to sacarstic criticism of his Gaia Theory. His critics challenged his theory on the ground that it is impossible for lifeless materials making up the earth such as air, water, rocks and soil to act in unison to create a wholesome and self-sustaining entity as stipulated in the Gaia Theory. They even jokingly asked if such dead materials had to hold a conference to decide on the behaviour of the weather in the coming year.
To rebut his critics, Lovelock created a hypothetical world warmed by the sun with only two species of living organisms- the black and the white daisies. He inputted some simple mathematical parameters such as the range of temperatures and the length of seasonal cycles in this Daisyworld and let the computer model run. Seeds of these daisies were scattered throughout this model planet. This imaginery world had all the necessary conditions for life but daisies only growed within a suitable range of temperatures. The results of his simulations were nothing less than striking. As the temperature increased, the black daisies thrived first because they absorbed the sun's heat more easily than the white diasies and a black belt of daisies appeared along the equator. But as the temperature increased further, the black daisies could no longer stand the heat around the equator and so they spread to the temperate regions. Then white daisies began to appear in the equatorial regions because of their ability to reflect the heat. During this second stage, white daisies inhabited the equator while the two poles were still too cold to alllow the flowers to grow. As the temperature increased still further, all plant life perished at the equator. At this third stage, white daisies replaced the black ones in the temperate regions which moved out to the poles. The final position was that the equator was barren while white daisies inhabited the temperate areas and the black ones migrated to the poles. If the temperatures fluctuated between the optimum range within these three stages, the cycles repeated themselves like an intellegently designed program.
The most striking phenomenon is that the temperature was kept reasonably constant during the different cycles. When the sun's temperature is cold, Daisyworld increased its temperature by the heat absorption ability of the black daisies because these were more numerous when the sun was cold. Conversely, while the sun's temperature is hot, the heat reflecting ability of the white daisies reduced the planet's temperature because these are more abundant when the sun was hot. This is a perfect image of a self- regulating ecosystem. Thus, Lovelock was able to throw a counter punge at his critics by proving that an ecosystem can be self-regulating and self-sustaining ( if it is allowed to do so freely ) without any intellegent planning or consciousness involved in the self- regulatory process. This is a process known as Autopoiesis pioneered by the Santiago School led by Maturana and Varela who have contributed substantially to the latest theory on the meaning and emergence of life. The thing we called life distinctively possesses the miraculous qualities of self-organisation, self-regeneration, self-regulation, self- perpetuating and self-sustaining. Everything about life seems to be automatic and, hence, the term Autopoiesis is appropriately used to describe the process of life. Poiesis comes from the Greek word for poetry implying creation, making and beauty. So it is with life. The important moral to be learnt from Lovelock's Daisyworld Model is that if we humans leave our environment alone everything would be fine. It is through intervention and depletion out of human greed and vanity that our beautiful and delicate Big Blue Marble is being slowly destroyed and desecrated.
Subsequently, Lovelock refined his Daisyworld model considerably by introducing greater numbers of living species with more sophisticated characteristics and the results were even more convincing with remarkable resemblance to our mother earth. The most important inspiration we can derive from Chaos and Complexity is that things
97
that look complicated may originate from just some simple rules. For example, some simple rules in the game of chess can give rise to an infinite number of complex situations which even a champion cannot anticipate and for which he may not be able to find a solution thus leading to a checkmate by his opponent. This is the result of multilateral interactions with numerous feed-back loops created after unpredictable moves by both chess players. On the other hand, things that look simple may originate from many complex interactions. For example, a lot of complicated chemical processes have to be carried out if we want to obtain 100% or even near to 100% pure water. I once heard a story from my secondary school science teacher about the famous American inventor Thomas Edison. The story goes that Edison was asked to fix up a malfunctioning steam engine. He spent some time knocking on different points on the engine body and finally used a piece of chalk to put a cross at one particular point. He ordered that a hole be drilled at that point and the engine worked properly after this was done. Edison asked for a fee of $100 dollars but was challenged on asking too much for simply putting a chalk mark. He said emphatically that only $1 was charged for making the mark but the other $99 was for knowing where to put that mark the knowledge of which he had spent his whole life in learning. It was definitely not as simple as it looked. There you have it. Simple things may have very complicated origins. There is a very well-known misconception in people's understanding of scientific theories called the Principle of Conservation of Complexity. Most people assume that complicated things must have complicated origins. They instinctively feel that the complexity in things must be conserved and can be traced back to a complex origin. Well, this is one of those occasions among numerous others that your natural instincts fail you. Common sense is only applicable to common situations. Extraordinary circumstances call for extraordinary measures !


( C ) The Eccentric Ideas

The most complicated of all structures in this universe is undoubtedly the human brain which consists of over 100 billion cells. The circuitry is so intricate with numerous feed-back loops that it can be considered as a classic example of a chaotic system. The human brain is the motivating force behind human behaviour and by analogy the grand motor of society. Therefore, the Theory of Chaos and Complexity is the most useful of all scientific theories in predicting behaviour in social and economic systems. Let us try to apply the theory socially and economically.
The significance of the theory in human behaviour lies in the fact that human beings are typical chaotic systems being very sensitive to changes in the initial conditions of the inputs affecting their behaviour. As mentioned above, the brain is such a huge chaotic machine with multiple feed-back loops that the predictions of the end results in terms of human behaviour are nearly impossible. However, the theory can predict the trend towards the possiblities of certain behaviour when certain key indicators reveal themselves in the behavioral patterns. An overall note of caution derived from the Theory of Chaos as applied to human affairs is, of course, to take absolute care before initiating any specific action. A corollary from this warning is not to take any action without thinking over its possible consequences.
The key to applying the rules of chaos in human behaviour in a group is to look for tell-tale signs of the key features of a chaotic or turbulent system which are :- the sink, the source, the saddle, the limiting cycle and the bifurcation point. Whenever there is a group of people there are bound to be different types of personalities present. There may be people who are centres of attraction for other people in the group. May be it is the result of their flamboyance or strong personalities. These are comparable to the concept of the sink. Then there may be those who are very keen to initiate some actions in the group. These are comparable to the concept of the source. Others are very often indecisive in their actions and sway between different opinions. These are comparable to the saddle. Still, there are some who prefer to form a small group on their own within the
98
larger group and uphold the interests of the their own small circles. These are comparable to the limiting cycle where no successful policy can be implemented due to a fragmentation of the opinions and conflicts of interests arising between the smaller and the larger group. Finally, the most important feature to note in a small social group like a trade association or a social club is the bifurcation point. There may be some special events like an election of the governing body of the group that may trigger some upheaval such as a struggle for power and contorl. This situation is comparable to the emergence of the bifurcation point. Extra care should be taken to prevent the situation from deteriorating into a full blown chaos which may have serious ramifications on the stability and peaceful existence of the group as a whole. With different personalities and personal interests and values, it is very often a volitile situation. Any slight changes in the moods and preferences of the individual members of the group can gives rise to different initial conditions that can lead to chaotic and unpredictable results. That is why the Theory of Chaos has been successfully applied to social and economic phenomena.
Similar analytical procedures are applicable to financial and economic behaviour. Investment activities in the stock market and other financial instruments are as unpredictable as the weather because they are all chaotic systems. The traditional methods of predicting trends in stock prices based on past data are less than reliable because very minor changes in the conditions at any particular point on the stock prices graph can lead to unpredictable results on account of the chaotic nature of investor behaviour. There was a remarkable story from a well known sharebroker firm on Walls Street in New York City. A competition was held between two brokers to predict which shares will rise in prices and which shares will fall in prices. One broker was allowed to use the high-tech program in a computer for prediction while the other simply used the primitive method of random chance by throwing a dart onto a list of shares printed on a sheet of paper glued to the office wall. The results from predicting 100 different shares on the market using these two radically different methods came out to be more or less a draw. It almost sounds like a big joke. There are simply too many illusive and related factors with multilateral feed-back loops to allow a comprehensive and reliable forecast in the financial market. The Financial Times newspaper once said that :- “ It is a conventional joke that there are as many different opinions about the future of the economy as there are economists.”
Having revealed the unpredictable nature of the financial market, there is still some saving grace that is bestowed by the Theory of Chaos and Complexity and that is “ Order in Chaos.“ Let us see how this can come about in the present example. While it remains generally true that economic or financial forecasts are at best guesstimates, there are a few rules which can point us to the right direction. Although a simple projection of the past results to a predicted future trend is not feasible and unreliable, we are reassured by the theory that Past History in the system under prediction is of paramount importance. This is rule number one. In fact, this is where social or behavioral sciences are different from the physical sciences. The latter are not affected by history as you will recall Einstein's all important postulate on the validity of the laws of physics in all frames of references. Secondly, the effects of this past history very often obey a set rules known as the Power Law. Mark Buchanan explains this quite convincingly in his book, “ Ubiquity “ that this Power Law is at work from earthquakes, forest fires, epidemics to money markets which are our present concern. Moreover, this Power Law is the manifestation of Scale Invariance which is the essential element behind the concept of Complexity as revealed in natural phenomena such as the snowflake, natural coastlines, leaves and clouds.
Rather unexpectedly, Mandelbrot also tried to apply his scale invariance concept to price changes in the stock market. He found a very important fact which is contrary to the prevailing beliefs of almost all shareborkers and investment consultants regarding share price changes. It has been a firm traditional belief that price changes greater than some typical size ought to be very rare. This is also in line with our common sense but Mandelbrot had found otherwise. In the 1990s, scientists conducted numerous exhaustive computer research into fluctuations in the stock and foreign exchange markets all over the world and have definitively confirmed that the power rule is actually at work in such systems. To be more specific, one such illuminating research was conducted on the
99
New York Stock Exchange in 1998 by Gene Stanley of Boston University based on price fluctuations of all the shares included in the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index. Stanley and his team studied prices recorded every 15 seconds over a period of 13 years from 1984 to 1996. There were a total of 4.5 million readings taken for his graph depicting this 13 years' trend showing very complicated and irregular ups and downs. The researchers found an underlying Power Rule behind all these crazy fluctuations. What they found was that price changes became 16 times less likely each time one doubles the size of such price changes. This applies to the New York Stock Exchange only while other markets may be governed by power rules of different magnitudes. As mentioned above, as far as the power rule goes it is not the number or quantitative side that is important. Rather, it is the qualitative aspect that is critical. The clear conclusion to be drawn from this lack of qualitative differences between the large and small fluctuations is that the power rule inevitably implies that there is no such thing as a typical fluctuation and, hence, no reason to assume that the larger fluctuation can be considered as abnormal. This is because there is no such thing as normality in any chaotic system. In the technical terms of Chaos and Complexity, there is Scale Invariance in the Stanley's graph depicting the share price changes meaning all fluctuations whether large or small are ultimately made up of similar patterns just like when you are magnifying the finer details of the coastline. All coastlines in the world are composed of bays and inlets separated by headlands. Scale invariance as applied to the stock market can be translated to mean that the investor should not be surpised by sudden huge upward or downward fluctuations in share prices for no apparent reasons at all. The simple reason is that large fluctuations can be expected in the same way as a small fluctuation since there is no such thing as normality in the market. The fact that you occasionally guess correctly on the price increase or fall based on all available market information ( there is, of course, no perfect information as there is no perfect market ) is merely a matter of serendipity. From the foregoing, you may now appreciate why the throwing of darts and the use of a computer program to predict share price changes can come out even handed. Further analysis of investor behaviour will be forthcoming in the next chapter on the Science of Networks. Meanwhile, let us proceed to other seemingly eccentric applications of the Theory of Chaos and Complexity.
The key concept and the most useful one revealed by the theory is “ Order in Chaos “ which is the crowning glory of this scientific theory. It has an almost universal application because chaotic systems are all over the place in our society. Without going into the details of the particular scientific research, we are given to understand that the following power rules apply to various natural phenomena as indicated. For earthquakes as measured by the Richter Scale, scientists have discovered that for earthquakes with twice the energy level of another it has 4 times less likelihood of occurring. It appears to be a square rule. Furthermore, the longer one waits for an earthquake to occur the longer one seems to have to wait for the next. Although this seems to be against our common sense yet this has been borne out by the Omori Law in seismology which has established that the waiting time for an earthquake is 2.6 times more if the period of non-occurrence is doubled. Finally, the initial movement in the earth's crust leading to any particular quake is usually irrelevant to the end results. That means a catastrophic earthquake can start as a minor tremor. The catastrophic result depends on the appearance of Critical State ( similar to Bifurcation Point ) which in turn is dependent on the Past Histrory of the build-up of the seismic tension in the related rock strata. Any system that obeys the Power Rule has no normal or typical behaviour. In other words, they are all chaotic systems.
Another example is forest fires. Based on over 4000 fires in national parks between 1986 and 1995, the US Fish and Wildlife Service found a fairly reliable power rule. Every time the area covered by a fire doubles, it is about 2.48 times less likely to happen. This power rule holds true for fires varying in sizes to a million fold. The qualitative indications of this rule seems equally stunning. The layout of trees in any particular park appear to organize themselves into a Critical State in which the next fire might be of any size that can lead to a big disaster or even total destruction of the area.
One final important example of the amazing predicting ability of the Power Rule is the KT Event that caused the distinction of the dinosaurs. This mass extinction event took place some 65 million years ago. KT comes from the words
100
Cretaceous ( in German, Kreide ) and the later period of Tertiary.It was caused by a huge meteor 's impact on our planet. Apart from KT there were 4 big extinction events in earth's natural history so far. Going backwards in time, they happened 210, 250, 365 and 440 million years ago. The power rule they revealed is this. If you double the size of the extinctions the disaster is 4 times less likely to happen. This regularity holds true from extinctions involving just a few species to the worst event destroying thousands. The rule does not tell us when just how often with no numerical data in terms of years.
These three examples are just a few among the numerous ones including more mundane things such as magnets, sand pile avalanches, potato shards experiments, epidemics, population growth and even population distribution, etc. Despite the lack of prediction in absolute quantitative terms, concepts such as Order in Chaos, Past History and Citical State do testify in favour of the existence of Universality and Ubiquity in our universe. This alone sends us a very important message and that is, this miraculous world of ours is ultimately comprehensible to a great extent. One word of caution is in order. My personal opinion regarding certain mathematical models used to simulate the emergence of life is that they are as yet rudimentary and have a long way to go before I am convinced that it was the actual course taken by life on this planet of ours if life originated on Mother Earth at all. Einstein once said :- “Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. “ No other comment can describe the Theory of Chaos and Complexity more aptly. The theory gives us qualitative trends and indicators to follow but the Golden Rule is nothing but a qualitative Power Rule and here lies the real revolutionary nature of the theory. Ever since the establishment of modern science in the Age of Reason some four hundred years ago everything about science and scientific theories have been nothing but quantitative. Finally, we are offered a qualitative approach to science through the Theory of Chaos and Complexity. This has not only broadened the scope of the discipline by making illusive phenomena accessible to science but has also provided a very powerful tool to analyze complex human behaviour and social phenomena. Armed with this powerful tool, let us proceed to another vital and recent scientific theory which has been dubbed the science of the connected age – the Science of Networks.


Chapter ( vi ) - The Science of Networks

The Science of Networks is a relatively new branch of scientific discipline that was established as an independent subject back in the 1960s. It was built upon some borrowed concepts originating from other branches of scientific theories including theoretical physics and especially the social sciences. On top of these borrowed ideas, a number of other ingenious insights were developed within the discipline itself to create one of the most practical branches of scientific theories that has found applications in all areas of human, social and economic affairs. Although it is still an evolving and
maturing discipline its impact on human affairs is nothing short of phenomenal. The Science of Networks stands out as a completely different breed of scientific theory from theoretical physics. It is the science of the real world and, therefore, has to be a really practical subject. It can deal with all social phenomena from population growth and distribution to more pressing problems such as epidemics ( including computer viruses ), collective decisions, investor behaviour, mass psychology and information systems. It is a discipline waiting to emerge by popular demand and an inevitable product of the computer age. On the advent of the world wide web internet system, science of networks has become almost indispensable to each and everyone. Although it stands on its own as a separate discipline, the science of networks uses concepts borrowed from the Theory of Chaos and Complexity. These concepts are applied to practical problems most successfully in conjunction with others ideas developed in the Science of Networks
itself along the way to its popularity. One such new concept is the Small World Concept.


( A ) The Theory

101

A Small World

The Small World Concept is derived from the notion that in this vast and complicated world there are bound to be some common threads that link people and things together through some underlying connections which may not be obvious at first glance. These subtle links will reveal themselves if we observe the system from the right perspectives and the Science of Networks will provide us with the tools to carry out such observations and analysis.
In 1967, a US social psychologist called Stanley Milgram conducted a strange experiment. He sent a number of letters to various unrelated persons in the Mid- West . He explained in his letters that each letter was, in fact, intended for one of his sharebroker friends who lived in the Boston area whose address he had mislaid. The recipients of his letters were asked to try their best to assist him in forwarding the letter to this friend of his with just the details of his friend's name and profession. As if by divine intervention, most of his letters reached the hands of his sharebroker friend in Boston in something like six steps. This was the birth of the now famous phrase - “ Six Degrees of Separation “ after which a movie was made. As unlikely as it may sound, it is claimed that all people on earth are connected to every other person only by a personal link of no more than six people. This is the origin of the Small World Concept. We are actually more closely connected than we would at first realize.
To understand this idea better, we must first know some basic facts about networks in general. There are three main kinds of networks for expressing the relationships between different variables. The first kind is a random network, the second one is the fragmented network and the third is the small world network. The first kind, as lts name implies, does not have any connections or feed-back loops among its constituent parts while the second kind contains connections among each local module but not as a whole. The third kind is the most interesting and useful one. Such a configuration means that there are shortcuts in the access routes between different parts of the small world network that can be exploited to increase the effeciency in communications among these divided regions of the network. These are the subtle connections, so to speak.
It is easy to visualize how the small world effect can come about in just a few examples. Let us look at some of these in turn. Suppose you are an accountant and your circle of friends are mostly accountants. Then, suppose your wife is a doctor and most of her circle of friends are in the medical profession. Normally, accountants and doctors have no frequent and necessary contact with one another but because of the relationship between you and your wife these two seemingly separate groups of people are subtly linked and may very well develop social and professional contact through you and your wife. Due to the multiple capacities each person must necessarily assume, each person's social and professional networks of friends may cover vast and complicated groups of seemingly unconnected people. If you add the blood relationships and in-law relationships of each person to his or her lists of possible groups of people they will interact, you can easily build up an extensive and colourful social network for each person. You may not realize the potential connections but they are there and can be very useful for you when you need them. For social networks, the significance of understanding such connections will be advantageous in terms of potentials in friendships, business development, personal assistance, job opportunities and exchange of important information when you need it. However, if the small world effect is applied to other
phenomena such as epidemics, its proper understanding can save precious lives. The most vital and rewarding characteristic of the small world effect that scientists have discovered is that subtle or informal connections may be even more important and decisive in the functioning of any particular network in which the effect is present. The following example will illustrate this point. The formal communication network in a big corporation is, of course, the local area network of computers but before any policy is finalized and approved by the management it has to be discussed. Therefore, any hints of a forthcoming administrative policy will not come from the formal information system. In
102
fact, management scientists have conclusively discovered that the most sensitive information system for capturing intelligence on upcoming company policy decisions exists in the informal circle of the secretaries of the various department heads during their coffee break gossips. This finding is the absolute truth and not a joke ! The chatting and gossiping of a group of secretaries is actually the medium for the propagation of the small world effect in any big corporation. The subtle link in the present example shows how the various parts of a big corporation can be connected by an informal sub-system and that remarkable shortcuts can be found in the corporate network's information system outside the mainframe computer. This, once again, is the same lesson taught us by the Science of Networks as in other theories to be meticulous in our observations and not simply following our instinct of paying attention only to the conspicuous facts. In many cases, it is the inconspicuous details that make the vital difference.


The Weak Ties

Another original idea emerging from the discipline is Weak Ties. Contrary to what the term implies, Weak Ties are in fact, the strongest cues that we can rely on to reach an understanding of the dynamics of any particular network. This is another useful concept pioneered by the Science of Networks. The special quality of weak ties as the scientists have discovered is that such characteristics do not only have an effect on the its owners but also have important external effects on the network as a whole. Take another example. Common sense may tell you that it is your closest friends that can really help you find a job because they care about you. Right ? Wrong. This is because your closest friends are more likely than not to have a similar background as you have. Whatever job they are holding are also the likely kind of job that you are looking for. They are, in fact, competing with you instead of being able to help you. On the contrary, it is your casual acquaintances that can provide the best prospects of finding you a job through their connections with people they know outside your own circle. They are the Weak Ties that can be your strongest allies. Similarly, family problems cannot be solved by members in the same family because they may also be the contributing factors to the problem. Thus, they are not objective enough to analyze the causes of the problem. It is very often the outsiders ( the Weak Ties ), say friends of the family who can play an effective part in solving family problems by providing objective and less emotional advice and mediation. This world is full of apparently paradoxical phenomena. However, in this particular instant, they can work to our advantage. I tend to feel that the existence of paradoxes merely points to the fact that there are always two sides to a coin and most paradoxes can be understood when viewed from the proper perspective. That is when you
can see their hidden connections. Applying the concept to human affairs, this idea teaches us the
lesson that the nature of things are usually not what their appearances seem to indicate. Anything by itself may look insignificant and isolated but its strength can arise from its connection with other aspects of a given system. This is the very up-to-date concept of systems thinking as has been so powerfully applied to our indispensable life support system – the computer network. Apart from this practical lesson, there is also the more subtle philosophical implication that it is processes and not things that are crucial to life. Material objects have very little value unless they are utilized properly in the appropriate context of the processes of life.
Synchronized State
This concept is not a new one but has found wider and more practical application in the Science of Networks as applied to social problems. As its name implies, it is used to describe a state of affairs in a network when all the relevant component parts act in unison automatically. When existing in such a state, the parts can produce certain
103
effects which can aggregate into more than the total sum of its parts in tems of quantity as well as quality. In theoretical physics, there is the ever familiar term of a Phase Transition. Whenever some physical phenomena are undergoing a phase transition such as water turning into solid state some strange and wonderful things usually occur. For this particular case in point, beautiful and symmetrical snow-flake crystals of endless different patterns will be formed. This is the result of water molecules entering into a synchronized state.
A synchronized state only appears at the critical and fleeting moment when all the necessary conditions are right. Therefore, the biggest problem about such a useful state is to know exactly when the conditions are right. In the technical terms of the Science of Networks, these component parts that work in synchrony to produce the desired effects are known as Oscillators. These objects are equally important in social networks as they are in biological networks such as the human body. Scientists have established beyond reasonable doubt that human genes as well as our immune system are mobilized by Biological Oscillators in our body working in synchrony to produce particular biological reactions that are appropriate in the various situations as and when our body requires those reactions. At first, scientists were puzzled by the strange way bio-molecules in various parts of our body can work in unison as if they have direct and instantaneous communication with one another. Later on, they have come to realize through concepts developed in the Science of Networks that individual parts operating in unison automatically can be achieved by the synchronization of oscillators. In the present case, the oscillators in the form of individual bio-molecules can make the whole network operate in automation as a single unit simply through the adjustments made by each molecule in response to the reaction and positioning or alignment of its immediate neighbour. There is no need for a central command unit to direct and co-ordinate the necessary adjustments. In short, this is the basic mechanics of self-organisation which is an essential feature of life. This important discovery also has profound implications on the emergence of life itself. Even lifeless atoms and molecules are capable of this miraculous juggling act. The following paragraph explains in detail how this can happen by way of the magnetization of a bar of iron.
Secondary school physics has taught us that a bar of iron is consist of numerous microscopic size magnets. To go a little bit deeper into the phenomenon of magnetism, we have learned from James Clerk Maxwell that electricity and magnetism are, in fact, two sides of the same coin. A spinning electron with a negative charge creates a magnetic field with a north and south pole. Spinning electrons tend to line up with one another because opposite poles attract each other. The normal state of affairs inside a bar of iron is this. The random alignment of these microscopic magnets cancel out all magnetic influence. Only when they are aligned in an orderly manner or a global alignment will the open ends of the bar have the north and south poles pointing to each end. Under normal room temperature, the magnetic force within each micro-magnet is negligible. Therefore, it is best to heat up the bar and then subject it to an outside magnetic field to bring about the global alignment of the micro-magnets inside the bar. The time and effort to bring this about depends on the existing state of the arrangement of the micro-magnets. If they are near the critical state ( i.e. most of them are already in a good position to form a line ), then the global alignment will come about easily. It is all a matter of the past history in the arrangement of the micro-magnets. In this sense, magnetization of an iron bar follows the rules of Chaos. History or initial condition matters a lot. The important thing to note is that once the critical or synchronized state is reached the completely magnetized condition in the bar will come about very abruptly. This represents a Phase Transition in the physical sense as predicted by theoretical physics. This subtle but profound concept had long ago already made its debut in ancient Chinese philosophy as enshrined in the text of the greatly respected book I-Ching. After achieving global alignment, the temperature should be reduced gradually to preserve the orderliness of the micro-magnets and, in turn, the strength of the magnetic force of the bar as a whole. If the temperature remains high, each micro-magnet inside the bar will have too much energy so that they tend to move out of their properly aligned position. Thus, we can see how by the blind adjustments of individual micro-magnets resulting from bumping movements of their immediate neighbours and themselves with the help of added energy ( the heating and subjection to an outside magnetic field ) global alignment of micro-magnets in an iron bar
104
can be achieved automatically without a central command. While the idea of a synchronized state leads to self-organisation which
in turn has thrown some light on the possible explanations for the emergence of life, it also begs the question of why we are not as yet able to create life. Some scientists are holding the view that if inanimate atoms and molecules are capable of self-organisation via some mechanical process through the synchrony of oscillators, then living organisms which are likewise composed of lifeless atoms could have emerged through self-organisation in a similar manner. Not so, as the Science of Networks seems to indicate. In physical sciences where the reductionist method seems to be infallible, one plus one almost always equal to two. However, as far as networks ( in this case biological networks such as living organisms ) are concerned “ more is different “ because of multilateral interactions between the individual parts thus giving rise to complex feed-back loops. This is precisely the situation with human genes. Just a few years back, the successful sequencing of the human genome had been hailed as a final breakthrough in discovering the secrets of life. As time passed, molecular scientists realized that each gene does not act alone to bring about the desired biological effect on the human body. Therefore, it is not possible to pinpoint the particular effects or functions of individual genes because most of the time they act as a group. So much for the final breakthrough on the secrets of life !
Applying the synchronized state concept to socio-economic networks, we can now understand why most phenomena of this kind such as mass panic in crowd psychology and panic selling on the stock market can easily come about without any special reasons. Any slight changes in the prevailing conditions can have devastating consequences if the critical or synchronized state is reached in the system. This situation bears surprising resemblance to natural disasters such as an earthquake in that when the critical state is reached in the tension building process of unstable rock strata the slight movement of any rock layer can give rise to an earthquake totally out of proportion to the originating slight disturbance. So, be warned as the same situation is equally applicable to human affairs in general. From the foregoing comparison, it can easily be seen that there is abundant evidence of Universality all around us. Underlying principles are at work in every corner and every level in this universe of ours.


Network Dynamics

Apart from overall concepts, there are also new ideas on the mechanics of the network systems which help to explain their operation. Among these ideas, the reader should learn at least a few elementary but important ones that will help you understand the basics mechanics of networks. The following are some of these basic ideas. They are dynamics OF the network, dynamics ON the network, clustering
coefficient, tunable parameters and nodes and lattices in the network. Dynamics OF the network refers to the evolution of the network
itself. For example, the network may be changing in its nature and characteristics by evolving from a random network to a small world network. Before the emergence of the Science of Networks, social scientists were at a big disadvantage compared to other scientists. This is because the graphical tools they were using represented snapshots or static pictures of the empirical data collected by social scientists and, thus, they failed to reflect the dynamic nature of the social phenomenon such static graphs were supposed to reveal. With the aid of modern digital computers and the latest concepts on network mechanics provided by the Science of Networks, greater attention can be paid to the dynamical changes of in the nature or structure of the network itself.
Dynamics ON the network refers to the working between the various components within the network such as how they interact and communicate with one another. Issues such as the circuitry of the routing and shortcuts in such routing are all relevant. For example, in a small world network the researcher may need to know any key links between the vital components of the system. In the case of a fragmented( or random ) network, information about the shortest routes between two major components
of the system will be very helpful to the researcher.
105
Clustering Coefficient is an index that can reveal the closeness of the relationship between certain components of the network. For example, there may be some common factors that can forge a closer tie between two members on the executive committee of a social club that is the network under study. The chairman and the secretary of the committee may be husband and wife so that their personal ties may be advantageous to their co-operation but their relationship can also unfairly affect the voting process should any particular matters need to be put to the vote. Such a situation will be reflected in a higher clustering coefficient for this husband and wife pair.
Tunable Parameters are factors affecting the working of the network which can be changed either to increase or decrease the effectiveness of certain inputs into the network. For example, increasing the remunerations of the employees in a corporation can result in greater output in their efforts. Conversely, increasing the retiring age of the employees can lead to increase in the overhead costs in terms of higher payrolls because senior employees cannot be replaced by lower pay young workers. Tunable parameters are the variables the researcher can change to achieve any desired effects on the network.
Nodes and lattices are location points ( also crossroads of routings ) and connecting routes of various components of the network respectively. These must be clearly identified in any network before a correct analysis can be carried out on the system. Without plotting out the nodes and lattices in the network, no proper control can be exercised and no meaningful predictions can made about the network.
Having familiarized ourselves with the basic mechanics and terminology of network dynamics, we can now proceed to gain further insights into other
more subtle and useful aspects of the Science of Networks.


Information Cascades and Externalities

What makes a network tick is nothing but information. Therefore, we must gain an in depth understanding of the nature and characteristics of this illusive and intangible entity we call information before we are able to appreciate the essence of the Science of Networks. Firstly, information is useful and orderly signals. Secondly, some signals can be information to certain recipients but “ noises “ ( useless signals or disturbances ) to others. It depends a lot on the user. For example, the irritating sounds created in a mahjong game are noises to the bystanders but very pleasing and orderly signals to the players participating in the game because the sounds signal the start of another round of play which can bring them winnings.Thirdly, life itself is all about information. Molecular scientists have come to the conclusion that the purpose for life to perpetuate is to pass on the human genes which are, in fact, coded information. It does not matter to the genes if the individual messengers like you and me die so long as the genes in our bodies are passed on to the next generation. This natural calling as we all know has given rise to the noble phenomenon of parental love and care for our children and also the greatest all time human theme of true love between a man and a woman which can be both inspiring and destructive. Even on a lower level of human affairs such as our daily routines, information can mean a world of difference. What are the winning lottery numbers for tonight ? What are the signs for a killer disease like cancer ? What are the best jobs for a fresh gradute ? What are the best buys for a family car ? What makes a good partner in marriage ? So, you will see that all aspects of our life whether they be
financial, social, biological or even emotional operate on useful information. Fourthly, information once given cannot be retrieved. It possesses a lot of Externalities. That is why we should be most careful about how we handle rumours.
Returning to the Science of Networks, scientists have discovered that there are many external effects or simply called Externalities in the propagation of information within a given network. The technical term for this phenomenon is an Information Cascade. For those who are not students of economics, an Externality is a situation in which a person's economic activity is affected by things happening outside the
106
transaction itself. For example, the costs of operating a radio station do not increase with the increase of additional listeners because the radio signals are on the airwave anyway and everyone can tune in without affecting the signals broadcast. This is called an external economy while pollution created by undisciplined industries is known as an external diseconomy. The costs of pollution are ultimately borne by socierty as a whole although the original polluting act was committed by the undisciplined industries with a greedy profit-making motive. These special conditions will call for unusual measures and regulations in order to ensure the efficient use and distribution of resources which are always scarce in the economic sense because there are an infinite amount of human needs while available resouces are always finite in amount. This is the cardinal reason for studying economics in the first place.
A simple description of an Information Cascade is this one thing leads to another until the situation runs out of control and creates a self-perpetuating phenomenon in its own right like a continuously thundering and unstoppable waterfall, hence the term Information Cascade. This phenomenon appears to be highly paradoxical because human beings are supposed to be rational in their decision making as our common sense would traditonally indicate and are, therefore, not expected to act irrationally like the flock of frightened sheep. Contrary to our common sense, the Science of Networks has conclusively proven in numerous experiments that when people interact in a network they stop behaving like rational individuals and would act more like a collective entity. Remember the dictum “more is different”. For this particular reason, an
Information Cascade can sometimes become a full-blown pandemic. In the 1950s, social psychologist Solomon Asch conducted an
experiment to prove what he called Coercive Externalties in the propagation of information. In effect, people can be forced to make a wrong decision against their own rational judgment if they are put under strong enough peer pressure. The experiment was conducted in the following manner. Asch showed seven participants in the experiment a flash card showing a single vertical 10 cm line on the left side of the picture and another group of three other vertical lines of 10cm, 12 cm and 14 cm, respectively on the right side in close formation. The participants were asked to point out which of the line on the right side had the same length as the single line on the left side. They were to shout out their answers aloud in turn. The first six participants were, in fact, dummies who were specially requested to give the same wrong answer which was the 12 cm line on the right side. The seventh participant who was the real subject of the experiment thought that what he presumed to be six other rational people could not have been wrong so he gave the same wrong answer against his own better judgment. He only confessed his true opinion at the end of the experiment when the identities of the other six dummies were revealed to him.
It is not just peer pressure alone that causes the Information Cascade to occur. In fact, acting in one's own rational interest can equally contribute to the cascade. The reasoning goes like this. In most real life situations, it is more often than not a case for a guessing game from the perspective of most decision makers because there is no perfect information as there is no perfect intuition. This is especially true when people act collectively as a group or network. One's own judgment counts as much as the judgments of others in the group. If I cannot be sure about what I think is right, I may as well look for some signs of other people's judgment on the common sense assumption that the majority should have a better chance of reaching the right decision. This is also known as Contingent Decision Making which means our decision can be dependent on that of others. This is also an important contributing factor to the cascade phenomenon. Thus, you can see how even following our common sense instincts can lead to a chaotic situation. However, this should not be taken to mean that we should not rely on our common sense. This may be the only decision making tool available to us in most
everyday cirumstances.
An Information Cascade does not automatically occur even when all the above factors are present in a particular network. We have to look to another concept borrowed from the Theory of Chaos for the ultimate reason of its emergence. This is the matter of history in the system in question. All cases of Information Cascades contain the above initiating factors but those factors do not always lead to the occurrence of cascades. They are the necessary but not sufficient conditions for the phenomenon.
107
The sufficient condition lies in the attainment of the Critical Threshold or the Critical State which depends on the entire history of the system developing up to that particular point in time. Even as we are attributing the sufficient condition for the occurrence of an Information Cascade to the History of the system, we must not forget the fact that history itself is not some independent element that is self-created. Instead, it is definitely the product of multilateral human interactions between themselves and their social environment which is in turn created by the collective actions of the humans themselves. This myriad of interacting units that form the complex web of life is a stunning structure of the highest complication. It is a case of the most sophisticated form of non-linear interactions in the universe. That is why Karl Marx exclaimed that :- “ Men make their own history, but they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves.”


( B ) The Inspirations A Network View of History

Under the enlightenment of the Science of Networks, one may view the world, and especially, world history rather differently. First of all, it is traditionally assumed that the great successes in history must have been proportional to the efforts or merits of the makers. This may not be so. Instead, it is very often a question of being at the right place and at the right time. For example, the thirteen weeks of mass demonstrations in Leipzig, the then East Germany in 1989 that very quickly led to the
dismantling of the infamous Berlin Wall on 10th November, 1989 is a case in point. The repressive communist regime in the former East Germany had been in power for over four decades since the end of World War II. There had been a number of far more violent rebellions that did not succeed in even rocking the regime. The fact that the Leipzig mass demonstrations ultimately succeeded merely pointed to the fact that the time was right for a change within the larger political climate in Europe resulting from Gorbachev's political reforms in the then USSR.
Secondly, the purpose of studying history is to learn from past mistakes to prevent future recurrence and, if possible, to improve on the ways things are to be done in future. Therefore, it is not enough just to examine the materialized portion of history but also to assess what could have happened to explore other better alternatives. From this analysis, we will appreciate that there is an existing bias in favour of the actual historical outcomes. The reader will be given a deeper analysis on this later in chapter (x), in the section- Of Destiny and Destination. It is always easy to be wise after the facts. Such lopsided view of history has to be modified in the light of the useful researches produced by the Science of Networks. This is because of the importance of the initial conditions or sum of history of the system up to a particular point in time. Slight changes in the initial conditions at any point can radically alter the subsequent course of history of that system. The reader should recall Edward Lorenz's weather systems which led him to the
discovery of the Theory of Chaos. Thirdly, the concept of Information Cascades leads us to the conclusion
that initial conditions that may not be very conspicuous can have a dramatic effect on the outcomes of an evolving system when viewed in hindsight . As a result, all factors under examinination should be assessed in the context of the structural conditions of the network as a whole. In other words, special attention should be paid to the existence or imminent appearance of Critical Thresholds or Synchronized States.
Before history has come to pass, it is rarely possible to predict the outcome of any given set of circumstances. It is the general consensus reached by the collective opinions of the majority that will win over the day. Owing to this only reliable rule, people usually base their own decision on the perceived majority view ( their perceived
108
reality or PR as explained in chapter (viii) later on ). Hence, the results of collective decision making under a democratic process is notoriously difficult to predict because of the possibility of the cascade effect. It is a process involving both personal opinions of the individuals as well as observing the opinions of others in the system together with non- linear interactions between these two elements that determine the final outcome. And so is history. That is why sometimes history does not make any sense.
How was it possible that many German people maintained that they did not know, and worse still, some even claimed that they could not believe that the Holocust had actually taken place. Luckily, the German people as a whole together with their elected government ultimately had the courage and wisdom to admit their older generation's mistake and had taken remedial actions accordingly to enable the healing process to come about. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the Japanese government which, even now, still cannot face up to its historic responsibility regarding the Second World War and continually attempts to cover up past mistakes of their older generation by changing the history text books for their young. This is really a very alarming as well as morally disturbing trend. Apart from preventing the healing process between Japan and its neighbours and, thus, disqualifying itself from playing a positive role in world affairs, such an ostrich attitude could ultimately lead to a possible repeat of the aggressive national policy that ended in Japan's total humiliation and unconditional surrender in the Second World War.
People tend to attribute this stubborn refusal to accept past mistakes to the so-called hero syndrome which is a long standing tradition of the samurai spirit- rather die than surrender implying that to accept that one is wrong also amounts to a surrender of one's initial position. A closer examination of this misguided spirit will easily reveal its logical fallacy. To accept one's mistake takes a lot of courage and courage is the defining hallmark as well as the bench mark for a true hero. To be a hero does not mean that you should not be afraid of anything but rather being very much afraid of it and still do it because it is the right thing to do. Therefore, to refuse to accept one's past mistakes is tantamount to the behaviour of a coward who dares not face the truth. Conversely, accepting your past mistakes ( in this case the mistakes of their older generation ) and facing up to the consequences will require tremendous courage. To undertake such a difficult act of contrition is undoubtedly a very heroic deed. My simple logic runs like this. If you have the guts to do it, you should also have the same guts to admit it. If my older generation had committed acts of atrocity, I would not hesitate to denounce such crimes vehemently and distance myself from such behaviour. It is both irrational and against the Natural Law to close rank with any wrong doers of heinous crimes. By so doing, it makes one an accomplice. A supporter or sympathizer of any heinous crime is in a even worse position than the perpetrator because the criminal had to face up to the consequences of his deeds somehow and runs the risk of punishment while the supporter only does the perpetrator lip service without even paying a price.
There is absolutely no fundamental differences between anybody or anything in this universe because all people and all things have ultimately originated from the same humble beginning that is stardust as explained in chapter ( ii ). No special favours should be done to your own race or even your own flesh and blood at the expense of natural justice. In the long run, justice and fairness to all will prove to be the only sensible way to maintain good order in society as well as the universe. So, please heed my warning. It is up to the younger and more open-minded generation of the Japanese citizens to do their part in keeping their own government in line with the prevailing moral standards and not to repeat the painful mistakes of the past generation. It would seem to me that in today's global village the more appropriate idea on the identity of inhabitants of this village is the concept of harmony with one another and more importantly with our environment. To this end, the idea of world citizenship is far superior to the narrow perspective of individual nationalities, races or religions. May John Lennon's ideas of world peace and harmony as expressed in his well known song “Imagine” carry the day.


Network Tolerance

109

In the research conducted into many real world complex network systems, scientists have discovered one very crucial point about any network. This point is, in fact, a very pessimistic conclusion. Regardless of how meticulous designers have been in the installation of safety devices in the most sophistcated of all networks such as national defence computer networks or electricity grids that span entire continents, there are bound to be some weak spots in any system that cannot be revealed until disasters strike. Put it in another way, accidents of some unforeseeable nature may happen no matter how hard scienitists try to anticipate and prevent their occurrence. Nowadays, most networks have the highest possible tolerance against breakdowns. Despite this high
standards in their design, it is a foregone conclusion that accidents could and will happen. In his book called “ Normal Accidents “, the social scientist Charles Perrow came to the same pessimistic conclusion based on the cascade effect which shows the inherent unpredictability in any system. The case studies supporting his conclusion ranged from the Three Mile Island nuclear accident to the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster. In fact, a simple example will illustrate how inconspicuous some risk factors for a potential disaster can be. A few years back, there was a strange phenomenon that had boggled the minds of the United Kingdom electrical grid engineers for over a year after they had updated and improved their supply network. The problem was this. During certain days in the week the then newly updated electricity supply grid encountered some overload problems during off-peak hours in the evening with apparently no good reasons at all. So much demand for electricity arose during just 20 odd minutes that the grid engineers had to switch on the reserve units. At first, the engineers suspected a design fault in the computer program that runs the grid. After millions of dollars had been spent on reassessing the computer software they found no bugs. Then one shrewd mind in the middle management noticed that all these electricity supply crises mostly occurred during the soccer season. Finally, a mundane reason was found to be the culprit. During the time out after the first half of every match the T.V.viewers started to scramble to put on their electrical kettles to make themselves a cup of coffee. This mad rush to make the best use of the time out led to a synchronized state being precipitated among the viewers that ultimately caused the cascade effect. A disastrous electrical blackout could have occurred resulting in great economic losses or even possible injuries to human life. Such seemingly inconspicuous reasons could hardly have come across the minds of the computer software program engineers during the designing stage of the electrcity supply grid. This real life episode has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that life is complicated and that no amount of planning is capable of providing an absolute guarantee against all possible contigencies. This is also a wake up call for arrogant complacency. Remember the Titanic disaster and the Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Theory. This latter mystical principle is sometimes applicable to the macro-world as well as the subatomic realm and has a lot of philosophical implications for our daily lives as well as in politics and
economics ( e.g. the impossible task of planned economies ).
Erratic Investor Behaviour
Most notorious stock market crashes such as th Wall Street Crash of 1929 and 1987 did not betray themselves with any extraordinary signs before the disasters struck. Once the price falls started, they snowballed at lightning speed and became a cascade in the blink of an eye. Analysts can always attribute specific and concrete reasons and factors to the disasters with the benefit of hindsight. Many of their elaborate reasons were eagerly accepted by the investment community because as Friedrich Nietzche said :- “ First principle : any explanation is better than none.” For the October, 1987 crash, most analysts attributed the disaster to computerized trading which was subsequently restricted. Could the drastic fall of 22% of the market value in a single day be so easily explained by just one lone factor ? Again, the 1929 crash was explained by excessive borrowing at the time. Are the real reasons that simple ? Everybody knew that
110
financial institutions routinely lent money to borrowers. Otherwise, how else can they make a profit with all the money in their hands deposited by their account holders ? Financial analysts have no choice but to insist that the investors are rational beings because they are the very reason for the analysts' own existence. The market trends are subject to some basic dynamics capable of expression in some laws thus making any forecasts meaningful. Of course, both of these assertions must be true or there would not be any need for the analysts in the first place. So, they keep on upholding the assertions. But do these assertions stand up under vigorous scrutiny ? I am afraid the answer is no. The scientist Alfred Zauberman has his own sarcastic law about any economy in general. It goes like this :- “Zauberman's Law : The worse the economy, the better the economists.”
For the same reason as the example given above where the throwing of darts and applying high power computer analysis on share prices come out even handed, I totally support the views proposed by the Theory of Chaos and the Science of Networks concerning unpredictability and information cascades.There cannot be any hard and fast rules for predicting investor behaviour. Now let us look at some reliable scientific research on the subject of investor behaviour to see what the results can
tell us.
Everyone agrees that our personal opinion can be influenced by other people and additonal information even though the latter may be purely promotional in nature. Take going to the movies for example, we seldom have a completely independent choice. Most of us usually know which one to see before we actually go to see it. Through advertisements in the media and comments from our friends who have already seen the same movie, we have most probably come to a definite opinion on the movie before going to watch it in the cinema. This is a decision based on our emotions and impulse rather than a rational and systematic decision making process. Of course, there is the Coercive External Effect at work. If everyone else has seen the movie and is talking about it, how can I afford not to see it for fear of being isolated socially. Therefore, it is easy to realize how human beings can influence one another irrationally in their decision
making process.
In 1999, the economist Thomas Lux of The University of Bonn and the engineer Michele Marchest of the University of Cagliari conducted a reaserch into investor behaviour to investigate the validity of the orthodox investment theory of rational investor behaviour based on changes in the economic fundamentals. Their alternative theory was fluctuations in share prices were mainly the results of “mutual interactions of participants “. The researchers' model was a very simple stock market with just one kind of stock and a population of investors who buy and sell the stock. The population was divided into three different categories of investors. The first group were the Fundamentalists who were the rational ones basing their decisions on economic fundamentals as proposed by the Orthodox Investment Theory. The second group were the Optimists who believed the market was on an upward trend purely by blind faith and wanted to buy. The third and last group were the Pessimists who consistently felt that the
market was at a down turn and wanted to sell. The researchers also put some authentic value on the stock and
tied it to some basic economic fundamentals. The price changed as the fundamentals changed. As in real life, it was the interactions between the different groups and the changes in the fundamentals that finally determined the price. So far, the scheme followed the orthodox view of the stock market. However, the reaserchers added one more assumption to enable them to test their own theory and that was the participants could influence one another. This new parameter proved definitively to be the volitile factor that rocked the whole boat.
The minds of both the Optimists and the Pessimists are not fixed permanently so that changes in the moods of some members of one group can lead to a overall inclination of the market towards either camp. This will result in the optimistic and pessimistic outlooks being propagated throughout the market on a cycle of swings between the two moods. The researchers also found that these two groups very often organized themselves until they reached the critical state for the system as a whole when slight changes in the moods of just a few of its members could lead to a change of the overall optimism or pessimism in the market. Once such a point was attained, a cascade
111
could easily occur in the market trend towards one mood or the other so that huge fluctuations of varying magnitudes would ensue. These upheavals would continue in a self-perpetuating chain of actions and reactions until it came to an end and then the trend could reverse itself and so on. What happened to the fundamentalists in this model ? Well, they did the best they could in using past data and changes in the economic fundamentals to make their investment decisions. They were understandably frustrated because their so-called rational behaviour was upset by the erratic mood changes caused by the other two groups. Decisions based on the orthodox method mostly turned out wrong as common sense was not allowed to operate freely because of the presence of irrational moody behaviour of the Optimists and Pessimists. Finally, even they, the rational ones had to succumb to market pressure and had to go along with whatever mood that was influencing the market at a particular time. Particularly, when the cascade effect took hold of the market even the Fundamentalists acted in accordance with the prevailing mood. So in effect, the Fundamentalists were eventually converted to either the Optimists or the Pessimists by the end of the game through Coercive Externalities of other members of the network. Only during very calm and gentle ups and downs in the market could the Fundamentalist sentiment be detected. There were bulls and bears or runs and rallies and moods just like the real world scenario where slight glimpses of hopes and doubts can be magnified totally out of proportion to the apparently insignificance initial disturbances in the market. Such minor disturbances can be real like some changes in the economic fundamentals or simply rumours like the impending resignation of the CEO of certain big corporations. The researchers had conclusively proven that the biggest volitility in the stock market arises not on account of the basic economic fundamentals or rational investor decisions as predicted by the Orthodox Investment Theory. Instead, it is the inherent unpredictability of the “ mutual interaction of the participants “ that is the main driving force behind this market volitility.
If all these sound familiar, it is because we have come across such phenomena in the Theory of Chaos and Complexity in connection with the occurrence of natural disasters like earthquakes and forest fires which follow the Power Rule. It will be recalled that for systems where the Power Rule applies there are no such things as typical behaviour in any aspect of the networks or systems in question. In other words, there is no such thing as a normal peak or normal trough in the investment graph. In short, there is no normal fluctuations, period. This may seem to be both a sarcastic and pessimistic view of the investment market but such conclusion is justifiable by research results as well as sound scientific theory. Does this imply that we should not invest in the stock market ? The answer is a resounding negative. So long as we are aware of the ultimate unpredictability and volitility of the system and not to put all our eggs in one basket in terms of the form of investment, we should be on home ground. The smart thing to do is to diversify into different forms of investment other than equity while holding only a fraction of your stakes in stocks as an aggressive component of your portfolio for growth and to beat inflation. However, you should be psychologically prepared and not to feel devastated should
disaster really strike for no apparently good reason. Sometimes, you cannot ask why ? This is equally true with life. It serves
you better to rally your efforts and find the courage to start all over again in life than to lament over your misfortunes. Why waste time in re-living your painful moments by trying to ask why it happened over and over again whereas, in fact, there may not even be any sensible answers. Very often, one thing leads to another and all the causes and effects are madly jumbled up. There is this telling historical question. What killed Abraham Lincoln ? The short answer is, of course, the assasin's bullet. This is only the immediate reason. The broader analysis would have to include the political situation, the misguided racist view against negroes, the technology that led to the invention of the assasin's pistol and so on and so forth. The true and complete answer is all these and other unknown factors working in unison in a Network that is the human society up to that fateful moment in history that killed the great and honourable President Lincoln. It is the complicated mechanics ( mostly human in this particular case ) working under various principles of the Science of Networks that actually killed the great man. So, as the saying goes :-“ Don't cry over spilt milk.“ Whatever tragedy hits you, it is to your advantage to look at it as a challenge and learn something from it. Bring out the Mr. Q's attitude within you and face
112
your tragedies with humour and, if possible, defiance. That is how you can manage to win in every instance in life. If tragedy actually strikes, there is no way you can prevent it. This is a fact of life. Rather take an indifferent view, if you can, because lamenting over it would only weaken your resolve to combat the tragedy. It is an uneconomic proposition because it represents a waste of resources and energy. Life has been and always will be an uphill battle against the odds. We have already learned this in chapter (ii) on the origin of life. However rich and powerful you are age will inevitably catch up with you. Tragedy of one kind or another will and must strike. Therefore, be positive and have faith in yourself. Look forward to your future, with a little help from luck and you will be alright. A postive attitude cannot ensure your success but a negative one can surely guarantee your failure. After all, what better can you do if you have already done your best !
The kind of lucrative returns we usually obtain from investing in equities precisely reflect the workings of one of the most sacred laws in the investment market. This golden law, so to speak, is that risks and return always go hand in hand. The greater is the expected return the higher are the related risks. What we have learned from the Science of Networks regarding investor behaviour is that when disaster does strike do not blame yourself on your bad judgment as everyone traditionally does because there is no sure way at all to read the ominous signs as there may not be any. If there really were observable signs and viable predictions based on past trends the computer would have been king of the investment jungle !


( C ) The Eccentric Ideas Fair Treatment for All

With the recent distinctive progress in the Science of Networks, a very encouraging trend can be seen. This is the collaboration between various scientific disciplines to foster closer ties both in terms of research techniques and insights gained in the respective fields of investigation. Traditionally, a lot of competiton has arisen between researchers within the same discipline. Some of this can be considered to be friendly competition which is likely to improve both the quality and efficiency of their research efforts. Unfortunately, there is another kind of competition which is less than healthy. Many researchers tend to guard their initial findings with great jealousy until they have completed the formulation and testing of their theory. As the development of a theory is a long and arduous process, different groups of researchers may be holding on to identical but precious information regarding the theory. Worse still, sometimes different pieces of the missing puzzle for the theory may be in the possession of different competing parties. An early collaboration between them will definitely shorten the whole research process and lead to considerable savings of precious and few available resources. I think the main reason for some cut-throat competition is the traditional way distinction and honour is bestowed on the pioneers of new scientific theories. For example, the highest honours such as the Nobel Prize for each discipline is traditionally awarded to individual laureates. Once in a while, the prizes are given to joint winners. Seldom are the prizes awarded to a whole group of reserchers ( the recent award bestowed on the CSIRO is a notable exception but not the rule ) except the Peace Prize. In the past, there were even cases of bypassing the lower ranking discoverers of scientific principles or phenomena in favour of the group leader. This is both unfair and counter productive insofar as such a practice tends to discourage the efforts of new blood in the army of scientific researchers. One of the most notorious examples of this sort is the 1974 Nobel Prize in Physics which was awarded to Antony Hewish of Britain for “his discovery” of the Pulsar. He was the leader of the group of astronomers in Cambridge, England that discovered the Pulsars in 1967. You may recall that the pulsars are, in fact, very compact neutron stars giving out periodic radio signals as they make regular and fast rotations. Their discovery at the time had given
113
rise to exciting claims of the existence of extra-terrestrials, hence it was dubbed the Little Green Man ( LGM ) Phenomnon. In fact, the actual discoverer was his student Jocelyn Bell who was not given the award on the ground that she worked under the supervision of the leader to whom full credit should be given. Would not awarding the prize to the whole group of researchers a more equitable arrangement ? I have always wondered why this was not done in the present case. There were those such as Sir Fred Hoyle , the proposer of the famous but discredited Steady State Theory of the universe, who vehemently objected to this unfair arrangement but were totally ignored. Sir Fred Hoyle for one was cold shouldered by the Institute for being so vocal on the case. Many members in the scientific community even felt that Sir Fred Hoyle was not awarded any Nobel Prize for his great contributions to astronomy because of his stance in this unfortunate and controversial incident. It would be a tremendous encouragement to the young blood of the science profession if team efforts are given the honour properly due to them. Besides, more equitable arrangements in recognising merits where honours are due can effectively help to reduce cut throat competition among researchers. It would be a great improvement all round. Let us keep our fingers crossed and look forward to more equitable arrangements in the awarding of academic honours in the near future.


A Manual for Everyone

In view of the practical nature of the Science of Networks and its direct application to most human affairs, it would be ideal if a practical manual for the basic working principles can be made available to the lay person. This would be of enormous benefits to the whole human race. I, for one, will eagerly support such a move. Although this discipline is still in the maturing stage, the established principles are already abundant and cover a wide spectrum of social and economic problems. I suspect that the general propagation of these practical principles will result in greater awareness by the general public on the complexity of all social and economic networks with which they come into contact on a daily basis. Hopefully, this can lead to fewer outbreaks of disasters due to the Cascade Effect. In other words, people may become more rational in handling their affairs and give due consideration to the wider perspective of the social network as a whole whenever possible. But that is not to say that everyone should always sacrifice their own good in favour of society. Instead, better understanding of basic mechanics of the social network will definitely lead to less irrational behaviour. In this sense, the public interest will automatically be served in the process.
I envisage that such a manual, when made available to the public at large, should contain basic guidelines for the rational behaviour of a modern and civilised citizen of the world on three different levels :- the individual ( personal ) level, the inner group ( family ) level and the network ( society ) level. Roughly speaking, the individual should be aware of one's position in the social network. The significance of the individual's position in society in the jargon of Network Mechanics is its function both as a receptor and initiator of interactions. Once the individual has actively initiated certain action, he or she will immediately become the receptor of reaction in the form of feed-backs from others responding to the original stimulus provided by the initiating individual. In this sense, an individual is both a maker of history and a product of his social environment the creation of which he is also partly responsible. This awareness should give rise to a genuine sense of social responsibility. Take for example, when I was a student in Hong Kong in the 1970s, I was involved as a volunteer in publicising the Clean Hong Kong Campaign run by the Urban Council. The usual response from young people who were the main target of the campaign expressed their attiude towards the publicity efforts as follows. Most of them felt that it was a waste of public funds because they are of the opinion that their individual resolution to refrain from throwing rubbish in the streets was not likely to prevent others from doing so. Firstly, this reflected a lack of confidence in their own ability to influence others. Secondly, they were not aware of their social responsibility in keeping their city clean. It was as if they would only do the right thing upon the condition that other would do
114
the same to ensure success. Otherwise, it would be foolish on their part to oblige. Had they known at the time the existence of the Cascade Effect and the Externalities of their good behaviour, they might have thought otherwise. If just a small portion of the population had actually started to respond to the call of the campaign, it would have been very likely that the whole social network would have organized itself into a critical state. A Cascade Effect could easily have taken hold and the good behaviour quickly snowballed into to a healthy social and cultural movement that would have saved the Hong Kong taxpayers million upon millions of precious tax dollars. Unfortunately, that was not to be. Decades later, the current Hong Kong Special Administrative Government still has to impose a fine of HK$1600 to stop people from throwing rubbish in the streets. Therefore, it is paramount for the modern citizens to realize the significance of their potential influence by way of their behaviour in their dual initiator and receptor position in the social network.
At the family level, members should realize the complexity of human affairs by virtue of the fact that human beings act like chaotic systems. It is more often than not for some mishaps like family quarrels to blow completely out of proprtion to the initial minor issues that started the trouble in question.The moral here is to refrain from starting any trouble unnecessarily. It is also wise to take note of the Weak Ties Concept. To reiterate, the best helpers for settling family quarrels are very often outsiders such as caring family friends who have only weak ties with the family. This is because such friends can provide more objective opinions and suggestions for the necessary remedial actions to help rival members make up for their wrong doings. Needless to say, more serious rifts should be referred to professional counselors.
Finally, at the society level, citizens should be educated on the Coercive Externality Concept. They should realize that their opinions can hardly be formed in isolation and independently of social pressure and information cascades such as overwhelming advertising campaigns. In fact, there cannot be any single correct opinion on anything. Therefore, everyone should respect the opinions of others. Furthermore, there can be a positive side to Coercive Externality. Take another example from my personal experince. While I was an undergraduate student, I was a committee member of a student organization in Hong Kong called the College Students Association of Hong Kong. Almost every summer, our committee would organize some volunteer projects to help the underprevileged. During one summer vacation, we were assigned to build a concrete footpath up the hill slopes of one of the squatter areas on the west end of Hong Kong Island. The existing one was a dirt path which would easily become a hazardous and slippery creek in the monsoon rainy season. A lot of accidents, big and small had happened along the dirt path causing personal injuries of all sorts. At first we did not get enough response from students to act as volunteer workers. Then, one of our advisors who was a catholic priest of the Jesuit Order thought of a bright idea to make a public call for help at a mass gathering of college students in one of the vacation camps mainly organized for recreational purpose catering for the needs of undergraduates who were enjoying their summer holidays. All of our committee members were instructed before hand to raise their hands in response to the call with the greatest of zeal. We were also instructed to spread among different parts of the gathering crowd of both male and female students. The Coercive External Effect caught hold of the masses with lightning speed and we got more responses than we needed in no time at all. Apart from the positive use of this often dreaded phenomenon, it turns out that the interactions and friendly competetion among volunteer workers both male and female were highly educational. This means that even volunteer social services which may sometimes mean hard work for the participants can also produce External Effects. Arts students very quickly picked up some mechanical and engineering skills in the application of lever systems designed by engineering students while the latter also swiftly learned some techniques in guitar playing from the former during rest periods. Most encouraging of all, the majority of participants heartily expressed their ecstasy in the superb feeling of satifaction derived from helping other people who badly needed their assistance. This state of mind could hardly have been achieved through studying in the class room as individual units or even by any amount of pecuniary rewards.Therefore, it is beyond any doubt that the total ( desirable efforts ) is more than the sum of its parts ( individual efforts ) and such a state of affairs can only be achieved through the multilateral interactions within a network, and hence, the absolute
115
necessity to learn the basic principles of the Science of Networks. Further insights into these principles will be described in greater detail
in my own Theory of Everything in Life ( and human behaviour ) in the closing chapters of this book. For now, we have to examine another very useful theory that can help us cut through the jungle of numerous puzzles that have obstructed the true face of the universe. And this odd man out of a scientific theory is the Science of Fuzzy Logic.


Chapter ( vii ) - The New Science of Fuzzy Logic

I describe this theory as the odd man out in the circle of scientific theories because it was not accepted comfortably in the academic arena. One of the pioneers in the field of Fuzzy Logic is Bart Kosko. He had studied philosophy, economics, mathematics and electrical engineering and holds degrees in all these disciplines. He was an Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Southern California and the chairman of several international conferences on neural networks and Fuzzy Logic. He is a controversial figure because he has advocated an idea that has proven to be very unpopular among most scientists. At the heart of his theory of Fuzzy Logic is the conviction that everything is a matter of degree. There is the implication of a lack of exactness in this approach which is a mortal sin in the meticulous discipline of the theoretical sciences especially theoretical physics. To make it absolutely clear, fuzzy as in Fuzzy Logic does not mean hazy or unclear or all muddled up. It simply means everything
is a matter of degree.
Despite his unpopularity in the western world, he is very much respected in the orient especially in Japan where his idea of Fuzzy Thinking has been very successfully applied to electrical technologies such as household electric appliances and even robotics which is very advanced in Japan. His idea of applying the “ matter of degree “ concept to everything seems to run counter to the sacred concept of discreteness under the powerful Quantum Concept. However, it need not be so because Fuzzy Logic is a practical concept meant for everyday macro systems quite distinct from the realm of subatomic particles governed by Quantum Mechanics. Let us now proceed to see what the fuss is all about and decide for ourselves whether or not Kosko's theory of Fuzzy Logic
contradicts the discreteness concept and most important of all whether or not it is useful. Another possible reason why Kosko is so often side-lined in the western culture concerns his belief in and support of oriental philosophy. He has always preferred the holistic approach over the the simple reductionist method that is the basis of western science since the ancient times of Aristotle when science was known as natural philosophy. Under the traditional reductionist approach no allowance is made for fuzziness. Everything is either black or white, right or wrong. There is no room for may be. This kind of value system is also kwown as a Bi-Valent System whereas the oriental holistic approach is more flexible and acknowleges gray areas. The latter system is what logicians called a Multi-Valent System and more akin to the Buddhists Philosophy. Both these schools of thinking accept the concept of A and Not-A and all the possiblities in between these two extremes. When A equals Not-A it represents the mid-point of the two extremes values such as 0 and 1; black and white; right and wrong. This unique position is just like the delicate balance or equilibrium exhibited in the black and white Yin and Yan sign found in the great chinese philosophy text of I-Ching ( Ching literally means bible in the western sense ) which is full of profound wisdom. Fuzzy Logic is a philosophy of compromise while the Bi-Valent system is one of the extremes of either black or white and right or wrong with nothing in between the two extremes. This is a polarizing and confrontational approach. This really rings a bell and reminds us of the current American President George w. Bush's famous declaration on his policy relating to the infamous Iraq War which goes like this :- “ If you are not with us, you are against us ! “ What about the middle-of-the-road opinions ? Must there only be either friend or foe ? There need not only be just A and B but also A and Not-A. An uncompromising attitude makes unnecessary
116
enemies. May be applying a little Fuzzy Logic would reduce much of the undesirable tension between USA and the rest of the world.
Kosko feels that the Muti-Valent System is more appropriate for the real world which is full of imperfections and should also be used in scientific endeavours if scientific theories are to be applied to the real world and not just the scientists' world of mathematical perfections. Later on in the chapter, we shall see how he applies this Muti- Valent Concept in everyday technologies. However, there is a price to be paid for flexibility and practicality and that is the sacrifice of vigour and clear cut distinction between the positive and the negative aspects of any given problem. To be clear on this point, supporters of the Muti-Valent System do not see this so much a sacrifice as a fact of life that everything is a matter of degree. Since scientists are renowned for their exactness in all aspects of their “trade” so, Kosko becomes a rebel in scientific research. That is why I call him the odd man out.
A very simple example will illustrate the essence of the Multi-Valent System. Once, Kosko told the audience during his lectures that just by asking two questions he could give a vivid picture of this system. First, he asked ;-” How many of you are married ? “ There was no hesitation among the audience and some hands were raised instantly. Then, he asked a second one :- “ How many of you are happy with your marriage life ? “ Some of the married ones raised their hands but after a while a few lowered their hands while others who did not raise their hands before did so gingerly. Then, there were others whose hands were up previously who now tried to withdraw them. It was a confusing scene. Suddenly, everyone nodded their heads in acknowlegement because they finally realized that in life there are many issues that cannot be resolved by a simple yes or no just as there can be no straight forward right or wrong as implied by the Bi-Valent System which can only reflect the man-made perfection of the mathematical world - the preferred language of the scientists. Einstein once said of mathematics as follows ;-“ So far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain. And so far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.“ For more than 2000 years since Aristotle, the western culture has always been based on the binary system ( including our indispensable digital computers ). Everything is based on the discrete values of 0 and 1. There is nothing in between. It is just like the gambler's slogan :-” All or nothing.” The mere fact that Fuzzy Logic is totally founded on a completely revolutionary Muti-Valent System is sufficient reason to raise eye brows among all conventional theorists, hence, the animosity and suspicion from the scientific community at large.


( A ) The Theory

The Theory of Fuzzy Logic originates from the idea that nothing is perfect in every sense of the word. There are no perfect straight lines, no perfect circles as there are no perfect human beings. Furthermore, there are no perfect measurements and perfect readings of the results of any measurements and most important still, there are no perfect interpretations of any facts the end result of which we call truths. So far so good. Now comes the tricky part. What are we to do in face of all these imperfections ? Can we turn this negative phenomenon into a positive and workable theory that we can make use of in our daily lives ? Kosko's answer is a certain and unqualified yes. Now, let
us see how the vital working concepts of Fuzzy Logic operate.
Universal, Empty and Fuzzy Sets
Set Theory has been around for just about over a hundred years. It is one of the most important and useful theories in Mathematical Logic. It is useful because it highlights the significance of classifying things into groups with similar
117
characteristics. By so doing, we can predict with reasonable accuracy the behaviour of things belonging to the same group or set. Further detailed analysis of the set gives rise to subsets which are also members of the same set but with slightly different characteristics while still obeying the same general rules of the set.
As a matter of fact, we have been putting Set Theory into practice day in and day out without realizing it. Whenever we are solving any problem, we must first indentify the problem. Then, we proceed to find out facts relating to the problem. There are also facts that may help to solve the problem. Straight away, we have automatically grouped these relevant facts into two groups or sets. One set constitutes the problem itself while the other the solution. Such grouping of facts or things is a fundamental step in any kind of planning and mental reasoning process or discipline. For example, in the accounting profession which mainly deals with assessing financial performance and profit, we must first record data and classifiy them into groups with similar characteristics such as assets and liabilities to be shown in the balance sheet ( the position statement ) and income and expenses to be shown in the profit and loss account ( the income statement ). Without segregating the financial data into these two categories ( assets and income ) there is no way to assess how a particular business has performed during a specific period of time. These data are two completely different sets of things having totally different characteristics. The most important step in financial accounting is to distinguish between capital and revenue items. The former have enduring or unexpended values while the latter are expended values or things that have expired as far as their values are concerned. Say, the difference between a durable piece of macinery ( e.g. a printing machine ) and an item of expense ( e.g. factory rent for the month ) lies in the fact that the former still possesses usable or future productive value ( i.e. a capital asset ) while the latter is expended or expired value without any future benefit ( i.e. a revenue item of expense ). The former have future or enduring benefit to the business ( and therefore, should be carried forward in the balance sheet as part of its net worth ) while the latter is history ( and should be matched or written off against the current income or revenue for the period in the calculation of the business' profit for the period in question in the profit and loss account ). Thus, by classifying financial data into their proper categories ( specifying the correct sets of financial data ) and applying the correct generally accepted accounting principles the profit or loss of a business for a specific accounting period can be properly arrived at. So, it is very plain to see how useful Set Theory is in every aspect of our quest for knowledge and our daily lives. It is only by grouping similar items together or specifying sets that useful and powerful predictive theories and techniques can be formulated in an orderly manner in every aspect of human activities and scientific research. Statisical techniques which are so crucial to scientific research are yet another
notable demonstration of the practical values of Set Theory. Returning to Fuzzy Logic, its special characteristics which sets it apart
from traditional logic such as Set Theory ( the corner stone of traditional mathematical logic ) can be demonstrated by considering two extreme cases of the Set Theory, namely, the Universal Set and the Empty Set. The Universal Set as its name implies includes everything in our universe. On the other hand, the Empty Set contains nothing and is also known as the Null Set. These two sets occupying the two extreme positions of having everything and nothing are comparable to the the pure black and pure white situation of the colour scheme. All the intermediate shades of gray are fuzzy black and fuzzy white with the exact gray colour at the mid-point of 50% black and 50% white. The idea of a Fuzzy Set comes in when a certain set of objects or things only partly belongs to another set. In other words, some members or components of the Fuzzy Set belong to another set but other members of the Fuzzy Set do not. Put it more simply. A Fuzzy Set is a set that is only partly contained in another set. The overlaping portion is the Fuzzy Area. For example, as mentioned before, there is no 100% perfect circle as there is no 100% perfect anything ! Traditional logic would describe a less than perfect circle as probably a circle while Fuzzy Logic would call it a fuzzy circle. Therefore, despite the usual criticism of inexactness and loose and permissive reasoning being leveled at Fuzzy Logic it will be seen from the above description of the imperfect circle that Fuzzy Logic provides a more definite and realistic account of the physical nature of the material world.
There are three important points to note in the above description of
118
the Fuzzy Set. Firstly, while the Universal Set and the Empty Set are represented by the colours black and white in the previous paragraph, you will note that they are just two points such as A and B on the extreme opposite sides of the scale from the black to white colour range. All the other infinite number of points along the black to white colour range as represented by a straight line ( i.e. all points between points A and B on the straight line ) belong to the Fuzzy Set of neither black nor white. All other points besides A and B fall within the category of Not A or Not B which are all members of the Fuzzy Set. This implies that reality is seldom completely black or completely white but different shades of gray. Fuzziness is the order of the day and fuzziness is the rule rather than the exception. Secondly, the reverse situation applies to the common sense notions of black and white. They are, in fact, the exception rather than the rule ( pure black and pure white are just two points at the two extreme positions on the black and white colour range among the infinite number of fuzzy components of Not Black and Not White ). This is a really sobering thought. We should adapt our thinking to this fuzzy world through the application of the multi-valent Fuzzy Logic instead of the traditional uncompromising Bi-valent Value System of black and white with nothing in between ! The traditional thinking does not reflect the actual situation but rather the idealized version of reality for the sake of simplicity and easy handling such as using the binary digits of 0 and 1 to represent all kinds of data in the computer. Thirdly, Fuzzy Logic is not as loose a discipline or as out of touch with reality as to become a detriment to the scientific method as many scientists have presumed it to be.
Apart from being only a rough approximation of the actual reality, traditional logic based on Set Theory also has its Achilles' heel. Bertrand Russell had proved that there could be contradictions in traditional logic. His famous example of self- reference statements is the case in point. Consider the following statement :-“This statement is false. True or false ? “ If you say it is true, then the statement is false. If you say it is false, then the statement is true. This is the famous Liar's Paradox. Russell had discovered the set of all sets that are not members of themselves thereby ending the the logical certainty in the ever reliable mathematical method. His paradox proves that even
the most logical discipline of logic can be illogical and contradictory at times !



Fuzzy Systems and Fuzzy Terminology

Fuzzy systems are systems that obey fuzzy rules. These rules differ from the traditional rules in that they may overlap one another and are not mutually exclusive. For example, the on or off switch in the traditional domestic electrical appliance such as an air-conditioner is not fuzzy. It works on a Bi-Valent System. The switch only turns the appliance either on or off with nothing in between. These positions are mutually exclusive. You can only have one but not both at the same time. In fuzzy systems , there are many more rules which may overlap and are not mutually exclusive. For example, a smart air-conditioner designed under Fuzzy Logic has many different rules to control its operation such as :- When it gets a little bit warmer, turns up the cooling effect a little bit more. When its gets very much warmer, turns up the cooling effect much more. When it is not warm at all , stop the cooling effect altogether. It sounds like the traditional thermostat but it is not. The fuzzy rules work on a continuous basis and not at discrete steps like the traditional thermostat which has to be set at a fixed temperature to trigger the on or off switch. It is smarter in the sense that it learns from the fuzzy rules to adapt itself to its working environment automatically. Furthermore, many other factors can be taken into account. For example, other rules such as :- When it gets a little bit humid , activates the
dehumidifying function a little bit and so on. The secret in fuzzy systems is to allow the smart machine to learn its
own trade through the input of numerous fuzzy rules which may overlap one another and which can all stop or work at the same time and to varying degrees. Under Fuzzy Logic, knowledge is treated as rules. These are useful pieces of organized information to be fed into the smart fuzzy systems to improve their machine intelligence or machine IQ as Bart Kosko used to call it. To gain deeper insights into the practical nature of Fuzzy Logic, we
119
must learn a little bit about fuzzy terminology. The following are some examples of the more important fuzzy terms that will help you to appreciate the finer points in how fuzzy systems work.
Fuzzy Approximation Theorem
Kosko had proved in a theorem called the Fuzzy Approximation Theorem ( FAT ) in 1990 that a fuzzy system can model or approximate any system. The theorem also shows why fuzzy systems can raise machine IQ. Behind this almost magical technology there lies a very subtle human connection that makes this technology viable. Fuzzy systems are, in fact, modeled after the working of the neural system in our brain. It mimics the way our neurons are fired in all kinds of actions and reactions that co-ordinate our physical movements and mental processess. As mentioned before, the human brain is the most complex structure in the whole universe. With over 100 billion cells and each neuron wired in parallel with over 10 thousand other similar cells that control our mental and physical processess, our brain is nothing less than a super computer. Neural research has shown that the neurons in our brain very often fire in parallel and they do so in such a way that minimizes the Linear Time Invariant ( LTI) uncertainty. LTI systems arerelated to the propagation of signals or information involving the trade-off between time and frequency. It boils down to the fact that the structures of such systems do not change or evolve very much over time. It has a particular Uncertainty Principle of its own. The LTI Uncertainty Principle states that you cannot completely pin down a signal both in time and frequency. The more you want to know the frequency of a signal the less you can know about the time at which the signal is propagated and vice versa. To give a simple illustration, if you are driving a car along the freeway, you cannot know for sure (100 %) your position at a particular moment and your speed at that moment to the same degree of certainty simultaneously. Once you look at the speedometer and confirm your speed your car would already have moved to a different position and vice versa. Furthermore, neurons fire on the weighted average of the intensity of the signal received by the receptor neurons to determine the appropriate physical or mental response to be taken as a result of the stimulus detected by the receptor neurons. Based on these working principles of human neurons, fuzzy rules are fed into fuzzy systems to allow them to develop their own machine intellegence and eventually to become smart machines based on the human
model.


Data In, Rules Out

Then, there is the DIRO principle applicable to fuzzy systems. It simply means Data In, Rules Out. Relevant data is fed into a Neural Network which is a computer software and Fuzzy Rules will be worked out by the Neural Network. For
example, information required for a smart air-conditioner like warm, cool, cold, humidity, high power, medium power and low power is fed into the computer run by the software and the appropriate fuzzy rules will emerge as the output from the computer under the DIRO principle. The input data are also segregated into like sets with direct relationships such as :- warm and high power or cold and low power, etc. Input data will also be classified into positive and negative categories. The positive ones help things move towards the desired goal while the negative ones turn things away from the designated target. All appliances designed under Fuzzy Logic and, similarly, all Fuzzy Systems are run on the DIRO principle. Data refers to relevamt information while Rules are considered to be organized knowledge created by the Neural Network software through the application of Fuzzy Logic on the relevant information.

120

Fuzzy Associative Memory

Fuzzy systems also works on Fuzzy Associative Memory ( FAM ). This concept is also pioneered by Bart Kosko. Again applying the blueprint of our brain, FAM is a very effective way of programing smart systems such as a fuzzy computer chip or fuzzy computer software. It differs from the traditional computer memory insofar as the traditional computer memory uses direct memory which retrieves and compares information one cell at a time until it gets the correct match from the data base with the target of the search. FAM on the other hand, uses associative memory which causes all the fuzzy rules of the system to fire in parallel or at the same time much like the neurons in our brain to make an instant scan of the total memory stored in the data base and to obtain an almost instant match if such a match between the target data and the stored data actually exists. Have you ever wonder why something or someone or some situation looks familiar to you as if you have come across them before but not quite exactly as in your memory ? This is the effect of associative memory of your brain in action. When we see something or meet somone for the first time our brain automatically scans the image
of that new thing or person and match the image against data stored in our past memory. Our brain does so by super-imposing the whole new image on our past memory to try to find a match. This process will cause all relevant sensor neurons to fire in parallel to accomplish an instant and total search. If the new image is very close to any data stored in our past memory the neurons will give the signal of a very close match. This is what causes the funny, familiar feeling although you instinctively know that the person or situation is not the same one in your memory. You will know this because you may be in that part of the world for the first time. Also, the signal from your brain will clearly tell you that it has not obtained 100 % match in that instant. This so called funny familiar feeling is very often the culprit of love at first sight syndrome when both loving parties may feel that they are destined to meet because they feel as if they have met before in their former lives ! FAM works effectively because it is a multi-valent system recognising grayness rather than a bi-valent system like traditional logic accepting only black or white with nothing in between. The uncompromising approach adopted by the latter system leads to the weakness in traditional logic of only being capable of using direct memory of matching memory cells in the computer memory one at a time. The rules the bi-valent system follows find difficulty in firing all at once or each to different degree because most rules in traditional logic are mutually exclusive or uncompromising. The Bi-Valent System does not effectively and truly reflect the situation in the real world. That is why Kosko has correctly highlighted the weakness in traditional logic by his comments :- “ Linear mathematics but non-linear world”.


( B ) The Inspirations Fuzzy Cognitive Map

Having gained some insights into the essence of Fuzzy Logic, let us attempt to apply the principles to our daily life by incorporating such fuzzy rules into our decision making process. To do this, we need to learn one more practical tool derived from this new science of Fuzzy Logic. The particular tool I am referring to is called a Fuzzy Cognitive Map ( FCM ). This thinking tool is much more simpler than its sophisticated sounding name implies. A FCM is just a simple diagram describing different factors working for and against our desired goal in plain English. For example, in assessing the political stability in the Peoples Republic of China, we would set out all factors working for and against the country's political stability such as :- (A) growth in gross national income, (B) more openess in the political process, (C) relaxation of control on the press ( these are
121
positive factors ), (D) corruptive practices, (E) unfair administration of laws, (F) greater influence by the military ( these are negative factors ). Having identified all relevant factors ( I am just setting out a few here but not all the relevant factors in this case for the sake of simplicity ), we can then put each factor in separate boxes to set up a flow chart. The next step is to place the various boxes in their proper sequence and follow the following fuzzy procedure :- “ IF THIS THEN THAT “.
A demonstration of the FCM process would work as follows. IF A THEN more stability is achieved. IF D THEN more instability will arise. Now you have got two fuzzy rules which can fire in parallel or to varying degree or not at all. Create as many fuzzy rules as you possibly can. For example, IF slightly more A THEN slightly more stability is achieved. IF A but much more D THEN instability will arise considerably. The more fuzzy rules you have properly created the more accurate will the conclusion or analysis you obtain from the FCM process. The most important thing to note is that some factors ( boxes ) can be placed in parallel or in sequence depending on their nature and relationship with one another. The positive factors should be added together while the negative ones subtracted from the positive ones. For example, A + B + C= 100% stability while A + B – D= 66.6% stability and so on. After taking into account all positive and negative factors in the context of all fuzzy rules derived from them and working through the complete flow chart that is the FCM, we can come to a reliable assessment and opinion on the China situation. The FCM method is easy to work with and does not involve complicated mathematics. FCM can also be applied to any type of problems and difficult issues both qualitative and quantitative. For this reason its usefulness is comparable to the Feynman Diagrams in Quantum Mechanics. The reader should also note that all fuzzy
rules closely follow the motto in Fuzzy Logic- Everything is a matter of degree.
Adaptive Fuzzy Systems
Fuzzy systems are systems that operate by applying fuzzy rules. On the other hand, Adaptive Fuzzy Systems are more advanced in the sense that they can learn from the fuzzy rules fed into the system and their machine IQ can grow like a human brain. Let us proceed to see how such thinking machine can be created through
the application of Fuzzy Logic. One of the crowning achievements of Fuzzy Logic is its ability
to raise machine IQ. Due to the traditional cultural values in oriental philosophy, Fuzzy logic is readily accepted in the East. As a result, the more advanced institutions and organisations applying Fuzzy Logic on a practical basis are mostly in the oriental countries such as Japan, Korea and China with Japan being the leader in the world in the application of Fuzzy Logic to modern technology. The Japanese government actively promotes fuzzy technology by setting up public research institutes such as the Laboratory for International Fuzzy Engineering Research ( LIFE ) in 1989 and the Fuzzy Logic Systems Institute ( FLSI ) in 1990 both funded by the government. Although LIFE caters for international research 90% of the members on the board of directors are executives from large Japanese manufacturing corporations. This indicates that western countries are way behind Japan and other oriental countries in applying Fuzzy Logic to modern technology. This is a worrying trend.
Having acquainted ourselves with the recent development in fuzzy technology, let us attempt to understand how Adaptive Fuzzy Systems work. For one thing scientists now know that such systems work on the Self-Organisation Principle just as the hypothesis on the origin of life. To take one example of an Adaptive Fuzzy System called the BAM (Bi-directional Associative Memory ) invented by Kosko in 1986. It is ,in fact, a neural computer net which is a software to control written messages to be shown on large information screens for public display. All the relevant data is fed into the neural network and fuzzy rules will be generated as output. The technical details are far beyond the scope of this book but suffice it to say that the whole system follows the DIRO principle of Fuzzy Logic as explained above. Roughly speaking, the most closely related data is
122
mutually wired and hooked up. This procedure gives rise to the term bi-directional. Suppose we want to display the O.K. Sign on the screen. The letters O and K will be hooked up through the software program of the neural computer net. Whenever the letter O is input into the system letter K also automatically fires. More complicated messages can similarly be hooked up multi-laterally. Due to the efficiency of the fuzzy rules mechanics which can fire in parallel and to varying degrees, the match between the input instructions and the target data is in the form of an instant blanket search like the human brain's neural scanning of its memory bank which exists in the form of various neural webs. This is in stark contrast to the single individual cell match in traditional computer prorgrams which follow bi-valent rules that are mutually exclusive and cannot fire in parallel but in discrete logical steps. It is easy to see that the neural computer net which follow fuzzy rules and fuzzy logic is by far more efficient than the traditional computer programs that run on bi-valent rules. Furthermore, as the system also follows the “ IF A Then B “ rule numerous additional fuzzy rules can be produced automatically under the DIRO procedure. In this sense, this system is a self learning program. Self-organization can also occur because the fuzzy rules will ultimately lead to the firing of synapses of all relevant data or stored messages that make sense to the input commands according to the logic of the fuzzy rules. All computing activities will tend to be attracted towards and centre around such relevant information wells in the data base. This phenomenon is comparable to the Sink ( centre point towards which all activites will be attracted and stablized ) concept in the Science of Chaos and Complexity.
Before we leave the topic of Adaptive Fuzzy Systems, let me set out some real life examples of products created under the principles of Fuzzy Logic.
You will notice that the majority of these are of Japanese origin :-
Product Air-conditioner
Anti-lock brakes Copy machine Chemical mixer Elevator control
Health management system
Television
Company
Hitachi, Matsushita,
( Panasonic ) Mitsubishi, Sharp
Nissan Canon
Fuji Electric
Fujitec, Mitsubishi Electric, Toshiba
Omeron
Goldstar ( Korea )
123

Fuzzy Logic Role
Prevents overshoot-undershoot temperature oscillation and consumes
less on-off power
Controls brakes in hazardous cases based on car speed
Adjust drum voltage based on picture density, temperature, and humidity
Mixes chemicals based on plant conditions
Reduces waiting time based on passenger traffic
Over 500 fuzzy rules track and evaluate an employee's health
and fitness
Adjusts screen colour and texture for each fram and stablizes
Translator Epson Recognizes, translates words in pencil-size unit
( Source of information :- the book Fuzzy Thinking by Bart Kosko published by Flamingo- An imprint of Harper Collins Publishers- 1994 edition )
Most of the above patented systems are also registered in the USA and the European Union. It seems that the western world has a lot of catching up to do regarding fuzzy technology. Japan is also the leading nation in Robotics and there is little doubt that the achievement in this latest and strategically important technology has a lot to do with Japan's tremendous success in applying Fuzzy Logic to industrial technology. As Robotics depends on mimicking the working of the human brain, Fuzzy Logic is particularly suited to this applied scientific discipline. Western scientists should reassess the importance of Fuzzy Logic in the role it should play in industrial technology for this is crucial to the competitiveness of all western economies and by inference on the progress and well being of world economics as a whole.


( C ) The Eccentric Ideas Our Brain as an Adaptive Fuzzy System

While Fuzzy Logic can be readily applied to commercial ventures as can be seen from the previous section, it can also provide a lot of insights into other more metaphysical aspects of the human life. One of the important basic working principles of Fuzzy Logic and Fuzzy Systems is the Multi-Valent philosophy which closely approximates the physical reality and the Multi-lateral actions and reactions of our neural function or the working of our brain. Lets us now review our understanding of the basic
mechanism that is responsible for the working of the human brain. Just to refresh your memory, our brain is made up of some 100
billion cells that weigh about 2 kilograms in total. Most of these cells are neurons that are wired together multi-laterally. The most important thing is not the numbers of neurons but the intricate way they are Connected ( still remember Connection is the main theme in this book ? ). The wires themselves account for some 40% of the mass of our brain. We call these wires synapses or neural connections. They are the real muscles of our brain and carry all the signals to enable all our mental and physical actions and reactions to take effect. Each neuron can connect with up to 10 thousand other neurons thus making the total number of synapses or neural wires in the quadrillions. That is why our brain is the most sophisticated of all computers. You will recall from the Holographic Model of our brain in chapter (iii) on Quantum Theory that none of the brain cells hold any memory individually but they do so collectively by imprints and signals produced in toto by various relevant cells. It is more like the video on the digital computer monitor which is composed of images built upon an ordered collection of small dots of pixels that do not individually contain any particular image. The neural cells all work in unison in the form of neural webs to carry out the memory function very much like the individual pixels on the digital computer monitor. This is the reason why the losing or damaging of part of the brain does not lead to loss of specific patches of memory although overall memory may become hazy. Conventional computers only store data in specific files at specific locations in its memory bank which makes it a very simple and rudimentary design compared to the way the human brain remembers things and episodes in our lives.
Now, comes the learning process. Both learning and memory functions lie in the operations of the neural network and not individual neural cells. The
124
efficiency in both of these faculties depends on how well or sophisticated the neural net is wired and how healthy and strong are the wires or synapses ( neural muscles ) to enable numerous signals in the form of electrical impulses to be relayed at literally lightening speed over and over again along the synapses to and from their target areas or destinations. Such target areas or destinations are either an episode in our past memory we are searching or the voluntary muscles in some part of our body that we want to move in response to changes in our environment or simply upon our wishes. Learning in human neural terms is causing changes in the synapses and the manner in which they are connected to one another.
To understand the learning process better, we need to know a little bit about how neurons work. While the neural network resembles a telephone network to some extent the former differs from the latter insofar as the receiving ends of the wires are not just mechanical telephone sets installed at an ordinary location such as a home or an office. The receiving ends of neural wires (synapses) are small reservoirs with dams (neurons) containing messenger chemicals the most important of which is called Norepinephrine (NE). This is the chemical that is the brain version of adrenaline ( secreted by glands situated above the kidney ) that increases all our bodily biological activities when we are excited or in fear. NE causes brain activities to accelerate in speed and the whole neural network will be on extra alert. This will result in greater sensitivity as well as reception capacity of the whole system and, therefore, making the neural network more conducive to the learning process. When the amount of brain signals in the form of electric pulses to reach the neurons in the motor areas of our body (e.g. the bicep muscles in our forearm) is strong enough such electric pulses will cause the dams in the neurons to literally burst open to release the appropriate chemical agent. This process will send chemical stimuli to the surrounding muscle to cause complicated contractions to take place that result in the appropriate muscle actions that we desire in the particular circumstances.
The key feature to note is the bursting open of the dams leading to the sudden rush of chemical stimuli. The small bio-chemical explosion taking place in each neuron upon activation by brain signals (electric pulses) will send stimuli to 10 thousand other connected neurons resulting in similar responses and feedbacks multi-laterally. So you can easily get the ultra complicated picture of the neural system at work. Scientists do not know the exact details of the process as yet but they know for sure that the more often the brain takes part in such activities the more efficient it becomes. Both the neurons (the chemical containing reservoirs) and synapses (neural wiring) become stronger and work faster just like what manual exercise does to our physical fitness. Scientists have put a rough estimate on the extent to which the average human brain is utilised at only 10 to 15 % of its total capacity. Therefore, do not be afraid to exert more brainy effort. At present, it is working grossly under capacity. This sudden bursting reaction of the neurons is the reason why we become more alert and can react faster physically and mentally when we are excited. It also accounts for the strong emotional feelings such as love at first sight. The retrieving of either knowledge or memory works like a ball rolling on the surface of the rubber sheet looking for a match. The search is completed upon the ball stopping at the relevant information well or Sink. You will see from this comparison that the ball moves faster if both the surface of the ball and rubber sheet are smoother through constant usage or more exercise. The similarity between our brain and an Adaptive Fuzzy System lies in the fact that our brain also adopts a Multi-Valent Logic System that allows all fuzzy brain rules to fire at the same time in parallel to maximize operational effeciency. This blanket firing of rules cannot be achieved in traditional logic because of the either this or that Bi- Valent system adopted in traditional logic. In fact, there is experimental evidence to show that the neurons in our brain fire in such a way as to minimise the uncertainty applicable to a Linear Time Invariant (LTI) system ( as explained above ) meaning it takes the shortest possible route to reach its target or to achieve its objective. Furthermore, our brain can also learn from its existing conditions by improvising new and more efficient routing of signals as evident from the fact that the more we learn the faster we can learn new things. This is due to the reason that the same principles (already learnt by the brain) may be applicable to a variety of things and processes. Thus, the learning process in our brain works on a geometrical rather than arithmatical progression basis as I mentioned in the
125
prologue. The superiority of our brain as compared to the conventional computer is aptly summed up by Bart Kosko as follows :- “That's why neural nets or neural computers differ from computers. In a computer the more you store the longer it takes to search for a match. Brains and neural nets don't work that way. The time it takes to recognize your parents' face in a photo does not change from age 5 to age 40 to age 70. But in that time you put more patterns in your brain.” The unique characteristic of neural nets is that they are self-organizing which is also the defining hallmark of life.
Near Death Experience and the Brain
There is an unexpected and mystical connection between the learning process and near death experience (NDE) which we have come across in chapter (iii) on Quantum Theory with respect to the Holographic Model of our brain. Stephen Grossberg of Boston University has proved that we learn a new idea or pattern only when it resonates with what we expect to see or hear or think. He calls this adaptive resonance. According to him, there exists an energy sheet ( a field rather than a physical sheet ) in our neural network. When you see an image or memorize some information it creates a well on that energy sheet. The more often you see the same image the deeper the related energy well. When you recall some information or memory you do so by matching the target with the energy sheet en bloc. If there is a match a resonance occurs and you either successfully recalled your memory episode or dug a new well for the new knowledge you have acquired.This blanket search or instant scan capability of the brain makes the matching of new images or information with stored data an easy task for our neural system. The time required for any search does not increase with the increased number of images stored in the brain because of its total and blanket cover capability. The search as exemplified by the rolling of the ball on the energy sheet always results in the ball stopping at the closest energy well that is the target of the search. It does not matter if there were one or one million stored images. Such is the wonder of our brain.
Now comes the eccentric speculation on the connection between the energy sheet and NDE. There are two types of most commonly reported phenomena in relation to NDE. The first type concerns seeing a bright white light. This is normally attributed to a massive rush of adrenaline just as in the case of imminent danger. The second type is more interesting and it deals with your life passing before your eyes. The following is a speculative theory on this strange and yet poetic phenomenon. Our survival instinct will try to find any possible means of avoiding death. It may do so by a franctic search for solutions through a total and instant massive associative parallel search of all stored data in the brain to cope with the emergency. All past episodes will be replayed in parallel due to the shortage of time in the hope of finding a way out of the emergency. The threat of present danger acts as a trigger in the form of the ball or numerous sets of balls rolling on numerous sets of energy sheets on equally numerous neural nets representing different past experiences and knowledge in search of the right energy well or Sink. All these are done with the sole aim of finding an escape from the present danger the body is subject to in the particular NDE. The critical point to remember is that learning changes an information medium. This medium may take different forms. In our brain it is the synapses and the whole neural network. Therefore, we must learn by conditioning and reconditioning our brain and by keeping the energy wells deep through constant exercise
and retraining.
On account of the fact that learning takes place in our brain by conditioning and reinforcement, a good education for the younger generation becomes the key to a better future in society and the hope of mankind. That is also the reason for my special interest in education for the young. To re-educate the grown-up population successfully would be an immense task. While we must continue to try to do our best in this regard our best possible shot at achieving a better society inevitably rests with the young. Let us all strive for this undoubtedly worthwhile goal in whatever way we can contribute without any reservation. Society as a whole will surely reap the golden harvest
126
in the long run.
The greatest lesson we can learn from Fuzzy Logic that is useful to our daily life is the imperfections in the real world and by inference in ourselves. To cope with such imperfection, we have no choice but to apply a Multi-Valent value system and must compromise in our approach to solving problems in both the material world and human affairs. This message is loud and clear in the reasoning of Fuzzy Logic. While traditional logic is still valid in the formulation of theories which represent ideal and generalized situations we must accommodate the imperfections in reality by the application of this new science of Fuzzy Logic in our daily toil. The traditional bi-valent system adopted in science thus far trades accuracy for simplification or approximation, albeit very closely like calculus. It is now to this imperfect Reality that we must turn in the
next chapter.


Chapter ( viii ) - The Reality

Reality is the phenomena and things that we perceive through our senses as operated by our biological functions including our sight, hearing, smell and touch. These are the basic physio-biological abilities. On top of these, each of us can apply to different extents, our higher mental abilities such as feelings and intuition which are mainly the results of the more subtle functions of the brain to find our way and interact with the physical world including social activities among fellow human beings. The key word here is perceive. Since our sensing and higher mental capabilities are developed to different levels of efficiency depending on our genes and training, the same signals we receive from the outside world may result in different interpretations by different persons receiving them. This is the obvious consequence of the different ways each individual human brain has been conditioned through the learning process as well as the different endowment each of us has inherited from our parents' genes. It is both a matter of nature
and nurture as has now been generally accepted by scientists and medical professionals. Due to these inherent differences in human ability to detect signals from his environment, the question of what reality means to each person may be quite different and complicated and not as simple and direct as the word may first suggest. To understand what reality means ( and its true face ) is of vital importance to our quest to arrive at a complete understanding of how Mother Nature works. Without achieving this understanding there is no way for us to exist and work in harmony with Her so as to attain our peace of mind and possibly learn about our purpose in life. So, let us take our first step
towards this meaningful goal.


( A ) The Theory

To start with, there is no single unified theory on reality. You will recall that the Grand Unification Theory on all the laws of nature is still an illusive target as of the present moment. However, there is fortunately a general consensus among scientists on the most likely routes to arrive at this noble grand unification theory. In fact, there are two camps of academics who have set their eyes on this goal during the past two thousands years or so. They are the scientists as well as the philosophers. In the very beginning which was at the times of Socrates and Aristotle, these two groupings were one. They were all philosophers but those who were dealing with the more physical aspects of nature were known as the Natural Philosophers while those that mostly dealt with the
127
human mind or thoughts were simply called the Philosophers. In fact, the profession called the Natural Philosophers persisted to the Sixteen and Seventeenth Centuries, the time of Rene Descartes ( the father of modern philosophy ) and Sir Issac Newton ( the giant of modern science ). These two gentlemen among many others are considered to be the first generation of the modern scientists. Since then, scientists and philosophers had parted company and became two separate and distinct professions. You may still recall that one of Newton's greatest books was called “Principia” which is the popular name for “Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy”. Here, Natural Philosophy refers to science. I hope that you have not yet forgotten the essence of the scientific method which is its testability and predicaibility. Youhave not effectively said anything in science until you have proven it in experiments or physical observations. The minimum requirement in this regard is that you must at least have suggested a way of verifying your statement. Then, your postulate ( basic idea ) would pass from a hypothsis to the stage of a scientific theory which must be capable of being subjected to testing ( i.e. being falsifiable if that is the unfortunate case ). If your theory can withstand numerous testing without fail, then it would attain the supreme status of a law. This is the highest order in scientific formulation. Let us proceed to attempt a demystification of the mystical face of reality. While we are still discussing various issues with reference to scientific theories a word of caution is in order. We have now ventured into the realm of another discipline and this is, of course, philosophy. We need to depart from purely scientific theory and branch out into philosophy simply because whereas science teaches us how to do things philosophy tells us why we should do them. That is the basic rationale for doing everything that we do. The big WHY is in a sense inborn. The speech ability of most infants starts with a WHY question ( such as why do stars twinkle ? ) to the parents as soon as the infant can master a complete sentence. Having adjusted our compass with reference to the chart, let us sail on !


Types of Reality

What is reality made up of ? That is the sixty-four dollar question. Before answering this question, we need to systematically pin down our target. This can be done by identifying the characteristics of reality. First of all, we know that it consists of phenomena and things. These may be tangible or physically touchable objects. On the other hand, they may be ideas, dreams or whimps of feelings or sensations which are more abstract. Even more elusive are other elements of reality such as the economy or the legal system which may be more complicated and defy classification into either the tangible or intangible categories. These are intangible in the sense that we cannot touch them but they are also indirectly tangible to the extent that we can experience their working in practical terms. Under our market economy, the price of everything is fixed by supply and demand. We have to work hard to earn money for our daily needs. We genuinely feel the burden of an inflationary economy. Likewise, we can be hardly hit with an expensive speeding penalty ticket if we break the traffic laws which are only really words on paper. Strange isn't it ? How can mere rules written on paper bound in a volume affect us in a tangible way ? Or how can money which is merely printed forms of paper make us work like a dog ? From these examples, we are given to understand that there can be hybrid types of reality that are derived from the mixing together of the tangible and intangible categories in an intricate manner. In fact, this hybrid category is the most common and numerous type. It usually arises through the interaction of the tangible and
intangible types of realities. For easy reference, I shall call the tangible type objective reality
(OR) because they obey the laws of nature and cannot be changed by us through our subjective wishes though we may be able to manipulate or rearrange them within the tolerance of the physical laws. As for the intangible type, I shall call it subjective reality (SR) because it is produced by us through our mental faculty ( which, of course, may by itself be a set of objective reality that runs on laws of nature ) and, to this extent, is under our control to some degree. For the sake of clarity, the mechanism of our brain which runs
128
our mental faculty is a physical object but the products such as ideas and sensations it creates are the subjective reality I am referring to. Finally, the mixed type I shall call hybrid reality (HR). The general impression we get after processing signals from our environment and filtering them through our mental faculty that has been pre-conditioned by our past experience and training up to that particular point in our lives, I shall call our perceived reality (PR). This is ultimately the Reality with a capital R that matters most to us. This is because at any particular point in our lives when important decisions have to be made that may affect our future, such decisions would be based on our perceived reality whatever it means to us and us alone. That is why some personal decision such as to commit suicide can seem so absurd to everyone else but the person involved in the tragic decision. Therefore, a little helping hand or kind word of encouragement at the crucial time can save a life. So, never miss the chance when it comes your way.
We need to classify reality into different categories because each has its own characteristics which may help us identify them and draw inspirations from each category for problem solving and guidance in our daily actions. This is again the function of set theory in logic for systematic thinking and decision making. To make effective use of this classification of reality including application to my own theory of
everything in life, a more detailed examination of each is in order. Objective Reality (OR)
This category include all physical objects and phenomena in nature. They are subject to the laws of nature and exist in the manner dictated by such laws. However, you should recall the Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Mechanics which is applicable to the subatomic world so that at the level of atoms, elementary particles, strings and branes some quantum uncertainty will prevail. In practical terms, such uncertainty is smoothed out by the sheer numbers of atoms that make up everyday objects to be of any significance in our daily routines.
The most important characteristic of OR is its constant and unchanging nature. It always appears to be the same and operates in the same unchanging manner being restricted by the laws of nature. As such, OR is the simplest of the three categories of realities. To co-exist in harmony with OR is tantamount to being at peace with Mother Nature. We can even manipulate or rearrange OR by applying the laws of nature wisely. For example, we can use wind turbines to produce environmentally friendly electricity supply by applying physical laws in building sophisticated machinery through putting the mechanical lever systems and Maxwell's laws on electricity into practice. Modern technology has done such things to perfection. Can you doubt the power of the digital computers that works on Quantum Mechanics and with softwares that are modelled after the ideas of the Science of Networks ? Stop short of the Grand Unification Theory ( i.e. the Theory of Everything ) that is supposed to unite all the four basic forces of nature of which gravity has still eluded the researchers, the scientists have done an unarguably superb job in technology and deserve our greatest respect. Therefore, there seems to be little difficulty in mastering OR.
As regards decision making based on OR, we simply need to be diligent and meticulous in our analysis of the facts and knowledge available to us. If we follow this approach to problem solving, there will be little doubt that solutions to most of the problems facing society as well as individuals will be forthcoming. With the pouplarity and convenience of the World Wide Web, our job in this area is made very much easier than our past generations. As long as we do not go against the laws of nature, everything
will be well and promising with men and society in their relationship with Nature.


Subjective Reality (SR)

129

This category of reality is more illusive and, sometimes, quite mysterious. It includes all the products created by our mind such as dreams, ideas, intentions, feelings, impressions and aspirations. The mind is not the same as the brain which is, in fact, the hardware that help to manifest the working of our mind. Therefore, the mind is a more subtle or deeper level of our mental faculty. It has a lot to do with consciousness which is the subject of the next chapter. All our actions and behaviour originate from SR because all behavioural issues and activities are set off with an idea or
intention being created in the brain. For example, a great work of art such as Michelangelo's Statue of
David which is still standing in Florence, Italy, all started with some inspiration or idea in the great artist's mind when he saw the huge block of marble. That is why sculptors sometimes say that they do not create statutes as such but they simply reveal the subject or the soul that is hidden in the stone. Even defining feats in human history such as men's first moon landing in 1969 by Neil Armstrong all began with a dream or idea. Once we give our mind a free hand, sky is the limit for what we human beings can achieve. Such is the incredible power and creativity of the human mind. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that total liberty be afforded to education and the quest for knowledge lest human progress would be impeded.
The most vital characteristic of SR is its infinite variety and abstract nature. SR can be strange even to the one who is conceiving it. Under normal circumstances, SR like ideas and inspirations are the results of one's cultural and social conditioning. When a great musical composer like Mozart creates everlasting pieces he was inspired by his environment or some deep personal experience. The fact that Mozart could do it and not the ordinary person is usually attributed to his extraordinary talent or genius. There is even the speculation that such wonderful talent or aptitude reflects the experience of former lives ( or consciousness ) and gives rise to the claim of reincarnation or rebirth. Anyway, SR can really be very mystical and even mind boggling sometimes.
The most important lesson to be learned from SR is that nothing can be considered strange or out of place with regard to SR. We should sincerely and truly respect the SR of other people including their ideas and beliefs. Of course, such respect must be subject to the overriding concern and rule of all just human laws and the Natural Law. Furthermore, we have a first and foremost right to our own moral principles and conscience. Not every SR of every person is scared and untouchable. There could very possibly be misguided ideas and unsound propositions created by abnormal minds as gauged by generally accepted moral and clinical standards. In such cases, it is not only right but legally obligatory for us to ignore or even to reprimand the creator of such SR. Notwithstanding all these reservations, SR is no less real than OR. This is of paramount importance for us to note in our daily actions. Unlike OR, SR is much more difficult for us to master and illusive to the extent that they do not operate by any fixed and well defined set of rules. So, we must be wary about SR and handle it with meticulous care.


Hybrid Reality (HR)

As mentioned above, this is the most numerous type of reality. It is usually the product of interactions between OR and SR. Take for example, a famous oil painting like the Sunflower by Van Gogh. The physical object of a piece of painted canvas mounted on a wooden frame is undoubtedly OR. However, the Sunflower is, in fact, the product of the SR of the painter's inspiration originating from his ingenious mind interacting with the OR of the artists' hands using the brush dipped in oil paint and contacting the piece of canvas in a particular style of hand movements to give rise to this immortal work
of art. To this extent, the Sunflower is HR created by Van Gogh. A more subtle and intricate example of HR is our economy. Our
market economy is a man made set of rules working on physical objects in the form of resources of all kinds. These include paper fiat money ( finance ) and other things such as high fashion in garments ( clothing ), fine food and wine ( eating ), luxurious apartments ( housing ) and magnificient sports cars ( travelling ). The working rules of our market
130
economy are innocently meant to achieve an efficient distribution and utilization of existing resources. These are always scarce in the sense that there are inevitably an infinite amount of human needs but there are unfortunately only a finite amount of resources available to meet those unlimited desires in all aspects of our lives. Despite the fact that the working rules are abstract SR created by us in our clever minds their practical implementation can ultimately create some harsh and, sometimes, even painful realities that are without a doubt oppressive OR in the form of poverty and unfair distribution of income. Bearing in mind that SR are of human creation that is not infallible and unchangeable like OR, it is wise to modify these impersonal and harsh rules as and when necessary to suit the ever changing socio-economical circumstances to avoid hardship to the affected sectors of the community for the sake of justice and compassion. This is the paramount concern and ultimate aim of a sound economic policy. From this example, you will appreciate the usefulness of classifying realities into different categories.
To provide deeper insights into the above example, the main functions of economic policies are as follows:- to maintain full employment; to keep inflation in check; to achieve reasonble economic growth and to have a fair distribution of income and wealth. To these four traditional functions, we must now add another very pressing function which is environmental protection. In other words, we must utilize our resources effectively in such a way as to keep our environment intact. Never deplete any particular type of natural resource including animals and plants. If a market economy is a good system in providing effective motivation for efforts to increase the production of goods and services it is a hopeless one in encouraging human values of justice and compassion because money calls the shots in a market or capitalistic economy. Such a system only takes care of the majority needs because capitalists only care about profit and, therefore, would stop at nothing to make an extra buck. This is the mortal sin committed in the name of economic efficiency. The profit motivation or more simply the Greed Motivation in a capitalistic or market economy leads to endless woes for the human race and our environment. It is time for the eleventh hour wake-up call before it is too late. Both Mother Nature and the underpreviliged sectors of society fall victim to this greed oriented system. The only saving grace for a market economy system is a fair taxation system ( for a more equitable distribution of wealth ) and greater control on environmental issues to ensure that future generations can still enjoy a reasonably healthy natural environment . We must keep in mind that we are not the owner of natural resources but only custodians for our future generations. Of course, all these counter-measures against the evils of a blind and heartless HR that is the market or capitalistic economy are only viable with a fair and democratically elected government. Democracy does not work in a society full of ignorant citizens. Therefore, education is again the bulwark of democracy. We must teach the public to understand and Connect all concepts vital to the operations of a free and democratic social system. Citizens must know their rights and, even more importantly, their obligations to society before democracy can work properly. Although democracy is definitely not a perfect system because no two votes are equal qualitatively yet it is the best socio-political system on offer. That is why E.M. Forster only gave” Two Cheers for Democracy “ in his book of social, cultural and political essays.
If you think that HR is complicated wait till you have learned the nature of Perceived Reality (PR). Yet it is the most important category of reality because it
can affect our future in possibly a profound manner. Let us see how.


Perceived Reality (PR)

This is the most decisive of all the different categories of reality. Our actions and decisions that may adversely or favourably affect our future are all based on our PR which is the final impression formed by us after taking into account all signals received by our sensing capabilities. In other words, PR is the resultant conclusion reached by us regarding the outside world based on SR, OR and HR or any mix of them as the case may be. It can be highly complex or illusive depending on the underlying
131
elements that give rise to PR. Since what we perceive to be the reality is so important to us we
must acquire an in depth knowledge of PR. First and foremost, the past conditioning of our brain both culturally and emotionally speaking has a significant bearing on our PR. The same thing may have different meaning for different people simply because they are brought up differently and from varying cultural backgrounds. For example, the left hand is considered dirty and should not be used to handle food under the Indian and her related cultures. Similarly, the cow and the pig are treated as sacred creatures by the Hindus and Muslims respectively. It may sound odd to other people but these concepts are taken for granted in their related cultures because people in those cultures are conditioned to accept them from their birth. We must learn to respect other people's PR and never make fun of them no matter how strange it might appear to you. Of course, that is not to say that you have to engage in similar practices as dictated by other people's PR. I am only suggesting a little sensitivity towards other people's feelings and their points of view which are the result of their PR. This is the most basic tenet for peaceful co-existence. Indeed, you must hold on to your own principles and beliefs. Otherwise, you will be just like a lighted candle flickering in the wind, turning in whichever way the wind is blowing. You will be aimless and your flame and vigour in life will probably be extinguished in no time at all. Your own PR is even more important because it reflects your own personality and giudes you towards your goal in life. However, you should always be aware that everyone's PR is equally important to each of them and should be treated with due respect. This is why sensitivity education is of paramount importance in our modern closely connected society made possible by the internet and other high-tech systems.
Another defining characteristic of PR is its motivating power. Our PR can provide us with the impetus to work towards our goals in life. Depending on the weight we put on our own PR, it may even act as the fuel that propel us forward in our path in life. If sufficient skill is mastered by us based on our PR, one can even acquire extra mental strength that may result in the ability to attain a state of mind over matter to varying degrees. There are some recorded cases of such incidents like a mother mustering super human strength to lift a car weighing close to a ton that is about to crush her beloved child. The mother in question was able to muster the extra strength ( which is an impossible feat under ordinary cirumstances and defies physical laws ) out of her motherly nature to protect her young which led her to the PR that she should be a super human being at the critical moment.
Finally, we should note that PR is the resultant product of various categories of realities such as SR, OR, HR acting together with the past cultural and emotional conditioning of our brain. This being the case, the rules of the Science of Chaos and Complexity are applicable. This further implies that the past history of each individual matters a lot and slight changes in the initial conditions of his personal PR at any given moment can lead to unpredictable development of this PR. In short, human beings can be unpredictable because their PR can also be chaotic in behaviour just like the working of
the human brain which is also an undisputed chaotic system.


( B ) The Inspirations

Having classified the different types of realities, let us now proceed to survey some insights of leading scientists on the nature of reality. Two such famous theoretical physicists are Roger Penrose of Spinors and Twistors ( see Chapter (iii) ) fame and David Deutsch of Oxford University. Both of them deal mainly with OR because they are both physicists well versed in the highly complex Quantum Theory. Their views mostly point to the nature of reality being objective in essence barring any subjective implication of quantum uncertainty. They feel that the latter phenomenon only occurs in individual subatomic entities and is very seldom manifested at the macro level. Therefore, such uncertainty should be treated as exceptions rather than the rule. The following are
their precious insights.


132

Penrose's Road to Reality

In his very recent book, “ The Road to Reality : A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe “, Penrose set out all the relevant laws of nature that are behind the working of the physical reality as we experience it. This physical reality is comparable to my category of OR. His book is nothing less than a complete encyclopedic survey of all the important physical laws and theories including the relevant mathematical methods in putting those laws and theories into practice. Being a seasoned mathematician, Penrose naturally places a lot of emphasis on mathematical modeling which takes up a greater part of his book of over 1000 pages.
His ultimate conclusion on reality is that while we are well on the road to reaching the true nature of physical reality we are still one step short of the grand unification of all the forces of nature. Gravity is the strayed lamb that has not yet returned to the fold so to speak. The sombre note seems to be that we need a totally revolutionary approach or a shift of the existing scientific paradigm before a final breakthrough is possible. This is especially true with our current concept of space-time which has not advanced much since it was first introduced by Einstein as a continuum back in 1905. Obviously, this static and background dependent perspective of the space-time entity is not dynamic enough to accommodate it within a unified framework of the other three forces of nature. The good tidings seem to be that with the flourishing research activities in the realm of Strings, Superstrings and Supergravity and their more advanced relatives in Branes, M-Theory. F-Theory and Penrose's own Spinors and Twistors Theory the long
expected breakthrough appears to be just around the corner. Penrose prefers to group reality into three categories in the great
Platonic tradition of “ Three Worlds and Three Mysteries “ classification. These are the mental world of boundless imaginations, the mathematical world of perfection and beauty and the objective physical world of great complexity but with apparent intriguing order at a deeper level. Notwithstanding their distinctive classification, these three worlds seem to have been derived from one another with the mental world ( my SR ) giving rise to the mathematical world through our thoughts and intelligence. This is also the crux of Plato's philosophy in the sense that human beings can rationalize and understand the physical world ( my OR ) through subjective logical reasoning and abstract thoughts. This is, of course, in stark contrast to the modern scientific method of experiments and observations pioneered by modern scientific giants such as Galileo and Francis Bacon that marked the debut of the modern scientific era. Nevertheless, mathematical modeling are still heavily depended upon by scientific theorists and researchers nowadays as a first step towards testing new ideas although no theory will be accepted as a scientific theory in today's world without being subjected to vigorous testing or without at least some viable proposals being put forward for the theory's testing.
With the creation of the mathematical world, it became possible in the pre-modern scientific period to describe and rationalize the objective physical world to a reasonably successful degree. To this extent, the mathematical world is the product of the mental world. Having demystified the complex physical world to a certain level, the miraculous human brain acquires further inspirations from this objective reality to evolve more abstract mathematical reasoning ability and to create more sophisticated mathematical techniques thereby completing the cycle of “ Three Worlds and Three Mysteries”. More advance mathematical skills will inevitably lead to better understanding of the material world that in turn gives our brain more inspirations. So, the creative cycle accelerates and prospers to the advantage and happiness of the whole human race. That is how the three worlds are interrelated. That is the Sacrosanct Connection between the Three Worlds.
So far, we have understood the sacred connection between the three
133
worlds. But how about the Three Mysteries ? Where do the mysteries come in ? Well, it is this. The mental world harbours the great mystery of its working and of its tremendous potential. The physical world keeps its mystery of origin, complexity and fine tuning all to itself. Finally, the mathematical world retains the mystery of beauty, perfection and predictive power and never betrays its secrets, not even a trace of them. Why is the universe so mathematical and readily offers itself to description in mathematical terms ? It has been said that if there is a Creator ( I haven't got the slightest doubt about this fact, my sacred SR !), He must be a mathematician. It will be recalled that perfection can only be found in mathematics but not in reality. Still remember Fuzzy Logic ? The only perfect circle or perfect pair of parallel lines exist in mathematics but not in real life. Still recall Einstein's saying :-” So far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain. And so far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” Besides beauty and perfection, the greatest of all mysteries hidden in mathematics is its predictive power. As mentioned in section (B) of chapter (iv) on Einstein's Special and General Relativity, mathematics has time and again proved to be one step ahead of us in our formulation of many important theories on the working of the universe. Some of the inspirational ideas such as Einstein's General Relativity would have been impossible to describe in a tangible way without the assistance of advanced mathematics in the form of complex mathematical models. This great mystery of mathematical predictablity is still very illusive and scientists are beginning to wonder if this deep enigma will ever be solved.
Penrose also poses the question of whether or not there is, in fact, a true nature for a really objective reality or all that we can possibly aim at is to get a closer look at the perception of that reality. Just like peeling an onion, there are shells after shells of skin though each layer more juicy and tender than the previous one. Finally, when we reach the last layer, there is nothing inside except the air that is in the atmosphere that we have been breathing all along when we first started the peeling process. This is not as pessemistic as it sounds because the real answer to the true nature of reality may lie both in the objective or material world as well as our subjective consciousness which is the subject of the next chapter. The interaction between these two mystical elements may provide some clues. There will be more to come on this interesting and profound topic in my eccentric ideas later on. Before we leave Penrose's monumental work, let us wish him good luck on his research, especially on the nature of the most challenging subject of the space-time concept ( his Spinors and Twistors Theory ) which will be vital for us to
complete our journey on the road to reality.


Deutsch's Fabric of Reality

Another important study on the nature of reality was done by another famous Oxford theoretical physicist named David Deutsch. In his book “ The Fabric of Reality “ published in 1997, he sets out his methodology in reaching out to identify what he calls the fabrics of which reality is made of. His approach differs from Penrose's in that it deals with the methods that can, in his opinion, lead us directly to the nature and fabrics of reality. In adopting this approach, Deutsch has presumed the possession of a certain degree of scientific training by his readers. Notwithstanding this assumption, his approach has the merit of directness and practical relevance. There is a touch of Logical Postivism of the 1920-30 Vienna School ( in philosophy ) about his approach which demands verification in a scientific manner in accordance with the universally revered scientific method. This being the case, Deutsch's version of reality necessarily deals with objective reality. So, without further ado, let us look into his version
of reality and the fabrics of which it is made up.

134

Criteria for Reality

According to Deutsch, reality should satisfy the most important criteria of autonomous reaction to external stimulus and complex and spontaneous behaviour. This is simple and direct. Any entity that exhibits these two characteristics is a real entity or an objective reality. Although these criteria sounds too simple to be true yet such criteria can be proven to be workable propositions. However,
the process of proof does call for some in depth examination of each criterion in turn. I could swear that the above criteria for reality sound pretty much like the conditions applicable to any living organism the origin of which is still obscure at the present point in our human history. The origin of life is still one big mystery of Mother Nature. On closer examination, one can see a lot of similarity between life and reality. For one thing, life is an indisputable reality. Must reality be comparable to life ? Not necessarily. However, if an entity does pass these two reality tests, then it will surely be an objective reality because it has even succeeded in meeting the higher conditions for a living organism which also forms part of objective reality. Thus, we can easily see that
Deutsch's criteria for reality are very stringent, indeed. The first of the criteria is autonomous reaction to external
stimulus. Suppose you want to test whether or not a stone is part of OR. The easiest way to do this is to follow the great philosopher Dr. Samuel Johnson's example of kicking at it. As a result of the strong nuclear force that binds the atoms tightly together in the stone and Newton's laws of motion regarding action and reaction are equal in strength but opposite in direction, you will experience some pain through the external stimulus of your kick at the stone by virtue of the energy from the reaction of the stone. This sensation of pain will confirm to you the OR of the stone under Deutsch's first criteria for reality. This is very straight forward.
Then comes the second criterion. A chemical analysis will likewise confirm the chemical complexity of the stone as being made up of mainly silicon and other minerals composed of some common elements such as calcium and carbon ( if it is a lime stone ) or iron oxide (if it is a volcanic rock ) and so on. Thus, the stone in question also
passes the test for the second criteria of OR. This is also straight forward enough. Here comes a more challenging issue, Deutsch points out that there is, in fact, no direct experience acquired by you in feeling the sensation of pain in the first case and, similarly, no direct one-to-one signal received by your eye when you did a chemical analysis of the stone in the second incident. All feelings and sensations are the result of nerve impulses produced by your sensory neurons as a result of external stimuli initiating bio-chemical reactions in your neural system that give you the pain and images of the different elements ( in the form of different colour sensations based on different frequency of electromagnetic waves emitted by different types of atoms ) in the stone. There is no direct contact between your brain and the stone or the atoms in the stone. Each neural operation is carried out through the intermediary of the sensory neurons, their synapses and the chemicals and electrical impulses in your intervening body cells. In short, there is no direct one-to-one correspondence between your brain and the external stimuli. That is why different people may interpret the same set of OR quite differently. If you have a fever of 103 degrees F, then you will feel a cold sensation when you are drinking even warm water of say 100 degrees F while a person with a normal body temperature will feel the warmth in the same water. Therefore, the same set of OR may still lead to different perception by different persons using different tools or organs of different conditions in their SR ( feelings and sensations ). It is very often an awkward case of mismatch between unchanging OR and varying SR. This is a very common source of trouble leading to disputes gravely out of proportion to the slight differences in the PR of the parties concerned. Despite this psychological challenge, we can still accept Deutsch's
criteria for reality as generally valid in most circumstances.


The Four Strands to Reality

135

Having named the criteria for reality, Deutsch very systematically introduces the four paths which he think will lead us to the nature of reality. He has picked the Theory of Evolution ( on life ), Quantum Mechanics ( on the subatomic realm ), the Theory of Computation ( on mathematics ) and Epistemology ( on the process of acquiring
knowledge ). Each has its unique contributions to make on the path to reality. Darwin's Theory of Evolution maps out our own origin. It is undoubtedly the most appropriate starting point of our search for reality. More than this, it also provides some clues for the life stories of many material entities in our universe including the possible life cycles of the stars and galaxies. Other significant areas on which the Theory of Evolution has thrown some light include the self-sustaining operations
of our earthly environment captured in the Gaia Theory. Quantum Mechanics has been discussed in great detail in
chapter (iii). Suffice it to say in the present context of the path to reality that this remarkable theory has propelled us into the illusiveness of reality. It proves beyond doubt that processes are far more important than isolated objects which do not really make up the meaningful reality or experience as we know it. More importantly, Quantum Theory has brought out the element of unavoidable uncertainty in life to the forefront and has condemned determinism which has ruled the scientific world for more than 300 years since Sir Issac Newton to eternal obscurity. The theory has also turned the traditional common sense logic of cause and effect on its head by showing that things may not have a definite cause at the subatomic realm. There things can pop in and out of existence without any apparent cause or events can take place spontaneously without any warning. This is inherent in the nature of reality with a capital R. Finally, it has also hinted at the possiblity of life being created out of quantum fluctuations and collapsing of the Shrodinger's wave functions relating to the atoms making up DNA and RNA. However, this cannot be taken to mean that the laws of nature could have done likewise because these laws are processes and procedures that are not made up of atoms and elementary particles. The reasons or causes for the emergence of the laws of the universe probably still exist, if they do, in the realm of philosophy as of the present moment in our human history.
The Theory of Computation deals mainly with mathematics and manipulation of data, digital or otherwise. Its major contribution to our understanding of reality lies in its potential to tell us the limit of our ability to process, arrange and rearrange, propagate, and simply to take in signals and information. This area of our activities will automatically extends to information networks that is closely linked to the spread of knowledge, economic and social activities which have taken up the main bulk of our OR, SR, HR and PR. The Turing Principle in the Theory of Computation in its strongest version states that it is possible to build a virtual-reality generator whose repertoire includes every physically possible environment. The complete understanding and practical utilization of this principle will be a tremendous help to us on our road to reality in that such a Turing Machine will assist us in proposing and testing by way of mathematical modeling all our theories relating to physical reality that obey the laws of nature. This enormous capablity to test and experiment will lead us to the true nature ( if there is, indeed, one in existence ) of reality in no time at all. But unfortunately this is only a theoretical prospect far from realization at this point because there is still the nagging problem of Godel's Incomplete Theorem in mathematical logic to be overcome if there is, in fact, an ultimate solution. In conclusion, the Theory of Computation is a promising vehicle on our road to reality. With the advent of the quantum computer which has already passed the test in the working principle level recently, the end of the road to physical reality may be in sight though still at
a considerable distance.
As regards the Theory of Knowledge ( Epistemology ), its function is very obvious. Without learning how to accumulate and process our acquired know how, no real progress in our learning can be made. There is no particular difficulty in the development of Epistemology apart from a complete understanding of the working of our brain which is not yet forthcoming because of its chaotic nature and ultra complicated multi-lateral wiring and interactions. We must leave this monumental task to the neural
136
scientists and bio-chemists and hope that they will achieve some dramatic breakthrough. All in all, Deutsch's version of reality and the proposed methodology in treading the path to reality is both promising and convincing with only some fine tuning to be carried out. The only reservation or unwilling criticism I would venture to make is that his proposals still lacks the teeth in the form of solid and practical formulation of an overall plan for action. May be this is not straightly the job of a theoretical physcist. Nevertheless, we should commend him on his originality and foresight. His propositions can no doubt form the foundation of that road to reality and represent a right
direction forward.


( C ) The Eccentric Ideas

I think that there are a few stumbling blocks that are of an inherent nature in our search for reality. Similar to the search for an objective theory of the origin of the universe in Cosmology, we cannot assume a truly objective vantage point simply because we are part of the very system we are trying to observe. By definition and as a matter of fact, the universe is everything ( the universal set ), we can never put ourselves outside of its domain to make an objective observation. Neither is it possible to conduct any control experiment to confirm our findings and view points as in other branches of scientific research. Reality like the universe, is everything that we can see and experience.
It is likewise a universal set where no outside view is possible. Then, there is the body and mind problem. This is called Dualism
in philosophy. Are they two different entities or is the mind ( i.e. consciousness which is the subject of the next chapter ) subordinate to the bodily functions ( the mind or consciousness being the physical manifestation of the physio-bio-chemical activities of the body ) and nothing more ? This is the age old puzzle that has boggled the minds of scientists and philosophers alike. At this juncture, I would just comment that most scientists are leaning to the side of Monoism ( i.e. there is only one single level of physical existence for all living organisms including human beings ). Those belonging to this camp are convinced that there is no higher tier of human existence such as the soul or a separate and independent mystical working entity called consciousness ( sometimes called the Life Force by many people ) as the motivating force behind our physical existence. Scientists call the concept of a Life Force or the soul Vitalism that is a part of mysticism which is down right unscientific rubbish. What we call consciousness is simply the result of physio-bio-chemical processes taking place in our body. All those strange sensations of mental pain in our time of sorrow and marvelous butterflies in our stomach when we are in love are just by products of our bodily processes period.
My own eccentric idea about reality is this. I feel that the ultimate answer to the true nature of reality, be it OR, SR, HR or PR, very likely lies not in some objective things or entities per se but in the interactions of whatever type of reality with our subjective consciousness with a capital C. I totally agree with the implications of Quantum Theory regarding the illusive nature of matter whether it consists of atoms and other subatomic elementary particles such as quarks or strings or branes. It is the processes involving multilateral actions and reactions between the elementary entities that give us the feeling of reality and experience and time. This may sound like Buddhist philosophy but it is, indeed, a sobering thought and an interesting angle from which to view the
reality.
Furthermore, strange phenomena like faster than light transmission of signals as proven in the Alan Prospect Experiment and Bell's Inequality and reincarnation claims and extra-sensory perception do point to the possible existence of a deeper implicate order. There is more than what meets the eye so to speak. While solid proof is still pending, it is fair to say that there is most likely to be something behind the scene of physical reality. Hence, there is no reason why scientists whose job is to find out how the universe functions should not explore in earnest in this direction. In this regard, there is already the Holographic Model advanced by David Bohm to serve as a foundation.
137
The most effective way to proceed seems to be a cross discipline co-operation between experts of all relevant fields such as theoretical physics, neural and cognative sciences, psychology, etc. Hopefully, researchers in all these relevant disciplines can put aside their traditional differences and taboos for the common goal of advancement in science and knowledge for the benefit of the whole human race. Furthermore, a more radical change in the present scientific paradigm of keeping spiritual and philosophical issues out of the boundary of science must be seriously reconsidered. In other words, an oriental holistic rather than the traditional western reductionist approach should be adopted. The exclusion of philosopical issues from the realm of science may be justified in the past when computer and other advanced technologies are non-existent. With the recent promising developments in the field of neural science where brain activities can now be more reliably monitored and analyzed, probing into our SR is no longer a less than scientific operation.
With all these favourable factors paving the way, the field is clear for an all out push towards the mystical realm that is our inner world of subjective reality or SR as I call it. As I have speculated that the answer to the true nature of reality may very well lie in the interactions between some objective elements (OR) with our own consciousness, we must now turn to the nature of our consciousness with an equally
critical attitude for a close scrutiny.


Chapter ( ix ) - Consciousness

It will not be an overstatement to say that consciousness is the eternal problem in philosophy, the oldest branch of knowledge which has existed since the written history of men began. Great names like Socrates, Aristotle and Plato are all inextricably linked to the human consciousness or the quest to understand its nature and origin. More recently, in the Age of Reason, other famous philosophers like Rene Descartes and John Locke all concerned themselves with unraveling the mystery of the human consciousness. Descartes' famous dictum :- “ I think, therefore I am. “ has become synonomous with Dualism and the single most important statement in philosophy with a profound legacy. There is no standard definition for consciousness in philosophy but it is generally considered to be awareness of one's own mental as well as spiritual existence. This awareness comprises of the whole realm of our sensory perceptions, sensations, thoughts and feelings in the widest sense. In particular, this understanding is largely the efforts of Descartes whose basis of philosophy rests entirely on doubting all fundamental and traditional beliefs. Doubting is also the foundation of knowledge and the learning process. The fact that we doubt even our own existence is solid proof of our consciousness. In his book, Methodical Doubt, he defined consciousness as the knowledge of the doubter that his own doubt is beyond doubt. Further down the road, Immanuel Kant's concept of “ Transcendantal Consciousness “ made the connection between self-awareness and the unity of objects of experience. This means that a person is not only aware of his or her own existence but also the environment and that objects and matters can be viewed from different perspectives. This understanding or concept is the fundamental condition for the possibility of knowledge. In other words, the ability to realize the separation between oneself from one's environment ( i.e. me in here and other objects out there ) is what makes human knowledge possible in the first place. Without separating the subject and the object there is no way to start. Again, the vital importance of perspective is very obvious. If there were no independent learner and some independent objects outside of the learner to be learnt, there could simply not be any learning process.
( A ) The Theory
138
Monoism or Dualism
Is there one level of purely physical or material existence for human beings or two tiers of existence with our consciousness being a separate and higher level of metaphysical entity ? There is, unfortunately, no definitive answer at the present stage of our human history. Nevertheless, it is worth our while to look into the various key issues involved in taking either stance. Monoism is similar to Instrumentalism pioneered by D.C. Dennett which, in the context of philosophy of the mind, refers to the originating cause of everything including our feelings and the human consciousness being the result of purely physical processes. There is nothing metaphysical or mystical about reality which only consists of the physical reality. All the effects including sight, sound, feelings and ideas we experienced are the by-products of the workings of our physio-bio- chemical instruments ( i.e. our body organs ). On the other hand, Dualism ( very often known by the personalized term of Cartesian Dualism in honour of its founder ) takes the view that human beings have a higher form of existence apart from our physical body. This is an independently existing and eternally enduring entity called the human consciousness analogous to the spiritual concept of a soul. Most importantly, all our actions and other mental activities are controlled by this metaphysical entity. This school of thought is described by most scientists as spiritualism or vitalism because it implies that
our physical body is subordinate to our consciousness or soul. If the answer to the nature of our consciousness is actually
Monoism, then it would mean that consciousness is merely the by-product of our bodily processes. To expand this reasoning a bit further, it would simply means that we can control or model our own consciousness once we have succeeded in achieving a complete understanding of our body mechanism, both physiologically and bio-chemically. Individual personality or character born out of a higher ( meaning above the materialistic world ) faculty we call consciousness which is supposed to be an independent and creative entity is an illusion. The whole phenomenon is nothing more than an elaborate mechanical automata that is capable of being reproduced in the laboratory. But the most important implication of Monoism is that human beings have no existence beyond the material body and everything ends at the disintegration of the human corpus upon death. Admittedly, profound human ideas can endure the test of time but everything else will become dust in the wind. Does this picture of human existence stand up to empirical tests and observations ? Let us recapitulate the known scientific facts concerning consciousness.
First of all, consciousness as defined at the beginning of this chapter can be the result of bodily processes. However, can is not equivalent to must have been. There is no solid scientific evidence leading to an inevitable conclusion that it is, in fact, the latter case. The main reason for this uncertainty can be traced back to the unfortunate situation of our present limited knowledege of the working of the brain. Of course, this is mainly due to the complexity of the brain which is without the slightest doubt the most sophisticated operating network in the entire visible universe. Up to the early part of the Twentieth Century, Cartesian Dualism has been the dominant force in the philosophy of the mind until Behaviourism, Instrumentalism ( akin to Monoism ) and Logical Postivism emerged to take centre stage.
Incidentally, the rise in these three last mentioned branches of philosophy coincided with the enormous progress made in scientific theories ( such as Quantum Theory and Special and General Relativity leading to better understanding of the reality ) and technologies ( such as the Theory of Computation leading to computer technology and Epistemology and neural/cognative sciences leading to better understanding of the brain and more accurate experimental capability ). These new scientific discoveries led to better confidence in the scientific circle to achieve a complete understanding of the objective reality to account for all physical and mental phenomena. Like the discovery of the DNA molecule and its subsequent decoding, such confidence appeared to be a bit premature. As we now all realize, the successful decoding and sequencing of the DNA
139
molecule just a few years ago proved to be the opening of the Pendora's Box that led to more questions and more new issues than answers to the mystery of life. The simple reason being that there is no one-to-one relationship or linear causation between each of the 100 thousand or so genomes in the human DNA molecule with either particular health conditions or other human attributes. The genomes are now confirmed to exhibit multi- lateral feed-back loop actions on various organs and health conditions and human attributes. The only thing that we are certain of is that the physical reality seems to be more complex as we proceed to scrutinze it at a closer range. This is a sobering reminder of the Fuzzy Logic statement by Lotfi Zadeh :- “ The closer one looks at a real world problem, the fuzzier becomes its solution.”
The second issue concerning the Monoism and Dualism tug-of-war is the inherent problems within the dualistic notion. These are as follows:- Firstly, it does not require an immaterial mind to explain any of our bodily processes. All human physiology can be understood in terms of physical, chemical and biological laws of the universe. Based on this argument alone and by the rule of Occam's Razor, an immaterial mind should be discarded just like the mystical ether in the propagation of light before Einstein's time. Secondly, based on the history of human evolution from the simple single cell organism to the present sophisticated homo sapien species, our present complexity has been achieved by purely physical processes. There is no consciousness as defined in human terms in other species. It would appear unnecessary for nature to put in a metaphysical mind as an independent working entity when the evolution process has attained the status of human beings. Thirdly, if the mind is really spiritual and non-spatial, then through what process does it control or interact with our physical body ? Fourthly, there is no observed effects from any verifiable incidents arising from our bodily processes that are linked to any processes that are other than the known physical laws of nature. These are the common arguments against Cartesian Dualism.
With all these negative arguments against Dualism, it would seem that by inference Monoism has captured the day. But it is not this simple. Otherwise, the problems with the mind or our consciousness would not have been something of an eternal issue in philosophy. Just as in the case with reality, we are so immersed in our own consciousness that no outside view point or control perspective is possible. This makes it difficult to be objective about ourselves who are always under the influence of our own consciousness. While keeping the weaknesses of Dualism in mind, it is also useful to weigh the alternatives against the Cartesian view. Let us look at Behaviourism, Instrumentalism and Logical Positivism to see what they can offer by way of insights into
our consciousness.
Behaviourism
As Dualism is a metaphysical concept incapable of material or empirical verification, the obvious alternative is a set of rules that can tell by observation or experimentation the manner in which our minds work. Carnap and Ryle put forward the argument that the only way to infer on how the mind works is by its behavioural tracks. How can you know that your friend is in pain except by hearing his groans and observing his painful facial expressions ? Behaviourists do not even try to attempt any claims of underlying rationale for any behavioural phenomena such as the pain and pleasure. Only by observing the related symptoms, so to speak, that behaviourists come to any particular conclusion regarding the mental state of a human subject under scrutiny. Much less do they contend that there is any motivating force or entity such as an abstract mind behind human behaviour. It sounds simple and straight forward. What you see is what you get. There is no complicated intricate order behind human behaviour or any mental activities
which are all manifestation of physical bodily processes. The main contentions of Behaviourism in the context of our
consciousness are as follows :- firstly, psychology itself is a scientific discipline for the prediction and control of behaviour. Secondly, the only proper information on which
140
conclusions or predictions should be based are all behavioural traits such as physical responses to physical stimuli. Nothing should be taken for these purposes if the information is not physical, observable and objective. Anything that is metaphysical falls outside the realm of psychology as a scientific discipline and, therefore, should be ignored altogether. Thirdly, any part of our mental state which does not result in observable tracks and so requires assumptions should form no part of psychological analysis because any conclusion reached from subjective views would be unreliable. In other words, Behaviourism is a purely methodological tool devoid of any philosophical or metaphysical contents.
Furthermore, all behaviourists accept or subscribe to the Turing Principle in the Theory of Computation as explained in the last chapter. In the context of human psychology, it means that it is possible to program any machine in such a way that its pre-programmed responses based on input data can and will mislead a human being communicating with that machine through remote connections such as the internet into thinking that the machine is, in fact, a living human being with cognative abilities. This is the arrangement in the famous Chinese Room Experiment proposed by the famous philosopher of the mind and logic, John Searle who is an expert in linguistics and the history of human language development. He is also a Logical Positivist. We shall have a
closer look at his insights later in this chapter when we examine Artificial Intelligence. There is no logical inconsistency within the scope of Behaviourism itself. It may even be considered as both simple and efficient though it cannot achieve a breakthrough into the realm of metaphysics. There is, however, one big embarrassing anomoly with this approach. And this is the inevitable conclusion that we will never be able to' feel 'our own feelings. This is because, according to Behaviourism, one cannot reach any conclusion regarding anyone's ( including oneself ) mental state without observing any objective physical traits to enable one to reach a valid and verifiable conclusion. There is an outrageous joke made up by opponents of Behaviourism to make fun of behaviourists. It is said that the true behaviourist really needs an observer to tell him whether or not he is actually having a climax during sexual intercourse. This is because only objective verification from outside the subjective mind is acceptable as conclusive evidence of a particular mental state if the principles of Behaviourism is followed strictly to its logical conclusion. This joke is, of course, ridiculous and of bad taste. However, it does
reflect on the limitations and rigidity of the purely behavioural approach.
Instrumentalism
One prominent supporter of Instrumentalism is D.C. Dennett. He puts the theory into a nutshell by contending that we are in no position to come to reliable and objective conclusions based on anything that is not physical, materialistic and tangible. All our organs and bodily processes are instrumental in producing the feelings and sensations of our consciousness and there is no further inner cause. Furthermore, he has a few objections against the common sense rationale of the so called inner-cause thesis that ascribe human behaviour to inner causes or, simply , the subordination of our physical behaviour to the control of the independently operating metaphysical entity we call our mind or consciousness. These objections are set out below for easy understanding. The Instrumentalist proposition, like the behaviouralist approach is equally materialistic in its argument. Unlike Behaviouralism, Instrumentalism allows the probing of internal mental states which are also considered to be products of physical bodily processes and not the manifestations of some spiritual or mystical entity like the soul or
any other independently working metaphysical entity. Dennett's first objection to vitalism ( the existence of a soul or
other life force behind our body physiology ) is that it is unlikely for science to uncover any inner-casual mechanism in our mind that is universally applicable to all persons with a particular belief. This means that apart from the subjective and personal nature of the same belief there is no common objectively identifiable mental process applicable to
141
everyone with the same belief. In other words, the same belief may be arrived at through different mental processes particular to each person on account of their different socio- cultural upbringing all of which are derived from the objective and physical reality. My friend believes in buddhism because his parents are buddhists. In this case, both his parents are physically existing persons. Or my cousin is a buddhists because he is an orphan brought up in a buddhist monastery in China. This time, the buddhist monastery is the physical origin of my cousin's religious belief. There is no need for anything deeper than the superficial reality to account for the beliefs in the above examples although the paths leading to the same belief may be different.
His second objection is that human beliefs that lead to specific desires are no different from the primeval reactions of lower animals to their natural instincts though human beliefs and desires are far more sophisticated because we possess an advanced brain. The human belief-to-desire mental process is merely a bio- chemical chain of action like a calculational and predictive device such as a programmed computer. It takes in input data like our beliefs and produces an output like our desires. Our brain is only a highly advanced computer while our beliefs are highly complex and composite input data. That is all. A vivid example put forward by instrumentalists goes like this. The statement that the Average American homeowner is a white, male and the father of exactly 1.9 children is true statistically but it does not necessarily describe entities of a particular kind. There is no father with 1.9 children in existence. The statement is merely ” instrumental “ in conveying the demographic background of the American homeowner. It is a way of systemizing the description of a particular sector of the American population. Similarly, the overall feeling of our own consciousness does not necessarily points to the existence of a specific independently operating entity we call the soul or life force. This is the argument of the Instrumentalists though I have some personal commemts on this
conviction later on in this chapter. Thirdly, Dennett objects to the inner-cause thesis and by inference
to the idea of Dualism on the ground that the “rationality assumption“ ( that people will generally believe what they ought to believe and desire what they should desire ) which is inherent in the thesis does not imply that the belief-desire chain of reasoning is purely based upon factual constructs. This is because it involves assumptions on people's mental state. Therefore, the thesis may not be as scientific as it appears to be. Again, this argument is closely based on the rationale of Logical Positivism which will be examined in the next section. All in all, Instrumentalism is a materialistic and utilitarian view on human physiology that fails to forge any connection between physics and metaphysics. But it cannot be accused of being unscientific in any sense although its predictive power may be some what limited by its very nature just as Behaviourism is. Simply put, what the reality means to Instrumentalism is that it is represented by the readings noted on the measuring instruments.
Logical Positivism
This branch of philosophy of logic had arisen during the 1920-30s and is closely linked to the Vienna School of philosophers. Briefly stated, Logical Positivismi is one of the most dominant branches of philosophy in the Twentieth Century which requires strict and objective proof of every statement made and each theory proposed regarding any discipline of learning. It has positively affected the thinkings of reseachers and theorists alike in various branches of science and philosophy. It would not be an exaggeration to say that logical Positivism has created a new paradigm in both the
science and arts disciplines in their theoretical as well as practical aspects. It all started with the ideas of Ludwig Wittgenstein, a Viennese
philosopher who went to war in the Austrian army during World War One. Wittgenstein not only fought bravely for the Austrian emperor but also created a whole set of logical thoughts while serving in the army. In his great classical work Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus he set forth in meticulous details his philosophical views on language, thoughts and reality which became the corner stone of the paradigm shifting school of
142
philosophy known as Logical Positivism. His ingenious insights succeeded in forging a sound philosophical connection between the inner world of our thoughts through our language with the reality. It is a brilliant piece of original inspiration enshrined in a comprehensive set of working principles touching every aspect of the world of knowledge, our inner world of thoughts and our world of communication that is our language.
The basic rationale for his philosophy is his idea that there must be something in common between the structure of a sentence and the reality that the sentence is referring to. Representation of the reality in our thoughts is made possible by logic but logical propositons themselves are not the true reality ( this is reminiscent of Einstein's comments on mathematical logic quoted in the last chapter ). Therefore, logic is the necessary but not sufficient condition for describing objective reality (OR). This argument is equally applicable to our language which follows the same set of logical system as our thoughts. His demonstration of this argument through his “picture theory of language“ is most convincing. He likened logical propositions to pictures reflecting OR. They are only approximations but can never be 100% of the real thing. Different logical symbols are just like different colours and images in different pictures. They may be able to mimick OR to a very great extent but can never be perfect. The same is true of language which uses a different set of symbols to describe OR. Both logical propositions and language symbols may bear remarkable resemblance to OR they represent but only
to certain limits.
Based on this rationale, linguistic statements are only meaningful when they can be related to OR and only observations can prove if such statements are true or false. Furthermore, there can only be two types of statements. First, there are analytical ones which have no empirical contents meaning that they cannot be verified against OR because they do not refer to OR or any objectively observable facts. These are also known as tautologies. For example, the statement :- “ The poor are poor because of their poverty” is a tautology. It is analytical in the sense that it does not refer to anything outside of itself. In other words, it has no empirical content. All the other statements that are not analytical are empirical statements which refer to OR and some objectively observable facts. These are the only meaningful statements because they can be proven right or wrong by reference to the fact that they allege to assert. The above rigid but practical rules make Logical Positivism a very powerful tool in all fields of knowledge including scientific research. It is the logical positivist's motto that if you cannot prove what you say by empirical evidence, you have effectively said nothing. Other Vienna School philosophers built upon this basic theory of Wittgenstein and subsequently formalize the
principles to form the Logical Positivism school of philosophy. The huge impact of Logical Positivism on all aspects of early
Twentieth Century science and philosophy had become a big challenge to Cartesian Dualism which had the support of organized religion since the Seventeenth Century. Logical Positivism had unintentionally became the vanguard and a powerful weapon for Monoism. However, there is still some weaknesses in Logical Positivism insofar as it still has to rely on the Verification Principle in proving its case empirically, and therefore, is still restricted by the inborn weakness of the Theory of Induction. Take the inductionist approach in verifying a scientific fact like the sun always rises in the east. Scientists are said to have proven their case with regard to this scientific fact because in the whole of human history up to the present the sun has always risen from the east. Their case is said to have been proven empirically thousands upon thousands of times but it only takes one case of falsification to shoot down the above scientific statement. This is the inherent weakness of the induction method. Of course we know in this incident that the sun will only cease to rise from the east in about 500 million more years' time when its nuclear fuel burns out. There is an informative story about the inductionist method. Once there is a farm full of happy little pigs which are all inductionists. They consider themselves to be smarter than all other pigs in the world because these little pigs know how to predict the future using the induction method. Every morning they are very happy to see their master who opens the gates to feed them. They enjoy life to the full because the pigs only eat and do not have to work. According to their inductionist analysis based on past experience they figure that seeing their master is the greatest joy in the lives. One day as usual, their master comes to open the gates. They greet him with all the usual happy grunts only to
143
find out that they are bound and led to the abattoir to be slaughtered. So, those poor pigs' inductionist predictions did not save them fom certain destruction. Therefore, there is no foolproof reliability in the inductionist method and so is the case for any method of prediction.
This unavoidable weakness in the Theory of Induction has prompted one of the most promising young philosophers of the 1940s called Karl Popper to pioneer his own set of principles in the learning process and scientific research. Popper based his philosophy on what he called the conjecture and refutation procedure. Instead of asking the scientists to prove that their theories are true to empirical observations and experimental results, Popper requires them to concentrate on devising procedures to prove that their theories or conjectures are wrong. This is Popper's famous conjecture and refutation procedure. According to his reasoning, if a certain theory or conjecture has more ways of being refuted it is to be preferred over one which has fewer. By his presumption of the negative results of any scientific theory or conjecture, Popper places tremendous onus on the scientists to prove their case and, thereby, achieving a higher standard for scrutinizing any scientific theory. I do not intend to go into his philosophy in depth but suffice it to say at the present juncture that it does have its weaknesses such as what is known to the philosophy circle as the Problem of Auxiliary Hypothesis. For example, when a conjecture is refuted for any reason it can always be saved by the proposer on the ground that some of the underlying background assumptions that are at fault and not the main body of the conjecture. This will imply that the same conjecture can still survive the “ conjecture and refutation procedure “ after amending its background assumptions. For example, there is the often cited Red Ferrari Hypothesis which states that all Ferraris are red. It can be refuted easily if you see a white one. However, the proposer of the hypothesis can always say that you must have mistaken a white Lamborghini for a Ferrari. There are lots of possible excuses such as someone must have modified the original red
paint to white and so on and so forth. So, you will see that no system is totally infallible.


( B ) The Inspirations

The arguments between Dualism and Monoism has never been settled one way or the other. There were times when public opinions favour the former and at other times the latter has come to the forefront being mainly supported by scientists. My own conclusion on the issue and the implications of accepting either view will come at the last section of this chapter. Meanwhile, we must turn to two other very important issues concerning our mind and consciousness. The two issues I am referring to are artificial intelligence or A.I. as most people would now call it after the best-selling movie of the same name and free will, the jewel in the crown of the noble nature of human existence
( or is it just an innocent ideal ? ). Artificial Intelligence ( A.I. )
We are not concerned with the technical aspect of A.I. which is the job of the computer engineers but we do care about whether or not A.I. can one day take over our lives and become our rival species. So far, scientists have still been unable to produce a fully cognative and thinking A.I. with human feelings and emotions. However, they have come pretty close with advancements in robotics and fancy computer software. The key question is whether or not it is possible for A.I. to replace human beings both functionally and emotionally. The former ability is not that difficult to achieve and has, in fact, been attained in A.I. to a degree beyond all physical human functional capabilities with the
144
exception of the reproduction function. Any custom made computer or computerized robot can carry out its assigned task better and faster than its human counter part. There are even computers that can make use of input data to “think” and create new skills and theories for the advancement of science and knowledge. Nevertheless, many theoretical physicists are still convinced that A.I. cannot become humans functionally as well as emotionally as a matter of principle. Let us carry on with our analysis of the arguments for and against the possibility of A.I. becoming totally human.
In order to understand the arguments and counter arguments relating to the above controversy, we must first familiarize ourselves with the basic characteristics of the human consciousness. The salient points regarding our consciousness cannot be better expressed than the detailed analysis set out in the book by one of the world's leading and contemporary philosopher, John R. Searle of the University of California at Berkeley. His landmark book on the subject of human consciousness is called “ Mind, Language and Society “. In his brilliant book, he set out the following seven propositions about human consciousness :- First, it is inner ( i.e. it is inside the subject person experiencing such consciousness and is not open for external verification ). Second, it is subjective ( i.e. nobody else except the subject can access such feeling of consciousness ). Thirdly, it is qualitative ( i.e. the feeling cannot be quantified ). Fourthly, it has a first-person ontology ( i.e. it cannot be reduced to a second or third-person view point ). Fifthly, conscious processes are biological processess resulting from lower level neural and cognative activities ( i.e. it has a physical origin in our bodily physio-bio- chemical reactions ). Sixthly, consciousness as opposed to conscious processes is the result of high level neural and cognative activities ( i.e. it has a physical origin of a higher level of sophistication ). Lastly, there is no objection in principle to producing an artificial brain that can give rise to a consciousness having these characteristics.
From the last proposition you may be led into believing that Searle accepts the strong version of the A.I. Thesis which maintains that a total duplication of the human consciousness by A.I. is possible and is inevitable. But it is not so simple as John Searle's trend of thoughts is always subtle and illuminating. In his famous China Room Experiment, he effectively refuted the proposition that A.I. can totally replace humans. This experiment will come under scrutiny in a little while. For the time being, it is more beneficial for our journey of discovery of the human consciousness to look deeper into Searle's description of the structural features of consciousness. He started by pointing out three common misconceptions traditionally held by laymen as well as philosophers. These mistakes are as follows. Firstly, since consciousness is a subjective mental phenomenon, it is almost always incorrectly assumed that we must be very certain about our own consciousness. This is the first common mistake in viewing our consciousness. In fact, we can be wrong about our own consciousness and feelings through self-deception ( e.g. We are too ashamed to accept our mistake and will mentally block ourselves to avoid facing the painful reality ). We can also misinterpret our true state of mind such as in a moment of great emotion you may think you are in love but, in fact, it may be pure infactuation. Then,
there can be the wavering mind just like the unsuccessful attempt to quit smoking. You know that you should give up smoking for health reasons but the addictive power which is something physical may prevent you from doing so. The mind is willing but the flesh is weak. In short, you do not know your true feeling in this instance. You may be thinking clearly to quit before the physical addictive effect sets in. Lastly, inattention may result in your failure to be certain about your own consciousness such as in the case of a change of your political stance over a long period of neglect and new experience. All these factors may cause us to lose certainty in our own consciousness. Therefore, one should never say that one has 100% control and certainty over one's own consciousness.
The second common mistake about our consciousness is the erroneous and even illogical concept of observing our consciousness through the process commonly known as introspection. It is traditionally presumed in philosophy that a person can observe and scrutinize his own consciousness by introspection or turning inwards to examine his own consciousness through his “ inner eye “. The concept of vision as the imagery of the introspection process is wrong on two different counts. Firstly, to observe requires the existence of a subject and an object. In the case of our own consciousness, only a subject ( i.e. yourself ) that is present. Secondly, you cannot actually see or
145
visualize any objective entities when you are thinking or feeling your own feelings ( consciousness ). When you are doing the so-called introspection exercise you are just doing one level of thinking or feeling. There can be no second level of mental activities going on at the same time in parallel to the existing one. Whatever you are feeling is a composite mental phenomenon. However, this is not tantamount to a claim that introsepection is not possible. In fact, we can carry out an introspection of our thoughts in the sense that such thoughts are mental data presented in your mind. But while you are doing the examination of the data you cannot be dwelling in a separate thinking or decision making process with respect to the contents of the data themselves. Such separate thinking or decision making process with regard to the data must be completed before the data can be examined in the introspection. This is John Searle's claim. You cannot be really objective about your own subjective consciousness.
The third mistake about consciousness is the traditional philosophical belief that all our different states of consciousness involve self- consciousness. In other words, we are conscious of the fact that we are conscious. For example, you are reading my book at this instance. The belief of self-consciousness requires that you are aware that you are reading it like watching yourself from above or behind you. But, of course, when you are visualizing your own action of reading my book you would have been distracted or have lost your concentration on the subject matter of my book and would be paying full attention to your action of comtemplating your own reading activity. Our mind cannot functionally take in two different subjective levels of thoughts all at once. It is similar to the fact that your eyes cannot focus at two different points located at different distances from your line of vision. It takes another set of objective eyes to achieve such an impossible feat. For example, you can visualize or being self-conscious about yourself enjoying the magnificient views of the Grand Canyon with yourself also in the big picture. But while you are contemplating the activity of yourself enjoying the scenery you cannot be at the same time purely enjoying the scenery in a subjective position without yourself being in the picture. That would involve two vantage
points all at once and would require another objective you ( or objective mind ).
Structural Features of Consciousness
John Searle has made some useful and interesting observations on the structural features of the human consciousness. These observations together with their significance in the understanding of the “mechanics” of consciousness are set out in detail below to assist us in gaining deeper insights into the working of our mind and consciousness. This will, in due course, have a significant bearing on our ability to learn
and to apply my proposed theory of everything in life ( TOEL ). According to Searle, there are ten important features relating to the
structure of our consciousness. Feature number one is SUBJECTIVE ONOTOLOGY. All conscious states must be experienced by an agent and only a sole agent. No other entity can experience the same conscious state at the same time as that particular agent. This subjective nature is the main reason for most scientists who hold a materialistic world view to reject consciousness as a scientific topic due to the requirements of objective proof and empirical evidence laid down by the scientific method.
Feature number two which is absolutely vital to understanding consciousness is that it manifests itself to us in a UNIFIED FORM. We never perceive things or concepts in isolation. When we think of the colour red it comes in the form of ,say, an apple. When we think of a car we inevitably visulize our dream car, perhaps a Ferrari, speeding along the freeway and overtaking numerous cars just like the saying goes :-” Bite my rubber and eat my dust.” Our brain automatically works this way bringing up Unified Form out of nowhere and putting things and ideas in a certain context that reflects our past experience and cultural upbringing. Up to the present moment, even cognative scientists do not know why this is so. When we look at three dots arranged in the form of an inverted triangle ( without the dots being joint ) with a curved line like a
146
crescent moon below it written on a piece of paper, we inevitably see a smiling human face like the famous face of the smiling man on Mars as observed through the astronomical telescope a few years ago. So writes Searle about this particular feature as follows :-” The ability to bind together all of the diverse stimuli that come into my body by way of the sensory nerve endings and unite them into a unified, coherent perceptual experience is a remarkable capacity of the brain, and at present we do not know how the brain does it. “
Feature number three is that our consciousness is essentially tied to ITENTIONALITY. This feature of the brain is most important for our survival in the physical world because it allows us to gain access to our living environment. It helps us to survive through two different modes of operations. Firstly, our consciousness can work in the cognative mode which means that we can perceive things ( obtain a picture or aware of a situation in our environment ). Secondly, our consciousness can also operate in the volitive or conative mode which means that we can form an intention regarding our perceived reality (PR). The second operating mode of our brain will ultimately lead to
actions being taken by us in response to external stimuli. Feature number four is that our conscious states manifest
themselves in different MOODS, either good or bad. This is what makes us human. Undoubtedly, moods are the by-products of different hormones secreted by our body in response to external stimuli. However, what makes the body secrete the correct type of hormone at the appropriate time is still a mystery.
Feature number five is that conscious states are always STRUCTURED. Even when our body recieves the simpliest of signals or stimuli, our brain always creates structured images and coherent pictures out of the scantiest of signals. It is this particular feature that sometimes enables our imagination to run wild. On the other hand, it also makes us very much alert to signals received by our sensory organs and
allows our brain to make the best or maximum use of these signals. Feature number six of consciousness is that it comes in varying
degrees of ATTENTION. In any conscious experience, we always have a centre of attention and subsidiary areas of attention and we are aware of these different degrees of attention. Furthermore, we can change our centre of attention at will. This feature enables the brain to set priorities and change their ranking as and when necessary.
Feature number seven relates to the BOUNDARY CONDITIONS of a conscious state. We always possess a sense of space and time even when this is not the centre of our attention. Sensations and feelings of where we are and whether it is early or late ( not in the sense of what the time is as told by the clock ) in the a particular state of affair are always in the background of any of our conscious state. Perhaps this is some sort of defensive or protective mechanism to allow us to anticipate any possible danger
lurking in the big picture covered by our consciousness. Feature number eight concerns different degrees of FAMILIARITY.
Like degrees of attention, our conscious states comes to us in varying degrees of familiarity. This feature reveals itself in our consciousness as a contiuum or series of perceived objects starting with the most familiar and ending at the most foreign. Suppose I am visiting the Louvre in Paris for the first time and are looking at a large range of exhibits. The things that will catch my attention first will be items related to the oriental culture because I am of Chinese origin. Then the next set of exhibits to catch my eyes will most likely be items of great publicity such as the painting Mona Lisa and the statute of Venus. Others less familiar items like the Napoleon treasures will be looked at by me much later than the more familiar ones mentioned above. Although it is said that familiarity breeds contempt it is,in fact, useful to us in the sense that it allows our brain to process and pick up as many signals and as quickly as possible to enable us to size up any new situation for better planning in case any danger is imminent.
Feature number nine relating to the structure of our consciousness is known as the OVERFLOW concept. This means that it is an inherent feature of our consciousness that one thought automatically leads to another and a whole related chain of thoughts is formed each time we start to think or recalls something. One idea will spontaneously give rise to the recollection of other ideas stored in our memory bank. Besides recollecting past data, the overflow function also produces a train of thoughts that
147
projects to the future. For example, when I think of my upcoming holiday trip with my family I will irresistibly think of what financial arrangement should be made for the trip. Then I will go on to worry about hotel and flight itenerary and other related future possible occurrences such as whether or not we will enjoy our trip and whether or not there will be any possible dangers and even whether or not there will be any backlogs of office work when I return. A whole train of conjectures about the future will automatically ensue. While this is basically a positive feature as far as it is conducive to sound planning for the future such tendency for our thoughts to overflow can exert a lot of pressure on our mind which may adversely affect our physical well being if the resultant pressure is excessive.
The last of the ten structural features of our consciousness is that consciousness states always come in varying degrees of being Pleasurable or Unpleasurable. In other words, we always ask ourselves the question of whether or not and how much any experience feels pleasurable or unpleasurable to us.The question of “did I enjoy it ? “ automatically pops up in our mind every time we experienced something. This could be a cause for building up our anxiety. Regardless of what we think or how we feel about the above structural feature, they are alive and functioning in our consciousness for better or for worse. Understanding their working and significance can provide us with a more thorough perspective of the strength and weaknesses of our mental faculty that give
rise to the human consciousness.
The Chinese Room Experiment
In 1981, John Searle proposed a thought experiment to support his argument that A.I. can never replace human consciousness because of his contention that A.I. cannot think and that it only carries out programmed operations. When the thought experiment was first published it was met with tremendous animosity among the A.I. community. The experiment involves a human subject who does not know Chinese and he is locked up in a sealed room with only one small mailbox slot opening to the outside. Inside the room is a set of flash cards with Chinese characters written on them which are not comprehensible to the human subject. However there is a written manual inside the room that gives him instructions as to what should be done with the flash cards when he receives written instructions through the mailbox slot from outside observers and participants in the experiment. The outside observers will feed in a sequence of English instructions written on flash cards to make up a meaningful sentence. Upon receving each English flash card the human subject inside the Chinese Room will dish out Chinese flash cards according to the instruction manual which, of course, will make perfect sense to the observers outside despite the fact that the human subject inside the room does not know a single word of Chinese. Searle maintained that the human subject in this experiment is just like A.I. which only knows the syntex ( or structure and mechanics ) of the Chinese language by means of the manual ( comparable to the computer program ) but not the semantics ( or meaning and substance ) of the Chinese language. The experiment proves that A.I. is not a cognative or thinking system as opposed to human consciousness.
There is a deeper meaning attributable to this experiment. Under the Turing Principle in the Theory of Computation, intelligence in machines is defined by the ability to imitate a human being in ordinary conversation. Once A.I. can do that it is thought to be a thinking entity or having human intelligence. The Chinese Room Experiment has clearly refuted this proposition convincingly.
Common Sense, Love and Sacrifice
Apart from the human ablity to understand both the syntex and semantics of language while A.I. only knows the former, there are other very important
148
human qualities that distinguish human intelligence from A.I. Three of the most important ones are common sense, love and sacrifice. We shall look into each in turn.
Common sense is acquired by us through our experiences gained in daily life. It requires us to put things in their proper context. Sometimes, it also needs human feelings to exercise common sense. Let us take the word pan for example. It can mean a frying pan used in cooking or it can mean a play pan for children to play in safely. But when I ask you to put the child in the pan you will immediately know that I refer to the play pan. On the other hand, A.I. may find difficulty understanding what exactly I mean. It may be confused in thinking that the child is to be put in a frying pan or it may respond by indicating that the command is illogical. It takes both common sense and human feeling and experience to put the word pan in the proper context. A.I. cannot acquire human feelings and bodily experience. Therefore, A.I. can be confused when faced with the need to put things in their proper context. This is because A.I. never has any children and has never experienced human feelings and emotions which qualities are incapable of being felt by a machine that is not made of flesh and blood and a
conditionable brain and consciousness. It is inconceivable that a machine can love. This noble feeling
we called love requires some higher faculty other than just materialistic and mechanical parts to produce. Admittedly, the manifestations of love can be felt at a materialistic level such as changes in our hormonal levels ( causing elusive swings in our moods ) and may even lead to physical and health disorders if love is deprived of or not allowed to run its course. Nevertheless, the conception of love has to go through the different stages of development starting with social interactions ( be it parental love or love between sibblings and unrelated persons ) and then the initial friendly feelings may blosom into deeper affection for each other that involves the more metaphysical levels in the faculty of our consciousness. It is such a complicated process that A.I. which does not possess a body and brain and human consciousness or any social networking is capable of engaging in. Even granting that future technological advancements in the computer and robotics may be able to reproduce all physio-bio-chemical aspects of the human body, the duplication of the human consciousness by A.I. appears to be impossible because of the infinite complexity of this higher human faculty which still eludes our comprehension.
More specifically, the extended persona of love is sacrifice. This is the most noble aspect of love. Jesus Christ went through the unspeakable suffering of the passion and crucifixation with the expressed intention of saving mankind out of his love. A mother will not hesitate to give up her life to protect her child. The loving husband will work like a dog over decades for the welfare of his beloved family. These great acts of sacrifice actually run counter to the logic of self-survival which is a natural instinct. Since all A.I. are run on formal logical systems akin to mathematics, it is a straight forward argument to me that A.I. cannot replace the human consciousness period because formal logical system simply cannot operate illogically. This would appear to me to sum up the rational argument against A.I. being fully capable of replacing the human consciousness. Until such times as further and finer points come to light on the nature of human consciousness I am quite convinced that my present contention which is in agreement with John Searle's position is comfortably tenable.
Free Will
The remaining significant issue concerning our consciousness is the problem of free will. Do human beings genuinely possess free will. Or are we purely biological automata ? As we all agree, there is no absolute freedom for us in the sense that we must obey all the physical laws of nature. We cannot freely fly through the air like a bird without the invention of airplanes. Neither can we overcome the pull of gravity at will without the aid of technology like simulating zero gravity in a diving Boeing 707 in flight at 36,000 feet. At the mental level, we cannot have photographic memory ( except in isolated cases of persons with special natural endowment ) or foretell the future with accuracy. So, do we,in fact, possess free will ? This is of vital philosophical as well as legal importance
149
because we cannot be held responsible for our actions if we are devoid of free will ( or effective intentionality ). Society in general seems to hold the view that we do have enough free will to be held accountable for our actions. Is this really a fair assumption ? Let us analyze the usual circumstances relating to our free will.
To the extent that we can control our thoughts and intentions through our consciousness and based on our sound mental function, I think it is fair to say that we possess free will subject to the overriding restrictions imposed by all the physical laws of nature. If this is the case, would the materialistic view of human consciousness invalidate this presumption of human free will ? In other words, must the claims of the existence of an immortal and independently and metaphysically functioning consciousness made by Dualism be valid before the case for the existence of our free will can be established ? Let us go into the finer points of this important philosophical and legal dispute which will affect the foundation of a civilized society.
The materialistic view of consciousness maintains that our conscious states are the by-product of our physio-bio-chemical bodily processes. There is no inner or higher cause for this phenomenon we called consciousness. Since all major bodily processes are fully understood by scientists except the cognative function of the brain the secrets of which are being revealed progressively, there is, indeed, an arguable case in support of the claim of biological automata in respect of most of our actions. Of course, human actions can be classified into involuntary reflex actions and voluntary intentional actions. It would seem that a stronger case of automation in the legal sense exists for the former type than the latter. Regarding the latter, a weaker case can still be made in support of automata if we accept the fact that our brain is conditioned by our physical and social environments which are beyond our control. This is, in fact, very often done in legal mitigations but it would appear that total absolution from legal responsibility is quite impossible and rightly so.
As regards Dualism being a necessary condition for the existence of the mind, consciousness and free will, I tend to accept the reasoning behind the brilliant and skilfully logical arguments put forward by John Searle. His line of logic goes like this. Traditional philosophical arguments for and against Dualism ( akin to Vitalism ) and Monoism ( akin to Materialism ) are all made on the implicit assumption that the two views are mutually exclusive and cannot exist side by side in the context of human consciousness. In fact, this is a mistake according to Searle. These two seemingly opposing views are neither the necessary nor the sufficient conditions for the existence of consciousness. This is how he sets out the most salient points of his argument in his book - Mind, Language and Society :- “ I do not think we are forced to either dualism or materialism. The point to remember is that consciousness is a biological phenomenon like any other. It is true that it has special features, most notably the feature of subjectivity, as we have seen, but that does not prevent consciousness from being a higher-level feature of the brain in the same way that digestion is a higher-level feature of the stomach......In short, the way to reply to materialism is to point out that it ignores the real existence of consciousness. The way to defeat dualism is simply to refuse to accept the system of categories that makes consciousness out as something nonbiological, not a part of the natural world......Grant me that consciousness, with all its subjectivity, is caused by processes in the brain, and grant me that conscious states are themselves higher-level features of the brain. Once you have granted these two propositions, there is no metaphysical mind-body problem left. The traditional problem arises only if you accept the vocabulary with its mutually exclusive categories of mental and physical, mind and matter, spirit and flesh. “ Therefore, his argument seems to have passed the logical test in the perfect world of mathematical logic that is in the realm of SR.
This is, indeed, a very cogent and convincing argument but I beg to differ from this argument on one very vital point on empirical grounds. Just like another great philosopher of the Twentieth Century Sir A.J. Ayer who is a Logical Positivist, Searle's proposition of consciousness being derived from neural or higher neural processes is an empirical statement that is falsifiable or meaningful in Logical Positivism terminology. At this present moment, scientists have not yet been able to conclusively determine that consciousness has its ultimate and sole origin grounded in neural and cognative functions of the brain. Hence, Searle's argument based on this empirical
150
proposition cannot be said to have been conclusively tested in objective evidence and experimental observations and must only be treated as tentatively correct in pure logical terms ( the perfect world of logic only ). More scientific research by neural and cognative scientists is in order to settle the Dualism-Monoism dispute on human consciousness. This situation calls to mind a similar issue in Quantum Theory regarding the faster than light propagation of signals in the Alan Prospect Experiment in apparent contradiction to Einstein's Realitvity. This piece of empirical evidence subsequently led to implications of an implicit order and conjectures for a Holographic Model of the universe by David Bohm. A similar develpoment cannot be ruled out for the dispute on human consciousness and I really hope that some breakthrough at least in the theoretical level may be forthcoming soon.
To recapitulate on the issue of free will, I hold the view that it genuinely exists and I am inclined to favour the speculative insights of David Bohm's Holographic Model of the universe as a possible solution of the problem of free will ( i.e. the implicate order being the ultimate origin of both free will and consciousness ) and by reference to the whole issue of human consciousness. From the human angle, I maintain that we hold our future in our own hands subject to our mortality and the rigid restrictions imposed by the physical laws of nature. How often do we act against our better judgments on health issues like smoking and other healthy practices out of weakness and environmental issues like deforrestation and global warming out of greed that we have literally changed the course of natural and human history. It is more than obvious that we do have free will. Before we commit ourselves to a certain course of action such as taking addictive drugs to seek temporary escape from difficult problems or from a particular emotional state such as being rejected in a loving relationship, we can always point to a specific moment or event that leads us across the line into that course of action or emotional state ( if we are really honest with ourselves ). For example, the lowest point of our swing of bad mood ( such as failing an important examination ) that make us feel life is unbearable without the intoxication of alcohol or drugs. In the case of falling in love, it may be the romantic atmosphere of a holiday cruise on a luxury ocean liner to some exotic tropical islands with your girl friend that makes you fall victim to cupid's arrow. To a certain degree, we can always tell this Tipping Point ( similar to that in the Theory of Chaos ) that leads to a change in the course of our lives unless we purposely block out our awareness of such a signal. Before we cross the line, we must have been aware of the decision we are making but ultimately choose to do what we have done for our own personal reasons. Having faced the undeniable existence of our free will, let us cherish it and be cautious about this unique power that is a double-edged sword bestowed upon us by mother nature and make the best of it for our own good and that of mankind as a whole.
( C ) The Eccentric Ideas
I have quite a few eccentric ideas about the human consciousness. I have always wondered why we, the laymen, are so afraid to look into the deeper secrets of our own consciousness. This attitude strikes me as totally nonsensical having regards to the fact that our consciousness is our single most important vehicle enabling us to tread our one way journey in life and making sense out of the scenery along the way. Each and every little piece of the puzzle ( in the different categories of reality ) that are the times of our life has to interact with our consciousness before there can be a sense of continuity or wholesomeness in our experience with the objective world. These little intricate pieces of puzzle produced by our consciousness would ultimately become part of our precious memories. Therefore, we have no alternative but to try our utmost to unravel the mysteries concerning the human consciousness. I have already boldly stuck my neck out in support of the speculative Holographic Model of the universe. On a less ambitious proposal, I feel that we should look to the holistic approach in search of answers for the nature and ultimate causes of consciousness because the traditional and still prevalent reductionist view within the existing scientific paradigm is limited in its power to tackle the complex
151
multi-lateral issues confronting the human consciousness debate. The holistic approach with its overall perspective and contemplative techniques may prove to be a bonus on our road to the discovery of the nature of the human consciousness. My main argument for abandoning the reductionist in favour of the holistic approach is as follows. The reductionist approach with all its objectivity but piece-meal flavour is not suitable for a subjective issue such as consciousness. On the other hand, the less logically formal holistic approach with its wider overall perspective may be able to find subtle and delicate connections between various pieces of the big puzzle.
On an even higher level, I think that the dispute between Dualism and Monoism ( or Materialism if you prefer to call it ) can be done away with because neither is the essential ingredient nor the necessary condition for the existence of our consciousness. Although each can provide its own perspective and insights into the issue of consciousness they are too polarized to enable any correspondence or cooperation to be effected between these two opposing views to make any further progress to unravel the secrets of consciousness. Nevertheless, these two views have been so important historically that they do affect many people's opinion one way or the other. Therefore, it is useful for us to understand the implications of each on our social and philosophical values.
If one accepts Dualism, it would imply that one also accepts metaphysical qualities or entities as something existing over and above the materialistic level or dimension. In other words, there are some higher forms of spiritual existence that cannot be quantified in physical or materialistic terms. It may, though not necessarily, also imply the acceptance of ideas such as the existence of a human soul or spirit or some other life force ( this is also kown as Vitalism or the Life Force Concept which has existed since the time of ancient Greece ) as the motivating force or control centre of our physical actions and mental activities. This notion reminds us of the idea of the Force in the Star Wars movies that have captured the hearts of billions of movie fans around the world. Some supporters of Dualism may even accept speculative and mystical ideas such as reincarnation and heaven and hell. The obvious advantages of Dualism are the hopes that it provides to us of perpetuating our existence in the form of our undestructible consciousness for all eternity and the possibility of the existence of God as a benevolent deity. Religion would not be possible without Dualism because spiritual existence would othwerwise be out of the question. The equally obvious disadvantage of Dualism is its metaphysical characteristics that do not lend themselves to scientific scrutiny. On the other hand, there is the additional advantage that Dualism provides a very firm foundation for ethical behaviour. This is an overflow from its spiritual and religious implications and this in
turn makes Dualism more socially oriented. If one accepts Monoism instead, it would imply the rejection of anything
non-materialistic. There would be no existence beyond the survival of our physical systems and all existence including mental values disintegrate upon the death of our material self. This is a sombre and depressing view of life but it does not mean that it cannot be the true situation for human beings. Monoism inevitably paints a grim picture and it is difficult to build an optimistic outlook on life using it as a foundation. If there is nothing after death why not make the best of this life for oneself by hook or by crook. Such a pessimistic view provides a licence and seemingly reasonable excuse for a live and let live attitude. It would take the strongest of men to maintain a selfless moral stance in life based on Materialism. But is this the real situaton in life ? It is an urgent task for us to prove or disprove this thesis for our own good and the well-being of society as a whole.
If I am forced to make a choice between Monism and Dualism at this point, I would favour Dualism. Apart from my favourite theory of the Holographic Model of the Universe which indicates the existence of an intricate order, I also feel that the mystical transformations between the two states of mass and energy which is going on all the time within the physical world is equally indicative of a higher level of existence over and above the mere material reality. Scientists often criticize the philosophers in metaphysics for their claim of an independent and metaphysical human mind or soul. This claim the scientists maintain is made by the philosophers purely on the ground that it will elevate the status of men to the most noble of all living things. In my view, this criticism is not justified insofar as it is not purely wishful thinking to claim the existence of an independent consciousness but such notion is to some extent supported by subtle pointers which include unexplained
152
phenomena like lucid dreams, out of body experiences, near death experiences, multiple personalities disorder, mind over matter incidences ( such as the desparate mother lifting a one ton car to save her child ), extra-sensory perceptions, telepathy, psychokinesis and reincarnation claims. Of course, these are speculative theories but they do point to the need for further investigations in these directions without delay. For the skeptics, they can always disregard such intriguing phenomena as yet undiscovered or hidden human abilities.
Regarding the issue of A.I. replacing human beings, I feel that it does not diminish human values even if A.I. can be proven to replace human functions because there is some noble uniqueness ( of course, abstract concepts such as being noble are also of a subjective human contraption ) about the individual. For one thing, life as opposed to A.I. has evolved from some as yet unknown processes as endowed by nature. It is like the imperfect diamonds that are sculptured by nature and the perfect artificial ones that are manufactured by men. The natural ones possess individual character even though being imperfect and each is different from the rest while the artificial ones are devoid of individual characteristics and they are merely identical replacements for one another. This element of uniqness and being irreplaceable alone sets life apart from A.I. Life, especially human life, is unarguably precious beyond compare and one of a kind. Therefore, cherish and protect life to the best of your ability.
Notwithstanding all the above issues, arguments and counter-arguments relating to human consciousness it is still an eternal enigma both in the scientific and philosophical arena. Our difficult journey on the road to the Theory of Everything in Life must go on despite our meagre understanding of the human consciousness. We just have to do the best we can. So, let us labour on and persevere !