Showing posts with label Plato. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Plato. Show all posts

Friday, 27 November 2009

Buddhism and Process Philosophy

Never stepping into the same river twice


Process Philosophy versus Substantialism

Process Philosophy holds that the underlying basis of reality is change, process and impermanence. Becoming is more basic than being, and existence is really just impermanence in slow-motion.

The converse view - Substantialism, holds that true reality is 'timeless' and based on permanent ideal forms. Change is accidental, whereas the substance is essential.

Traditional Western philosophy has always denied any full reality to change, which is conceived as only accidental and not essential.

Buddhism is, of course, the ultimate Process Philosophy. According to Buddhism, all functioning phenomena are impermanent and have no essential natures or inherent existence.


Dominance of Substantialism in Western thought
However, Substantialism has dominated Western philosophy from the time of Plato until the early twentieth century, and is still deeply embedded within our culture.

There were indeed Process Philosophers among the early Greeks. For example Heraclitus pointed out that no-one can step into the same river twice. It's not the same river nor is it the same person.

Process Philosophy Field Trip

Nevertheless, the early process philosophers were ignored or forgotten, and the theory of ideal forms propounded by Plato was adopted by the later Greeks and then enthusiastically embraced by the Christian Church as a justification for Creationism, and the derived doctrines of Original Sin, the Fall of Man etc.

Darwinism and Process Philosophy
Creationists believe that species are unchanging and derive their forms by reference to a divine blueprint equivalent to Plato's 'essences' or 'ideal forms', which were fixed by God, unchanging and inherently existent. Bible-believing creationists claim that the world and all its species were created in six days of a single week around 4004 BC.

In contrast, Process philosophy is evolutionary. If all things are impermanent, constantly arising, becoming, changing and fading, then nothing exists 'from its own side' or by reference to some 'essence'.


Just as Buddhist philosophers had previously rejected the Platonic mechanism of production from 'ideal forms' as being the fallacy of 'production from inherently existent other', so the Darwinians came to the conclusion that a species does not correspond to any inherent reality, but is merely a concept that the mind imputes over interbreeding groups of plants and animals with similar characteristics (and the majority of their genes in common). The boundary between one species and another is not clear-cut.

The Michelson–Morley experiment
Just as the theory of evolution emphasised the dynamic processes of mutation and selection, rather than static species as the fundamental realities of biology,  a similar transformation of thinking was to affect physics a few years later with the negative result of the Michelson–Morley experiment.

Until the nineteenth century, it was thought that all waves must propagate through matter. In other words, processes such as sound and water waves needed some substance to support their existence.   It was therefore assumed that space was filled with a 'luminiferous aether' through which electromagnetic waves such as light, heat, radio waves, X-rays etc propagated like ripples on a pond.  But the Michelson–Morley experiment demonstrated that this aether did not exist, and thus electromagnetic waves were standalone processes with no supporting substance.   Quantum physics was later to show that the fundamental particles of matter are also processes.


Quantum Physics, Chemistry and Substantialism
Another blow to substantialism came from atomic physics. For 2000 years scientists believed that atoms were solid chunks of matter embodying the unchanging qualities of their elements. During the 20th century this has been superseded by subatomic physics, which views matter as being a manifestation of quantum interactions and processes.


Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev

In the 19th century chemists such as Mendeleev discovered numerical relationships between the elements. Then, with the development of subatomic physics, it was demonstrated that an element's properties aren't determined by its essential nature, but by the number of electrons orbiting its nucleus.

The worldview of quantum physics differs radically from that of classical physics. An an electron isn't actually a 'thing', it's a dynamic mathematical process known as a wavefunction.


Classical physics regarded the universe as being composed of clearly-defined building blocks ('things') which were specified by their own internal properties. Quantum physics sees the universe as an ever-changing set of relationships between entities which can be defined only in terms of those relationships.



Whitehead's Process Philosophy
The first real break with 2000 years of Western substantialism came with Alfred North Whitehead's Process Philosophy formulated in the 1920's: 'The process metaphysics elaborated in Process and Reality proposes that the fundamental elements of the universe are occasions of experience. According to this notion, what people commonly think of as concrete objects are actually successions of occasions of experience. Occasions of experience can be collected into groupings; something complex such as a human being is thus a grouping of many smaller occasions of experience.' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_philosophy

Whitehead on Buddhism and Christianity
Whether Whitehead's formulation of Process Philosophy was influenced by Buddhism, or whether he arrived at his conclusions independently and later realised their similarity with Buddhism, is unclear.

Alfred North Whitehead

Whitehead famously remarked that "Christianity ... has always been a religion seeking a metaphysic, in contrast to Buddhism which is a metaphysic generating a religion." This observation is something worth considering in the current debates in the Buddhoblogosphere about whether Buddhism is a religion or a philosophy, and how far Buddhism and Christianity are compatible.

The underlying metaphysic that generates the religion of Buddhism is the Four Seals of Dharma.


'Existence' is really just impermanence in slow-motion.

To say that something exists is ultimately an arbitrary statement. All we are saying is that its rate of disintegration is negligible on the timescale of our lifetime. In reality, all functioning phenomena are impermanent - it's just that some are more impermanent than others.

'Change and decay in all around I see...'

All 'things' are impermanent, and so all things are in reality processes. Things do not stay the same from one millisecond to the next. Anything composed of atoms is composed of parts in a constant state of flux.


- Sean Robsville



RELATED ARTICLES:

Detailed Discussion of Process Philosophy and Buddhism

Rational Buddhism

Essentialism, Ideal Forms, Plato, Buddhism and Generic Images

Evolution is no Threat to Buddhism

Existence, Impermanence and Emptiness in Buddhism

The Four Seals of Dharma

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in Science and Engineering

Essentialism in Physics, Chemistry and Biology

Sunyata - the emptiness of all things

Inherent Existence in Buddhist Philosophy

Quantum Buddhism - Buddhist Particle Physics


---


---

Saturday, 14 November 2009

Essentialism, Ideal Forms, Plato, Buddhism and Generic Images.

Ocean of Nectar - cover picture of Chandrakirti,
the Buddhist philosopher who formulated
the rejection of essentialism - Tharpa


Plato and Essentialism
Essentialism is the philosophical theory that particular instances of objects derive their identity as members of a class by 'participating in', or by reference to, an Ideal Form which is their 'essence'.

The theory was first formalised by Plato, who said 'We customarily hypothesize a single form in connection with each of the many things to which we apply the same name. ... For example, there are many beds and tables. ... But there are only two forms of such furniture, one of the bed and one of the table.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism

Thus there are countless tables in the world but the form of tableness is at the core; it is the essence of all of them.

Plato held that the world of forms is separate from our own world (the world of substances) and also is the true basis of reality. Removed from matter, forms are the most pure of all things. Furthermore, Plato believed that true knowledge/intelligence is the ability to grasp the world of forms with one's mind. (But see boxiness and trayfulness for a refutation of this argument)


Inherent existence of Ideal Forms
A form is aspatial (outside the world) and atemporal (outside time).

Atemporal means that it does not exist within any time period. It did not start, there is no duration in time, and it will not end. It is neither eternal in the sense of existing forever or mortal, of limited duration. It exists outside time altogether.

Forms are aspatial in that they have no spatial dimensions, and thus no orientation in space, nor do they even (like the point) have a location. They are non-physical, but they are not in the mind. Forms are extra-mental. [In Buddhist terminology we would say they are 'inherently existent'. ] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_forms


Darwinism versus essentialism
Similarly plants, animals etc were thought to derive their form by 'reference to' or 'participating in' the Ideal Form of Rose or Dog etc (see Evolution for a refutation of this)

In Buddhism, essentialism is known as 'production from inherently existing other' (Geshe Kelsang Gyatso - Ocean of Nectar p187) and was rejected by Chandrakirti in the seventh century AD.

But it took well into the twentieth century for essentialism to be banished from the West, probably due to the influence of Plato in philosophy and Creationism in religion (Ideal Forms of all the separate and distinct species were believed to have originated in the mind of God and then were implemented in the six days of creation.)

In fact, essentialism still lingers on as Creationism in some backward places :
'Even today Darwin's overthrow of essentialism has not been completely assimilated .... the Darwinian mutation, which at first seemed to be just a new way of thinking about kinds in biology, can spread to other phenomena and other disciplines, as we shall see. There are persistent problems both inside and outside biology that readily dissolve once we adopt the Darwinian perspective on what makes a thing the sort of thing it is, but the tradition-bound resistance to this idea persists.' (Daniel Dennett in Darwin's Dangerous Idea , p 39)


Buddhism and the problem of universals
So if Buddhism rejects inherently existing ideal forms or essences, how does it deal with the problem of universals?

Well, instead of ideal forms it has the complete opposite - totally empty conceptual holes known as 'generic images'. These are double negative logical constructions. Thus the generic image of an elephant is the opposite of non-elephant. Double-negation may seem a rather strange way of identifying anything, but there is some evidence that negation may be a more efficient algorithm for identification than 'mapping-on', see Generic Images.

- Sean Robsville

 

RELATED ARTICLES:


Rational Buddhism

Essentialism in Physics, Chemistry and Biology

Generic Images in Buddhism

Inherent Existence in Buddhist Philosophy

Evolution is no Threat to Buddhism

Existence, Impermanence and Emptiness in Buddhism

Sunyata - the emptiness of all things

Why Beauty Matters - Spiritual Art versus the Cult of Ugliness




Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essentialism,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_universals,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_forms,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism

---


---



Sunday, 25 October 2009

Generic Images in Buddhism

Twenty iterations of a binary search will generate
a 'logical hole' corresponding to a generic image.


Identification of an object through its generic image


Our mind identifies an object by means of a mental generic image of that object, where the generic image, not the object itself, is the appearing object of our conceptual mind.

A conceptual mind knows its object through the appearance of a generic image of that object, not by seeing the object directly.

However, the generic image is the negative of a negative, a kind of 'logical hole'.

To quote Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in Understanding the Mind, page 24:

"When we think of or remember an object, say an elephant, there appears to our conceptual mind an object that is the the opposite of non-elephant. This appearance is the generic image of elephant. Even though there is no actual elephant in front of us, nevertheless there is a generic image of elephant appearing to our mind. Thus our conceptual mind apprehends elephant through the generic image of elephant. We can apply this to all other phenomena"


The generic image is therefore the appearance of a non-non-elephant.

Like a toddler with one of those wooden peg puzzles, it's almost as if when I produce a generic image of a dog, I do so not by producing a stand-alone positive image of a dog, but by producing an image which is specified to fit into a dog-shaped mental hole,

But why is the generic image a double negative? How does this help the mind 'map it on' to the perceived object. The reason seems to be concerned with efficiency of information processing.

Consider the game Twenty Questions, sometimes known as Animal, Vegetable and Mineral (which has now been computerised) . By following the process of elimination (excluding everything that is non-object) it is possible to arrive at a conceptual 'hole' into which only one object will fit, and to do this within only 20 (or 25 in the computer game) yes/no questions.

To quote Wiki:

"The game suggests that the information (as measured by Shannon's entropy statistic) required to identify an arbitrary object [by elimination] is at most 20 bits. The game is often used as an example when teaching people about information theory. Mathematically, if each question is structured to eliminate half the objects, 20 questions will allow the questioner to distinguish between 2^20 or 1,048,576 objects. Accordingly, the most effective strategy for Twenty Questions is to ask questions that will split the field of remaining possibilities roughly in half each time. The process is analogous to a binary search algorithm in computer science."

A positive-to-positive matching of a perceived elephant to an image of an ideal elephant would require tedious bit-by-bit matching (how many bits of information do you need to positively specify an elephant?) The method of elimination is more efficient. The possible elephant is matched to its 'logical hole' and if it fits then it is indeed an elephant.

This also clearly demonstrates how the mind recognises objects without recourse to mapping on to some Platonic 'ideal form' or 'inherently existing other'. In fact, the generic image is a complete opposite of a Platonic Ideal Form. For whereas the Ideal Form is inherently existent, the generic image is totally and completely empty, being a 'logical hole' formed by exclusion of anything and everything else.

However both Platonic Forms and Generic Images claim to specify the same objects. Thus Form is Emptiness and Emptiness is Form.

- Sean Robsville

RECENTLY UPDATED AT  
Madhyamaka Conceptualism, Universals and Category Recognition 


 

Related Posts
Roger Scruton on Algorithms, Data Structures and Mind

How things exist - according to Buddhism and Science

All Watched over by Machines of Loving Grace


Rational Buddhism 

---


---