The Singularitarian Self

The Singularitarian Self Paul Budding Abstract A Jungian collective developmental approach to the issue of subject/object dynamics is adopted arguing that in general humanity has progressed from unconscious participation mystique to differentiated ego consciousness: i.e. the subject-object split. The latter occurred with the advent of the scientific revolution. From then until the present-day the general collective has experienced differentiation from the world but this has been accompanied with ego anxiety. Therefore science has been (and still is) regarded as not necessarily at the service of human psychological health as it negates religiosity and replaces it with nothing. However, the Singularity - as articulated by Ray Kurzweil heralds a time of extraordinary and exponential technological growth which will certainly include medical science within its domain. Indeed technology will be everywhere including within our bodies. As technology extends our reach we progress from differentiated anxious ego's to a larger 'Self'. This completes the Jungian developmental approach, albeit the 'Self' expressed here is the 'Singularitarian Self'- as it is technology that completes the human being. Introduction This essay is about our subject-object worldview from the perspective of Jungian psychology and the Singularity. It is an essay that I hope will result in reflection on the part of the reader. An historical approach towards the relationship between subject and object is adopted in this paper. I argue that in pre modern times there was an artificial synthesis between subject and object. Then Descartes and the scientific revolution presented us with our worldview of subject-object split. Accelerating rates of technological growth that will usher in the Singularity will however bring about a return to greater subject-object unity in our worldview. But rather than it being unconscious projection onto the external world it will be based on reality. The outer world will not be littered with fictional gods but rather with technology and that same sort of technology will be literally inside the human subject as well. As Ray Kurzweil puts it… “most computing will not be organized in such rectangular devices but will be highly distributed throughout the environment. Computing will be everywhere: in the walls, in our furniture, in our clothing, and in our bodies and brains”.1 In this paper I argue that a link with the Jungian „Self‟ can be made here. Albeit, the Jungian aspect is admittedly radically „Post‟ Jungian. As well as linking the Singularity and Jungian view on the „Self‟ I also argue that the Singularity will vanquish much (albeit not all) psychological suffering. The vanquishing of much neurosis will be due to technological advances eliminating disease and death. A mere partially conscious/largely unconscious fear of death can cause neurosis. Obviously the closer to death or the more that one is actually suffering physically, the more conscious it is and the more natural psychological harm this causes. Already religion (in terms of belief in gods and heaven) has less of a role now than it did in the past… but it has more of a role now than it will in the future. In other words the more that we vanquish physical suffering the less compensation we need. Remember that much religion was/is to do with saying that paradise awaits you and therefore suffering will be no more. I say to this that therefore if we (on earth) vanquish suffering such religion will decline. There will be no need for it. Jungianism occupies a place whereby it says “But hang-on. Science hasn‟t been at human service enough and hence we still need something.” Jungianism is clearly related to the decline in traditional religion. And whilst it compensates for decline in faith and compensates for human sufferings itself… it will be less needed in the future concerning existential psychological problems. Of course Jungian psychology will continue to reflect reality in colorful ways. (myth) But as far as its therapy side is concerned – we can safely say that with risks to the physical body largely eliminated the therapeutic aspect of psychology will become more and more about psychology itself (faulty thinking) and less about natural responses to physical suffering. 1 This essay brings together a post-Jungian perspective synthesized with thoughts on the Singularity. It is argued that the latter impacts on all of society and therefore impacts on psychology including Jungian psychology. Moreover, in doing this I accept a largely Jungian perspective on the role of subject and object in collective human development. Albeit this is complicated by the fact that I substitute the Jungian Self for the Singularitarian Self. And I leave it up to the reader to determine whether that takes me completely out of the Jungian-fold or not. In order to enjoy this essay some familiarity with the basic thought of Jungian psychology and the basic predictions of the Singularity are necessary. Cultural Development In Critical Jungian Studies I wrote that on the one hand Jung declared his work to be scientific whilst “on the other hand, [he] declared his work as cultural.”2 I then quoted Jung: “whatever happens in a given moment has inevitably the quality peculiar to that moment.”3 I continued “This apparent contradiction is explained as Jung viewing his work as an evolving science. Even in physics the discipline doesn‟t stand still. And in psychology Jung often said that ideas require updating in order to express and be conducive with the specific time and place.”4 Then in the footnote to this I wrote that “Jung said this about all ideas, fearing that otherwise they would become dogmatic. For example he said it about Christianity. See Jung, C, 1977, p736, par.1655 & 1666.”5 I refer to all of this here in order to make the point that Christianity and Pure or Classical Jungian Psychology were conducive to a stage of human development. If Jungian psychology evolves to be conducive to new times and places then it needs to start to talk less and less about the needs of myth to compensate for human suffering… and more and more about science fiction becoming science fact. (And how this can benefit us psychologically. I give an example of this approach, see pages 13-15: Psychological Meaning concerning the full subject merger with objects). We can now evolve out of needing fictions as containers for the psyche, as the human psyche (at least in the westernized world) becomes more and more comfortable with reality. With science evolving into being more and more at the service of humans, reality becomes less hard and cold and more soft and warm. With the Singularity there becomes less need for compensation. With the advent of the Singularity many psychological problems will simply vanish due to the vanquishing of physical disease, physical pain and literal death. Jungian Psychology and the Singularity Carl Jung always accepted that for millennia there was a lack of individual differentiated ego consciousness and therefore no real scientific thinking enabling the establishment and advancement of science. He writes: 2 “Directed thinking or, as we might also call it, „thinking in words‟, is manifestly an instrument of culture, and we shall not be wrong in saying that the tremendous work of education which past centuries have devoted to directed thinking, thereby forcing it to develop from the subjective, individual sphere to the objective, social sphere, has produced a readjustment of the human mind to which we owe our modern empiricism and technics. These are absolutely new developments in the history of the world and were unknown to earlier ages. Inquiring minds have often wrestled with the question of why the first rate knowledge which the ancients undoubtedly had of mathematics, mechanics, and physics, coupled with the matchless craftsmanship, was never applied to developing the rudimentary techniques already known to them (e.g., the principles of simple machines) into real technology in the modern sense of the word, and why they never got beyond the stage if inventing amusing curiosities. There is only one answer to this: the ancients, with a few illustrious exceptions, entirely lacked the capacity to concentrate their interest on the transformations of inanimate matter and to reproduce the natural process artificially, by which means alone they could have gained control of the forces of nature. What they lacked was training in directed thinking. The secret of cultural development is the „mobility and disposability of psychic energy‟. Directed thinking, as we know it today, is a more or less modern acquisition which earlier ages lacked.”6 For Jung further psychological development would mean greater knowledge of ones inner Self - - - a more whole being that is aware of unconscious processes and so forth, and is able to experience psychic religiosity without need for the experience to be literally true outside of psychological reality. Moreover none of the ego‟s achievements (differentiated and directed thinking) are vanquished. As Robert Segal puts it, for Jung “The birth, childhood and adolescence of the hero symbolize the emergence and development of the ego and of ego consciousness, which is consciousness of the difference between oneself and the external world. The adulthood and death of the hero symbolize the return of the ego to the unconscious and its reintegration with the unconscious to form the self”.7 But, as said, by this Jung doesn‟t mean that the ego is destroyed. That would equate to psychosis. Rather, it means that the ego is relativized. In my radical post-Jungianism the ego is relativized by technology which extends the reach of the individual „Self‟ giving it longevity and the psychological comfort of knowing that it won‟t be harmed by disease and death. This allows the ego to reflect on life without compensations and defenses. The individual goes from being a psychological ego to being a psychological and technological „Self‟. (The „Singularitarian Self‟). Jungian psychology is often colorful and vague. Nevertheless, as we shall continue to see, there is logic in it when it speaks in a general sense about the collective psychological development of the human species. But when Jungian psychology speaks of the „Self‟ I can imagine many people scratching their heads and thinking that they do not envisage psychology as developing on its own in the sense of individuating humankind. Indeed, the thought seems to deny common sense. However, the Singularity is something visible. When Ray Kurzweil speaks about the future he does so by speaking also about the distant past, recent past and present in order to back-up what he is saying. 3 He demonstrates that technological growth is speeding up and becoming exponential. And just like the telephone was an extension of ourself so are all of these new and near future technologies. And not only are these technologies getting smaller they are getting everywhere… and some of them (most notably nanobots) will ultimately be inside us. This to me sounds like the „Self‟. So ok, it‟s not how Jung described it. But therefore this is a radical post-Jungian position. For many classical Jungians it will be too radically distinguishable from Jung and therefore not Jungian at all… even with the „post‟ as a preface to the „Jungian‟. But the „Singularity Self‟ does result in at least a little reevaluation of what life is all about. It is true that even here one can slide back into Jungian unconsciousness and therefore live an unthinking and unreflective life. I am not putting the Singularity on a pedestal as an answer to all problems. However, what the Singularity envisages is the destruction of physical disease and literal death. (See note)8 Hence, this brings about some transformative thinking (changed thinking and feeling that is more whole is very Jungian and consistent with the logic of the Self). As we shall see it brings about a modern merger of subject (individual) and object (technology). “Understanding the Singularity will alter our perspective on the significance of our past and the ramifications of our future. To truly understand it inherently changes one‟s view of life in general and one‟s particular life. I regard someone who understands the Singularity and who has reflected on its implications for his or her own life as a “singularitarian”9 (Ray Kurzweil) Absolute Identification/Participation Mystique “I use the term „identity‟ to denote a psychological conformity. It is always an unconscious phenomenon since a conscious conformity would necessarily involve a consciousness of two dissimilar things, and consequently, a separation of subject and object, in which case the identity would already have been abolished. Psychological identity presupposes that it is unconscious. It is a characteristic of the primitive mentality and the real foundation of participation mystique, which is nothing but a relic of the original non-differentiation of subject and object, and hence of the primordial unconscious state. It is also a characteristic of the mental state of early infancy and, finally, of the unconscious of the civilized adult, which, in so far as it has not become a content of consciousness, remains in a permanent state of identity with objects…. It is not an equation, but an a priori likeness which was never the object of consciousness.”10 (Carl Jung) Absolute and Relative Identification: Essay: Part 2 of Applying a Reformed Complex Psychology to Cultural Life In Critical Jungian Studies I wrote an essay titled Applying a Reformed Complex Psychology to Cultural Life. I coined the terms „Absolute Identification‟ and „Relative 4 Identification‟. The former equates to the subject absolutely identifying with the object. The latter has moments when they absolutely identify BUT they come out of that absolute identification and think/feel about other things in life… hence they relatively identify. The subject is not at the mercy of the object. Part 2 of that essay is re-published below. I am re-publishing it here because I am not convinced that the Singularity will quickly vanquish the problem of absolute identification. It WILL DO for those who absolutely identify with a traditional religion in order to compensate for fear of literal death or to compensate for physical disease and pain. (existential psychological suffering) But some people will still suffer from unskillful psychology, faulty thinking. They will still be in-need of basic psychological education. I leave it up to the reader to estimate how many absolute identifiers would be saved by medical technological advances. I would just say that, of course, those who live before, during and after the advent of the Singularity are influenced by the „before‟ and not just the advent of the Singularity and the „after‟ the advent of the Singularity. Hence there will be a hangover from times where risk was still at the least, „perceived‟ to be high concerning disease and death. Hence negative psychological conditions could have been well-and-truly cemented into the psyche that wouldn‟t have been if the individual had not lived in pre-Singularity times. Part 2 of Applying a Reformed Complex Psychology to Cultural Life Essay. We will now apply Robert Segal‟s methodology to certain areas of life. However, despite Segal‟s engagement with the Jungian world his fields are philosophy and social science. Hence, the theories expounded in this part of the essay derive from not only thinking hard about Segal‟s approach but also thinking hard about improving on the usual discussion that Jungian types engage in when writing. The result, we will show, is a Complex Psychology that is subjected to probability. (i.e. Complexes and dissociation are subjected to probability). As we shall see, emphasis is placed on Absolute Identification and inextricably linking complexes and dissociation to it. Previously complexes and dissociation were not subjected to probability. Yet those who live a life of Absolute Identification possess high probability of triggering complexes and experiencing dissociation. The first thing that we need to do is simply choose a topic. Let‟s say that the topic is Michael Jackson and his fans. Now imagine a picture of the crowd at a Jackson concert. We typically lumber them all in-together as one… as passionate, fanatical, frenzied, emotional, and so forth. At this point we have illuminated absolutely nothing. Anyone can say this. Saying that they are in the grip of an archetype also illuminates absolutely nothing. What then can psychology tell us about the topic at hand that we would not otherwise know? Here I expound a theory of Identification. (i.e. Absolute Identification and Relative Identification). The theory can be applied in many areas of life. In this essay we apply it to Michael Jackson, football team, Cults, Girlfriend. Jackson fans aren‟t all alike. They can be split with some belonging to a category of Absolute Identification and some belonging to a category of Relative Identifciation. Absolute Identification is 24/7. Their interest is monopolized by Michael Jackson. Relative Identification is more common than absolute identification. When at a Michael Jackson concert, someone characterized by Relative Identification towards the singer has the same psychological experience as someone characterized by Absolute Identification 5 towards him. But the person who is characterized by Relative Identification ceases identification when not at the concert. The person characterized by Absolute Identification does not cease their identification… it is absolute. With regards to the fan characterized by Relative Identification, other aspects of cultural life compete for their interest. Absolute Identification is associated with psychological monopoly. Relative Identification is associated with psychological competition. Projection is different again. It requires doubt and insecurity… abit of angst. This is clearly different to Identification because in identification there is no doubt. What is the value of this knowledge? There‟s always the “So what factor”? of saying things like this. So I will try and tackle that here. Remember the picture of a frenzied Michael Jackson crowd during concert. We said that you can‟t visually tell the difference from one fan to the next. Those in both Absolute and Relative Identification all look the same. They are all either screaming, fainting, or crying etc. Psychology can say something that we would otherwise not know. It can take a random selection of those fans and study their thoughts, feelings and behavior in a different context. Those in Absolute Identification would always be thinking, feeling and doing things related to Jackson. Those in Relative Identification would not. One thing of value in this knowledge is about RISK. We can say that those in Absolute Identification are at greater risk of neurosis, dissociation and so forth (i.e. at greater risk of negative psychological states of mind if something bad happens to Michael Jackson as it obviously has done). Whilst those characterized by Relative Identification are at less risk. Hence PROBABILITY comes into play here. Does this illuminate? Anyone can look at a Michael Jackson concert crowd and say that it is passionate. But psychology can categorize, bring in risk and probability… as I have argued here. And I have even said that there is value in this knowledge. This is especially true for anyone who is evolving into absolute identification. Relative Identification is preferable to Absolute Identification because life is more in your own hands if your Identifications are relative as opposed to absolute. Indeed following Michael Jackson‟s death some of his fans who absolutely identified with him committed suicide.11 Another cultural area that psychology should be able to understand is soccer… especially in societies where it is the national sport such as Spain, Italy and England. Again we can picture a crowd at a soccer match. Imagine it as a picture following a VITAL GOAL FOR the team that the fans support. They are going wild with joy. Any layman would say that they are all one. Hardly anyone would think of splitting those fans. We can say that they are all experiencing Absolute Identification. But they are not really all living their life through their soccer team. We can take a random selection from the crowd and change the context. Let‟s say we studied some boys (from the picture) in relation to their level of interest (relative or absolute) in their soccer team. Let‟s put them in the context of the school classroom a few days later following the match. We would observe that some are thinking about school work, some may be focusing on something other than school and other than soccer, and yes, some may well actually live their life through their over-valuing of their soccer team. (Absolute Identification). The latter may look like they are concentrating on their school work, but actually be excited about the match that they were at a few days ago and excited about the fixture coming up at the weekend. Had his team lost at the weekend he would still be dissociated from it and desperate to make up 6 for it at the weekend in the next match. Thus his psychological health is at the mercy of his soccer team. Of course, even if his soccer team is successful he never lives his own life. He therefore sells his psyche. And when someone suffers from Absolute Identification there is increased risk of violence when one understands other soccer teams fans to be in total opposition to what you absolutely identify with. You may even understand that they hate what you absolutely identify with. Not surprisingly therefore, there is a history of soccer crowds spilling over into violence. We have shown that the logic of Absolute and Relative Identification can be applied to the cultural phenomena of Michael Jackson and Soccer. To further strengthen the theory we will now apply it to Cults. Within the context of the Cult, a Relative Identifier may again be indistinguishable from an Absolute Identifier. The Relative and Absolute Identifiers in this case identify with the leader. And unlike a pop concert or a soccer match the Identifiers live with the Cult leader and group 24/7. Hence the distinction between the psychology of the Absolute Identifier and Relative Identifier may never be apparent. But it is precisely because of the reality of competing cultural phenomena and therefore loss of absolute totalitarian control that the Cult Leader needs to shut out the external world. The Absolute Identifier would NOT cease identification in a different context. The Relative Identifier would cease identification. The Absolute Identifier lives his or her life through the Cult hence is at serious risk of neurotic dissociation if the Cult ceases to exist. We have also seen Cults resort to violence when they feel threatened by outsiders; e.g. the Waco Cult in the United States. What does this psychology tell us that we wouldn‟t otherwise know about the subject inquestion? Well, we normally just think about cult members as all nuts. If we are asked for an opinion about cult members, we don‟t tend to ask which member? Yet not all cult members are the same. The point that some cult members reintegrate back into everyday society far more easily than others is evidence of Relative Identification and Absolute Identification. As we have seen Absolute Identification can have serious consequences. In our final example of Absolute Identification we are going to refer to a real-life case that resulted in the murder of a woman who was intimidated by the obsession (towards her) of what we are referring to as Absolute Identification. We have all heard about men becoming obsessed with a woman who is either his lover, ex, or a desired after potential lover. People unable to accept the break-up of a relationship or the lack of reciprocation from a desired-other… are suffering from Absolute Identification. Just like with the other areas of life we have looked into… such a person lives their life through the person that they are infatuated with. And hence there is nothing to fall back on. Other competing cultural aspects of life are completely irrelevant and of no value to the person experiencing Absolute Identification. If other aspects of life were of interest to the Identifier then he wouldn‟t be experiencing Absolute Identification. He would be experiencing Relative Identification. If a man experiences Absolute Identification to a woman then she equates to the whole world. He therefore will not cease his infatuation. Hence if the woman will not be with the man then the man will stalk her saying things like “I have no choice because she will not answer my calls.” He cannot accept the dissociation that would 7 come with the loss of his infatuation. In our other examples the stage (Jackson), stadium (Soccer team) or house (Cult) is the place where the Absolute Identifier goes to be in the environment that they feel the need to be in. But in this example the Absolute Identifier is being denied their need by the very thing that they need. Michael Pech responded to Clare Bernals rejection by saying “If I can‟t have you nobody will.”12 Clare Bernal wouldn‟t let him have her. Hence he carried out his threat by walking into the Harvey Nichols store where Clare worked and (as the Independent UK puts it) “without a word of warning, took a gun and pumped three to five bullets into the 22-year-old beauty counter worker.”13 Pech had already demonstrated that his desire for her was at absolute identification levels. He had harassed her and warned her that “If you dare report me I will kill you.”14 Clare had gone to the police over the harassment and they handed the case over to the Southwark Hate Crime Unit. They warned Pech but he kept on stalking her at Harvey Nichols and in other places… after being arrested he still ignored bail conditions following her home on one occasion. A further arrest and warning were again ignored resulting in Clare‟s murder at Harvey Nichols.15 Pech also ended his own life there and then. Clearly then the point of the inclusion of this tragedy in this essay is to demonstrate the importance of Absolute Identification; i.e., its potential seriousness concerning not only the person who is suffering from Absolute Identification but also the undeniably serious consequences it can have for others in certain cases. In this case Absolute Identification led to the absolute consequence for the victim. The importance of the subject-matter clearly shows that Relative Identification whereby the identifier has interest in competing cultural life is far more psychologically healthy than selling your mind and whole life to that which you identify with. Absolute Identification, Jungian Psychology and the impact of the Singularity In the above work on absolute and relative identification I took Complex Psychology as being the personalistic wing of Jung‟s work… concerned with complexes and dissociation BUT NOT the more famous transpersonal side of Jung‟s work which focuses on archetypes and the collective unconscious. The fact that we place the emphasis on Identification (as opposed to participation mystique) equates to a borrowing from psychoanalysis more than Jung… albeit Jung too occasionally referred to identification. In this work (on Subject-Object dynamics and the Singularitarian Self) I am merely questioning how much neurosis would remain with much physical suffering vanquished. Anthony Storr writes that “It was as a result of his work with word-association tests that Jung introduced the term „complex‟ into psychology. A complex is a collection of associations linked together by the same feeling-tone. […] When complexes are touched upon, the person concerned shows evidence of emotional disturbance; and Jung demonstrated this disturbance not only by measuring the prolonged reaction-time to stimulus words, but by recording the subjects depth of respiration, the electrical resistance of his skin, and his pulse rate. These physiological indicators alter in response to emotion.”16 In this essay we are not rejecting this logic. But we are placing the 8 emphasis on Identification which we think enables the person in-question to do something about their situation and hence NOT experience the neurotic dissociating complexes in the first place. The way to do that is to not evolve into Absolute Identification. So in our reform of Complex Psychology a complex is an overidentification, over-valuation, it is AN ABSOLUTE IDENTIFICATION. Precisely because one is over-identifying, consciousness is highly sensitive to anything that puts the objects value into question; hence consciousness will fight to repress anything that tries to question it out of fear of the highly neurotic experiencing of dissociation. Hence I reformed (for myself) Jungian psychology in the sense of referring more to identification than complexes. Now I relativize identification with Singularity. But again, I do not deny that faulty thinking would remain even if physical bodily suffering was eliminated. However the more into the future we go the less psychological suffering I expect will exist. The Scientific Revolution: borderland between pre-modern participation mystique and modern ego differentiation The Nobel Prize winning physicist and Jung collaborator, Wolfgang Pauli writes: “As a consequence of the rationalistic attitude of scientists since the eighteenth century, the background processes that accompany the development of the natural sciences, although present as always and of decisive effect, remained to a large extent unheeded, that is to say confined to the unconscious. On the other hand, in the Middle Ages down to the beginning of modern times, we have no natural science in the present-day sense but merely that pre-scientific stage, just mentioned, of a magical-symbolical description of nature. This, of course, is also to be found in alchemy, the psychological significance of which has been the subject of intensive investigation by C. G. Jung. My attention was therefore directed especially to the seventeenth century, when, as the fruit of a great intellectual effort, a truly scientific way of thinking, quite new at the time, grew out of the nourishing soil of a magical-animistic conception of nature. For the purpose of illustrating the relationship between archetypal ideas and scientific theories of nature Johannes Kepler (1571 – 1630) seemed to me especially suitable, since his ideas represent a remarkable intermediary stage between the earlier, magical-symbolical and the modern, quantitative-mathematical descriptions of nature. In that age many things that, later on, were to be divided up by a critical effort were still closely interrelated: the view of the universe was not as yet split into a religious one and a scientific one.”17 (Wolfgang Pauli) Also note: I see many people as borderland personalities because physical disease and literal death is not as yet vanquished. Hence the stage between the scientific revolution and the Singularity is characterized not only as the stage of differentiated ego consciousness but rather (more precisely) as the stage of the understandably anxious 9 differentiated ego consciousness and existentialism. There is less suffering than before hence less compensatory traditional religion advocating belief in literal gods and otherworld afterlife. But the Singularity will lessen traditional religion much more. Keplers worldview has lessened and the differentiated ego strengthened but this process is definitely not complete. It will be when we reach the Singularity stage. The Singularitarian perspective on Science’s relationship to the Individual Person “A common view is that science has consistently been correcting our overly inflated view of our own significance. Stephen Jay Gould said, “The most important scientific revolutions all include, as their only common feature, the dethronement of human arrogance from one pedestal after another of previous convictions about our centrality in the cosmos. But it turns out that we are central, after all. Our ability to create models – virtual realities – in our brains, combined with out modest-looking thumbs, has been sufficient to usher in another form of evolution: technology. That development enabled the persistence of the accelerating pace that started with biological evolution. It will continue until the entire universe is at our fingertips.”18 (Ray Kurzweil) It is at this point that compensatory traditional religious beliefs become largely obsolete as they become entirely unnecessary… as they have nothing to compensate for. The destruction of disease and death means that the reality of life will be no longer intolerable. Therefore those that persist in pre-modern thinking will increasingly be regarded as ill. Kuhn’s Paradigm Shifts from the Singularity’s Perspective Kurzweil writes that the Singularity “represents the nearly vertical phase of exponential growth that occurs when the rate is so extreme that technology appears to be expanding at infinite speed. Of course, from a mathematical perspective, there is no discontinuity, no rupture, and the growth rates remain finite, although extraordinarily large. But from our currently limited framework, this imminent event appears to be an acute and abrupt break in the continuity of progress. I emphasize the word “currently” because one of the salient implications of the Singularity will be a change in the nature of our ability to understand. We will become vastly smarter as we merge with our technology. […] When scientists become a million times more intelligent and operate a million times faster, an hour would result in a century of progress (in today‟s terms). […] The rate of paradigm shift (technical innovation) is accelerating, right now doubling every decade.”19 (Ray Kurzweil) 10 What is Consciousness? Q: What is consciousness? A: Subjective experience Q: What about your dog, was she conscious? A: Yes Q: Why? A: Because she, like all dogs, possessed conscious feeling, e.g. happiness Q: But a human can think. Isn‟t that consciousness? A: Yes. But so is feeling. You are consciously alive when you can at least subjectively feel. The difference between man and dog is that whilst both may experience subjective happiness, man has language and is more intelligent. So a man may say that he is happy because “I liked the jokes I‟ve been listening too and I like the company I‟m with.” Q: But in Jungian psychology the dog would be said to possess unconscious feeling (participation mystique). The emphasis is on unconscious here. Right? A: Yes. So let‟s put it altogether. Humans and dogs (and many other animals, e.g. cats, horses) possess subjective feeling consciousness. Humans alone possess both subjective thinking and feeling consciousness. And we can say that subjective feeling consciousness = unconscious participation mystique. The unconsciousness is with regards too subjective thinking. Ray Kurzweil on why consciousness is a contentious issue “There exists no objective test that can conclusively determine it‟s [i.e. consciousnesses] presence. Science is about objective measurements and their logical implications, but the very nature of objectivity is that you cannot measure subjective experience – you can only measure correlates of it, such as behavior (and by behavior, I include internal behavior – that is, the actions of the components of an entity, such as neurons and their many parts). This limitation has to do with the very nature of the concepts of “objectivity” and “subjectivity”. Fundamentally we cannot penetrate the subjective experience of another entity with direct objective measurement.”20 (Ray Kurzweil) Of course science needs the subjective conscious individual to approach and study science… in order to establish areas of objectivity. (see below). 11 Ray Kurzweil on Science, Subjectivity and Objectivity “Precisely because we cannot resolve issues of consciousness entirely through objective measurement and analysis (science), a critical role exists for philosophy. Consciousness is the most important ontological question. After all, if we truly imagine a world in which there is no subjective experience (a world in which there is swirling stuff but no conscious entity to experience it), that world may as well not exist. In some philosophical traditions, both Eastern (certain schools of Buddhist thought for example), and Western (specifically observer-based interpretations of quantum mechanics), that is exactly how such a world is regarded.”21 (Ray Kurzweil) In Jungian language…. we need the differentiation of ego consciousness distinguishing subject and object. That is subjective experience. Therefore subjectivity is necessary for the establishment and advancement of science. For example the mind-body split in medicine. The mind = subjectivity. The mind tries to establish objectivity with regards to the body. Before the scientific revolution the mind did not distinguish itself as much as it does today. Thus science was not as-yet born. Therefore we can see that a hefty amount of subjectivity is necessary in life… i.e. necessary in order to establish objectivity. Absolute subjectivity and absolute objectivity might as well be impossible. It appears as if totalitarianism in many major fields is undesirable and unworkable… politics, economics, psychology, science. Projection The individual who lives a life of subjective unconscious feeling will assume (unthinkingly!) that others live and experience life in the same way. And whenever the fore-mentioned individual experiences a conflict then he or she will project negative motivations and negative intentions onto the „other‟ who is perceived to be causing the conflict. Thus the theorist of myth, Robert Segal, writes “The withdrawal of projections from the world does NOT leave us defenseless against the unconscious. On the contrary, it leaves us far better defended. For only by withdrawing projections are we in a position to recognize the source of projections and thereby to tend to that source far more directly, which means with far more consciousness of that source.”22 It is of course healthy to think creatively and articulate fictional narrative and myths that partially reflect real life to greater or lesser extents. But that is radically different from non-thinking unconscious shadow projection. If it wasn‟t then the writers and actors involved with movies, dramas, comedy‟s etc - - - would all have to be deemed to have unresolved psychological problems. Obviously that is not the case. Conscious projection is healthy. Suggestibility and Subject-Object merger 12 Alien Abduction: Trance-like state. The subject becomes one with the object after projecting cultural contents onto the object. The extract below is taken from page 26 of my small book titled Critical Jungian Studies: “Jenny Randles, a British thinker who studies Ufology says that when an abductee is abducted they do not physically move from the place that they were abducted. Studies have shown that other people in the area have noted this. Hence, surely the abductee has gone into a deep hypnotic trance. This is an extreme dissociation. Randles says that such a person typically has this experience when they see a UFO. Yet someone else that is with them does not go into the trance. Either the beings on the UFO have abducted the abductees spirit OR (infinitely more likely) the abductee has (as said) dissociated and gone into a hypnotic trance. The unconscious projections onto the UFO are inevitably cultural. If you are convinced that you are experiencing a UFO encounter, and if you are extremely suggestible, then you go into a dissociable trance and experience the culturally determined UFO pattern of abduction.”23 My writing on subject-object merger concerning alien abduction is a good way to view some of Carl Jung‟s experiences, especially his experiences with Philemon, Salome etc. In this case it would mean Jung‟s consciousness (subject) merging with his unconscious (object), resulting in a powerful (or numinous to use Jungian language) waking dream. Potential for full subject merger with objects Ray Kurzweil says that we are on the brink of merging with technology (object). I bracketed the word „object‟ there but Kurzweil emphasizes that, like the telephone, nearfuture technology will be an extension of ourself. Hence, for Kurzweil at least, subject and object merge. He writes: “We‟re going to merge with our technology. We‟re already starting to do that in 2004, even if most of the machines are not yet inside our bodies and brains. Our machines nonetheless extend the reach of our intelligence. Extending our reach has always been the nature of being human”.24 The above raises questions concerning „what kind of future merger‟? Certainly the medical aspect is sound… technology vanquishing disease and death. The key point here (and of this essay) though – is that – the near future will almost certainly see a move away FROM subject-object split as common sense TO a belief that subject and object are (as far as technology goes) inextricably linked. Hence, whilst (at present) the author of this work believes the subject-object split still holds…. I also see it as in motion… evolving in the direction of merger with technology. Psychological meaning concerning the full subject merger with objects Meaning here concerns our individual ability to imagine. What do you want the future to 13 be like? What implications does this have for our present reality? Virtual reality is an important idea here. The word „virtual‟ is unfortunate because as Ray Kurzweil says… virtual reality will be “totally convincing”.25 And “From the perspective of your brain, it‟s real because the signals are just as real as if your senses were producing them from real experiences”.26 And again “Initially VR [i.e. virtual reality] will have certain benefits in terms of enabling communications with others in engaging ways over long distances and featuring a great variety of environments from which to choose. Although the environments will not be completely convincing at first, by the late 2020s they will be indistinguishable from real reality and will involve all of the senses, as well as neurological correlations of our emotions. As we enter the 2030s there won‟t be clear distinctions between human and machine, between real and virtual reality…”.27 So advanced is this technology that it is not fanciful to imagine a human-created Matrix. The Matrix idea, made famous by the late 1990s movie, resulted in academic discussion in different fields such as science and philosophy. For example, David Chalmers, a philosopher who studies the hard problem of consciousness, penned a well-worth reading essay arguing that not only is it possible that we could create a Matrix, we may be living in a Matrix.28 Chalmers is fairly neutral on the question of whether we really are living in a Matrix or not. But my point here would be that not so long ago an intelligent man like Chalmers would have thought the suggestion that we are living in a Matrix was outrageous in the extreme. Technological advance has clearly moved western thinkers (with lay people moving unconsciously behind) into a new evolving worldview. If all of this virtual reality is possible and we cannot distinguish it from reality as we know it then that naturally puts reality as we know it into question. Are we living in a Matrix? If so then that means that we could create a matrix within a matrix. Hence, what is to say that there aren‟t several or an infinite number of matrix‟ each giving birth to another? If no such Matrix reality exists at the present time, then from a depth psychological perspective, the Matrix is still a good myth for our age… reflecting the virtual reality advancement and the possibility of creating a matrix reality ourselves. Chalmers himself points this out. He writes “We can think of the Matrix Hypothesis as a creation myth for the information age”.29 From a post-Jungian perspective such sci-fi narrative is modern myth conducive to modern minds. In this sense there is a place for myth in the modern world, and postJungian thinking (and creative thought from other disciplines) can colorfully reflect reality with a mixture of truth, speculation and outright fiction. But whilst technology changes our worldview and impacts on psychology in this way…. It also lessens suffering and lessens the need for other types of psychology. However, there is a long way to go yet before killers of the physical human body such as cancer are totally defeated hence psychological compensations will continue for the time being. Of course there are other human sufferings that contribute towards neurosis, e.g. social isolation. In Alchemical Studies (volume 13 of Jung‟s collected works) Jung says something that was true for his time but not true for now or in the future. He writes that “By becoming conscious, the individual is threatened more and more with isolation, which is nevertheless the sine qua non of conscious differentiation. The greater this threat, the 14 more it is compensated by the production of collective and archetypal symbols which are common to all men”.30 However, with the advent of the Singularity it is now possible to (as already said) colorfully speculate and tell colorful truths… as opposed to just telling outright fantasies for compensations as has previously been done. No longer is becoming conscious a rejection of things held dear in favor of meaninglessness. Rather it is a rejection of some colorful ideas and beliefs that are replaced by equally colorful ideas and beliefs. At least it is so provided that the individual is conscious of the direction that western society is headed. As Kurzweil says, science is now at the service of humans.31 NOTES 1: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p136 2: Budding, P, 2009, p3 3: Jung, C, in Budding, P, 2009, p3 4: Budding, P, 2009, p3 5: Budding, P, 2009, p8 6: Jung, C, 1992, par 17 7: Segal, R, 1998, p145 8: The most important implication of the Singularity is surely the destruction of physical disease and death. Kurzweil argues that we can live long enough to live forever! This essay isn‟t about the detailed science of the Singularity. Nevertheless, a note on this practical yet crucial piece of what the Singularity means to us - - - seems to be worth noting. Kurzweil writes that biotechnology and nanobots are key. He says that the key purpose of having nanobots in one‟s bloodstream is to “keep you healthy. They‟ll destroy pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, and cancer cells, and they won‟t be subject to the various pitfalls of the immune system, such as autoimmune reactions. Unlike your biological immune system, if you don‟t like what the nanobots are doing, you can tell them to do something different.” (Kurzweil, 2005, p255). On the next page he writes “When nanotechnology is mature, it‟s going to solve the problems of biology by overcoming biological pathogens, removing toxins, correcting DNA errors, and reversing other sources of ageing”. (Kurzweil, 2005, p256). Kurzweil adds that ageing will be reversed. He says that it is a key benefit and writes that “we‟ll actually accomplish most of that [i.e. ageing reversal] with biotechnology, methods such as RNA interference for turning off destructive genes, gene therapy for changing your genetic code, therapeutic cloning for regenerating your cells and tissues, smart drugs to reprogram your metabolic pathways, and many other emerging techniques. But whatever biotechnology doesn‟t get around to accomplishing , we‟ll have the means to do with nanotechnology […] Nanobots will be able to travel 15 through the bloodstream, then go in and around our cells and perform various services such as removing toxins, sweeping out debris, correcting DNA errors, repairing and restoring cell membranes, reversing atherosclerosis, modifying the levels of hormones, neurotransmitters, and other metabolic chemicals, and a myriad of other tasks. For each aging process, we can describe a means for nanobots to reverse the process, down to the level of individual cells, cell components, and molecules”. (Kurzweil, R, 2005, p256 & 257). Kurzweil says that the idea is to stay young indefinitely and writing in 2004, he estimated that we (as individual) would get these nanobots in “About twenty to twentyfive years”. (Kurzweil, 2005, p257). Nanobots are also arguably the key ingredient to the subject (i.e. the individual) merging with object (i.e. technology). The individual will inevitably think of the nanobots as part of ones Self. By the time that we have nanobots inside of us the common sense of subject-object split will have evolved into subject-object synthesis in many respects. 9: Kurzweil, 2005, p7 10: Jung, C, 1976, par: 741 – 742 11: Sky News, 29th June 2009 12: Pech, M, quoted in Judd, T, 15th September 2005 13: Judd, T, 15th September 2005 14: Pech, M, quoted in Judd, T, 15th September 2005 15: Judd, T, 15th September 2005 16: Storr, A, 1991, p21 & 22 17: Pauli, W, in Jung, C & Pauli, W, 1955 18: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p487 19: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p24 & 25 20: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p378 21: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p380 22: Segal, R, 29th March 2009 23: Budding, P, 2009, p26 16 24: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p298 25: Kurzweil, R, 18th May 2003 26: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p319 27: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p319 28: Chalmers, D 29: ibid 30: Jung, C, 1983, par 395 31: Kurzweil, R, 2005, p487 17 BIBLIOGRAPHY Budding, P, (2009) (Docstoc Website) Critical Jungian Studies: (Second Edition) Chalmers, D, (Internet Essay) The Matrix as Metaphysics: http://consc.net/papers/matrix.html IAJS Discussion Archives: http://mail.iajsdiscussionlist.org/pipermail/iajsdiscussion_iajsdiscussionlist.org/ Judd, T, (15th September 2005) Harvey Nichols Victim had Reported Stalker to Police (The Independent UK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/harveynicolsvictimhad-reported-stalker-to-police-506906.html) Jung, C, (1992) CW: Vol 5: Symbols of Transformation (Princeton University Press) Jung, C, (1976) CW: Vol 6: Psychological Types (Princeton University Press) Jung, C, (1983) CW: Vol 13: Alchemical Studies (Princeton University Press) Jung, C, (1977) CW: Vol 18: The Symbolic Life: Miscellaneous Writings (Routledge) Jung, C, & Pauli, W, (1955) The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche (Bollingen Series, Pantheon Books: New York) Kurzweil, R, (18th May 2003) (Internet Essay published on KurzweilAI.net) The Matrix Loses Its Way: Reflections on „Matrix‟ and „Matrix Reloaded‟: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0580.html Kurzweil, R, (2005) The Singularity is Near (Penguin Books) Segal, R, (29th March 2009) IAJS Discussion Forum: Subject: Jung on Archaic Man Segal, R, (1998) Jung on Mythology (Routledge) Sky News (29th June 2009) Grieving Jackson fans 'Commit Suicide' http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090629/ten-grieving-jackson-fans-commit-suicide8a3eada.html Storr, A, (1991) Jung (Routledge) 18 19