Copyright 2009 by Christine M. Skolnik
Classical physics is characterized by two philosophical orientations as previously discussed: materialism and determinism. According to the assumption of materialism only material causes have material effects. Hence, consciousness can have no effect on the body, the brain, or matter in general. From this perspective mind and matter are fundamentally separated. The material world is a closed system. And many well-documented phenomenon in psychology and medicine as well as physics remain unaccounted for. There is no unified theory of the psychological and biological effects, nor any possibility thereof. Materialists search for a unified theory based on classical physics, but they do not admit influence from other disciplines. They want to keep the disciples in silos while asserting the hegemony of classical physics—the ultimate science—as empirical ground and pinnacle. Ironically it is leading scientists in biology and the medical sciences, rather than physics, who have become the guardians of materialist assumptions, as research physicists have moved definitively beyond this paradigm. Only a physics which succumbs to consciousness can articulate a coherent theory of the physical world and unified theory of mind and body, culture and the nature, information and energy.
Classical physics is also determinative. It imagines the evolution of the universe and life as a direct and singular result of an initial physical cause. Though that first cause remains mysteriously undefined, materialists assume that all of nature evolved through quasi mechanical processes in a direct line from this first cause. Because non-material forces can have no effect on material substances, human consciousness, if it exists at all, is not operative in evolution. Though the illusion of human consciousness might be admitted as an effect of evolution, it is not thought to play anything but an auxiliary role in our future development as a species. Human agency is similarly considered an illusion as all behavior is determined by the interaction of selfish genes and other non-human physical causes. And human beings can consciously affect neither their genes nor their environments in the interest of their own evolution of even survival as a species. Our futures are already determined by the first causes—the script is already written. Perhaps a large-scale cosmic event, like an asteroid, might deflect the course of human evolution, but even such a seemingly random event is regarded as a logical consequence of physical creation.
In this paradigm the human being is always the creature and never the creator of her or his own destiny. Individual responsibility might be a pragmatic social construct, but individuals can not seriously be held responsible for their actions in this kind of universe. Genetic research and medical science bolster this lack of responsibility, furthermore, by attributing all manner of social behaviors and physical conditions to genetics, while continuingly undermining or at least deemphasizing the role of human choice, habit, will, and spirit.
Under this paradigm rhetoric functions only within the purview of the mind, with no direct effects on the body, brain, or physical universe at large. Rhetorical research is limited to observing overt behaviors, and the rhetorical aspects of experimental research in physics and biology are patently ignored. And the study of rhetoric in general, as a humanistic discipline, is relegated to third-class academic status behind the sciences and social sciences. All rhetoric is “mere rhetoric,” and the relationship between rhetoric and human agency is a theoretical construct. Similarly the notion of rhetorical ethos is irrelevant as human actions reflect pre-determined conditions rather than a notion of a developed character or integrity.
In the second case, the quantum physical paradigm, there is a continuity and transformation of mind and body, information and energy, culture and nature. Material “realties” are no longer privileged. Rather physicists study the relationship between human consciousness and external forces. Mind and matter are no longer considered incompatible spheres of influence. Rhetorical messages become energy and information which organizes other forms of energy and information. And nature is not merely constructive of culture (as in a deterministic genetic and evolutionary paradigm), nor is culture determinative of nature. Rather each influences the other.
But most importantly this universe is non-deterministic. The laws of quantum physics are stochastic; their predictions rest on probability functions; and consciousness is represented in their equations. Human consciousness can actually affect the chances that elements of the physical universe will behave one way or another. Thus quantum physics allows a role for human agency and volition, defining a different relationship between mental, biological, and other physical realities.
Individuals can affect the flow of energy and information within their minds, bodies, and brains. We can also influence the flow of energy in other individuals. Our energy and information production becomes the context for the energy and information flow of other individuals. Within a family or work environment, as creators of culture, we create a context for other individuals which can have positive or negative effects. These effects, furthermore work on multiples levels: mind, body, brain, brain region, neuron, and even the gene. And these effects, which we can control to a large extent, can direct the course of our own individual development, that of our children and neighbors, our cultural, as well as biological evolution at large.
Within this paradigm rhetoric is efficacious not only as an extension of consciousness but as a constituent of consciousness itself. Processes of emotional self-regulation and self-directed neuroplasticity are dependant on both external and internal communication and persuasion. Rhetoric is integral to human agency as everything we say has the potential to affect our mind, brains, bodies, and the environments we inhabit, as well as the minds, brains, bodies and environments of our neighbors both near and far.
This new paradigm revives what are in many quarters considered outdated notions of individual responsibility, ethical choice, and individual and communal spiritual consciousness. As previously mentioned individual responsibility is inseparable from a notion of individual agency. Responsibility is the physical and philosophical ability to respond to any given situation. In a materialist and determinist paradigm responsibility is not possible. In a quantum physical paradigm it is a given. Our every choice has an effect and we must take responsibility for the effects of our choices.
The findings of research in neuroplasticity and quantum physics also foreground the role of a transcendent executive function that allows individuals to resist genetic, cultural, and other environmental determining factors, and regulate the body and the mind through various cognitive and emotional process, as well as overt physical behaviors and habits. Motivation for the information processing and general energy expenditure involved in emotional self-regulation, self-directed neuroplasticity, self-directed personal development, and socially conscious evolution emanates for this transcendent self, and its faith in its own value, integrity, and power. Spirit, spark, intent, will, faith, hope—however we recognize it, this independent variable tips the scales of the quantum universe at every moment of decision. This connection to self, others, and the universe enables us to hear the voice within in us and stay the course of the ethically-engaged and yet profoundly unfettered individual. At the same time it enables us to find a more comfortable location in the universe—not as masters or all we survey, but as components of a much larger, organically whole, and integrated system of systems.
In the future we may begin to collectively redefine what in means to be human according to such new paradigms, and find ourselves humbled by our conclusions as well as inspired by having come together to such wisdom. Our rhetorical assumptions and practices may change dramatically. Though rhetoric will remain instrumental in various contexts, we may also begin to understand and embrace a rhetoric of mutual influence and cooperation. Discourse could be directed to ever more profound levels of reciprocal understanding, and such understanding could be regarded as a prerequisite to negotiation. Our negotiations, furthermore, may be informed by a more developed perspective on our own interests as inextricably bound with those of our most distant neighbors and the environment at large.
(See Jeffrey M. Schwartz and Sharon Begley The Mind & The Brain . . . on materialism and determinism.)
No comments:
Post a Comment