Does any creature with a nervous system, which I guess is any animal, have some amount of free will? Or does free will extend to any living thing?

Why is it important? I am interested in defining the 'threshold' level of organism that can 'contribute' to the progress of universal consciousness.

New to all this, so I apologize if I am covering old ground, or using the wrong terminology.

Hi EssJay,

There has been a lot of discussion about free-will (just use the search function to review), but I don't recall anyone having approached the matter from quite the angle you have presented. Great question!

Facts and theory both suggest, imply, really, that in the evolution of each chunk of consciousness, there must have been a first instance of the use of free-will.


Do you suppose that it was wholly a sudden advent of a choice...? Or did it (opportunity to sensible choose between two options) slooooooowly dawn like consciousness itself?

I don't know if Tom addresses this particular issue in his books; I keep having to stop reading and follow sidelines, so just haven't got that far yet. Maybe one of the old hands will have something useful to say about the question; it does point to an interesting piece of the puzzle!

Montana

Hello essjay :)

Do a search on "Free will" and "Decision space", there are some excellent posts on exactly your question.

I can do a quick answer though :)



Every sentient being has free will, and that is absolute free will. A nervous system or another system with the same functionality is indeed part of being sentient. In the MBT model, sentience and consciousness is practically equated. If one would expand the concept of consciousness, one could include lifeforms as plants, but they are not sentient, and thus not conscious in the way we know of. There is a whole thread about plants and consciousness on the board, you can search for that.

So, every sentient being has the same "amount" of free will, but not the same amount of decision space. The decision space is the available choices that one can choose from, the decision space is based mostly on the quality of the consciousness, but more precisely awareness. A cat or dog for example, would then have a much smaller decision space the average human. There is much more about decision space on the forum, search for it.

A precise treshhold level would be very difficult to give, the best one is "sentience" I guess, and there even might be some difficulty in determining that, but as a general description it's fine :)

Like this sea cucumber, it has small decision space, it did what it could. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKWSLg5PDiU, it had it's smaller world turned upside down, literaly, for these bigger world things to have fun with. I actually feel bad for the cucumber....
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

AUO and all individuated consciousness entities have free will. It is a part of being consciousness. Even a fundamental particle has free will. Just not much room to exercise it. If every thing is consciousness, then every thing is conscious. What is different between you and a fundamental particle is the decision space. Fundamental decision space is fundamentally limited to only the functions of the fundamental. In the case of a fundamental particle, the decision space is completely limited to the singular space-time PMR experience in a singular (non-complex) being similar in scope to AUO. The difference between a fundamental particle and AUO is the amount of presence of being. In PMR this is measurable as mass. For all practical PMR instances, a black hole and a fundamental particle have only presence as a difference. Both are fundamental "particles" in PMR from our point of view. But you, as a human being are much much more complex than either the particle or the black hole. The decision space of a fundamental particle is limited to one kind of awareness in one time and one space. It has free will, but not many choices to make. How much free-will a being has is dependent upon its complexity. The more complex the being, the greater the number of differences in awareness there can be. The greater the awareness, the more decision space exists in any situation that the being is aware of. So the decision space is proportional to the complexity of being, and so too then is the free-will.

_________________
Most people are mostly good most of the time. - the Deefburger assumption of marginal probable personal state.

Everything is not consciousness (in the sense you are saying), if one uses the concept of a virtual reality. A fundamental particle is just as virtual as your brain, is your brain consciousness? No, it is virtual.

I think your example of fundamental particles can be used as an analogy or metaphor, a single particle can be seen as a single bit, but the single bit is not conscious. Consciousness is not contained in a single bit, or particle, but in a complex organization or pattern of these. Complex meaning "The whole is more than the sum of it parts".

I agree with the complexity part, but complexity does not start at a single bit or particle.

Free will in a single fundamental particle? It has no sentience, it is virtual, and not consciousness by the definition agreed on. See slide 27 http://www.mybigtoe.com/CaliforniaWorkshopSlides.pdf

Let us say AUM is thinking or dreaming this reality will live in. Is the thought thinking? Is the dream, dreaming? Nope, and that is my point :)

You are applying the model to the reality. The reality is consciousness. That is the primary assumption of the MBT Theory. In this PMR the model works, but not as an absolute. The MBT theory itself works very well.

In MBT the primary and secondary assumptions are treated as absolutes. Consciousness and Entropy. Later, as we see how these two assumptions interact to create realities, we bring in the model to help explain it. But the model does not define the assumptions, instead, the testing of the assumptions leads us to use the model as a language to describe in more familiar terms the nature of the reality. The real "Model" is in the primary assumptions of the Theory.

So, in PMR, even a fundamental particle is consciousness. How that works is where the model helps to explain. The virtual reality model does not exclude consciousness. If it did, it would be in conflict with the primary assumptions of MBT. It is not in conflict, it is secondary as an explanation of the big picture.

_________________
Most people are mostly good most of the time. - the Deefburger assumption of marginal probable personal state.

Consciousness is Being. That is what it is because it is the ONE and it is Dasein experiencing time. Complex consciousness adds complexity to the being. That complexity begins to manifest as sentience as the complexity increases.

_________________
Most people are mostly good most of the time. - the Deefburger assumption of marginal probable personal state.

Consciousness (this is the word we've agreed to using which is our soul too, to use a different word) is real, everything else is virtual. Everything is data, and it's all nonphysical, but Consciousness is real, right? That is my reality.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Thank you. I did try that first for 'free will' but the search engine told me the terms were too common. Will try for decision space though, thanks.

The thing is, I don't think the sea cucumber had any decision space at all. Nor did the Molusc Dr Campbell talked about in his youtube-published lecture.

The sea cucumber, in my view, was just following a script, as is a molusc when you poke it. Do the same thing to it 100 times and it will always respond in the same way. As will any insect, and as will something more complex, say like a crocodile or a snake, to external stimuli. They are not making any decision, they are just doing what is hardwired into their brain, just like a computer program, the same stimuli will always evoke the same response - no decision is to be made, therefore there can be no consciousness.

I think you really need to get up to the level of a mammal or a bird, with a brain of a certain size, before a threshold is passed whereby the creature has some idea of 'choosing' between one action/response or another. A dog or a cat for instance can certainly do that. A smart bird, like a raven, from what I observe, also shows a 'playful' demeanor in some situations, and looks to me to be clearly choosing a course of action.

I would say they are making the decisions allowed from within their limited decision space.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Hey Essjay, what about this?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4g9XN7xiP8&NR=1

In MBT Consciousness is used with two meanings:

1. As the fundamental substance or energy potential (which covers everything in the Consciousness System includying Virtual and non Virtual).

2. As Consciousness subsets with the capacity of being sentient, self-aware, able to learn and make decisions with free will.

Now I define Virtual:

3. The "Virtual" term is usually applied to the concept in 1. that some other subset of Consciousness applied decisions (which can include rules or rule-sets) to it. A virtual self can also has the properties of 2., even though it was constrained by some other Consciousness subset.

Both 1. and 2. definitions are or include information. 2. is a particular case that is not only information but also capable of interpreting information to a certain extent. in my metaphor everything is information, so everything is real (both 1. and 2.). Some other people like to distinguish saying this is real (1. or 2.) and that is virtual (3.), but then you get into trouble because you are virtual (3.) but still also are 1. and 2. So with my definition of real I don't get involved in any conflicts ("everything is real because everything is information"). As long as you understand 1., 2. and 3. you should be OK using virtual (3.) and whatever you choose to define real (in my case I choose 1., 2. and 3.).

I know it may be difficult for some to understand. Well, I tried something.

Claudio

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

Thanks Claudio. I think between the two of us we can get this across!

So, fundamentally any thing is consciousness having these aspects:

1. Presence - this is unique presence within the system of the One. It is Heidegger's "Dasein". And Decartes' existence axiom. Presence is Heidegger's Dasein and Decartes' axiom combined. Presence Exists. In the VRRE and TBC this is a bit.

2. Time awareness - This is the ability to be aware and have an experience of time. Without this, the presence is moot. With this the consciousness, the Dasein is Being. In the VRRE and TBC this is the ability to experience.

3. Will and Intent - This is the ability to be seen. It is the replacement for randomness in any systemic model. Will is the choice of direction, Intent is the magnitude of the presence in that direction Outward. It is the magnitude of presence information that is transmitted outward as time potential. In the VRRE it is the source of transmission on the RWW.

From these three attributes an entire universe can be built. A consciousness unit with these attributes can have either unitary presence, such as a fundamental particle in PMR or systemic presence, such as yourself. The only difference between you and the fundamental is the range of awareness possible and the number of ICUs (Individuated Consciousness Unit) present in the system. For your IUOC(Complex ICU system) there are many many ICU's that are fundamentally experiencing time in common. Think of the ICU as a transistor. You can have a circuit with just one(not fun, all alone, nothing much to do), or you can have a complex system of many and have a computer. You can also have a more complex network of computers and have a larger more complex system where the computer is more fundamental than the larger network.

Now, the free will of the fundamental is very limited because there is only a unitary presence. That one point can only make two choices. Towards an other unit, or away from another unit. Decrease the assumed distance or increase the assumed distance. This is what decision space is.

For a more complex system of ICUs you get more choices because there is a set of new directions and combinations of ICUs that can choose. So the system gains awareness by being larger and more complex. Now if you consider the free will, it is systemic and has a much larger decision space.

Continue increasing the complexity, add systems together into larger more complex systems, and the decision space gets larger and more complex. The larger complex system gains greater numbers of possible choices and the free will of the more complex system becomes more complex in its decisions because the decision space is much larger.

This is not "mass" largeness, this is pattern largeness. This is complex organisation not just ducks in a row. Think quarks connected in threes to make Protons and Neutrons, and then connecting those systems together to make molecules. This is increasing the complexity and making it "larger" in complexity.

Life happens when the PMR fundamentals have combined into systems of fundamentals complex enough to do more than just the default of sitting there waiting for something to happen. Will and Intent can be exercised at the systemic level. For our PMR this happened when water happened. Water is a system of consciousness that is as close to fundamental as you can get and still be a complex system. Water does what it WILL. You are the result.

I think I know where the trouble might be for many of you. What the heck do I eat? What do I kill and consume?
Tom draws the line at neurons. If it's got neurons, it has reached a new level of complexity that has sentience possible. The actual sentience comes as the neurological systems increase in complexity. I don't have a level of complexity of neural systemic presence that I can point to and say "sentient" or "not sentient". So I take a more pragmatic approach to my own sustenance. What's for dinner? No I won't eat my cat. I will however still eat steak. It's a personal choice to be made in the larger decision space my consciousness occupies! However, that could change. I may decide I'm not comfortable with eating meat any more. Then again I might not. It's up to you, and how you feel. It's partly the reason you are here in PMR. Solve these complex problems.

_________________
Most people are mostly good most of the time. - the Deefburger assumption of marginal probable personal state.