The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

User avatar
Sainbury
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 6578
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: Ocala, FL
Contact:

The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Sainbury »

Transcribed by nessie
Edited by Sainbury

Donna: People are always interested in the origins of the Larger Consciousness System. Can you tell us your theory on that?

Tom: Theory is a good word or perhaps conjecture is a better word. When it came to beginnings we really can’t say much more than conjecture. It’s very difficult because beginnings are always problematical. What was in existence, what was there, or what happened before the consciousness system actually became the consciousness system, is difficult if you are a part of that system. So what was there before the system existed is one of those things we can just guess at.

Earlier on, in one of my first talks in London, I gave an example that the bacterium in a person’s gut couldn't know about things like sunshine, rain, ploughs, planting, seeds, and that sort of thing. Even if it's a scientist of the first order that looked at all the details, and all the facts in the gut, it just couldn't get outside if its own reality. We’re like that too. We can’t get outside of the consciousness system to see how that consciousness system came about. That has to remain mysterious to us. Logically it's not a failure of information or a failure of understanding. It’s a logical fact that we cannot observe ourselves before we existed. So that’s the logical problem, and it doesn’t have to end up in an infinite regression of causality. That’s another trick, or pit, that you fall into when looking into beginnings. What was the cause of that? And you come up with something. Then what was the cause of that? And you end up in an infinite regression of causes. Once you admit no knowledge, or an inability to say anything objective about it, then the infinite regression disappears. Because it just stops.

2.45 We don’t know, and we can’t know. But I can take it back a little further than what I did in my books. In my books I start with an assumption that consciousness exists and that evolution exists. And the consciousness was just something that was very primordial as far as consciousness goes. All it could do was tell 'this-from-that.' There were at least two states that it could exist in. Two states of its existence and they’re different. And it was aware of that difference. It could be in 'state-one or state-two.' Or we could say '0 or 1.' Which starts to remind us of bits in a computer.

3.35 We can go back a little earlier than that. And the point here is to try to simplify. To try to get back to an origin that is the minimum number of assumptions, and the minimum number of things that you have to suppose. We are trying to get back to the very minimum amount of information required in order to have the most simple, and most uncomplicated, description of where consciousness came from. We can do that by asking where that consciousness came from. The consciousness had to come from some place - even that little primordial consciousness. Things can come out of nothing. Well more like ‘no thing’ than nothing. And that is from a potential for something. Nothing is there yet, but there’s a potential for it. Now in computer speak that would be lots of random bits. If you had lots and lots of random bits you would have no information. But you’d have potential for information just because you had bits. The fact that they’re random meant that you had no information system. So that can be the analogy of something that has potential but actually has 'no thing.' There is nothing there. There is no information. It is totally blank.

5.20 There is a science called Emergent Complexity. And Emergent Complexity says that if you have a potential for something, even though there is nothing, eventually, (just by those random bits in our case, or just by that potential giving the opportunity to change or modify itself, to do whatever random things do,) that it would construct something. It would find some order. Some little piece of order would come about. Or maybe a couple of bits got stacked in a row or had a little pattern. And if it did that then sometimes that pattern would randomly dissipate and go away. But it is also possible that they could create a pattern that would persist - one that you could add on to. Then we would have nothing, 'no thing,' no information at all, but we would have potential. And that potential could spontaneously erupt into some piece of information that persisted, and something that could be built on. And statistics show that this is not only possible but it's likely after a certain amount of time. These things happen. There is this spontaneous structuring that takes place in random fields of potential. And that often creates something that can then be built upon. Because there is purpose in that potential. And the purpose in that potential in our computer terms would be to lower entropy, to build, to be something, or to create something. So that purpose is there. And if you created something, even just by accident, then you would want to add to it. You would want to create something that didn’t just dissipate. So we can start with this void - just the void that might create something. But we don’t have consciousness yet, and we don’t really have any understanding of a purpose. We have something that just happened.

7.36 The next science, or the next mathematics that we use, will be the mathematics of Cellular Automata. Cellular Automata says that if you have bits of information scattered about, or if you have some array of bits of information, you can write a little rule of how that information can change. One very simple example is if you had a checker board with black and white squares. You can have a rule that says, 'Every white square that’s bordered by two black squares will turn into a black square.' And vice versa a rule that says, 'Every black square that is bordered by two white squares will turn into a white square.' Then you can just let that rule go, so delta t=1. You make all the changes of white-to-black and black-to-white which gives you something new. And then you apply the rule again and make something new, and then you apply the rule again.

8.43 This is what is called a process fractal. It’s a process, and not a geometric shape like geometric fractals. It’s built on a process and the output keeps feeding the input. And the process changes input to an output. It takes the input and makes a new output out of it. This process fractal, that we call Cellular Automata, has the potential to build magnificent highly complex and highly structured things out of just very, very, simple little rules. Just like geometric fractals can make huge, interesting, and beautiful, patterns just out of a simple little shape like a triangle. It just keeps adding triangles-to-triangles-to triangles in different scales and in different sizes. It is repetitive in the way it does this, and it can cause wonderful shapes. If you are not familiar with fractal geometry or fractal pictures Google them. And you will see that they are immensely detailed and complex. And they have no boundary. It’s not like they run to a certain point and quit. They just keep going, and going, and going, and continue to evolve according to that simple rule set.

10.10 If we had this potential, and it spontaneously created something - and if those 'somethings' were ordered by a simple rule set - you would now have had a process fractal that could have grown into something very, very structured. And it would have been something very, very complex that had all the attributes of a general purpose computer. Edward Fredkin, and a colleague he worked with, showed that these Cellular Automata performed all of the basic functions of a general purpose computer. They have logic, they have memory, and they can transport that memory.

So that is an idea of how we got to that first potential. Now we had this process fractal that was evolving. And because like any fractal as it evolved it lowered its entropy. It became more complex - more structured. That's the nature of a fractal. It continued to become more and more complex, and more and more structured, as it iterated on its process or on its geometry - if it’s a geometric fractal. Eventually it seemed to have the awareness to be aware of itself. And I start my book with that assumption of self-awareness - of this piece of potential we call a reality cell. A reality cell that understood 'this-state' from 'that-state.'

Now we can see a little bit further back to where that primordial piece of consciousness came from. It may have come out of this nothingness that created something, and that produced a process. But you still are stuck with an assumption that self-awareness existed. Whenever a scientist says the word, ‘somehow,’ that means he doesn’t really know what the answer is. And we hear scientists say, 'somehow,' lots of times. This is where I will say, "somehow," because again, we can’t know what happened before we existed. We can only say somehow that self-awareness existed, consciousness existed, awareness existed, and from there we can build up something rather grand.

12.55 In Hindu theology they started at the beginning of time, or the beginning of existence, with a void. And they say, "The void was pregnant with potential. And out of that void spontaneously erupted existence." And then it began to evolve. It immediately evolved into what they call Indra’s Net. Which in that theology is a metaphor of an array of jewels that are all netted. They are a network all connected with each other - Indra’s Net - jewels in a network. The Larger Consciousness System would be the whole Indra’s Net. And we, the Individuated Units of Consciousness, would be those jewels in the network that are communicating with each other. The void that was pregnant with possibility and potential created existence. And that existence turned out to be these units that communicated and that are netted with each other. Indra's Net is ancient - probably 3000 years old. It's hard to say. I don’t know the origin of that writing. It maybe even older- even 4000 B.C. So that’s very, very ancient. [1]

14.47 How did these ancient people know those things? They knew the same way that we know these things. Ancient peoples had consciousnesses just like we do. Ancient peoples were being played by Individuated Units of Consciousness just like we are. And one can always explore inner space. So we have people 5000, 6000, 7000, or even up to 10,000 years older than we are who explored inner space. All it takes is enough time to spend with yourself exploring your consciousness. All the things that we do today could easily have been done just as well back then. So people did do that. And we did have this understanding of the beginning of where it all came from. And it makes perfect sense in terms of the MBT theory. We look at that ancient Vedic knowledge and we can see how it fits into the MBT structure very easily.

16.03 Now we have this void that spontaneously became lower entropy and created information. That information was then acted on by a simple rule which was the cellular Automata. And the Cellular Automata was able to evolve, what we think of now, as consciousness. It was in that Cellular Automata that self-awareness developed. An awareness of itself as, "When I do this this, this is what that rule set does to me." It is an awareness of what it is, and an awareness of what’s going on. And that may just have occurred out of memory - an awareness of here’s memory of our history. And to be able to look at that history and see pattern in it. This is a thing that is created of pattern, and that’s what lowers entropy. A thing of pattern was able to be aware of its patterns. That was the first consciousness. And exactly how that came about or how that worked is just conjecture. That’s about as far back as we can go on this origins story.

17:27 But now let’s take it a little further to see how this Larger Consciousness System began to evolve into the thing that we know of today. We think of the Larger Consciousness System today as kind of the operating system of reality. It's very low entropy. It is a 'being' because it has consciousness. It's aware, it has emotions, and it has feelings. It is sort of like us in a sense except it is much bigger, grander, and more experienced than we are. And we'll talk about how we got to this place. We have this consciousness system that began evolving and needed to lower its entropy. And along the way it discovered a few ways to do this. And one of the first ways that it discovered, besides patterns, was it could also have sequences. Which brings us to time.

18.28 Time is a technology and an invention of consciousness. Time allows consciousness another whole dimension in which it can build order, and in which it can expand. Sequences are orders. It’s a pattern in time rather than a pattern in space or in thought. There really is no 'space' there. But rather than just ordered things, it's ordered things in sequence. Time is just another technology that was probably a breakthrough. Because suddenly the way that consciousness could arrange things it could build, and the constructs it could make, took on another whole dimension in sequence. Before we got regular time, we had what I call primordial time. And primordial time is just defined by change. That primordial consciousness could be in state '1 or 2,' 'this or that,' or '0 or 1.' That was a change. It could be in 'this' or it could be in 'that.' Well now you have a 'before' and an 'after.' If it could be in 'one' and then it could be in 'another,' then time had just been birthed. But this was primordial time and not regular time at this point. Change defines time. Something that can change has to have time or it can’t change. Nothing can ever change without time. There's always a 'before' and an 'after.' Through this evolution change was happening all along. Change was happening from the pregnant void that erupted into something through the Cellular Automata. All of this is about change. So primordial time is fundamental, and it’s at the very root of existence.

20:26 When the Larger Consciousness System got to inventing a new technology that technology wasn’t really time. It was regular time. It was time that was like a metronome. And that is easy to do if you have cells of 1’s and 0’s. You just flip between cells - 1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0. That’s a metronome. And a metronome keeps time. So the system could create a clock just by flipping between two states. And that clock could then be used to sequence precisely everything else. So that was the invention of regular time. That’s what I’m talking about when I say time was a technology. And that regular time was the technology. That’s how we get to the kind of time that we think of which is tick-tock, tick-tock time.

20.20 This Larger Consciousness System that was evolving had a second big ah-ha moment after the invention of regular time. The LCS was just a monolithic thing that made one choice at a time. It was the single choice maker. One thing making choices is very limited, because you only can really interact with yourself. There are no other choice makers. The next big technological breakthrough of how to grow, how to have more space in which to create, and how to add order to all the available bits was to split itself apart into pieces. And the LCS gave each piece free will. These free will pieces, that I call Individuated Units of Consciousness, could interact with each other. And because each had free will there was no way to tell exactly how those interactions would work out. This created novelty and more possibilities.

22.50 The Larger Consciousness System was not yet a grown up system, and was still in its infancy. But it decided that it needed to break itself into pieces even at that time. And of course we are those pieces; we are those Individuated Units of Consciousness. And no doubt the Larger Consciousness System tried to order those pieces and tried to line those pieces up. It tried to have those pieces sing together in harmony to create more order. And the Larger Consciousness System found out it didn’t work because these pieces had their own free will. When the system said, "All right all you pieces line up and take it from the top. We are going to sing this song today." Some of those pieces said, "Nah don’t want to, I want to go do something else. My friends and I are going to have a conversation or some other thing. Go and sing your own song."

23.52 The LCS, for the first time in its existence, had to deal with other things with free will. It wasn’t just 'the one free will' that made 'the choice.' Now there were all of these other free wills making choices. In the beginning the Larger Consciousness System wanted to dominate, and to manipulate the new free will pieces. It wanted to order its new creation to lower entropy in ways that it thought these pieces could help it construct more content, and more information. But these free will pieces had the free will to just say, "No," and no doubt they did. The Larger Consciousness System had to learn how to deal with other pieces of consciousness whose free wills were just as immutable, and inviolate as its own. And this was a long and difficult process. The consciousness system didn’t come to this conclusion right away as to how to optimize these new pieces with free will. But it had now created a social system with itself in the center and all of these Individuated Units of Consciousness outside of itself. Now we had individuation - individuals. It was, "Here I am." And, "There you are." And, "You are not me, and I am not you." We have this duality of 'me,' and 'not me,' because we have all these other free wills. I suspect that the PMR, the virtual reality that the Larger Consciousness System evolved for us to play in, was probably done before it had learned this lesson of growing up. It was struggling with this just as we struggle with this lesson today. Because it started as potential, just potential, with free will to make choices.

26.08 Consciousness requires time or there is no such thing as a choice. Because a choice defines 'before' and 'after.' Consciousness needs free will because without a free will there are no choices. Free will defines, 'choices exist.' So the system now needed to find ways for its Individuated Units of Consciousness to evolve, grow up, and have experiences. The Larger Consciousness System had the experiences of all the Individuated Units of Consciousness. And the Individuated Units of Consciousness had experiences of each other, but that wasn’t going anywhere very quickly. That’s what I describe as the big chat room where they could pass information back-and-forth. But that’s about all they could do. There weren’t a lot of consequences to that game. So the virtual reality was created that we call our home, which we call our universe, for the Individuated Units of Consciousness to play in.

27.12 The Larger Consciousness System was still in the process of growing up, and it tried to order these IUOCs as they played avatars in our system. This is a bit of conjecture of mine. I explained to a friend of mine, Eric Cunningham who is a professor of history and Catholic Studies at Gonzaga University, this idea of the Larger Consciousness System having to grow up, and having to mature. In a social system of its own creation it found that it had to let the Individuated Units of Consciousness' free will work out whatever way it did. The Larger Consciousness System could not control them. Because you optimize a social system with love and caring, and not with force or manipulation. It hadn’t learned that yet. And as I explained to Eric that the system was still in the process of learning these things, he suddenly said, "Oh that explains a very big mystery that I’ve had for a very long time. There’s this schizophrenia between the New Testament, which is about love and turning the other cheek, and the Old Testament which is about this angry and jealous God. A God that demands things of his people. And those two seem to be completely incompatible with each other." So that got me to thinking as well.

29.20 That was why I said it was conjecture that the Larger Consciousness System produced our virtual reality before it had fully grown up yet. It was something like we are. It was grown up enough so that it could make and build some amazing things just as we can. But the Larger Consciousness System was still full of enough ego and fear not to have grown up yet to the point of becoming Love. Now we have this angry and jealous God turning people, who defy its orders, into pillars of salt and so on. A God who destroyed the enemies of its chosen people. All of this I had previously just written off as men making God in their own image. Men have egos and fears, so they just imagined that was the way God was too - sort of like them. Instead of that being the only possibility now there’s another possibility. The possibility their interactions with the Larger Consciousness System, which ancient people often interpreted as God, was indeed true. You had a Larger Consciousness System with an ego, with fears, and with anger. And who wanted things to be the way it wanted them to be. It was still trying to manage a system with its own overlay of the structure that it thought was best, rather than letting all the pieces just interact however they would. If that’s the case, then that is the transition between the very ancient writings of the Old Testament and the much newer writings of the New Testament. And indeed there might have been an angry, jealous, manipulative, and demanding Larger Consciousness System early on in our beginnings here in this Virtual Reality we call our physical reality. I call it Physical Matter Reality, (PMR.). So I thought that this was a very interesting thought.

31.28 Donna: Would you say that you could apply that conjecture about other ancient beliefs, cultures, myths and things other civilizations experienced going back even further? Also, can you take this Larger Consciousness System’s potential back before it split into Individuated Units of Consciousness, and see that the potential that it contained was given to us as well? In addition could the non-physical Individuated Units of Consciousness explain the stories that you often hear of the fights between good and evil, but perhaps not in those terms? Is that this conflict as well?

32.30 Tom: Yes, if we look at ancient literature often the gods were Gods of War. Gods weren’t necessarily love beings in all of the ancient tales we have. They tended to be a little more demanding, full of ego, fear, and beliefs themselves. The ancient descriptions of men’s gods do tend to fit that pattern a lot more. Of course some of the gods were very benevolent, but then of course so were some of the people. You see we are full of fear, ego, and belief but yet we can produce some beautiful and good things. And we have some terrific philosophies, ideas, and thoughts. Just because this Larger Consciousness System wasn’t grown up yet doesn’t mean that it wasn’t capable of doing some amazing and very productive things. It just means that it wasn’t grown up yet. It could still function on a very high level of creativity and do magnificent things. It could have big thoughts and understand a lot but at what we call our subconscious. It wasn’t necessarily working at the being level. It was working out of its intellectual level. It still had fears, and it still had ego. The Larger Consciousness System was able to create some magnificent things, and some good things like our Virtual Reality, but it also had fears.

34.18 We are a chip of that old block in the fact that the Larger Consciousness System just started as a potential. When it became conscious as a Cellular Automata it had the potential to make choices. We call that free will. This free will could allow it to make bad choices as well as good choices. It was just potential. Potential can go either way. It can de-evolve or evolve - either way. We are chips of that old block. We are pieces of that Larger Consciousness System, and we just have potential. And our potential can also go either way. Here we are pieces of potential in a big chat room, and we’re chatting with each other. Nothing's very difficult, nothing's very hard, nothing's very demanding, and nothing has much consequence. So we get a virtual reality. The system decided to evolve a virtual reality that created more experiences, more ethical and moral choices, more feedback, and more consequences that were important to those individuals.

35.48 Virtual realities started with a ruleset and with the initial conditions that I’ve talked about before in other places. And the Larger Consciousness System let the virtual reality evolve. It played all the characters itself until this evolution produced creatures such as us. Or maybe until evolution created things less than us, such as animals, but things that made choices. Anything that made a choice was something that an Individuated Unit of Consciousness could log into, could run, and could make choices for. When the Individuated Units of Consciousness started making those choices, then the Larger Consciousness System stopped making the choices for that critter - that being.

36.30 Eventually we evolved out of this virtual reality - this simulation. And we have a lot of choices we can make. So entities came in droves. And I think they were very highly encouraged by the system to join this game. They were encouraged to log on, to pick an avatar, and to play that avatar. Think of the transition they went through. They had potential to be whatever they could be. They had never been anywhere except that big chat room. Suddenly they logged on and now they were 100% immersed in this avatar. The only data stream they got was the data produced by this avatar's computed senses. They only got data of what that avatar saw, heard, smelled, felt, tasted, and nothing else. They didn’t take a break and go have lunch, or take other breaks. This was consciousness. They were 100% immersed with no other data stream coming to them except what was created in this virtual reality with their avatar.

37.52 Now suddenly they found themselves out of the chat room and into a place where survival was hard. A place where they had to eat, where other things wanted to eat them, where they needed shelter, where they needed to survive as a species, and where they needed to procreate. They had all sorts of pressures now, and all sorts of things were very difficult. What they developed in response to those pressures was fear. They had to stay alive long enough to procreate, long enough to find food, and long enough to find shelter. So it was a very violent and difficult space to be in. Because that’s just the way things evolved in this big simulator. That was the way the game was played. So when these rather naive Individuated Units of Consciousness suddenly enrolled in this game, that you couldn’t put on pause and walk away from, they began to identify as the avatar. The Free Will Awareness Unit is the part that logs on. And it only came with its quality of consciousness. It didn't come with a memory. And it had no sense of consciousness being anything other than this avatar.

The Free Will Awareness Unit identified as the avatar. And experiences like when it was about to be eaten by something bigger, or when it was about to be killed by another of its own species, (to take the stuff that it had,) or when it had to deal with other things created fear. These pressures created ego. It created the sense of 'I.' I need; I want; and 'I must have.' And it created a lot of beliefs about how to get those things, how to keep those thing, and what you had to do to stay alive. That’s where our fear comes from. It’s because we started as potential. Being consciousness potential in a big chat room doesn’t really dig very deeply into its possibilities, because the interactions are extremely limited. But potential in this virtual reality, as a totally immersed piece of consciousness in an avatar, now that has some possibilities for dramatic choices that were never there before.

40.29 Donna: That draws out the potential to its highest level.

Tom: Right, that really lets that potential express itself in all sorts of ways. But because the environment was so violent and difficult the Free Will Awareness Unit expressed itself in fear. But that being also had caring. It had caring for its children, for its mate, for its tribe, and it had community relationships among its group. There were good things too. It wasn’t just all bad and awful. There were relationships, there were connections, and there was caring at a much, much greater level. The potential for love, commitment, caring, and giving suddenly blossomed tremendously. We got to blossom and to make choices in all these ways. And that’s what makes this place such a great place to grow up. Although our environment isn’t nearly as violent and chancy as it was then, our potential to grow up now is as much as it ever was. Our potential for fear is starting to dissolve a little bit because we don’t live in such a fearful place. But our growing up is a slow, slow process.

42.02 We are in the same process now that the Larger Consciousness System was with Individuated Units of Consciousness in the beginning of Virtual Realities. The Larger Consciousness System had to realize that it formed a social system with us. And the only way the Virtual Reality worked was if the Larger Consciousness System didn’t try to bully, to demand, to impose its will, or to impose its organization on the IUOCs. The Larger Consciousness System had to let the Individuated Units of Consciousness do their own thing, and in their own way. It had to provide a system in which IUOCs had the kinds of choices that would enable them to grow up. You see the Larger Consciousness System couldn’t manage the Physical Matter Reality. It had to let it evolve on its own. And here we were trying to learn the same things the Larger Consciousness System had to learn through us. Now we have to learn it through each other in this environment. It was too hard to learn this in a big chat room. That’s why the Larger Consciousness System was still in the process of learning this when this Virtual Reality was created. Because it wasn’t until this Virtual Reality was created that the ability to really explore the potential for Love and fear bloomed. And the LCS’s growth sped up. It was able to grow up for the same reasons we grow up here. The Larger Consciousness System grew up partly from us being here and trying to interact with us.

43.29 The Larger Consciousness System learned that Love is the answer. It learned that Love is the only thing that works. Caring is the only thing that helps. And with anything else, other than co-operation and Love, that the downside is much bigger than the upside. You just have to let things be. You have to give Individual Units of Consciousness an environment in which they can grow up. And you have to let evolution go pretty much however it goes. You can nudge here and there. You can rearrange the environment some, but you pretty much have to let it go.

44.05 We and the Larger Consciousness System really started to kind of grow up together, although it probably had a big head start. The Larger Consciousness System was already very clever and it created this virtual reality. So it was already pretty much grown up at the intellectual level but not so much at the being level. And it had to grow up at the being level in order to optimize the relationship it now had with the IOUCs. Just as we have to grow up at the being level with each other. We are really doing this together, and the Larger Consciousness System is just a few hundred billion years ahead of us. It just had a head start because it existed for a long time in a slow growth process. It didn’t have a virtual reality to give it traction for its growth.

45.05 That’s how we all evolved together. That’s why we think the Larger Consciousness System now is the system of Love. It’s the core, it’s our source, and its pure Love. It wasn’t always that way. It had to evolve just like we did. It didn’t just somehow pop into being as pure Love because it had potential. The Larger Consciousness System has emotions, has feelings, has intellect, and has a being level. It has all the things we have. And it needed to struggle to grow up, to lower entropy, and to become Love the same as we do. Now it is way ahead of us. And it has given us a better, and better, environment in which to grow up in. Also, it does more nudging now and very little manipulation. It only does nudging, which you might call manipulation, where it doesn’t show and where there’s no trace of it. In other words, instead of a heavy hand it works with a very light touch. A touch that has to be hidden within the uncertainty of the situation. That is kind of how we came to be here.

46.18 Donna: Let’s go back to when the first virtual reality started and we had to survive. I think we have challenges today that are different than just survival challenges. We have very complicated challenges that we have to deal with. Can you address that too? Going back to the chat room, for just a minute, were there non-physical battles and wages for power that would indicate the battle between good and evil?

Tom: Whenever you have free will and a bunch of Individuated Units of Consciousness you are going to find cliques. And cliques become organizations. Because of free will, organizations tend to disagree with each other. There is going to be some that want to go this way and others that think that way is better. And these disagreements will develop into individuals not liking each other very much. Because nobody is very grown up at this point. So yes, you do have this theme of one side versus the other. The side which is higher entropy we call evil, and the side which is lower entropy we call good. But there’s always been this competition for what is basically different points of view, different ways of being, and different ways of interacting with each other. That’s been a theme from the very beginning. It is just natural in a social system that people have differences in opinion. And if they’re not grown up enough to really care and co-operate, then what they do is they pick sides and squabble.

48.30 Donna: So that’s where we get our stories. That’s where we get our conflicts in various cultures and various myths. That’s where all of those things come from. And they would have a thread of truth to them.

Tom: Yes look at our literature, movies, stories, and ancient scripts. You will see that the good versus evil, high entropy versus low entropy, is the number one theme running through all of our existence. It’s the struggle to grow up, a struggle to lower entropy, that’s been going on since Individuated Units of Consciousness existed.

49.20 Donna: You have often talked about the system being an efficient system. And over billions of years the Larger Consciousness System realized that to operate optimally Love was the answer. So it passed along, or tried to pass along, that information to us on how we need to operate in a lower entropy.

Tom: The system did finally grow up pretty much. I suspect the system is still growing up, and it’s still evolving. But the Larger Consciousness System has grown to where when we interact with it now, relative to ourselves anyway, it is a system of Love. It’s a very loving, and very caring system. But again that’s relative to us from our viewpoint. That's relative from ourselves compared to it. We are still a mixed system with an awful lot of fear, belief, and ego. Matter of fact our fear, belief, and ego dominate us. Probably 80-90% of our choices in a day are made out of our ego, fear, and belief. We have a long way to go, but the Larger Consciousness System had a head start on us. It was evolving slowly, but still evolving quite a bit, before it even created Individuated Units of Consciousness. So it did have a big head start.

50.58 We are potential just like the Larger Consciousness System, and that potential has all sorts of possibilities. This virtual reality lets us explore a lot of these possibilities. Now our challenges are different; they’re more complicated, they’re more complex, and they’re not so basic any more. There’s probably a minority of us that have to worry about food and shelter day-by-day. Before it was probably everybody’s problem to find food and shelter day-by-day. Now it’s probably less than half, maybe only a quarter, who are actually wondering day-by-day whether they are going to get enough to eat, are going to freeze to death, or are going find water.

51.46 We have made a lot of progress. As our culture and our technology has grown our problems have changed into much more complex problems. But we are much more able to deal with and understand complex problems. The problems we have to deal with are representative of the culture and the things that we’ve built up to this point. But yes, we are still working out of our fear and ego. We still want to abuse other people, and we still want to take their stuff. There’s still lots of people who spend their whole lives, and their whole jobs, figuring out how they can get money out of your bank account into their bank account. What we call business is how to get people to give you their money. What do you have to do for that? You have to give them a product or promise them something. So that’s where we are now.

52.50 Donna: So these same Individuated Units of Consciousness have been recycling through life experience packets in various PMR’s. Those who have evolved positively and those who have not evolved in a positive way, continue to recycle through this PMR. You mentioned people with not enough food, or the different challenges that people face. Some people have an awareness that if a person is starving in one part of a country, they need to center their life on trying to solve that problem. And there are others who don’t think that there is anything to solve at all. Are we eventually going to realize that in order to evolve positively, and evolve towards Love, that we will have to continually learn to be more loving and caring?

54.20 Tom: Sure, that’s our evolutionary path. As we grow up there will be more people who are co-operative and caring, and there will be less people who are full of fear, ego, and belief. Those people, as you say, who are going round-and-round in multiple experience packets are in general, becoming kinder, gentler, and more evolved. We are much better off now and are more evolved than we were. Look back five hundred years and see how cheap life was. Look back and see how difficult life was and how easy it was to abuse others. And the amount of abuse was on a horrendous scale based on the population. You’ll see that though we have a lot of grievances and abuses today, it’s not nearly at such a scale and level that it used to be. And it's not in the same fashion. People today have more choices than before. So we are growing up. It doesn’t mean that those entities that de-evolve will continue to de-evolve. Many of them will find that de-evolution is not a good path, and they will just have to turn around. They will have to evolve themselves back out of that hole they’ve dug. And that’s the point.

55.30 There is more positive evolution than there is negative de-evolution. And the whole system is growing up slowly. We’re working on it, but evolution is slow. That’s the bad news. The good news is that evolution is also relentless. It never stops. Evolution keeps working even if you take two steps backwards. There is still going to be a pressure to move forward. And eventually we will move forward. We have moved forward. So this relentless thing called evolution doesn’t stop until it evolves us in a positive way. It just keeps up the pressure to do that.

56.17 What is the pressure? Well, if you evolve positively your life gets to be pleasant and full of joy. Positive evolution means life is fun, interesting, exciting, and challenging. You de-evolve and you’re miserable, you’re unhappy, your life's a chore, your life's a struggle, and there’s lots of pain. So it’s the old, "How do you get the donkey to move?" The carrot and the stick are the ways you teach the donkey. The carrot is something good that you entice it with. And if it doesn’t behave, the stick is something that you whack it with. And we’re in that same kind of learning situation. Most learning can be brought down to the carrot and the stick. We have the carrot of peace, joy, co-operation, caring, and more free will. We get more of what we want to do and more of who we want to be. Learning means we have more choice and we have more freedom. Then we have the stick of pain, misery, struggle, unhappiness, and dissatisfaction. And that’s what we get if we de-evolve. Eventually we tend to move toward the carrot and away from the stick.

57.38 Donna: So that’s how the system works most efficiently, if you want to put it in a scientific way and not put it in a fluffy way. You could simply say the Larger Consciousness System has to evolve efficiently.

Tom: Love is the most efficient way for a social system to interact. Anything else is less efficient. Anything else doesn’t work in the long term. And the Larger Consciousness System had to learn that. And we’re in the process of learning that Love is the most efficient way too. Trying to manipulate, force, coerce, and oppose your will on others will raise entropy in the long term. You may think that you’re lowering entropy. "I’m going to get everybody to sing in key, on note, and in three-part harmony. And that will be a good thing." But just fact of forcing function will create more problems than you will gain from the three-part harmony. So in the long term forcing people to do things they don’t want to do, even if you think it’s a good thing for them to do, is a bad thing. It’s you imposing your will of what you think is a good thing to do upon others. And it never turns out to be a good thing to do in the long run. It’s just not efficient or effective. De-evolution doesn’t take you to anything positive. So yes scientifically it will get better. One way is inefficient and dysfunctional, and the other way is efficient and functional. And we have free choice. Eventually we will move to the more functional way. It doesn’t mean that we can’t backslide. It doesn’t mean that we can’t go in reverse and de-evolve for a while. But that pressure to evolve will always be there. And we will always start climbing back up that hill no matter how far we slide down. It’s not a matter of will we get there. It’s a matter of how long will it take.

59.50 Donna: The LCS knows how to best make the system efficient.

Tom: Yes, it’s like the old person in the tribe who has more experience than anybody else. The Larger Consciousness System was around having experiences for eons before the Individuated Units of Consciousness even came on the scene. And it has a bigger picture of understanding things at a much higher level than we do. This bigger picture helps the Larger Consciousness System learn more quickly. That is our goal as well to become very much like that. That’s what we are trying to do. We are trying to emulate that growth and we will eventually. Because that’s the only way that works. The system had to find that out the same hard way as we have to find it out. There is no free lunch here. The system didn’t start as a being of love. It started as consciousness that had to grow up just like we do.

60.55 Donna: And experience is something you speak about all the time. Experience is exactly what we need in order to come to this conclusion for ourselves.

Tom: Right if it’s not your experience, it’s not your truth.

1. Indra's net (also called Indra's jewels or Indra's pearls, Sanskrit Indrajāla) is a metaphor used to illustrate the concepts of Śūnyatā (emptiness), pratītyasamutpāda (dependent origination), and interpenetration in Buddhist philosophy. The metaphor was developed by the Mahayana school in the 3rd century Avatamsaka Sutra and later by the Huayan School between the 6th and 8th centuries. Wikipedia
Last edited by Sainbury on Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
dtally
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by dtally »

In this video when talking about the evolution of the LCS, Tom talks about how the LCS might have tried to force the IUOC's to behave a certain way but learned that it needed to let them make their own choices. If the LCS is just the combination of all IUOC's, how can it tell it's pieces what to do and they refuse? I'm confused as it sounds like the LCS is actually separate from the IUOC's.
I'm Not Who I Am, I'm What I'm Doing
User avatar
Sainbury
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 6578
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: Ocala, FL
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Sainbury »

There is a hierarchy in the LCS. The Big Cheese is an example of that. Management has tried many things to see what would work, and what won't. Tom has said that there used to be a lot more interference in this PMR. But, that it was found that it was more effective to just let the PMR evolve as it may. Now there is more nudges than anything else.
dtally
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by dtally »

Thanks, I see my problem now. I thought Tom meant the LCS was trying to control all IUOC's, not just the ones here in PMR. I don't know why I thought that since he was talking about religion here in PMR.
I'm Not Who I Am, I'm What I'm Doing
BlankMind
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:18 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by BlankMind »

I think that Tom said that the LCS tried to control IUOCs when it first evolved IUOCs.

But Tom's new theory is that the LCS maybe was not highly grown up yet when it first created PMRs. So maybe it was still in the process of learning these lessons at the time of creating the first PMRs
dtally
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by dtally »

BlankMind wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:43 pm I think that Tom said that the LCS tried to control IUOCs when it first evolved IUOCs.
If he did actually say that then I'm still confused. I will have to re-watch the video.
I'm Not Who I Am, I'm What I'm Doing
BlankMind
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:18 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by BlankMind »

I understand your question though. The LCS is a complex thing to comprehend. I am very excited to continue exploring how all of this works
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Ted Vollers »

I think that Tom said that the LCS tried to control IUOCs when it first evolved IUOCs.
The LCS did not 'deliberately' evolve IUOCs. IUOCs evolved based upon Emergence and self organization which are natural properties of extremely large and complex systems. Things began to happen deliberately only after The One Consciousness developed which in its first stage was called AUO or the Absolute Unbounded Oneness. This information is in Tom Campbell's original trilogy but not clearly spelled out in full. Read Tom's Model of Reality for a statement of this development and more as to explain further here would involve too much posting or leave out too much information.
http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/The_MBT_Model_Link_Page

Ted
dtally
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by dtally »

You are correct, at 23:00 in the video Tom says it split itself into pieces. I take that to mean that it is now many rather than one. If the whole no longer exists how can it try to control the pieces?
I'm Not Who I Am, I'm What I'm Doing
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Ted Vollers »

This process is explained on the link you were referred to.

The LCS was not one thing as a union when this splitting apart occurred. It was the reality cells and data which through Emergence and self organization changed into the IUOCs in their first primitive forms which actually United the LCS by creating the IUOCs and the RWW over which they could communicate over the whole of the LCS. Prior to this stage of development, data could only travel in short straight lines until it collided with other data creating mutual destruction.

If you would condescend to read the link you are referred to, all of this is explained there instead of having to explain in short pieces as lack of understanding is shown.

Ted
dtally
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by dtally »

In this video at 21:20 (I believe he says it other places too) Tom said that the one monolithic thing only has only 1 free will choice at a time and can only interact with itself, so it deliberately split itself into pieces/IUOC's and gave each piece free will.

I understand what the books & Wiki say which is why I'm confused about what he is saying now.
I'm Not Who I Am, I'm What I'm Doing
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Ted Vollers »

The LCS as Tom Campbell is speaking about it here is one monolithic thing as a Cellular Automaton. A cellular automaton is the reality cells and their contained data which interacts by its own special rule set. It can certainly only interact with itself. If you could refer me specifically to what and where Tom Campbell said what you are referring to, I could more accurately interpret its precise meaning. If you go to the version of the trilogy on Google Books and search for cellular automaton, you will find only one reference. Tom Campbell has explained how he left this kind of very technical reference out of his books and only referenced them indirectly and without explanation in the last part of his last book of the trilogy.

When Tom's Wiki was first created, it kind of fell to me to generally supervise its filling with data and to provide much of that data myself. I asked Tom about the problem of providing references to sources and he told me that since in many cases, only he and I had this information at that time, we could only reference ourselves. Tom left it to me to do while he was busy with other things, just as it still is today. I spent a lot of time writing the first version of the Model as it shows in the Wiki today and then I passed it to Tom for his comments and corrections. There has been a lot of water over the dam and illness on my part since then and I have not gone back on my computer to find the old original data files that we passed back and forth then in this iterative process of writing up this more technical version of Tom's model. My general memory is that Tom did not find many errors or correction that he chose to make when I expanded his metaphors in his books into more technical terms as he hinted at in the back of the last book. I was taking the technical description as far as I could at the time to be as complete as possible versus the trilogy which was written to be understood metaphorically by non technical people, not mathematicians or scientists, as you may remember. I also added other materials which I had been led to study during my life by LCS guidance, among which were Indra's Net which spoke to ancient origins of the metaphorically equivalent model of Reality and Cellular Automata, starting with cellular automata in an article in Scientific American I read as a teenager in high school.

I can't find a reference to that article at the moment or spend a lot of time chasing it down. I have referred to it here on the board and possibly on the Wiki before. Here is one article on the development of CA studies prior to this time and probably through it as well. The article I refer to was not by one of the mathematicians involved in the origination of CA research but someone who came to it later. http://psoup.math.wisc.edu/491/CAorigins.htm Unfortunately the search engines of today have had their algorithms changed over the past year to produce searches which leave you lost in a widening circle of confused articles peripherally related to what you search for rather than homing in on what you specifically search for as they once did so that article I first read on CAs would require a lot of looking to find again. Before the big search engine change, I found the article I sought on the first page of the search results. I had saved that issue but that was lost decades ago in my life time of moves and changes.

So my version created for the Wiki of Tom's Model of Reality uses different metaphors and as much science and mathematics, although still at a technical understanding but not a scientist/physicists or mathematician persons level. I was a retired engineer turned mystic and metaphysician rather than a still working scientist like Tom who was still working for NASA in an advisory/management level on space systems design. So some of the metaphors have/must change for the different purposes in which they were presented but Tom Campbell was most certainly involved in a supervisory role in the writing of that model and it is Tom's model, not my model. So I want to see the actual writeup of what you are stating from Tom in a presentation to see how they correlate with the more technical write up of the Wiki.

The Wiki model is based upon an information system as the model for the LCS developing consciousness while Tom's earlier metaphors were more based upon a free form development strictly in non technical terms that were open to readers and listeners who had no mathematical or scientific background at all. So the LCS changes from the metaphor of consciously and deliberately splitting up to create the IUOCs to the mathematical model of a vast information system naturally, no consciousness required, metaphor of Emergence and Self Organization as studied in mathematics and science of vastly large systems, whether information systems or studied as the distribution of tree and other vegetation species in forests or studied as the structure of coastlines of the oceans of earth. They all show signs of Emergence and Self Organization in their natural development.

So instead of the metaphorical development of The One Consciousness in a general and amorphous development of consciousness, we change to a more detailed process based on known mathematical processes of CAs, Emergence and Self Organization of Information Systems. This places the development of Consciousness later as the IUOCs have been United to start their free will interaction which still amorphously and metaphorically leads to actual Consciousness as opposed to consciously 'splitting apart' to create the IUOCs. The natural mathematical processes lead to the creation of the IUOCs and the RWW to connect and Unite them into what could now become The One Consciousness. This is a more detailed version but is still limited to what we have managed to understand to date while as I have pointed out, this model needs to be taken further to create an explanation of how time and data flow works in the LCS to explain the three data bases which can be visualized as to their creation in the present state of this model but not to explain how they can be accessed and information brought forwards from the past and also backwards from the future to make it available NOW as we know it to be in the VRs as our avatars memories do function and we, some of us anyway, do have access to the probable future as it changes as it approaches the now moment of the VRs. And it is I who am working on these things while Tom does what only he can do instead. He has only so much time in a day despite his ability to expand his time by slipping into NPMR to expand his available 'thinking' time. This while I plod along more slowly in the old fashioned way in one VR, PMR, at a time. I do get suggestions from the LCS as before I went to sleep last, I did not think about creating this long explanation while when I woke after 2 AM to do the board backup, I have this explanation generally in my mind and only need to do the detailed explanation in words for posting.

Ted
VirtualBrain
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by VirtualBrain »

dtally wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:00 pm In this video at 21:20 (I believe he says it other places too) Tom said that the one monolithic thing only has only 1 free will choice at a time and can only interact with itself, so it deliberately split itself into pieces/IUOC's and gave each piece free will.

I understand what the books & Wiki say which is why I'm confused about what he is saying now.
It is perhaps both. AUO having developed from cellular automata. Maybe this is the event which caused the evolution from AUO into AUM. All That Is pushing itself to a new level of organization. AUO(undifferentiated oneness) dies(transitions) in the process of splitting and AUM being born as the union of IUOCs. Reincarnation and evolution on a large scale. At the same time All That Is is still All That Is, an entity in and of itself.

I’m not sure I’m seeing where the discrepancy is.
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by Ted Vollers »

I may come back to edit and add to this if I haven't gotten the full idea of the scope intended as I have not yet listened to the full video linked. However at present, about half way through, what Tom Campbell is doing is that he has finally decided that at least a significant part of his followers watching videos are ready to be introduce to the fuller and more technical version of his Model of Reality as on his Wiki versus the deliberately more simplified version for ease of understanding in his trilogy.

This means that Tom pushes back to earlier in the time sequence of the development of the LCS, the details of what we can say about the development of the LCS and The One Consciousness. This means that he includes ancient metaphysics as in Indra's Net visions of ancient Indian mystics and metaphysicians which I have experienced and included in the Wiki Model. This is what the LCS actually provides itself to those who ask it how it all began. Tom also includes Emergent Complexity as the basis for the splitting up of the original all one thing of the LCS as a Cellular Automaton, just as I explained in my post above. It remains a cellular automaton, but it now has a pattern within it as the result of emergent complexity, creating all of the IUOCs that are now both divided by and interconnected by the RWW to produce the Unity of all the LCS as IUOCs. This versus the deliberate splitting up of itself as in the books.

The LCS was all one thing originally but with only local communication as a CA while now it is all one thing and United as never before by the communication path created by the LCS. Before there was only local, short range, communication but now all is United by this new communications web of the Reality Wide Web which allows long range, end to end of the LCS, communication and not just short range.

Ted
VirtualBrain
Power Poster
Power Poster
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Origins of Consciousness; a New Look at MBT

Post by VirtualBrain »

Ted, so if I understand you correctly, your saying it wasn’t a deliberate splitting but rather a byproduct of emergent complexity of the CA, thus creating all the IUOCs. Is this correct?

Also, how did the formation of IUOCs result in the long distance communication you mention? I’m assuming the RWW was formed at the same time thus creating the LCS, is this correct?

Also what is the difference between the LCS and AUM if any?
Post Reply

Return to “Tom's Interviews, Lectures, and Workshops”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests