Archetyper: To know the Program and the Programmer of Everything

I have just come across another definition of an Archetype from this site:

"An archetype is an unlearned tendency to experience things in a certain way. The archetype has no form of its own, but it acts as an "organising principle" on the things we see or do."

How could something that has no form act as an organizing principle? A formless function?

Surely there is something very elusive here. If its some kind of "algorithm" or function that runs the universe, then I want to know the "programmer" as much as I want to know the "program".

As you can see, the Archetyper Blog is an account of the search for that primal essence, that fabric of truth behind the universe we experience.
This is an adventure of the mind. Join me in the journey. We might just get there!

Both The Ghost and The Machine

I have come across a wonderful article by Jonah Lehrer (editor of Seed Magazine) about the mind and reductionism.
The article calls for a new method to understand Consciousness, and to move beyond reductionism.
The other points of the article are extracted and shown below:

- Reductionism alone cannot answer the question of where the self or the mind comes from.
- The whole is best understood in terms of the whole
- You and I are "epiphenomenon"

Now, we come to the Archetyper's classic extraction of 'archetypes' from this article:

"Look at a Beethoven symphony. If the music is reduced to wavelengths of vibrating air -- the simple sum of its physics -- we actually understand less about the music."

"The mind is like music."

"Our consciousness...feels like more than the sum of its cells...we feel like the ghost, not like the machine."

"Neuroscience has effectively investigated the sound waves, but it has missed the music."

"How does our pale gray matter become the Technicolor cinema of consciousness? What transforms the water of the brain into the wine of the mind? Where does the self come from?"

Now what does the Archetyper say in response to the article itself? Well, its simply that the Mind is The Ghost and The Machine entwined together. The Mind, like Light, is both a wave and a particle. It is not Mind-Body Duality, rather it is Mind-Body Singularity - The Mind and Body is One.
As such, simultaneous research innovations in BOTH the science of machine "deconstruction" or reductionism, as well as unconventional "wholistic" analysis of emergent entities like the mind is necessary to truly understand Consciousness. Balance is the key. Like Yin and Yang, the clue is both the brain itself and the mind; its the form and the function together. Both the analytic prowess of the Left hemisphere and the creative genius of the right hemisphere must both be employed and put to work together to understand the enigma of the mind.

link: www.latimes.com

Tornado in a Junkyard : An Example of an Error in Analogy

We often use analogies to drive a point, specially if we want to convince someone of an idea. If the agenda comes first, it often ends up in the peril of the one who wants to convince others. Let me give an example:
Someone who wants to argue that life in the cosmos must not have arisen spontaneously used the analogy that a tornado in a junkyard would never be able to assemble a 747 jet. Truly a visceral analogy, but sadly flawed, and silly to support its "agenda". It may have failed in the details of the idea it was trying to debunk: Natural Selection takes much much longer than a fleeting tornado, and the steps of evolution are many and not just one tornado swoosh. Also the tornado in the junkyard is pure chance, while natural selection is a combination of random and order: combinations of features in organisms are retained in the next generation because the parent survived (of course).
So there's an "analogical error" that occurs when an "agenda" comes first prior to formulating an analogy. This is what I want to avoid.
Central to "archetyping" is to stumble upon the meaning from an observed pattern before a "conclusion" is made. No agendas. "Archetyping" is meant to simply find meaning from patterns - to uncover the "message" from the archetypes without bias. And all the while, careful thought is given to details to avoid errors in analogy, metaphors, abstractions and paradigms.
I have written this post not only to remind and caution myself from such errors, but also to slowly solidify the concepts behind the idea of Archetyper.com - an exciting journey to uncover some awesome wonderful Truth.

Smudges on the Glass for Clouds in the Sky

One of the most important theories in Astronomy developed in the past 15 years -- one that won a Nobel Prize -- could be toppled by just a simple analogy: Like Smudges on the Glass.
A recent article on Wired tells about how a lone Astronomer named Gerrit Verschuur, challenges a theory of how galaxies grew from packets or "seeds" of hydrogen in the very early universe. NASA scientists led by George Smoot announced in 1992 that their CoBE satellite had imaged the ultimate baby pictures of the universe, revealing the seeds. Like acorns growing into oak trees, they theorized, those seeds grew into galaxies like the Milky Way.
However, Verschuur's research asserts that the seeds are not located on the edge of the universe at all. Rather, he says, the so-called seeds are just previously unmapped clouds of "neutral hydrogen" gas located inside the Milky Way. In other words, astronomers who mistook the "seeds" for objects on the edge of the universe are like someone who looks outdoors through a window and mistakes smudges on the glass for clouds in the sky.

Symmetry and Archetypes: Its a Small Universe !

Carl Sagan said that "there's something terribly beautiful, austere, glorious, majestic about the fact that the same laws apply everywhere". This is called Symmetry - a property of our universe where the laws of nature are the same in all parts of the cosmos (except inside the singularity, perhaps).
This post mainly shows the connection between the laws of nature and universal concepts. The Laws of Nature include the laws of physics, atomic laws, chemical laws, and so on. And the universal concepts are the archetypes.
Cosmic Laws and Universal Concepts are linked via Emergence. Let us follow the chain of emergence: The laws that govern the most basic elementary 'particles' give way to the behavior of atoms which follow atomic laws, producing molecules that follow chemical laws, which made possible the emergence of biological life, animals and ecosystems, which supported the evolution of conscious beings - able to perceive and ponder itself via concepts and paradigms. These concepts and archetypes are very similar to Plato's Forms, and they will be perceived by any intelligent and sentient being in another part of the universe, by way of symmetry.
There will be a difference in language, of course, but nevertheless, these Archetypes or Platonic "Forms" will be understood, in one way or another. Like Mathematics, there will be a common ground between us and sentient beings that live thousands of light-years away in another galaxy. If its just distance that separates us from extra-terrestrials, but they are only a "thought" away, then it means that Symmetry makes the universe seem smaller. Its a small world universe after all. :)

2-Minute String Theory Introduction loaded with Archetypes

I've often mentioned String Theory as one theory that hinges upon a simple string to understand the inner fabric of the universe. Amazing what the power of archetypes can do! Check out this 2-minute introduction of what String Theory is and notice the process of archetyping involved to make an otherwise abstract idea into a simple concept, easy to understand and even seeds more ideas.

The Song, Self, Soul and Spirit

I remember a transposer software that automatically generates the chords in a different key for a song. Transposing is useful as it helps us sing a song at a more comfortable pitch if the song is either too high or too low for the range of our voice.
Why is it that even if one raises or lowers the key, one can still recognize the song? Regardless of which octave it is on, the distinct character of the song is retained. This property brings one thing to my mind - each one of us is a song.
We all have our unique character, personality and identity. Its what we call the self in philosophical terms or the soul in spiritual jargon. Is it possible to preserve or extend the "self" even when the material substrate from whence the mental life arises is destroyed? It cannot be denied that the brain supports much of our consciousness. Marked changes to the brain from injuries, drugs, strokes, senelity, surgery or illnesses such as Alzheimer's literally changes the mind. How can one's sentient life and consciousness can be regenerated, extended or even resurrected if it depends on a fragile piece of crumpled meat? Let us explore a premise : There is some sort of a "metadata" repository of an individual's moment by moment slice of consciousness through time. Our very existence leaves behind trails of information regarding our "self". A history. Consider this scenario : If all of my very self, my soul, and everything that makes me who I am - past, present and future - were laid out flat and static as one long page of musical piece frozen in time (think of Julian Barbour's Time). Now if a Superbeing that transcends all dimensions were to change bits of the past chords of my life and rearrange notes here and there, then my soul's "DNA" loses the unique essence of who I am - it would be the utter destruction to my soul. Every single bit of past experiences has molded the "me" in it's entirety. The choices I made in the past shaped my identity. Had I chosen different decisions, I might have been a different "me" - another song with a different tune.
Throughout life, an individual's soul is being written out on this current octave- the physical world. Each day is like a musical bar, and every minute we are leaving 'notes' as the universe records the 'musical piece' of our soul. Whether we like it or not, our very existence leaves behind trails of information regarding our "self" as time goes by. Could it be really true that each one of us will eventually give an account of one's life? For if there's a record, then it can definitely be played back by the superintellect who owns such a "database" (Heb. 4:13, Ecc 12:14).
Time goes by, i.e, it "moves forward" because there might be another octave that everything is destined to move into - a higher key, a higher dimension (such concepts of higher dimensions already have a mathematical description used in the field of String Theory that they call the Calabi-Yau Space). In that higher plane, it may be possible to completely regain our personality, memories, consciousness, and mental life. Somewhat like 'porting' or transposing the 'self' into a higher platform. Could resurrection really be possible? Only if Someone 'ports' our soul, a Cosmic Musician who must transpose everything for us to ever get a shot at a future life.
Is there something beyond for us? Or is there nothing at all? Something or Nothing, Eternal or Ephemeral. Its our choice what to believe now, but whichever is our choice, that is our faith.
But if one is still challenged by the question of life beyond death or the even existence of a personal self to begin with, then perhaps the Song metaphor will give an insight. Each individual is a song.
It is amazing how a glimpse of some understanding about the human soul can be gleaned from the field of music. As Ludwig von Beethoven said, "Music is a higher revelation than philosophy." Indeed, music has been providing insights throughout the ages over mysteries of nature. We hear phrases such as "harmonies of nature", "music of the spheres", and "Cosmic Symphony". Its no wonder why String Theory, which probes the very fabric of the universe is hinging upon the metaphors provided by music. Our universe simply screams of such archetype patterns for us not to notice.

Computation: A Tool to Decipher Nature's Patterns

If you've ever wondered about the shape of seashells and how the patterns on their outer shell came to be, then its worth to revisit "A New Kind of Science" (NKS) from Stephen Wolfram. Using the sheer power of computation to model the inner details behind nature's shape-making processes, Wolfram has provided a breakthrough insight to learn how shapes and patterns arise in nature. NKS, together with its software Mathematica gives a toyful learning environment to play with the inner workings of nature. With Cellular Automata, we discover that nature follows some pretty simple basic rules to come up with interesting patterns, such as those of the seashell.
Complex as our world may seem, it runs on basic discreet laws that can be deciphered. This idea is in unison with the focus of Archetyper.com - to recognize patterns, basic laws and simple rules within different emergent levels of the natural world. This task ignites the sense of wonder and awe that comes with living in a universe as mysterious as ours, and provides a continuous stream of insight to understand our world better.