A Brain without Spirit

It has been possible to broadly study the anatomy of the brain. The way the chemicals influence the personality demystifies the dark matter of human anatomy which is the study of the brain. Despite leaps in the scientific approach to the study of the brain there is a fundamental aspect which holds the most important organ in darkness. It is the existence of mind. There are diverse definitions of the mind. One is that it is a stored warehouse of emotions and thoughts that could not be expressed over time. Another definition points out that the mind is tantamount to consciousness without which the brain would be rendered numb. There are dualistic theories and materialistic theories of the mind. The dualists liken the mind to the spirit while the materialists hold the hypothesis that the mind can be reduced to organic terms, which supports 'Medical Science'. If the mind were to be a spirit then the phenomenon of memory defies it. If the mind were to be a spirit then why is it that some people lose memory when they are alive? It has been testified as one grows older that memory becomes weak in many cases because the brain maybe decaying. This contradicts the dualistic theory.

Let us take the materialistic view where the mind is supposed to be reducible to matter. If the mind is nothing but a physical component then what triggers the flow of chemicals? Why is there something called ‘personality’? Why are there individual differences in the consequence called ‘personality’? There are answers to these questions. Chemicals, personality and differences are explained by the materialist in that they are consequences of a complex process of conditioning. This conditioning is the result of responses to stimuli from the environment. They start off as instinctive responses in infants and are later expressed with sophistication which is the result of the norms that are observed. As emotions get more and more channelized and as there are many responses possible a person reacts in a predictable manner which is the result of self-programming.

The fact that personality is a complex mechanism is because it has taken years to construct it in the first place. We do not have the means to factor in the number of variables that go into the formation of personality. But it is not the result of involuntary calculation. It is more to do with manipulation which the determinists hold to be predictable due to predispositions which have nothing to do with the existing life time. In this manner they account for the existence of a spirit which is beyond the brain. But this to me is not convincing as the spirit cannot be conscious without a brain on one hand and it cannot have any personality to carry forward to a brain because memory itself is prone to destruction in the same lifetime. There are enough reasons to account for personality in one life time. Just because it is complex does not mean that there is a spirit beyond the brain. At the same time we cannot jump to the conclusion that there is no spirit at all. Why is that? The spirit itself can be the consequence of the way a human being finds himself forced to manoeuvre his way through the events of the world. The spirit can be that very personality which is the result of a defense mechanism. It is deeper than ‘ego’ and more subversive than matter but it does not precede matter.  It could be in other words the last stage of the evolution of matter. It could be a creative product of the limitations of matter. 

A brain can still function without the existence of the spirit but the spirit cannot exist without the brain. The spirit can be thought to be an abstract reaction to the experience of existence. It is the seat of personality as the latter can be observed while the former can only be inferred. Whether this inference is valid or not cannot be determined by the existing instruments of Science as neither memory nor abstract experience can be observed by them. But what can be inferred is that there is a creative response at some point where instinctive reaction is curbed and diverted. Scientists are still grappling with the phenomena of creativity and do not have access to the variables in question. Or maybe they are just limited by what they know. There is some unlearning required without which the education that we undergo itself can be an enemy to progress.

When the Clock Stops Ticking

It has been observed that animals like human beings read time and consider it a valuable resource. Time is determined by the changes that happen to us and to our surroundings. Although this is an imprecise definition it must be known that without observable changes to us and the environment, ‘time’ would not have any meaning whatsoever. ‘Time’ in other words thrives on change for its survival to the extent that without understanding ‘change’ we cannot fully comprehend or measure it. If we were to represent ‘time’ we have to spot out the changes that take place along the frames of life. But why do we actually give so much importance to time? Is it to measure ‘change’ or is it because it adds meaning to our lives? Time exists independent of whether we make use of it or not. Change cannot be denied by inaction. To deny would itself involve some change. Therefore time to a greater or lesser extent is undeniable.

Although we are gripped by time we use it as a tool to measure our progress. It has been documented in history that time was measured through nature, and living beings would prepare for a rainy day in a systematic manner as do the ants and birds. It is, as must be quickly noted that just because we have not overcome ‘time’, we cannot be said to have cause to believe that it is ‘all pervasive’. But if we take it that we have clearly not conquered its movement we can at least ensure that it does not cause us a great amount of anxiety to get through with life. The fear of temporariness as caused by time makes us experience a reduced amount of ‘pleasure’. If we listen to music we are scared that the time will pass off quickly thus preventing us from fully relishing the melodies. To the grave extent that it makes us sit on the edge we cannot believe that we have managed time.

The phrase ‘Time Management’ is in my view a misnomer if we do not know what to do when there is not enough time.   We cannot manage time without having a grip of it. We cannot mange it without ever planning in advance. Time as an agent of change does not convey the real essence of the relationship which exists between a human being and nature. As our approach to it is truncated we draw a circle and do not move out of that circle. We are not only able to read time but fit in it and accept it as the ultimate reality that governs us. We have no idea of what it is like when time stops as we have never experienced timelessness. We would need to resort to time to measure it which is self-defeating. In a ‘flow’ experience where we enjoy what we do, we are unaware of the passage of time. In meditation we may experience the impotence of time where we to some extent lose consciousness of it. Only when the mind is not gripped by time can we truly say that we are not harassed by its movement in one direction. This may also explain why we tend to have reduced peripheral vision when we are as anxious to come to grips with the pace of time as we are when the clock stops ticking.   

   

The Minute and the Cosmic

In the grass grows the temptation
Lying by the fire on the other side
Creeping slowly upon the edges of twigs
I find myself floating in heaven
A gentle breeze helps me along
I no longer cling to vacant feelings
Moments blown away by the breeze
Like colorful candles with fading light
I move slowly it appears to me
In another world I could care less about
Then you come along with hopeful cherries
I could try one despite hesitation
Find myself unable to get up
Deprived of the joy of levitation
I relish having lost the world below
It's floors above where I am
Take me along the free runway
The pain of having to stop the world
Seems like a dead illusion to my mind.

The Path Never Taken

The question of choice comes into play only when there is what we may call ‘Will’. To say the least it is invariably taken for granted because to an extent that no one can deny it, freewill exists. We can discuss in length about the role of determinism to subjugate freewill but even this in objective reality at least is an exercise of freewill. Instead of pursuing a circular argument let us open our eyes to the process of ‘becoming’ and ‘doing’. As ‘becoming’ and ‘doing’ are possible only with existence and traceable only to the actions of the doer, the one who does is held accountable for them. But if freewill is itself subject to a form of determinism called predetermined ‘tendency’ then it is negated and the individual cannot be held accountable. As a consequence there is no actor as action assumes significance only when it is recognized as being done by somebody. Choice is possible only when its precursor is singled out as being done by somebody who before chose to do it when he could have done something else. 

However, it is equally important to recognize that actions are not isolated within a framework of limits and as such have their cause traceable to someone outside the ‘doer’. This leads to the question of ‘constructed paths’. It does not follow that individual freewill alone exists.  This does not mean that determinism existed prior to the individual for it could also imply that determinism is the result of ‘one action’. For example; in Chess one move can decide the result of the game. This means that determinism follows freewill in such a context. If we for one moment shift our attention from the one who chooses to the one chosen we may be able to throw more light on the subject in the end. 

But this will not be possible till we understand the path that is less taken or the choice that was never made. In the path less taken the individual makes a decision to not follow the herd instinct. He chooses to take a path less ‘tried out’. He may at some point go through feelings of regret that influence his ability to link the action to himself, ‘the doer’. Choices can be made only when they are available. He could only make a limited set of choices. This mistake is a perspective born out of feelings of regret. If more choices are available it is difficult to predict what the outcome will be. If one chooses to pursue trading as a career option then he could have chosen this either as an initiative or as a reaction.    If he feels happy about his decision because it has given him the much needed stability from the perspective of his career then he has no motivation to associate the decision to opt for trading with some force outside him. This is simply because the decision took off favourably. If the same individual chooses to pursue ‘Visual Communication’ because it sounds unconventional then he may be mistaken as he cannot choose it just because it sounds unconventional. He must have some aptitude for it to make some sense. 

Let us suppose that his actual talent lies in an interdisciplinary subject in the humanities and not in visual communication. But such an interdisciplinary option does not exist. He then feels forced to pursue ‘Visual Communication’ because he has to opt for some unconventional career. He restricts his choices but largely the choices that he can make have to be within the framework. He will not know the fruits of his choice till he pursues it with full rigour. The path less taken has benefits as long as it is an informed choice. If it is made just to be different then the path less taken may not yield favourable results. If on the other hand you have some talent in an unconventional subject then one of the biggest benefits that you could get is a unique identity. The choices that you make first will take you to a framework where there will also always be a limited set of choices only. If you want to break free from all frameworks you need to construct your own path which may well be a path that was never taken. This is psychologically a path of no return.             

On Separation

Birth into a world is like being dropped in a well of differentiation. Unusual as this may seem without this differentiation of the entity there can be no transaction with the world. The other objects are differentiations but this does not mean that they are held together by an invisible chain. What holds objects in the well together is this very differentiation itself. Differentiation creates space as an actuality which is why two beings are held together by the same feeling. Birds from the tree that drop dead because of the heat are separated from life. They do not move out of the well but are finished in it by the hostility which is different in personification from wrath. A being that laughs at death usually is removed from life displaced in the evergreen inactivity of indifference. The hope that joy brings is separated from despair and sorrow.

When you befriend someone then you are united by the thought of insecurity. This insecurity may or may not grow as the friendship grows. Depending on the nature of ‘attachment’ formed this insecurity forms a web that holds the two as objects. The web gets cut off only when the friendship deteriorates to a point when insecurity turns to dust. The only hope out of this possibility of separation is the realization of the possibility of separation as an actuality. This in reality is a supra-virtual fact. Unless it is it is not. The fear of losing a friend will remain as long the two individuals remain friends. This also explains why there is no attempt to become strangers to each other again by undoing the friendship. When friendship is feigned to be undone what remains is the reason for wanting to undo it and therefore in reality this is an impasse. The two shared a space recorded in the memory of objective reality and therefore there is no question of undoing the friendship. The insecurity is lost because the two do not wish to restore communication as friends. The friendship that existed in the past prevents the two from being strangers once again. 

In impulse a friend cannot exist as an informal commitment because it is an impulse. It cannot exist as an impulse as the desire is to commit. This self-contradiction is what causes separation which is the fear of togetherness. The fear of being together fuels separation and the fear of separation nourishes friendship. The impulse has done away with itself to transform the nothingness of a relationship into a value ascribed by human possibility. Making the best out of vacuum is the space that is created for events to happen. To call this vacuum as a precious creation is to undermine the events that happen in it. This causes self-contradiction which consistency and steadfastness use as a fear to sustain themselves. In the blank space there are only particles that you can use and in turn get used to resolve the condition of black-outs. It is only in a black-out that the conflict of separation gets finally resolved.

Lost Souls in the Woods (Poem)

Are you feeling the joy that kills you?
I call out your name and all I see is blue
The love that should have been yours
Turns to vapour filled with chores
I am the only man you can talk to.

Do you lurk in the corner of death?
Filled with mountains of explosive regret?
The cold that hides you in disease
Gives you relief through release
You wake up to know only what you see.

The man lives in the woods somewhere
To give him company you need to go there
The animals die to give both of you way
The only man to give you company is not here to stay
The only man to give you company will soon go away.

I call out your name now in a frenzy
The reply I get is crazy;
My brain is rotting for lack of difference
But I can see you in the corner of free exuberance.
I get to see you from grace to the blues
I get to see you in all that I choose.

The Basis of Cotard Delusion

There are not entirely uncommon cases in Science when a person feels that he is a stone and that he is devoid of life. The medical pragmatist tended to call this a delusion but it is quite possible for one to suddenly feel lifeless. Feeling lifeless is not a low feeling or a catatonic spell. Although it could be a delusion, the feeling of lifelessness by itself is a valid experience. If it is a form of madness then like Michel Foucault said; “madness is the déjà la of death” (from Madness and Civilization). But there is a difference as there is absolutely no anticipation of reality in a person with Cotard delusion. Let me explain why I chose this topic. One point I can make for choosing it is that its experience shakes the foundation of what we commonly call reality. We experience the life of every sensation that breathes through our veins. It is for this reason that it is quite complicated a matter to define life. It would be better to resort to a more pathological perspective just to escape the metaphysical implications of this state.

The Cotard syndrome is considered to be a negation delirium. It occurs when a person has a delusional belief that he is dead which is why it is also called walking corpse syndrome. One may feel that one’s existence does not exist. The negation of oneself is treated as a consequence of existence itself. Of course it is distinct from other states such as derealisation and depersonalization. The first hint at what it means to not have life is typically boredom. In boredom one feels a lack of excitement. This lack of excitement is a state one is usually conscious about. In the case of someone with Cotard delusion the experience of lifelessness or death is not a state to be conscious of. It might be argued that this state cannot be discussed or explained by someone without this syndrome. Martin Heidegger talks about how boredom reveals the totality of existence and how boredom takes you away from the trivial and the ordinary. As long as one is conscious of something there must be life.

Supposing you walk in a garden and suddenly feel disconnected from your surroundings and your thoughts then what are you left with? You may be left with consciousness but if you are then you cannot experience lifelessness then because what takes you back to your surroundings is your consciousness. In case you lose consciousness of your own consciousness then you experience the black out of sensory perception. In this situation you cannot continue walking, clinically ‘alive’. The active cogito-reflex is absent and so is the negation of it. In such a state one is alive only to the surroundings but not to oneself. There is no self as the cogito-reflex is dead and this experience is perceived medically to be the Cotard syndrome. It is called a delusion because it is not enough for the self to deny its existence but also for the objective reality to do so.

In case someone continues living just for self/body-preservation then he is said to be in a state of ennui rather than lifelessness. The state of ennui is the affirmation of the meaninglessness of life but not death of life. The negation is not achieved in ennui but is achieved by someone with the negation delirium. The ennui afflicted individual treats experiences as a passenger would in a train. He would experience the Doppler Effect and other cascading effects and lose them as they go out of sight. The Cotard syndrome may be called the anti-solipsistic fallacy where there is someone to say that he does not exist. There is something to say there is nothing and therefore nothingness denies itself. As it is not enough for someone to say that he does not exist and as it is equally necessary for the objective reality or the ‘others’ to also negate his existence he cannot be said to be non-existent. But through it, it is still possible for someone to experience lifelessness or the negation of self despite being alive to objective reality. Therefore there is a layer of vacuum beyond consciousness which marks the end of identity and experience.