Transpersonal Psychology
'The central concept in Transpersonal Psychology is self-transcendence, or a
sense of identity which is deeper, broader, and more unified with the whole. The root of
the term, transpersonal or literally "beyond the mask," refers to this
self-transcendence'
- John Davis,
History
Transpersonal Psychology grew out of the rejection of the mechanistic
or behaviorist model of the mind which was the orthodoxy of the mid-twentieth century
academic establishment . Charles T. Tart refers
to this orthodoxy when describing his college experience in the 1960's:
'As to things like mystical experiences, if they were mentioned at all, which was
rare, they were relegated to the fringes of psychiatry as being undoubtedly schizophrenic
in nature and just showed how sick religions were to be associated with superstitious
nonsense like that.
Real people in real life were still having transpersonal experiences of course, but they
didn't speak of them around psychologists unless they wanted to be referred for treatment
for psychopathology...'
Gradually, the climate of opinion has changed. And the mind (as distinct
from being an epiphenomenon of matter) has been rediscovered. A number of reasons
for this development have been suggested:
The experiences of the 60's generation with mind-expanding substances.
Growing familiarity with meditational techniques which offer a glimpse
of the non-physical nature of the mind.
The failure of Artificial Intelligence to deliver. Computers can model
and simulate any physical system but they do not appear to be able to
simulate the mind.
A gradual realisation of the participatory nature of reality, as the
implications of quantum physics have become more widely
disseminated among non-physicists.
However, although there is general ageement among Transpersonal
Psychologists that the mind is something more than a physical machine, models of the
mind still remain vague. It is hoped that this webpage, while not offering many
answers, may at least define what kinds of questions can sensibly be asked, in particular:
Is there one Universal Mind or are there many individual minds?
The Buddhist influence has always been strong within Transpersonal Psychology, and it is
perhaps worthwhile considering the Buddhist teaching that one should avoid defilement by
'stains of conceptions of the eight extremes' [1]. The
particular extremes which apply to conceptions of the mind(s) are:
- The extreme of plurality.
- The extreme of singularity.
The Extreme of Plurality states that our minds are separate from the divine mind and
from one another. The Extreme of Singularity states that there is one
all-encompassing divine mind.
The Extreme of Plurality
The Extreme of Plurality is illustrated by the dogmas of all the repressive religions (memes), that the mind of God is separate from the souls of his
creatures. The world is a sorting machine. God feeds the souls in at one end, and
life sorts them out into those which are fit to be united with the mind of God, and those
which are to be rejected. (This results in a logical contradiction - If God is
omniscient, why does He need to put souls through the Quality Control system in the first
place. Presumably he knows in advance where they're going to end up before they enter the
sorting machine).
The Extreme of Singularity
The Extreme of Singularity comes in two versions - Solipsism and Pantheism.
- Solipsism
Solipsism states that my mind is all that exists and all other phenomena, including other
people, are illusions. Life is a dream. Solipsism is impossible to disprove, though it
isn't a very popular belief. Solipsist Associations don't attract many members, probably
because most solipsists don't go around trying convert other people.
- Pantheism
Pantheists believe that all is ensouled. The Mind of God is everywhere. Consciousness
resides throughout the universe in humans, animals and also in inanimate objects such as
trees, tomatoes, rocks and thermostats (thermostats! - You
think I jest?). Of course, if mind is in all objects, then there is little to
differentiate it from matter, and the concept of mind becomes meaningless.
From a Buddhist point of view, an ordinary object could not be said to partake of
mind unless it were sentient, which at the lowest
common denominator means it is capable of experiencing dukkha.
'A paradox! A paradox! At commonsense she gaily mocks...'
So we have a paradox. When we try to enumerate mind in terms of one or many, or
separation or identity with the divine, we end up with logical contradictions,
meaninglessly vague definitions, or solipsism. Don't these Buddhists just love
paradoxes!
We could accept the paradox in the way that we have to accept that an electron is both
a particle and wave. We could say that mind is both one or many. Fortunately, there
is another way out. We could take the view that the concept
of number does not apply to mind(s). Crazy? No
it's actually a respectable mathematical theory due to John von Neumann, one of the
pioneers of computer science.
Mind is the source and origin of enumeration.
Mind(s) is/are the source and origin of enumeration. It/they therefore
cannot be enumerated.
Von Neuman's theory relies on simple manipulations of sets:
A set is a collection of things. An empty set is a collection of nothing at all.
An empty set can be thought of as nothing with the potential to become
something (that is to be become a set with at least one member).
Von Neumann proposed that all numbers could be bootstrapped out of the empty set by the
operations of the mind:
The mind observes the empty set. The mind's act of observation causes the appearance
another set - the set of empty sets. The set of empty sets is not empty, because it
contains one non-thing - the empty set. The mind has thus generated the number 1 by
producing the set containing the empty set.
Now the mind perceives the empty set and the set containing the empty set, so there are
two non-things. The mind has generated the number 2 out of emptiness. And so it goes on
all the way up.
Stated stepwise the operation is:
STEP 0 {} Empty set has 0 parts.
STEP 1 { {} } Mind generates set containing empty set, which has one part.
STEP 2 { {}, { {} }} Mind generates set containing two parts, the set and the set
containing the empty set.
etc, etc
So the entire number system, from zero to infinity, is generated purely and
simply by the play of mind on emptiness, in the complete absence
of the need to refer to any material objects being counted.
The philosphical implication of these findings is that mind ontologically
precedes number. In other words in the ground of being, mind
is more fundamental than number. Asking 'How many minds are there?'
is putting the cart before the horse. It is equivalent to asking 'What is the color of
electromagnetism?' Transpersonal mind is transnumeral mind.
Conclusion
Mind(s) is/are the source and origin of enumeration. It/they therefore cannot be
enumerated. Understanding that existence is neither the extreme of one mind, nor the
extreme of many minds, makes Buddhist practices - such as tantra, exchanging self and
others, receiving blessings from enlightened beings, and generating great compassion -
easier to understand. It also explains why the operations of the mind(s) are
non-computable (ie non-algorithmic).
- Sean Robsville
[REF 1] 'Eight Steps to Happiness'
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Tharpa Publications
Ulverston, 2000, ISBN 0 948006 65 x, Pages 201 - 203
See also:
Introduction to Buddhism
Buddhist Teachings
on the mind, personal relationships, meditation and the spiritual path.
Formless Mind
'..The fact that the mind is formless means that it is unconstrained, and hence has
immense potential. The mind can comprehend all objects including its own creations.
The description of the root mind as 'formless' doesn't just refer to its non-material
nature, but it emphasises that it is unlimited, non-mechanistic and totally free from any
structure or topology. In Buddhist psychology the root mind is non-physical and
non-algorithmic. The mind cannot be understood in terms of circuit diagrams and
flowcharts. It is pure awareness..'
Materialism (Physicalism)
...'It is fairly obvious how Kadampa philosophy maps onto
physicalism. It agrees that things-in-themselves are unfindable and can only be
known by interdependence with other things. It agrees that the first of these ways of
interdependence is algorithmic - IF ... THEN... ELSE - cause and effect. It agrees that
the second way of interdependence is by analysis into structured information. However
it goes further by pointing out that physicalism is an inadequate explanation for
all phenomena. A third mode of interdependence - dependence on the mind
- is necessary to explain the phenomena of awareness.'...
Meditating on
emptiness
'....For a qualified meditator single-pointedly absorbed in emptiness, there is
no difference between production and disintegration, impermanence and permanence, going
and coming, singularity and plurality - everything is equal in emptiness and all problems
of attachment, anger, and self-grasping ignorance are solved...'
Secret
mantra
'....The etymology of Secret Mantra is as follows. `Secret'
indicates that these methods should be practised discreetly. If we make a display of our
practices, we will attract many hindrances and negative forces. This would be like someone
talking openly and carelessly about a precious jewel they possessed and, as a result,
attracting the attention of thieves. `Mantra' means `protection for the mind...'
Primordial Mind
'....Throughout its early history, the universe continued to develop as an immense
superposition of probabilities. Not only was the structure of the universe superposed, but
all logically possible states of matter, physical constants, properties and laws were
simultaneously present and evolving into ever increasing diversity. Quantum theory states
that any physical system remains in a superposed state of all possibilities until it
interacts with the mind of an observer. At some instant one of these possible alternative
universes produced an observing lifeform - an animal with a nervous system which was
sufficiently evolved to form a symbiotic association with a primordial mind. The first act
of observation by this mind caused the entire superposed multiverse to collapse
immediately into one of its numerous alternatives...'
Mind, Soul, Heaven and Hell in Christianity
and Buddhism
The entity which survives death is known as 'The Soul' by Christians and as
'The Very Subtle Mind' by Buddhists...The terms 'Soul' and 'Mind' are not
equivalent. There are a number of minor distinctions between the concepts which,
taken by themselves, could be regarded simply as trivial doctrinal differences.
However, there are also two major philosophical differences which separate the concepts
of mind and soul into different ontological categories.
Repressive religions
'...Caesar-in-the-Sky has been so overspecified with superlatives, especially with the
fatal feedback loop of omniscience, that he has been constructed into what philosophers
would call a 'logically necessary being' (ie a changeless, inherently existent being ).
But a logically necessary being can neither change anything, nor undergo change itself.
Nor can it make a decision or in any other way interact with contingent reality. The
concept of the Creator is fraught with difficulty. Who created the creator? If the
Creator 'just is' then maybe the universe 'just is'. Why multiply entities
unnecessarily?...'
Emptiness of mathematics
'.....in the final analysis the entire number system has been generated by the
play of mind on emptiness, in the complete absence of the need to refer to any material
thing, or things, which are being counted. Numbers do not exist by reference to
physical reality, nor are they self-existent, abstract 'things in themselves'...'
The unreasonable effectiveness
of mathematics in the natural sciences
So we are left with something of a mystery. According to the physicalist
worldview, the mind (including mathematicians' minds) is an epiphenomenon of matter which
has evolved solely to ensure the survival of the selfish genes which code for it. Why
should this 'top-level' phenomenon have such intimate access to the 'bottom level'
phenomena such as quantum physics? After all, the two levels are supposedly separated by
less well-understood (in some cases) explanatory layers such as evolutionary psychology,
neurology, cell biology, genetics, molecular biology, and chemistry.
RATIONAL
BUDDHISM
If we regard Buddhism as a combination of a philosophy, psychology and religion, then how
much mileage can we get from the first two aspects before we have to start invoking
religious faith? |
