Cell Intelligence in Physiological & Morphological Spaces

[Cleric K]

And what do you think about constructing a brain? Could it generate qualia?

First we should be careful with the word 'generate' because we can easily fall into the reductionist trap again. And as we know, the only firm foundation of knowledge starts with the given, which is the ever metamorphosing first-person state of being. For this reason, we should always think about the vertical integration. A symphony is a good metaphor. Qualia is all that exists but takes on different configurations in our mandalic experience.

Let's start with the simpler case. Let's really assume that biological life can't exist without the higher order etheric/life morphic space. The latter bends the space of the particles and guides through states that result in temporal consistency of life. The question is, if we purely mechanically put together the particles of a cell together in the proper order, will it become alive (that is, not only for a while before it decoheres but in the true way)? I'm not sure at this time. It is possible that the potential higher life spaces are ubiquitous and as soon as they musically resonate with appropriate particle configuration in the lower order space, they will so to speak take over and keep the cell running. It might also be possible that such a resonance can only exist on the principle "omnis cellula e cellula" (every cell comes from a cell). In other words, the morphic spaces have started in resonant relations and only when the life space guides the division of the cell it results in both cells being properly attuned to the life space. As said, I don't have a certain answer but in the case of simple biological life I guess that it could be possible. Interestingly, if this is the case, it would have a very peculiar consequences for materialism because when some day scientists assemble a cell completely by hand (bottom-up, de novo) and potentially it becomes alive by resonating with higher order spaces that take over it, they would say "See, we told you that life is purely mechanical". We should note that the success of Venter's artificial cell is based on a top-down approach. He starts with living cells and practically knocks out the genes (by replacing the whole DNA with mechanically assembled one) until a minimal palette of genes is reached where the cell still functions and replicates. Yet this still remains an "omnis cellula e cellula" method. All of the cell's machinery besides the DNA comes from an original living cell thus any preexistent resonance with the life spaces is kept (basically the method mutilates a cell to the extent that the life spaces can still pivot its states such that it can stay integral with minimal amounts of genes - thus proteins/enzymes).

The question with a brain is more complicated because it seems to me that it would be much more challenging for mental spaces to take over just any appropriately constructed brain. The reason is that the symphony between the mental steering and the astral, etheric, physical spaces is much more complicated. In our present life these spaces have grown together around a single fertilized cell and as a result are tightly adapted to each other. No two brains are the same. If our ego (mental body) would try to take over just any random brain that might be practically impossible because the lower spaces of that brain would be like a completely different language for the constitution of our present mental space (resonance might not be possible). So it's my feeling that a mechanically constructed brain (even if it may become biologically alive by being taken over by life spaces) probably won't be able to resonate with a locus of mental space that can have clear self-consciousness there. This doesn't mean that mental beings can't have some experience in relation to that brain, it's just that that experience would be more like noise.

Of course, these are only my intellectual speculations. Simulations are interesting because they can potentially show whether purely mechanical interactions of particles are enough for biological life (because unlike assembling real particles, there's no danger for the simulation algorithm being taken over by life spaces).

[AshvinP]

Of course, these are only my intellectual speculations. Simulations are interesting because they can potentially show whether purely mechanical interactions of particles are enough for biological life (because unlike assembling real particles, there's no danger for the simulation algorithm being taken over by life spaces).

Anthony and Cleric,

This is a fascinating discussion. I have a question - are we speaking here of perfecting the simulation of mechanical particle interactions so that we could theoretically use a 3D printer and print out a bunch of living liver cells, for example, and then use them in a liver transplant operation?

It also seems to me that even if we were able to accomplish such a feat, the top-down life spaces would still be taking over, insofar as they are embedded in our human activity that made it all possible. By unconsciously utilizing the life forces/spaces, we were able to build up our physical body, grow stronger, develop the intellect, develop computer tech, go to school and get an education, study the functioning of living cells, imitate their functioning, and so forth until we developed the simulations. So the life spaces are still latent and waiting for the proper particle configuration to arrive through our observant and imitative activity. Perhaps that is what you meant by “the potential higher life spaces are ubiquitous”. They are always there but mediated by all sorts of partial transitions we undertake through the mineral-mechanical domain, and so far we haven't brought those transitions to proper completion in our simulations. And if we were to much more consciously utilize the life forces, instead of through heavy mediation by the mineral element, then many of those partial transitions would be obviated and potentially a broader segment of humanity could work directly on manifesting living cells and regenerating their own organs, for ex., without reliance on people with super specialized education and enormous funding.

Does that make sense?

[Federica]

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

[Cleric K]

It also seems to me that even if we were able to accomplish such a feat, the top-down life spaces would still be taking over, insofar as they are embedded in our human activity that made it all possible. By unconsciously utilizing the life forces/spaces, we were able to build up our physical body, grow stronger, develop the intellect, develop computer tech, go to school and get an education, study the functioning of living cells, imitate their functioning, and so forth until we developed the simulations. So the life spaces are still latent and waiting for the proper particle configuration to arrive through our observant and imitative activity. Perhaps that is what you meant by “the potential higher life spaces are ubiquitous”. They are always there but mediated by all sorts of partial transitions we undertake through the mineral-mechanical domain, and so far we haven't brought those transitions to proper completion in our simulations. And if we were to much more consciously utilize the life forces, instead of through heavy mediation by the mineral element, then many of those partial transitions would be obviated and potentially a broader segment of humanity could work directly on manifesting living cells and regenerating their own organs, for ex., without reliance on people with super specialized education and enormous funding.

Does that make sense?

Yes it does. BTW I think it will be a very bad direction if ideas such as those of Levin (nested morphic spaces) become more popular and people try to simulate the vertical aspect through computation. It is bad enough that we reduce the sensory spectrum to numbers and operations between them but when we try to do the same with the higher order spaces we completely miss the fact that these spaces are not to be theorized about and computed but experienced and known as the living depth spectrum of our Cosmic being.

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

Regenerating cells is a moral task as far as it results from the full depth harmonization. As a matter of fact, disease is nothing but dissonant relations between the spaces. Needless to say, regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells' contents through technology. That will simply make the pressure burst from another place with probably even worse consequences. And by saying this neither should we imagine that everything should be accomplished in thought alone. The harmonic relations between the spaces include also everything in the sensory spectrum, so physical habits, food, environment, etc. are just as important parts of the process. It will be found that even the geometry of our cities and homes add or remove from the vertical harmony.

Regeneration is our moral task when we realize that health should be our ideal not simply for our personal wellbeing but because in that way we harmonize something of the Cosmic totality. Everything else, especially trying to tinker with the cell through technology, will be (already is) precisely the inspiration of Ahriman, who wants to feel himself as a completely bottom-up being, so to speak (not necessarily material). This justifies the use of any means conceivable to manipulate the basis of experience. In Ahr's mind there're no higher order spiritual spaces that guide the unfoldment of evolution.

[Federica]

It also seems to me that even if we were able to accomplish such a feat, the top-down life spaces would still be taking over, insofar as they are embedded in our human activity that made it all possible. By unconsciously utilizing the life forces/spaces, we were able to build up our physical body, grow stronger, develop the intellect, develop computer tech, go to school and get an education, study the functioning of living cells, imitate their functioning, and so forth until we developed the simulations. So the life spaces are still latent and waiting for the proper particle configuration to arrive through our observant and imitative activity. Perhaps that is what you meant by “the potential higher life spaces are ubiquitous”. They are always there but mediated by all sorts of partial transitions we undertake through the mineral-mechanical domain, and so far we haven't brought those transitions to proper completion in our simulations. And if we were to much more consciously utilize the life forces, instead of through heavy mediation by the mineral element, then many of those partial transitions would be obviated and potentially a broader segment of humanity could work directly on manifesting living cells and regenerating their own organs, for ex., without reliance on people with super specialized education and enormous funding.

Does that make sense?

Yes it does. BTW I think it will be a very bad direction if ideas such as those of Levin (nested morphic spaces) become more popular and people try to simulate the vertical aspect through computation. It is bad enough that we reduce the sensory spectrum to numbers and operations between them but when we try to do the same with the higher order spaces we completely miss the fact that these spaces are not to be theorized about and computed but experienced and known as the living depth spectrum of our Cosmic being.

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

Regenerating cells is a moral task as far as it results from the full depth harmonization. As a matter of fact, disease is nothing but dissonant relations between the spaces. Needless to say, regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells' contents through technology. That will simply make the pressure burst from another place with probably even worse consequences. And by saying this neither should we imagine that everything should be accomplished in thought alone. The harmonic relations between the spaces include also everything in the sensory spectrum, so physical habits, food, environment, etc. are just as important parts of the process. It will be found that even the geometry of our cities and homes add or remove from the vertical harmony.

Regeneration is our moral task when we realize that health should be our ideal not simply for our personal wellbeing but because in that way we harmonize something of the Cosmic totality. Everything else, especially trying to tinker with the cell through technology, will be (already is) precisely the inspiration of Ahriman, who wants to feel himself as a completely bottom-up being, so to speak (not necessarily material). This justifies the use of any means conceivable to manipulate the basis of experience. In Ahr's mind there're no higher order spiritual spaces that guide the unfoldment of evolution.

Cleric,

Reflecting on the following from your last replies:

I think that the biological cell is an almost perfect mechanical automata, so if the parts are in place I imagine that it can keep functioning for some time, "by inertia" as it were. But there should be something which attracts the evolution of the cell's state towards the spaces compatible with life.
…
I'm really looking forward towards more of these simulations.

Simulations are interesting because they can potentially show whether purely mechanical interactions of particles are enough for biological life (because unlike assembling real particles, there's no danger for the simulation algorithm being taken over by life spaces).

Needless to say, regeneration [of cells] should not happen by manipulating cells' contents through technology.

I wonder: although there is no immediate life danger (danger of unconscious, bottom-up hacking of life force) in the act of running a simulation algorithm, isn’t this sort of simulation the prodrome of a real and imminent cell regenerative engineering, both in the intentions of the operators, and in all likelihood?

And if yes, isn’t it contradictory to say at the same time “I’m really looking forward to more simulations” and “cell regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells through technology"?

[AshvinP]

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

As a general rule, I think any time people seek to get wealth, health, longevity, happiness, and so forth without also giving something up inwardly, i.e. undergoing inner moral transformation through self-sacrificial activity, it can only result in towers of babel that are struck down and scattered because they only imagine they are reaching the heights, when only moral transformation actually ascends and attunes the vertical gradient. That is the redirected pressure that Cleric spoke of - we 'solve' one symptom of the problem, but the inner disease remains and gets expressed in even worse symptomatic ways.

But a similar mere imagining comes into play when spiritualists avoid the responsibility of healing and regeneration, or 'hygienic occultism', which requires us to become just as familiar and involved with the sensory spectrum as the materialists and transhumanists. It requires us to really get to the bottom of things and follow all the developments with keen interest, eventually finding creative ways to steer those developments in healthy directions. We should understand these developments as part of the karmic plan that provides opportunities for us to really understand the depths of our being in ways that would not be possible otherwise.

[Federica]

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

As a general rule, I think any time people seek to get wealth, health, longevity, happiness, and so forth without also giving something up inwardly, i.e. undergoing inner moral transformation through self-sacrificial activity, it can only result in towers of babel that are struck down and scattered because they only imagine they are reaching the heights, when only moral transformation actually ascends and attunes the vertical gradient. That is the redirected pressure that Cleric spoke of - we 'solve' one symptom of the problem, but the inner disease remains and gets expressed in even worse symptomatic ways.

But a similar mere imagining comes into play when spiritualists avoid the responsibility of healing and regeneration, or 'hygienic occultism', which requires us to become just as familiar and involved with the sensory spectrum as the materialists and transhumanists. It requires us to really get to the bottom of things and follow all the developments with keen interest, eventually finding creative ways to steer those developments in healthy directions. We should understand these developments as part of the karmic plan that provides opportunities for us to really understand the depths of our being in ways that would not be possible otherwise.

I understand that, Ashvin. Cleric said it above: "regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells' contents through technology....And by saying this neither should we imagine that everything should be accomplished in thought alone."
It was pretty clear. But the thing is, I wrote that because I felt that you had left yourself be carried away a bit by the 'technological excitement'. I know there is a part of that in you, or at least so it seems to me. Would you say there could be some element of truth in that?

[Federica]

It will be found that even the geometry of our cities and homes add or remove from the vertical harmony.

Like a sort of inwardly experienced feng shui that seamlessly shape outer space (natural and man-made alike), home space, and inner space... that would be the coolest profession for an incarnation to come

[AshvinP]

And we should also ask: is regenerating liver cells a moral task? And if it is, under what conditions and to what aspirations. In other words, how to distinguish in intents this type of cell manipulation from black-magical, less-than-random, karma-reshuffling?

Of course, the aspiration cannot be: "because we want to enjoy life as long as possible on this Earth". Worse variation of which: "let's 'democratize' longer physical life on planet Earth".

Also, the reason cannot be: "I'm excited by scientific prouesse, it's fascinating".

As a general rule, I think any time people seek to get wealth, health, longevity, happiness, and so forth without also giving something up inwardly, i.e. undergoing inner moral transformation through self-sacrificial activity, it can only result in towers of babel that are struck down and scattered because they only imagine they are reaching the heights, when only moral transformation actually ascends and attunes the vertical gradient. That is the redirected pressure that Cleric spoke of - we 'solve' one symptom of the problem, but the inner disease remains and gets expressed in even worse symptomatic ways.

But a similar mere imagining comes into play when spiritualists avoid the responsibility of healing and regeneration, or 'hygienic occultism', which requires us to become just as familiar and involved with the sensory spectrum as the materialists and transhumanists. It requires us to really get to the bottom of things and follow all the developments with keen interest, eventually finding creative ways to steer those developments in healthy directions. We should understand these developments as part of the karmic plan that provides opportunities for us to really understand the depths of our being in ways that would not be possible otherwise.

I understand that, Ashvin. Cleric said it above: "regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells' contents through technology....And by saying this neither should we imagine that everything should be accomplished in thought alone."
It was pretty clear. But the thing is, I wrote that because I felt that you had left yourself be carried away a bit by the 'technological excitement'. I know there is a part of that in you, or at least so it seems to me. Would you say there could be some element of truth in that?

Federica,

Right now, I think that my enthusiasm and knowledge in relation to natural science and technology is woefully underdeveloped. I don’t understand nearly as much as I should in relation to these topics, for example I couldn’t even tell you all the different components that go into the functioning of a living cell. I know that these greater detailed insights into the phenomenal world will develop with time, so I am in no extreme rush to get it done, but I also know that part of the spiritual evolutionary path will definitely involve attaining that intimate familiarity and eventually, perhaps in the next lifetime, taking on redemptive responsibilities in relation to them that I can scarcely imagine right now. All of these future tasks are becoming more concrete for me and so I don’t think of them as vague possibilities or speculations, but realities that I need to begin seriously probing with my thinking activity in preparation. When Steiner wrote about making the World content into our own thought content – or when Christian theology speaks of being responsible for the ‘sins of the World’ - I am beginning to realize we should take this in the most literal way. It is fear of the unknown and unfamiliar that is Ahr’s greatest weapon against the Spirit, so we need to meet the World developments with great courage and penetrating insight, the kind that only comes from being compassionately and enthusiastically interested in the living details.

[Cleric K]

I wonder: although there is no immediate life danger (danger of unconscious, bottom-up hacking of life force) in the act of running a simulation algorithm, isn’t this sort of simulation the prodrome of a real cell regenerative engineering, both in the intentions of the operators, and in all likelihood?

Yes, your statement is completely correct. We might say that simulations could be the 'gateway drug' leading to practical technology. But other than that, I want to make a sidenote here because I mean something else with the word 'danger' (that is, I didn't mean it in the sense that there's no practical danger because only a very few move from simulations to the hard stuff, so to speak). Some may find the topic interesting.

If we are able to arrange actual molecules in a certain configuration, as we speculate, these may be taken over by higher order spaces because physical particles, as we call them, are natural part of the musical hierarchy.

Now when we implement an algorithm with a computer, clearly the latter is also made of physical particles but we take special care that these particles can manifest themselves only in very constrained ways. These constraints are the copper or silicon traces on the circuit board/chip, shielding from electromagnetic interference, cooling, etc. Now possibly the electrons that move through the system can still be very lightly steered by higher order spaces but in no way can they modify the workings of the computer such that some other algorithm be executed. As an extreme case, the most that can happen would be some form of destabilization which will at best corrupt the program execution.

Here's a simple example. You take an ordinary calculator and add 2 + 2. Many things happen in the electronics. Zeros and ones (physically implemented as different voltage levels) ripple through the logic gates and finally activate the needed segments of the LCD. All of this is very rigidly implemented in hardware. If we think superficially we may say: "Intelligence from higher order spaces can bend the physical space in such a way that 2 + 2 would print 5". But this is extremely unlikely. The whole circuit state would have to be manipulated into a very specific (and non-trivial) state if it is to print 5 instead of 4. A higher space would have to manipulate the curvature of physical space in a very complicated manner, for which there are simply no means. It would be like trying to use our hands to exchange the place of two particles of water in a bucket without disturbing the whole volume. To put it into an exaggerated picture, the higher being would rather be able to rise the temperature of the whole device and eventually make it malfunction but not manipulate the individual voltage levels in the circuit in order to accomplish something meaningful.

If we implement a simulation algorithm with a computer, there's no danger that this algorithm can be taken over by some higher spaces. I hope it's clear what I mean here with 'danger'. There's a huge difference between higher order spaces modulating the biological machinery and the idea that these same forces might be able to influence the algorithm implemented in hardware/software which simulates that machinery (which is simply a calculation, no different in principle from 2 + 2 on the calculator). The ability of higher spaces to steer a biological physical system through states compatible with life in no way translates to the possibility that these spaces can also cleverly manipulate the hardware executing an algorithm such that it exhibits some 'super natural' behavior.

So that's the meaning of the 'danger'. It's no different than saying "there's no danger that by overheating the computer it may produce some more clever results". It's just that higher spaces can't sensibly modify what the computer is doing (at most they could corrupt it), thus we can be pretty sure that whatever the computer displays is entirely the result of the algorithm we have coded. That's why I say that a simulation is a testing bench which might show whether a physical space-only simulation is enough for life. The reason is that there's no danger of some higher life spaces creeping into our algorithm and meaningfully manipulate the results of our calculation (the same can't be said for the way we think out the algorithm itself. I'll explain later when I write in connection with the full paper). As said in the previous post, this is different if we assemble an artificial cell from molecules because then it might be (again, we're only speculating) taken over by life forces and we may mistakenly believe that the living behavior is produced entirely from the mechanical interactions of the parts we've put in. In contrast, if we code specific laws into an algorithm, what we see will most certainly but the product of it and nothing else.

And if yes, isn’t it contradictory to say at the same time “I’m really looking forward to more simulations” and “cell regeneration should not happen by manipulating cells through technology?

Well, in a sense - yes, it is contradictory. To be sure, such simulations are in no way needed for the spiritual progress of humanity. And you are right that it is contradictory to look forward for something that may serve as a 'gateway drug' for regenerative technology. The reason I say this is because attempts in these simulations will be made anyway (we can't convince scientists to abandon that route) so in that sense I'm simply looking forward to see if the results will confirm my intuitions. It's not that I'm looking forward for this because it is an indispensable milestone towards the Spirit.