Intentionality II

O My Servant! Obey Me and I shall make thee like unto Myself. I say 'Be,' and it is, and thou shalt say 'Be,' and it shall be.

            (Baha'u'llah, The Four Valleys: 63)

I am attempting in these early posts on Intentionality to lay a groundwork for perceiving Intentionality as a power of consciousness.  That is no secret, after all what else could it be?  But Intentionality has, in the modern day, only been discussed as a human power.  For me, the intentions of human beings are part of a field of possibility opened up by each Revelation. Baha’u’llah writes that: “In every age and cycle He hath, through the splendorous light shed by the Manifestations of His wondrous Essence, recreated all things, so that whatsoever reflecteth in the heavens and on the earth the signs of His glory may not be deprived of the outpourings of His mercy, nor despair of the showers of His favors. How all-encompassing are the wonders of His boundless grace! Behold how they have pervaded the whole of creation.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah: 61-62)

The concept of intentionality was central to the philosophy of the Middle Ages.  Medieval philosophers, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, took the concept from their studies of Islamic philosophy.  In the medieval view, intentionality was a way of discovering structure in the universe.  That is, it was a powerful way to understand both human and physical nature. 

However, after the general acceptance of Descartes complete split between body and mind and a materialistic understanding of the self and the universe was consolidated, the concept of intentionality fell out of use, replaced by a mechanical explanation of all phenomena.  Intentionality was reintroduced by Franz Brentano in the last half of the nineteenth century.  The concept was further advanced by both Sigmund Freud and the phenomenologists Edmund Husserl, and has grown to be accepted as part of human endowment. 

Quantum mechanics helps explain the effect of human intentions on the natural world.   Intention is what creates the full reality of a physical state or condition, an ordering of energy into specific attributes, a moving from becoming to being.  Last post said that in the philosophy that has grown up from quantum mechanics sub-atomic matter takes form from the intention of the observer/participator.  This is another example of human subject completing the processes of nature.  Perhaps it is the fact that “the universe is enfolded within thee” that enables us to do this.  The universe is enfolded within us in the way described by the Bab: “Verily hath God created within thyself the similitude of all that He hath fashioned in creation, that thou mayest not be veiled from any effulgence.”  (Understanding the Writings of the Bab: 43)

This also links up with our discussion of the four causes (formal, final, material and efficient) that go into the creation of anything.  I see Nature as operating on purely material and efficient causality, a two-part structure/stricture of creativity, whereas human creativity is a four-part structure and process that includes the formal and final causes.  Formal and final provide the origin and the purpose, ontos and telos, of the thing, the envisioned intention and the imagined purpose.  The structural impact of any interplay of the human observer and Nature is completed in and by the subjectivity of the human observer, who gives it form and purpose. 

The mind as the unconscious processes of creation is as the processes of nature.  Mind completes nature.  “On another occasion 'Abdu'l-Bahá said with regard to the same subject, "All that we see around us is the work of mind. It is mind in the herb and in the mineral that acts on the human body, and changes its condition." (Abdu'l-Baha in London:95)

Consciousness, then, is a general power that not only holds the universe together, but also is an emergent power that manifests in some new form when a certain level of organization is needed among interacting parts.  Taken as a whole, creation progresses upward from mineral through human, every higher level of organization of life is also a different and more complex form of consciousness.  With every greater complexity new meanings are knowable and new possibilities for thought and behaviour become manifest.  In the evolution of life, all this drives toward what de Chardin called “the noosphere,” (Pierre Teihard de Chardin, The Phenomenon of Man) the integrated fabric of mental process that envelops all life, and which is, according to de Chardin, the highest level of consciousness now appearing on earth.

Currently, writers such as psychoanalyst Rollo May and the philosopher John Searle, view intentionality as the process of creating one’s reality through directed consciousness and action. (Rollo May, Love and Will and John Searle, Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind)  It is the examination of will and volition and its power to realize desire. That is, manifesting what already exists as possibility to be manifested.  But I find May’s discussion a bit deeper.

            Both May and Searle would say that intentionality is the means by which the subjective state of the individual and the objective state of the world interact and co-evolve in their relationship. Each act of intentionality tends toward something and has within it, no matter how latent, some commitment to meaningful action. According to May, however, intentionality is not mere voluntary or purposive action.  It is not just the succession of conscious intents: I choose to do this or that. Intentionality, rather, refers to a state of being, the creating of meaningful experience, and involves the person's whole orientation to the world.  “By intentionality,” writes May, “I mean the structure which gives meaning to experience.  It is not to be identified with intentions, but is a dimension which underlies them; it is man’s capacity to have intentions.” (Love and Will: 223-224)

            There are far-reaching implications in this discussion.  It makes intentionality the pivotal mental property in the transformation of the conditions within which human action takes place. Intentionality is the dimension linking mind and matter, fitting the mind to the world in a cause and effect relationship.  We are the creators of our universe in the sense that we create a particular set of relationships that organizes our perceptions in a certain way, so that the world reflects what we put into it.

            However, our discussion of intentionality does not end there.  Humanity and nature are in a co-evolutionary process.  But humanity is the more important partner in the relationship, for though nature may have consciousness, only humanity has self-consciousness and the rational intellect.  “Possessing this gift,” ‘Abdu’l-Baha states, “the human reality is the sum of earlier creations....Man alone, among created beings, has this wonderful power.” (Paris Talks: 41)

          Though unified, (i.e. nature and humanity in a state of coherence with humanity completing nature) this unity of nature and humanity is incomplete, because it is evolving, and in need of a higher order to make it complete.  Humanity completes nature, but can not complete itself.  There is a third party to the relationship that unites and completes them.  We’ll find out more about that completing power and how it does its work in the next posts.  

Intentionality: Transforming the World

O My Servant! Obey Me and I shall make thee like unto Myself. I say 'Be,' and it is, and thou shalt say 'Be,' and it shall be.

            (Baha'u'llah, The Four Valleys: 63)

In this and the next few posts I will explore the theme of Intentionality, using the above quote from Baha’u’llah to guide the discussion.  Intentionality is much in vogue in many places as the ability to manifest one’s desires.  I believe there is both scientific and scriptural—from all scriptures—support for this belief.  The Bahá’í Writings actually have a great deal to say about it, but give it an added dimension to those from science or new age thought.

           

The philosophical thought growing from the physics of the last one hundred years has been built upon two startling observations.  First, in the words of one of astrophysics’ most eminent practitioners, Sir James Jeans, “The universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine.”

The second observation, from quantum mechanics, is that the subatomic foundations of the physical world are pure potential, a kind of boiling cosmic broth that, nevertheless, responds in predictable ways to human thought.  Put these two theoretical observations together and one can suggest that all things are imbued with intelligence, since, if the universe is a thought that thought must also embrace and infuse the subatomic particles of that universe.

The idea that the foundation of the physical world is a dance of transient, impermanent forms, a world of pure possibility whose parts are constantly being reorganized, is not new to human thought, only new to modern scientific thought.  The Buddhists called this potential “nothingness”, the Hindu philosophy termed it “maya”, and the mythic traditions of many peoples named it, among other things, Chaos, void, or the primordial ocean.  But science has experimentally rediscovered this plasmatic foundation and rediscovered, too, that it must possess intelligence because it responds to human intelligence.  Nature is a boiling sea of potentials organized by consciousness.

For example, quantum physics says that the sub-atomic particles of physics (it may be better to call them quanta or packets of energy) by themselves exhibit only tendencies to exist.  Oh, the energy definitely exists, but any form that energy may take can not be known until someone defines it.  That someone is called the observer.  Thus quantum theory tells us that the act of observing a particle manifests it, for example, either as a wave or a particle.  The quantum not only responds to the presence of a conscious observer but actually manifests itself as the observer chooses—either as a wave or a particle.  Different observers with different intentions bring about different states of actuality.  For quantum physicists, nothing “exists” until it is observed—at least nothing exists for the observer.

Some quantum physicists go further and say that the quanta of physics are neither things nor just formless potential, but “patterns of potential”, because “particles” exist in several different probability states simultaneously.  They can only say probability states because the traits that define any given quantum are, again, waiting for an observer to make a decision that gives them those observable traits.  But if quanta can manifest as either waves or particles, for example, then they must already possess the qualities of both wave and particle.  That is, they must already BE both wave and particle.  The quantum is both at once, both here and everywhere.  Theoretically, it could be anything, only awaiting an observer’s intention to determine what.  The observer decides what he or she will observe by reducing a multi-faceted potentiality into a single actuality.

When physicists say that at the quantum level all seems to be possibility until an intention is directed toward it, they are saying that the properties we observe in the “external” world are enmeshed in our perceptions.  Physics and the physicist, the laws of nature and the laws of mind, so to speak, unite in any close, intentional observation.  Thus, in quantum mechanics the observer is really a participator.  The mind both observes and creates, because intention is a creative act.  The observer can never be an indifferent observer.  As participator the observer is creating or at least influencing the universe to manifest what he wishes to see.  Other disciplines are coming to the same conclusion, but with respect to larger objects than those of subatomic physics.

That is, moving from subatomic physics to the everyday, or what some call Newtonian physics, pure energy gets composed and ordered by the laws of nature into atoms, molecules, tissues and so on until they reach the level things and objects perceivable to our physical senses.  Even these may be influenced.  For example, in his highly interesting book, The Hidden Messages of Water, author Masaru Emoto says: “I also have the impression that the act of looking at water crystals is an act of creating life.  This is because when we look at crystals, the water changes its appearance moment by moment.  Your gaze has a special energy of its own, and while a gaze of good intentions will give courage, an evil gaze will actually take it away.” (The Hidden Messages in Water: 64)  And The Secret Life of Plants by Peter Thompkins and Christopher Bird is an extended discussion of how plants respond to human intentions.  That animals have a consciousness with which humans communicate can not be doubted. 

I go further than those physicists who say the properties of the universe are enmeshed in our perceptions and say they are enmeshed in our being.  Why?: Because all the qualities of God are both diffused throughout the universe and localized in every human spirit.  Baha’u’llah states: “Likewise, reflect upon the perfection of man's creation, and that all these planes and states are folded up and hidden away within him.  Dost thou reckon thyself only a puny form, when within thee the universe is folded?” (The Seven Valleys: 34) 

Recall that Baha’u’llah also states of Socrates that: “He it is who perceived a unique, a tempered, and a pervasive nature in things, bearing the closest likeness to the human spirit, and he discovered this nature to be distinct from the substance of things in their refined form.” (Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh:146)  I interpret that phrase “bearing the closest likeness” to mean, as I have repeated before, alike in form but not in nature.  The forms of the qualities of God in the universe and the forms of these same qualities in the human reality are alike, so there is homology thus recognition AND manifestation in both places. “Even as He hath revealed: "We will surely show them Our signs in the world and within themselves." Again He saith: "And also in your own selves: will ye not, then, behold the signs of God?" (Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah:177) 

More in next post.