V. I. Melnikov
At present the matter is many-valued concept depending on sphere of its application .
1. In substantive aspect boundless possibility of which occur and are available any definiteness, things and qualities; primary chaos, shapeless and visually imperceptible, maternal origin of the world.
2. In substrate aspect – a) or something maximally plastic, primary building raw materials pictorially and arbitrarily compared with clay, “first stone”, ashes, silt, water, wood, spontaneous force and so on; b) or relatively elementary and spatially extended part of one or the other levels of the universe (elementary particles, atoms, molecules, protein bodies and others).
3. In the phenomenonlogical sense it is the aggregate of formed and spatially bounded objects whose hardness, elasticity, impenetrability and resistance to external actions are discovered by sense organs of a subject to be retained by perceptions; the objective reality independent of human consciousness and given to a human being in his external sensations.
4. In eastern-mystical sense it is maya, the source of illusions, outward appearance, means for masking the absolute (Brakhman) from people and other beings.
Among philosophers of different schools and directions there is no consensus in interpreting the concept of matter and the issue of essence of material verge of reality always remains urgent. Materialists raise the matter to the absolute by attributing to it features of not being created, eliminated, exhaustible as well as omnipresence, infinite extension and eternal duration; they determine the matter as a single and universal substance (fundamental principle); spontaneous manifestation of this absolute theoretically explains the world integrity, the regularity and variety of things and spiritual states. Marxist-Leninist materialism refrains from considering a matter as a constant substance “initial one” and clarify the concept of material substance : a) as the basis of spiritual phenomena not identical with a subjective state of a human, his consciousness; b) as something common in different varying phenomena and processes of the world, universal substance of interactions; c) does not reduce the concept of matter as objective reality to specific natural-science conceptions about its structure so that to fill with the concept “material integrity of the world” all familiar and so far unknown for science forms of objective existence capable of being an object of human external perception. In systems of objective idealism the matter is comprehended either as the physical world created by non material substance (God, Absolute spirit, the heaven world of ideas) from nothing and from outside or the emanation (outflow) of ideal origin, ethereal and immanent with the world and its revelation (embodiment) in the forms of its spatial representation. In the light of subjective idealism the matter is described as the external projection of complex of human feelings, reduced to perceptibility property and lost the status of objective reality. The philosophical dualism accounts for the available objective reality as the product of interpenetration or intersupplement of two independent substances – the matter and the origin of (spirit, energy, form, consciousness) that cannot be presented by spatial expression.
Consciousness as the aggregate of sensitive and mental images has been always contrasted with the matter which under normal conditions is characterized by somehow distinct knowledge (“associated knowledge” “realization”) of the fact that I am who survive these images.
The consciousness has the structure determined by an individual microcosmos due to which each content immediately takes its specific form and to which in the course of interaction the other elements of content join. The consciousness accompanies and controls the body interaction with the environment, being between irritation acting from outside and the reaction to this irritation. The action of this control function of consciousness is stronger, the higher is a living creature organization.
Continuous, many-sided and controversial history of concepts “matter” and “consciousness”, endless in time and fruitless in results disputes have split up the world society of philosophers in some independent and incompatible branches. In those disputes the basic question concerned the interrelation and the primary origin of either of them. And as known, according to this fundamental ideological watershed the other problems in philosophy, natural science and world outlook were solved.
The criterion of accepting one or the other world view by different schools and branches is the issue concerning the world fundamental principle over a priority of spirit (or consciousness) or matter. Infertility of thousand-years’ discussions over this issue speaks about crucial unsettled deep issues, so far even not set up, but governing the solution of the problem concerning matter and consciousness. The assumption offers itself, that feeling (comprehension) of validity of accepted one or the other fundamental principles is inborn and none of arguments of mind manages to overcome this inborn confidence. But most probably, so far one did not create the universal system of description which would allow each point of view to be given the place accurately marked and substantiated.
The conception of TCS to a certain extend can facilitate the solution of this problem. In Table 1 the dyad of matter and consciousness is interpreted as a particular case of CCS model composed of an object – matter and anti-object – consciousness which are in the state of one-side informational interaction. In the given case there do not exist the pure form of the opposed subjective active principle of the real process and the objective information action. They exist together in a certain harmonious and organic combination with partly deconstructed each scheme of interaction. The real ontological subjective action is of one-side direction towards the consciousness change when there is no direct and simultaneous matter change. Informational gnoseological objective action has equitable reference both to matter and consciousness estimation. The hybrid of simultaneously combined real and informational action can be illustrated by the scheme presented in Figures 1, 2.
Figure 1 Action mode O is the object; (-O) is the anti-object; CU – is the consciousness unit; SE is the prescribed set up, setting element; CE is the comparison element; CSZ1 is the controlled separation zone in the subsystem Î…-Î; CSZ2 is the controlled separation zone in the subsystem SEFC2 CSZ1; (SS is the source of settings, programs for SE; AI is the spirit, absolute idea, god and so on; SEFCC1, SEFCC2 is the source of energy for feeding consciousness and the control systems of CSZ; NE is the material nature of the element; (ωi is flows of action).
Figure 2. Perception mode: Î is the object; PE is the perception element; (SCP is the source of complex of programs, settings; AI is a spirit, and absolute idea, god and so on; SEF is the source of energy, a brain (consciousness) feeding; NE is the nature of system elements.
According to this scheme there are two variants of interaction process of consciousness and a material object: in perception and action modes. In a perception mode occurs only the knowledge process. Therewith a certain sign information (an image of material object) from the material object Î acts upon the consciousness Ñ to be processed by means of embedded program of the element SE to form the new image or to update the previous one. The programme can be embedded by the certain source (SS or an absolute idea, spirit, god and so on. In the action mode the consciousness interacting with a material object occurs by more complex scheme. The new image in the consciousness Ñ (SE) formed under the action of material object Î is the control signal ω2 of material flow (3which is of physiological nature and implemented by motions of some execution organs SZ2 (for example, arms). After the control signal from the changed consciousness SE being overlaid on the flow ω1, CE is transformed into the material flow ω2 (the nervous pulse that acts as the control signal via the execution device SZ1 on the material force flow ω3 (muscle), transforming its flow ω4 acting upon initial material objects Î and (-Î), i.e., we have the simplest scheme of automatic control, where the setting element is a certain part of brain and the comparison element is its different part to compose jointly the consciousness.
In the above scheme one clearly distinguishes two cascades of strengthening. The first cascade strengthens the flow w coming from the source of feeding SEFC2 to the element SZ1. This flow w in physical sense represents force motion (traction) of muscles. The traction control is performed via a control electric pulse (flow ω2) coming from consciousness Ñ.
In its turn, in the second cascade of strengthening the flow w is the control pulse for the interaction flow (5 moving between the object O and the anti-object (-O). The control element of the flow ω2 is the element SZ1 and the flow ω3 – SZ2.
In terms of TCS SZ1 is the controlled separation zone in the system Î…(-Î) and SZ2 – the controlled separation zone in the system SEFC2 SZ1.
The objects Î and (-Î) are connected via information flows (7 with ÝÑ of consciousness Ñ (feedback). At that, the action of SC on SZ (flow ω2) is changed to control according to the above scheme the flow ω5 between Î and (-Î). This scheme from the point of automatic control theory is one of the simplest and, in general, does not contain anything new if it were not for the real content and physical-physiological-psychological sense of the scheme elements and flows circulating between them. In particular, these are the flows ω1…ω6, where the last one is the flow of energy physiological feeding of the brain (C). All these elements and flows are material. The flows ω7, ω8, ω9 are informational. The underlying difference is the source of formation of the complex of control programs of SE. According to the above opposite idealistic and materialistic systems there can be two sources: material and spiritual. In favor of the first variant (and correspondingly idealism) speaks the so far not recognized and hence, unaccountable “work” of our consciousness. Formally, considering the complexity of structure and functioning of brain composed of 1011 of neurons, each of them in its turn representing a complex biochemical scheme, one can assume that a brain “spirituality” could be its still obscure “materiality”. But it is a matter of time rather than principle. Moreover, analyzing a genome of a human and an amoeba shows its 50% identity, i.e., a sole and an intellect of a human are encoded in ¹1 symbols, that also speaks about unlimited possibilities of material nature of a human being or a material part or consciousness.
In favor of the second variant, i.e., material, speaks quite proved materiality of correction nature of “software”. These applications can be fundamentally corrected under the appropriate changes and impacts of environment: bringing up, education, emergency situations, conditions of life, work and others. The assumption about prevailing, almost unlimited effect of material action of environment upon the spiritual origin of consciousness could be wrong.
TCS along with revelation of scheme of elementary operation of the system consciousness – matter states a high probability of material basis of consciousness. In other words, consciousness is most likely to be not recognized matter.
In the above context the issue of either side being primary makes sense in the least probable variant, i.e. with God available and, obviously, is solved in its favor. In more probable variant of material essence of spiritual origin the matter of priority is no longer relevant by itself since there is no action without counteraction, i.e., there is no object without anti-object, no consciousness without matter, they can exist only simultaneously. However, in this case, the conception, definition of matter, is supposed to change, because in the action mode there cannot be an objective and independent reality as cannot be “what everything has been done of” (see the first substantial definition). The matter in TCS is only a part of CS which cannot exist (and act) without the remaining part of the same CS. This is, certainly, an evaluative definition, but it suggests the main idea.
The perception mode (informational) deals with a potential, future action, which does depend on the future “partner” by CS. Thereby can not be a pure objectivity, because any interaction depends on properties of all parts involved, i.e., in principle, the concept of matter must be determined of concepts of action and ÇÑ. But this is a matter of future. The definition of concept of consciousness in its “ material” version is still more complicated problem. The definition like “the property of highly organized matter” possesses the evident uncertainty. Probably, the future definition of consciousness will have to involve its functional-structural characteristics which relate to the above block-scheme of CS human being-environment in the part consciousness-matter.
Thus, the exact definition of concepts of matter and consciousness is the issue of the future as well as that of their priority.