SCIENCE, OBJECTIVITY AND CONSCIOUSNESS

This long-awaited and seminal book arguing for a self-reflective and interdisciplinary science of consciousness goes back to the epistemological roots of Western thought and culture to articulate a new and subtle relationship between science and philosophy. The author's deep thinking and extensive knowledge challenges the reader to re-approach perennial questions with a holistic mindset and in a new and self-critical light. The 16 chapters are grouped into three parts: the argument from quality thinking, a self-reflective, interdisciplinary science of consciousness, and a science towards the limits; there is a good deal of overlap between the sections as the fundamental issues can be approached from a number of different angles. Two of his key original and connected insights relate to what Emilios calls pre-epistemology and self-locking objectification.

If epistemology is how we know things, then pre-epistemology 'is concerned with how we isolate, objectify and lock into our fundamental perceptions and conceptions' (p. 31). We easily mistake reality for the representations we make of it, taking an object-mediated approach for granted. Emilios recommends that we cultivate an awareness of this objectification process, which is where the self-reflective process comes in. He points out that 'conception is not possible without perception, perception is not possible without representation, and representation is not possible without objectification' (p. 205). One could add the necessary metaphorical nature of the thought process to this observation. Fundamentally, the investigating consciousness needs to investigate itself.

Readers will find their minds reformatted by many formulations in this profound discourse. Here are some examples of Emilios' reflexive bootstrap observations, which are like linguistic equations:

• there can be no examination of consciousness without a consciousness informing that examination

• the subtlety of understanding depends on the understanding of subtlety

• science can help us to better understand consciousness, but only to the extent that consciousness helps us first to better understand science

• you define in terms of what you think you know and you know in terms of what you think you can define

• consciousness can be understood in terms of facts only to the extent that facts can be understood in terms of consciousness

• if it is necessary that wholeness incorporate consciousness, should it not be equally necessary that consciousness incorporate wholeness?

Both right and left hemisphere thinking are required to understand these formulations, and the analysis here is informed by the equally subtle thinking of Iain McGilchrist. In one chapter, consciousness is defined as the fifth force, wholeness in action on its parts, the process whereby physical reality wraps itself into form and is thought into existence. This in turn is related to qualitative thinking, and there is an extraordinary 17-page chart of bullet points articulating the unfolding consciousness and the patterns we use to understand ourselves and the world. Language is also very important, all the more so in its evocative and even ambiguous function. At one point, Emilios quotes a translation of the first verse of the Tao Te Ching, which is usually rendered as 'the Tao which can be spoken of is not the real Tao; however, this translation is based on the either/or logic of the West, and a Chinese person from the classical period would understand the sentence as follows: 'the Tao which can be spoken of may, or may not, be the real Tao' (p. 116) Another related strand is both/and rather than this exclusive either/or. Emilios points out that nature 'equally uses wholeness and fragmentation, structure and process, linearity and nonlinearity, consistency and spontaneity. (p. 67).

Pointers to a self-reflective interdisciplinary science of consciousness can be found in 'relativity, quantum mechanics, Bohr's complementarity, Heisenberg's uncertainty, Goedel's meta-theorem, Chew's bootstrapping, complexity theory and fuzzy logic', all of which 'cry out for a new understanding of the physical world that is dependent on self reflection, multiform tea, direct experience and profound intuition' (p. 164) These scientific breakthroughs 'point way beyond its conceptual framework', still largely based on mechanism and reductionism, frequently articulated in a scientism that is quite oblivious to its own philosophical underpinnings; and there is considerable resistance to findings that suggest the inadequacy of scientific materialism as an approach. Emilios comments that 'they honestly believe that they are not philosophising when they stipulate that "only" the tangible is real, "only" measurements can assess it, and "only" facts can describe it (p. 171). Later, he likens modern cognitive scientists and neurophysiologists to mediaeval schoolmen in their unquestioning belief: 'cognitive science and neurophysiology query everything - except their own fundamental assumptions', which are contextualised not only in terms of our thought processes but also more generally in cultural, philosophical, political and educational terms.

The last chapter is devoted to suggestions for a way forward regarding the development of a self-reflective interdisciplinary science of consciousness. How do we train ourselves in wholeness and transform our own sensibilities? One important method is a Bohmian type of silence-punctuated dialogue in which presuppositions and assumptions are suspended and egos kept out of the exchange. This will allow wholeness and new insights to emerge spontaneously from the collective intelligence. You can read more detail on this in the article beginning on page 15. The next step cannot be taken starting from where we currently are: 'using a closed science to investigate a restricted consciousness will not help us use consciousness to open up that closed science' (p. 254). Rather, we need what he calls a pattern approach focusing on complex interactions, realising that 'the quality and level of our conceptual apparatus influences the scope of our insights…we are as we perceive' (p. 170) The implications of the approach recommended could not be more far-reaching as they probe the very basis of our thinking as it has been translated into the world we live in, and anticipated results will be de-artificialising intelligence, rehumanising technology, and re-personalising society so that we can ask ourselves what is real quality in life.

Readers will be richly rewarded by careful study of this philosophical and scientific tour de force - the fruit of a lifetime's reflection and conversation - and it is sure to count among the most defining and significant books of the decade.