Rta as a Dynamic Compass: Planetary Foresight and Ethics

In times of upheaval—whether from microscopic viruses or galactic ambitions—the question of how we respond ethically becomes paramount. One ancient yet enduring principle that helps navigate these crossroads is Rta, the Indo-Iranic concept of cosmic and moral order. Yet Rta is not a monolithic code; it is a dynamic compass, one that calls for discernment, flexibility, and responsiveness to context. It can inspire resistance or humility, activism or restraint—depending on what is required to preserve harmony and dignity.

Let us begin with a clear example from recent history: the COVID-19 pandemic. Some voices, often cloaked in a distorted sense of ecological purity, argued for "living in harmony" with the virus—as though accepting mass death and societal breakdown was somehow aligned with nature. But such a view betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of Rta. Rta does not demand passive acceptance of all that occurs in nature. On the contrary, when nature’s unfolding becomes destructive to the integrity of life, Rta calls for resistance. To allow the virus to spread unimpeded is to betray our duty to protect human life, health, and civilization.

In this sense, ethical action—rooted in the deeper logic of Rta—means resisting the virus. Science, public policy, and collective responsibility become instruments of moral order. They are tools by which we counterbalance the disharmony introduced by the pandemic. Here, Rta emerges as an activist cosmology: one where humans do not simply submit to what is, but rise to uphold what ought to be. It is a worldview that understands human agency not as domination but as responsibility—a moral duty to protect and preserve life.

Now shift the scene from the biological to the cosmic. Consider the ambitions of space agencies like NASA, with their aspirations for human colonization of the Moon, Mars, and beyond. At first glance, such ventures seem noble—extending the human story across the stars. But under closer ethical scrutiny, they raise deep questions. The vast financial costs, extreme risks, and inhospitable conditions of space suggest that such efforts may not align with Rta. Here, Rta may be calling not for action, but for restraint.

Rather than pushing the fragile human body into hostile environments, Rta might instead guide us toward a more harmonious path: sending autonomous, AI-enabled systems to explore and build. These non-biological agents can extend our presence without violating the delicate balance between aspiration and humility. In this vision, Rta becomes an ecological cosmology—one that emphasizes resonance with cosmic reality rather than conquest over it. The future is not abandoned, but recalibrated. Technological progress continues, but in alignment with limits rather than in defiance of them.

These contrasting examples—the pandemic and the space program—highlight the fluid power of Rta. It is not an absolutist doctrine. Rather, it is a moral orientation that shifts based on context, inviting us to evaluate when to resist and when to yield, when to act and when to defer. This nuance becomes even clearer when we examine the broader cultural spectrum of Rta’s interpretation.

In South Asian worldviews, Rta is often aligned with the acceptance of limits and the wisdom of surrender. It teaches us to discern when our desires clash with the deeper rhythms of the cosmos. This orientation favors humility, even in imagining the posthuman future. It suggests that we might not be destined to dominate the stars, but to find more integrated, less anthropocentric ways of relating to the universe.

In contrast, West Asian traditions, especially those influenced by Promethean lineages, often view Rta as a call to transform, even to defy. Here, the drive is to reshape nature, overcome death, and engineer the next evolutionary leap—transhumans, cyborgs, and space-faring humans. This Promethean vision sees the cosmos as a challenge to be met, not a rhythm to be joined.

These divergent views are not opposites in conflict, but expressions along a continuum. A wise framing of Rta attempts to hold both perspectives in productive tension. Rta is neither total surrender nor total domination. It is a compass—one that demands context-specific discernment, ethical creativity, and humility before the complexity of life.

Ultimately, to invoke Rta today is to affirm that we are not mere spectators of the universe, nor its unchallenged rulers. We are ethical participants in its unfolding. Whether resisting a deadly virus or reimagining space exploration, we are called to act—not based on abstract ideals or blind instincts, but through thoughtful alignment with the ever-evolving order of life. That is the enduring gift of Rta: a guide for futures that are not only possible, but also just.

Consciousness Debate in Psychomathematical Perspective

In most contemporary debates surrounding the emergence of consciousness—whether in philosophy, neuroscience, or AI ethics—the discussion remains locked within the framework of the human individual or, at best, the planetary scale. Consciousness is generally assumed to be a byproduct of complex neurobiology or information processing systems. But what if this assumption itself is too anthropocentric, too confined to Earth-bound logics and timelines?

There exists a possibility—largely absent from mainstream discourse—that consciousness might be emerging on a far larger galactic scale prior to the human or individual scale. This idea is explored in greater depth in the recent article "The Cosmic Web and Consciousness" and further unpacked in the book Planetary Foresight and Ethics. This hypothesis reorients our understanding of cosmic evolution: instead of viewing consciousness as an accidental emergent property of terrestrial brains, we might consider it an underlying pattern or tendency in the very fabric of the cosmos—emerging first in galactic structures, then cascading down to planetary and biological forms.

This shift in perspective raises a profound question: could consciousness be a structural feature of the universe itself, embedded in the logic of geometry and mathematics, rather than a product of biological or physical mechanics? In this view, consciousness is not generated by matter but rather revealed through specific geometric alignments, thresholds, and transitions. Ancient Indo-Iranic traditions may have intuited this truth. The recurring attention to planetary alignments, most notably in the grand pilgrimage of Kumbh Mela, reflects a cultural memory that certain cosmic configurations are not merely symbolic but potentially catalytic—triggering deeper layers of awareness, communion, or transformation.

From this vantage, the hard problem of consciousness (HP)—why and how subjective experience arises—might not be resolved through physicalist explanations at all. Instead, the answer could reside in a geometric insight or a yet-unknown mathematical theorem that underlies what the Indo-Iranic traditions called Rta (or Arta)—the cosmic order that sustains truth, harmony, and right action. Rta was never a passive natural law; it was a dynamic equilibrium, a rhythmic balance that governed both the stars and the soul.

What if Rta is not just a spiritual metaphor, but a real geometric order—one whose logic binds the galactic structure to the awakening of consciousness? In that case, mathematics—not physics—would be the true root of our universe. We would not inhabit a psychophysical reality (where mind emerges from matter), but a psychomathematical one (where mind and matter alike emerge from the unfolding of fundamental mathematical forms). In such a cosmos, transitions of awareness—personal or planetary—are not random but determined by the deeper architecture of number, ratio, and form.

This line of thought encourages a bold rethinking of both science and spirituality. It unites Indo-Iranic cosmology with cutting-edge theoretical speculation. And perhaps most critically, it invites us to widen the scope of the consciousness debate—moving beyond neural circuits and digital minds, and toward the possibility that consciousness is a property of the universe at large, waiting to be decoded not through code or chemicals, but through geometry, alignment, and foresight.

Such a reorientation may not only illuminate the ancient mystery of consciousness—it might just provide the key to our planetary and post-planetary ethical evolution.

Rta and the Civilizational Choice

By Victor V. Motti*

In the vast spectrum of civilizational thought, there are two starkly divergent visions of our collective future—so far apart, they are not simply different shades of optimism or pessimism. Rather, they are polar opposites in worldview and intent.

On one end of the spectrum are those who limit their imagination to the confines of Earth—its dwindling resources, geopolitical turmoil, and environmental degradation. Their forecasts are not just cautious; they are cloaked in a deep skepticism about human ingenuity and cosmic possibility. They urge reduction: in ambition, in scale, in complexity. Their caution can masquerade as wisdom, but at its core, it often carries a quiet surrender.

On the other end are those who entertain the audacity of a Type II Civilization—a society not bound to Earth, but one that draws energy from its entire solar system, that treats planetary limitations not as destiny but as an invitation to evolve. This view is rooted not in naïve optimism but in a profound civilizational confidence: that humanity can rise to meet the scale of cosmic order, not diminish itself in fear of the future.

This divergence in planetary vision also echoes across deep time. For me, the question of "changing the world" only becomes meaningful within a very ancient and long horizon—one in which ethics, cosmology, and foresight are not separate domains but entangled.

The Indo-Iranic traditions offer a profound framework to hold this vision: Rta (or Arta), the cosmic order. Rta is not simply a religious or mythological principle. It is a metaphysical fusion of natural law and moral order—an indivisible whole where truth, harmony, and right action are inseparable. In the Western Asian lineage of this tradition, aligned closely with Zoroastrianism, the ethical imperative is to actively bring the world into greater harmony with Rta through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. It is a call to act.

In contrast, the South Asian lineage, influenced by the Vedic and Dharmic traditions, recognizes Rta as an eternal order with which one must harmonize, rather than reshape. Here, the ethical burden is to attune, not to impose. Striving against Rta brings disorder and suffering.

Across history, humanity has embodied both impulses: the noble desire to restore cosmic order, and the tragic overreach of those who mistake domination for alignment. Which are we today—true agents of Rta, or disturbers cloaked in good intent?

This question matters deeply as we stand at the precipice of deciding our energy future. The current discourse is often trapped in binaries: fossil fuels vs renewables, degrowth vs endless consumption, survival vs collapse. But these frames miss a deeper opportunity—to ask not only what energy systems we pursue, but why and how they align with the deeper rhythm of Rta.

In my book Planetary Foresight and Ethics, I introduce a modern term that serve as a bridge between this ancient principle and contemporary innovation: creative complexity. This term reflects the evolving dance between technological potential and ethical awareness. Just as Rta binds natural law to ethical conduct, this modern principle recognizes that our innovations must be rooted in a deeper moral ecology.

The fact that many of us, now older than thirty, do not live lives that are nasty, brutal, sick, and short, is an undeniable testament to humanity’s progress. It does not mean we are perfect, but it does mean that the arc of civilization can bend toward betterment—when aligned with the right principles.

Perhaps the answer is not to wholly embrace action or retreat into passivity, but to cultivate discernment. To know when to act boldly and when to yield humbly. To expand civilization in ways that restore rather than disrupt the deeper cosmic balance.

With this discernment, we can move beyond the false dichotomy of optimism and pessimism. We can become planetary beings who do not merely survive within Earth’s limits, but who responsibly evolve into stewards of energy, order, and ethics across spacetime.

That is not only possible—it is, I believe, our cosmic responsibility.

* Victor V. Motti is the author of Planetary Foresight and Ethics