TPF : Mind - Matter Paradox

[Gnomon]

You are using an idealist argument - I love it! — Pop

Yes. But I also use Realist arguments where appropriate. However, it's the Idealist notions that tend to inflame some posters on this forum. I coined a term to describe my BothAnd philosophy : I'm a Redealist. I don't have to deny physical Reality in order to "see" meta-physical Ideality, the invisible world of interrelationships, that we know as Ideas or Meaning. Depending on what you are looking for, you will see and experience either the immaterial ideal world of Relationships. Or you can see the real world of Objects. It's a matter of perspective, as in Einstein's principle of Relativity. But some people seem to be blind (intentionally ?) to the reality of Relationships. And that is the whole point of Carlo Rovelli's latest book, HELGOLAND. The traditional belief of Science was that scientists can stand outside the Real world, and see it as it really is. But Kant shot-down that notion, long before Quantum Theory undermined the material foundation of Reality. Rovelli says, "the external point of view is a point of view that does not exist".

Rovelli goes on to say, while discussing the meaning of Information, that "this condition [subjectivity], which is perhaps a problem for naive materialism, is beautifully satisfied if we rethink matter as interaction and correlations". [my bracket] In my experience, the primary argument against Ideal concepts is based on the authoritative belief system (dogma) of Naive Materialism. That prejudice is understandable though, because we are all materialists, when we tend to the needs of the body. But the tip of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is "Self-Actualization", which has nothing to do with the physical body, but focuses on the meta-physical Self, which is merely an idea in the mind. Naive Materialism tends to view the mental aspects of the world as merely various functions of Matter.

My "Idealist" perspective turns that primacy around, to view Matter as merely one form of meta-physical Information. Rovelli emphasizes that Real/Ideal distinction by listing some of the obviously immaterial forms of mentality : "The mental world has different aspects --- meaning, intentionality, values, objectives, ends, emotions, aesthetic and moral senses, mathematical intuition, perception, creativity, consciousness . . . ." When Plato imagined a separate realm of Ideal Forms, those immaterial qualities are what he had in mind. Of course, that ideal realm is not really separate, just metaphorically on a different plane, so to speak. And it's metaphorical language, comparing ideal concepts with real objects, that annoy Naive Materialists. They will, of course, deny that label. But, you can label me a Redealist.

Naive Materialism :
According to the naïve realist, the objects of perception are not merely representations of external objects, but are in fact those external objects ... ___Wiki

Ideality :
* In Plato’s theory of Forms, he argues that non-physical forms (or ideas) represent the most accurate or perfect reality. Those Forms are not physical things, but merely definitions or recipes of possible things. What we call Reality consists of a few actualized potentials drawn from a realm of infinite possibilities.
1. Materialists deny the existence of such immaterial ideals, but recent developments in Quantum theory have forced them to accept the concept of “virtual” particles in a mathematical “field”, that are not real, but only potential, until their unreal state is collapsed into reality by a measurement or observation. To measure is to extract meaning into a mind. [Measure, from L. Mensura, to know; from mens-, mind]
2. Some modern idealists find that scenario to be intriguingly similar to Plato’s notion that ideal Forms can be realized, i.e. meaning extracted, by knowing minds. For the purposes of this blog, “Ideality” refers to an infinite pool of potential (metaphorically equivalent to a quantum field), of which physical Reality is a small part.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html

[Gnomon]

I thought I did explain. But I forgot you are a dualist, so it wouldn't make much of an impression on you, I'm sure.
For a dualist, information exists as patterns of energy / matter everywhere else except in mind! — Pop

If you explained the meaning of "information integrates itself", I missed it. Would you run it by me again?

Actually, I am both a Dualist and a Monist, just as I am both a Realist and an Idealist. That's how I unify a universe of many parts into a single whole system. But I don't understand how Holism could explain how a bit or byte of Information could "integrate itself". That seems to attribute some self-control to abstract Information/Energy -- as-if a bit of information is a self-conscious entity. I sometimes describe EnFormAction, metaphorically, as-if it works like the Holy Spirit of God, "moving on the face of the waters". But, it's not intended to be taken literally or physically or religiously.

As a world system, Information (EnFormAction) is already integrated, but when Generic Information takes on the form of Matter or Energy, it necessarily dis-integrates. Maybe what you meant to say was that Information is inherently unified in its holistic form. But the Integrated Information Theory, postulates that the real entities, that we perceive around us, must somehow become re-integrated. I'm not sure how the mathematical manipulations would actually achieve that goal. But we do it instinctively all the time when we change our perspective from subjective to objective, and vice-versa. So, information is constantly changing form, from holistic Potential, to particular Actual, and back again. In the human brain/mind, information is converted from neuro-chemical processes into the idea processing that we call "thinking". But the information doesn't re-integrate itself, because it requires intention on the part of the thinker. Anyway, this seems to be minor semantic distinction for me. But, I could be missing something important.


EnFormAction :
Ententional Causation. A proposed metaphysical law of the universe that causes random interactions between forces and particles to produce novel & stable arrangements of matter & energy. It’s the creative force (aka : Divine Will) of the axiomatic eternal deity that, for unknown reasons, programmed a Singularity to suddenly burst into our reality from an infinite source of possibility. AKA : The creative power of Evolution; the power to enform; Logos; Change.\
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html

PS__I do see signs of Intentionality in the process of Thermodynamics and Evolution. And I propose a hypothetical deity to provide the teleological direction to the system as a whole. But taken literally, that could imply hard determinism. So, my metaphorical deity is assumed to give the world a push in a particular direction, then leave it alone to find its own path through almost infinite possibilities to a destination that is determined only in outline. Sadly, all of that hypothetical nonsense sounds like mere philosophical quibbling. So, I don't make a religion of it.

[Gnomon]

Therefore, as the logic of the physical world is verifiable by observation, "logic is empirical". — RussellA

OK. But it's the physics that's empirical, not the logical inferences. Logic is not a physical object, it's a mental process of making meaningful connections between otherwise meaningless events. The distinction is between the physical event and the metaphysical observation. People tend to see only the object in front of them, and ignore the seer (with knowledge and prejudices) behind their eyes. Simply seeing the obvious is not scientific observation. Classical Physics allowed scientists to ignore the observing mind. But, Quantum Theory requires scientists to include the Observer in the observation.

[Gnomon]

Fair enough. Your understanding seems to have evolved since last we spoke, and so has mine. — Pop

My philosophical understanding has been rapidly evolving since the core concept of the Enformationism Thesis occurred to me about 12 years ago. I continue to develop that kernel in my blog, and on this forum. Having my solipsistic ideas challenged is key to making philosophical progress in the complex world beyond the Self.

The information of the first and second Wavicle is integrated ( and memorized ) to the form of the third Wavicle. — Pop

Unfortunately, that assertion seems to be based on assumptions that I am not privy to. I can vaguely imagine that each wave-front is altered (form changed) by its interaction with another wave. Thereby retaining a "memory" of the event, long after it happened. Is that even close to your understanding of wavicle "memory"?

consciousness as information integration — Pop

I interpret that assertion as saying that Consciousness is a process of "connecting the dots", or categorizing independent external factors into holistic meaning, to the observer.

If a big bang is a disintegration, the opposite of a big bang will be integration. So, following a big bang period ( disintegration period ), one would expect an integration period . — Pop

That sounds like what Teilhard deChardin called the Omega Point. I just started reading the 1987 book by astronomer John Barrow and mathematical physicist Frank Tipler : The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Both of those "visionary" scientists reached somewhat religious or mystical conclusions about the destiny of the universe. But they are usually ridiculed by scientists and philosophers who still hold the Copernican Principle dear.

The Omega Point is a supposed future when everything in the universe spirals toward a final point of unification.

Copernican Principle :
In physical cosmology, the Copernican principle states that humans, on the Earth or in the Solar System, are not privileged observers of the universe.
Note -- this is usually interpreted to mean that the universe is not Anthropic -- that there is nothing special about humanity, and the universe is not teleological.

[Gnomon]

3. If everything is made of energy and information, then so is consciousness. — Pop

My understanding may be a little different, in that I would say that every thing and every process in the world is a form of Generic EnFormAction (the power to cause change of form). One form is Matter. which is what we know as physical Objects. Energy is another form, but it's a process of change, not a static object. And Consciousness is also not a stable thing, but an ongoing process of interpreting incoming Information (energy) into Subjective Meaning. So, consciousness is more like Energy than Matter. But it's hard to say what an ongoing process is "made of". You could say that C consists of a stream of Ideas or symbols or meanings. But that's a metaphor analogous to flowing water, which is actually made-of both Matter (H20), and energy (momentum). Maybe C is like a water-wheel mill that uses flowing energy to convert raw material (grain) into edible (meaningful) flour.

This wavicle interacts with another wavicle, and in the interaction the frequency and amplitude ( information ) of the two wavicles modulate to form a third wavicle. This third wavicle in its form of frequency and amplitude symbolizes the interaction of the first two wavicles. — Pop

I think I vaguely grasp what you're saying. But to me, "symbolize" is a metaphor for what goes-on in a conscious mind, not in abstract space. Are you implying that the wavicle "memory" and "symbols" are in G*D's mind?

A symbol is a subjective idea (metaphor, analogy) that represents an external object or someone else's idea. For example, the NAZI swastika originally symbolized divinity & spirituality, or just good luck. But it was adopted by the NAZIs to symbolize the dynamic "spirit" of the German folk. So, like beauty, a symbol is in the conscious mind's eye of the beholder.

This is what consciousness does, it integrates information to a symbol. — Pop

Yes. C converts objective coded energy (out there) into subjective Meaning-to-Self (in here). In its coded form, the energy is meaningless. So, I guess you mean by "integrates", that C "interprets" patterns into meanings or symbols.

mind is the arena that facilitates the self organization of information. — Pop

Yes but, I would interpret "self-organization" as an action that is automatic, and inherent in the coded information, and requires no interpretation by the recipient. Something like a self-extracting ZIP file. But for me, it takes two to "integrate" or interpret many possible meanings into a singular relevance to the recipient's Self. So, I would say that incoming information (usually in the form of energy) is meaningless and non-symbolic, until it is process in a prepared mind with the code-key (reason) to extracting the potential information. Of course, the meaning of the incoming data was known to the sender (G*D??), but not to the receiver, until the mind "faciitates" the decoding process with a "code key" (Logic) that is known to both parties in the communication.

[Gnomon]

But, on the other hand, if logical truths hold in any domain, then any domain has to contain the logical objects. Thus for logical objects there can be no empty domain. — RussellA

I am in general agreement with your assessment of Logic. But the quoted statement reminded me of the weird notion of Quantum Fields and Virtual Particles. The field itself is defined mathematically (logically) as a grid or matrix of dimensionless points (i.e. no extension, no measurable contents). And the Virtual Particles that theoretically occupy those points can be described as Potential-not-actual particles. Therefore, as a "logical object", a Virtual Particle seems to be an Empty Domain that could potentially be filled with substance.

Of course, most physicists prefer the positive-sounding term "virtual" to the negative implications of "not actual". In any case, the theoretical mathematicians don't really care that those "point" domains are mostly empty, until randomly-and-without-provocation, those vacant domains are filled with measurable particles of matter. It's only in an averaged statistical sense that the field is real. So, it seems that the human mind can "see" logical relationships between imaginary "objects". In that case, Virtual Particles could be described, philosophically, as Metaphysical instead of Physical. But that's a no-no in Physics.

Do Virtual Particles Really Exist? :
The effects of the quantum vacuum are real; the virtual particle visualization is useful, but the particles themselves are not real.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswith ... lly-exist/

Virtual reality (VR)is a simulated experience that can be similar to or completely different from the real world.

[Gnomon]

Mass is energy, and that's generally considered a material property. — Kenosha Kid

Mass is indeed a property of matter. But, in that stable form it is no longer the same as dynamic Energy. I like to think of Matter as a condensed form of slowed-down Energy. For example, as the frequency of light energy slows down, it's vibrations are less energetic. So at some point, light energy is transformed, as-if by magic, into a sluggish material form. That's how plants make potential-energy-rich, but low-frequency, sugar molecules from sunlight. Technically, Mass per se is not Energy. But it is mathematically equal to the frequency of the energy multiplied by the speed of propagation of light (E=MC^2).

mass–energy equivalence :
the energy E is measured in Joules, the mass m is measured in kilograms, and the speed of light is measured in meters per second.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%8 ... quivalence

[Gnomon]

Is this due to G*D? I understand it as the laws of the universe ( including the ones we haven't discovered yet ) combining to cause Self organization, in an intrinsic way - Teleology, no externals necessary. — Pop

I think your "law of the universe" may be similar to my notion of EnFormAction. I didn't define it in terms of Self-Organization, but I suppose that's one way to look at it. Since the hypothetical Enformer is out of the picture, physical changes appear to be self-caused. That may be what Sheldrake had in mind for his notion of Morphic Resonance. But, I remain skeptical about his inference that "paranormal" events, such as mental telepathy are attributable to the Morphic Field.

EnFormAction :
Ententional Causation. A proposed metaphysical law of the universe that causes random interactions between forces and particles to produce novel & stable arrangements of matter & energy. It’s the creative force (aka : Divine Will) of the axiomatic eternal deity that, for unknown reasons, programmed a Singularity to suddenly burst into our reality from an infinite source of possibility. AKA : The creative power of Evolution; the power to enform; Logos; Change.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html

Morphic Resonance :
Morphic resonance is a process whereby self-organising systems inherit a memory from previous similar systems.
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance


But if everything is caused to self organize, then an intrinsic consciousness is necessary, in order to intrinsically navigate the information, and form an intrinsic "self" in the process. Which do you think it is? — Pop

I think the automatically evolving (self-organizing) processes of Nature imply that Organized Intention, rather than Disorderly Randomness, is at work. That's why I describe Evolution as functioning like a computer program, which seems intent on reaching some ultimate solution to an open question -- hopefully, the answer will be more enlightening than "42". But the original teleological Intention was in the mind of the postulated Programmer, and was eventually expressed in the emergence of creatures capable of their own self-control (cybernetics) and self-directed Intentions.

However, I refrain from applying the notion of self-consciousness to the lifeless & mindless elements (particles) of Physics. Instead, the "intrinsic consciousness" was in the Enformer, who achieves He/r goals by means of EnFormAction (a combination of causal Energy and cybernetic Information). Hence, Nature is a goal-directed cybernetic organism (a holistic system), imbued with self-directed consciousness by its Intentional Designer. But, I have to be careful not to say such outrageous things out-loud on this forum.

Principia Cybernetica :
Philosophies traditionally start with an ontology or metaphysics: a theory of being in itself, of the essence of things, of the fundamental principles of existence and reality. In a traditional systemic philosophy, "organization" might be seen as the fundamental principle of being, rather than God, matter, or the laws of nature. However this still begs the question of where this organization comes from. In a constructive systemic philosophy, on the other hand, the essence is the process through which this organization is created.
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/METAPHI.html
Note -- but who or what organized the process of Evolution???

[Gnomon]

If you had a definition of consciousness then you may be able to make a coherent case for such a proposition, by examining whether the definition "only" fits humanity.

I have a definition of consciousness that fits humanity very well - "information integration for the purpose of self organization". — Pop

Yes. Your definition is broad enough to include almost anything that "processes" information, including a rock that absorbs radiant light energy, which it then "integrates" into its structure as thermal heat energy, which it then radiates back into the environment. Since I define Energy as a form of Generic Information (EnFormAction), the rock is "aware" of that incoming data only briefly. Whether that constitutes self-organization though is debatable. The rock may be changed by that interaction (thermal expansion), but the effects of such a minor change in structure might take eons to make a discernible difference. So I would reserve the term "information integration" for a more dramatic change, such as what happens when an animal "integrates" food into its structure and metabolism. That subliminal integration is essential for self-organization, but is it sufficient for meaningful Consciousness?

A dictionary definition of Consciousness is "the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings." But it's hard enough to detect minimal consciousness in a comatose human, let alone a stone. Christof Koch laments the lack of a "consciousness meter" for that purpose. And elementary particles are even more remote from our concept of "awake" and "aware" than a rock. So, I prefer a narrower application of the term, that is more meaningful to the human mind, and to the human perspective. I'm not really concerned with what an atom thinks or feels, as it is dis-integrated in an atom smasher. However, I am interested in the advanced form of Information, that can be described as "Self-consciousness" --- knowing that you know.

Christof Koch -- What is Consciousness :
Consciousness is everything you experience. It is the tune stuck in your head, the sweetness of chocolate mousse, the throbbing pain of a toothache, the fierce love for your child and the bitter knowledge that eventually all feelings will end.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05097-x
Note -- he sounds like a homo sapiens chauvinist.

[Gnomon]

There seem to be many measurable physical effects that seem to point to the existence of virtual particles, but "virtual particles" are not the only possible explanation of these measurable effects. — RussellA

Yes. Like Dark Matter, Virtual Particles are imaginary objects created from logical reasoning to explain otherwise puzzling empirical observations. And I don't doubt that they are useful constructs for the purposes of science. But I'm also aware that ancient people imagined invisible human-like agents to explain the otherwise inexplicable manifestations of invisible energy. For example, lightening reminded them of spears from heaven, so they assumed that someone was throwing them at specific targets, such as humans who offended the gods.

That general theory of disembodied Spirits was useful to pre-scientific thinkers for thousands of years. But we no longer need to imagine those natural effects as caused by human-like intentions, because Nature seems to be operating on auto-pilot. Hopefully, the need for ghostly objects will also no longer be necessary for future science. My money is on the causal (energy) and substantial (matter) effects of Generic Information (EnFormAction) in the natural world