TPF : Argument from Reason -- Metaphysics

[Gnomon]

"The argument from reason challenges the proposition that everything that exists, and in particular thought and reason, can be explained solely in terms of natural or physical processes".___OP

My own approach is more oriented around 'history of ideas' and understanding how ideas influence cultural dynamics and entrenched attitudes, leavened somewhat with my engagement with Buddhist praxis — Wayfarer

My knowledge of the 'history of ideas', and of Hindu/Buddhist philosophy --- not to mention "praxis" --- may be superficial compared to yours. And my knowledge of Western Philosophy --- especially of the modern era --- is superficial to that of ↪180 Proof. So, I don't pretend to compete in those arenas. But my "expertise" --- relatively speaking --- is in the 21st century sciences of Quantum Physics (QP) and Information Theory (IT).

The pioneers of QP, baffled by the variance of their experiments from classical/mechanical Newtonian Physics, turned to Hindu & Buddhist vocabularies --- not the religions --- to express the Holistic & Immaterial (mental) aspects of sub-atomic reality. John A. Wheeler even went so far as to combine QP and IT in his famous "It from Bit" postulation. Then, he went on to propose the Participatory Anthropic Principle*1, which implied that the observer's mind could have real effects upon the material world --- at least on the sub-atomic scale. He eventually toyed with the idea of a Weak Anthropic Principle, and even a Strong Anthropic Principle*2.

Obviously, such spooky-woo notions (per 180) are anathema to a believer in hard Materialism, in which the Mind is a minor side-effect of Brain functions, with no magical powers over the material world. Being a practicing scientist, not a philosopher, Wheeler didn't expand his Information/Matter/Mind theory to its ultimate conclusion. So others took-up the gauntlet for him. And their Information-centric (not matter-centric) reasoning led to the conclusion that the human mind must be a descendant of a Prime Mind of some kind : a Logos or Enformer/Programmer.

Both the woke Buddha and itty-bitty Wheeler, being pragmatic practitioners in their own fields, astutely avoided making the philosophical inference of an ultimate Mind, who planted the enforming seed that eventually sprouted in homo sapiens (rational ape). Yet, since I am an amateur philosopher, with no peer review to revile my unorthodox ideas for conformance to established orthodoxy*3, I feel free to take the "it from bit" seed to its logical ontological conclusion.

However, since I have no interest in founding a popular religion, I'm content to use the ancient vocabulary of Plato (Logos) and a neologism of my own devising (EnFormAction) to express my personal opinions on an opinion-sharing forum. As for Plato, my Logos/Enformer is no Satan or Savior, just Order-Organization-Reason in a growing-maturing-complexifying material world --- where the only Nirvana is a refuge of your own imagination.



*1. "A participatory anthropic principle (PAP) was proposed by the American physicist John Archibald Wheeler. He suggested that if one takes the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics seriously, one may conclude that, because no phenomenon can be said to exist until it is observed,"
https://www.britannica.com/science/part ... -principle
Note : This strange statement by a physicist, echoes Berkeley's Idealist assertion : "Berkeley's immaterialism argues that "esse est percipi (aut percipere)", which in English is to be is to be perceived (or to perceive)." ___Wiki

*2. "THE STRONG ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE The ultimate form of anthropic reasoning is to assert that the coincidences we have remarked on are more than that: that the universe must be such as to admit the production of intelligent life at some time. This idea is known as the strong anthropic principle."
https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Pea ... ck3_5.html
Note -- Weak Principle = Intelligence from Coincidence. Strong Principle = Intelligence from Intelligence.

*3. On this forum, 180 proof has appointed himself as the un-official inquisitor of Scientism/Naturalism/Materialism orthodoxy. And what vexes his know-it-all-neurons most is the mutual ideas : a> that there is some immaterial force in the world (energy/information) and b> that it originated in some preter-natural Intelligence. He need not worry though. The Enformationism philosophy, with a single adherent, is just a personal opinion (like that of Gallileo), based on eye-opening observations of the squishy (non-mechanical) foundations of the material world.
No, 180, I'm not equating my little QP/IT notion with Gallileo's church-threatening revelations. Perhaps Information-centric physicists, Wheeler & Paul Davies, though, will find a similar place in the future history of science & philosophy. All I can say, as an amateur with no credentials, is that the all-purpose role of Information in the world makes sense of many philosophical & scientific enigmas for me : such as the emergence of intentional Reasoning in a world of dumb Matter & dynamic Energy.

*4. "By the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, logos was the term established to describe the faculty of human reason and the knowledge men had of the known world and of other humans. Plato allowed his characters to engage in the conceit of describing logos as a living being in some of his dialogues."
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Logos


lwell0j7189z.jpg