BothAndBlog Forum

Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem is an examination of axiomatic sets that ground math equations. Without him looking for it specifically, Gödel elaborated within his theorem a representational description of absential materialism. Due to their encompass of absential materialism, a label for higher-order dynamical processes elaborated in Terrence W. Deacon’s Incomplete Nature, axiomatic math sets are strategically incomplete. — ucarr

I'm aware of Deacon's application of the mathematical Incompleteness Theorem to the real world in his book Incomplete Nature. However I was not familiar with Absential Materialism, so I Googled it, and found no entries. Hence, I assume the paradoxical & oxymoronic term is of your own coinage. Since this post is fairly long, and technically over my untrained head, I'd appreciate an abbreviated definition of "absential materialism" that distinguishes it from "immaterialism", and identifies why the term is needed for philosophical intercourse. I may want to use it in my own argumentation, but need to make sure I understand its meaning and relevance.

PS___ I looked for graphic images of intersecting gravitational fields, and didn't find any that looked like a model of Consciousness, or might illustrate Absential Materialism.


Paradox at the heart of mathematics :
Gödel's incompleteness theorems are connected to unsolvable calculations in quantum physics. A logical paradox at the heart of mathematics and computer science turns out to have implications for the real world, making a basic question about matter fundamentally unanswerable.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.18983

An oxymoron is a figure of speech that juxtaposes concepts with opposite meanings within a word or in a phrase that is a self-contradiction. As a rhetorical device, an oxymoron illustrates a point to communicate and reveal a paradox. ___Wikipedia

For this reason, I don’t think my pairing rises to the level of a new coinage. More importantly, I’m inclined away from characterizing the pairing as oxymoronic. I see the main thrust of the pairing as an expression of the bridge across the matter/immaterial divide — ucarr

OK. Let's just call Absential Materialism a "novel pairing" with seemingly paradoxical implications. It's oxymoronic only in contrast to Materialism as here & now Realism.

But my main interest is in the "bridge" of which you speak. My own personal worldview, Enformationism, is not posited as the opposite to Materialism, but as a 21st century update to that ancient worldview, expressed most simply in Atomism : nothing but atoms & void.

I suppose you could say that Deacon's Absence discovers a purpose for the Void*1 : not only to serve as a passive complement to material Presence, but to make room for material Change. In a related sense, Absence/Void is the not-yet-real pool-of-Potential from which Actual material things and immaterial properties may Emerge.


The non-locality of ententional mind is not transcendence of our natural world of material_physical things. Instead, it is gravitational manipulation of spatio_temporally extended material things. — ucarr

I notice that you spell "intentional" with an "e", as I do in my own thesis, following Deacon. For me, it implies Energy as in Mental Causality --- intent to cause change --- which is unexplained by Materialism. My thesis postulates a precursor to Energy, Matter and Mind in the power to transform Potential into Actual. That "power" is what J. A. Wheeler referred to in his "it from bit" analogy of matter emerging from causal information. And the most common term for the power-to-transform is "Energy"*2.

I still don't fully grasp your analogy of Absence to the interaction of two gravitational fields. Deacon uses the metaphor of a whirlpool, sucking calm water into its maw. A graphic image might help me to imagine how two gravitational fields interact. A black hole is usually portrayed as a solo, not a pas de dieux. The image below is not very enlightening*3.

↪Wayfarer asks "what is the role of matter" in this scenario. As I proposed above, Absence may play the role of causal Energy in an evolving world of Stuff (matter ; the clay) and Changes to stuff (energy ; sculpting). BTW, in my philosophical model, Gravity is a form of Absential Energy, warping the immaterial Void.


*1. Absence :
Deacon says that Absence is “a defining property of life and mind”. Like the name-less Tao, it’s a way, not a wayfarer, it’s a channel, not the flowing water.
https://bothandblog3.enformationism.info/page33.html

*2. What Is The Power of Absence?
Energy flows into The Void
https://bothandblog3.enformationism.info/page33.html

*3. GRAVITY WHIRLPOOL
cropped-ether.jpg?w=246&h=246

If Absence/Void is active and causal, as in the case of grounding emergent material things, then its energetic_material, not absential. The absential gaps are due to constraints imposed by dynamic metabolics upon the universal, thermo-dynamical tendency towards equilibrium and inaction. — ucarr

My Absence/Void analogy was referring to Potential for change (probability), not Actual causation (energy). In other words, Aristotelian Potential is unreal & immaterial & meta-physical, and not measurable in terms of thermo-dynamics. Potential is knowable only in hindsight by reasoning, or by mathematical calculation of statistical Probability for a future event.

I suppose you could say that "Potential" refers to the Absence part of Absential Materialism. It's the latent Tendency or Propensity, not the manifest Actuality. Potential is another name for my concept of EnFormAction as a precursor of Energy. Potential is Absence that causes Presence. It's not a valid concept in materialistic Physics, but is a useful concept in mathematical Physics.

PS___ The potential-to-actual transformation could be construed as "top-down" causation. As Deacon put it : "the downward . . . causation . . . is in this sense not causation in the sense of being induced to change . . . but is rather an alteration in causal probabilities" p161. {my emphasis}

Potential :
Aristotle's concept of potentiality and actuality is a fundamental aspect of his metaphysical philosophy. Potentiality refers to the capacity or possibility for something to become actual, while actuality refers to the state of being fully realized or manifested. . . . Actuality is what 'manifests.' Potentiality is what 'could be'.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-diffe ... -actuality

Probability :
The philosophy of probability presents problems chiefly in matters of epistemology and the uneasy interface between mathematical concepts and ordinary language as it is used by non-mathematicians. Probability theory is an established field of study in mathematics. . . . . "physical" and "evidential" probabilities.[/i]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabili ... pretations

Absence may play the role of causal Energy… — Gnomon
Energy, even as a waveform, is a presence. — ucarr

In order to "play the role of energy", Absence (void) must transform from Potential (not yet real) into Actual (matter). The mathematical waveform is not a real thing, but a pointer to the potential or possible Presence of a particle (photon). There are no material waveforms in Reality, only conceptual forms in Ideality. Do, you see what I mean?

The mathematical waveform is not a real thing — Gnomon
There are no material waveforms in Reality — Gnomon
Ocean waves might be considered as waveforms, although they are erratic. Radar, etc. are waveforms in reality. — jgill

Hmmm? An ocean wave is a modulation of water, but what is the real substance of a radar waveform? Radar is a modulation of physical Energy, but it has no "real" substance, except perhaps for ethereal Aether. The waveform is described in terms of time, frequency, space, polarization, and modulation. But all of those are mental concepts, not material objects. Hence, they exist in what I call Ideality.

Note --- I was a radarman in the Navy, but never saw or touched a waveform, except as a graphic representation in a book. That's because a waveform is a mathematical idealization, not a real thing like "radar love".

PS___ I asked ↪ucarr for a graphic representation of Interacting Gravity Fields to help me understand his analogy to Absential Materialism. He didn't respond, so do you know where I could find such an illustration of material absence? I'm serious.

Radar Love
I've been drivin' all night, my hands wet on the wheel
There's a voice in my head that drives my heel
It's my baby callin', sayin', "I need you here"
And it's a half past four and I'm shiftin' gear…

My Absence/Void analogy was referring to Potential for change (probability), not Actual causation (energy). In other words, Aristotelian Potential is unreal & immaterial & meta-physical, and not measurable in terms of thermo-dynamics. Potential is knowable only in hindsight by reasoning, or by mathematical calculation of statistical Probability for a future event. — Gnomon
I think your use of “potential,” a stored-energy, material phenomenon, connects Absence/Void to other material things. Think of a battery. — ucarr

No. I was not talking about storage of invisible energy in tangible chemistry, but about Potential as a Principle, as Aristotle defined it. The Map is not the Terrain ; the Potential is not the Chemical.


Principle in philosophy and mathematics means a fundamental law or assumption. The word "principle" is derived from Latin "principium" (beginning)
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Principl

Herein, I will attempt to profile Gnomon and Wayfarer philosophically: You’re trying to plot a course midway between reductive materialism at one extreme and brain-in-a-vat Platonism at the other. In so doing, you must affect a dalliance with materialist science without becoming infected by it. You’re both involved in the game of double-agentry. I’m surmising dancing with science-nuanced-cum-philosophy presents as one of the major strategies of today’s savvy immaterialists. — ucarr

Actually, on this thread, "double-agent" Gnomon is trying to understand your "course" right through the middle of Materialism and Absentialism simultaneously. Your arcane language is over my head, so I was hoping you could provide a graphic representation of your overlapping field concept : a picture is worth a thousand words ___Henrik Ibsen

PS___ Your characterization of ↪Wayfarer & Gnomon as "immaterialists" may provide a clue as to where your strategy is coming from.


businessman-shoot-two-targets-with-one-bullet_47328-216.jpg

I think Deacon is one of those developing an extended form of naturalism — Wayfarer

Yes. But, ironically, Ursula Goodenough and Terrence Deacon, in The Sacred Emergence of Nature --- referred to the topic as "religious naturalism".
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/v ... io_facpubs

In a marginal note of Incomplete Nature, I summarized the book as "a naturalized account for Life, Mind, Soul, Sentience, & Consciousness". But, as a practicing scientist, he seems to carefully avoid crossing the taboo line between Physics vs Metaphysics, Realism vs Idealism, and Science vs Philosophy. So, I also noted, "In order to establish the plausibility of absence-based (Metaphysical) causation, Deacon has to weed out unwarranted assumptions of Physicalism and Materialism". This straddling strategy and ontological balancing act led me to add : "The deistic inferences I'm drawing from Deacon's evidence & reasoning are precisely the one's he's trying to avoid".

I give him some slack though, because Deacon is a scientist whose specialties --- Anthropology, Biosemiotics & Neuroscience --- straddle the dividing line between Science & Philosophy and Classical & Quantum worldviews. My own Enformationism worldview also tiptoes along the same borderline. But, I assume that ↪ucarr intends to remain firmly on the side of "secular naturalism". Which is fine with me. But, I view the Presence vs Absence dichotomy as a figure/ground concept like Ideal/Real & Physics/Metaphysics that depend on your personal subjective perspective, not on True/False facts.

An early Wiki review said, "this book speculates on how properties such as information, value, purpose, meaning and end-directed behavior emerged from physics and chemistry". Enformationism could be described the same way. And the associated philosophical attitude of BothAnd --- neither Realism nor Idealism, but Both --- places me on the same moot margin as Deacon. So, his book has added new dimensions to my own understanding of how Physical Reality and Metaphysical Ideality can co-exist in a world of embodied minds, capable of exploring the near infinite universe by means of ententional imagination.


Incomplete Nature :
The book expands upon the classical conceptions of work and information in order to give an account of ententionality that is consistent with eliminative materialism and yet does not seek to explain away or pass off as epiphenominal the non-physical properties of life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incomplete_Nature

Pulsating electromagnetic energy? I consider this a real "thing", but the aether probably is not. — jgill

Energy is real in its observed effects, but immaterial in its thingness.

Is energy real or a concept?
The reason it is so hard to define is because it's an abstract notion. In physics, the concept of “energy” is really just a kind of shorthand, a tool to help balance the books. It is always conserved (or converted into mass) so is incredibly useful in working out the results of any kind of physical or chemical process
https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/phys ... is-energy/

so do you know where I could find such an illustration of material absence? I'm serious. — Gnomon
How about radar. — jgill

OK. How does Radar --- a focused energy field --- illustrate how Absential Materialism works? Radar is not a pulsating machine gun shooting bullets (matter) & spaces (absence) at a target. Or is it?

PS___As a radarman, I once saw a high-powered radar antenna cook a seagull perched nearby. Definitely real effects! But the "bullets" (pulses or bad vibes) could pass right through or bounce off most matter, and worked best on transparent water, as in a microwave.

Energy is [ ... ] immaterial in its thingness. — Gnomon
So (rest) mass is "immaterial" too? — 180 Proof

Yes. Mass is not an objective thing, it's a measure of Matter. And measurement is a mental function. In my personal philosophical thesis, Mind (e.g. Intention) is also a form of shape-shifting Energy. And physical energy is just one of many forms of Generic Information (power to change form). Matter is a tangible form of that universal Causal Potential. Causation is the process of form change, again not a material thing.

Rest Mass Energy :
One of the terms in the relativistic kinetic energy equation is the rest-mass of the particle and its given by E=mc^2. The rest-mass energy is the energy that is stored inside a stationary particle as a result of its mass. Rest-mass energy implies that mass is simply another form of energy.
https://aklectures.com/lecture/relativi ... ass-energy

Mind as Energy :
The mind is viewed as energies of relationships, with no beginning and no end, that give rise to consciousness in an observer processing change or information from the universe.
https://researchoutreach.org/articles/mind-as-energy/

Consciousness as Energy :
Recent neuroscientific evidence suggests that consciousness is a product of the way energetic activity is organized in the brain.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 ... 02091/full

PS___In this exchange, ↪180 Proof seems to define "immaterial" as unreal or spiritual, or imaginary or irrelevant. A secondary dictionary definition is "spiritual, rather than physical". Personally, I don't think in terms of "spiritual". So, for me "immaterial" means literally "not made of matter".

And that "immaterial" label includes invisible metaphysical Energy, as noted in the links above. Causal Energy is Real, in the sense that its actions have sensable and measurable effects on matter. But Energy is also a subjective Metaphysical process in that it is a definition, not an objective thing. Likewise, Space, Time, and Causation are philosophical ideas, not real things. None of those concepts can be observed with eyes or scopes, but only through reasoning from observations. Perhaps 180 would say that Reasons are Real. And I would agree that those mental functions are indeed included as immaterial Ideas in my Real world.

Picture the moon in earth’s skyline, with the ocean at high tide. This is an interaction of two celestial bodies with gravitational fields: earth holds the moon in its orbit and the moon raises the ocean tides. — ucarr

OK. I'm imagining those interacting gravitational fields. Now, what does that mutual attraction have to do with Absential Materialism? Deacon says that "what is absent matters"; but that means it's meaningful to an observer. Is Meaning the kind of Matter your \term refers to?