Phil Forum : Fieldism vs Materialism

[Gnomon]

In this discussion, I think your use of a mathematical concept as metaphor to connect physics to ‘mind’ is murky at best. — Possibility

Apparently, I misunderstood your intention for this thread as similar to my own usage of the term "Field" to denote the distinction between Realism and Idealism. So, when you contrasted "Fieldism" with "Materialism", I immediately thought of my own notion of a "Mind Field". The only hit I got on Google for "mind field", though, was for a TV documentary that has nothing to do with my concept, except that it is an evocative word-play. I thought the metaphor would be more apparent and common. I was wrong. If I have hi-jacked your thread, I apologize.

A magnetic field is imagined as pervading the universe with little dimensionless magnets (illustrated with arrows) at every vector point in space. Likewise, I imagine the Mind Field as pervading the universe with little dimensionless information elements (bits) at each mathematical (value) point in space. The usual definition of a field is intended to be materialistic, but the points or vectors that make-up the field are not made of matter or even energy, but of immaterial potential. Information is also Potential and Value..

Note: Technically, the Mind Field metaphor may be more like a Gravity Field in that its arrows are uni-polar and universal, rather than being generated in specific locations by flowing energy. The gravity arrows point toward any center of mass. The Information arrows point toward Intention; but that's another just-so story.


Magnetic Field (vector field): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field

Mind Field : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_Field

Potential : http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page16.html

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/370263

Understanding that structural relationship is the key to a holistic worldview. — Possibility

Apparently, when you say "structural" relationship, you are actually referring to an immaterial "logical" or mathematical relationship : this is related to that by this value. I was assuming you were looking for some physical connection between Mind & Matter or Fieldism and Materialism. Maybe something like the "silver thread" that connects body & soul in an out-of-body experience.

The logical "structure" of the Yin/Yang symbol is central to my BothAnd philosophy. My "focus on the commonalities" was simply an attempt to establish the analogy between Universal Mind (EnFormAction) and the various fields postulated by physicists to explain "spooky action at a distance", such as gravity. Just as gravity is interpreted as a physical "force", EnFormAction is the creative "force" of evolution : the elan vital. But it's not a physical force; it's a metaphysical (mathematical) force :the power of ratios and relationships.

Yin-Yang Symbolism : As exemplified in the harmonious Yin/Yang symbol, the black or white halves would struggle for supremacy if not for the restraint of the encircling holistic power of the whole, like gravity pulling all toward the center. http://www.bothandblog.enformationism.info/page5.html

This is not how I imagine a magnetic field, and I don’t think the field is intended to be as materialistic as that. — Possibility

I suspect that Maxwell's original notion of an electro-magnetic field was intended to be a metaphor. But some modern physicists think of it in more materialistic imagery, such as the notion that a field occupies space. In the quote below, "physical quantity", "number", "tensor", and "value" are all mathematical concepts that have logical (informational) definitions, but no material substance or physical dimensions.

Physical Field : In physics, a field is a physical quantity, represented by a number or tensor, that has a value for each point in space-time. ... In the modern framework of the quantum theory of fields, even without referring to a test particle, a field occupies space, contains energy, and its presence precludes a classical "true vacuum".
https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... in+physics

All of these are relationships of potentiality: — Possibility

Precisely. That's why I distinguish between Real (Actual) and Ideal (Potential), between Physical (matter) and Metaphysical (mental). The "Mind Field" is EnFormAction, which is the potential to cause change, which is similar to the physical notion of Energy, which is not a material thing, but the potential to cause change. Just as immaterial Energy can transform into Matter (E=MC\2), metaphysical EnFormAction can create all of the physical things in the world.

The way I see it, these relationships of potentiality - the combined ‘field’ of mind - all refer to five-dimensional information: potential and value. — Possibility

Three spatial dimensions plus potential and value?



PS___I have frequently been forced to explain that the word "Structure" has two meanings : 1> the bricks and steel beams that a building is constructed of , and 2> "the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex." [the logical structure]


But ‘structure’ - this second definition - is not necessarily ‘logical’. — Possibility

By "logical" I meant "rational", in the sense of : defined by ratios and proportions. That definition includes emotions and human values, since in Enformationism, everything in the world boils down to Information : ratios and proportions; some of which are meaningful to humans.

In common usage of "logical" and "rational", the terms are deliberately intended to contrast with "emotional" and "valuable" --- as in Vulcan Logic. But in the BothAnd philosophy, it's all a matter of degree, a continuum. Everything and every idea in the world has a logical structure. But humans assign personal values to them on a good vs evil scale. Those values are relative (rational) to the evaluator. What's logical and valuable to a man, may not matter to an ant.

Information : Knowledge and the ability to know. Technically, it's the ratio of order to disorder, of positive to negative, of knowledge to ignorance. It's measured in degrees of uncertainty. Those ratios are also called "differences". So Gregory Bateson* defined Information as "the difference that makes a difference". The latter distinction refers to "value" or "meaning". Babbage called his prototype computer a "difference engine". Difference is the cause or agent of Change. In Physics it’s called "Thermodynamics" or "Energy". In Sociology it’s called "Conflict"..
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html


but the classical concept of ‘potential’ as inherent in the actual object makes it difficult for some people to grasp the metaphysical nature of potentiality. — Possibility

That's why philosophers are forever defining and redefining terms.

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/370263

I think in my mind I've conflated the fields with the probability waves. — fishfry

That's understandable, because field theory crosses the line from material Physics into immaterial Metaphysics. The "field" is just a hypothetical "place where something happens", imagined as a body of water. The waves are changes in the field, imagined as ocean waves. So, they are not material things, but mathematical relationships. Waves of Probability are "made" of statistics, not matter. Both Fields and Waves are abstractions.

Metaphysics : "the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space. . . . abstract theory with no basis in reality."


Understanding that structural relationship is the key to a holistic worldview. — Possibility

Apparently, when you say "structural" relationship, you are actually referring to an immaterial "logical" or mathematical relationship : this is related to that by this value. I was assuming you were looking for some physical connection between Mind & Matter or Fieldism and Materialism. Maybe something like the "silver thread" that connects body & soul in an out-of-body experience.

The logical "structure" of the Yin/Yang symbol is central to my BothAnd philosophy. My "focus on the commonalities" was simply an attempt to establish the analogy between Universal Mind (EnFormAction) and the various fields postulated by physicists to explain "spooky action at a distance", such as gravity. Just as gravity is interpreted as a physical "force", EnFormAction is the creative "force" of evolution : the elan vital. But it's not a physical force; it's a metaphysical (mathematical) force :the power of ratios and relationships.

Yin-Yang Symbolism : As exemplified in the harmonious Yin/Yang symbol, the black or white halves would struggle for supremacy if not for the restraint of the encircling holistic power of the whole, like gravity pulling all toward the center. http://www.bothandblog.enformationism.info/page5.html

This is not how I imagine a magnetic field, and I don’t think the field is intended to be as materialistic as that. — Possibility

I suspect that Maxwell's original notion of an electro-magnetic field was intended to be a metaphor. But some modern physicists think of it in more materialistic imagery, such as the notion that a field occupies space. In the quote below, "physical quantity", "number", "tensor", and "value" are all mathematical concepts that have logical (informational) definitions, but no material substance or physical dimensions.

Physical Field : In physics, a field is a physical quantity, represented by a number or tensor, that has a value for each point in space-time. ... In the modern framework of the quantum theory of fields, even without referring to a test particle, a field occupies space, contains energy, and its presence precludes a classical "true vacuum".
https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... in+physics

All of these are relationships of potentiality: — Possibility

Precisely. That's why I distinguish between Real (Actual) and Ideal (Potential), between Physical (matter) and Metaphysical (mental). The "Mind Field" is EnFormAction, which is the potential to cause change, which is similar to the physical notion of Energy, which is not a material thing, but the potential to cause change. Just as immaterial Energy can transform into Matter (E=MC\2), metaphysical EnFormAction can create all of the physical things in the world.

The way I see it, these relationships of potentiality - the combined ‘field’ of mind - all refer to five-dimensional information: potential and value. — Possibility

Three spatial dimensions plus potential and value?



PS___I have frequently been forced to explain that the word "Structure" has two meanings : 1> the bricks and steel beams that a building is constructed of , and 2> "the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex." [the logical structure]

[Gnomon]

I agree that every concept can be evaluated according a logical structure - but not all information. The process of ‘boiling down’ information to ratios and proportions is limiting or reducing that information to what fits into a particular value structure before you’re even aware of what information is available. The way I see it, the common experience that what’s valuable to me may not be logical to me refutes the idea that we’re talking about a simple continuum here. — Possibility

In my thesis, Information is the basis of Logic and Math : a relationship between two values. The key word there is "value". Relationships and Ratios are nothing until evaluated (interpreted) by a mind. But Information is also the basis of Physics : Thermodynamics. So, Information is a continuum that bridges the imaginary gap between Physics and Metaphysics, between mathematical and human values.

Information : Information has a well-defined meaning in physics. In 2003 J. D. Bekenstein claimed that a growing trend in physics was to define the physical world as being made up of information itself . . . . In thermodynamics, information is any kind of event that affects the state of a dynamic system that can interpret the information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information

It necessarily positions ‘objectivity’ outside of all value structures, logical or otherwise (which may be another discussion). — Possibility

For another take on Time and Objectivity, check-out Donald Hoffman's concept of "Model Dependent Realism".

Objective Time : As Einstein put it, “Time and space are modes by which we think, and not conditions in which we live.” One interpretation of Quantum Theory, Quantum Bayesianism10 (QB) says that “quantum states describe not the objective world but the beliefs of agents about the consequences of their actions.”
http://bothandblog6.enformationism.info/page23.html


Exploring the human experience in relation to information theory can get confusing, because computer-based information is only every binary, whereas the human experience of information takes into account the integration of four, five and even six dimensional ratios in a complex interacting system of interacting systems of interacting systems. — Possibility

That's because Computer information processing is Binary, while human brains are Analog. Like Quantum Computers, the human brain can evaluate an infinite continuum of information from Zero to One. The logical mathematical basis of Information is a binary ratio, but analogous human reasoning goes way beyond the basics to consider fractional ratios and even irrational numbers.

Digital vs Analog : A digital signal is a signal that is being used to represent data as a sequence of discrete values; at any given time it can only take on one of a finite number of values.[1][2][3] This contrasts with an analog signal, which represents continuous values; at any given time it represents a real number within a continuous range of values.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signal

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/372261

Information is a continuum that bridges the imaginary gap between Physics and Metaphysics, between mathematical and human values. — Gnomon


What I’m most interested in is the bridge itself: what is the conceptual structure of that ‘continuum’ — Possibility

In literary analysis, structural inter-relationships are usually broken-down to Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics. So, if you are interested in a corporeal “bridge” you should look for a Physical connection (material) between elements. If the interest is in a meaningful link between elements, the connection would be Metaphysical (mental, immaterial). If however, your interest is in the various common usages of the notion of a relationship between elements, you'd have to look at Abstract Geometry, Steel Bridges, and Romantic Love.

A physical system manifests itself only by interacting with another. The description of a physical system, then, is always given in relation to another physical system, — Carlo Rovelli, ‘Reality Is Not What It Seems’

The Rovelli quote seems to be looking at the notion of “correlation" from the perspective of a Classical Physicist, which requires some kind of physical contact to form a relationship. But he's a Quantum Physicist, and must deal with “spooky action at a distance” in which no material crosses the gap between particles. What does fill the vacuum between particles in space is metaphysical Information, a continuum that I call EnFormAction : the power to cause Change. In some cases it works like flowing energy, by direct contact. Yet it also works like Gravity (or Love), by mutual attraction, not like a Star Trek Tractor Beam, imagined as a stream of magnetic particles. It also manifests like Quantum Entanglement in that the only connection is logical or historical, i.e. metaphysical. So, Cosmic Enformation is like a universal Information Field : a continuum that binds all elements into a dynamic system.


Meta-physics : The branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, substance and attribute, fact and value.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page14.html

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/372261

But there is a six-dimensional level of relation, which is meaning as pure relation, or ‘love’, from which all potentiality - as a reduction of all possible metaphysical information from all possible relations - is manifest. — Possibility

I'm not sure how you arrive at that multi-dimensional hierarchy of Information. But, in my thesis, the next higher level above immanent EnFormAction is simply transcendent G*D. In some speculative philosophies, such as Kabbalah and Theosophy, all of the lower level manifestations are emanations of the unmanifest, unknowable God : "a unitary divine principle". Their analysis of metaphysical realms is similar to my own concept, except that they are assuming that the Torah is a revelation from God. They were good guesses for their times, but I abandoned biblical revelation years ago.

So, my own "revelations" are drawn from modern science, especially Cosmology and Quantum Theory. I draw no religious implications from this personal worldview. It's not a revelation from on high, but merely an attempt to make sense of the paradoxes of the post-Big-Bang, and post-Quantum world. Since the infinite potential of G*D is all possibilities, S/he is necessarily both Love & Hate, Good & Evil, Male & Female, Positive & Negative. Any comprehensive philosophical worldview, could be turned into a religion for the masses, only by choosing one side of the coin, and by taking its metaphors literally : "God is Love". Also, by turning the abstract deity into Santa Claus or Satan.

In my thesis, the infinite creative power of G*D, EnFormAction, is manifested in reality as Energy, which is the cause of all physical change in the world. But eventually Energy has manifested as Mind, and is responsible for all cultural change in the world. Since the early 20th century, Gallieo's and Newton's cosmologies have become almost as out-dated as the Bronze Age Bible's understanding of how the world works. The 21st century is the Age of Information.


Emanationism : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanationism

EnFormAction : Active Information. 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 : Energy; Change; The Creative Power of Evolution; the Power to Enform;

G*D : other terms for the axiomatic First Cause : LOGOS, ALL, BEING, MIND, Creator, Enformer, Nature, Reason, Source, Programmer. These names and associated qualities are attributed to the unknown unknowable deity as logical inferences from observation of the Creation.

PS__I have read Rovelli's, Reality Is Not What It Seems

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/372261

This makes some sense to me - although your list of alternative terms suggests prior knowledge of an endpoint, which I dispute. The way I see it, this transcendent G*D refers to a relation of all possible information, including illogical possibilities, such as squaring the circle, and love. — Possibility

I refer to Evolution as Ententional, because it has a direction of progression toward some unknown future state. I can only guess what that "Omega Point" might be. (see Graph below) But, because Evolution is progressing in a zig-zag path via Hegelian dialectic, I assume that the end-point is not pre-destined, but only the parameters of success are predefined --- as in Evolutionary Programming (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_programming). It's just a guess.

Since G*D is presumed to exist infinitely and eternally, the "ALL" characterization includes all logical possibilities, but the "LOGOS" label prohibits "illogical possibilities. Yet, again, I'm just guessing.


Human Nature : Essentialism
reply to Siti, page 5
. . . . . In my analogy between Intelligent Evolution and Genetic Design, I indicated that the designer (human or deity) used the heuristic search process, specifically because there was no viable path directly to the goal. In the “evolved antenna” design, the barrier was computing power. So, they established parameters to be met, and let their artificial intelligence computers “stumble” upon the optimum solution by a process of trial & error. Our Programmer was a wise-wizard, in that S/he started before the beginning. It's called a "program" : a plan of action.

In the Intelligent Evolution theory, I postulate that the Programmer had no entention of creating dumb creatures like Adam & Eve, but merely had the “idea” of creating semi-autonomous intelligent creatures --- little avatars for entertainment. So, S/he simply designed a process that would “stumble” upon an optimum solution --- within the constraints of space & time, and natural laws --- by learning from its own mistakes. The design criteria & parameters are assumed to be working via Natural Selection. So the final goal was specified only in terms of a problem description. And the zig-zag path to that goal was what Hegel called “The Dialectic Process”, as contrasted with the “Didactic Process” of Intelligent Design. The Process is the Product. Playing the game is the point, not the final score. "The play's the thing". ___Shakespeare, Hamlet

Dialectic : a back & forth philosophical argument between Good & Evil. Bottom-up design.
Didactic : an autocratic method of instruction by commandment. Top-down design



The EnFormAction Hypothesis : http://bothandblog3.enformationism.info/page23.html

Cosmic Progression Graph : http://bothandblog3.enformationism.info/page28.html

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/372261

The focus is an ontological one. What is the world fundamentally made up of? It's not the ordinary stuff we experience everyday. As contemporary physics becomes further removed from the ordinary, the question is whether materialism is the right term for saying what the fundamental stuff or reality is. — Marchesk

That's exactly why I developed the Enformationism Thesis. It's intended to be a 21st century update to ancient theories of Atomism, Materialism, and Spiritualism. Information is all of the above. In modern physics, Information is Matter & Energy & Mind. Information can be imagined as a Mind Field permeating the real world, and manifesting in many different forms. If you doubt that assertion, I have lots of essays presenting my evidence and reasoning.

Information : http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html
also see the sidebar

[Gnomon]

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/372420

It is at this point (in the ‘mind’) that all illogical possibilities are ignored, isolate or excluded from the eventual actuality of the universe, but not from G*D. — Possibility

Of course, illogical concepts are possible in the dualistic state of Reality, but not in the unitary state of Ideality. Eternal LOGOS includes all logical possibilities, including negations, which offset to neutralize each other to Zero values. But space-time opens Pandora's Box to all kinds of illogical and irrational mentality.

Yes, the "fitness function" requires a choice (natural selection) between good & bad outcomes. All creatures make what seem to them at the time & place to be logical choices. But the veil of Time does not allow them to see the future consequences of those choices. So, they get the grade now (life or death) and the lesson later (ooops! bad choice).

[Gnomon]

This transcendent G*D is also immanent in my theory - which is not panENdeist, — Possibility

A non-personal deity who is both Transcendent and Immanent is, by definition, PanEnDeism.