Dear readers, I proudly announce my new book: "The Cybernetics and Mathematics of Consciousness" in the series "Bridging Science and Spirituality". If you are not convinced by the idea of reductive materialists, that consciousness magically emerges from complexity in material structures or processes or if you are not satisfied with the viewpoint of idealists that matter is a mere thought form, then the present hypothesis may be something for you. This is however a popular science book, so don't expect to be drowned in formulas and equations.
In this collection of Capita Selecta from my previous books, I will address the cybernetic dynamics of consciousness. Starting from the premise that Consciousness is the Ontological Primitive, I will propose mechanisms which may explain how a digital mathematical and material existence can be generated.
Digging into Category Theory, Computational Simulacra and Quantum Computing, I will explore the mechanics of self-sustaining self-referential feedback loops as the Modus Operandi of Consciousness.
Let's dive in the vortex of kaleidoscopic reflections, the wormhole of a dazzling "mise-en abyme" of recursiveness and the rollercoaster of the quantum non-locality. Explore the map which is the territory simultaneously by drawing your map of maps. Discover the non-dual bridge closing the gap between Science and Spirituality.
What can we know at all? Is the scientific method based on empirical observations a reliable way to gain knowledge, an understanding of the truth? Or is the method fundamentally imbued with uncertainties? Is an objective reality possible at all? In this provocative talk, I will challenge your belief systems and rock the foundations of your knowledge. Fasten your seatbelts!
Good morning ladies and gentlemen,
Welcome to my presentation on the topic of Epistemology. For those who don't know me, my name is Antonin Tuynman, I am an examiner in biotech in the field of clinical diagnostics.
A couple of months ago Liz asked me to give a talk on my book "Transcendental Metaphysics" and later on my co-authored book "Is reality a simulation?" As the topics discussed in this book border on the esoteric, I was a bit hesitant, but there are actually a number of topics I deal with in these books, which might be of relevance to you. I decided to split my originally prepared talk in 2 parts: the first on Epistemology or the study of what we can know at all and the second about From Information to a Theory of Everything.
When you hear the word "metaphysics" you probably think of topics like "soul", "afterlife" or perhaps even "consciousness". The title of my book Transcendental Metaphysics is actually an intended pun. It was my intention to build a bridge between science and spirituality, by showing that they are connected rather than completely independent from each other. I actually argue that we should redefine these terminologies.
The reasoning goes as follows: If Reality includes everything which influences reality, there can be no real things or things of relevance outside of reality. For if they would influence reality, they would be included by definition and if they wouldn't, they are of no relevance to us at all and not worthwhile to be considered "real".
Meta means beyond or outside of and metaphysics beyond or outside of physics. In a similar reasoning as I just made for reality, if there is anything beyond the physical which influences the physical, it should be considered to be physical and if it does not influence the physical, it is of no relevance whatsoever.
The terminology transcendental also means "going beyond". A certain branch of theology has hijacked the terminology "transcendental" by postulating that there is a God who is wholly independent from our reality. If it/she/he has no connection with our reality, it is of no relevance, if it does it is not transcendental in their definition.
In these talks I will show you that we can perhaps redefine these terminologies slightly so that they can still be useful.
After this introduction I now start with the actual topic of today: Epistemology: or the study of what can we know at all.
How do we know things, facts? We may read, learn or hear certain facts and believe these on the basis of an authority, such as "it has been scientifically proven.." or "the sacred book is the word of God...", but such knowledge gathering is second hand, we haven't actually been able to verify it ourselves.
The most general direct ways we have of gathering knowledge are based on empirical observations and the logical inferences we can make on the basis thereof.
Logic, a tool of reason, has three modes: deductive, inductive and abductive:
A deductive reasoning starts with a factual premise which is true for all members of a class such as:
All men are mortal. To this an instance of the class is compared: Socrates is a man. and then the general rule is applied to this instance and an inference is made: Hence Socrates is mortal.
In the inductive mode we start from an observational premise such as:
The sun rises every day. We compare this with an instance: Tomorrow is another day. and infer a prediction: tomorrow the sun will rise.
In the abductive mode the starting premise is often conditional:
If it rains, the grass gets wet. instance: the grass is wet. inference: it has rained.
But this mode is a logical fallacy, because the grass maybe got wet because the sprinklers were on.
Deductive reasoning claims to start from facts, but except for mathematics, if we look at the physical world, all facts we know were once gathered by observation. In other words, all deductive premises are the result of empirical observations as well. So it seems that all knowledge we can rely on, is ultimately grounded in observations:
We have a hypothesis, we gather data, we observe a pattern by connecting the dots and we come to a predictive theory.
But there are a number of problems with this approach.
First of all we are biased by our hypothesis: we look at reality in a certain way, because we expect it to be in a certain way. R.A.Wilson, one of my favourite authors used to say: "The prover proves, what the thinker thinks": What you are looking for, you'll find evidence for. Or you'll try to make your observations match your ideas.
Secondly, there are multiple ways to connect the dots. I'd like to illustrate this with a few slides: There is for instance the famous problem of aliasing, whereby more than one sinusoid curve can perfectly fit a set of data. Usually, when we try to fit a curve to a set of data we use statistics. but what kind of curve should we apply to connect the dots? a linear? a sinus? a polynomial? Scientists often use the principle of "Occam's Razor", which states that the hypothesis with the least number of assumptions is the most likely. But this can unduly cast away complex explanations where complexity is involved.
Scientists adhere to certain theories as beliefs. A ruling scientific theory is called a paradigm. But paradigms can be challenged by anomalous data. These are often called "outliers". What to do with such points? Are they artefacts? Should we disregard them? Or do they reveal more complex mechanisms?
As the body of anomalous data increases, it becomes more difficult to maintain a paradigm. Yet it often takes until a complete generation of scientists has died until a new paradigm is accepted. Why? because of dogmatism. Furthermore, there is also nepotism in the scientific world. It's easier to get your article peer-reviewed, if you're friends with one of the peer reviewers or if you know one of the editors of a journal. And there is the problem that here are more and more pseudo-scientific journals claiming to be scientific, where scientists pay to get published without proper peer-review.
Moreover, science is analytical: we only look at parts of a problem, from a certain perspective. We fail to see the whole picture. This reminds me of the Elephant parable from Hinduism and Buddhism: There were a number of blind men touching an object: One said it's a hose, the other one said no, it's a pillar, yet another one said it's a broom, and in fact they were all touching different parts of the same object, which was an elephant. This notion of perspectivism is also clear from this slide: The same image is considered as rabbit and duck depending on the way you look at it. Even better here, we see that seemingly mutual exclusive perspectives of a circle and square can be reconciled and transcended in the higher truth of a cylinder. And it is in this way that I'd like to redefine the word transcendental: A higher dimensional fact that includes and reconciles seemingly mutually exclusive perspectives thereof. Science is analytical and not holistic, so that we usually don't observe the whole truth of a phenomenon.
Then there is also the problem of measurement uncertainties and inaccuracies: Is our set-up correct? Are our instruments well calibrated? Is our calibration method valid and accurate?
Moreover certain phenomena have inherent uncertainties, such as the Heisenberg uncertainty in physics: You can't know exactly the position and the speed of a subatomic particle simultaneously. You can determine either of them exactly, but never both together.
There are incomputability problems: Certain numbers cannot be reduced to a simple algorithm that takes fewer digits than the number of digits the number takes itself. Certain problems cannot be decided computationally to lead to a correct yes-no answer and there is no algorithm possible that correctly determines whether arbitrary programs eventually halt when run.
Linked to this is Gödel's incompleteness theorem: There are certain mathematical statements which can be true (or not) but for which it cannot be proven that they are true or not. However this fact can be proven, which is this theorem. This means that even mathematics is not capable of leading to a complete knowledge.
Why is this important? Because it shows that we can fundamentally never get a complete picture of reality, we'll always be looking at parts from a certain limited perspective. We can't even be certain about the "truth" of most patterns. Worse, certain quantum mechanical experiments, which I'll discuss in the next talk, even strongly challenge the notion of a so-called objective reality. If you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change, meaning that there is a subjective influence of the observer, which implies that physical truth is relative.
Apart from the truth that everything is relative, there may not be an absolute truth. It is sometimes said that Epistemology looks for the overlap between belief and the truth. But if there is no such absolute truth, how can we be so sure we have found this overlap? How can we be sure that we are not hallucinating or dreaming up our reality? Or that we are maybe living in a computer simulation as Neo in the film the Matrix?
Can't we be sure about anything? Well, if we have a technological application of a theory, at least we have lifted our knowledge to a higher level than a mere predictive theory. The application shows that we master at least this part of what we call real. This is why in my book I speak of Tech-know-logy or Technovedanta, in which Vedanta stands for the Hindu word of the complete body of all knowledge.
Buddha once said doubt everything, but then doubt the doubt.
Having said this, in my next talk I'll try to come to a more solid foundation of knowledge based on Information Theory.
Thank you for your attention.
Any questions?
By Antonin Tuynman Ph.D. Talk given on 18-09-2018 in Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
This post was first posted by me on Steemit: https://steemit.com/philosophy/@technovedanta/transcendental-metaphysics-i-published-my-latest-book
I finally self-published my meta-philosophical treaty "Transcendental Metaphysics"
in which science and technology meet spirit in the light of the
“Technological Singularity". Some of the chapters I already published
here and on Steemit. I commit to making all the chapters of this book
available on Steemit and once I have done so, I will republish the book
hopefully on "Steemit Publishing".
Marketing Blurb
Have you ever read a book, which logically shows where logic is
absurd? A book, which scientifically shows where science fails? A
meta-philosophy, which shows where philosophy is useless?
Welcome to the book of books. A Clavicula to open the gates of Hell
and Heaven to summon the forces of Mind and Matter. A quest into the
deepest realm, where reality and imagination fade into each other like
pictorial values.
A journey into the Highest Transcendence, Consciousness.
The final frontier.
These are the voyages of the Epistemonauts. Their ongoing mission:
To seek out the Magick of Technology and the Technology of Magick, to
boldly go where no one has gone before, where the grand Union of all
possible perspectives and the sole true Theory of Everything lies:
“Everything is hereby incorporated by reference.”
From the primordial Sense to the scattered kaleidoscopic
reverberations in the Hall of Mirrors; the octaves and scales of
Ouroboric existence, the mighty worm of digital virtualisation.
This is my gift to you: To free you from any belief system, to free
you from the chains of your self-inflicted prison of Mind. Fear not to
be left in the agnostic Limbo, even if I won't lead you to your Gods;
instead I will show you the Technology, which one day will make a God of
you.
Meet me at the junction where Vedic and Buddhist spirituality join
Science, and I will show you what lies beyond the Technological
Singularity.
This is Technovedanta 2.0, Transcendental Metaphysics of Pancomputational Panpsychism.
Targeted Audience
The present book will be appealing to scientists and engineers, who
have an interest in Eastern mysticism and to spiritual people, who seek
for confirmation of their beliefs in science, in the tradition of books
like "The Tao Of Physics" by Fritjof Capra and "The Dancing Wu
Li Masters" by Gary Zukav. The book will appeal to any reader interested
in the dynamics of consciousness and the mind, especially for those who
want to transcend, what Robert Anton Wilson and Tim Leary call the
“larval circuits”. The book also addresses the growing mass of
“Singularitarians”, which aim for the advent of the “Technological
Singularity”, as explained in Ray Kurzweil’s “The Singularity is Near”.
Overview
Technovedanta 2.0 is the junction where science and technology meet
spirit in the light of the “Technological Singularity”. This book is
written for people with a scientific or philosophical orientation and
with an interest in (eastern) spirituality.
The book aims to explore the concept of consciousness as the
foundation of being and to provide a complete theoretical and
technological digital framework to integrate all possible knowledge of
matter, mind, information and mysticism without contradictions. Its
basic tenet is that Panpsychism and Pancomputationalism are not
contradictory notions, but two sides of the same coin that constitutes
existence.
The book also aims to show the limits of logic and science and
furthermore aims to rid people of their self-inflicted belief systems.
In fact, the book is an epistemological quest showing how philosophy,
religion, logic and science fail to provide reliable knowledge and are
speculative at best.
Synthesizing a technological concrescence of the teachings of
R.A.Wilson, the Principia Discordia, Buddhism and Hinduism on the one
hand and quantum computing and artificial intelligence (AI) technology
on the other hand, the book shows a path out of quagmire of this pure
agnosticism using a Pancomputational Panpsychic Theory of Everything,
where you can be a God in a Kardashev IV society of Gods. Where sense is
only sensational and ratio nonsensical.
Its purpose is to show how technology and meditation can help us
transcend every limitation and to prepare us for the experiential
dimension of the Technological Singularity, which is beyond anything we
are currently familiar with.
The book moreover defends the thesis, that and how we probably
already live in a virtual reality based on unusual clues from physics,
mathematics and astronomy. By reverse engineering our reality and
integrating AI technology with notions from Patentology a peculiar broth
is concocted to prepare for a computational internet-based webmind
substrate, which we can enter via prosthetic extension of our Minds,
without the need for uploading these.
The book finds its apotheosis in musings about the Highest
Transcendence possible and what this technologically spoken would imply.
Table of Contents
Preface. p.iv
Part 1 Prolegomena.
The Star Trek of the Soul. (a poem) p.1
Chapter 1 An introduction into Transcendental Metaphysics. p.3
Chapter 2 The Anta and Amrita of Technovedanta. p.8
Chapter 3 An Anthology of Bloom: A Solution to “The God Problem”. p.19
Chapter 4 The Materiality of Unbound Energy and the Substance of Emptiness. p.27
Chapter 5 Metaphilosophy. 42 Chapter 6 Meta-system Extropy. p.57
Chapter 7 Infinitism: The Ouroboric tailbiting. p.67
Chapter 8: Memetic alignment for psychological profiling. p.75
Chapter 9 The 15th meta-invention: The invention generator. p.78 The Quagmire of Ontological Disambiguation. (a poem) p.81
Chapter 10 Meditation is Ontological Disambiguation. p.85
Chapter 11 Feedforward Daemonology. p.90
Chapter 12 I AM METAPHYSICS (AND SO ARE YOU). p.104
Chapter 13 From the Magic of Technology to the Technology of Magic. p.106
Part 2. Pancomputational Panpsychism.
Chapter 1 Pancomputational Panpsychism as framework to build a T.O.E .p.110 The art of descent into I. (a poem) p.122
Chapter 2 Technovedanta 2.0: A technological meta-knowledge philosophy beyond science and religion. p.123
Chapter 2bis: 1,2,3,7: The Clavicula of our Simulation, Gematria and Katapayadi. p.147 The Leela of Ouroboric tailbiting. (a poem) p.155
Chapter 3 From the technology in the Vedas to the Veda of Technology. p.157 The Richo of Epistemology of the Rg Veda. (a poem) p.167
Chapter 4 Technovedanta avant la lettre et sa mise en abyme par incorporation de soi-même. p.168
Mahakala's Quantime. 181 Chapter 5 Mahakala's Quantime and the frame-rate of the Universe. p.183 Kallisti (a poem) p.193
Chapter 6 The Golden Ratio of the Erisian Apple: When Logic is Nonsensical and Sense Alogical. p.194
Chapter 7 Patentological Strategies towards a Fuller Understanding of a Geometry for Artificial Thought. p.207
Chapter 8 The Infopsychological Concrescence of Conspansive Transcendence. p.222
Chapter 9 It’s God Jim, but not as we know it. p.234
Chapter 10 Transcending Transcendence. p.253
Appendix 1: Technovedanta’s answers to the traditional questions of Metaphysics. p.258
Appendix 2: Details of the Vedantic webmind. p.269
References. p.276
Conclusion
I hope I have tempted you to read my book. As said you will be able
to read it on steemit, but if you can't wait you can order it in paperback or as an ebook. Plus that there is an advantage in the book in that it is completely referenced and cross-referenced.
