Ask A Genius 620: Utility of Metaphysics and Informational Framework
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2021/08/20
[Recording Start]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: I’ve been pondering the concept of metaphysics for quite some time. You’ve been thinking about this even longer than I have. Together, we’ve developed the idea of potentially reintegrating metaphysics with physics. Ancient Greek philosophers, especially those from the Ionian school, were deeply engaged in metaphysics. They didn’t have the physics that we have now.
Rick Rosner: You don’t necessarily need to, but nowadays, you can engage in metaphysics with a better chance of accuracy. The more you know about the universe and the closer you are to an accurate picture of it, the more likely your metaphysical ideas won’t be wildly off. Unless your metaphysics is either so vague it can describe anything, or so profound it remains relevant regardless of the universe’s accurate portrayal.
Jacobsen: Right, so we’re discussing the practical utility of metaphysics in providing a valid and sound description of the universe.
Rosner: Yes, and it’s worth mentioning that physicists, and maybe scientists in general, but especially physicists, often say that all science eventually boils down to physics. Biology, chemistry, they all reduce to physical interactions. When they become more complex, they turn into chemistry, and even more complex, biology, and eventually even the social sciences. However, people still specialize in biology, chemistry, and the social sciences because it’s efficient. You don’t need to deconstruct everything to basic physics all the time, although sometimes, delving into quantum physics helps explain new phenomena in biology and chemistry.
Jacobsen: Sean Carroll talks about poetic naturalism, where we can scientifically discuss love in many ways. However, we still use poetic and literary language, like “I love you,” to describe human experience, understanding that it’s founded on scientific reality. It’s about considering different levels of analysis and description, from folk psychology and interpersonal reactions to physics. Essentially, it’s all interconnected.
Rosner: Exactly, and our world has enough flexibility to allow these different levels of order and complexity. For example, my friend Chris is attempting to map every single feedback loop in biology within the human body. These feedback loops exist at various levels of complexity relative to basic physics, and he believes most are yet to be discovered.
Jacobsen: This is similar to Dmitri Mendeleev with the periodic table. He started simply, with many gaps, which were filled in over time. Chris could be initiating a similar process for feedback loops in biology.
Rosner: When we talk about metaphysics, we’re discussing the principles of existence, which overlaps with physics. It’s about what can exist and, by extension, what cannot. Quantum mechanics, especially, aids this discussion. It’s essentially the math and physics of things that barely exist, dealing with incomplete information. It describes how things behave when not fully characterized, like the position and velocity of an electron.
Jacobsen: However, I wouldn’t classify the math of quantum mechanics as metaphysical. It’s more about the math of existence.
Rosner: True, but there’s still a metaphysical aspect because it models what existence fundamentally is. You would think metaphysics should lead to more stringent and precise science. However, it seems we can use the solid science of quantum mechanics to inform our understanding of metaphysics.
Jacobsen: That’s counterintuitive, considering the history of metaphysics, which hasn’t been great at arriving at precise, sound views of the world.
Rosner: It’s akin to the struggle in defining consciousness or the history of theology. There are myriad interpretations, often leading to wrong or contradictory answers.
Jacobsen: In Western tradition, we’ve seen centuries of speculative metaphysics. In contrast, the last five hundred years have shown gradual refinement in understanding the universe through physics, chemistry, biology, and psychology. While some mysteries may be eternal, others are merely hard problems awaiting solutions.
Rosner: Quantum mechanics, being about a century old, has seen various attempts at applying its principles to other contexts, often incorrectly. Yet, you can use these principles in different ways, such as in predicting traffic behavior or in sports analytics. There’s a strong connection between quantum math and Bayesian probability, both frameworks characterizing uncertainty.
Jacobsen: So, when we talk about ‘frameworks,’ we’re referring to these structures or descriptions of the universe. However, these are not the universe itself. They are tools we’ve developed to create accurate maps of reality. But they remain maps, not the terrain.
Rosner: The language we use evolved because it was useful. Language and thought products aim to predict and act. Therefore, every word and its associated characterization is subject to fuzziness. Some words, like ‘apple,’ are fairly specific, but still encompass a range of variation and imprecision.
Jacobsen: Consider the notion of the soul, which historically justified inhumane treatment of animals. Our experience feels unified, but for a long time, the assumption was that a spirit or soul underpinned it, leading us in wrong directions.
Rosner: Let’s pause on the soul concept. The soul, as some see it, is an essence of oneself, transcending details and memories. It’s the core of who you are. However, I see the soul more as an informational substrate, somewhat independent of individual cognition.
Jacobsen: Extending that idea, one’s impact on themselves, others, and the environment during and after their life can be seen as an extended sense of the soul. It’s an extended self, essentially.
Rosner: An analogy between information and the universe is that the universe consists of space and matter. We think about the material bodies, but the space itself, curved around, forms an underlying structure determined by matter distribution. This curved space that contains everything is akin to what a soul might be – an underlying landscape determined by the aggregate of everything that’s happened.
Jacobsen: So, our descriptions of the universe, while useful, are just tools for understanding. They don’t capture the intrinsic operations of the universe.
Rosner: Language evolved to help us survive, so it’s efficient in that sense. But every word and sentence is subject to fuzziness and imprecision. This is especially true for terms in metaphysics.
Jacobsen: Hence, the danger in assumptions like the soul, which can lead to misguided beliefs and actions.
Rosner: The soul, as an informational aggregate resulting from everything that’s happened, is an unspecific underlying structure. It’s shaped by the overall curvature and dynamics of the universe.
Jacobsen: We’ll need to pause here and come back to this discussion later.
Rosner: Sure, let’s continue later.
[Recording End]
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 