Monday, December 26, 2016

Contra Materialism: Outside the Null

The existential null proposition (primary, ultimate, non-contingently necessary state) is not that stuff exists [1] for no reason. It is that there is no reason for stuff to exist. In other words, material non-existence is logically the natural state, and material existence is not.

If the null position is that material existence just “exists”, then the complexity of the "fact" of necessarily existing materiality requires explanation. That can’t be the null proposition or state, because “nothing” is a less complex state and demands no explanation.[2]

One might argue that there actually is a compelling fundamental reason for material existence, and that is to maintain the principle of Cause and Effect, which, despite Hume’s contrary proof, is the basis for empirical examination and discovery within material existence. Cause and Effect defines and delimits what we can know about physical existence. But of course that would place that principle – or any other choice of principles - prior to the material existence, and why should that principle exist all alone, even without any existence to justify it? Further it supposes that there is a prior necessity involved: that of the creation of material existence being necessarily caused precisely in order to support a pre-existing principle. And this, in turn, suggests a deeper cause which created that necessity. The existence of a deeper cause outside and beyond the null violates the null if we are to maintain Materialism and not presuppose a deeper agency. We have to retreat from this hypothesis.

So we now return to the null proposition and ask why it has been violated with the actual material existence which we experience. Perhaps nothing actually does exist. The Field Theory of Quantum Mechanics suggests that mass does not exist as solid particles. What appears solid is actually knots of local energy fields which behave locally in manners which lead to physical principles such as inertia and momentum (mass). This comports with the concept of energy = mass x constant. If there is no fundamental “hard” mass and only energy in various contexts, what does that say about existence? Are we deluded by our perceptions of hardness, heaviness, texture, color, rigidity, etc.? Or do those things exist, perhaps as a deception, yet with material qualities? Do we exist within an algorithm, one which manages energy to appear as hard particulate existence?

If that could possibly be the case (and there is not much reason to think otherwise), then there are some possible conclusions to be made. First, the algorithm is not recursive, providing the same “thing” over and over but in bigger sizes, and shapes as in Chaos Theory: the universe is not likely to oscillate in and out of existence. Second, free will does exist, empirically and culturally/legally. Living creatures, some of them at least, choose their paths. They remain hosted within the constraints of the algorithm, being within bodies which are algorithmically realized and animated. But the choice and intellect occur outside of the deterministic algorithm.

At this point, the observation stalls at the issue of how (not whether) independent, non-algorithmic choice, thought, agency and rational analysis can exist, when everything else is algorithmic (Darwin’s Horrid Doubt).

There appear to be (at least) two separate types of existence which arise beyond the null hypothesis: algorithmic energy, and non-algorithmic free minds.

For anything to have emerged beyond the null hypothesis, some sort of leverage or causal factor must exist (and to exist continuously in order to prevent reversion into the null state). What can we know about this, without engaging in unprovable [3] hypotheses? We know that the causal factor must exist non-materially (prior to the creation of material existence), and has the power, ability, and incentive to overcome the null state. We know that the non-material causal factor has the power, incentive and ability to create energy and the algorithm for its existence and functions, and the power, incentive and ability to create independent minds. Further we can observe that independent minds can have some control over algorithmic energy constructs.

All of this presumes that we are not delusional and deluded and that we recognize, of course, that the delusional cannot prove that they are not delusional. The recognition of the possibility of delusion is the purpose for which free minds created Aristotelian logic and its offspring, objective Baconian empirical science. These are independent processes by which consistency, coherence and accuracy of thought can be maintained.
If [Null state], THEN [no conditions are required to create or maintain the state}
IF [not Null state], THEN [external leveraging agent];
IF [external leveraging agent], THEN [make your own conclusion].
Materialists will likely argue that there is no “proof” possible for the obvious resolution of this bare bones logic. That the “non-material” cannot be shown to exist as a possible state. But this depends upon the presupposition that material, Empirical science is the arbiter of both material existence and material non-existence. It is not; here’s why: empirical science requires experimental testing of hypotheses deduced from inductive observations of material instances. E.g., every swan observed has been white (induction), therefore the next swan to be observed will be white (deductive hypothesis). Instances of non-existence cannot be materially, experimentally tested, and are not subject to material, Empirical testing. Claiming Empirical science as the arbiter for non-existence is a blatant Category Error.

Thus Materialists have no case to make regarding the logic shown above.

It is logically internally coherent to claim that the material existence we enjoy is fully dependent upon a non-material existence, a non-material agent, to cause the state to rise into material existence rather than merely remain in the null state. And the material state is also fully dependent on the non-material agent for maintaining continuous existence through time in order not to revert back into the null state.

This is not intended as a rigorous theodicy; it is a demonstration of logic existing outside of the Philosophical Materialist necessity paradigm, and being immune to materialist claims. There is no reason or force within the null state which could cause or allow the formation of the materialist state. The null state (no material existence) is stable, consistent, and without any reason whatsoever for allowing the material state to arise. The necessity of a deeper cause should be obvious.

1. By “exist” and “existence” is meant the physical existence which is recognized by Philosophical Materialists. I.e., All that exists is physical (tangible, measurable, tactile, etc.).

2. The null state can also be demonstrated by the requirement of zero (0) in order for information to exist: a series of ones (1111111) without zeros has no meaning.

3. Logically non-coherent, violating Aristotelian form or Reductio Ad Absurdum.

No comments: