Only partly tongue-in-cheek, I call my own Enformationism thesis a "Theory of Everything", in the sense that it boils all Matter, Energy & Mind in the universe down to a single all-encompassing "entity" : Information. This is based on current extensions of basic Information Theory, from Shannon's 1s & 0s, to a wide variety of physical, mathematical, & mental applications. If you sum-up all those various Forms of information, the whole cosmic system could be viewed as "God", at least in Spinoza's notion of deus sive natura. As you suggested : "God is one entity and is the simplest explanation for everything". :smile:What could possibly be simplest explanation for all phenomena? A ToE (theory of everything)? One with just one entity obviously, oui? — Agent Smith
Hey! You raised the question of TOE & novacula occami. So, what was your motivation? Was it simply to ridicule the idealistic fantasy of ultimate non-redundant simplicity in a complex world? Or is your pessimism complicated by an itch you can't scratch, except philosophically?↪Gnomon
You maybe onto something. I, however, am not so optimistic, but don't let me, an agent of the system, dampen your spirits. Carry on. Do keep us posted on any interesting developments. — Agent Smith
To some extent, yeah. To combat the theistic implications of the fine-tuning of the universe, some people have created literally infinite entities out of thin air (many worlds.) — theRiddler
The novacula occami aka Occam's razor is a principle applied to explanations and simply states that entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity. — Agent Smith
You seem to be going beyond the necessity of any particular explanation by stating that the restriction suggested by Occam applies to all possible statements. — Paine
The concept of a single theory, or even a single equation, to explain everything in the world, is a sort of Holy Grail for physics & cosmology. For a while it looked doable. But in recent years, they have tried & failed to reconcile Relativity/Gravity equations with Quantum/Non-local mathematics. If they ever do discover an algorithm to calculate every phenomenon, from smallest to largest scales, Hawking conjectured that "then we would know the mind of god". In other words, we would understand more than a complex pile of isolated facts, but the integrating force that holds the entire system together : i.e. Holism. So, you could say that the TOE is both simple (singular ; container), and complex (comprehensive ; contents).Why should a ToE be simpler? Shouldn't it be more complex?
Coming to your theory of Enformationism, do you have any specific reason why you settled on information rather than something else, assuming there's an alternative, to construct your own ToE? — Agent Smith
The entities are only a sufficient cause if they provide what their absence does not. Simply listing God as a cause is no advance toward explaining phenomena. That is tantamount to saying nothing can be explained — Paine
So, you could say that the TOE is both simple (singular ; container), and complex (comprehensive ; contents). — Gnomon
it from bit — Gnomon
omnipresence — trogdor
Yes. Some prognosticators imagine that humanity has become (is becoming) the little-gods of this world. That's because, unlike most animals, we share abstract information with each other. Animals communicate mostly concretely (smell, taste, touch). But humans have learned how to express subjective thoughts in objective symbols & metaphors. Consequently, we are no longer bound by the old-fashioned self-organizing rules of the natural (physical) world. So, we can now make our own cultural (meta-physical) rules. Unfortunately, despite our good intentions, we also make our own mistakes (nukes). Therefore, until we learn to control our disparate immaterial ideas & feelings, our quest for the grail of godhood will remain an impossible dream.So that's what it means! :up: The way I make sense of it is that with regard to anything & everything, we can come up with an algorithm (code) that tells us how to create them. In short, we're in the process of sussing out how to create a universe, and all things, including consciousness, in it. — Agent Smith
OK. What do you mean by "God doesn't exist"? What mental concept are you negating? Is it the Abrahamic father-god of a unique people in a specific region of the world? Or, the Christian father-son-mother god family that became the dogma of Catholicism? Or perhaps, the invisible intangible (no race, no gender, no body), yet omnipotent Being, who demands perfect obedience to written rules, upon pain of head-chopping or eternal burning? What about the New Age notion of impersonal power inherent in all things?I'd like to bring to your attention that, in my experience, we can say what we can't mean. An example? God exists & God doesn't exist. There, I said it, but I can't mean it (it's inconceivable). — Agent Smith
Yes. Enformy (negentropy) does indeed contradict the 2nd law. But, there's nothing unlawful or supernatural about it. You wouldn't exist if Entropy had its way unimpeded. I simply gave a positive (information related) name to the phenomenon recognized by scientists (in afterthought) as a local tendency toward organization instead of disorder. The 2nd law only applies to the universe as a whole, but does not prohibit progressive change in isolated pockets, such as our solar system.After all your Enformy counteracts the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy always increases) and that's, science says, solar/stellar energy — Agent Smith
Reading another thread i realize what i ment to write was omniscient, omnicience. I mean from a rationell point of view.
Yes but can a machine truley know everything? — trogdor
Yes. Enformy is an underdog in the race to the Final State of the world. It's also a slow starter, taking almost 14 billion years to produce living & thinking creatures. But we are only approaching the midpoint of the projected lifespan of the universe. So, you could guess, now that Enformy has finally gotten up to speed, it could overtake stumbling Entropy before the finish line. Some positive thinkers, such as futurist Ray Kurzweil and AI enthusiasts imagine that rapidly-accelerating human technology will replace plodding physics & biology as the organizing force behind upward evolution.Nice! What about the fact that, on the whole, entropy has the upperhand, vis-à-vis negentropy? That there's more disorder than order is a fact, oui? In other words negentropy is fighting a losing battle...eventually life, the paragon of order, will fizzle out (heat death of the universe). — Agent Smith
I'm sure someone/something smart enough like post-technological singularity AI will find a workaround for such obstacles to omnscience, if they even exist that is. — Agent Smith
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.