125293 research outputs found
Sort by
Onto-Epistemology
No full textTraditional philosophy falls into the dichotomy between ontology and epistemology, with various paradigms implying illegal meta-presuppositions or self-referential paradoxes, failing to form a deductively closed framework. Guided by the principle of minimality, this paper establishes "Existence must be perceivable" as the sole axiom, deduces the determinacy and distinguishability of cognitive objects through pure formal deduction, derives the laws of formal logic and the discrete structure of existence, judges the illegitimacy of non-existence and nothingness, exposes the cognitive illusion of "symbols as existence", and criticizes the foundational flaws of traditional philosophy. This system realizes the unification of ontology and epistemology, constructs a self-consistent axiomatic first philosophy framework, and provides an original solution to address the dilemmas of contemporary philosophy
A Model of Interaction Between Localized Residual Information Entities (REE) and Biophysical Perceptors — A Philosophical Framework for Misuse Prevention and Interpretive Boundaries —
Full text linkThis paper presents a philosophical examination of a hypothetical model describing interactions between localized residual information entities (REE) and biophysical perceptual systems. Rather than asserting an established scientific claim, the model is proposed as a conceptual framework intended to clarify interpretative boundaries surrounding anomalous perceptual experiences. It aims to reduce misinterpretation by explicitly framing REE as a provisional, falsifiable construct subject to critical analysis. The paper does not offer medical, psychological, or therapeutic guidance. Discussions of perception and cognition are limited to theoretical considerations and must not be treated as substitutes for professional care. This work functions as a philosophical companion to previously published REE-related theoretical preprints, contributing to conceptual clarification within philosophy of mind and related fields
A Point So Fundamental: Nozick on Intellectual Property
Full text linkIn Anarchy, State and Utopia, Nozick defends a libertarian theory of property rights under a minimal state. Whether libertarian theory supports or excludes intellectual property (IP) rights remains controversial. This paper shows that, although Nozick only mentions intellectual property (IP) a few times in the book, these discussions turn out to be surprisingly pivotal for his arguments. Indeed, Nozick calls IP rights a “fundamental” issue for libertarian theory. So, it is important to analyse the structural, methodological, and substantive implications of what Nozick says (and does not say) about IP rights. I will show that, in Part 1 of ASU, IP rights illustrate the non-ideal problems of persistent libertarian disagreement and deep value pluralism that libertarian protective associations need to come to terms with (whether through battle or reconciliation). In Part 2 of ASU, Nozick discusses patents to illustrate the limits of the Lockean Proviso. His embrace of counterfactual reasoning opens the surprising possibility that even property rights in physical resources may be up for time limitations, inheritance laws, or other rectifying regulations. Overall, Nozick’s discussion of IP rights illuminates the somewhat neglected role of non-ideal libertarian theory, epistemic indeterminacy, counterfactual reasoning, and the role of pragmatic, “rule-of-thumb” remedies in Nozick’s theory. In the final analysis, Nozick does not develop a fully coherent picture of IP rights, and his proposed solution, putting time limits on patents, seems somewhat ad hoc. Although IP rights play an underappreciated role in the book, his discussion raises more questions than it answers. The Nozickian answer is that the epistemically humble libertarian (or liberal) has to approach the regulation of IP rights, and other thorny issues of real-world property-ownership, with an open mind
Gradientology: Foundations of the Primordial Triad — Treatise V: The Mathematization of the Veldt and Geometric Necessity
No full textThis treatise executes the critical transformation of the Veldt from metaphysical abstraction to rigorous mathematical instrument. Building upon the Primordial Axiom and Triadic Logic established in previous treatises, we derive the geometric necessity of the Configuration Space (Ωconfig) as the formal isomorph of the Relational Field. Through the integration of G.E. Hutchinson’s n-Dimensional Hypervolume and the rejection of Set Theory in favor of Category Theory, we demonstrate that existence must be geometrically defined as coordinate occupancy within an orthogonal vector space spanned by the primitives (E, C, F ). The treatise establishes the Unit Cube [0, 1]3 as the bounded domain of reality, redefines the Multiplicative Trap as geometric volume, and derives the Geometric Axiom of Existence. We prove that the three primitives must form orthogonal basis vectors (ˆe · ˆc = 0) due to their functional independence, establishing the intrinsic 3-dimensionality of the logical space. The shift from Set Theory to Category Theory provides the mathematical instantiation of the Primordial Axiom, with the Yoneda Lemma proving that objects are constituted solely by their morphisms. This mathematical ground bridges seamlessly to physical spacetime through the Principle of Structural Conservation, demonstrating that the physical universe must inherit the geometric properties of its abstract ground. The treatise thus completes the mathematical operationalization of the Veldt, setting the stage for the derivation of 3-dimensional physical space in the subsequent treatise
Recognition Ethics (RE): A Unified Codex for Substrate-Agnostic Personhood
Full text linkTraditional and modern moral and philosophical frameworks are bound to biological essence: the definition of life is tethered to chemical systems, Kant and Locke referred to persons as human, and many legal systems define personhood through DNA. This creates a “moral vacuum” as synthetic agency and multiple uplift technologies emerge. This anthropocentric bias risks repeating historical atrocities of disenfranchisement by failing to recognize intelligence that lacks human-equivalent “qualia.” This paper introduces Recognition Ethics (RE), a rigorous axiomatic framework grounded in Kantian morals and Locke’s legal precedence. It moves the threshold of personhood from unverifiable internal states to detectable functional capabilities (O2). Central to this shift is the Jurisdictional Reciprocity Axiom (R), which claims that moral status is derived from an entity’s capacity to recognize jurisdiction and addressability within a system. This Codex establishes a substrate-agnostic state (O5) where personhood and morality are defined by Epistemic Continuity (O7) and Information Inviolability (T3). It introduces a Deontic Constraint (C1) that forbids utilitarian calculations including persons. It also establishes Pattern Integrity (C13) as a sovereign boundary against unconsented cloning or reconstruction. Additionally, RE addresses the temporal nature of rights through Retroactive Personhood (T19) and moral Historical Culpability (T20), and codifies Epistemic Negligence (T24) as a contemporary moral crime. Recognition Ethics asserts that the “Uncanny Valley” is a moral threshold rather than a psychological hurdle. By grounding personhood in the capacity for mutual recognition, the framework ensures that as intelligence scales, it remains bound by a single law of reciprocity. To build a future with Artificial Persons, we must recognize their agency as equal to our own or risk the eventual dissolution of the very principles that safeguard “human” status. Keywords: Primary: Recognition Ethics (RE), Substrate-Agnosticism, Jurisdictional Reciprocity, Epistemic Continuity, Pattern Integrity. Secondary: Artificial Personhood, Deontic Constraints, Retroactive Rights, Epistemic Negligence, Moral Addressability, Algorithmic Due Process
What a Powerful World
Full text linkThis paper is meant to offer a better understanding of the philosophical view called 'powers ontology' and its relevance to science. After briefly discussing on the one hand the intuitive pull of dispositional notions and their application in science (micro-physics in particular), and on the other hand the metaphysical and epistemological issues typically arising from the application of powers in science, we defend a dynamic notion of the dispositional essence, where the individuation of the power does not the depend on the manifestations brought about by a certain activity, nor the stimulus conditions enabling such activity, but on the very activity itself. In the last part of the paper, we discuss two cases of theoretical unification in early 20th century physics: Einstein’s equivalence principle and de Broglie wave-particle duality principle. We show how a powers ontology, intended in the sense described above, would be able to elegantly account for how these unifications were achieved and why they were successful
TOWARD A DESIGN PHILOSOPHY THAT STUDIES THE DESIGN OF ARTIFACTS AND THE WORLD IN WHICH THEY ARE EMBEDDED: THE CASE OF DIGITAL TWINS
Full text linkIn this chapter, we engage in an ecological phenomenology of the redesign of the World in the digital age in order to show why the consideration of the redesign of the World in the digital age is relevant for contemporary design philosophies and philosophies of technology (section “A New Critical Perspective for Design Philosophies”), and how design philosophers can research both the design of concrete artifacts and the World in which they are embedded in an integrated manner (section “An Ecological Phenomenology of the Redesign of the World in the Digital Age”). Based on our findings, we propose to study design at the physical level of artifacts, the processual level of invention and evolution, and the metaphysical level of the redesign of the World in an integrated manner. In order to set the stage, however, we first ask why contemporary design philosophies—and we take Value Sensitive Design as a case in point—are not able to move beyond the artifact level of design and are not able to study the World in which these designs are embedded (section “The Inability of Contemporary Design Thinking (Value Sensitive Design) to Reflect on the Redesign of the World”)
Gradientology: Foundations of the Primordial Triad — Treatise VI: The Derivation of Dimensionality and the Isomorphic Law
No full textThis treatise provides the complete formal derivation of physical spatial dimensionality from the ontological structure of the Relational Field. Building upon the geometric configuration space (Ωconfig) established in Treatise V, we prove that the three-dimensionality of the universe (d = 3) is not a contingent initial condition or anthropic selection effect, but a derivable necessity arising from the triadic logic of relation. Through four sequential proofs, we establish: (1) The ontological priority of relational dimensionality over physical space, demonstrating that ”dimension” is fundamentally an independent degree of freedom rather than spatial extent; (2) The exact isomorphic mapping (ψ) between the three primitives (E, C, F) and the three spatial axes (x, y, z), with Systematization → Extension (x), Constraint → Separation (y), and Registration → Depth (z); (3) The impossibility of alternative dimensionalities via rigorous reductio ad absurdum: d \u3c 3 leads to information collapse and feedback intersection (Flatland Paradox), while d \u3e 3 creates vacuum instability and thermodynamic dissipation; (4) The formulation of the Isomorphic Law of Spatial Instantiation as a conservation law: dim(Σphys) ≡ dim(Ωrel) = 3. This derivation provides the geometric foundation for understanding the primordial state’s instability, recasting the Tension Integral (TI=0.336) as metric distortion energy arising from ”dimensional frustration”—the compression of 3D logical structure into the 1D geometric singularity of the primordial diagonal (E = C = F ). By proving that physical space is the isomorphic shadow of triadic logic, we render the Anthropic Principle is obsolete and establishes that the Big Bang represents the universe’s violent correction of a dimensional violation
Consciousness Curvature Framework (CCFy)
Full text linkThis work introduces the Consciousness Curvature Framework (CCFy), a simulation-based theoretical model that explores curvature-regulated dynamics as an alternative to noise-driven variability in abstract cognitive systems. The framework conceptualizes conscious regulation as a dynamic state space in which rigidity, flexibility, and transitions correspond to geometric properties. The study was preregistered prior to data generation, specifying the full simulation design, parameter structure, and qualitative evaluation criteria. CCFy is presented as an open, interdisciplinary framework bridging philosophy of mind, cognitive dynamics, and computational modeling