contents

2. reduction

 

I used to think I invented the idea of reduction. It was that psychological issues are grounded in biology, biology is a function of chemistry, chemistry results from the laws of physics, and physics can be described with mathematics.

 

I didnít have a term that labeled this philosophy; but recently I learned of reduction. This is a term that describes a similar view of the Big Picture; but it carries with it a meaning or challenge that runs fully counter to my assessment of whatís required to explain reality. Reduction seeks to boil it all down to the behavior of a most simple fundamental particle; whose properties can account for reality by constructing our reality from those building blocks. This is very close to the picture of a photon Universe coming up; but one issue is opposite. The properties do not arise from the particle. They are properties of the Universe. The Universe is its rules. The virtual interaction of all particles produces all real meaning. This is a point that should be made here, though it isnít explained here ó the whole book explains it. In a sense, it is to say that the particleís behavior does arise from within; however, the mechanism for this is the structure of the Universe ó the Universe is within all "particles."

 

A particle is a point in space relative to other points in space, and other space. This is logical. It is a framework for process. The particle is temporal ó it has a lifetime, which makes it a process. It is involved with other particles in a process. This is temporal logic. If the behavior was purely random at every level, you might not be inclined to say that it is logical. In that case you might dismiss the underlying black/white logic of space/particle, because of the constant gray picture it would generate. But this is not the case. The behavior of process is governed by overbearing rules at every level. They arise at all points as the nature of the given process. They arise as the relationship of processes at various levels. Reality may as well be running on a computer, by program, in memory.

 

If you attempt to boil reality down to the interplay of independent, simple, very small particles, you will throw the baby out with the bath water. You cannot explain psychology by dismissing it. The same goes for biology, chemistry, and physics. The only thing reduction can really eliminate is the concept of a smallest simplest particle. Contrary to what it sets out to do, reduction demonstrates the requirement that inner reality must be exceedingly complex in order to generate reality as we know it.

 

This philosophy values all levels of knowledge. This is not an attempt to pander to the egos of a wider audience. This is reality. This is what itís made of. These various schools of thought should not be in competition with each other to see whoís the one thatís right. They are all right. They are all representative of various true facets of reality. Reality is rules. They are complex. They are interrelated, in complex ways. The way you look at it is your reference frame. All reference frames can be correct, yet different. This makes reality complete.

 

This philosophy discards the simplifying element of reduction. That anticipation is replaced with an acceptance of the complexity of reality; to include all reference frames as valid components of reality.

contents