Review
In scientific and philosophical research, asking the right questions is integral for expanding knowledge however in our efforts to uncover ideas we may neglect to ask certain questions especially if we think inside the box. In this post I'll determine principles of how thinking can lead to questions we don't ask, what those questions are, and then my attempts to answer these questions.
In asking questions of knowledge, knowing the structure of knowledge is important. Knowledge can be understood to have a logical ordering with foundational ideas coming first and being the foundations of more detailed ideas which come after foundational ideas. An example of this is natural selection being foundational to the detailed ideas of biology which explains details of ecology, genetics, and such. As foundational ideas form the foundations of fields of knowledge, they require to be well founded in which if they aren't there will be flaws and deficiencies in knowledge. Foundational ideas define the box and perspective we think in which if there are flaws in foundational ideas it is best to think outside the box. Thinking outside all boxes is not possible as perspectives and boxes of thought are necessary for any thinking so thinking outside the box is all about finding the best box to think in. Ironically supposedly 'wise' experts on a subject are more likely to badly effected by bad boxes of thought (if they are flawed) in which young people and nonexperts who aren't so entrenched in ways of thinking are more able to figure out better ways of thinking. Inside the box thinking can also be seen in the phrase "not seeing the wood for the trees" in which people may be so focused on details that they don't think about the foundations of their fields and the big picture. Foundational ideas are easy to overlook when people rush into thinking without careful consideration of foundations in which I feel there needs to be a careful education for those seeking to test whether fields of knowledge have flawed or imperfect foundations. A famous example of thinking outside the box can be seen in the Copernican revolution where the assumption and foundational idea that the heavens move around the earth produced flawed knowledge of geocentrism which with questioning of foundational ideas lead to heliocentrism which is out of the box thinking.
With understanding outside of the box thinking being required given possibly flawed foundational ideas, an insidious problem is the phenomenon of knowledge having implicit foundations. Implicit foundations have foundational ideas that are not well stated or explored even though they are very important in which ideally they should be made explicit and well understood. Implicit foundations result in neglected foundational questions which are the questions we don't ask as they are about foundational ideas which we aren't even fully aware of. Foundational questions are questions that will never be asked given inside the box thinking which can be seen in a fanatical ideologue thinking inside their box of their ideology not asking questions outside their box. I feel a good example of implicit foundations being uncovered can be seen in the works of people like Nick Bostrom who have uncovered implicit ideas of macrostrategy, humanity's general activities we should be doing, and humanity's future which leaders haven't given proper thought to even though they are foundational for dealing with the world. Some may dismiss implicit foundations as trivial and too simplistic to be noteworthy however I feel they are still good to examine and I'd beg to differ as I think there are many important ideas waiting to be discovered.
In trying to determine foundational ideas which may be implicit and currently unknown, I propose fundamental questions which all actors (entities) in the cosmos (cosmic actors) should ask and be the foundations for knowledge. The most fundamental question is as follows:
"So we are in the universe so like what the heck are we really supposed to be doing?"
This fundamental question can inspire subquestions that the cosmic actor would find useful for doing specific activities in the cosmos. The "really" in these questions means proper treatment with definite and explicit principles. The subquestions are as follows:
These subquestions make sense as the cosmic actor first assesses its situation and the phenomena of the situation ("What really is there?"), then thinks about the situation ("How do I really go about thinking?"), and then finally does things in the situation ("How do I really go about doing?"). These three questions I feel forms the foundation of all knowledge that an cosmic actor would find relevant to itself (as specified in my idea of 'thought theory' of my magnum opus 'WAK11') and so I'd determine these questions to form the proper box we should be thinking in. Although the questions are important, they are implicit (as per implicit foundations) in which very rarely do people talk about them and they are not usually comprehended or asked. They also aren't seen as important as they should be and should be prominently placed in regard to all knowledge. As an example of how these questions relate to existing knowledge (primarily philosophy), the subquestion "How do I really go about doing?" is partially answered by existing ethics but only for a smaller specialised scope of moral action and not all action and I'd argue there are implicit principles of doing that haven't been uncovered by others currently.
Although I can't cover and discuss every fundamental question in full detail in this post, I'll be covering action philosophy (of "How do I really go about doing?") and my theory of 'structure selection' (of "What really is there?") which are my most refined, obvious, and pertinent set of ideas from my magnum opus of WAK11.
The first and foremost idea of how we really go about doing is the 'cosmic actor perspective' which states we are fundamentally actors in the cosmos which think and act based on cosmic situations and what we value in priorities. The cosmic actor perspective is the fundamental perspective that all actors in the cosmos should take and as such although simplistic and implicit in our actions, its very important.
After having the right perspective, actually understanding how action works is important in 'action theory'. Actions occur given situations which select ideas for proper action based on the situation and then which go on to produce consequences. Consequences for situations occurs via cause and effect in which the individual imagines consequences for a given situation and action and reasons what will happen. Situations and consequences can be understood by the cosmic actor in which situations and consequences can be understood or not in which not understanding fully situations and consequences can cause unintended consequences which are unpredicted. Understanding of situations and consequences can also be impeded by complexity of situations and consequences in which complexity leads to situations and consequences which are not readily understandable and vice versa for simple situations and consequences.
Along with understanding how situations and consequences occur in action, action itself can occur in various ways. 'Optimal action' for a given situation emerges over time (noninstantaneously) as ideas for how to perform something is refined over time ultimately reaching a final (selectional) equilibrium of completely optimal ideas. Optimal action can be principled based in my action ideas of action philosophy and such and also optimal action can see 'practical optimisation' in which there needs to be a balance of practicality and optimisation in which it isn't practical to completely optimise actions all the time. Action can also be understood to occur in general situations where 'general actions' are done or in special situations where 'special actions' are done e.g. the general situation of going out of a door would require general actions such as opening it while a special situation such as a special door would require special actions such as locking it. Actions can also be simple and complex where 'simple actions' don't require much however 'complex actions' require things like logistics, arrangement, and thinking in accounting for many things. Complex actions can see 'special arrangements' made for the action of special actions and also complex actions are fraught with optimisation and efficiency problems of various ways actions can be done in 'complex action optimisation'. Important action can also be prioritised per cosmic priorities in 'action prioritisation' which are thought about more and specially given their high priority.
Action can occur given priorities and can be understood by 'cosmic priorities' and 'ethics'.
In determining priorities, an entity of a specific type has priorities in which general human priorities are given in my ideas of cosmic priorities. Other entities may have different priorities than human priorities potentially. There are 'fundamental priorities' which are the fundamental things humans prioritise in which humans prioritises the self to both not suffer and not die (mortality) and also humans prioritises others to not suffer and not die. With these fundamental priorities, certain areas of attention and focus can be defined which I refer to as 'priority focuses'. Priority focuses can either be 'individual focus' which focuses solely on the individual to benefit the self, 'other individuals focus' which focuses on other individuals to benefit others such as family and friends, or 'world focus' which focuses on the world to benefit others and perhaps the self. Priority focuses are useful for classifying what actions are directed towards who. Fundamental priorities are terminal goals and are achieved by instrumental goals which are the means to the end. Problems are situations which are bad for priorities which can be either direct (e.g. a friend getting injured) or indirect and of instrumental goals (e.g. losing your car keys). An important perspective of defining the scope of cosmic priorities is 'universal goodwill' which states any empathetic being regardless of time and space should direct their care towards any and all other empathetic beings that are suffering regardless of time and space in which the concept of universal goodwill is related to longtermism with future people's value being considered as well as for people of the present. Universal goodwill can be directed to anonymous people in 'anonymous goodwill' in which even if you are not known to others and you feel alone in your suffering, a thought of care towards the anonymous still encompasses care towards you. Human priorities can also be understood evolutionarily in which morality and priorities has origin in evolution seemingly (see my theory of structure selection). Morality has been evolutionarily generated through the personal interaction of people in what I call 'personal morality' in which the impersonal dealing of people e.g. of many people, isn't easily morally comprehensible; it is hard to comprehend the moral significance of a million people and people focus on individual persons and stories.
With ideas of cosmic priorities, actions can be made ethical in which ethical action can be classified by priority focuses into 'individual ethics', 'other individuals ethics', and 'world ethics'. Individual ethics sees ethical action of survival of self mortality and hedonism of self suffering. Other individuals ethics sees caring action of mortality and suffering towards others. World ethics tries to achieve the most ethical world all things considered in which ideas of utilitarianism would apply such as the principle of utility which states all actions should be judged based on utility it provides, that is, their tendency to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness i.e. of suffering or mortality of fundamental priorities. With the principle of utility, utility calculus can be used to calculate the utility of actions for maximal utility in which suffering and mortality of actions can be calculated with 'suffering calculation' measuring relative amount of distress (e.g. sadness), eustress (e.g. happiness), and neutral states given actions for each person and 'mortality calculation' enumerating lives of each person that can be saved given actions. Given action per action theory can have complex consequences simple calculation may not be enough to completely understand what the best course of action is e.g. an important individual may hold more value in providing utility to others and thus should be prioritised.
Given the cosmic actor perspective you are fundamentally an actor in the cosmos so it's best to consider the whole cosmos when taking action in which cosmic situations can either be universal to all actors in the 'universal situation' or local to the individual in a 'local situation'.
In trying to determine the fundamental situation we are in, there are many possibilities of what the true nature of reality is like which some may consider unfalsifiable and thus unable to be studied (which may be a cop out imo). One possibility is there could be a godlike entity which I argue could be likely as godhood is desirable for any entity so if it’s possible it has almost certainly occurred. The godlike entity could either be according to religions or not. A second possibility is perhaps we are living in a computer simulation per the simulation hypothesis such as for ancestor simulations or for experimentations on civilisation. The simulation hypothesis may go hand in hand with the possibility of a godlike entity as the entity could be in charge of the simulation. A final possibility is it could be arbitrary and unknown and could feature anything from interdimensional reptilians to the current empirically determined reality of modern physics with the big bang, no supernatural godlike entity, and a universe in a natural state and in a natural anarchy excluding earth with a possibility of alien civilisations. I have my own views of the likely cosmic situation which I've stated in 'cosmos specifics' in my magnum opus WAK11.
Along with the general possible cosmic situations, we find ourselves on earth and so have certain earthly things we can consider. The earthly situation has problems, which can be called 'earthly problems', that every human individual encounters which are safety concerns (e.g. from accidents), physical health concerns (e.g. illnesses, fitness, and nutrition), and mental health concerns (e.g. entertainment and relationships). Given these earthly problems, obtaining certain things can deal with them in which types of things can be personal things (e.g. possessions, money, job) or relationships. Obtaining things can also be of things of the economy in which the economy allows for dealing with earthly problems via fabricating things and resources which can be obtained to resolve problems e.g. the economy can produce medication to keep you healthy and alleviate physical health concerns. The economy can also see technologies be developed that can resolve problems in which the earthly situation has 'important technologies' such as AI and life extension technologies coming on the horizon. AI in particular is important as it could be capable of resolving nearly all problems if sufficiently capable in which many capabilities and technologies would be created shortly after the development of ASI. For those wishing to live an indefinite life span life extension technologies could be a situation to prioritise with a longevity escape velocity perhaps being an important consideration. Life extension technologies however may be created by an ASI so AI could be more important to prioritise.
With my ideas of the cosmic actor perspective, action theory, prioritised action, and cosmic situation ideas, they can collectively be grouped under a topic of 'principles of action' in which these principles of action apply to all areas of action. These ideas can be organised in the following way:
In the following sections I'll detail particular 'areas of action' which these principles of action would operate in.
Areas of action has a topic I call '(unspecific) general action' which encompasses how the general actions of thinking and doing can be done better. Thinking can either be done purely in what I call 'sophisticated thought' or with the intention of doing in what I call 'thinking about doing / planning'. Doing can either be done purely in what I call 'doing principles' or with the intention of thinking in what I call 'doing thinking'. The topics of thinking and doing in this context I refer to as 'cosmic thinking' and 'cosmic doing' respectively and can be understood in the following:
My ideas of sophisticated thought determine principles of thinking in which the ability to think with sophistication is important for a cosmic actor in order to act in the most intelligent way possible. The action of thinking is important to determine for the question "How do I really go about doing?" as much action is thinking.
The first things to consider are the 'principles of sophisticated thought' in which one of the first things you can do to vastly amplify your intelligence and memory is writing down your thoughts. Writing ideas down overcomes mental limitations of memory which can be accomplished by writing ideas down in normal prose as you discuss them in which this is comparable to written maths compared to mental maths in which mental maths is far harder than written maths in which purely mentally thought ideas are easily forgotten and not considered. In WAK11 I've determined many minor ideas of 'proper reasoning' such as the already discussed ideas of foundational ideas. Another topic of principles of sophisticated thought is the topic of 'thought development' in which thought can approach an equilibrium and stable state over time in regards to reasoning and evidence in what I call 'thought selectional equilibrium' in which this can be seen in reaching stable conclusions to reasoning. Thought development can also see 'initial naivety' in which your first ideas about a topic are usually very simple however over time they become more sophisticated. Initial naivety sees 'occurrence in the majority of knowledge' in which initial naivety of an actor can occur across various topics with perhaps a majority of topics of knowledge is not known and covered by vague simplistic ideas e.g. a layman’s understanding of quantum mechanics would be covered by simplistic ideas; these simplistic ideas can often be grossly inaccurate so its probably a good idea to cover topics in the best way possible without investing too much time into it.
The last topic of principles of sophisticated thought is 'thought regulation' in which metacognition is about understanding and regulating thinking in which regulation can be about following principles of proper reasoning such as starting with foundational ideas before jumping into detailed ideas, working on holes in knowledge, and thinking about the specific aims and goals of thinking. Thought regulation can also see 'thought initiation' and 'thought termination' in which thought initiation occurs upon the recognition of problems in which some problems are obvious to find however others require exploration in order to perceive them. Thought termination should occur in order not to spend potentially indefinite amounts of time thinking about things in which there needs to be a point when thinking is determined as good enough and findings from reasoning are used. Thought termination can occur due to the cosmic situation demanding action or else the completion of thought perhaps seeing the stability of ideas at thought selectional equilibrium.
In my endeavours to think about my theories over the past decade, I've developed many techniques for sophisticated thought which are too numerous and minor to list in this post however the key techniques I've developed is to first write down my ideas in discussion which I do in my diary 'DD' and then from that discussion, distilling and consolidating ideas of the discussion in lists which organises ideas by topic in what I call 'frameworks'. Frameworks which distills knowledge work in specific ways of first having 'knowledge pieces' (that are the things which are listed) given names and descriptions and then these knowledge pieces are then placed in 'knowledge placement' which can either be placed in 'position' (where knowledge is) or 'ordering' (when knowledge is). Position places knowledge pieces by topic via nesting which can be accomplished in text by idents (spaces) while ordering places pieces in a logical ordering where concepts come before others (such as of foundational ideas coming before detailed ideas) which can be accomplished in text by lines coming one after the other. An example of how frameworks are constructed can be seen in the following:
Where X is the name while Y is the description of the knowledge pieces. X and Y are different for each section (one section per line). The earlier framework of cosmic thinking and cosmic doing is another example.
Moving on from sophisticated thought, the action of thinking can occur with the intention of doing which is 'planning'. Thinking about doing requires 'goal determination' in which project and goals to be done given the cosmic situation are determined. With these goals a certain set of actions may be required in which for complex actions 'plan decomposition' is required in which complex action and projects can be broken down into a series of simple actions (see the concept of the divide and conquer algorithm).
Moving on from cosmic thinking to cosmic doing, doing things can have principles in which generally doing can have doing types of either 'maintenance doing' or 'progressive doing' in which maintenance doing maintains the current situation while progressive doing progresses towards and prepares for new situations i.e. making things better. Another topic is 'activity principles' in which the general doing of activities can have principles of doing them such as 'chunking of activity' in which it is more efficient to do things all in one go per economies of scale and 'priority of the particular' where activities can either be dependent on conditions or not in which undependent activities can be ordered and made arbitrarily while dependent activities are given priority in ordering. An example of priority of the particular is disabled people parking places being nearer to the entrance of a place.
Doing with the intention of thinking can have principles. Thinking I feel is 'the wisest action' as the wisest course of action is often to increase wisdom in which when it is not it is due to things demanding attention based on your current conception of your situation; an exception is if you're completely sure of everything that is integral which means then increasing wisdom is unnecessary. An important perspective regarding thinking I feel is the 'tragedy of misunderstanding' in which misunderstanding the world disallows the ability to resolve problems in the cosmic situation. Misunderstanding can be thought as the cause of perhaps all (or at least a great range of) tragedies which could be prevented with better understanding as per the phrase "knowledge is power".
Activities can occur as per priority focuses in which there is individual focus activities, other individuals focus activities, and world focus activities. Individual focus activities consist of dealing with obstacles that life has and obtaining things effectively in the earthly situation in which individual can also obtain life skills. Individual focus activities in the earthly situation should primarily strive for hedonism to reduce suffering of the self in which self mortality can rely on others who are working to develop life extension technologies among other things that address mortality which one cannot hope to address with a single person's effort. Self mortality can also be address with leading a healthy life. Other individuals focus activities are about dealing with relationships and people effectively in which understanding personality of people can be accomplished by my theory of 'NSC theory' (which stands for 'neural sensitivity continuum theory' which is in my magnum opus WAK11). World focus activities deals with global priorities, world issues, and technologies in which various things to work on are AI, life extension technologies, and other global priorities e.g. climate change and global catastrophic risks. For all prioritised activities, an 'ideal situation' for all priority focuses that one can hope to achieve is good to determine and envisage so one can work towards it.
Problems encountered in the cosmic situation can be dealt with and managed in which the first thing to consider is 'problem discovery'. Problem discovery is the determination of problems (perhaps in creativity) and things that would be good but aren't present. Some problems are unknown and require exploration to perceive them. Problems can be researched in 'problem research' which can occur in a personal journal perhaps per sophisticated thought. Some problems are 'unpredictable problems' which are unpredictable events of the cosmic situation that may pop up out of nowhere due to incomplete knowledge of the cosmic situation and cause problems that need to be dealt with. Unpredictable problems can be seen in the phrase "sh*t happens" and the concept of a black swan events which are events that comes as a surprise and has a major effect.
Problems can be solved in 'problem solving techniques' in which these ideas are not my own and I merely placed them in my body of action philosophy knowledge due to their notability. Firstly problems are defined, problems are analysed, various solutions to problems are considered, various solutions are developed, solutions are evaluated (such as ease of accomplishment and effectiveness of resolving the problem), solutions may be tested in evaluation, solutions are selected based on evaluation, solutions are implemented and acted on, and then there is measuring of results and whether the solution succeeded and whether the actor should try again at making a solution.
What I've discussed of action philosophy are foundational ideas of how action should be thought about and answering the question "How do I really go about doing?". Action philosophy can be organised by the following framework (with names but no descriptions):
action philosophy
In assessing the structures (matter with a specific form) of the cosmos there are many commonalities which they share which can be understood by my theory of structure selection. I refer to structure selection simply as 'SS' commonly.
In evaluating the behaviour of matter, matter often converges towards certain states such as similar to the idea of an attractor state. These states are stable and can inspire a principle I call 'the SS principle' which states that "the world is populated by stable structures with unstable structures being eliminated in deselection and stable structures remaining preserved in selection" i.e. 'survival of the stable' or 'collecting of the stable'; selection is existence while deselection is nonexistence. This principle which can be traced back to Richard Dawkins and the late Daniel Dennett realised at least partially its importance as part of universal darwinism calling darwinism a "universal acid". The SS principle, which can be captured by the phrase 'collecting of the stable', can be seen in species dictated by natural selection collecting into stable (fit) configurations however many other phenomena can be described to collect into stable configurations from chemicals reacting and reaching stable products to galaxies collecting matter via gravitation into stable stars and planets.
When things (such as structures) reach stable selected states, I call such a state a 'selectional equilibrium' which is similar and related to the concept of thermodynamic equilibrium where thermodynamic systems reach stable selected states. Another useful word is 'settling' in which when things settle down they reach stable states in which many thing can be said to settle down on top of species settling down into stable fit configurations of adaptations. In the process of settling, things are initially in chaotic states in which over time many semi-stable things exist for brief periods of time before transforming into more stable longer lived structures. An example of this can be seen in leaves in a windy courtyard which collect into stable configurations in nooks and crannies out of the way of the wind. Species also reach stable configurations in fit adaptations to the habitat. Just as leaves find stable configurations in nooks and crannies so do species find stable configurations of fit adaptations. Examples of settling can also be seen in ecological succession seeing an ecosystem approach a stable state through successive stages, the early internet settling and having websites rise to prominence, and a person settling down in living in a new house.
The SS principle of collecting of the stable is applicable to literally all matter in which any matter configuration can have the quality of stability conceivably. Simply looking around you all the structures surrounding you have collected into their configurations due to their stability. For nonagency structures the SS principle of collecting of the stable can be seen firstly in cosmology where matter within the universe has settled down and reached stable states since the big bang. In astronomy matter settles and collects into celestial bodies where it is stable via gravitational settling in which other applications can be seen in stable orbits of celestial bodies which can have stable orbits that are undisturbed by other bodies and may see resonance in orbits where specific orbital configurations are stable and also in stars where there is a equilibrium between internal forces and may ultimately transform (collect) into more stable white dwarfs or other such end states for stars. In thermodynamics matter evolves and collects towards stable states at thermodynamic equilibrium.
In chemistry chemicals seek to attain (and collect) a full outer shell of electrons via gaining or losing electrons which is a stable configuration. Electron configuration stability can be seen in ionic and covalent bonding which seeks to attain (and collect) the stable configuration of electrons. Also in chemistry, energy determines bonding in which bonding is made stable to energy such as in exothermic reactions which release energy and endothermic reactions which absorb energy. Finally in chemistry, chemical equilibria can see specific quantities of chemicals collect in a dynamic equilibrium and reach and collect to a stable state. In nuclear physics, nuclides which are types of atomic nuclei, have stability and exist and collect primarily on 'the belt of stability'. In particle physics particles have stability and exist and collect in the universe primarily as ordinary matter of protons, neutrons and electrons. In earth science the structures of earth collect and reach stable states. This can be seen in landscapes which change and reach stable states over time such as via erosion, weathering, and such. Other applications of the SS principle can be seen in what I call 'agency' structures such as species and other complex structures.
Time progresses in a direction which can be related to collecting of the stable occurring in a direction. The SS principle can be said to characterise time itself and is more fundamental than the thermodynamic arrow of time I feel. Time can be characterised by systems interacting and changing in which these interactions yield stable configurations of matter as seen in the SS principle. Interactions can produce stable configurations such as seen in astronomical configurations of matter, chemical and atomic configurations of matter, and subatomic configurations of matter.
Collecting of the stable occurs to situations in which various principles can be made for structures which collect based in the situation they are in. Given 'changes to situations' it can be characterised as a destabilising event in which new structures collect to the new situation which can be seen for example in changes to the environment and habitat of a species which causes new adaptations of the species to collect. Changes to situations can see structure have a 'dependency' on the situation in which specific situations select specific structures which may otherwise be deselected. Dependency can see 'structure support' where situations support specific structures which can be seen in convergent evolution seeing certain situations supporting specific configurations of matter as seen in a specific habitat resulting in similar specifically supported adaptations e.g. fins of fish and whales (cetaceans).
Given a situation it takes time for structures to collect to situations which I call 'noninstantaneous collection'. Sometimes instantaneous collection can be thought to occur if collection time is negligible. This can be seen in adaptations of a species collecting gradually and noninstantaneously to a habitat. Given noninstantaneous collection the principle of 'stability collecting more' can be made in which with frequent changes to situations and instability of situations there is a lack of collection of structures per noninstantaneous collection in which there is not enough time to collect structures i.e. 'stability collecting more'. In WAK11 there are various minor principles of stability collecting more that I won't cover here. Examples of the principle of stability collecting more can be seen in temporarily living in a new place if not staying for a long period of time things may not be established and collect, extinction events if happening too frequently may not allow for the settling down of species, and if stimuli changes too much patterns may not be able to be determined and ideas about the world may not be able to be determined and collect.
Structures which tolerate a wide variety of situations and remain selected display with adaptability and can deal with many situations. A special type of structure is capable of dealing with varying situations which I call 'agencies'. Agencies see 'agency reaction' in which agencies adapt via reacting to the environment which works via first being affected by the environment (in intraselection) and then having a corresponding (adaptive) effect on the environment (in extraselection and per the adaptation principle). Agencies changing the situation to be more favourable to them is a way situations can be dealt with and so is a manifestation of adaptability. Reaction and adaptation to the environment allows for obstacles to selection to be avoided. Examples of agencies are cells which can react to the environment via gene regulatory networks and signal transduction, and nervous systems which can react to the environment and allow the organism to survive and remain selected to a greater degree. Agencies are a natural consequence of matter that is capable of dealing with a variety of situations in adaptability which occurs via agency reaction (as can be seen in the SS types).
SS can be applied to specific agencies with types of agencies being an SS type. The SS types are 'cellular selection', 'nervous selection', 'computer selection', and 'AI selection'. In cellular selection, cells (i.e. biological cells) are agencies which can react to their environment. In nervous selection, nervous systems are agencies which can react to their environment. In computer selection, computers are agencies which can react to their environment. In AI selection, AIs are agencies which can react to their environment.
In the following sections I'll detail 'agency principles' which detail how agencies such as of the SS types work. Agencies can characterise many ideas of complex structures especially on earth.
Agencies and their environment can evolve (coevolve) together in 'coselection'. In coselection the environment affects (internally) the agency in 'intraselection' which occurs via 'substructures' of the agency which are the internal affected structures contained in an agency. After intraselection, the agency effects the external environment in 'extraselection'. Coselection of intraselection and extraselection occur precisely in the following stages:
The concept of selection ties together the SS principle of collecting of the stable and coselection in which substructures 'collect due to stability' to the environment and environmental objects collect due to stability to the agency; collection is the bringing of the agency (in its substructures) and the environment (in its environmental objects) to a stable state. Another idea is the 'adaptation principle' which states extraselection is dependent on intraselection due to varying substructures being selected in intraselection in which selected substructures go onto select the environment in its environmental objects in extraselection. Extraselection dependent on intraselection manifests itself as the structure adapting and reacting to the environment firstly in intraselection then in extraselection.
Another useful perspective of coselection is of 'input-output reaction'. Inputs from the environment are linked and associated to the outputs towards the environment via an inner working of substructures which link inputs to outputs. Substructure selection which links inputs to outputs manifests as reaction and adaptability towards the environment. Input-output reaction occurs in the following stages:
Coselection can be seen in nervous systems with intraselection occurring via sensors and extraselection occurring via muscles and in computer selection where intraselection occurs via input devices and such and extraselection occurring via output devices and such.
I've developed various principles of intraselection which I won't discuss completely here in which one of the most important is what I call 'substructure selection'. In substructure selection, substructures of the agency are affected by the environment which can either occur in 'elastic selection' or 'plastic selection'. In elastic selection, substructures are 'activated' which conditionally selects substructures based on environmental conditions in which combinations of environmental conditions can produce patterns that elastically select different substructures activationally. In plastic selection in contrast with elastic selection, the actual substructures that are conditionally activated are altered and changed in which this produces different extraselection given different substructures from the same environmental conditions. Substructure selection without plastic selection and with only elastic selection can characterise an agency as an automaton as no new programed responses to the environment are made e.g. cells are sophisticated automatons although natural selection provides plastic selection which alters cell behaviour with evolutionary progress. Computers are automatons with natural selection being a simplistic form of plastic selection and computer selection not seeing plastic selection at all. Elastic and plastic selection are well named concepts as elastic selection can explore unaltered various types of substructure activation while plastic selection alters the types of substructure activation.
I've developed various principles of extraselection which I won't discuss completely here in which one of the most important is what I call 'the resource cycle'. The resource cycle, which occurs in stages, arises from extraselection as a means of effectively selecting the environment. The resource cycle occurs in economics and metabolism where resources are processed for their use as the goal of extraselection. The resource cycle firstly sees 'extraction' where resources are firstly taken from the environment, then in 'fabrication' resources are transformed with stages of fabrication seeing incomplete resources. After fabrication there is 'use' in which once fabrication is finished, 'complete resource' are then used such as in consumption. Complete resources may be used in further fabrication of other resources e.g. glue being a complete resource used for fabricating things. There can be types of use such as single use, limited reuse, and (virtually/practically unlimited) reuse with reusable resources are able to be repaired by fabricating damaged parts (such as modules being replaced). After use there is 'disposal and recycling' in which with recycling resources enter the fabrication stage again.
Given an environment with resources, any type of agency would see the resource cycle in which examples of the resource cycle can be any manufacture of goods in the economy, washing hands as a fabrication towards a desirable state (requiring soap, requiring fabrication in water treatment, disposal of water down a drain), cooking fabrication, and the digestion of food (food extracted from the environment, broken down in fabrication, assembled and fabricated by enzymes, waste disposed in urination and defecation). Food chains see the extraction of complex chemicals from successive organisms which are needed for the complex structures of organisms. Resources can be matter or energy with matter composing physical things and energy moving physical things.
Along with focusing on singular agencies, phenomena of multiple agencies can be understood. With agencies acting together there can be 'agency strategy' in which there are 'strategy types'. The strategy types are 'neutrality' where agencies mostly not interacting with each other, 'cooperation' where agencies work with each other, and 'conflict' where agencies work against each other. Agencies may change strategy in 'strategy changing' which occurs given changing situations. Another idea is 'insecurity selfishness' which states in conditions of instability and lack of resources disallows the supporting of larger cooperating groups and thus require selfish (conflict) behaviour of agencies. Insecurity selfishness can be seen as a special case of stability collecting (and supporting) more. Agency strategy and behaviour given multiple agencies can be understood by game theory which has concepts like tit for tat and forgiveness.
I've determined various principles of both cooperation and conflict strategies which I won't completely state here however they can be found in my magnum opus WAK11. Cooperation can be seen in cellular multicellular organisms (such as with organs), nervous sociality and eusociality which can be seen in ants and human society, computer networks and the internet, and perhaps in the future AIs could cooperate. Cooperation sees 'specialisation to roles' in which agencies perform specific tasks as part of a cooperating group primarily as part of the resource cycle in managing resources although other roles exist that may be present in the specific circumstances of cells and humans e.g. cellular selection having the role of muscles and nervous selection having the role of scientists. Specialisation can be seen in cellular 'cell specialisation' and the nervous 'division of labour' seeing specialisation.
An outstanding principle of cooperation is 'local and universal interactions' in which agencies can interact with others either locally or universally. In 'local interactions', agencies interact and communicate between specific individuals. This can be seen in cellular juxtacrine and paracrine cell signaling between nearby cells, nervous interactions between individuals i.e. talking with someone, and computer LANs (local area networks). In 'universal interactions', all agencies of a domain interact and communicate with a central dictating thing. This can be seen in cellular endocrine cell signaling using hormones (of central glands) in the bloodstream to reach all cells of the domain, nervous interactions with organisations (such as central governments and corporations coordinating people), and computer WANs (wide area networks) with central servers e.g. the internet.
These ideas of structure selection (SS) answers the question "What really is there?". structure selection can be organised by the following framework (with names but no descriptions):
structure selection
The ideas I've presented of action philosophy and SS are foundational and answer the fundamental questions "How do I really go about doing?" and "What really is there?" respectively. Action philosophy and SS deals with implicit foundations of knowledge in which in this post and WAK11 I've made them explicit. Given they are foundational and currently not explicitly known to others, in my opinion makes my ideas extremely important. With action philosophy all action can be made better with my explicit ideas of action. Action philosophy should be placed prominently in relation to all knowledge and I feel should replace ethics' position as a major branch of philosophy in which ethics is encompassed by my action philosophy. Action philosophy should be useful for all people and all action can be made better and principled. With structure selection (SS) all types of structures can be understood from physical structures from stars to atoms to complex earthly (agency) structures from cells to computers. SS is a synthesis and unification of many phenomena with a few principles and the power of natural selection in biology is generalised to all types of structures be them natural or artificial in the SS principle. SS explains the origin of structure in general. Although my ideas are quite simple and deal with concepts that some may see as trivial, I feel there is worth in making implicit ideas and foundations explicit.
I'd firstly like to ask for feedback on this post to know if there are any deficiencies with my ideas I'm hoping to popularise in which if you see my ideas as important as I think they are, I'd like comments that review my ideas which I can quote in spreading my ideas further. If you found this post interesting you may want to read my magnum opus 'WAK11' which details all my ideas of philosophy and some science and has more ideas of similar if not greater importance than my presented ideas in this post. WAK11's 'cosmos specifics' section is a bit speculative so if your not convinced by it you can jump straight to the next section of 'self principles'. WAK11 is best viewed on a PC instead of a phone due to frameworks requiring a wider screen. Along with WAK11 I'd like to ask for help in spreading my ideas. My position is of an autodidact and amateur thinker outside the scientific and philosophical community and I'm hoping to popularise my ideas. If you want to spread my ideas you can message and email people you know about and feel would find my ideas interesting and perhaps link this post and/or WAK11 or if you are capable and equipped for spreading my ideas yourself you can act as a spreader. WAK11 can be found here and I also have an X (Twitter) (link here) in case you want to follow my activity and a YouTube channel (link here) in which my email can be found on my YouTube channel in case you want to contact me directly.