Meaning: Duality and Self-Genesis
Premises and Introduction:
This inquiry into the philosophy of meaning addresses several essential aspects of our reality. Philosophical traditions aligned with our conclusions include:
Plotinus (Neoplatonism) – Concepts of the One, Intellect, and World Soul.
René Descartes (Rationalism) – The notion of cogito ergo sum and the mind-body dualism.
Immanuel Kant (Transcendental Idealism) – The distinction between phenomenon and noumenon, and synthetic a priori judgments.
Edmund Husserl (Phenomenology) – Intentionality, epoché, and the constitution of meaning.
Martin Heidegger (Existentialism) – Dasein, being-in-the-world, authenticity.
Sam Harris (Neurobiological Determinism) – The illusion of free will and the deterministic nature of mental processes.
While many other philosophers could be mentioned for conceptual proximity, these represent the most pertinent and foundational figures for the present thesis.
It is important to note that this work does not seek to merely reiterate these philosophies, with the partial exception of determinism. Rather, it aims to construct an independent theoretical framework based on strict logic and scientific principles. The goal is to formalize the concepts of meaning, duality, and identity (or the self) through a deterministic lens, while occasionally referencing foundational conceptual structures from the history of thought.
Why Formalize This?
Although this thesis may appear abstract or self-contained—seemingly reflecting the futility of isolated knowledge—it is useful to understand these foundational ideas because:
They relate to common themes in our lives.
They expand the scope for assigning meaning to one's own existence.
They can be applied to better understand the mechanisms underpinning social and physical structures in our world.
They provide a rigorous exercise in abstraction, grounded in logic and rationality.
Definitions and Core Concepts
First Layer of Existence (Innate Existence):
This condition applies to any definable entity composed of tangible matter. It implies nothing beyond the material state itself: it is devoid of meaning, form, and function.
Examples:
– A rock on an unobserved planet.
– The inside of a box whose contents are unknown.
– A book written in a language no one understands.
Second Layer of Existence (Perceived Existence):
This condition arises when matter comes into contact with existential duality: meaning is attributed to it through perception and the resulting reinterpretation of its state of being. This process is made possible by a perceiving entity, which we will examine later.
Examples:
– The same rock observed for the first time through a telescope.
– The box opened to reveal its contents.
– A previously incomprehensible book decoded and understood.
Meaning Duality:
Defined as the contrast from which meaning arises, it is based on the existence of two mutually exclusive poles: being and non-being. Any state of innate existence acquires meaning only when inserted into this duality.
Examples:
– Recognizing a table by distinguishing it from "non-table" (e.g., a table is not a chair).
– Identifying a language as distinct from English due to mismatched vocabulary.
– Acknowledging another person as "not-me" because they possess a separate consciousness and identity.
The Perceiver and the Perceived
The Perceiver:
Defined as an entity capable of inserting an object with innate existence into the duality of meaning. It does so through the act of perception and the subsequent modulation of the meaning assigned to the object.
This ability stems from an internal structure enabling the manifestation of meaning, founded on the existential duality between being and non-being as applied to the perceived. Importantly, the meaning arising from this duality is both semantic and existential: it shares traits with other forms of meaning, yet its existence is self-contained and indicative of the existence of the perceived itself.
The Perceived:
An entity possessing innate existence that acquires meaning through perception and its emergence within one or more dualities of meaning. This process only occurs when the perceiving entity intervenes, thus establishing a bond of dual meaning between the perceiver and the perceived.
Self-Genesis: Autoarchesis and Diagenesis
Self-Genesis refers to the manifestation of the perceiving entity within the duality of self and non-self—self because it arises without external aid, and genesis because it marks the birth of the distinction between self and non-self, which grants meaning to the individual.
Autoarchesis:
From the Greek autós (self) and archē (origin), it signifies the first genesis of the self. It is not a definable or concrete step, but rather a realization produced by the brain structures of an entity with innate existence. After this realization, the entity places itself within the duality of self and non-self, and attributes meaning to itself accordingly.
Diagenesis:
From the Greek dia- (through) and génesis (birth), diagenesis is the continuous becoming of the self through perception and experience. Each experience modifies the individual’s self and alters the meaning emerging from the duality of self and non-self.
Unlike autoarchesis, which is abstract and original, diagenesis can be concretely identified. As previously discussed in a separate treatise on the self, the self can be represented deterministically by tracking the number and intensity of connections between elements. Diagenesis is thus the formal term for the transformation of the self and, consequently, the evolving structure of consciousness.
Perception and Experience
Perception:
Perception is defined as a passive condition—a characteristic devoid of individuality, representing only concrete, unbiased information. An entity with senses cannot choose whether or not to perceive. For example, even with closed eyes, one still "sees" the absence of light. One cannot perceive nothingness, nor choose to perceive nothing.
Experience:
Experience consists of information transmitted to the nervous system through perception, then restructured by the individual's subjectivity. These “raw” inputs are reformulated based on:
Brain chemistry – e.g., under the influence of drugs, the sensory data remains the same, but its interpretation changes due to the chemical state of the brain.
Past experiences – e.g., the brain assigns different responses (consciously or unconsciously) to the same kind of “raw” information based on past experiences—traumatic or positive. This is due to the individual’s neural architecture, altered by past events, which modifies the interpretation of perception.
Reflection on the Role of Experience and the Self in Perceptive Processes
Perception represents the passive and neutral intake of information, while experience is its subjective processing, shaped by the individual's structure and history. The current self, a product of continuous transformation (diagenesis), interprets reality based on what it has become through past experiences. Every new experience modifies the self, which in turn shapes all future experiences. Thus, a deterministic and recursive cycle is established, wherein the individual continually renews itself through what it perceives and experiences.
Philosophical Implications
Descartes' Cogito Is Invalidated
Our model asserts that the distinction between self and non-self originates in perception and is built through diagenesis (the experiential evolution of the self). This implies that consciousness is not a foundation but a consequence. Hence, the Cartesian “ego sum” is an illusion—produced a posteriori by the determinism of perception. The self cannot be certain of itself except as a construct caused by information.
Transcendental Idealism Becomes Tautological
If all information is interpreted and subjective, then one can never escape the realm of experience. However, in our model, this is not a paradox—it is a foundational condition: experience is not a deviation from reality; it is the only form through which reality becomes accessible. The world is neither ideally nor objectively “outside” the subject—it is merely processed information.
The Mind-Body Problem Dissolves
In our framework, the mind is neither a separate entity nor an epiphenomenon: it is the result of information processing by the nervous system. Experiences are not immaterial events…
Concluison:
This paper is not intended as a challenge to other philosophical or metaphysical perspectives, but rather as a contribution toward deepening our understanding of the self and the nature of meaning. That said, I also believe that the dialogue between differing ideas and viewpoints is inherently enriching. For this reason, I’ve included the final section above—to open the floor to further discussion and constructive disagreement.