The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
stevie
Posts: 762
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by stevie »

Gee wrote: October 25th, 2021, 2:36 am
stevie wrote: October 25th, 2021, 1:54 am
JackDaydream wrote: October 24th, 2021, 8:11 am @ stevie

... Many do seek the whys within the physical sciences but even these do draw upon metaphysics. ...
I don't think so. Based on and in line with already validated knowledge a logically consistent hypothesis is set up that can be experimentally tested. If the hypothesis can be confirmed by experiments then the concept of "hypothesis" is transformed into the concept of "theory". So there is no room for metaphysics.
So stevie,

Maybe you don't think so, but on the other hand maybe you should think about it a little more.
I don't think so considering the quote I have responded to.
Gee wrote: October 25th, 2021, 2:36 am I ... would like to state that science is ... very much about observation.
Correct. In contrast to metaphysics science it about what can be publically observed, i.e. about what is accessible by the five senses independent of beliefs, i.e. about what is evident.
Gee wrote: October 25th, 2021, 2:36 am Please observe that you are in a philosophy forum, not a science forum, and that this is the forum dedicated to metaphysics
Please observe that when a users tries to conflate sience and metaphysics then that is in line with this forum. And when another user states that science and metaphysics are incompatible categories then that is in line with this forum, too.
Posting in a forum that also is dedicated to metaphysics does not depend on being a follower of metaphysics. And finally please observe that this forum isn't exclusively dedicated to metaphysics but also to epistemology.
Gee wrote: October 25th, 2021, 2:36 am Also note that the current topic is about consciousness; it is not about the brain, so science is pretty clueless on this subject as most insist that consciousness is relegated to the brain.
Taking the brain as the source of consciousness it depends on the inclination of the user as to whether the current topic is related to the brain or the consciousness. Looking at the title of this thread brain or consciousness may be called 'aspects of the current topic' but not 'the current topic'.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Steve3007 »

Steve3007 wrote:
JackDaydream wrote:But, I do have another question which I raise for you or anyone else reading the thread, which is to what extent should physics be the foundation for metaphysics?
To answer that question (or any other question) we'd have to establish how we're using the words that it contains. If the word "metaphysics" is being used to refer to the study of what exists (i.e. if we take metaphysics to consist largely of ontology), then physics could be the foundation of some metaphysical positions. For example, consideration of the findings of physics might help some people to decide whether or not to adopt the metaphysical/ontological position called materialism.
=JackDaydream wrote:@Steve3007

The particular philosophy which draws upon physics as a basis for materialism is the position of realism, but the holographic model goes beyond the division between materialism and idealism. That is because it sees consciousness as imminent in matter, rather than mind being some 'disembodied' presence, or as being reduced to matter. It could be seen as suggesting some essential idealism, but on the other hand, it is also compatible with emergent views of consciousness. Perhaps, matter and consciousness emerge together rather being inseparable. This may be seen in human beings, but this may also be true of rudimentary consciousness in all things, on a level which may contain a basic form of panpsychism.
My answer was to your question (above) about whether physics could in any sense be the foundation for metaphysics. As I said, since metaphysics is largely concerned with what exists, and metaphysical positions therefore includes positions as to what entities are deemed to exist, theories of physics inevitably inform metaphysical positions. Materialism was just the example I gave. There are others, and I don't really agree that there is a clean division between materialism and idealism. There are metaphysical positions that are not materialism but are not idealism and are not the holographic model.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Gee wrote: October 25th, 2021, 2:36 am [To stevie] ... this is the forum dedicated to metaphysics -- something that you do not understand.
In fairness, our recent topic on defining or describing "metaphysics" failed to discover any form of words with which all (or most) could agree.

One reason for this is that the word is used as a catch-all term, so the things that it gathers together and refers to are not as intimately associated as intuition might expect.

It's like "unconscious mind". We have the "conscious mind", which refers to one part of our minds, and "unconscious mind" that refers not to one part, but to all of the other parts of the mind: a catch-all term, which understandably leads to some confusion. Especially when the one-part term, "conscious mind", is contrasted with the all-parts term, "unconscious mind", as though they are somehow equivalent, and therefore, comparable. But this is not about the mind, it's about metaphysics, and this paragraph is offered only as an example of catch-all terms, and how they can sometimes lead to confusion. 👍
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Belindi »

Pattern-chaser wrote: October 24th, 2021, 12:33 pm
Belindi wrote: October 24th, 2021, 9:47 am It's a psychological matter , because we select which inductive ideas are useful (i.e. make sense) and which are useless (i.e. nonsense).
I'm afraid I have to disagree once more, but only in a minor way. 😉 I agree that "we select which inductive ideas are useful and which are useless", of course. But I'm less convinced that use and sense always have the intimate connection you imply. Also, must nonsense always be useless, I wonder? 🤔
Nonsense is useful for lateral thinking however both sane and deluded people base their decisions on the stories they tell themselves. Stories are not stories unless they are meaningful.
Sense, for some posters here, seems to exclude feelings. I believe sense necessarily includes feelings. Except for maths, logic, and a sort of empirical method (if such exists) that excludes the experimenter's feelings.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

@Gee

I am glad to receive a reply from someone who has read Talbot's ideas. I have to admit that I didn't pay too much attention to the notes, but just sought to understand the basics of the perspective from a philosophical point of view. I would definitely agree that the understanding of the nature of consciousness can probably be best understood by science, philosophy and religion having ' equal voice'. My own searching is one which seeks to combine these, but many people don't think that science and religion are compatible at all. Of course, there are such varying approaches to religion, and the perspective from which I approach religious experience and knowledge is to see the wide panoramas of comparative religion. Science and religion approach life differently, in the sense that science looks for theories based on evidence and religious worldviews are based on symbolic ways, as expressed in stories. But, Talbot' s emphasis on how even the holographic model is a model only captures the way in which knowledge is limited. It may be about the way in which explanations are based on models, descriptions and metaphors that is extremely important, and that the understanding of consciousness needs to blend these varying aspects in order to come to a fuller understanding because consciousness involves all of these aspects in their fullest complexity.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Belindi wrote: October 24th, 2021, 9:47 am It's a psychological matter , because we select which inductive ideas are useful (i.e. make sense) and which are useless (i.e. nonsense).
Pattern-chaser wrote: October 24th, 2021, 12:33 pm I'm afraid I have to disagree once more, but only in a minor way. 😉 I agree that "we select which inductive ideas are useful and which are useless", of course. But I'm less convinced that use and sense always have the intimate connection you imply. Also, must nonsense always be useless, I wonder? 🤔
Belindi wrote: October 25th, 2021, 12:23 pm Nonsense is useful for lateral thinking however both sane and deluded people base their decisions on the stories they tell themselves. Stories are not stories unless they are meaningful.
Yes, indeed! Also, stories are not stories unless they're memorable. Stories are one of the best ways for us to remember things. Some of our best lessons are preserved in the form of stories. And then there are the remnants of our history, long forgotten in a more formal sense, but preserved in the form of stories. I love stories!

Belindi wrote: October 25th, 2021, 12:23 pm Sense, for some posters here, seems to exclude feelings. I believe sense necessarily includes feelings. Except for maths, logic, and a sort of empirical method (if such exists) that excludes the experimenter's feelings.
Wise words.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

@Steve3007

It may be that there is a lot of variation in the extent that people use physics as a foundation for metaphysics. It is likely that people can use and interpret physics as some kind of basis to support metaphysical claims. As far as the materialist and idealist perspectives, they are 'dualist' constructions and it is possible to go beyond such duality in thinking about consciousness. The holographic model offers one possibility of going beyond the extremes, but, definitely, it is not necessary to accept the holographic model in order to avoid this duality.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Steve3007 »

JackDaydream wrote:As far as the materialist and idealist perspectives, they are 'dualist' constructions and it is possible to go beyond such duality in thinking about consciousness.
I'm not sure why you'd call materialism a "dualist construction". Materialism is monist. That's because it's a metaphysical position/stance/view which holds that there is only one type of real existent (matter).
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

I see what you mean about materialism being monist, in the sense of seeing matter as being the only 'real existent'. At times, I have embraced non dualism, which is essentially going beyond the duality of matter and mind. This is monist too, but differs from materialism, but in some ways, it may come down to the issue of emphasis. Some materialists suggest that consciousness is an illusion, whereas the non dualitist does not think that at all, but sees mind and matter as being two interconnected realities, but in some ways it may be seen as only a subtle difference. The dualist is more distinct in the way of seeing mind and matter as clearly seprable.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

@Steve3007

Sorry, that's the second time today I have been writing my reply and it gets sent while I am still writing. So, the post above is for you. It was almost finished, but with a spelling error of the word separable.

What I would add is that I am inclined to think in some ways there is some duality, with brain and mind not being identical because there is the translation from the physical to mental states, which depends on some underlying spark to ignite consciousness. However, to separate mind and matter is probably impossible because it would imply some kind of disembodied form of existence, rather like the ghost coming out of the machine.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Belindi »

JackDaydream wrote: October 26th, 2021, 12:36 pm I see what you mean about materialism being monist, in the sense of seeing matter as being the only 'real existent'. At times, I have embraced non dualism, which is essentially going beyond the duality of matter and mind. This is monist too, but differs from materialism, but in some ways, it may come down to the issue of emphasis. Some materialists suggest that consciousness is an illusion, whereas the non dualitist does not think that at all, but sees mind and matter as being two interconnected realities, but in some ways it may be seen as only a subtle difference. The dualist is more distinct in the way of seeing mind and matter as clearly seprable.
Seems there was a confusion between Cartesian dualism, and advaita non-dualism.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

@Belindi

I have read a little about advaita non-dualism and found that it makes sense in some ways, but I do find that the mind and body problem is so difficult, especially as there are so many different forms of dualism. One of the main critiques of Cartesian dualism which I am most familiar with is that of Fritjof Capra, who argues that mind is imminent in body. However, when thinking about Cartesian dualism, it is questionable to what extent the development of this tradition was the exact way that Descartes thought about it, and he definitely seems to have seen the role of 'I' consciousness as a mediating factor.

In speaking of ideas about consciousness arising from the holographic model, I also discovered a few weeks ago that Bohm, who was one of the central advocates, has written books on topics such as awakening and enlightenment. I would like to read some of these writings at some point, to see to what extent the ideas which he develops later than those in the model, and see whether he has gone further in the direction of non--dualism.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Belindi »

Jack Daydream wrote:
I have read a little about advaita non-dualism and found that it makes sense in some ways, but I do find that the mind and body problem is so difficult, especially as there are so many different forms of dualism. One of the main critiques of Cartesian dualism which I am most familiar with is that of Fritjof Capra, who argues that mind is imminent in body. However, when thinking about Cartesian dualism, it is questionable to what extent the development of this tradition was the exact way that Descartes thought about it, and he definitely seems to have seen the role of 'I' consciousness as a mediating factor.

In speaking of ideas about consciousness arising from the holographic model, I also discovered a few weeks ago that Bohm, who was one of the central advocates, has written books on topics such as awakening and enlightenment. I would like to read some of these writings at some point, to see to what extent the ideas which he develops later than those in the model, and see whether he has gone further in the direction of non--dualism.
I found David Bohm quite difficult, as I could not understand the physics. May I recommend that you a good secondary source on Spinoza? Spinoza's on mind and body is "the mind is the idea of the body". That understanding from Spinoza accords with modern neurology especially regarding perception and the organs of special sense.Stuart Hampshire is good source for Spinoza .

Spinoza was a student of Descartes, but changed the idea of two ontic substances, mind and body, to the idea of mind and body as two aspects of the same substance, Nature.

I will revise Bohm's idea of implicate order, as it is important.
____________________
i have just looked it up in Wikipedia :
In Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order, he used these notions to describe how the appearance of such phenomena might appear differently, or might be characterized by, varying principal factors, depending on contexts such as scales.[1] The implicate (also referred to as the "enfolded") order is seen as a deeper and more fundamental order of reality. In contrast, the explicate or "unfolded" order includes the abstractions that humans normally perceive. As he wrote:

In the enfolded [or implicate] order, space and time are no longer the dominant factors determining the relationships of dependence or independence of different elements. Rather, an entirely different sort of basic connection of elements is possible, from which our ordinary notions of space and time, along with those of separately existent material particles, are abstracted as forms derived from the deeper order. These ordinary notions in fact appear in what is called the "explicate" or "unfolded" order, which is a special and distinguished form contained within the general totality of all the implicate orders
It now seems to me that the implicate order is what I call "The Absolute" within which our accustomed order of space, time, and force is an explicate order.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by Steve3007 »

JackDaydream wrote:I see what you mean about materialism being monist, in the sense of seeing matter as being the only 'real existent'. At times, I have embraced non dualism, which is essentially going beyond the duality of matter and mind. This is monist too, but differs from materialism, but in some ways, it may come down to the issue of emphasis. Some materialists suggest that consciousness is an illusion...
I don't see why any materialist (or anyone else) would suggest that consciousness is an illusion. It would be a very odd usage of the word "illusion", although I have seen some people using that word in some odd ways. It seems pretty clear, based on all the evidence we have, that consciousness exists and that it is always associated with the physical things called brains. That's not to say that new evidence couldn't arise at some later time to indicate something different. But it wouldn't make much sense (to me at least) to base my views on what evidence might turn up in the future. Since any evidence might turn up in the future, I'd then have to believe every possible thing.
...whereas the non dualitist does not think that at all, but sees mind and matter as being two interconnected realities, but in some ways it may be seen as only a subtle difference. The dualist is more distinct in the way of seeing mind and matter as clearly seprable.
Yes, despite the fact that no evidence exists to suggest that they are actually separable.
What I would add is that I am inclined to think in some ways there is some duality, with brain and mind not being identical because there is the translation from the physical to mental states, which depends on some underlying spark to ignite consciousness. However, to separate mind and matter is probably impossible because it would imply some kind of disembodied form of existence, rather like the ghost coming out of the machine.
I don't really know what you mean by the first sentence there. I don't know what you're referring to with the phrase "translation from the physical to mental states".
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3219
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: The Holographic Model of Reality:Is it Useful?

Post by JackDaydream »

@Belindi

I can see that Spinoza is relevant. I have started reading his ideas, but found it hard to concentrate on his ideas. However, several people have recommended him, so he is definitely on my 'to do llist'.

As far as the Bohm's ideas are concerned, as your quotation demonstrates, it does hint at a form of possible 'absolutes', and I have wondered if could possibly be seen as equivalent to Plato's ideas of the Forms. But, I definitely wish to read up on Bohm's later writings.In some ways, I wonder if he comes from an idealistic conclusion, even though the holographic model seems to be hinting at a way of thinking in between idealism and materialism.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021