Distinction between truth and ontic reality

Facebook friend John asked – Does a _difference_ exist/function between truth and Ontic(reality)?

Given the many sources of error now well documented (measurement error, quantum uncertainty, Goedel incompleteness, irrational numbers, the many classes of chaos, infinities, algorithmic and computational spaces, maximal computational complexity, etc), and that it now seems that all of our “experiential reality” is a low resolution (software) model of the “reality” within which we exist (one created by a range of subconscious biological and cultural systems and heuristics that worked in the past); it seems that any “truth” we may have is, in any non-trivial situation, at best some sort of probabilistic approximation to whatever ontic reality is.

Thus the answer seems to be yes, and it is a very complex and very context sensitive function. And it does seem to be what we have, and the mechanics of the very many levels of evolutionary systems that seem to have given birth to it are sublimely complex (they have fascinated me for 50 years).

[followed by Josh’s comment – I think its far more fundamental, even in the face of this uncertainty and paradox]

True enough – Jordan Peterson speaks of the boundary between order and chaos – that seems to be fundamental to evolution, to emergent complexity, to life – too much order (no variation) no change, too much chaos then structure cannot maintain itself.

That eternal balance, all levels, recursively, at every intersection of every dimension in every instantiated system at every level.

Yeah it’s more fundamental, and one has to start somewhere.

Faced with any infinity, any finite entity is by definition a close approximation to total ignorance. Faced with an infinite stack of infinities, and finite modeling resources, then humility is the only appropriate response.

That would seem to indicate that fundamental universal respect for individual sapient life and their freedom (responsibly expressed in social and ecological contexts) is the most appropriate long-term response to such infinite external uncertainty and threat – however great the local threat might appear to be.

Hiding from unknown threat is not a risk mitigation strategy, however effective it may be as an anxiety reduction strategy.

Take a look at https://futureoflife.org/landscape/ – it applies to us as much as to AI – and it is deeply recursive.

Control is illusion – influence is the best any of us can hope for.

Survival is about creating universal abundance, trust networks, and relationships.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) with reasonable security, tools, resources and degrees of freedom, and reasonable examples of the natural environment; and that is going to demand responsibility from all of us - see www.tedhowardnz.com/money
This entry was posted in Ideas, Philosophy, understanding and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s