The ontological separation of the behavior of matter from the matter itself, exposes a vast array of analytic and information processing implicit in the laws of physics, but otherwise not recognized as such. When the previously implicit information processing is made explicit, those resources essential to operate Quantum Mechanics are reified as the Quantum Determination Mechanism (QDM). It then allows the assumption of additional but presently unknown concepts to remove the indeterminacy derived from the Uncertainty Principle. This conceptual framework offers the QDM to explain the teleonomy necessary to make Evolution plausible and makes evident its homology to Consciousness in the mind-body problem. Because it is only a restructuring of the metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics and therefore remains tightly coupled to it, it may be a more acceptable approach than alternatives.
The ontological separation of the behavior of matter from the matter itself, exposes a vast array of analytic and information processing implicit in the laws of physics, but otherwise not recognized as such. When the previously implicit information processing is made explicit, those resources essential to operate Quantum Mechanics are reified as the Quantum Determination Mechanism (QDM). It then allows the assumption of additional but presently unknown concepts to remove the indeterminacy derived from the Uncertainty Principle. This conceptual framework offers the QDM to explain the teleonomy necessary to make Evolution plausible and makes evident its homology to Consciousness in the mind-body problem. Because it is only a restructuring of the metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics and therefore remains tightly coupled to it, it may be a more acceptable approach than alternatives.
The genesis of actuality from potentiality, with the apparent role of the observer, is an important and unsolved problem which essentially defines science‟s view of reality in a variety of contexts. Observation then becomes lawful and not emergent. Panentheism is needed to provide a mechanism for order outside of blind efficient causality, in a Universal final causality. Classical physics is over a hundred years out of date, yet scientific models remain mechanistic and deterministic. Deism, a remnant of classical cosmology, is examined and rejected by scientists and philosophers, and certain pre-scientific notions of religion are scorned, putting the matter to rest. Quantum physics, in its basic form, is necessary if there is to be any philosophical or scientific notion of free will and self-determination, as potentiality. Quantum metaphysics is also needed because classical physics is fundamentally limited to localized external relations, lacking the internality and non-locality of relatedness. God, or the equivalent, is necessary to complete the equation. Physicists now tell us that reality is fundamentally mental and is created by observation. Observation is here taken to mean experience, with experience going all the way down to the lowest order of a Universal mentality.
In this essay I make use of the resources of ‘naturalized ontology’ in order to determine what quantum mechanics implies about answers to fundamental metaphysical questions. Naturalized ontology is a methodology for metaphysics influenced by the philosopher Willard Van Orman Quine which makes explicit reference to our best scientific theories in order to answer questions which have traditionally been reckoned to belong solely to the realm of philosophy such as ‘What is the nature of reality in the most general sense?’ Quantum mechanics faces a unique interpretational problem known as the ‘measurement problem’ which makes determining the answer to such general metaphysical questions on this view especially problematic; nevertheless, naturalized ontology interprets and evaluates the various responses to this problem via measures of ‘theoretical virtue’, and ultimately concludes that the best interpretation of quantum mechanics—and thus reality—is absurd.
It is widely accepted that consciousness at the start of the 20th century was considered mainly in the context of neurology and the mind-body problem belonged to the domain of neuroscience, psychology and philosophy, later broadened by behavioural science and cognitive science. However, these disciplines cannot completely explain the correlation between mental activity and matter. \nChapter one starts by defining the difficulty of determining consciousness. A discussion of how philosophers (such as Descartes, Locke, Dennett and Nagel) attempted to describe this phenomenon leads to the conclusion that firstly, consciousness is indefinable and secondly, it continues to be a challenge for both – philosophy and science – to explain how subjective consciousness fits into the objective world. The following two parts of the chapter focus on the major philosophical theories of the mind-body problem. \nIn chapter two there is a focus on the mutual relation between philosophy and science, physics in particular. However, this project deals more with the implications of science for the philosophy of mind and mind-body problem than the science itself. The second enquiry of this chapter is to point out the difference in philosophical and scientific understanding of the word ‘substance’ (crucial to the mind-body problem). \nChapter three considers quantum theory, since the relation between mind and body started to be tackled from the completely new point of view, after the philosophers began to assimilate the implications of quantum physics. Firstly, there is a short introduction to quantum theory and the most significant points for philosophy and quantum mechanics issues are provided (such as quantum superposition, the measurement problem or the backward causation). Analysis of three prevailing theories is provided. \nThis project addresses the contribution of quantum mechanics to the studies of consciousness and matter and examines whether it helps in solving the mind-body problem.
The philosophy of quantum mechanics has often been conceived by physicists as a collection of dogmas concerning what can be measured, observed and known. To this branch of dialectics the present paper does not attempt to contribute, chiefly because it is written from the conviction that no part of science, nor any philosophy, can safely predict what may be feasible or knowable. Rather, this brief essay endeavors to expose the epistemology of quantum physics in a way which allows it to be recognized as an extension of the ordinary processes of cognition, as the continuation of a line which starts in sensory perception, leads straight through the methods of classical physics into quantum mechanics and shows no signs of terminating even there.
The article proposes a non-dual informational ontology to dissolve the “hard problem” of consciousness. It argues that modern physics (quantum field theory, holography, and emergent gravity) undermines classical materialism, showing that reality is not made of local substances with intrinsic properties but of relational and informational structures. Within this framework, essential operators generate integrated trajectories whose intrinsic aspect is phenomenality (consciousness) and whose extrinsic aspect, under holographic projection, appears as physical dynamics. Thus, mind and matter are not separate substances or universal properties but two aspects of the same informational process. The model avoids reductionism, dualism, and panpsychism, while offering falsifiability criteria: it would be refuted if fundamental information loss, restored locality, or primitive materialism were demonstrated. This approach presents a coherent, scientifically compatible alternative for unifying consciousness and physics.