Knowledge Implosion - MoAPS

Aiming for ground-zero of the imminent knowledge implosion...... They don't call me Chicken Little for naught.

Sophia is my secret weapon, this this regard. Agape sounds rather impersonal in this same regard.

I love to eat. This is a psychological state that permeates the animal kingdom. It is the motive force behind all motility. Is it impersonal? There is the animating spirit of all life.... the vital force. There is sentience, and then there is sapience.

There is knowledge and information. Are they impersonal? Well, they may be abstracted or extracted from the personal?

Plants possess as much DNA as do you and I? Is it personal?

Motility must be guided. Plants posess rudimentary motility, chemically mediated. What was the origin of the nervous system? Bacteria can follow chemical gradients... chemotaxis.

Action potentials in single-celled eucaryotes prefigured the nervous systems in their multicellular progeny. The sperm cells of plants have a rudimentary directed motility, that can be quite complex, nonetheess. See 'evolution of the nervous system'.

But do I look like a Darwinist? Do I look like a geneticist? Look again!

Those who suppose that intelligence may be impersonal point to AI and to evolution to make their case. Who argues against them? Am I the only one? The mind-body brigade argues that mind is not physical.

It is hard for me to tell if there are any living personalists of note. Wait, there is a van Rampuy listed, but no living philosophers that I can see.

How does an immaterialist explain DNA? Hesitantly. Watch me hesitate. It's about the birds and the bees, I guess.

Of all the cycles, the reproductive cycle is key. Given the myriad metabolic cycles, it would be very strange to find DNA absent. Once we decided to play the atomic game, we have to play it out. Blame it on logic. Blame it on the unreasonable effectiveness of logic, of the logos, UEL.

Which came first, the logos or the atomos?

What did they used to call it? The germ plasm? What would it be logically, if not atomic? The mighty oak from a tiny acorn grows.

DNA is no more impersonal than is logic. Socrates was a logician, therefore Socrates was a person.

Are not computers impersonal? Sure. But what is a computer if not a personal artifact? Information is nothing if not artifactual. There is a named argument, in this regard...... Pancomputationalism (PC), it took me almost an hour to find this, finally at the SEP. Try to find the SEP version of PC mentioned on the Wikipedia. Is this because Jimmy Wales is an atheist? I wonder, seriously.

It was John Searle who introduced 'interpretivist pancomputationalism' (IPC) in 1992. TBMK, IPC proves personalism. Was Searle a personalist? No, but he was a subjective atheist, which TBMK is about as close to oxymoronicity as any philosopher is liable to get.

This is all about upward v. downward causation. It is all about intentionality and the final cause. That is the CTC loop that we are in. With the MoAPS, it all comes home to roost, with the bird's-eye view of God. And there's nobody home but us chickens.

(continued to part 2.....)

9-18-14