Footnotes2Plato Podcast

Someone recently tipped me off to Google’s latest AI product: NotebookLM. Here is a link to the article “they” are discussing: “Standing Firm in the Flux: On Whitehead’s Eternal Objects” (Whitehead at Harvard, 1925-1927, ed. by Joseph Petek and Brian Henning. Edinburgh University Press, forthcoming). I am honestly not sure what to think about this yet. Is it sometimes cringe? Yes. Is it sometimes offering a decent entryway to rather inscrutable ideas for nonspecialists? Yes, I think so actually. Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

A summary of some of the themes we explored: McGilchrist Conference ReviewSimon and Sam had been watching some of the recordings of the McGilchrist conference I cohosted back in March, asking for my overall sense of whether some synthesis perspective emerged from the various presentations. I explained that one major theme was the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and how it is influencing our human self-understanding. Several speakers including John Vervaeke and Zak Stein expressed grave concern about the ways tech companies are seeking to integrate AI into culture through marketing and interfaces designed to mimic human interactions. This is a very dangerous trend, particularly for young people who may grow up with these technologies in ways that derail normal psychosocial developmental pathways.Recontextualization and Human AtomizationSimon shifted the conversation to a discussion about recontextualization, drawing insights from Mike Levin’s conference talk on bioelectricity. He highlights the idea that humans currently experience a highly atomized sense of self, disconnected from larger social and cosmic bodies. In premodern cultures, people generally felt more integrated into their communities and environments, while modern individuals feel isolated within their own bodies. Simon reflects on how, in the past, people might have felt part of the “body of Christ” or the “body of the cosmos,” while today, humanity struggles with its place amid the deterioration of Gaia’s biosphere.Gaia as an Organism and Evolutionary TheoryI then explored the idea of the Gaia hypothesis and the way that traditional evolutionary theory itself can’t fully explain Gaia’s status as a living organism. Life on Earth might be viewed as derivative from a more primary “Gaian cell,” shifting the way we think about life’s origins and evolution. Rather than Darwinian selection alone, Gaia could represent a more primary form of self-organization that Darwinian processes enhance but do not create. Granted, many of the self-regulating feedback loops currently understood by Earth Systems Science seem to have emerged at some point after living cells, but we can understand the birth process of Gaia as beginning prior to our usual understanding of what constitutes biological life.Humanity’s Role as an Organ in GaiaThe conversation deepens into an exploration of humanity’s role within Gaia, with speculations on whether humans can learn to see themselves as organs within Gaia’s planetary body. We liken the human role to that of cells within a liver or another organ, questioning how cells identify with their place in the body. Might humanity come to recognize itself as a vital organ within the biosphere?Disruptive Societal Changes and EvolutionIt may be difficult to distinguish in advance whether a societal shift will be destructive or lead to a higher form of organization. Referencing Whitehead’s philosophy, I suggested that “evil is novelty in the wrong season,” and sometimes, disruption is necessary to catalyze evolution, even if the initial effects seem negative.Death, Mortality, and ReincarnationThe conversation takes a spiritual turn as we get into the importance of death in human and biological evolution. Confronting our mortality may turn out to be essential for contacting Gaian intelligence, since individual human life is part of a larger planetary and cosmic cycle. I explore the possibility of reincarnation as a way to take our ecological responsibilities seriously. Even in a naturalistic sense, reincarnation can foster a sense of continuity between generations and deepen our connection to the nonhuman lifeforms with whom we share this planet. Humans inherit the successes and failures of past generations, and the idea of reincarnation offers a way to understand how our actions today impact the future, as we will be here to face the consequences.Critique of Transhumanism and the Denial of DeathWe criticize the transhumanist goal of defeating death and the idea that human consciousness could one day be uploaded into machines. I believe it to be a great delusion that may lead to a bifurcation in human evolution, where some people become cyborgs while others resist such technological “enhancements.” This discussion ties into the broader theme of humanity’s technoscientific disconnection from Gaia her potential immune response to ecological degradation, such as declining fertility rates due to environmental toxins.Humility, the Role of Humanity, and Gaia’s EvolutionWe emphasized the importance of humility in humanity’s relationship with Gaia. Although humans may currently act as parasites, Gaia likely values human life and is seeking to guide us back into alignment with planetary processes. We discuss the possibility that humanity is still in an adolescent phase, rebelling against its parent (Gaia), and that technological infrastructure represents our attempt to create an artificial womb from which we must eventually emerge to fully re-integrate with the Earth.Wonder, Love, and Cosmic CommunionSam reflects on the importance of cultivating wonder and love as antidotes to the indifference that can destroy the fabric of human society as well as Gaia’s body. He suggests that the human ability to experience awe is a powerful means of reconnecting with Gaia and understanding our role within the larger cosmic order. I believe this sort of cosmic communion is essential for the growth of the divine body—an evolving process that depends on the conscious participation of all beings.The Internet, Noosphere, and New Forms of ConsciousnessI mentioned Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s idea of the Noosphere or emerging planetary mind. I am critical of the transhumanist interpretation of the Noosphere as simply equivalent to the Internet, suggesting that instead, it represents Gaia’s emerging consciousness. He speculates that the Internet and AI infrastructure may be a temporary scaffolding for something more organic and subtle that will arises humanity matures. The Internet has the potential to create planetary culture and a sense of global interconnectedness, though it has also fueled culture wars. We agree that this tension represents growing pains as humanity navigates the transition to a more conscious and integrated planetary body. Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

Early this week, I shared some reflections on Peirce’s essay “A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God.” You can read that here:Tim and I met earlier today to discuss this essay. Peirce has both a radically original and a perennial understanding of the relationship between logic and ontology. He is defending a new kind of proof for the reality of God that is neither deductive nor inductive but rather abductive—rooted in our direct intuition and imaginal experience of ideals like Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. In Peirce’s cosmos, human imagination or “Musement” (and our scientific explication and evaluation of its speculative harvests) is continuous with nature’s spontaneous originality and order-creating tendency. In fact human imagination attuned to its own theurgic powers is just the biopsychosocial process of earthly and cosmic energetic transaction become aware of itself. One implication of Peirce’s argument is that evolutionary biology shall become the scientific study of spirit’s incarnation into flesh. Peirce believes (at least in his brighter moods) that healthy thinking is or will be led by force of its own sound logic, careful observation, and moral pragmatism to affirm the hypothesis of God as necessary being.Peirce’s triadic logic serves as his foundation for thinking about divine order. He is like other thinkers such as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Rudolf Steiner, and Alfred North Whitehead, who sought to integrate evolutionary theory with Christianity, implying a neglected continuity between evolutionary theory and the Biblical account of the crucial role of history in mediating the God-World relationship.Tim describes Peirce’s argument as a form of meditation, one that begins with the contemplation of phenomena, approached from different perspectives and without the urge to leap to conclusions. For Tim, this contemplative approach mirrors the essay itself, as he treats it as a living encounter with Peirce's mind, full of personality and philosophical depth. He adds that Peirce's concept of God's reality—rather than God's existence—must be understood in terms of experience and its effect on conduct, much in line with Peirce's pragmatic maxim.Our conversation often circled around Peirce's nuanced and problematic use of the word "God"—not as a precise term but as a vernacular one, vague and unscientific, yet useful in capturing something fundamental. Peirce criticizes logicians and scientists who become atheists by trying to over-define God, missing the point of its vagueness and its role in human experience. Tim expands on this, noting that Peirce distinguishes between arguments and argumentation: arguments as signs that induce belief, but not necessarily through precisely defined premises. The "neglected argument" itself, Tim notes, is a form of abduction, which begins the process of generating premises rather than relying on pre-established ones.Peirce argues that abduction serves as the origin of all inquiry, not just in theology but also in natural science. For Peirce, this form of reasoning allows us to reach into the origins of phenomena, and encourages our primal faith in the human capacity to interpret and communicate.Peirce claimed that everyone—atheists included—secretly believes in God due to their inherent faith in their own capacity to think and reason. Here, Peirce’s concept of thirdness becomes particularly important, as it refers to the divine element of mind and its role in creating the other categories (firstness and secondness). Tim and I engaged in a long discussion about whether thirdness should be considered primary or whether firstness and secondness already imply it. We agree there may be tension in Peirce's thinking, as Peirce sometimes implies that chance (firstness) is sufficient for order to arise, while at other times he suggests that a pre-existing habit-taking tendency (thirdness) is necessary.I also questioned Peirce’s description of God as the “Creator” of firstness and secondness, and his affirmation of the traditional divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. God is a Creator ex nihilo.And yet, Peirce suggests that God may be said to grow, contradicting the traditional notion of divine immutability. He acknowledges the inherent difficulty of reconciling a purposeful, evolving God with the notion of divine transcendence, yet leaves the tension unresolved. For Tim, this reflects Peirce's desire to have it both ways: an evolving, creative universe that hints at God’s reality without fully committing to the traditional theistic conception of God as omnipotent and immutable.We touched on the problem of evil, which Peirce links to secondness and describes as one of the "major perfections of the universe." I introduced Josiah Royce’s interpretation of Peirce in his two volume work The Problem of Christianity (1913), as well as his criticisms of Bergson’s account of the perception/conception dichotomy. Peirce allows us to think the firstness of impression and the secondness of reflection (or percept and concept, respectively) as always already mediated by the thirdness of interpretation.William James’ viewed religion as primarily a solitary endeavor, which contrasts with Royce’s understanding of the centrality of the beloved community in religious life. I appreciated Tim’s emphasis on the prosaic nature of firstness: that religious experience should not be seen as the preserve of a few exceptional individuals but as something available to everyone in the everyday world. I thought of Whitehead, who in Religion in the Making further contextualized James’ idea by suggesting that religion is also about world-loyalty, tying religious experience not only to human communities but also to a deeper connectedness with the cosmos.We linked Peirce’s thought to ancient traditions, including Kabbalah, Taoism, and hermeticism. I drew connections to thinkers like Gregory of Nyssa and Pseudo-Dionysius, who engaged in negative theology, establishing a tradition of unsaying God, which resonates with Peirce’s emphasis on vagueness. Tim brings in psychoanalytic perspectives, especially Jung and Lacan, noting how psychoanalysis, like theology, grapples with the deep structures of human meaning-making and its confrontation with trauma, alienation, and the symbolic order. Tim explores the idea of God as "insistence" rather than "existence," paralleling the way the unconscious insists through its perturbations of consciousness in psychoanalysis.Peirce’s argument resonates with other evolutionary thinkers like Teilhard and Steiner. While the human mind is of course continuous with the many other examples of mindedness at play in natural processes all around us, there is also something unique about our capacity for conscious participation in what nature and perhaps even God undertake unconsciously. We are not just another species of animal. Steiner claimed that each human individual constitutes its own species, while Teilhard saw humanity as a new kingdom of nature. Peirce’s convergent idea of humans as generalizers and creator/discoverer of new universals sets us apart from other forms of life, echoing Hermetic and Kabbalistic traditions like the work of Pico della Mirandola, who argued that humans are not instinctually bound to any one archetype but are free to embody them all. Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

I had the pleasure of dialoging with Oliver Griebel about our shared interests in philosophy, cosmology, and the integration of modern scientific thought with spirituality. I’ve been reading the anthology that Oliver edited, Both One and Many, and particularly appreciated his insightful critiques of materialism rooted in the premise that scientific knowledge itself presupposes human personhood (conscious agency, etc.), and so cannot explain it away by reference to some favored set of abstractions.We touched on the role of expertise and the balance between inclusivity and maintaining rigorous, well-defended philosophical and scientific foundations. We also explored Whitehead's process philosophy and its relevance to modern scientific developments, considering its potential to offer an alternative to reductionist materialism. Oliver shared his interest in Whitehead's idea of a constantly updating universe and how this might relate to his own cosmic holism. We both agree that irreversible time is a real feature of the physical universe, contrary to some popular reductive (meta)physical arguments otherwise (eg, the block universe or cartoon “flip book” conception of the universe). Next time we plan to delve into more theological issues. Watch the video of our dialogue: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

Timothy Jackson and I discuss M. Beatrice Fazi's book Contingent Computation: Abstraction, Experience, and Indeterminacy in Computational Aesthetics (2018), focusing in particular on her interpretations of Gilles Deleuze and Alfred North Whitehead.Watch our dialogue below: Here an edited ChatGPT summary of the transcript: Discussion on Computation and Ontology:* The conversation begins focused on the book Contingent Computation by M. Beatrice Fazi, which Matt had not encountered before but is now deeply interested in, particularly due to its engagement with Deleuze and Whitehead. He appreciates how Fazi reads Whitehead as "post-Deleuzian" and contrasts their views on discreteness, logic, and potentiality.* Matt explains Fazi's position that Whitehead offers a way to treat logic and computation as irreducible to sensibility or bodily affect, distinguishing conceptual prehensions from physical ones. He notes Fazi's emphasis on the irreducibility of logical and quantitative aspects of computation, which she believes Whitehead's philosophy can accommodate.* Tim expresses some skepticism, noting that Fazi's reading of both Deleuze and Whitehead might be overly simplistic. He references how Deleuze’s political critique of computation, while grounded in concerns about control and identity, might still allow for a more nuanced understanding of the ontology of computation. Tim also brings in the concept of computational irreducibility, as explored by Stephen Wolfram, and suggests that Fazi could have engaged with this concept to bolster her argument.* Matt and Tim explore the idea that both Deleuze and Whitehead might be more balanced in their philosophical approaches than Fazi suggests. They delve into Whitehead's concept of God, which Fazi omits, arguing that Whitehead's God plays a crucial role in maintaining the coherence of his philosophical system, particularly in balancing the conceptual and physical aspects of reality.Philosophical Tensions and Syntheses:* The conversation weaves through various philosophical tensions, such as the relationship between the eternal, the virtual, and the actual, the role of abstraction, and the balance between identity and difference. * Matt highlights Whitehead's view that abstraction is a constructive process, integrating past actuality and ideality into experience, which contrasts with Deleuze’s more critical stance on abstraction as a burden on experience. Tim argues that Deleuze, too, recognizes the constructive role of abstraction, though in a different way, emphasizing the need for novel differentiation.Conclusion and Future Directions:* The conversation concludes with a discussion on the importance of taking an ontologically realist and media ecological perspective on computation. Both Matt and Tim see the value in exploring how our direct experiential engagement with emerging technologies shapes the ways we then come to understand those very technologies. They plan to continue their exploration of these ideas, with a return to Peirce’s work in their next discussion. Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

Watch the video of my conversation about Owen Barfield with Ashton K. Arnoldy and Daniel Garner of O.G. Rose below: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

Here’s the video of our conversation:A rough summary of our conversation: The conversation covered a broad spectrum of topics, touching on shared intellectual influences, critiques of past and current socio-political movements, and the potential for new forms of community organization and governance. Michel Bauwens shared his thoughts on the evolution of his ideas, particularly around commons-based practices, and explored historical patterns of societal collapse and renewal. The discussion also delved into critiques of identity politics, the challenges of modern capitalism, and the potential of decentralized technologies like blockchain to support new forms of social organization.Key Topics Discussed:* Shared Influences and Intellectual Background:* We noted common influences, such as Thomas Berry and Jorge Ferrer, with Bauwens also mentioning his early interest in the California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS).* Bauwens reflected on his past admiration for Wilber and the intellectual property dispute that led to their falling out.* Despite this, Bauwens acknowledged Wilber’s early insights (“mean green meme”) but noted the limitations and issues within the Integral movement, particularly in how it dealt with criticism and internal politics.* Marxism and its Evolution:* Bauwens discussed his Marxist background, noting how it still influences his thinking, particularly in terms of class analysis and the potential for societal change.* He acknowledged the moral ambitions of Marxism while critiquing its historical implementations, particularly the pitfalls of revolutionary movements that often lead to new forms of elitism.* Social and Political Change:* We discussed the failures of recent progressive movements, particularly the Democratic Party in the U.S., and the role of Bernie Sanders as a left-wing populist whose campaigns were sabotaged by the party establishment.* We both expressed disillusionment with electoral politics and the need for deeper, more fundamental change, with Bauwens introducing his theory of “jurisdictional alliances” and the idea of top-middle-bottom coalitions to create real change.* Commons and Decentralized Systems:* Bauwens outlined his vision for a new civilization model based on the commons, where local, bioregional production is combined with global, translocal cooperation.* He introduced the concept of “cosmo-localism,” where everything heavy (like production) is local, and everything light (like knowledge) is shared globally, supported by decentralized technologies such as blockchain and DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations).* Critique of Identity Politics:* Bauwens offered a critique of identity politics, describing it as a tool used by the elite to divide and control, particularly in how it has been weaponized against more traditional class-based movements.* He argued that the focus on identity over structural economic issues has weakened the left, making it less effective in addressing the real challenges facing society.* Historical Patterns and Future Projections:* The conversation touched on historical cycles of societal collapse and renewal, with Bauwens drawing on the work of macro-historians like Spengler, Toynbee, and Sorokin to analyze current global trends.* Bauwens suggested that we might be heading towards a “dark age” due to the failures of current institutions and the exhaustion of existing socio-economic models, but also noted the potential for new forms of community and governance to emerge from this collapse.* The Role of Technology and the Internet:* Bauwens highlighted the transformative potential of the internet and decentralized technologies in creating new forms of social organization that could support a more sustainable and equitable society.* He contrasted this with the historical limitations of past civilizations, which lacked the communication technologies needed to navigate their declines.* Personal and Social Resilience:* The conversation ended on a personal note, with Bauwens sharing his experiences living in a community in Chiang Mai, Thailand, which operates on principles of commoning and gifting within an extended family structure.* He emphasized the importance of rebuilding social fabrics and communities around shared values and mutual support, particularly in the face of potential societal breakdowns.Check out Michel’s Substack: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

* Listen to the recent episode of The Jim Rutt Show with Jordan Hall here. * For more on how I’d want to think about the role of Christianity in moderating the relationship between markets and states, see this recent lecture on social threefolding: * Here is a lecture of mine on Catherine Keller’s theopoetic reading of Genesis:* The Triadic Logic of Charles Sanders Peirce: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

I mention Flavio’s insightful video on Whitehead and quantum physics, which you can watch here: The video of our conversation is available here: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe

We tried our best to get real. Watch a video of this conversation below: Get full access to ☿Footnotes²Plato☀☾ at footnotes2plato.substack.com/subscribe