[FRIAM] Mysticism: still effing the ineffable?

[steve smith]

FWIW I composed one of my arbitrarily long (and convoluted) observations 
(maybe just mansplaining) about the multiple uses of the term /Reality/ 
and how I apprehend them and how I (think) they relate to the business 
of "chatting with LLMs" and the implications for the discussion 
at-hand.    Maybe there will (co)arise a white paper elsewhere.

However, to (try to) be concise I trimmed it a bit.   I think I hear us 
talking (effing) all the way around the question of whether there is an 
ineffable and is it just "mysticism" by another name?

I hear DaveW holding Qualia as the only truly grounded Reality and EricS 
alluding to the way the Intersubjective dribbles over into Placeholder 
(a handwaving name for something we all think we know, but can't seem to 
pin down or agree on).  Most of us trained and operating in Sci/Eng/Tech 
*want* there to be a simple Objective which the formalisms of 
math/science help us converge upon but defer to Operational/Pragmatic 
most of the time?

My suspicion of mystical rhetoric is that it is a most /obscurational/ 
form of Placeholder Reality... while also being *aspriational* ("but 
what IF there IS an objective reality which *only I* can access through 
unspecified occult means?").  That said, I DO agree with DaveWs 
suggestion that there are things which can be perceived, even 
apprehended which cannot be expressed ("effed"). thus they are 
"ineffable".  The arts of the Arcane and Occult attempt to "eff" them, 
though gesturally, pointing vaguely toward an interstice?   Alexander's 
QWAN, etc.

My working definitions of "Reality" to be found at the bottom of the post.

I acknowledge Qualia as fundamental to *my* existence..  but recognize 
the  Pragmatic as a common mode of my expression and even apprehension, 
all the while aspiring to Objective but deferring heavily to 
Intersubjective to interpret all of the others.     EAC is most 
interesting to me whether it is the autopoesis of M&V or the 
vedic/buddhist dependent co-arising, or wheeler/beyond quantum 
realities.   But maybe because it is more exotic?

EricS wrote:
>
>> On Jun 27, 2025, at 7:31, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dave writes:
>>
>> <My 'mysticism', like my hallucinogenic experience, is nothing more 
>> than a source of what I consider to be "real" data and a supply of 
>> fascinating questions—never answers.>
>>
>> Not clear why something that supposedly cannot be captured by mere 
>> language keeps getting pitched as a real and intersubjective thing 
>> via language.
>
> I am much less bothered by this _in principle_, since I generally hold 
> the two premises:
>
> 1. Language is a collection of signals _within_ a system,
...
>
> 2. The term “reality” is a problem in general.
> I do like the idea that this is just a version of the normal 
> confusion, for things not understood very well (like, quite badly), 
> and that one could find ways to do better.

Without belaboring (but including for completeness) I offer my working 
definitions of various uses of the term /*Reality*/:

1) Operational Pragmatic Reality: /
/

    /That which affords coherent behavior—the reliable background
    against which action can occur.  As from ecological psychology
    (/Gibson/’s affordances), predictive processing (/Friston/), and
    some aspects of (our beloved) /Peircean/pragmatism?/

2) Intersubjective Reality:

    /That which is constructed, maintained, and enacted through language
    and shared narratives.  As from /Luckman, Lacan, Foucault/?/

3) Formal (Scientific) Reality:

    /That which can be modeled with precision, prediction, and
    repeatability.  As from Mathematics, physics, systems theory?/

4) Experiential Reality: /
/

    The immediately given, lived experience—the “suchness” before
    concept.**/As from /Husserl, Merleau-Ponty, Varela?  Whence /Qualia/.

5) Placeholder Reality:

    /The term “reality” as a placeholder or dummy variable—used
    rhetorically to defer deeper ontological commitments.  As from /all
    of us/all the time?/

6) Participatory Reality:

    /Reality as not wholly determinate /until observed or enacted/—that
    is, it co-arises with participation./

7) Linguistic Manifold Reality:

    /LLMs inhabit and approximate intersubjective reality.  Each
    language model represents a “manifold” within a semantic plenum.
    “Reality” is the high-dimensional attractor surface that forms when
    enough participants (biological or artificial) converge on something
    shareable, predictive, and compressible./

Enactivism / Autopoiesis / Dependent Co-Arising (EAC) is not a single 
category in this typology—it is a *meta-theory of reality-generation*, 
operating across:

  *

    *Operational* → it explains the /conditions for affordances/

  *

    *Intersubjective* → it explains /how we co-construct the shared/

  *

    *Experiential* → it explains /how we inhabit the lived/

  *

    *Participatory* → it explains /why observation creates reality/

And it gently critiques:

  *

    *Formal* → by showing its limits

  *

    *Placeholder* → by showing its necessity

  *

    *LLM-based* → by asking what is missing for full participation


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250627/30760eaf/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3118 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250627/30760eaf/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250627/30760eaf/attachment.sig>