I often wonder if there is a growing consensus regarding the ligitimacy of the claim that, despite a long history dominated by the Independent Mindset, the actual nature of existence is one of interdependently existing phenomena. To that end I posed two questions to Google’s AI Mode. The responses are encouraging.
Prompt: The prevailing understanding of the nature of existence is that it consists of independent, separately existing objects. Recent scientific investigations support a different reality. The emerging picture of existence is that it consists of interdependent phenomena. In this view independent existence is impossible. Which is correct?
AI Response:
Both frameworks provide valuable insights depending on the context, but modern science increasingly supports the model of interdependent phenomena over strictly independent objects. While classical physics and everyday human perception treat the universe as a collection of separate, distinct entities, fields like quantum mechanics, ecology, and systems biology demonstrate that fundamental separation is an illusion.
Direct Comparison of the Two Perspectives
In short, while treating objects as independent is highly practical for navigating daily life, it is scientifically recognized as an approximation rather than the fundamental nature of reality.
|
Attribute |
Independent Objects (Classical View) |
Interdependent Phenomena (Emerging View) |
|
Core Premise |
Things exist in and of themselves, with intrinsic properties independent of other things. |
Things exist only in relation to other things; identity is defined by relationships. |
|
Scientific Basis |
Newtonian mechanics, macroscopic observation, and traditional reductionism. |
Quantum entanglement, ecology, complexity theory, and relational quantum mechanics. |
|
Primary Concept |
Separation: A table or an atom is a fundamental building block that exists on its own. |
Entanglement & Contextuality: Particles and systems do not have defined properties until they interact. |
Prompt: Assuming the Classical View is true results in different human behaviours than result from recognizing the primacy of the Emerging View. Which of the two types of behaviours are better in terms of the longterm wellbeing of living systems?
AI Response:
Recognizing the primacy of the Emerging View (interdependence) produces behaviours that are fundamentally better for the long-term wellbeing of living systems. [1]
When human systems act according to the Classical View, they operate under the assumption of fundamental separation, leading to zero-sum dynamics. In contrast, operating under the Emerging View aligns human actions with the actual, relational rules of biology and ecology. [1, 2]
How the Two Views Shape Human Behaviour
Why Interdependence Wins in the Long Term
Living systems—whether an individual body, a coral reef, or the global biosphere—are inherently complex adaptive systems. They survive through delicate equilibrium, feedback loops, and symbiotic partnerships.
|
Metric |
Behaviours Driven by the Classical View (Separation) |
Behaviours Driven by the Emerging View (Interdependence) |
|
Resource Management |
Extraction & Consumption: Treating natural resources as isolated, infinite commodities to be harvested without systemic consequences. |
Regeneration & Stewardship: Managing resources with the understanding that disrupting one node damages the whole network. |
|
Problem Solving |
Siloed Optimization: Fixing isolated symptoms (e.g., using heavy pesticides to clear crops), which often creates unintended, cascading crises down the line. |
Systems Thinking: Designing solutions that account for feedback loops, long-term ripples, and cross-domain impacts. |
|
Social Architecture |
Hyper-Individualism: Prioritizing the immediate gain of the self, corporation, or nation state over the collective. |
Collective Well-being: Structuring institutions around “we-being,” recognizing that individual health is impossible without a healthy community. |
|
Time Horizons |
Short-termism: Maximizing immediate, measurable metrics (like quarterly profits). |
Multi-generational Planning: Aligning present actions with the carrying capacity and future viability of the ecosystem. |
The Classical View creates a behavioural mismatch: it applies linear, reductionist actions to a non-linear, connected world. This mismatch is the root cause of modern systemic crises, from ecological collapse to widespread social alienation. Recognizing interdependence shifts human behavior from acting upon nature to acting as a conscious part of nature, which is the only viable strategy for long-term survival. [1, 2, 3]
Comment:
Existing AI operates on information that assumes that existence is composed of separate, independent objects. This is an erroneous assumption that has led us to value harmful practices.
What if an AI was trained exclusively on information about the nature and values of interdependent existence?