The laws of mental complexity are more primary and form the basis for many of the other laws of nature we know. The laws of nature are often derived from the phenomena that the laws of complexity first created.The laws of complexity are what they are, and they are well documented. They have emerged by observing nature and all kinds of phenomena, analysing patterns and formulating the result conceptually and mathematically.
The material leads to the discovery of abstract laws. Such is the traditional understanding of how laws of nature relate to the material world.
In our idealistic world, it works the other way around. The abstract laws lead to the experience of matter, which then leads to the laws of nature.
The abstract, mental laws of complexity actually lead to everything.
These magical, somewhat alien, historically new «laws of chaos» are also «laws of nature» as good as any. But they are primary to the laws of physical nature.
The «higher emergent» physical laws of nature are something thought and have arisen through a process that is governed by mental laws of chaos that came first.
The laws of nature that we know so well, and all other knowledge about how the world works, exist. In an idealistic worldview, everything is as before. Researchers can keep going as they always have.
Nothing must be declared incorrect or invalid.
In short, there is no conflict between a material and an idealistic worldview. On the contrary, they are functionally identical.
However, materialism encounters The Hard Problem. Consciousness is left out and unexplained. What things fundamentally are remains unresolved. The subjective is a mystery.
In idealism, consciousness and the subjective is all that exists.
The universe is a mental conception, an experience, a subjective experience.
There are some mental laws, the laws of complexity, that describe how cognitive processes work. They come before and in addition to everything physical and are also found in the physical laws.
But there is still no conflict between the two radically different worldviews.
Therefore, idealism is not dangerous. It threatens no one and nothing. It offers only an explanation of all that materialism, by definition, cannot explain.
The two basic philosophical views complement each other and are interconnected.
In the
last chapter, we will take a closer look at how all this works in practice. How the mental and material interact.
But we are still missing the last piece in our puzzle. We have so far talked about the experienced material and the abstract.
But what about the subjective, that which experiences the universe?
It is in the subjective, in you, that the laws of mental complexity unfold.
Or is it?
What are you?
