claim

active

claim:the-ontological-commitment-to-a-bounded-self-is-computationally-equivalent-to-having-the-dual-sectorisation-constraint-as-a-rigid-transparent-prior-rather-than-revisable-hypothesis

The ontological commitment to a bounded self is computationally equivalent to having the dual sectorisation constraint as a rigid transparent prior rather than revisable hypothesis

Formal counterpart of Metzinger's phenomenal transparency applied to the separation prior

Source paper

extracted_from

There is no self-evidence: A physics of emptiness realisation

(2026) · Lars Sandved-Smith · Chris Fields · Thomas Doctor · Ruben Laukkonen +1

Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count

Concepts (1)

concept

Phenomenal Transparency
extends
Metzinger's concept applied to sigma: the agent looks through the separation prior without seeing it as a construct

Related by similarity (8)

cosine ≥ 0.65 · no typed edge

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

relinquishing ontological commitment to bounded selfconcept0.829
Post-realisation, the agent gives up the belief that there truly exists a separate, bounded self.
Self-evidencing may continue unimpeded after this transition, grounded in structural realism about causal regularities, while the ontological commitment to a bounded self is relinquished.claim0.808
Post-realisation functioning of the agent.
One dimension of self-evidencing is provably impossible: evidencing the boundary that would constitute the agent as an entity separate from their environment.claim0.737
Central thesis of the paper.
"We will not have certainty, but if we dissolve arbitrary criteria and search for deep invariants across all possible minds and bodies, we will have a morally defensible position."concept0.729
Concluding practical guidance.
Any system that persists must minimise surprisal, thereby gathering evidence for its own generative model, a process known as self-evidencing.claim0.729
Foundational claim of the paper, defining self-evidencing.
For some purposes, it will be convenient to settle for specifications in terms of fulfilling internal commitments, and sometimes the public character of promises will have to be taken into account in the specifications.claim0.728
Trade-off between internal and public obligations.
If we dissolve arbitrary criteria and search for deep invariants across all possible minds and bodies, we will have a morally defensible position.claim0.727
Conclusion that deep invariants yield ethical robustness.
For signed goal-relative evaluation, the gap between function and phenomenology that the conceivability argument requires cannot be coherently openedclaim0.726
The paper's response to the hard problem of consciousness