7,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Perhaps the first satisfactory thinking theory in history
- Strikingly revealed the mysteries and true face of human minds
- A creative conclusion of hitherto philosophy and an opening of its new stage
- A solution to reinventing and reactivating social sciences
- A necessary and correct application of IT and AI principles in the humanities
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025
Ähnliche
Bin Li
The Algorithmic Philosophy, Volume I
Copyright © 2025 by Bin Li
All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the author, except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.
Published by Spines
ISBN 979-8-89691-998-8
THE ALGORITHMIC PHILOSOPHY
VOLUME I
AN INTEGRATED AND SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY
BIN LI
CONTENTS
Abstract
Preface
§0. Introduction
1. The Goal of Philosophy is to Discover a Proper Theory of Minds
§1. A Proper Theory of Minds can be Used to Synthesize all Philosophies: the philosophical history perspective
§2. A Proper Theory of Minds can be Used to Synthesize all Philosophies: the philosophical branch perspective
§3. What a Priori Theory is Needed
§4. The “Difference Prior to Identity” and Deconstruction of Being (1)
§5. The “Difference Prior to Identity” and Deconstruction of Being (2)
§6. The “Difference Prior to Identity” and Deconstruction of Being (3)
§7. Materialization of Thought and Its Discreteness
§8. Interaction of Thoughtful Entities
§9. The “Softwareization” of Theory of Mind
§10. Flow - Stock; Serial - Parallel
2. The New Principles and New Knowledge this Thinking Theory can Bring
§11. No. 1: Constant Thinking Tools and Their Discretionary Use
§12. No. 2: The Combinatorial Explosions Bring Endless Development
§13. No. 3: The Sedimentation, Solidification, or Patterning of Thoughts
§14. No. 3: The Sedimentation, Solidification, or Patterning of Thoughts (continued)
§15. No. 4: The Mental Distortions
§16. No. 5: The Forced Closure of Thinking and Different Versions of Knowledge
§17. No. 5: The Forced Closure of Thinking and Different Versions of Knowledge (continued)
§18. No. 6: The Algorithmic Logic
§19. No. 7: Desires, Instincts, and Emotions as the Innate “Hard Software”
§20. No. 8: Pluralism and High-Order Consistency
§21. No. 8: Pluralism and Higher-Order Consistency (continued)
§22. No. 9: Convergence, Divergence and Marginal Adjustment
§23. No. 9: Convergence, Divergence and Marginal Adjustment (continued)
§24. Conclusions & Supplements
3. The Algorithmic Thinking Theory
§25. Instruction
§26. Instructions (continued)
§27. From Simple to Complex (1)
§28. From Simple to Complex (2)
§29. From Simple to Complex (3)
§30. Single-Instruction Computer
§31. Why Computers Can Be Originally “Alive” (1)
§32. Why Computers Can Be Originally “Alive” (2)
§33. Why Computers Can Be Originally “Alive” (3)
§34. Why Computers Can Be Originally “Alive” (4)
§35. Algorithmic Thinking Theory: the standard edition
§36. Algorithmic Thinking Theory: the manual and anonymous versions
§37. Algorithmic Principles as the Inferences (1)
§38. Algorithmic Principles as the Inferences (2)
§39. Algorithmic Principles as the Inferences (3)
§40. “Human Knowledge Thesaurus”
§41. How to Use this Theory
§42. How to Use this Theory (continued)
4. The Thoughtful Entities
§43. The Thoughtful Entities and Their Quantitativeness
§44. Entity Completeness
§45. The Generation of the Concept of Entity
§46. The Specific Traits of Thoughtful Entities
§47. The Novelty of Thought
§48. The Novelty of Thought (continued)
§49. “Truth” is Derivative and Partial
§50. “Truth” is Derivative and Partial (continued)
§51. Algorithmic Theory as a Minimized Whole
5. The Psychology
§52. Introduction
§53. Consciousness (1)
§54. Consciousness (2)
§55. Consciousness (3)
§56. Consciousness (4)
§57. Consciousness (5)
§58. Consciousness (6)
§59. Desire
§60. Desire (continued)
§61. Purposefulness and Purposelessness
§62. Purposefulness and Purposelessness (continued)
§63. Emotions (1)
§64. Emotions (2)
§65. Emotions (3)
§66. Subconscious
§67. Personal Growth, Education, and Evolution
6. The Fundamentals of Philosophy
§68. Definition of Philosophy
§69. Classification of Philosophy
§70. Epistemology and Ontology
§71. Epistemology and Ontology (continued)
§72. Logical Reasoning is Productive Activities
§73. Extension of Deductive Reasoning
§74. The Algorithmic Logic
§75. None of the Four Laws of Classical Logic Hold True
§76. The Algorithmic Pros-Cons Analysis
§77. Traditional Entities
§78. Dissolution of Traditional Entities
§79. Dissolution of Traditional Entities (continued)
7. The Ontology
§80. Generation Algorithmic Entities: substances
§81. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: split, merger, relation and change
§82. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: information
§83. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: models
§84. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: universals
§85. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: types, essence
§86. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: spirit and its freedom
§87. Generation of Algorithmic Entities: spirit and its freedom (continued)
§88. Relationships between Entities: plurality, conflict, consistency, scheme
§89. Relationships between Entities: cause and effect, and categories
§90. Relationships between Entities: certainty, possibility
§91. Conclusion: the metaphysics in the unified philosophical system
About the Author
LIST OF DIAGRAMS
To my father, Yuqi Li, for his good health and happiness
PREFACE
As information technology (IT)-based artificial intelligence (AI) engineering is ushering in a historic breakthrough, this book aims to report to readers that IT can also lead to a breakthrough in philosophy, the humanities, and social sciences, and its significance may be no less than the former.
In fact, this is a report to the English-speaking world on my independent research work over the past 20+ years. It is both a restatement of my three previous Chinese books1 and a collection of the latest philosophical applications of the thinking theory proposed therein. I would like to take this opportunity to let English readers know that the domestic Chinese have not only been achieving world-class scientific and technological achievements in areas such as AI and robotics, but are also modernizing and internationalizing their study in philosophy, humanities, and social sciences (although research freedom has been restricted at present). The main content of this book was brewed in China. Although it is written inside the United States, I first write in Chinese, and then translate it into English. My longtime experiences living in rapidly changing China have stimulated me to explore and delve. Compared with China’s huge population size, the tremendous “human computing power”, and the support provided by its economic strength, the domestic Chinese contributions to basic research have not been too much, but too little.
Kant’s philosophy can be re-interpreted that human thinking activities are carried out in a binary way of “thinking tools + information”. And what are the thinking tools? It was not until the computer age that the answer emerged: the “instructions”. Multiple human “Instructions” work on information alternately with their limited, tiny, and specific functions, forming dynamic thinking processes, which lead to the infinite growth of human knowledge and wisdom. The result of a specific Instruction processing specific information will never change from time to time, or from person to person, but different combinations of Instruction and information lead to a huge amount of personalized pieces of knowledge and their comparison and interaction, thereby causing the phenomenon of innovation and development. In this way, we have broken through the statics, a major defect of Kant’s philosophy, while maintaining the universal necessity of knowledge. Infinite development indicates that Parmenides’ ontology as a large convergent model is wrong, and the human knowledge system is a unidirectional, expansive, and explosive system like the universe of the Big Bang. The meaning of this theoretical discovery is revolutionary. If readers agree that this inference is in line with historical facts, then there is reason to believe that the general direction of the philosophical system since Greece shall be reversed.
The history of philosophy can be considered strongly supportive of this meaning. The basic spirit of Greek philosophy is to try to elevate everyday life to the pursuit of absolute truth. It implies that truth is a simple system and can be obtained sooner or later. This pursuit first manifested itself as the “Being”, then as God, and later gave birth to science, a great contribution to humankind. However, it also caused the division and conflict of the knowledge system. What is particularly shocking is that communism must be logically regarded as a consequence of Greek philosophy in the social field. Considering that the emergence and prosperity of Greek philosophy actually came from dissatisfaction with Greek democracy, this argument put forward by Karl Popper is actually completely acceptable. This clarification is a necessary step to the reformation of philosophy.
On this basis, we can find very clear routes of philosophical development. After Kant, philosophers tried to bridge the gap left by Kant from different approaches—denying metaphysics is certainly a way to resolve this contradiction. The importances of different parts of the human knowledge system have been emphasized respectively. However, the effort to rebuild traditional monistic philosophy failed in Hegel in a disgusting way. Since then, philosophy has turned to criticisms, negations, and supplementations, and then fallen into a stalemate. At present, the morale of the philosophical community and the humanities and social sciences is generally low, and it can even be said that the meaning of the existence of philosophy itself has become a question.
However, vitality is born out of despair. Computers are born on the basis of philosophical achievements. What I have done is to extend computer science into a theory of thinking, and then use it as a bridge to connect the two relatively independent parts of analytical philosophy and continental philosophy to make a totality. The effect of this reorganization can be magical! We realized that the history of philosophy for more than two thousand years can be encapsulated as a history of searching for such a thinking theory, and this theory of thinking closely fits almost every chapter and every page of philosophical history! Not only that, the overall outline of the entire human knowledge system has also arisen quite clearly—in which philosophy can of course logically have its own due place.
Human thinking activities are to use certain universal thinking tools to process information alternately; this basic theoretical framework must be adopted as a necessary and minimal cornerstone of all relevant disciplines. According to this theory, the following common phenomena can be explained: any novel inventions and creations can be traced back step by step, and then it can be found that they are almost “ordinary” and can be made by anyone. Therefore, people will generally agree with these inventions and creations, and these inventions and creations will win respect and rewards. This thinking mode leads to thinking processes and knowledge stocks, thereby highlighting the issue of the quantity of knowledge as an important and central philosophical issue. In line with this issue, topics such as subjectivity, plurality, and freedom can now be generated and exist “scientifically” rather than metaphysically. This unity that contains plurality seems self-contradictory, but in fact it is naturally consistent with the commonsense rationale.
This theory of thinking means that human thinking activities can be regarded as a series of thoughtful and real entities (Instructions, information, and their results), like microscopic particles, coexisting and interacting mutually or with physical entities at the same logical level. They are similar to chemical reactions. These thoughtful entities stay between humans and nature, constituting a relatively independent third party. Although based on tremendous differences, this system could not have rejected a possibility of unification, but embraced it. This is like static theory is just a particular of dynamic theory, or like the cognitive processes, action processes, and constructing processes are just in a continuous and interactive chain of thinking. This picture also naturally incorporates social existences and social processes, because the social objects are mainly thoughtful objects, and their coexistence and interaction with physical objects can simultaneously determine the differences and connections between social sciences and natural sciences.
When this theory of thinking is used to unravel many theoretical and methodological puzzles in the humanities and social sciences, its effects have been amazing as well. For example, I believe that we have finally taken a solid and correct step in answering the conflict between democracy and autocracy that still troubles the current world. Obviously, all the basic problems within our field of vision are interrelated and are essentially the same problem, and this problem is literally philosophical—or, as Heidegger said, it is the problem of “Being”. Before this philosophical problem is to be solved, all other disciplines have always obediently bowed their heads to it and dared not to cross the line. Even the heroes of our time, the AI scientists, can testify to this: when I listened to their interviews, I still heard the old philosophical language.
This is why I traveled to America from the other side of the earth to deliver this theory. The openness, inclusion, and pluralism of the United States ensure that any “strange talk” will not be completely ignored here. In fact, the enthusiasm of my English readers has consoled me (also see my bibliography for the English publications and discussions on the websites). However, the “Algorithmical” economics, social sciences, and philosophy still need to be discovered by the mainstream academic community. And, if readers still cannot understand them from my writings, sooner or later, they will experience the rationales from the development of AI. When the highly developed AI is still constrained by computing power, or powerful giant AI systems still have to adopt the strategy of typification or stylization, or the endless new knowledge generated by machines has to be processually arranged with human daily life, the dominance of computing economy over the social world will eventually emerge, and the big secret under the iceberg will be exposed after all.
While AI is in full swing, the extreme left and extreme right political forces are fighting drastically in the United States. This fight is similar to that inside China, or between China and the United States. It seems that few people know that all these hot topics in the media have come from the same source: the ignorance of our own thinking manner. In other words, I believe that a knowledge revolution and a grand synthesis based on the thinking theory will finally end this historical tragedy. Despite the fact that conflicts of interest are eternal, the awakening of knowledge can certainly alleviate the political fights.
The theoretical principles proposed in this book are formed both “naturally” and deliberately for humanities and social sciences. To understand and use them, a reader or a researcher needs not know computer science in advance, but common sense and common logic only. This theory was originally generated during my exploration, in the 1990s and at the turn of this century, of those fundamental conflicts inside and between economic and social theories. In achieving a comprehensive unification of economics and social sciences, it has satisfied me. When the second Algorithmical book, “A Preliminary Exploration of Principles of General Social Science”, was published in 2012, I didn’t yet know that it could be used to synthesize the entire philosophy, so I just said in the book that this theory could be used to synthesize the “modern philosophy” (a Chinese term, referring to the philosophies after Hegel). Afterward, my research on the entire philosophy and the history of philosophy was long and intermittent. More than two years ago, when I got through the last few bottlenecks, I was shocked by the secrets of philosophy I discovered. Then, I decided to write this book.
Neither the word “synthesis” nor the word “unification” is appealing or pleasant. From the perspective of the knowledge quantity and thus the “softness”, a theoretical unification does not have to reach the point of “oneness”. Even if we achieve the “oneness” (which the Algorithmic Thinking Theory can literally do; see §30 of this book), it could not really be a big deal. Therefore, I had no choice but to choose the relatively neutral word “integrated” in the subtitle of the book. I’d like to live in an environment of softness, rather than in the traditional monistic or either-or context, and I also don’t like to use “pluralism” as a rigid dogma or slogan. Following the introduction of Algorithmic Thinking Theory, many commonsense and recognized elements and principles can now enter the abstract world so that the ailing philosophy, humanities and social sciences can be reformed, with surgical and tonic procedures.
Just like the theme of this book has multiple relations with AI engineering, the English manuscript of this book is also the product of my cooperation with AI translation. As a non-native English writer, I have to draft the book in Chinese first, then translate it into English. However, even the translated English has lacked the soul of native spoken English, therefore, I have suspended the drafted translations of the first and second Algorithmical books. Fortunately, just after the Chinese manuscript of this book was completed, the AI revolution happened. Although the AI translation cannot be directly adopted, it provides many elements that I am not good at. This cooperation model illustrates that AI would be mainly collaborative with humans in the future, rather than only replacing human labor, and AI would help people improve productivity significantly in almost all aspects. This also indicates a strategy for the development of AI; that is, in the face of unlimited knowledge development potential, it can focus on developing products that can form a cooperative relationship with humans. The knowledge and skills of an AI product shall be neither too close nor too far from ordinary people. It’s as if children always like to get along with their peers. This logic is “Algorithmical”.
It can be said that the secrets of human minds have been largely revealed by AI engineering and this book. AI provides a technological paradigm while this book uses the so-called “software approach” to provide a concise answer, avoiding the redundant complexity of natural sciences. Faced with the possible revolutionary changes that would take place after these inventions and discoveries, I am particularly excited as an “insider”. This refers not only to the changes that AI will bring, but also to the changes in philosophical and social concepts that the Algorithmic Thinking Theory may arouse. After experiencing the “Algorithmical awakening”, readers can be expected to adjust their basic attitudes towards knowledge stocks and memory, so that they can better manage their own lives, both mentally and psychologically, let alone its impact on social engineering, public policies, and collective behaviors. As I mentioned in the appendix, I believe that people in the current era must not be conservative, and would better plan for the future more actively than before.
Readers are very welcome to write to me and give their opinions and views on this book. I have been eager to end my longtime independent work. As long as there are active discussions available, I think I would be able to continuously write new works. However, “Algorithmical work” can be endless and will never be exhausted by myself. For example, using the Algorithmic principles to reform those relevant disciplines shall actually be done by professional scholars in their respective fields, after they have accepted and mastered the principles and methods. My involvement in all these fields is largely for a preliminary illustration and demonstration of them, and I do not regard myself as an expert in most of these fields. The same is true for philosophy.
This book is divided into two volumes. In Volume I, it first explains the formation of the basic ideas of Algorithmic Thinking Theory (ATT) and enumerates the new principles and new knowledge it brings, then introduces computer principles, the Algorithmic Thinking Theory and its main inferences. Chapters 4 to 7 expound the philosophical applications of ATT, that is, the fundamental contents of “Algorithmic Philosophy”. Volume II extensively showcases the philosophical applications of Algorithmic Philosophy. The first is the Algorithmic social philosophy and philosophy of science (Chapters 8 to 12); then, in the order of philosophical history, it elaborates on how the Algorithmic principles and philosophy can be used to achieve a grand, critical synthesis of philosophy (Chapters 13 to 16). While commenting on various philosophical schools, branches, and scholars, the Algorithmic principles and philosophy are further demonstrated. Finally, the conclusions of both volumes of the book. Nevertheless, all the narratives in this book are preliminary and concise, and I only see them as a beginning, or some illustrations.
The English edition and the Chinese edition of this book are published concurrently. Since the original Chinese manuscript of this book quotes a large number of Chinese literature, I have added the equivalent English literature to most of them; this is why dual references in many places are to be found.
I appreciate Prof. Yan Song very much for inviting me to live, study, and write in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for several years, and for helping me in various aspects. I would like to thank Prof. Yew-Kwang Ng, a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia, Prof. Weisen Li of Fudan University, and Prof. Tao Feng of Xi’an Jiaotong University for their guidance and help. Many thanks to Dr. John Reardon, Senior Lecturer at the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire, and Prof. Qiang Chen of Shandong University, for their decadelong enthusiastic support. Thanks to Prof. Yang Yao of Peking University, Prof. Cindy Mason of University of California at Berkeley, for their advice. Thanks to Prof. Laixiang Sun who taught me at Peking University and helped me as an incumbent professor at University of Maryland, College Park. Thanks to Prof. Jinsong Chen of Renmin University of China for the discussions. I would like to express my special remembrance of my friend on academia.edu, Prof. Stephen Schafer who selflessly helped me. Thanks to the support from Mrs. Yingchun Fu of the North Carolina Chinese Scholars Sino-Us Exchange Association. Thanks to my lifelong friend, Mr. Wei Li, for his persistent discussion with me. Meanwhile, I am responsible alone for the contents of this book.
Bin Li
1Bin Li, “A Theory for Unification of Social Sciences: Algorithm Framework Theory” (in Chinese), Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2009; Bin Li, “A Preliminary Exploration of Principles of General Social Science: The Algorithmic Approach” (in Chinese), Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2012; Bin Li, “Foundations of Algorithmic Economics: The Cognitive Revolution and the Grand Synthesis of Economics” (in Chinese), Beijing: Economic Daily Press, 2019.
THE GOAL OF PHILOSOPHY IS TO DISCOVER A PROPER THEORY OF MINDS
§1. A Proper Theory of Minds can be Used to Synthesize all Philosophies: the philosophical history perspective
For the sake of simplicity, all the hitherto philosophies can be boiled down to “the efforts to find an appropriate theory of minds”.
This boil-down cannot be perfect, but it can be defended that it captures the main content of all existing philosophies. With the help of a theory of the mind, the upcoming synthesis might not be strictly exhaustive, but the many breakthroughs and advances to be made from it would probably be enough to convince readers to accept the phrase of “grand synthesis”.
The theme of philosophy throughout history can be thought of as the study of the relationship between mind and matter, or between subjectivity and objectivity. However, this theme was only realized after many twists and turns. Early Greek philosophy focused on things outside the mind, and developed many theories about the origin and nature of the physical world (or the universe). Parmenides, in particular, argues—in today’s parlance—that behind many phenomena, there is an unchanging essence that controls everything; and that the phenomena are false passers-by and only the essence is the truth, something that really exists. Therefore, he called this unchanging essence “Being”. In contrast, people’s thoughts are just “opinions”. Parmenides clearly recognized that the human minds are heterogeneous and fickle.
In the ancient Greek city-states, the social order based on the then-real ideas of real actors was liberal and democratic. Truth, or high-quality knowledge, can only be discovered or developed through the specific competitions and debates of the actors involved. Such processes are often slow, conflictual, tortuous, and precarious, especially for those who have more knowledge. Therefore, Socrates continued Parmenides’ style, raising highly the banner of reason, and striving to prove and praise the role of reason. But what is reason? When the question went deeper, his successors, Plato and Aristotle, had to go in different directions. Plato emphasized the contemplative, deductive, and theoretical approach, believing that human could reach the ultimate truth, while Aristotle emphasized the process of knowing by advocating formal, inductive, and empirical routes. This was a glaring split in philosophy during the Greek period.
In the centuries that followed, the separation of Being from opinions intensified. Being has evolved into concepts such as Ideas, substance, God, Absolute, science, and so on, and its posture of overarching all other types of human thought and trying to engulf them has not fundamentally changed by far.
The epistemological philosophy initiated by Descartes changed the attitude of the previous philosophy centered on external objects, and placed the human mind in the first and central position. The gist of epistemological philosophy is that what is called Being or “truth” is nothing else in the first place, but an idea in the human mind, a thought. However, this understanding alone is not enough, because thoughts may not be in line with external objects, and in fact there are plenty of imperfect thoughts. Since the “truth” as the destination of thinking processes has been presumed, the processes of development of knowledge from low quality to high quality seem only to confirm the attraction of the “truth”. This attraction, in turn, highlights the importance of methods. Thus, methodology became the focus of then philosophies.
