Flavio and I explored the intersection of Whitehead’s process philosophy with modern theories of consciousness, such as Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and the Free Energy Principle (FEP), while also tying in quantum physics (as we’ve discussed in prior sessions). Flavio had been pondering whether IIT could be compatible with Whitehead’s framework and how concepts like Von Neumann entropy in quantum mechanics might lead to a rethinking of FEP’s treatment of Shannon information.
I agreed that there are superficial similarities between IIT and Whitehead's philosophy, but pointed out a key difference: IIT treats experience as intrinsic and non-relational, while Whitehead’s process-relational ontology allows us to analyze experience in terms of prehensions or feelings; that is, in terms of its relational essence.
Flavio proposed that IIT might be useful in quantifying moments of concrescence, the process by which an actual occasion reaches satisfaction. I agree there is something to the comparison worthy of further consideration.
I also shared my concerns with FEP’s focus on error minimization, suggesting that Whitehead’s philosophy offers a more complete account of life, one that includes a creative urge to ingress novelty.
We moved into a discussion about quantum physics, specifically how Whitehead’s process ontology might address the question of wave function collapse. I introduced Quantum Bayesianism (Qbism), suggesting that with a slight shift from an epistemological to an ontological orientation it starts to sound a lot like Whitehead’s panexperientialism.
We ended by reflecting on the broader implications of moving from a mechanistic worldview to a cosmovision that embraces relationality and the intrinsic value of all life.
Our Relational Reality: Integrated Information, Predictive Processing, and Quantum Potential