Codex / Praxis
On further reading, this document by Steven Mizrach is more than just a good start. It’s absolutely the closest thing I ever hope to find to my own ideas. I need to find out more about the person responsible.
I get the impression from what research I’ve done that this synthesis and analysis of ideas is separate from the way Erik Davis uses the word (and he did create it, after all). It seems to me that his use denotes an area of study, not a specific realm of philosophy that can be “subscribed to.” In addition, I’m not quite sure where the community in question in The Document resides; there’s a bit of a hidden subject there. My next step is to find a copy of Davis’ book, as well as a good number of those referenced in the article, and see what I can find.
I have to say I’m happy that this differentiation exists. As neat as the term “techgnostic” is, I think it works better for the study of the areas of thought Davis is concerned with than for a system of ideas that are distinct from beliefs only in that I maintain a healthy skepticism, even in the face of seeming proof.
So if there is a community of people, in any sense of the word, for whom the ideas laid out in this document are relatively accepted, where are they? Do they have a name? A meeting place? If you fit the bill, I’d certainly like to know.
There are certainly areas where I differ from what’s put across in this piece. For instance, I never really thought about the process in terms of entropy, though it seems like a perfect fit. I would also quibble about the sort of justification for any and all “technological progress” that seems to be assumed here. It’s not about the chronological newness of information; it’s about the internal complexity, the richness, the quality of information. One need not throw caution to the wind and simply smash forward at all costs, shouting “progress,” to be part of the “solution.” Choices matter more in my world-view, not less; I’d hate to see it reduced to a kind of fatalism.
I also feel that a lot of applicable stuff here requires that consciousness be looked at as having some different qualities than other kinds of “information.” The “cybernetic universe” idea requires consciousness in order for the system not to remain inert. Also, plain and simple, I think it warrants its own branch of thinking.
Anyhow, this is only the beginning.
Any suggestions on a name for this area of thought?