Is Information Immaterial?

[RationalThought]

I was posed a question the other day by a friend who stated: Can you think of anything that is immaterial that you can show exists?

I thought about it for a few minutes and came up with a few answers. I said that consciousness, the laws of logic and information would all answer his question.

He decided to focus on information, and asked for a more in-depth answer. I told him that information isn't bound by space-time limitations and through different quantum mechanical tests it can cause different outcomes simply by being known. He was highly unsatisfied with this answer, and said he still didn’t believe me.

He then rephrased the question to a statement: Give me a thought experiment that demonstrates types of information that exist without a physical medium.

First I’d like to get everyone’s views on if I am correct in the first place with my assessment that consciousness, the laws of logic and information are truly immaterial. Second, I need some help trying to come up with an answer to his statement . Any help would be appreciated as I’m lost for a rational explanation.

[Charlatan]

Everything is material. If you want to have a thought it will resound in your mind in the chemicals if your body until it materialises as an act, or has no reaction. Nothing can exist without causing reactions.

Everything is material. Logic comes about through your chemical responses it, where it is kept in your mind. If you wrote something into a book, then it is material aswell, as if nobody is there to read it, then it still exists, but does not exist in any material fom other than the one it is written on.

Conscious is also a mass of chemical responses in your brain and nervous system. That is about it, your friend is right.

[Ken Carman]

Everything is material. If you want to have a thought it will resound in your mind in the chemicals if your body until it materialises as an act, or has no reaction. Nothing can exist without causing reactions.

Hm, but here's a thought. (Neurons fire...) ...if we both think of any specific subject or thing do neurons fire in the exact same way in both of our brains, or have we learned to interpret them that way: individually? Same with chemicals, since they often are activated by brain activity.

So while "material" in one sense, is it so different that one might claim it immaterial since the response varies and it depends on how we interpret the initial event/reaction? This reminds me a bit of the old conundrum: do we see blue exactly the same way or have we learned to interpret what we see, individually, in a different way? Til we have the tech to live in each others heads we may never know, and I'm not so sure that would be a good invention if government, ad execs and the worst of religious leaders get a hold of that invention.

I admit, I am no one's biologist and have no idea how much we know in this field of brain research.

[Charlatan]

Hm, but here's a thought. (Neurons fire...) ...if we both think of any specific subject or thing do neurons fire in the exact same way in both of our brains, or have we learned to interpret them that way: individually? Same with chemicals, since they often are activated by brain activity.

So while "material" in one sense, is it so different that one might claim it immaterial since the response varies and it depends on how we interpret the initial event/reaction? This reminds me a bit of the old conundrum: do we see blue exactly the same way or have we learned to interpret what we see, individually, in a different way? Til we have the tech to live in each others heads we may never know, and I'm not so sure that would be a good invention if government, ad execs and the worst of religious leaders get a hold of that invention.

I admit, I am no one's biologist and have no idea how much we know in this field of brain research.

In that sense it would 'exist twice', or share existence. If you add more 'existences' you still have at least one material existence, yes?

[Angry Citizen]

'Consciousness' is like 'math'. Of course it's immaterial, because it's an abstract concept, not a physical reality. It's something we humans define, much like 'information' and 'order'. They're not quantifiable realities.

That is, unless you're referring to a quantum mechanical 'information', which is not anything like that described by most people.

[neochronomo]

I was posed a question the other day by a friend who stated: Can you think of anything that is immaterial that you can show exists?

I thought about it for a few minutes and came up with a few answers. I said that consciousness, the laws of logic and information would all answer his question.

He decided to focus on information, and asked for a more in-depth answer. I told him that information isn't bound by space-time limitations and through different quantum mechanical tests it can cause different outcomes simply by being known. He was highly unsatisfied with this answer, and said he still didn’t believe me.

He then rephrased the question to a statement: Give me a thought experiment that demonstrates types of information that exist without a physical medium.

First I’d like to get everyone’s views on if I am correct in the first place with my assessment that consciousness, the laws of logic and information are truly immaterial. Second, I need some help trying to come up with an answer to his statement . Any help would be appreciated as I’m lost for a rational explanation.

Angry Citizen is right about consciousness being immaterial. It's an abstract concept applied to the result of certain brain functions (I'm not a biologist or neurologist, so I can't go into details.)

As for information existing beyond physical mediums, certain things do. Whether or not sentient beings exist in the universe doesn't prevent the Earth from existing, or the laws of logic as you mentioned. Sure, nobody will be around to know them or write them down, but they still exist. We did't invent the Earth or the laws of logic, we discovered them. If we weren't here, 2 + 2 would still equal 4.

[Ken Carman]

In that sense it would 'exist twice', or share existence. If you add more 'existences' you still have at least one material existence, yes?

The question to me is, is the actual firing or chemical happening actually a material representation of the flower, the tree, love... whatever... or do we interpret it that way because society teaches us (sort of) to do that and the firing/reaction varies as to what actually happens differently in each person.

If it happens the same then you have "material." If it happens differently: even if slightly and we interpret it according to our own preconceptions, societal or otherwise, the "material" not so much.

[RationalThought]

Thanks for the replies everyone, I appreciate your help. Would anyone happen to know any easy thought experiment I could use? I tried saying: let's imagine the universe as near infinite information potential which only actualizes once observed through a medium. The fact that you simply are not observing it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[neochronomo]

The question to me is, is the actual firing or chemical happening actually a material representation of the flower, the tree, love... whatever... or do we interpret it that way because society teaches us (sort of) to do that and the firing/reaction varies as to what actually happens differently in each person.

If it happens the same then you have "material." If it happens differently: even if slightly and we interpret it according to our own preconceptions, societal or otherwise, the "material" not so much.

When you look at a flower, the light travels through your eyes and it's converted to electrical signals that are then stored somehow in your brain for later recall. In other words, your brain somehow has contained within it some kind of material representation of the flower.

This topic is full of concepts that are poorly defined though. Let me ask a blunt question: What does it matter if our brains contain material representations of objects? What implications does it have on things that can exist without conscious beings?

[neochronomo]

Thanks for the replies everyone, I appreciate your help. Would anyone happen to know any easy thought experiment I could use? I tried saying: let's imagine the universe as near infinite information potential which only actualizes once observed through a medium. The fact that you simply are not observing it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Propose the universe at a time before living beings existed. Ask if 2+2 still equals 4, or if A and Not A still both can't be simultaneously true. Ask why a material entity is required for those things to be true.

[Meleagar]

First I’d like to get everyone’s views on if I am correct in the first place with my assessment that consciousness, the laws of logic and information are truly immaterial. Second, I need some help trying to come up with an answer to his statement . Any help would be appreciated as I’m lost for a rational explanation.

I agree with your assessment.

He then rephrased the question to a statement: Give me a thought experiment that demonstrates types of information that exist without a physical medium.

Ask him in what material medium the number 10^150 exists, since that number is larger than the number of quantum events that have occurred in the lifetime of the known universe. Then ask him in what material medium the equation 10^150 x 10^20 can be solved.

The universe doesn't have the material resources to even transcribe the problem; much less compute it.

BTW, another thing that can't be material is morality. Morality is a description of how humans ought to behave, but you cannot get an ought from an is (classic philosophy). The existence of a starving child doesn't inform you that you ought to feed it; the fact that an old woman is being mugged doesn't inform you that you ought to stop it. What "is" provides no oughts; and that's all that the material world provides - what is.

Since the material world only provides what "is",how can we imagine what does not yet exist? How can the material mind of an engineer, only impulsed by material causation from what "is", imagine what does not yet exist, draw up detailed plans and schematics of the thing that does not yet exist, organize labor and materials to build something that does not yet exist? How can what does not yet exist materially cause images and representations of itself to appear in material substrates (the supposed material minds of the engineer) before it even exists?

Where do plans for things that don't yet exist come from? Where does that information come from?