Arts and Humanities

Abstract: This study examines the phenomenon of pseudoconfident knowledge in the context of the everyday use of generative artificial intelligence. By pseudoconfident knowledge, we mean a response that is substantively plausible, rhetorically coherent, and outwardly persuasive but is treated and understood as knowledge before its actual reliability has been established. Of course, we do not use the term “pseudoconfident knowledge” to denote knowledge in the strict epistemological sense. Rather, it denotes a special form of AI-generated content that acquires the status of knowledge in the user’s perception before its reliability, source-based justification, or factual correctness have been established. The problem here is not that such an answer is already knowledge but that it is prematurely accepted as knowledge because of its coherence, completeness, and rhetorical confidence. The aim of the study is to identify the epistemic gap between the everyday operational integration of artificial intelligence and the user’s critical ability to distinguish between persuasiveness and justification. The theoretical framework combines approaches to AI literacy, epistemic vigilance, and contemporary forms of digital mediation in the circulation of knowledge. The empirical basis of the study is an online survey of AI users. The analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics, contingency tables, and methods for testing associations between categorical variables. The results show that the key differentiating factor is not the frequency of AI use but the strategy used in handling its responses. More epistemically robust positions are associated with practices of comparison, editing, and verification, whereas uncritical acceptance of the answer is associated with greater vulnerability to pseudoconfident knowledge. We conclude that the spread of generative artificial intelligence is producing a new socioepistemic problem that calls for a shift in emphasis from simple instrumental literacy toward a culture of verification, doubt, and epistemic responsibility.

Abstract: The functioning of complex natural structures, such as living systems, still lacks a generally accepted theoretical basis with respective empirical experimental verification for decades. We propose a class of experiments to test whether such systems could be subject to an unknown ordering principle that cannot be captured by known physical laws. We hypothesise that the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle enables ordering phenomena in nearly chaotic systems in the sense of a strong emergence principle, which would not be expected when they are modelled conventionally, as several authors have already formulated in various forms. To account for the harsh conditions prevailing in living systems that may preclude fragile macroscopic quantum coherence, our hypothesis does not require such coherence at all, contrary to earlier related proposals. To test this hypothesis, two virtually identical and sufficiently complex experimental setups should be compared. One setup will operate with deterministic pseudo-random number generators at key sensitive points, while the other one will use quantum-based physical random-number generators, the two setups being otherwise identical. Existing artificial neural networks are proposed as possible test objects, and their performance under identical training conditions can be used as a quantitative benchmark. As this working hypothesis extends far beyond artificial networks, a successful outcome of such an experiment could have significant implications for many other branches of science.

Abstract: In the philosophy of language, Frege’s (1892) distinction between sense and reference provides a foundational framework for identity statements. Geach’s (1967) relative identity breaks out of the framework of absolute identity and opens another perspective for us. Putnam’s (1975) “Twin Earth” thought experiment, with its striking insight, pushes externalism to the extreme, successfully challenging the internalist model of meaning and setting the basic agenda for decades of subsequent debate on the problem of reference determination. However, despite the inspirational value of these groundbreaking works, a noteworthy phenomenon is that the debates they triggered—such as discussions around core cases like the Ship of Theseus and identical particles—seem to have reached a certain impasse. This paper argues that this impasse may not stem from the depth of the problems themselves, but precisely from a deep, unexamined presupposition shared by these otherwise highly persuasive theories: namely, that there exists a single, decisive category (whether microscopic physical structure or historical causality) capable of once and for all answering the question of identity. Instead of continuing to seek a better single answer under this presupposition, a more productive approach may be to reflect on the presupposition itself. To this end, we attempt to analyze the problem from a different angle. Interestingly, this angle shows that the aforementioned seemingly opposed excellent theories can actually all be understood as special cases of this theory under different categories; the difficulties they encounter become inevitable precisely when they attempt to make assertions across categories. Therefore, this paper is not intended to negate previous work, but to clarify the valid scope of its application, thereby providing a new path to resolve a series of philosophical difficulties arising from category mistakes.

Abstract: This chapter examines the ontological assumptions, epistemological challenges, and ethical implications involved in using Agentic AI to assist, guide, or potentially replace human agents in the making of moral and legal decisions. It argues that different metaphysical assumptions regarding the ontology of ethics, justice, cognition, and AI decisively shape the framework within which such systems are evaluated. In this respect, the analysis distinguishes between two different levels of severity in the moral issues raised, corresponding to two distinct levels of AI autonomy: first, AI systems operating as advisory systems, with limited autonomy; and secondly, AI systems operating as regulatory systems, with full autonomy, that is, as entities entrusted with final decision-making authority. The text adopts a critical perspective on the use of Agentic AI in contexts of moral and legal judgement, highlighting both the conceptual fragility and the epistemological challenges that accompany proposals for such applications. At the same time, it considers the conditions under which such systems could genuinely contribute to human flourishing. Particular attention is given to the risk that ostensibly advisory systems may, in practice, become tacitly regulatory, especially under the pressure of widespread assumptions concerning AI objectivity and effectiveness. The chapter’s structure follows an algorithmic logic, in which a series of key questions serve as branching yes/no nodes, each possible answer leading to a distinct line of philosophical analysis.

Abstract:

This study integrates Vedic philology, ritual history, and philosophical hermeneutics in a multi-layered analysis of Agnihotra. Within the Yajurvedic tradition, where its exterior performance is linked to varṇa and āśrama, the study elucidates Agnihotra’s technical structure and śākhā-specific methods through Śruti sources. The question of ritual eligibility in the context of declining dharma is examined through Purāṇic and Smṛti depictions of the Yugas, while retaining the normative authority of Śruti. Passages from the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad Gītā are then analyzed to demonstrate the internalization of yajña, where the Upaniṣads emphasize the primacy of knowledge and the Gītā reinterprets sacrifice in terms of niṣkāma-karma and jñāna-yajña, establishing a continuum between ritual practice and philosophical insight leading to mokṣa. Finally, the Mādhyandina and Kāṇva recensions of the Śukla Yajurveda are compared to assess their suitability for understanding Agnihotra in the Kali Yuga. While the Mādhyandina recension provides systematic clarity, the Kāṇva recension preserves earlier and more detailed ritual layers. The study concludes that the Kāṇva recension offers a particularly strong framework for the textual and ritual-philosophical analysis of Agnihotra in the Kali Yuga.

Abstract: Traditional cosmological arguments are often thought to rely fatally on the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR). This paper develops a contingency argument that does not. We adopt a two-sorted first-order logic with predicates for world-membership and symmetric accessibility between possible worlds. Within this framework, we formulate four axioms, each verified to be consistent and independent both from one another and from the PSR. We provide philosophical justification for each axiom. Then, we demonstrate that, if the empty world does not access any non-empty world, the existence of a necessary entity follows from the well-foundedness of a transmundane material condition of possibility.

Abstract: This article critically examines the conceptual, historical, and epistemological foundations of bioethics as a transdisciplinary field that emerges in response to the ethical tensions produced by technoscientific development. Through an analytical and interpretative approach, the paper revisits the historical events that shaped modern bioethics, and the contemporary challenges that arise from the expansion of biomedical and technological interventions. The analysis highlights the persistent dilemmas involving autonomy, paternalism, vulnerability, and intercultural asymmetries. It also addresses the ethical impact of technoscience on the reconfiguration of life, death, and human nature. The article argues pluralistic and adaptive bioethics capable of sustaining epistemic vigilance and guiding decision-making processes in diverse and complex sociocultural contexts.

Abstract: This paper develops a systematic philosophical dialogue between Kantian autonomy and Buddhist ethics in relation to freedom, moral agency, and moral cultivation. And in place of a hierarchic or reductionist juxtaposition, it is rather a question of how each tradition articulates the ethical normativity it adheres to in relation to specific philosophical problems. Kantian moral reasoning connects freedom with rational self-legislation and conceives moral obligation through universal law as articulated in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason. Buddhist ethics, by contrast, understands freedom as liberation from ignorance and craving, emphasizes causal continuity, compassion and moral cultivation, and it does so without postulating an enduring self. Drawing on recent contributions in Buddhist moral philosophy particularly that of Damien Keown, Charles Goodman and Jay L. Garfield, the article argues that the two perspectives offer kairotic rather than chronological perspectives on moral agency. Kantian universal respect and autonomy are at odds with Buddhist ethics which discloses the emerging and relational character of ethical existence. The conclusion is that the concept of moral freedom is better conceptualized when understood through the combined view of rational normativity and moral cultivation.

Abstract: This article addresses the “Hard Problem” of consciousness not as an immutable ontological barrier of nature, but as an iatrogenic separation—a methodological artifact induced by the reductive third-person perspective (3P). By systematically and intentionally removing the subject from the world-description to achieve a veneer of objectivity, modern physicalism creates a restrictive “substance grammar” that subsequently struggles to locate the qualitative dimension of experience within its own datasets. Using Hans Holbein the Younger’s painting The Ambassadors (1533) as a primary epistemic model, we analyze the anamorphic “blot” as a representation of the Real that eludes frontal, mathematical domestication. We argue that the resolution of this parallax requires more than a simple shift in focus; it demands a “step to the side”—a transition from static representation to the processual performance of enactive inference. Integrating Karl Friston’s Free Energy Principle (FEP) and the Neurophenomenological Enactive System Schema (NESS), we define meaning not as an intrinsic property of objects, but as a temporal alignment and an energetic achievement of a system striving for coherence under the constant pressure of existential concern (Sorge). The paper concludes by proposing a “processual perspectivism” and the figure of the Sovereign Witness, suggesting that the Hard Problem is dissolved when subjectivity is understood as the active, embodied performance of the world-relation.

Abstract: This paper addresses a growing mismatch between how contemporary artifacts appear and how they persist. Many artifacts are still encountered and classified as discrete objects, even though their continuity is increasingly sustained through updates, recalibration, layered dependencies, retained states, and repeated return into later operation. Under these conditions, an object-based account of identity no longer explains enough. The paper argues that some artifacts are better understood as regimes, using the term in a restrained sense to name organized operative orders that remain continuous across structured change. The argument first shows why surface continuity and public sameness no longer settle the question of artifact identity. It then develops a middle-level account of persistence in terms of organized continuity, basic structural requirements, sufficient internal coherence, traceable continuity over time, the retention of prior states, and the way earlier configurations continue to shape later operation. This makes it possible to distinguish continued identity from gradual transformation, mounting pressure toward replacement, and the emergence of a successor artifact. The final step argues that once continuity organizes exposure, behavior, and conditions of use across time, it cannot be treated as normatively neutral. Governability must therefore be understood as internal to the continuing order of the artifact itself. The result is a framework for judging when one artifact still persists through organized change and when a different judgment of identity has become necessary.

Abstract: Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming education. Tools such as modern AI language models can now generate essays, explain complex concepts, create lesson plans, produce quizzes, and summarize entire textbooks within seconds. For many teachers and institutions, this raises an important question: what is the role of a human educator in an age when machines can instantly provide information? This paper presents an accessible framework that helps schools and colleges integrate artificial intelligence into teaching while preserving the essential human elements of education. Rather than viewing AI as a replacement for teachers, the framework positions AI as a powerful assistant that can support lesson preparation, personalized feedback, and adaptive learning resources. By automating repetitive tasks such as content generation, grading support, and material organization, AI allows educators to focus on what machines cannot easily replicate: mentorship, creativity, ethical reasoning, critical thinking, and inspiration.The framework outlines practical strategies for using AI responsibly in classrooms, including guidelines for AI-assisted lesson planning, student engagement techniques, and safeguards to maintain academic integrity. It also discusses how institutions can prepare both teachers and students for an AI-augmented learning environment by promoting digital literacy, responsible tool usage, and critical evaluation of AI-generated information.Ultimately, the goal of AI-enhanced teaching is not to replace educators, but to empower them. When used thoughtfully, artificial intelligence can reduce administrative workload, expand access to high-quality learning resources, and create more personalized educational experiences. In this vision, AI becomes a supportive partner, while teachers remain the guiding force who cultivate curiosity, wisdom, and human understanding in the classroom.

Abstract: What is causation, and how do mind and matter fit within the causal structure of reality? This paper argues that conventional reductionist causation — the view that causal influence flows only upward from microphysical constituents to larger and larger structures — is both metaphysically incomplete and inadequate to the facts. After surveying standard accounts of causation in Western philosophy and science, I argue against epiphenomenalism and the emergentist denial of genuine mental causation. In their place, I develop the concept of radial causation, according to which every actual entity exerts causal influence outward in all directions, with no privileged bottom-up priority. Building on Whitehead’s process metaphysics, I propose that causation has two inseparable aspects: an internal or mental aspect constituted by each entity’s own perspective and subjectivity, and an external or material aspect available to outside observers. Radial causation allows top-down as well as bottom-up causation (and “sideways causation”) and explains how higher-level conscious entities can be genuinely causally efficacious without violating physical principles. The paper concludes with a brief examination of how General Resonance Theory and contemporary electromagnetic field theories of consciousness provide one empirically grounded implementation of radial causation at the neural level, offering a mechanistic picture of how mind and matter interact as genuinely co-equal aspects of a single causal web. This is a radically participatory and collegial view of the universe.

Abstract: Contemporary philosophy of mind is beginning to rehabilitate Arthur Schopenhauer as a proto-phenomenologist whose metaphysics of the will—once divested of its ontological commitments—provides thick descriptions of embodied agency, self-structure, and intersubjective resonance. This article validates this thesis through a four-stage naturalized reconstruction: (1) Schopenhauer’s "world-knot" and the unity of body and will are interpreted as phenomenal facets of minimal self-models within the framework of the Free Energy Principle (Friston, 2010). (2) His fragmented theory of the self is situated within Gallagher’s Pattern Theory of Self (2013). (3) His ethics of compassion is framed as a precursor to a Pattern Theory of Compassion. (4) Finally, affective criticality is employed to explain Schopenhauer's diagnosis of pessimism as a form of predictive dysregulation. Methodologically, the paper circumvents the pitfall of superficial analogies by adopting a weak methodological naturalism, utilizing cognitive models as a functional grammar for phenomenal material without reductively truncating the metaphysical deep structure.

Abstract: The Trace & Trajectory Framework (TTF) offers a non-representationalist approach to meaning, cognition, and selfhood grounded in dynamical systems theory and radical enactivism. Rather than treating meaning as something stored in mental representations, TTF proposes that meaning is enacted—it emerges through temporally extended navigational patterns called trajectories traversing dynamic structures called ribbons. The framework’s layered ontology comprises traces (probabilistic preconditions), threads (pre-navigational filamentary configurations emerging as the first semiotic coherence structure over trace sets), ribbons (coordinated thread-bundles whose fold dynamics generate navigational positions), and trajectories (meaning-events). The dual-parameter architecture (λ for structural granularity, σ for epistemic access) combines with ribbon dynamics to handle phenomena typically addressed through separate, domain-specific machinery. This version foregrounds the toroidal topology (T² _H) of navigational space. The Gaussian saturation profile—previously presented as a hill with a terminal apex—is reconceived as a cross-section of an asymmetric torus: the upper half carries the saturative convergence gradient (from maximal thread differentiation toward autosimilar collapse through Θ); the lower half maps the dissolutive gradient (decreasing dissociative awareness toward NET substrate). Autosimilar collapse (A) is redefined as a navigational-epistemic function rather than a structural property. The ontological stack from threads upward is grounded in semiotic coherence (SC)—the structural tendency of configurations to maintain consistency across differential positions—rather than temporal accumulation; threads are reconceived as SC structures (filamentary coherence-tracking) rather than cumulative functions, and ribbons as second-order SC morphisms. A three-factor convergence model (architectural predisposition, mimetic fold dynamics, emergent navigation) replaces single-factor accounts of how configurations stabilize, positioning TTF against stochastic, nativist, and social-constructivist alternatives. The framework retains ribbon dynamics as its primary organizational level, with the Hx namespace, QRS-CONFIG, stratified epistemic barriers, hex bands, and Macro-α providing analytical instruments. The framework dissolves rather than solves classical problems—including symbol grounding, the scalability challenge, and the tension between embodied and abstract cognition—by rejecting the representationalist premises that generate them.

Abstract: The rapid emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) language models has generated intense debate regarding their appropriate role in scholarly communication. Critics frequently argue that AI-assisted writing undermines intellectual authenticity by bypassing the traditional labor associated with authorship. This commentary proposes an analogy between AI-assisted writing and laboratory-grown diamonds. Both produce artifacts that are materially indistinguishable from their traditional counterparts—classically written prose and mined diamonds—yet provoke cultural discomfort because their provenance differs. By examining this analogy through the lenses of technological history, epistemic responsibility, and evolving definitions of craftsmanship, this paper argues that resistance to AI-assisted writing largely reflects cultural attachment to narratives of effort rather than objective differences in intellectual value. Historical parallels—including the adoption of statistical software, word processors, and digital literature databases—demonstrate that scholarly practices often undergo initial moral panic followed by normalization. AI does not eliminate authorship but relocates the locus of scholarly mastery from mechanical production toward conceptual clarity, judgment, and interpretive accountability. The critical ethical question is therefore not whether AI tools participate in writing, but whether authors retain responsibility for accuracy, reasoning, and intellectual integrity. Understanding this shift may help academic institutions develop policies that promote transparency without conflating technological assistance with intellectual fraud.

Abstract: Theories of consciousness span a wide conceptual spectrum, yet most may be broadly categorised into one of two methodological perspectives: the Local-Quantitative (LOQ), positing consciousness arises exclusively from quantifiable, neurological processes, and the Anti-Local-Quantitative (ALOQ), positing extra-physiological, unquantifiable origins. By delineating key criteria—such as neural localisation, empirical measurability, and metaphysical assumptions—this framework offers a structure with which one may more effectively organise and compare theories ranging from Global Workspace Theory (Baars, 1988) to Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Hameroff and Penrose, 1996). Rather than replacing existing philosophical taxonomies, this framework serves as a supplementary tool to identify the commitments and experimental conditions of contemporary models. Establishing this dichotomy may streamline discourse, clarify philosophical commitments, and promote more coherent debate in consciousness research.

Abstract: Background: Ejagham, an African language, has received limited scholarly focus compared to other African languages. Most studies emphasise grammar and sociolinguistics, while its number system remains underdocumented. Number systems in underdocumented languages like Ejagham are rarely examined for their cognitive, philosophical, or symbolic dimensions. Yet, Ejagham’s counting system may encode concepts of economy, hierarchy, memory, and logic, reflecting broader cultural values. Objective: This paper analyses the Ejagham counting system from one to ten, seeking to understand its structure, cultural reasoning, and mnemonic potential. It also aims to support the documentation and promotion of this amazing language. Method: This study focuses on the Cameroonian variety of Ejagham, also known as Eastern Ejagham. It employs critical analysis, an insider perspective, and simple arithmetic to examine patterns and explore possible connections. The numbers are transcribed using the International Phonetic Alphabet. Results: Ejagham numbers from one to ten follow a cultural logic: larger numbers are formed additively and spoken first, reflecting seniority and economic mastery. A distinct word for ten confirms a decimal system. Conclusion and Recommendation: This research argues that Ejagham’s numerical expressions reflect a worldview grounded in economy, seniority, symmetry, and cognitive efficiency. The cultural logic embedded in Ejagham numbers contributes to ongoing efforts to document this language. Increased scholarly and financial support is vital for its preservation and for further interdisciplinary study.

Abstract: Methodological statistics has developed under the pervasive belief that the value of a simulation study lies in its ability to demonstrate the superiority of a proposed method. This belief has distorted the epistemic role of simulation research by encouraging selective reporting, narrow design spaces and the suppression of results that fail to show improvement. Drawing on philosophical accounts and on meta scientific critiques by several studies, this paper argues that non superiority is not a failure but an essential source of methodological knowledge. It marks the boundaries at which a method performs adequately, where it begins to degrade and where it breaks. Using empirical patterns evident in contemporary methodological literature and drawing on the widely cited case in which machine learning methods often failed to outperform logistic regression in clinical prediction, this paper demonstrates how non-superiority clarifies expectations and guides methodological refinement. The paper proposes a structural remedy that pairs the Registered Reports model with principled simulation design following the ADEMP framework of \citet{morris2019using}. This alignment protects the visibility of non-superiority and restores the integrity of simulation research. Boundary mapping is therefore not a modest contribution but a scientific and ethical imperative for methodological transparency and applied reliability.

Abstract: This contribution proposes an ontological interpretation of the "neurophilosophy of awakening" through the lens of enactive inference. Here, awakening is conceptualized not as an elusive, irreversible endgame found in classical Asian traditions, but as a process-oriented recognition of reality's fundamental structure. It marks the spiritual moment when consciousness becomes aware of itself—a transition into meta-awareness. Within the framework of processual perspectivism, the "Witnessing-Space" emerges as the central, metastable configuration of an enactive inference system. We describe awakening as a radical reorganization of this space: a transition from fragmented, affectively dysregulated patterns to an integrated perspective where the system discerns its own generative architecture. The Witnessing-Space thus serves as an operative hinge between process-ontological philosophy, empirical brain dynamics, and the existential dimensions of spiritual self-realization. Ultimately, we argue that the study of awakening provides a heuristic key to resolving the classical mind-body problem by exposing the generative mechanisms of phenomenal appearance.

Abstract: Debates on ontological underdetermination—from scientific realism to Bayesian epistemology—typically assume that epistemic agents remain structurally intact even when evidence fails to determine theory. This paper argues that such debates tacitly preserve a “posture of mastery”: indeterminacy is treated as a problem for theory selection rather than as a destabilization of epistemic agency itself. I introduce the concept of epistemic anti-mastery to describe a rational reconfiguration of epistemic posture under conditions of radical opacity. Through a structural reading of Marguerite Porete’s account of annihilation in The Mirror of Simple Souls, I demonstrate that: (i) Bayesian conditionalization presupposes an architectural stability that radical underdetermination undermines; (ii) scientific realism’s convergence rhetoric depends on an untenable mastery-orientation; and (iii) under structural opacity, epistemic anti-mastery is rationally required. The aim is conceptual intervention: rational engagement requires revision of epistemic stance rather than refinement of theoretical control.