Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Research
Data sources: ZENODO
addClaim

AUTHORED — The Mind Behind a Maintained Universe — Institutional Research & Book Framework Edition

Authors: Shahzad, Syed Raheel;

AUTHORED — The Mind Behind a Maintained Universe — Institutional Research & Book Framework Edition

Abstract

AUTHORED is Book Four of The Architect’s Protocol and moves the series from moral order to the structure of reality itself. Its central question is explanatory rather than merely devotional: what kind of account best fits a universe that is mathematically intelligible, law-governed, life-permitting, information-bearing and capable of producing conscious observers who can understand it? The book builds a cumulative case from fine-tuning, physical order, entropy, biological information, origin-of-life questions, consciousness and the convergence of multiple lines of intelligibility. It explicitly rejects a “God of the gaps” method. A gap-filler inference says authorship is true wherever science has not yet explained something; a bounded authorship inference instead asks whether the character of the evidence, including successful scientific explanation itself, is more expected under mind or under brute fact. This dossier places the argument alongside anthropic reasoning, multiverse proposals, naturalistic emergence, philosophy of information, philosophy of mind and the problem of evil. It does not claim that fine-tuning proves a designer, that biological information is literally language in every relevant scientific sense, or that consciousness is impossible under physicalism. Its conclusion is abductive: authorship is presented as a candidate explanation whose force comes from convergence, not from one disputed datum.

Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback