Challenge of DIKWP Active Medicine: From Understandability to the Debate over "Ultimate Truth" of the World

Yucong Duan

International Standardization Committee of Networked DIKWP for Artificial Intelligence Evaluation(DIKWP-SC)

World Artificial Consciousness CIC(WAC)

World Conference on Artificial Consciousness(WCAC)

(Email: duanyucong@hotmail.com)

Abstract:From the dawn of civilization, humanity has pondered whether the world possesses an inherent and intelligible internal order. Through scientific exploration and philosophical reflection, we have seen that the world is not purely chaotic; instead, it reveals regularities, patterns, and structures across multiple domains—physical, chemical, biological, social, and cultural. Yet these regularities do not consolidate into a single ultimate formula; rather, they appear as a complex network of laws, emergent phenomena, probabilistic characteristics, and self-organizing processes across various scales and levels.This complexity raises the question: can we ever reach an “ultimate truth,” a final, irrefutable explanation of the world’s internal order? Epistemological constraints, historical scientific shifts, logical insights (such as Gödel’s incompleteness theorems), and philosophical traditions collectively suggest a cautious stance. While we can consistently deepen and refine our understanding, there is no guarantee that a once-and-for-all ultimate truth is attainable.This paper, integrating scientific evidence, philosophical and epistemological reasoning, and historical experience, proposes a balanced and open attitude: yes, the world has an intelligible internal order that we can explore and approximate, but this order is dynamic, multilayered, and evolving—defying the notion of a permanent ultimate truth.

I. Introduction: The Issue and Its Challenges

The question of whether the world has an internal order that can be understood by human beings has haunted intellectual discourse for millennia. From the Greek philosophers’ notion of ideal forms, the Indian concept of Rta, the Confucian and Neo-Confucian notion of “heavenly principle” (tianli), to the modern scientific discovery of universal laws and mathematical harmony, various cultural and intellectual traditions have affirmed some measure of underlying order.

In the 21st century, our understanding of world order has transcended simplistic, linear determinism. Complexity science, quantum theory, ecological equilibrium models, social statistical analyses, and studies in cognitive science and culture reveal a world order that is multifaceted, dynamic, emergent, and adaptive. This complexity leads us to a deeper inquiry: even if the world exhibits intelligible order, can we ever reach a conclusive “ultimate truth”? Here, philosophy of science and epistemology encourage humility. The progression of knowledge is replete with paradigm shifts, refinements, and the replacement of once-definitive theories.

II. Components of the World’s Internal Order

1. Physical and Mathematical Dimensions:At a fundamental level, physics provides strong evidence of order. Classical mechanics predicts celestial motions; electromagnetism and relativity describe spacetime structures; and quantum mechanics, though probabilistic, still yields precise statistical predictions. Mathematics offers an abstract language—through equations, symmetries, group theory, and topology—allowing us to describe the universe’s underlying structure. Thus, at a basic scale, the world is not random chaos but displays measurable regularities.

2. Hierarchies and Emergent Phenomena:Moving beyond the inorganic realm into chemistry, biology, ecology, and society, we encounter emergent properties. Higher-level phenomena—such as evolutionary patterns, ecological balances, collective human behaviors—cannot be simply reduced to lower-level physical laws. Instead, each layer displays new rules and structures. This suggests the world’s order is a multi-tiered, dynamic network rather than a single linear framework.

3. Probability and Uncertainty:20th-century scientific revolutions (e.g., quantum mechanics, chaos theory, complex systems research) revealed that world order does not need to be strictly deterministic. Probabilistic distributions, sensitivity to initial conditions, and nonlinear dynamics show that “order” can incorporate randomness and uncertainty. Rather than negating order, these aspects broaden the concept to include statistical patterns and emergent behavior recognizable at aggregate levels.

4. Self-Organization and Adaptability:Biological and social systems evolve through feedback, selection pressure, and information processing to form organized and adaptive patterns. Such order is not imposed from above but emerges through dynamic interactions. This indicates that order is a continuously generated and reshaped process, rather than a static and final blueprint.

Together, these observations depict the world’s internal order as a dynamic, multilayered network of interrelated laws, emergent structures, probabilistic regularities, and adaptive self-organization.

III. From Observation to Reasoned Integration

If the world had no order whatsoever, the continuous success and refinement of scientific theories would be inexplicable. Over centuries, we have built and tested models, discovered laws, and honed predictive power. These achievements confirm that a comprehensible order does exist. Yet, the sustained evolution and diversification of theories imply this order is not embodied in a single, final theory. Instead, the world’s order is open-ended and subject to increasingly subtle exploration as our conceptual and empirical tools improve.

IV. The Debate Over “Ultimate Truth”: Epistemological and Logical Considerations

When we move from acknowledging world order to positing an attainable “ultimate truth,” we face significant epistemological and logical hurdles:

1. Methodological and Epistemic Limits:Karl Popper’s fallibilism and Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm shifts show that scientific knowledge evolves through conjecture, refutation, and revision. No logical necessity guarantees we will reach a final, unrevisable truth. The historical pattern of replacing or modifying theories undermines the notion of a once-and-for-all ultimate truth.

2. Insights from Logic and Mathematics (Gödel’s Theorem):Gödel’s incompleteness theorems indicate that within sufficiently complex formal systems, not all truths can be proven consistent and complete. While this applies directly to formal mathematics, it metaphorically suggests that for a system as vast and intricate as the universe, expecting a fully self-contained and ultimately proven “final theory” is overly optimistic.

3. Historical Experience and Philosophical Traditions:Newtonian mechanics once seemed near-ultimate, only to be superseded by relativity and quantum theory. Kant highlighted the inaccessibility of the “thing-in-itself,” and Eastern philosophies (Daoism, Zen) emphasize the limitations of language and concepts in grasping ultimate reality. These traditions all caution against any naive assumption of reaching an absolute endpoint of knowledge.

4. The Impossibility of Guaranteeing Non-Refutation:Claiming to have reached ultimate truth would require assurance that no future phenomenon or higher-level framework could challenge it. Given finite human capabilities and partial empirical access, no such guarantee is logically or practically possible.

While not a strict disproof, these reasons collectively foster a rational skepticism about the attainability of an ultimate, unchallengeable truth.

V. A Comprehensive Conclusion: Embracing Humble Openness

Our analysis leads to a nuanced conclusion:

1. The Existence of Internal Order:The world does exhibit internal order across multiple layers and scales, as evidenced by the success of scientific theories and interdisciplinary insights.

2. Non-Reduction to a Single Final Structure:This order is not a simple unity. Its complexity and diversity, emergent properties, probabilistic aspects, and adaptiveness resist compression into a single ultimate formula.

3. Prudence About Ultimate Truth:While we continually refine and deepen our understanding, the interplay of epistemological constraints, historical patterns of theory change, logical incompleteness, and philosophical skepticism advises caution. We have no solid reason to claim we can or will achieve a final, immutable truth.

This stance is not pure agnosticism; it acknowledges real and expanding knowledge, yet maintains that knowledge remains open to revision, extension, and reinterpretation. Our evolving framework for understanding the world’s order is always “work in progress.”

VI. Contemporary Relevance and Future Outlook

In a globalized, interdisciplinary academic landscape, this approach to world order and ultimate truth carries significant implications:

1. Encouraging Interdisciplinary Dialogue:Recognizing a multilayered, evolving order encourages the exchange of methods and theories between physics, biology, social sciences, cognitive studies, and philosophy.

2. Fostering Continuous Innovation:Knowing that no “final truth” is guaranteed spurs scientists, philosophers, and thinkers to remain open to new paradigms, computational modeling, and integrative approaches.

3. Cultural and Philosophical Exchange:Awareness that world order can be understood yet never fully exhausted resonates with various philosophical traditions, promoting constructive dialogue across cultures, religions, and ethical systems.

References (Selected):

• Aristotle, Metaphysics.

• Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason.

• Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

• Popper, Karl. Conjectures and Refutations.

• Gödel, Kurt. On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems.

• Hawking, Stephen & Mlodinow, Leonard. The Grand Design.

• Morowitz, Harold. The Emergence of Everything.

• Prigogine, Ilya & Stengers, Isabelle. Order Out of Chaos.

• Davies, Paul. The Mind of God.

• Capra, Fritjof. The Web of Life.

Conclusion

Human inquiry is driven not only by the desire for knowledge but also by the recognition of our cognitive and conceptual limitations. Regarding the internal order of the world, we confidently assert that it exists and is partially accessible. Yet the richness and complexity of this order—its emergent properties, probabilistic nature, evolving patterns, and adaptive self-organization—suggest that understanding remains an ongoing, never-completed process.

While we lack a definitive proof that ultimate truth is unattainable, the cumulative logical, epistemological, historical, and philosophical evidence strongly supports adopting a humble and open-ended posture. This perspective does not diminish our achievements; rather, it inspires us to continue learning, exploring, and inventing new tools and conceptual frameworks, giving enduring meaning to humanity’s intellectual journey in a universe that remains forever intriguing and not fully unraveled.