Part I: Foundations

Truth as Scale-Relative Enaction

Introduction
0:00 / 0:00

Truth as Scale-Relative Enaction

The Problem of Truth

Standard theories of truth face persistent difficulties:

  • Correspondence theory: Truth as matching reality. But: which description of reality? At which scale? The quantum description doesn't "match" the chemical description, yet both can be true.
  • Coherence theory: Truth as internal consistency. But: internally consistent systems can be collectively false (coherent delusions).
  • Pragmatic theory: Truth as what works. But: works for whom, for what purpose? Different purposes yield different "truths."

A synthesis: truth is scale-relative enaction within coherence constraints, where "working" is grounded in viability preservation.

Scale-Relative Truth

A proposition pp is true at scale σ\sigma if it accurately describes the cause-effect structure at that scale:

Trueσ(p)  ⟺  p minimizes prediction error for scale-σ interactions\text{True}_\sigma(p) \iff p \text{ minimizes prediction error for scale-$\sigma$ interactions}

Example (Scale-Relative Truths).

  • Quantum scale: "The electron has no definite position" is true.
  • Chemical scale: "Water is H2_2O" is true.
  • Biological scale: "The cell is dividing" is true.
  • Psychological scale: "She is angry" is true.
  • Social scale: "The company is failing" is true.

None of these truths reduces without remainder to truths at other scales. Each accurately describes structure at its scale.

Scale-relative truths must be consistent across adjacent scales, in the sense that:

Trueσ(p)∧Trueσ′(q)  ⟹  ¬(p contradicts q at shared interface)\text{True}_\sigma(p) \land \text{True}_{\sigma'}(q) \implies \neg(p \text{ contradicts } q \text{ at shared interface})

But they need not be inter-translatable. Chemical truths constrain but do not replace biological truths.

Enacted Truth

Truth is enacted rather than passively discovered. The true model at scale σ\sigma is the one that best compresses the interaction history at that scale:

Truthσ(W)=arg⁡min⁡W′∈MσLpred(W′,interaction history)\text{Truth}_\sigma(\mathcal{W}) = \arg\min_{\mathcal{W}' \in \mathcal{M}_\sigma} \mathcal{L}_{\text{pred}}(\mathcal{W}', \text{interaction history})

where Mσ\mathcal{M}_\sigma is the space of models expressible at scale σ\sigma.

This is not mere instrumentalism. The enacted truth must:

  1. Predict accurately (correspondence constraint)
  2. Cohere internally (coherence constraint)
  3. Preserve viability (pragmatic constraint)

For self-maintaining systems, truth-seeking and viability-preservation converge in the long run:

lim⁡t→∞Wviability∗=lim⁡t→∞Wprediction∗\lim_{t \to \infty} \mathcal{W}^*_{\text{viability}} = \lim_{t \to \infty} \mathcal{W}^*_{\text{prediction}}

A model that systematically misrepresents the world will eventually lead to viability failure.

No View from Nowhere

There is no "view from nowhere"—no scale-free, perspective-free truth. Every truth claim is made from within some scale of organization, using models compressed to that scale's capacity.

This is not relativism. Some claims are false at every scale (internal contradictions). Some claims are true at their scale and can be verified by any observer at that scale. But there is no master scale from which all truths can be stated.

Truth is scale-relative but not arbitrary. At each scale, there are facts about cause-effect structure that constrain what can be truly said. The viability imperative ensures that truth-seeking is not merely optional but constitutively necessary for persistence.