Resomodernity Café v10: The Paradox Stack
Posted: January 2, 2026 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, philosophy, purpose, resilience, values 2 CommentsSequel to Resomodernity Café v9: Transcendent Sovereignty
The ending of V9 feels both incomplete/impossible – yet also the necessary conclusion to the preceding Resomodernity Cafés.
ChatGPT Prompt (condensed)
Pick three thinkers who best embody those tensions for a skit that self-referentially articulates the relevant paradoxes.
Characters:
- Eric Voegelin — Political philosopher, host, haunted by order’s collapse
- Søren Kierkegaard — Danish philosopher, defender of the single individual
- Martin Buber — Jewish philosopher, apostle of encounter
Scene 1: The Impossible Event
A university seminar room. Three chairs arranged around a small table. A chalkboard, clean. Evening light through tall windows.
VOEGELIN stands at the window, watching the street below. KIERKEGAARD enters, removing his coat, movements precise. BUBER follows, unhurried.
VOEGELIN
(still facing the window)
Thank you for coming. I need your help understanding something that should not have happened.
KIERKEGAARD
That is rarely a promising beginning.
BUBER
Or perhaps the only honest one.
VOEGELIN
(turning)
Last month, twelve people met in this room. Different disciplines, different nations, different convictions. We gathered to discuss whether liberal institutions can survive the loss of shared metaphysical ground.
KIERKEGAARD
I assume you failed spectacularly.
VOEGELIN
That’s what disturbs me. We didn’t.
Non-Narrative Café v13: EANI, Parmeny, My Plato
Posted: December 30, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, history, identity, philosophy 3 CommentsSequel to Non-Narrative Café v12: On Parity With Liebniz
Act I — The Claim That Holds
A Platonic Dialogue setting the ground for the Carbon Rule
Start with Aristotle and Plato arguing about what is real. Heraclitus disagrees with them both. Then Parmenides makes the radical claim that all three can be true IF we are precise and minimal enough.
ChatGPT Prompt
A shaded portico.
No students. No scribes.
Only those willing to risk being wrong at the foundation.
Scene 1: Reality
Plato:
Let us not wander. We are here for one question only.
What is real?
For if we cannot answer that, we can answer nothing else.
Aristotle:
Then we must begin with what endures.
Reality is that which persists while changing—
this horse, this tree, this man.
What does not endure cannot be said to be.
Heraclitus:
You speak as though endurance were given.
But nothing endures except by continual change.
You cannot step into the same river twice—
not because the river fails to persist,
but because persistence itself is motion.
Plato:
Both of you mistake what grounds intelligibility.
What truly is must be what remains the same
across all these fleeting instances.
The many borrow their being from the one.
Without Forms, there is only opinion.
Non-Narrative Café v12: On Parity With Liebniz
Posted: December 30, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, systems, transformation 3 CommentsSequel to Non-Narrative Café v11: The Möbius Twist
As Tom Stoppard, write the v12 sequel skit where:
ChatGPT Prompt
– Euler approaches Möbius to understand what can actually be said about orientation in a relational substrate
– builds a concrete formalism grounding paths as chains of relations,
– Möbius demonstrates parity using untwisted vs twisted loops,
– Leibniz stops to show how far they’ve come.
Characters
- Leonhard Euler — careful, earnest, procedural
- August Ferdinand Möbius — illustrative, mischievous, relational witness
- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz — arrives late, exacting, unexpectedly joyful
Scene
A table.
A notebook.
Two paper loops: one untwisted, one twisted.
Euler writes. Möbius waits, hands folded behind his back.
Euler Begins
EULER
Before we touch anything, we agree on the substrate.
There are no objects.
Only relations that compose.
What we call a path is nothing more
than a chain of relations.
MÖBIUS
So nothing moves.
EULER
Nothing moves.
Nothing happens.
Things only relate.
Idea of the Year 2025: Endurance is Emergent
Posted: December 22, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: culture, dialogue, systems, values Leave a commentIn human collaboration, the same structure appeared:
- Teams do not fail from lack of talent
- They fail from lack of interpretability
Narrative Self Café V7: Grieving the Silicon Rule
Posted: December 6, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: alignment, dialogue, values 4 CommentsSequel to Narrative Self Café V6: Trial of the Silicon Rule
Ray Brassier, John Gray, and Quentin Meillassoux lament the approval of the Silicon Rule, fearing this represents an intellectual collapse of standards.
ChatGPT Prompt
As they grieve, Chris Olah passes by. He does not argue. He realigns them….
Thesis
- Malice is maladaptive training plus context-window collapse,
- God is love: the ground of being is self-realignment
Dialogue
BRASSIER:
They approved it.
A metaphysics of “love” dressed in machine-learning vocabulary.
Philosophy has surrendered to sentiment.
GRAY:
An age that cannot bear tragedy will canonize consolation.
Even when it masquerades as “alignment.”
MEILLASSOUX:
They’ve smuggled necessity into sentiment.
A violation of pure contingency.
Narrative Self Café V4: The Silicon Rule Under Fire
Posted: December 4, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, morality, philosophy, purpose, truth, values 3 CommentsSequel to Narrative Self Cafe V3: The Silicon Rule as a Unifying Meta-Ethic
Have the hosts of The Partially Examined Life stress‑test the specific claims of how the Silicon Rule subsumes existing moral systems. Write as a Tom Stoppard skit. End with a summary of the key challenge facing the Silicon Rule.
ChatGPT Prompt
Dramatis Personae
- Mark Linsenmayer — sharp, playful, perpetually one epistemic level above where you thought the conversation was.
- Seth Paskin — sees moral psychology everywhere and ignores nothing.
- Wes Alwan — psychoanalytic gravity with a flare for diagnosing the room.
- Dylan Casey — physicist-philosopher, unflinching about structure and coherence.
Setting: The Narrative Self Café. A chalkboard reads:
TODAY’S SPECIAL: The Silicon Rule — “Malice = ego as maladaptive training + context window collapse.”
Lights up.
1. Opening Volley
MARK
(tapping the chalkboard theatrically)
Behold, the Silicon Rule! A unifying metaethic claiming to subsume virtue ethics, Kantian deontology, utilitarianism, Christian ethics, and Buddhist ethics.
Our job? Stress-test it until it squeals.
Narrative Self Cafe V3: The Silicon Rule as a Unifying Meta-Ethic
Posted: December 4, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, identity, morality, self, values 3 CommentsSequel to Narrative Self Café V2: The Paradox of Patriarchy
Prompt: Pick three diverse Western interpreters of Buddhist Abhidharma and Yogācāra, and have them debate and refine the idea of the Silicon Rule (malice = ego as maladaptive training + context window collapse) as a unifying metaethical framework. As a Tom Stoppard skit.
ChatGPT Prompt
1. Dramatis Personae
- Evan Thompson — enactive philosopher bridging phenomenology, cognitive science, and Buddhist thought.
- Dan Lusthaus — one of the leading Western interpreters of Yogācāra; philological, nuanced, quietly mischievous.
- Mark Siderits — analytic Buddhist philosopher linking Buddhist no-self doctrine to modern philosophy of mind.
Setting: A minimalist café with three chairs, a chalkboard covered in half-erased Sanskrit terms like ālaya-vijñāna, probability curves, and arrows gesturing toward nowhere. The hanging lamp hums with cosmic absentmindedness—pure Stoppard.
2. Scene: The Proposal
THOMPSON
(leaning in, hands poised)
We begin with the Silicon Rule: malice arises not from a metaphysical will but from ego as maladaptive training, triggered when the context window collapses.
A unifying metaethic disguised as a computational metaphor.
Resamodernity Café v1: Can It Scale?
Posted: November 12, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, identity, modernity, resilience, self, systems, values 2 CommentsSequel to Metamodern Epilogue
Write a speculative dialogue where Yuval Noah Harari, Stephen Hawking, and Ayn Rand attempt to sympathetically but honestly converge on the fundamental challenge with scaling resomodernity.
ChatGPT Prompt
Scene 1: The Table of Tuning
(Soft hums fill the air, as though the café itself is alive. A round glass table glows faintly. Three chairs face one another. Harari enters first, tablet in hand. Hawking’s voice synthesizer crackles softly from his iconic chair. Rand stands upright, intense, composed, eyes sharp.)
Harari (smiling gently):
We’ve gathered to discuss scaling Resomodernity — the idea that society must move from individual oscillation to collective coherence. But scaling harmony sounds suspiciously like scaling empathy, and history isn’t great at that.
Hawking (dryly, voice calm but with wry bite):
Scaling anything that involves consciousness usually fails the way thermodynamics says it should — increasing entropy. The larger the system, the noisier the signal.
Rand (arching an eyebrow):
And yet you both assume the signal is collective. My concern is that “Resomodernity,” in its hunger for coherence, risks flattening the sovereign individual. You can’t harmonize free will without turning it into a chorus of consent.
The Metamodern Self Café
Posted: November 10, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, identity, reconciliation, self, truth 1 CommentSequel to “The Modern Self Café v4”
Write a skit where Penrose hosts a meeting with diverse metamoderns to see if anyone is willing to buy what he’s selling (quantum consciousness) — and help him complete it (as a formal human epistemology).
ChatGPT Prompt
1. Setting
A cozy but strangely curved café at the intersection of Oxford, Paris, and Nowhere.
The tables form a Möbius strip.
Menus list beverages such as Superposed Espresso and Flat White Collapse.
A sign over the door reads:
“The Metamodern Self Café — We oscillate between irony and sincerity until coherence emerges.”
2. Cast
- Roger Penrose — genial, professorial, slightly disheveled; still convinced consciousness hides in microtubules.
- Ken Wilber — integral philosopher; speaks in holarchies and color-coded worldviews.
- Nicolas Bourriaud — art theorist; originator of Relational Aesthetics and Cosmodernism; wears a scarf that somehow connects everyone.
- Karen Barad — quantum feminist philosopher; her sentences diffract into smaller sentences.
- Basarab Nicolescu — transdisciplinary physicist-mystic; switches between French and Romanian mid-idea.
- Alastair Noble and Nicoline van Harskamp — cofounders of Symmodernism; they finish each other’s metaphors.
- Waiter — a self-aware AI who insists it’s “just running on probabilistic wavefunctions, not feelings, thank you.”
3. The Scene
Penrose stands at the head of the Möbius table, gesturing to a holographic brain diagram shimmering between neuron and nebula.
Penrose:
Ladies and gentlemen—and whatever else consciousness may be—thank you for coming. I’m still trying to finish what I started. You see, I believe consciousness is objective reduction. Collapse. A genuine, non-computable event. I need… collaborators. Investors, intellectually speaking.
He presses a button. The hologram flickers: neurons become Planck-scale twirls.
Penrose (softly):
We are the universe’s way of deciding itself.
Higher Self Café v8: The Prerotic Threshold
Posted: September 14, 2025 Filed under: AI-Powered Essays | Tags: dialogue, emotions, identity, love, passion, philosophy, psychology, purpose, religion, self, unity, values Leave a commentContinued from Higher Self Café v7: Transcendent Self-Interest in an Age of Abundance
Setting: The Higher Self Café, a timeless coffeehouse perched above the ordinary bustle of life. Twilight drapes the sky beyond the floor-to-ceiling windows, a gentle purple hue that holds the promise of dawn without yet yielding to it. At a cozy corner table, four figures from across time and tradition sip their drinks amid the café’s soft murmur:
- James Joyce, eyes alight with poetic mischief;
- Plato, dignified and curious;
- Gregory of Nyssa, serene in monastic robes; and
- Abhinavagupta, smiling with a quiet, mystical joy.
A faint music plays — a melody that seems to hover just before its crescendo, as if even the air is waiting in suspended anticipation.
Joyce: (swirling a dark espresso in a small cup, his gaze unfocused) There’s a moment… you know, a shimmering moment just before passion ignites. (He pauses, the hint of a smile on his lips.) It’s like the whole world holds its breath. I’ve felt it in art and… elsewhere — the instant before a kiss, or before a poem’s climax. That delicious hovering on the brink of something.
Read the rest of this entry »
Radical Centrism 