The Participatory Ontology: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Recursive Influence of Belief on the Fabric of Existence

Written By Pieter Lamper
Orange is the new black

1. Introduction: The Collapse of the Spectator Theory of Knowledge

For the better part of three centuries, the prevailing scientific and philosophical consensus rested upon a foundational premise: the universe exists as an objective, determinate reality, independent of the human mind. This paradigm, crystallized by Newtonian mechanics and Cartesian dualism, positioned the human observer as a detached spectator—a camera looking out at a clockwork cosmos. In this view, beliefs, theories, and perceptions were merely internal maps. A map could be true or false, accurate or distorted, but it possessed no ontological weight; it could not alter the territory it described. The universe was "out there," a static container of matter and energy, indifferent to the "in here" of consciousness.

However, the trajectory of sophisticated inquiry across physics, cognitive science, sociology, and philosophy over the last century has irrevocably eroded this "spectator theory" of knowledge. The evidence, accumulated from the subatomic scale of quantum mechanics to the macroscopic scale of global economic markets, suggests a far more radical ontology: that "belief"—defined broadly as observational orientation, cognitive expectation, and collective social consensus—is not a passive reflection of reality but an active, causal operator in its construction.

This report posits that we inhabit a "Participatory Universe," a term championed by physicist John Archibald Wheeler, where the boundary between subject and object is porous, if not illusory. We will examine the mechanisms of this participation across three distinct but entangled strata of existence: the physical, the biological, and the social. By synthesizing the Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation of quantum mechanics, the "It from Bit" hypothesis, Quantum Bayesianism (QBism), the Interface Theory of Perception, Biocentrism, and the sociological theory of Performativity, we establish a comprehensive framework for understanding how our beliefs about what the universe is effect existence itself. The findings suggest that reality is not a noun but a verb—a dynamic process of actualization where the observer is an essential co-author of the physical history, biological viability, and institutional structure of the world.

2. The Quantum Architect: Consciousness as a Fundamental Operator

The most profound challenge to the notion of an independent, objective reality arises from the foundational paradoxes of quantum mechanics. The "measurement problem" forces physics to confront the role of the observer not merely as a recorder of data, but as an agent that precipitates the transition from potentiality to actuality.

2.1 The Von Neumann-Wigner Interpretation and the Chain of Measurement

The standard formalism of quantum mechanics, particularly the Schrödinger equation, describes physical systems as evolving in a deterministic, continuous manner known as unitary evolution. A particle does not exist in a single location but as a wavefunction ($\psi$), a mathematical description of a superposition of all possible states. However, when a measurement occurs, this linear evolution is violently interrupted; the wavefunction "collapses" to a single definite state. This is the "reduction of the wave packet."

John von Neumann, in his rigorous mathematical formalization of the theory, identified a logical problem with the location of this collapse. He argued that the measuring apparatus itself—the Geiger counter, the photographic plate, the retina of the eye—is composed of atoms and is therefore subject to the same quantum laws of superposition. If the particle is in a superposition, the detector interacting with it should also enter a superposition of "detecting" and "not detecting." Von Neumann posited that the "chain of measurement" could be pushed back indefinitely, through the instrument, the optic nerve, and the brain, without ever finding a physical mechanism to break the superposition. Consequently, he concluded that the chain must be broken by something non-physical: the "abstract ego" or consciousness of the observer.1

Eugene Wigner expanded this into what is now known as the Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation. Wigner argued that "consciousness" is the distinct ontological variable that causes the collapse of the wavefunction. In this view, the physical universe remains in a state of suspended animation—a "twilight zone" of probabilities—until it is apprehended by a conscious mind. The act of observation is not passive registration; it is the act of creation that forces the universe to decide what it is.1

2.1.1 The Stapp-Von Neumann Process

Physicist Henry Stapp integrated Von Neumann's logic into a process-based ontology involving three distinct stages of universal evolution. "Process 1," which Stapp calls "The Heisenberg Choice," is the conscious decision of the observer to ask a specific question of nature—to set up the experiment in a particular way. This choice is free and not determined by the prior physical state of the universe. "Process 2" is the deterministic evolution of the Schrödinger equation (the "Dirac Process"). "Process 3" is nature's response—the collapse of the wavefunction to a specific outcome.1

Stapp argues that this framework resolves the conflict between divine omniscience and human free will. If the universe is a participatory process where the observer’s choice (Process 1) is a necessary input for the actualization of reality, then the future is genuinely open. Even a hypothetical "God" might choose to limit their own knowledge to allow for the finite "Heisenberg Choices" of conscious agents, thereby preserving the participatory nature of the cosmos.1 This implies that our beliefs about how to interrogate the universe (the questions we choose to ask) determine the cross-section of reality that manifests.

2.2 John Archibald Wheeler and the Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP)

John Archibald Wheeler, a titan of 20th-century physics, radicalized the observer's role further. He proposed the "Participatory Anthropic Principle" (PAP), rejecting the Copernican Mediocrity Principle which suggests observers are incidental to the cosmos. Instead, Wheeler argued that the universe is a "self-excited circuit." It begins with the Big Bang, evolves complex heavy elements, gives rise to life, and finally produces observers who look back at the universe. This act of "looking back" is what confers reality upon the beginning. The universe must produce observers to exist, because "no elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon".3

2.2.1 "It from Bit"

Wheeler’s most famous aphorism, "It from Bit," encapsulates the mechanism of this creation. He argued that the fundamental stuff of the universe is not matter or energy, but information. Every particle, every field, every force derives its function and existence from "apparatus-elicited responses to yes-or-no questions" (bits). The physical "it" (the atom) emerges from the "bit" (the information gained through measurement). This reverses the materialist assumption: physics does not give rise to information; information gives rise to physics.3

This perspective suggests that our search for a "theory of everything" is actually a search for the logic of information processing. If reality is constituted by bits, then the universe is essentially a digital reality, computed through the interaction of conscious agents.

2.2.2 The Delayed-Choice Experiment: Retroactive History

The most startling implication of Wheeler's view is the mutability of the past. In his "delayed-choice" thought experiment—later confirmed by laboratory experiments using interferometers—an observer chooses whether to measure a photon as a wave or a particle after the photon has already passed through the slit but before it hits the detector. The experiment demonstrates that the choice made in the present determines the path the particle took in the past.6

Wheeler concluded that "we are participants in bringing into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago." This leads to a radical insight: the history of the universe is not a fixed archive. The "Big Bang" and the billions of years of cosmic evolution are theoretical constructs we build in the present to explain current data. We are, in a very literal sense, constructing the past through our present beliefs and measurements. The past exists only insofar as it is recorded in the present.3

2.3 Quantum Bayesianism (QBism): Physics as a User Manual

A contemporary development that refines the participatory view is Quantum Bayesianism, or QBism. Developed by Christopher Fuchs, Rüdiger Schack, and David Mermin, QBism strips quantum mechanics of its metaphysical baggage by reinterpreting the wavefunction not as a description of the world, but as a description of the observer's belief about the world.7

2.3.1 The Wavefunction as Subjective Expectation

In the QBist framework, probabilities are not frequencies of occurrence in nature (frequentist view) but Bayesian degrees of belief (subjective view). When an observer writes down a wavefunction for an electron, they are encoding their expectations for a future experience. When a measurement is made, the wavefunction "collapse" is not a physical event where a cloud of probability shrinks; it is a Bayesian update inside the agent's mind. The agent simply has new information, so they update their table of bets.10

This interpretation elegantly dissolves the paradox of "spooky action at a distance" (quantum entanglement). If two entangled particles are separated by light-years, and Alice measures one, she instantly knows the state of the other. In standard realism, this requires a signal to travel faster than light. In QBism, nothing travels. Alice simply updates her belief about what she will find if she measures the second particle. The change happens in her notebook, not in the remote galaxy.8

2.3.2 Participatory Realism and the "Euglena"

QBism is often accused of solipsism, but Fuchs vehemently denies this, arguing instead for "Participatory Realism." The world is real, but it is not "finished." It is plastic. When we interact with it, we push on it, and it pushes back. The "Born Rule" acts as a normative guide—a "law of thought"—that tells us how to align our beliefs to survive the world's push-back.8

Fuchs uses the analogy of a Euglena (a single-celled organism) swimming with its flagellum. The Euglena does not have a complete picture of the universe; it has a local interface. Its interactions (measurements) help it navigate. Similarly, quantum mechanics is a handbook for human agents to navigate reality. It does not describe "nature itself" but the "interface between the agent and nature." This implies that the universe is not a "block" universe but a "growing" universe, where every measurement adds a new fact to existence that was not there before.11

Table 1: Comparative Interpretations of the Observer's Role in Quantum Mechanics

Interpretation

Nature of Wavefunction (ψ)

Role of Observer

Mechanism of "Collapse"

Implications for Reality

Copenhagen

Tool for prediction

Necessary to define context

Indeterminate transition

Reality is complementary (wave/particle)

Von Neumann-Wigner

Real physical entity

Causal Agent (Consciousness)

Physical event triggered by mind

Reality requires conscious actualization

Wheeler (PAP)

Information carrier ("Bit")

Participant / Creator

"It from Bit" (Information to Matter)

History is retroactively constructed

QBism

Subjective degree of belief

Gambling Agent

Bayesian Belief Update (Internal)

Reality is a local interface; no "view from nowhere"

Many Worlds

Real physical entity

Passive splitter

None (Branching)

All possibilities exist; no unique reality

3. The Biological Interface: Perceptual Construction and Evolutionary Fitness

If quantum mechanics suggests that the fundamental substrate of reality is responsive to observation, cognitive science and evolutionary biology suggest that the "world" we experience is a species-specific user interface, constructed not to reveal truth, but to hide it.

3.1 Biocentrism: The Biological Origin of the Cosmos

Robert Lanza’s theory of Biocentrism flips the standard cosmological narrative. Instead of the universe creating life, life creates the universe. Lanza argues that the parameters of the cosmos—the fine-tuning of universal constants—are perfectly balanced for life because they are the products of life’s own spatial-temporal logic.13

3.1.1 Space and Time as "Animal Sense Perception"

Drawing on Kantian idealism, Lanza asserts that space and time are not external objects. You cannot put time in a bottle; you cannot touch space. They are forms of animal sense perception—software tools the mind uses to organize information into a coherent narrative. Without a biological observer to weave the data into a spatiotemporal framework, the universe remains in an undefined probability mist. Thus, the "external world" is an active reconstruction occurring inside the mind.15 The "kitchen" we see is not a static room; it is a stream of photons processed into shapes and colors by the brain. The "reality" of the kitchen depends entirely on the specific neural architecture of the observer.13

3.2 The Interface Theory of Perception (ITP)

Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman provides a mathematical proof for this "unreal" nature of perception through his Fitness-Beats-Truth (FBT) Theorem. Using evolutionary game theory, Hoffman demonstrates that an organism that perceives reality as it actually is (veridical perception) will always go extinct when competing against an organism that perceives a simplified model tuned for fitness.17

3.2.1 The Desktop Icon Analogy

Hoffman compares our perceptual reality to a computer desktop. A blue icon on a screen represents a file. The icon is blue and rectangular, but the file itself is not blue or rectangular—it is a complex array of magnetic charges on a drive. The icon is useful precisely because it hides the truth of the magnetic charges. If you had to toggle individual voltages to write an email (i.e., interact with the "truth"), you would never survive.

Similarly, physical objects—apples, snakes, tables—are "desktop icons" of our species-specific interface. Space-time is the desktop background. We believe the snake is a physical object, and this belief allows us to avoid it and survive, but the "snake-in-itself" is a complex reality completely unlike the icon we perceive.19 This implies that our belief in the solidity of the material world is a useful fiction—a "controlled hallucination" designed to guide adaptive behavior, not to reveal ontological truth.21

3.3 Predictive Processing and the "Beast Machine"

Neuroscientist Anil Seth reinforces this with the theory of Predictive Processing. The brain is not a passive receiver of sensory inputs but a "prediction machine" that continuously generates top-down hypotheses about the causes of sensory data.22

3.3.1 Controlled Hallucination

Seth argues that what we call "perception" is a "controlled hallucination." The brain hallucinates a world that matches the incoming sensory signals. When the hallucination aligns with the signals, we call it reality. The content of this hallucination is driven by allostasis—the need to regulate the body's internal state. We perceive a "self" and a "world" because doing so keeps the biological machine alive. The redness of a hot stove is not a property of the stove; it is a "belief" about the danger the stove poses to the organism, rendered as sensory qualia.24

This leads to the conclusion that our experience of being a "self"—a continuous, conscious entity—is also a controlled hallucination. We are not the pilot of the beast machine; we are the interface the machine generates to navigate the social and physical environment.23

4. The Somatic Bridge: Belief as Physiology

The influence of belief is not limited to the abstract construction of "reality" or "perception"; it fundamentally alters the biological substrate of the observer. The boundary between "mind" and "body" is shown to be permeable, with beliefs acting as physiological instructions.

4.1 The Mechanism of Placebo and Nocebo

The placebo effect is often dismissed as "just in your head," but research shows it is a specific neurobiological event. The expectation of a clinical benefit triggers the release of endogenous opioids, dopamine, and other neurotransmitters that structurally mimic pharmacological agents.26

Crucially, these effects can be "system-specific." If a patient believes they are receiving a heart medication, their cardiovascular system responds (e.g., blood pressure drops). If they believe it is a respiratory drug, their lung function changes. This indicates that "belief" is not a vague emotional state but a precise set of signaling coordinates sent to specific physiological pathways.28 Conversely, the nocebo effect demonstrates that negative beliefs (e.g., fear of side effects) can induce actual physical harm, confirming that the mind can manufacture pathology out of pure information.28

4.2 The Ghrelin "Milkshake" Study: A Case Study in Mindset

A landmark study by Alia Crum provides a definitive example of belief overriding biology. Participants were given the exact same 380-calorie milkshake on two separate occasions but were primed with different beliefs:

  • Condition A (Indulgence): Participants were told the shake was a 620-calorie "Indulgence" treat.

  • Condition B (Sensible): Participants were told the shake was a 140-calorie "Sensi-Shake."

Results: When participants believed they were drinking the high-calorie shake, their levels of ghrelin (the hunger hormone) dropped roughly three times as much as when they believed they were drinking the low-calorie shake. The drop in ghrelin signaled physiological satiety and ramped up metabolism.

Implication: The body's metabolic response was not determined by the actual nutrient content (which was constant) but by the belief the mind held about the food. The "institutional fact" of the label became a "brute fact" of digestion. This suggests that even our most basic biological functions are participatory, modulated by the semantic meaning we assign to our environment.30

5. The Sociological Engine: Performativity and Institutional Reality

Moving to the macroscopic scale of human society, we find that belief possesses the power to create and sustain the very structures of our civilization. This is the domain of Social Constructionism and Performativity, where shared beliefs solidify into "institutional facts."

5.1 The Thomas Theorem and the Definition of the Situation

The sociological axiom known as the Thomas Theorem states: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences".33 This theorem explains how subjective interpretations become objective realities.

A classic example is a "bank run." A bank may be financially solvent (an objective fact), but if depositors believe it is insolvent (a subjective definition), they will rush to withdraw their funds. This collective action causes the bank to actually run out of money and collapse. The false belief becomes a true fact through the mechanism of behavioral consequence. Reality is thus plastic to the collective definition of the situation.35

5.2 Performativity in Economics: The Model Makes the Market

Sociologists Michel Callon and Donald MacKenzie have advanced the theory of Performativity to explain how economic models function. They argue that economics is not a camera that passively records market behavior; it is an engine that actively shapes it.37

5.2.1 The Black-Scholes Equation

MacKenzie’s analysis of the Black-Scholes option pricing model illustrates this perfectly. When the model was first published in 1973, option prices in the real market deviated significantly from the model's theoretical predictions. However, as traders adopted the model, programmed it into their calculators, and used it to identify "mispriced" options, their trading behavior forced market prices to converge on the model’s predictions.

This is known as Barnesian Performativity: the use of a model makes the world more like the model. The map created the territory. By believing the Black-Scholes equation was "true," traders created a market reality where it became true.39 This demonstrates that the "laws" of the market are not natural laws like gravity but performative enactments of economic beliefs.

5.3 Institutional Facts and the Social Imaginary

Philosopher John Searle distinguishes between brute facts (e.g., the height of a mountain) and institutional facts (e.g., the value of a dollar bill, the existence of a marriage, the authority of a president). Institutional facts exist only because a community collectively believes they exist. The moment the belief creates a consensus, the fact acquires causal power—money can buy food; a president can order an army.36

Cornelius Castoriadis expanded this concept with the Social Imaginary. He argued that societies are instituted by a "magma" of significations—shared myths, meanings, and values—that determine what is possible and what is real for that society. These imaginaries are not merely mental; they drive the construction of physical infrastructure. The "capitalist imaginary" of infinite growth, for example, physically reshapes the Earth's geology (mines, dams, cities) and alters the atmosphere (climate change). The belief system manifests as a geological force.41

Table 2: Types of Socially Constructed Reality

Concept

Definition

Mechanism

Example

Thomas Theorem

Subjective definition creates objective consequence.

Behavioral Reaction

A rumor of scarcity causes panic buying, creating actual scarcity.

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

False definition evokes behavior making it true.

Feedback Loop

The "Bank Run" or the "Placebo Effect."

Barnesian Performativity

Use of a theory makes the world fit the theory.

Model Adoption

The Black-Scholes model aligning option prices.

Institutional Fact

Facts existing only by collective agreement.

Consensus / Status Function

Money, Borders, Laws, Governments.

Social Imaginary

Deep structural myths instituting society.

"Magma" of Significations

The "American Dream," The "Nation-State."

6. Social Imaginaries and the Physical Environment

The power of the social imaginary extends beyond institutions to the very physical environment we inhabit. The framing of environmental issues like climate change demonstrates how belief constructs physical vulnerability.

6.1 The Social Construction of Climate Vulnerability

Climate change is a physical phenomenon, yet its impact is mediated through social constructs. The "Harmful Impacts Frame" used by scientists and media emphasizes global temperature rise and extreme weather.44 However, the actual physical devastation is often determined by social inequality.

Vulnerability is endogenous. A flood in a wealthy, well-insured district (a product of a specific social imaginary of safety and capital) has a radically different physical consequence than the same flood in a marginalized community. The "disadvantaged" suffer disproportionately not because the rain is harder, but because the social structure has denied them assets, insurance, and infrastructure. Thus, the belief systems that justify inequality (e.g., neoliberalism, caste systems) literally dictate the lethality of the physical environment.46

6.2 The "Magma" of Meaning

Castoriadis describes the social imaginary as a "magma"—a fluid, indeterminate substrate of meaning from which society solidifies its institutions. This magma is the source of ontological creation. When a society imagines a new way of being (e.g., the transition from feudalism to democracy), it physically reconstructs its cities, its laws, and its technologies to reflect that new imaginary. We literally build our beliefs into stone and silicon. The current ecological crisis can be viewed as a crisis of the imaginary—a failure to imagine a relationship with the biosphere that is not based on extraction and domination.43

7. Comparative Epistemologies: Non-Western Participatory Ontologies

The insight that reality is participatory is not a novel discovery of Western science; it is a foundational truth in many non-Western ontological systems.

7.1 Yogacara Buddhism: "Mind-Only" (Citta-matra)

The Yogacara school of Mahayana Buddhism, founded in the 4th century CE, posits that external objects do not exist independently of consciousness. Reality is Vijnapti-matra—"representation-only" or "cognition-only".49

Yogacara analyzes the structure of reality through the "Eight Consciousnesses," specifically the Alaya-vijnana or "Storehouse Consciousness." This layer of mind acts as a repository for "karmic seeds" (bija)—impressions left by past actions and intentions. These seeds ripen to project the illusion of an external world, much like a film projector creates a movie. Thus, the mountains, rivers, and people we see are the collective manifestation of our past beliefs and actions.51

7.1.1 The Three Natures of Reality

Yogacara describes existence through three natures:

  1. Parikalpita (Imagined Nature): The false duality of subject and object; the belief in a separate "self" and "world."

  2. Paratantra (Dependent Nature): The reality of causal flow; the interconnected stream of perceptions arising from conditions.

  3. Parinishpanna (Perfected Nature): The realization of non-duality; seeing reality as it is, without the filter of conceptual imputation.52
    This framework mirrors Hoffman’s Interface Theory and QBism: the "external world" is a user interface (Parikalpita) generated by the mind to navigate the causal flow (Paratantra), and true insight requires recognizing the interface for what it is.

7.2 Indigenous Australian Dreaming: The Ontology of the Everywhen

For Indigenous Australians, the concept of The Dreaming (Tjukurrpa) represents a sophisticated participatory ontology. The Dreaming is not a mythical "time before time" but an eternal "Everywhen"—a parallel reality of law, creation, and ancestry that co-exists with the physical present.53

7.2.1 Singing the World into Existence

In this ontology, the land, the law, and the people are consubstantial. The physical features of the landscape (hills, waterholes) are the physical embodiments of Ancestral Beings. Crucially, the existence of the land is not static; it must be maintained through the active participation of the people. Rituals, songs, and ceremonies are not merely commemorative; they are ontological technologies. "Singing the country" is required to keep the land alive and physically coherent. If the belief and the ritual cease, the land itself diminishes or loses its vital essence. This is a radical form of participatory realism where the human agent is an essential metabolic component of the cosmos.55

8. Digital Ontologies: Virtual Realism and the Simulation Hypothesis

As humanity migrates into digital environments, the question of "belief creating reality" gains technological urgency. Philosopher David Chalmers, in his analysis of Virtual Realism, argues that virtual worlds are "genuine realities," not illusions.57

8.1 Virtual Reality is Genuine Reality

Chalmers posits that for something to be "real," it must have causal power (it can affect you), it must be perceivable, and it must appear independent of your immediate volition. Virtual objects in a Metaverse meet these criteria. If a digital sword in a game can "kill" your avatar and cause you to lose digital gold (which has real economic value), that sword is a real object within that context.

Chalmers extends this to the Simulation Hypothesis: the idea that our entire physical universe might be a simulation running on a post-human computer. If this is true, then quarks and electrons are simply bits of code. This aligns with Wheeler’s "It from Bit." It implies that "physical reality" is just the "physics engine" of our particular simulation. Therefore, virtual reality is not "fake" reality; it is just another reality made of bits, exactly like our own.57

8.2 The Probability of Being a "Sim"

Chalmers and Nick Bostrom argue that if it is possible to create conscious simulations, and if civilizations do not destroy themselves before doing so, they will likely create billions of such simulations. Statistically, the number of "Sims" (simulated beings) would vastly outnumber "Nonsims" (biological base-reality beings). Therefore, the probability that we are Sims is overwhelmingly high.60

This leads to a recursive ontology: Reality is nested. Our beliefs (as programmers) create virtual worlds, which may eventually contain agents who hold beliefs that create their own worlds. The "creator" and the "created" are links in a chain of information processing.

9. Synthesis: The Recursive Universe

The converging lines of evidence from quantum physics, cognitive science, physiology, sociology, and comparative philosophy point to a singular, startling conclusion: Existence is a feedback loop between the Observer and the System.

The "Spectator Theory" is dead. We are not watching the universe; we are "self-excited circuits" within it.

9.1 Second and Third-Order Insights

  • Insight 1: The Physics of Meaning. If Wheeler is correct that "It from Bit," and if meaning is the organization of information by a conscious agent, then the creation of meaning is a fundamental physical act. Writing a law, coding a simulation, or observing a particle are all expressions of the same operation: collapsing probability into actuality through information processing. Meaning is the software that runs on the hardware of the universe.

  • Insight 2: The Normative is the Ontological. In QBism, the "Born Rule" is a normative guide for rational betting. In sociology, the "Thomas Theorem" turns definitions into consequences. This suggests that values (how we ought to bet, what we believe is true) precede facts. The normative rules of belief become the ontological furniture of the world. "Is" emerges from "Ought."

  • Insight 3: The Evolution of the Interface. If Hoffman is right that we see a "fitness interface," then our scientific progress—building larger telescopes and colliders—is not necessarily revealing "truth." It is extending the interface. We are building more complex "desktop icons" to manipulate the underlying data structure more effectively. The "Theory of Everything" may ultimately be a theory of the Observer's Interface, not the Thing-in-Itself.

9.2 The Responsibility of Participation

This framework imposes a profound responsibility. If the universe is participatory, we are not victims of circumstance but co-authors of our condition.

  • Biological Responsibility: The "Milkshake Study" implies we have agency over our metabolic health through mindset.

  • Social Responsibility: The "Social Imaginary" implies that heteronomy (the belief that laws are fixed by God/Nature) is a false consciousness. We have the autonomy to re-imagine and re-institute our societies, economies, and relationship with the planet.

  • Cosmic Responsibility: If we shape the past and future through our observations (Wheeler), the nature of the universe itself is contingent upon the quality of our consciousness.

10. Conclusion

How does our belief about what the universe is effect existence itself? The answer is total and recursive. Our beliefs act as the source code for the reality we experience.

  • At the quantum level, our choice of measurement actualizes history and property.

  • At the biological level, our interface constructs space, time, and objects to ensure fitness, while our expectations regulate our physiology.

  • At the social level, our collective agreements solidify into the institutional facts of money, law, and nations.

We inhabit a reality that is responsive, plastic, and inextricably entangled with the mind that beholds it. The universe is not a noun; it is a verb, an ongoing performance where the script is written in real-time by the actors on the stage. To believe is to build.

Table 3: The Hierarchy of Participatory Existence

Level

Description

Key Proponent/Concept

Example

Level 1: Fundamental

Existence requires information/observation.

Wheeler ("It from Bit")

A photon has no path until measured.

Level 2: Perceptual

Reality is formatted by the species' sensory tools.

Hoffman (Interface Theory)

We see a "desktop icon" of a snake, not the quantum field snake.

Level 3: Physiological

The body aligns with the mind's expectations.

Crum (Mindset Physiology)

Ghrelin drops because we think we ate a heavy meal.

Level 4: Institutional

Social reality is created by consensus.

Searle / MacKenzie

A piece of paper is "money" because we agree it is.

Level 5: Technological

Simulated reality becomes genuine reality.

Chalmers (Virtual Realism)

A digital asset in a metaverse has real value and utility.

Works cited

  1. The von Neumann– Wigner Interpretation - Mosaic, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://mosaic.messiah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=mps_st

  2. Interpretations of quantum mechanics - Wikipedia, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://static.hlt.bme.hu/semantics/external/pages/megtestes%C3%ADtett_megismer%C3%A9s/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics.html

  3. It from bit? | plus.maths.org, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://plus.maths.org/content/it-bit

  4. It from Bit: Pioneering Physicist John Archibald Wheeler on ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.themarginalian.org/2016/09/02/it-from-bit-wheeler/

  5. It From Bit: What Did John Archibald Wheeler Get Right—and Wrong?, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://mindmatters.ai/2021/05/it-from-bit-what-did-john-archibald-wheeler-get-right-and-wrong/

  6. The Participatory Universe: How Consciousness Shapes Reality, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://dinisguarda.medium.com/the-participatory-universe-how-consciousness-shapes-reality-adff7fa64539

  7. The dizzying free fall of Quantum Bayesianism - Essentia Foundation, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.essentiafoundation.org/the-dizzying-free-fall-of-quantum-bayesianism/seeing/

  8. Quantum Bayesianism - Wikipedia, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism

  9. A Private View of Quantum Reality | Quanta Magazine, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum-bayesianism-explained-by-its-founder-20150604/

  10. QBism: The simplest interpretation of quantum physics - Big Think, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://bigthink.com/13-8/qbism-simplest-explanation-of-quantum-physics/

  11. What is QBism? Can it solve paradoxes of quantum mechanics?, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.firstprinciples.org/article/could-the-qbism-interpretation-solve-many-of-the-paradoxes-of-quantum-mechanics

  12. Objectivity and subjectivity in quantum mechanics - Medium, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://medium.com/neo-cybernetics/objectivity-and-subjectivity-in-quantum-mechanics-6303c8b347cd

  13. Biocentrism by Robert Lanza | Summary, Quotes, Audio - SoBrief, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://sobrief.com/books/biocentrism

  14. Biocentrism Book Summary by Robert Lanza - Shortform, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.shortform.com/summary/biocentrism-summary-robert-lanza

  15. Biocentrism: Robert Lanza's Controversial View of the Universe, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/11/biocentrism-robert-lanzas-controversial-view-of-the-universe.html

  16. 11 Interesting Principles on Biocentrism and Consciousness, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.higherfrequency.living/blog/the-11-principles-of-biocentrism

  17. The Truth About True Models: | Harish's Notebook, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://harishsnotebook.wordpress.com/2020/10/25/the-truth-about-true-models/

  18. Fitness Beats Truth Theorem - Atlas of Public Management, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.atlas101.ca/pm/concepts/fitness-beats-truth-theorem/

  19. Arguments against Donald Hoffman's 'Fitness Beats Truth' model?, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyofScience/comments/tm437u/arguments_against_donald_hoffmans_fitness_beats/

  20. “Fitness” Beats “Truth” - Surtil, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://surtil.com/2023/07/23/fitness-beats-truth/

  21. Fitness Beats Truth in the Evolution of Perception - UC Irvine, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://sites.socsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/FBT-7-30-17

  22. Controlled Hallucination, with Dr. Anil Seth - This Is Your Brain, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://thisisyourbrain.com/2023/12/controlled-hallucination-with-dr-anil-seth/

  23. Anil Seth on the predictive brain and how to study consciousness, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/anil-seth-predictive-brain-explaining-consciousness/

  24. Is Reality a Controlled Hallucination? - with Anil Seth - YouTube, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXcH26M7PQM

  25. Perception as a Controlled Hallucination | Issue 149 - Philosophy Now, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://philosophynow.org/issues/149/Perception_as_a_Controlled_Hallucination

  26. The Science Behind The Placebo And Nocebo Effects In ... - YouTube, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM6_5TZHpQw

  27. Understanding the mechanisms of placebo and nocebo effects, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://smw.ch/index.php/smw/article/view/2865/4679

  28. Placebo, nocebo: Believing in the field of medicine - Frontiers, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pain-research/articles/10.3389/fpain.2022.972169/full

  29. Placebo Effect - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513296/

  30. Mind Over Matter: You Are What You Think You Eat | Yale News, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://news.yale.edu/2011/05/24/mind-over-matter-you-are-what-you-think-you-eat

  31. How Expectations Change Our Body's Response to Food, Study Finds, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.nutritional-psychology.org/how-expectations-change-bodys-response-to-food/

  32. Mind Over Milkshakes: how our expectations change reality |, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://behavioralgrooves.com/blog/mind-over-milkshakes-how-our-expectations-change-reality/

  33. Social Constructionism | Definition, Theory & Examples - Study.com, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://study.com/academy/lesson/social-constructionism-definition-and-theory.html

  34. Thomas Theorem | Research Starters - EBSCO, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/thomas-theorem

  35. Construction of Social Reality: Summary - StudySmarter, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/social-studies/social-institutions/construction-of-social-reality/

  36. Social Construction of Reality – Introduction to Sociology, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://pressbooks.howardcc.edu/soci101/chapter/social-construction-of-reality/

  37. Are financial markets embedded in economics rather than society ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://research.diis.dk/files/56319/WP2009_10_critical_review_performativity_thesis.pdf

  38. Economics making markets is not performativity, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.hse.ru/data/2011/04/05/1211693735/PerformativityMoscow2011.pdf

  39. Performativity: Saving Austin from MacKenzie | LSE, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://personal.lse.ac.uk/ROBERT49/teaching/ph232/pdf/Maki-SavingAustinFromMacKenzie.pdf

  40. Do economists make markets? On the performativity of economics ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/economics-and-philosophy/article/do-economists-make-markets-on-the-performativity-of-economics-edited-by-donald-mackenzie-fabian-muniesa-and-lucia-siu-princeton-university-press-2007-371-pages/FCA5193D4324A938D60A47FE8EFA7BCC

  41. A Conceptual Model of the Social Imaginary, and its Application to, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/77545/1/2020EarleSPhD.pdf

  42. Cornelius Castoriadis on Social Imaginary and Truth*, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://ww2.fks.uoc.gr/english/cvs/kavoulakos/Kavoulakos%20Social%20Imaginary.pdf

  43. Imaginary and Imagination at the Crossroads - Association Castoriadis, accessed on December 13, 2025, http://www.castoriadis.org/imgPDF/C_1_Imaginary_and_Imagination.pdf

  44. Full article: Social Constructions of Climate Futures: Reframing ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17524032.2024.2305827

  45. Social Constructions of Climate Futures: Reframing Science's ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/116655/1/Social_Constructions_of_Climate_Futures__Reframing_Science_s_Harmful_Impact_Frame_Across_News_Media__Social_Movements__and_Local_Communities.pdf

  46. Climate Change and Social Inequality* - the United Nations, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf

  47. Climate Impacts on Society - US EPA, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-society_.html

  48. THE RADICAL FREEDOM OF THE IMAGINARY IN CASTORIADIS, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/download/746/1431/3682

  49. What does "mind-only" mean in Yogācāra? - NobleChatter, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://noblechatter.com/faq/2273/Yog%C4%81c%C4%81ra

  50. What is and isn't Yogācāra, accessed on December 13, 2025, http://www.acmuller.net/yogacara/articles/intro.html

  51. How Do We Create Our Reality? | Lion's Roar, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.lionsroar.com/how-do-we-create-our-reality/

  52. 5.3 Yogācāra: Mind-only school and its theories - Fiveable, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://fiveable.me/introduction-indian-philosophy/unit-5/yogacara-mind-only-school-theories/study-guide/5IOVtqodZIF09xwZ

  53. Indigenous Australian Philosophy | Issue 167, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://philosophynow.org/issues/167/Indigenous_Australian_Philosophy

  54. Understanding Aboriginal Dreaming, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.aboriginal-art-australia.com/aboriginal-art-library/understanding-aboriginal-dreaming-and-the-dreamtime/

  55. Aboriginal social, cultural and historical contexts, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.thekids.org.au/globalassets/media/documents/aboriginal-health/working-together-second-edition/wt-part-1-chapt-1-final.pdf

  56. THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL 'DREAMTIME' - Gamahucher Press, accessed on December 13, 2025, http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/books/religion/DREAMTIME1.pdf

  57. [PDF] Reality+ Summary - David J. Chalmers, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.shortform.com/pdf/reality-pdf-david-j-chalmers

  58. Reality+ - Virtual Worlds and the Problem of Philosophy, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1445-73772023000100003

  59. Reality+ by David J Chalmers review – are we living in a simulation?, accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jan/19/reality-by-david-j-chalmers-review-are-we-living-in-a-simulation

  60. Book Review: David J. Chalmers, Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the ..., accessed on December 13, 2025, https://www.philosophy-of-education.org/2549-2/

Pieter Lamper https://www.opened-source.com
Next

’’A broken Church’’