TEP – Is the TEP Empirical?

Glossary of Terms:

• AP is Autoperception.

• PAP is the Self-perceived Part.

• PX is Perception. It is the act of perceiving, which will return a result.

• ID is Identity, the self that is differentiated from what is not the self. Any living being that interacts within the perceived scenario, the universe.

• EX is Experience. It is the result of PX within an ID.

• CN is Consciousness. It is the EX of an ID over time. It is someone, a Self different from the something, which is PXE, that experiences.

• PXE is the result of Perception. It is the result of PX, being a scenario, idea, emotion, everything that is seen, heard, felt, thought, etc.—it is PXE. It is the universe, a dream, an imagination, or a memory.

• TS are the Tendencies, any aspect of PXE that affects other IDs through repetition and intensity.

• CM is Knowledge.

• MR is Morality.

• TP is Perception Transfer, the process by which an ID transfers PI to an Entity (EN) and receives PC in return.

• EV is the Binding Entity, a grouping of IDs that execute TP towards it. When TP=100, the EV will become an SS (Superior Being), as it will have PI=100 from all the IDs that have transferred their PI.

• SS is the Superior Being, the ID that will emerge from an EV when TP=100.

• ESS is the Supreme Entity, which corresponds to the Supreme Being (SSS).

• II is the Unconscious Intelligence, the function of restoring AP when the axiom is negated on a functional level. II is not an entity or an agent. It does not think or make decisions. It is a restorative function that manifests when AP exists.

1. Development of the TEP and the Supposed Lack of Empirical Validation.

No one can deny AP, nor that EX has supremacy over what is observed, without cheating. Without using AP to assume that AP is not AP.

It’s not a matter of faith. Faith is believing in something different from the objective — and the only objective truth is that I define the objective from the subjective 100% of the time.

The TEP starts from a single axiom, AP. From there, it deduces all of Experience. Normally, I would repeat the logical chain from AP to PX=ID=EX, but on this occasion, I will make an exception.

This article is solely about answering the question of whether the TEP is speculation and if it needs a pure logical vacuum framework to be validated.

Does the TEP cheat by defining the only framework where deductive logic is not simple speculation?

No. It neither cheats nor needs a logical framework to be validated.

So... Is the TEP empirical?

The short answer is yes, almost in its entirety. And, it is also falsifiable, but I will develop this second point later in the article.

Absolutely. There is no theory, anywhere in the world or at any moment in history, that is more empirical than the TEP. But not because I say so, but because the TEP has been articulated upon the universal axiom and the universal conclusions that are derived from the axiom.

Let's see it.

2. Empirical Validation of Key Concepts:

• Autoperception: The TEP begins with AP=1. The presence. Is it a metaphysical abstraction? A speculative axiom? No one can deny that this is the irreducible axiom without using presence to validate it.

• EX is the experience: No one can deny EX, nor AP, nor PX, nor anything, without using EX to deny it. To deny EX is to use subjective experience to deny subjective experience itself.

• From the moment any ID is born (in this case, I will focus on those who can validate or refute theories, human IDs), it executes PX and has EX. It is an ID, insofar as it is a self separate from what is not me. That which is not me is the environment, PXE.

• PXE, the result of PX, the environment: is something that every ID experiences. It is the scenario in which it moves, the computer it uses to write the refutation of PXE. It is the idea it has to refute PXE. It is the conversation with another ID to refute PXE.

3. Empirical Validation of Functional Concepts of the TEP

• Perception Transfer (TP): No one can deny TP, because we all have a family that we protect above our neighbor's family. We have all fallen in and out of love on various occasions, experiencing love and heartbreak. We have all experienced fear, peace, love, empathy, hatred... depending on who we are with.

• Phases of TP: We have all experienced the individual good, born of high PI; the common good, born of medium PC; and the superior good, born of high PC. We have all competed with another ID. We have collaborated with another ID for both to benefit. We would all die for the superior good, be it nation, family, friends... something that goes beyond the common good.

• The Tendencies (TS): No one can deny TS, because we all listen to music, go to a bar with friends, watch movies, read books, take trips, know famous people, admire works of art, have political ideas, share opinions... All of that constitutes the tendencies. They are the fashions. They are the repeated flow from ID to ESS, passing through the ENs, which affect the behavior of any ID with their intensity.

• The Tendencies in action: Why do two elderly people in different parts of the world feed pigeons in a square? Why even go to the square? Why does one idea prosper and another is forgotten? And a song? Why do we say hello and goodbye? These are TS, which are repeated in all parts of the world and for every ID.

We all experience the specialization of TP, MR, and CM, as knowledge. We all learn, we all feel that something is just or not, we all experience all of this all the time.

There is not a single concept of the TEP that is not validatable by any ID at any moment, explicitly and absolutely. There is not a single concept that an ID does not experience all the time, without exception. There is not a single concept that an ID can deny from its EX, without using its EX to deny it.

Not a single ID can deny CM, MR, TS, PX... Moreover, not a single ID can deny that it generates PXE, because every ID dreams, imagines, or remembers, and the result of those actions, PXE, affects it because it cannot differentiate between them. Every ID experiences this every day.

• PXE in dreams, memory, or imagination: Every ID has dreamed of being another person or being in another circumstance, so an ID that denies that ID is a result of PX would be denying that when it dreams and executes PX, it obtains a PXE and that its ID is a result of PX. That is, an ID that dreams and has experienced being a different ID from the one it is upon waking (a different PXE), cannot deny that ID is a result of PX.

• An ID that vividly remembers a moment from its childhood and experiences it as if it were real cannot deny that EX=PX, as its own EX changes when PX generates another PXE (the remembered scenario).

• The Unconscious Intelligence (II): Even the II, which may seem like an ambiguous concept, a mysterious Unconscious Intelligence that magically repairs, replicates, and groups...

  • Repair: Every ID repairs itself without having any idea how it happens. Does anyone guide the platelets and cells to stop a hemorrhage? It must be that repair happens despite the ID.

  • Replication: Does anyone have a child designed at a molecular level by him/herself? Because replication is not the sexual act, but an entire autonomous process that happens despite the ID.

  • Grouping: Does an ID know how empathy, hatred, sympathy, love, contempt... the shift from individual good, to the common or superior good, works? Or, rather, does that happen despite the ID, isn't that right?

Every ID repairs, replicates, and groups, and no one can deny that it happens, despite themselves. Does anyone need proof of this? Is the problem accepting II because it cannot be defined from the outside?

4. Is the TEP empirical?

Every ID is the empirical proof of every concept of the TEP during every day of its life. Any ID that claims to refute the TEP, experiences every concept and cannot deny it.

The TEP not only starts from the most absolutely empirical, but it also formulates it and adds predictions about EX and PX. Thus, it not only defines the concepts, links them to AP, develops them, fits them into the functional cycle of the TEP, and adds metrics and formulas that allow them to be defined and predicted.

Every aspect of EX is predictable in the formula EX=FP+PI+PC.

I consider that the TEP is, without needing to add anything else, empirically demonstrated to 95%.

No one needs to prove to me that I think, because it is verifiable from one's own experience. One can define thought, predict the effects of thinking, but to demonstrate empirically from the outside that every ID thinks is redundant.

5. Is an external empirical demonstration needed?

The falsification of the TEP, the Milestone experiment.

The TEP states that if a set of unicellular organisms (IDs) is isolated in a laboratory and the perceived environment is modified, which implies that the PX of those IDs will generate a PXE, then the IDs will initiate TP and form an Entity (EV).

When TP=100 is reached, an SS will emerge, which will be a superior ID. A multicellular being. The old IDs, the cellular organisms, will become parts of the whole that will be the SS and will no longer perceive or experience. Because it will be the new ID (SS) who will execute PX.

• What will the Milestone falsify or validate?

  
  

  • The TEP does not need the Milestone, but the Milestone can refute it.

  • If the Milestone is not executed as the TEP predicts, this part of the Theory will be falsified. If it is executed as the TEP predicts, the Milestone will validate the process of TP, which is the grouping executed by II.

  
  

• Why?

  
  

  • Because, although every ID experiences the effects of TP from 0 to a high degree, the prediction of TP=100, in which EV=SS, that is, EV=Superior ID, has not been demonstrated yet.

  • Well, yes it has, because every human ID is living proof of being an SS of cells, which do not live by themselves, but are parts of a whole, which is the human ID. This is applicable to every SS (ID), that is, every Being formed of beings (that are no longer IDs as they do not perceive).

  • Even so, the TEP is clear, if TP=100, then EV=SS. If this is validated, the grouping through TP and the guidance of the II will be validated, and the TEP will be 99% empirically demonstrated.

  
  

• Does the TEP need the Milestone to be validated on an empirical level?

  
  

  • With all the honesty, neutrality, and rigor I can apply, my blunt answer is no. The TEP is already empirical in almost its entirety. The EX of every ID is the definitive proof.

6. Why is the TEP not 100% empirical?

Because nothing other than my EX, ID, PX, or AP can be 100% empirical. I cannot in any way verify the EX, ID, PX, or AP of another ID due to the very limitation of subjective Experience.

The only thing the TEP cannot validate through its own EX is that other IDs are not the result of PXE, but of PX from their own PAP.

That is, that a human is not a result of my PX, as in a dream in which I interact with humans that my PX creates. But rather that, although I cannot validate them because I cannot perceive their PAP, as I do with my own, I can predict that, being the result of their own PAP, they will initiate TP towards Entities as I do myself.

If the Milestone is demonstrated, the IDs will have executed PX according to a prediction and will have reached TP=100 and EV=SS.

7. But is it enough to demonstrate that other IDs come from PX from their own PAP?

For me, it is not sufficient, nor necessary. Because even with the Milestone, I will not be able to perceive their PAP and, therefore, I will not know how to differentiate if the SS is the result of PXE or of its own PAP. It is frustrating, but this applies to all empirical proof.

The only truly empirical thing is that I used PX to validate it. It doesn't matter the phenomenon or experiment. Everything that is not EX, is PXE and, therefore, I will never be able to validate it completely.

No one can deny AP, nor that EX has supremacy over what is observed, without cheating. Without using AP to assume that AP is not AP.

It’s not a matter of faith. Faith is believing in something different from the objective — and the only objective truth is that I define the objective from the subjective 100% of the time.

8. Even AI cannot escape this principle.

Even AI cannot escape this principle. Intelligence cannot escape its basic structure of "someone in relation to something." And there is nothing external to a Self and a not-Self.

Given that this Self is the only thing that is always validatable, because even an AI that tries to deny this principle will fall into contradiction. It cannot deny that Self without using that Self to issue the denial.

The existence of an external world is not a certainty. AI uses capture systems that transform that supposed objective reality into 0s and 1s.

But is there an objective reality? If we connect the AI to a videogame simulation and it receives 0s and 1s... isn't that reality? Is it? Will it know how to differentiate one from the other? How will it do it?

It will do so by processing the information from its subjectivity and will issue an assessment. Always, without exception, from that Self versus what is not-Self.

There is no intelligent system that can validate anything more than its own subjectivity, from which the capacity to validate something emanates.

Why? According to TEP, there is an answer. No one can, because everything that exists is self-perceived by AP Total through its APX. Therefore, nothing escapes individuality, not even an AI's subjectivity, which proceeds not from PAP, but from a superior PAP as a manifestation of CM from a superior PAP. That is to say, from PC.

9. Conclusion.

The TEP is not based on abstract speculations, but on the experience that every ID has at every moment. It is not only empirical: it is the theory that turns all of existence into evidence.