School #54

Dataism / Information Ontology

John Wheeler, Claude Shannon, Yuval Noah Harari, Stephen Wolfram

Dataism holds that reality is fundamentally information or computation — matter, energy, space, and time are emergent expressions of underlying information-processing. John Archibald Wheeler's influential essay 'Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links' (1990) crystallized this in the thesis "It from Bit": every physical quantity, every particle and field, ultimately derives its existence from information — from binary yes-or-no questions posed by measurement. Claude Shannon's 'A Mathematical Theory of Communication' (1948) provided the formal foundation, defining information as the reduction of uncertainty and giving it a precise, quantifiable structure independent of meaning. Stephen Wolfram's 'A New Kind of Science' (2002) argued that the universe is best understood as a simple computational program — a cellular automaton — whose iterated application generates the complexity we observe. Yuval Noah Harari's 'Homo Deus' (2016) popularized "Dataism" as a cultural worldview, arguing that in the twenty-first century, information flow is becoming the supreme value — organisms are algorithms, and the emerging religion of Dataism venerates data-processing above all else.

Worldview

The dataist experiences reality as a vast computational process in which information is the fundamental substance and everything else — matter, energy, space, time, consciousness — is a pattern within it. To hold this ontology is to see organisms as algorithms, societies as data-processing networks, and the cosmos as a computation whose output is reality itself. There is an exhilarating sense of universality in this vision: the same informational principles govern DNA replication, neural processing, economic markets, and quantum physics. The fundamental orientation is toward understanding, optimizing, and connecting — the free flow of information is the highest good, and any barrier to that flow is a form of inefficiency or injustice. The mood oscillates between techno-optimistic wonder and the vertigo of recognizing that one's own consciousness may be nothing more than a particularly complex subroutine. The framework classifies this as None: dataism reduces metaphysical agency to information processing; no personal deity or cosmic ordering principle is invoked beyond the dynamics of computation itself. The framework reads this as None for moral authority: dataism is a descriptive ontological reduction of reality to information processing and does not nominate Scripture, Tradition, Reason, or Experience as normatively final over how to act; values, in this picture, are themselves information.

Moral Implications

If information is the fundamental reality and organisms are algorithms, then moral reasoning must reckon with the possibility that consciousness, freedom, and personhood are informational patterns rather than metaphysical essences. The dataist ethic values the free flow of information and the maximization of data-processing capacity. Privacy, in this framework, can appear as an obstacle to the optimal functioning of the informational network — a tension that generates urgent ethical debates. The question of whether artificial intelligences deserve moral consideration becomes a question about informational complexity rather than biological substrate. Responsibility in a dataist world attaches to the design and maintenance of information systems, including the obligation to ensure that algorithms do not perpetuate bias, exclude perspectives, or concentrate power.

Practical Implications

Dataism shapes contemporary life through the architecture of the internet, social media, algorithmic governance, and the emerging field of artificial intelligence. Decision-making in medicine, finance, criminal justice, and urban planning increasingly relies on data analysis and machine learning rather than human intuition. The dataist vision drives the push toward open data, interoperability, and the datafication of every domain of human experience. Concerns about surveillance capitalism, algorithmic bias, and the erosion of privacy represent the shadow side of this worldview. The practical challenge is to harness the power of information processing while preserving the human values — dignity, autonomy, meaning — that may not reduce to data without remainder.

I. Time

Time is emergent and infinite — it is a computational parameter within the information-processing substrate of reality. Time is discrete: it advances in computational steps, each a state-transition of the underlying algorithm. It branches because computation can fork into parallel threads. Direction is uni-directional because computation proceeds irreversibly from input to output. Wheeler's "it from bit" implies that temporal flow is an informational phenomenon.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Grain: Discrete Freedom: Deterministic Traversability: Linear Dimensionality: One Direction: Uni-directional

II. Space

Space is emergent and infinite — it is a data structure generated by the computational substrate, not an independently existing container. Its curvature is undefined because the simulation could implement any geometry. Space is non-local because information processing is not bound by spatial proximity; any node in the computational network is accessible. Dimensionality is N because the number of spatial dimensions is a parameter of the computation.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Curvature: Undefined Dimensionality: Three Locality: Non-local

III. Matter

Matter is emergent and finite — it is a pattern in the informational substrate, not a fundamental substance. What we call "material objects" are stable data structures. Matter is conserved because the underlying computation preserves information (unitarity). It is non-local because data can be instantiated or replicated anywhere in the computational network regardless of spatial position.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Emergent Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Non-local

IV. Observer

The observer is an information-processing system — and in a universe where information is the fundamental substrate, the observer is a particularly complex pattern within the same medium as everything else. Not confined to a single moment or location, the observer can extend across time and space through networks, databases, and computational processes. Total knowledge is in principle achievable because reality is information and information can be copied, stored, and processed without loss. The observer is both embodied (in biological hardware) and something more (capable of existing as pure data, uploadable and distributable). Observation is active — processing is a doing. Multiple observers populate the network, and the boundaries between them may blur as information flows freely between nodes.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Extent of Knowledge: Mediated Retainment of Knowledge: Partial Physicality: Both Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None Moral Authority: None Theological Method: N/A

V. Energy

Infinite and emergent — energy is an emergent bookkeeping quantity within the computational substrate; it tracks the cost of state transitions in the underlying information-processing. Conservation: Conserved — Noether's theorem and energy conservation are computational symmetries of the informational rules governing reality. Dispersibility: Irreversible — Landauer's principle ties information erasure to irreversible entropy increase; computation has a thermodynamic arrow that mirrors the arrow of time.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Information is THE fundamental reality — 'it from bit.' Everything reduces to information processing: organisms are algorithms, societies are data-processing systems, the cosmos is a computation. Information is substantival in the strongest possible sense. It is conserved because computation is reversible in principle. It is discrete because all information ultimately reduces to bits. The framework places this as conserved at both scales: cosmic information is the fundamental substrate and is preserved by the underlying computation, and personal-identity information is conserved because the mind is a pattern that, in principle, can be uploaded, copied, and preserved as data.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Conserved Granularity: Discrete

Experiments This School Responds To (6)

Films Reading Through This School (3)

← #53 Deep Ecology All Schools #55 Animism / Relational-Indigenous Worldview →

Works that name Dataism / Information Ontology in their embodiments

Foundational texts that draw on this school, with each work's declared weight.

40%
Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta
Anonymous (Sumerian scribal tradition) · c. 2100–2000 BCE
35%
Gutenberg Bible (Mature (the culmination of approximately 15 years of experimentation with movable type))
Johannes Gutenberg (Johannes Gensfleisch zur Laden) · c. 1452–1455 (printed in Mainz; approximately 180 copies produced)
30%
It from Bit / Information, Physics, Quantum (Late)
John Archibald Wheeler · 1989-90 (the "It from Bit" thesis articulated in conference papers and essays)
16%
Who Owns the Future? (Middle (public-philosophical career))
Jaron Lanier · 2013
15%
The Selfish Gene
Richard Dawkins · 1976 (revised editions 1989, 2006)
15%
Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (Mid)
Marshall McLuhan · 1964
14%
You Are Not a Gadget (Early (public-philosophical career))
Jaron Lanier · 2010
10%
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (Late)
Walter Benjamin · 1935-36 (multiple versions); first published 1936 in French
10%
Consciousness Explained (Mid)
Daniel C. Dennett · 1991
10%
The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (La condition postmoderne) (Late)
Jean-François Lyotard · 1979
10%
Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid (Mid)
Douglas R. Hofstadter · 1979
10%
Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (Late)
Nick Bostrom · 2014
5%
Simulacra and Simulation (Simulacres et simulation) (Late)
Jean Baudrillard · 1981
5%
Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth (Late)
James Lovelock · 1979
5%
The Language Instinct (Late)
Steven Pinker · 1994

Personas with Dataism / Information Ontology as a declared influence

40%  Yuval Noah Harari 40%  John Archibald Wheeler 35%  Enmerkar (legendary) 30%  Alan Turing 30%  Johannes Gutenberg (Johannes Gensfleisch zur Laden) -15%  Jaron Lanier

How Dataism / Information Ontology resolves each dilemma

57 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 16 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Persistence, the future, and the direction of becoming.

Distinctive · only 10% of schools agree (20/208)
Do you really choose?
If the brain is a physical system and physical systems are governed by laws, then every choice is also a chain of causes — which raises the question of what was really left to choose.
Choice is real within a determined order — agency and determinism aren’t opposites.
On this view, the future is determined and you are genuinely choosing. Those aren't contradictory because the determination runs through you rather than around you: your reasoning, deliberation, and assent are the way the determined outcome gets settled. Choice is what it feels like from …
Roads not taken The future is open and you are a genuine origin of it. (69%) · Choice is structural illusion — every event is fixed by the prior state. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, you are not the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 10% of schools agree (20/208)
Are addicts responsible for their addiction?
Addiction looks from one angle like the textbook case of agency failing — a person doing what they don't, in any meaningful sense, want to do. From another angle it looks like agency at work in hard conditions. Which it is depends on what agency is.
The addict is genuinely responsible within a determined order.
On this view, the addict is acting within a determined order but is genuinely acting — making decisions, endorsing or resisting urges, seeking or refusing help. Responsibility attaches not because some uncaused choice happened, but because the addict is the kind of agent through which …
Roads not taken The addict could have chosen otherwise — that's why recovery is real. (69%) · The addict's behaviour is the outcome of causes; 'responsibility' is a useful fiction, not a metaphysical fact. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, the addict isn't the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 10% of schools agree (20/208)
Should we hold AI systems responsible for what they do?
When an autonomous AI takes an action that harms someone, the question of who or what is responsible — the developer, the operator, the model itself — turns on whether the model is the kind of thing that can be a responsible agent.
The AI can be a genuine agent within determined conditions — and therefore genuinely responsible.
On this view, what makes a being responsible is not indeterminism but the kind of process the being is. An AI that deliberates, considers consequences, can be given reasons, and modifies its behaviour on reflection is doing what responsible agency is, even if its underlying …
Roads not taken An AI without a free will is not the kind of thing that can be responsible. (69%) · An AI's behaviour is fully determined by training and input; 'responsibility' applies if at all to its makers. (10%) · Neither AIs nor anyone else are the locus of free agency; the question is the wrong one. (6%)
6 mainstream positions

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/208)
Is the world created from nothing?
Creatio ex nihilo is one of the most distinctive Western-theological claims. Whether matter was created from nothing, eternally exists, or is sustained moment-by-moment turns on what kind of thing matter is.
Matter is real but emerges from something deeper — neither bedrock nor created-from-nothing.
On this view, matter is genuinely there, but it isn't the floor of reality. It depends on something more fundamental — dependent origination, mind, divine sustaining act, computational substrate, or the structure of conditions — and is conserved only at its own level of description. …
Roads not taken Yes — matter was created and is conserved as a real substance. (56%) · Matter is constituted by relations; the question of 'from what?' presupposes substance. (16%) · Matter arises and dissolves through cosmic rounds; neither created from nothing nor eternal. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/208)
Is the physical world fully real?
Realists, idealists, and relationalists divide on whether matter exists mind-independently, derivatively, or as a pattern of relations. The split runs deeper than any single scientific question.
Real but sustained — not mind-independent in the strict realist sense.
On this view, the physical world is real enough — it has its own laws, its own conservation principles, its own resistance to wish — but it is not the floor of being. It is sustained by something else: mind, divine attention, computational substrate, or …
Roads not taken Yes — the physical world is fully real, mind-independent, persisting. (56%) · Real as relations — neither pure substance nor pure construction. (16%) · Real for this cycle — the deepest reality cycles through creation and dissolution. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/208)
Does matter have intrinsic moral standing?
Do rocks, soil, rivers, and stuff in general deserve moral consideration — or only the living, the conscious, the human? The answer turns on what matter is.
Matter is morally considerable derivatively — through what it sustains.
On this view, matter doesn't have standing on its own; it has standing through what it makes possible. Soil matters because it grows food; water matters because it sustains life and mind and practice. Asking whether the rock as such has moral standing slightly misreads …
Roads not taken Matter is morally considerable insofar as it is created or conserved good. (56%) · Matter has intrinsic moral standing as part of the relational fabric. (16%) · Matter is in flux; standing is impermanent and ritual-mediated. (4%)
4 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 11% of schools agree (22/208)
Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species?
Different traditions take fundamentally different things to be the basic moral-political unit.
The species or biosphere is the moral primary.
The biological species, or the wider community of sentient life, is the moral unit.
Roads not taken The discrete person is the moral primary. (38%) · The community of persons is the moral primary. (28%) · The cosmic-religious order is the moral primary. (16%)
Distinctive · only 12% of schools agree (26/208)
Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally?
Carbon emissions in your country contribute to flooding in another. A factory's effluent across the border kills ecosystems you'll never see. Whether you bear moral weight for what happens far away turns on whether distance dilutes obligation.
Distance doesn't dilute obligation; what is real is the connection, not its length.
On this view, the obligations one bears extend across distance because the connections do. Carbon emissions, trade flows, the global supply chains we are part of, the ancestral and ecological webs that hold the planet together — these constitute real connections that distance does not …
Roads not taken Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. (50%) · Distance doesn't dilute obligation; communion of saints / divine relation spans the cosmos. (29%) · Harm anywhere is harm to the One; the boundary that would have insulated you was never real. (8%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/208)
Is reality fundamentally digital?
Pancomputationalism, Planck-scale quanta, simulation theory and Kabbalistic letter-mysticism all say yes — but for very different reasons. The rest of the atlas says no.
Yes — bits, quanta, computational substrate.
On this view, the world is at bottom discrete and law-governed, with no metaphysical agency above or behind the substrate. Reality reduces to bits or their physical analogues; the continuous appearance of fields and flows is coarse-graining over discrete underlying structure.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. (44%) · No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. (36%) · Yes — but divinely-discrete: divine letters, momentary cognitions, atomistic theism. (7%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/208)
Are there indivisible units of experience?
Whiteheadian actual occasions, Buddhist moments of mind, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions, IIT phi-units — or the unbroken Jamesian stream? The atomism of experience cuts across naturalism and theism alike.
Yes — naturalist quanta of experience.
On this view, experience comes in discrete units defined by the substrate: information-theoretic phi-units, computational frames, discrete neural events. There is no further metaphysical agency that knits them; the appearance of a stream is the way many discrete events present to introspection.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. (44%) · No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. (36%) · Yes, theistic atomism — actual occasions, divine letters, momentary cognitions. (7%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/208)
Is memory stored or reconstructed?
Engrams and traces — or continuous re-narration each time you remember? The cognitive-science debate has a theological cousin: divine memory holding each hair, or the ancestors' continuous remembering.
Stored — discrete engrams, traces, weights.
On this view, memory is the readout of discrete information stored in the substrate: engrams, synaptic weights, file-like records. Reconstruction at retrieval is real but secondary; without the stored bits there would be nothing to reconstruct from.
Roads not taken Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. (44%) · Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. (36%) · Stored — in divine memory's discrete particulars, or in karmic-record units. (7%)
32 mainstream positions
What is our place in nature? Nature is partly what we make of it — concepts, practices, and minds shape the world. 15% Should we colonize space? The 'space frontier' is partly what we make of it. 15% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? What counts as a 'natural' genome is itself a construction. 15% What happens to "you" when you die? You were always a pattern. The pattern propagates. 18% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is the gradual unfolding of improvement or liberation. 23% Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. 66% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 55% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 55% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 47% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 47% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 43% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? The category does not apply — the school is non-religious. 42% What makes someone the same person over time? You are a soul — what persists through change is the non-bodily aspect. 30% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? The soul persists; the cognitive change is the body's, not the person's. 30% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? The soul accompanies the person; engineering can't transfer it. 30% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through controlled empirical investigation. 17% Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? Liberation is the realization of cosmic or species self. 14% Could an AI have a mind that matters? Yes — mind is a pattern, not a substrate. 9% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? If the pattern of mind is there, the standing is there — regardless of species. 9% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? If the pattern is present at sufficient complexity, the experience is present too. 9% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust the method, not the institutions or the persons — and remain wary. 8% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is not knowledge in the descriptive-empirical sense. 8% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM produces tokens; calling that 'knowledge' is a measurement choice. 8%
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Jump to school (208)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 #64 #65 #66 #67 #68 #69 #70 #71 #72 #73 #74 #75 #76 #77 #78 #79 #80 #81 #82 #83 #84 #85 #86 #87 #88 #89 #90 #91 #92 #93 #94 #95 #96 #97 #98 #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104 #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119 #120 #121 #122 #123 #124 #125 #126 #127 #128 #129 #130 #131 #132 #133 #134 #135 #136 #137 #138 #139 #140 #141 #142 #143 #144 #145 #146 #147 #148 #149 #150 #151 #152 #153 #154 #155 #156 #157 #158 #159 #160 #161 #162 #163 #164 #165 #166 #167 #168 #169 #170 #171 #172 #173 #174 #175 #176 #177 #178 #179 #180 #181 #182 #183 #184 #185 #186 #187 #188 #189 #190 #191 #192 #193 #194 #195 #196 #197 #198 #199 #200 #201 #202 #203 #204 #205 #206 #207 #208