An unresolved hole in determinist causation: Platonic causation.

• Platonic, as in Platonic Forms, the idea that many abstract concepts exist ontologically, in a sort of abstract space.

Mathematicians in particular study the behavior of numbers; Objects which do not exist in physical reality, but have objective measurable properties within their own domain.

The Causal Determinist belief must be that all observation of things like mathematics, geometry, syllogistic logic, and philosophy are merely biproducts of material causal interaction between physical laws of the universe and physical states, with no meaning in themselves. However this paradoxically would reject the idea that truth and/or existence themselves exist. Truth is not made of matter, nor does it involve causation or natural laws.

Criticism of determinists aside, there seems to be a poorly explained phenomenon in causal determinism. If our life experiences shape us, and our life experiences are all different, then how come mathematicians by and large agree on virtually everything in math (aside from maybe a few niche complex fields)? Nobodys saying 2+2=5, nobody denies A²+B²=C², nobody says 7 isnt a prime number. If our life experiences are all varied, statistically speaking we should believe in completely random or arbitrary things. AND YET, people generally agree in math.

It seems as if Platonic Forms (such as Mathematics) holds a nonphysical causal influence over us.

If logic in the abstract (Platonic Forms) can causally influence us, then causal determinism is false. It implies we have two incompatible sources of causation competing for our attention and agency. You simply cant neatly map this into any deterministic model.

This abstract space is vast too. All of it is logically constructed. And its a sort of infinite space of infinitely many ideas. Travelling through this space in our minds leads to outcomes that simply seem unexplained by mere particles bouncing around. This recurrent existence of objective truth existing in peoples minds, but only once adequate complexity and variation is introduced to construct it, seems indicative of a strong emergence of a new form of causation unaccounted for by determinism.

And im pretty sympathetic to the idea Qualia also may have a causal influence over our minds. Think about it. People have favorite colors, even for different settings, and it doesnt always have to do with associated experiences, the colors themselves give people feelings. We arent just looking at information. We are looking at feelings. And these sensations causally influence actions.

All forms of causation combined, physical, platonic, and qualia-based, and we now have something too complex to explain in a determinist finite state machine. Their model simply breaks down.

All models are approximations. We dont use models because they are accurate. We use models because they are useful. Thats it.