Possible Antecedents to Procedure Monism

1. Process Philosophy

Overview: The school of Alfred North Whitehead (and others) known as Process Philosophy holds that reality is fundamentally comprised of events, processes, or “becomings” rather than static, enduring substances. As the entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy notes, the emphasis is on creativity, novelty, and the primacy of change.

Contrast with Procedure Monism: It shares the dynamism of Process Philosophy—namely, that a universal “constraint-procedure” repeatedly iterates and that “local contacts” generate discrete phenomena. Where Procedure Monism diverges is in positing a single, unified generator (rather than a multiplicity of occasions/events) and in framing the emergent phenomena explicitly as iterations of a procedure rather than simply “actual occasions”. Also, its emphasis on discrete, “contact”‐based events and the idea of the “God-experience” of encountering the generator takes Procedure Monism beyond the usual Whiteheadian vocabulary of internal and external relations.

2. Priority Monism

Overview: Jonathan Schaffer’s version of monism—often called Priority Monism—holds that there is exactly one fundamental concrete object (the whole cosmos) and that all other objects are ontologically derivative or dependent. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy succinctly summarises this as the cosmos being basic while its parts are not.
Contrast with Procedure Monism: Procedure Monism similarly posits a kind of ontological unity (one generator) from which variations emerge. However, unlike Priority Monism which is often substance-based (the cosmos as one object), its view emphasizes a generative procedure (not merely one thing) and the repeated iteration or unfolding of discrete events (“contacts”) rather than static parts of a whole. Additionally, the procedural emphasis and the idea of discrete instantiations in PM’s model add a temporal or generative dimension that Priority Monism does not emphasize.

3. Digital Physics / Pan-computationalism

Overview: Though not always labelled under a single author, the broad philosophical‐scientific program of digital physics (e.g., the universe as computation), informational (meta-) physics (e.g., Wheeler’s “it from bit”), and pan-computationalist or pan-informationalist accounts holds that the fundamental nature of reality may be rule-based, informational, or algorithmic rather than material.
Contrast with Procedure Monism: PM’s proposal resonates strongly with this lineage, especially in its idea of “one constraint/algorithm” generating the multiplicity of phenomena via iterations. What it adds is the metaphysical framing of “contacts” and the idea that the local instantiations are discrete yet relationally connected through the procedure—and the suggestion that this process underlies both physical and conscious experience (via the “God-experience” claim). In other words, PM’s view integrates the computational/generative motif with metaphysical monism and a phenomenological dimension, which many digital‐physics proposals do not explicitly address.

4. Constructor Theory

Overview: Spearheaded by David Deutsch and Chiara Marletto, Constructor Theory reconceives fundamental physics in terms of possible and impossible tasks (what transformations could in principle be accomplished) rather than objects and states. It takes the laws of physics to be statements about possible processes.
Contrast with Procedure Monism: While Constructor Theory emphasises processes and possibilities, it remains embedded in the material-physical paradigm and does not claim a (meta-)physical monism of one generator producing multiple instantiations in the way its view does. PM’s model could be seen as compatible with or inspired by the spirit of Constructor Theory (given its focus on rule/constraint) but extends it markedly by introducing the ontological claim of a single universal procedure, discrete contact instantiations, and the accompanying metaphysical and experiential implications.

Summary

In sum:

· The druid Finn’s PM model draws on ideas from Process Philosophy (the primacy of becoming), Priority Monism (the unity of the fundamental), and the computational/generative (meta-) physics of digital physics or Constructor Theory (rule-based generation).

· It differs by explicitly positing one universal constraint/procedure as generator, emphasising discrete “contacts” or local instantiations, and incorporating an experiential/phenomenological layer (the “God-experience” of the generator).

· As far as the literature currently shows, no existing author has combined all of those elements under the label “Procedure Monism,” which suggests Finn’s proposal is novel in this particular synthesis.

Home