The druid said: “The meaning of a message is the response it elicits”

By Bodhangkur

1. Meaning as procedural effect, not semantic content

If the meaning of a message is the response it elicits, then a message does not contain meaning. Meaning does not travel. Meaning is manufactured.

A photon of 500 nm wavelength has no intrinsic semantics. It becomes:

· “green” in a human retina,

· sugar in a chloroplast,

· a voltage in a CCD sensor,

· nothing at all in a rock.

The same “instruction” series produces incompatible outcomes. Therefore information is not transmitted; it is procedurally transduced — generated as receiver-specific state-change under constraint.

This overturns informational monism. The world is not built from information. It is built from blind contacts forcing constrained systems to become something new.

2. The universe as analogue output of quantum strikes

From this follows Finn’s core thesis: the identifiable universe is the analogue world precipitated from digital or quantum impacts. Pattern and form are not encoded in quanta; they are analogue side-effects of survival-filtered constraint systems reacting to impacts.

Hence:

Quantum impacts + Constraint logic → Structured reality

This relation is not representation, not symbolism, not encoding. It is Procedural Transduction — the compulsory conversion of blind contact sequences into local, temporal worlds.

3. Philosophy reinterpreted: metaphysics as behavioural engineering

Here the argument takes its unexpected turn.

If meaning is response, then philosophical systems do not function primarily as descriptions of reality. They function as response-engineering devices.

Seen in this light, Spinoza’s “God or Nature,” Plato’s Forms, the Buddha’s no-self, Heraclitus’ Logos, Augustine’s sin, even modern informational metaphysics — all operate as red herrings: as graded conceptual training-runs designed to disrupt prevailing reflexes.

Spinoza’s substance monism was not a model of reality. It was a semantic solvent engineered to neutralise the obedience-economies of Christianity and Judaism without frontal assault. God was redefined into harmlessness.

Plato did not discover Forms; he broke addiction to sensory immediacy.
The Buddha did not locate nirvana; he short-circuited attachment loops.
Heraclitus did not map flux; he sabotaged naïve substance-thinking.

They were not describing what is. They were reprogramming how humans respond.

4. Procedure Monism in the same lineage

Finn’s Procedure Monism now stands revealed in the same tradition.

It is not primarily an ontology. It is an intervention designed for a culture drowning in:

· data idolatry,

· AI mysticism,

· informational fetishism,

· representational realism.

By deleting “information” as substance, by collapsing meaning into response, by redefining reality as procedural transduction, it dismantles the reflex that treats descriptions as things and models as metaphysical furniture.

Its apparent vacuity is not a flaw. It is a training gradient.

5. The final, unsettling conclusion

Philosophy is not the discovery of eternal truths.

It is the construction of temporary falsehoods powerful enough to break obsolete cognitive reflexes and force the next form of human agency to emerge.

Spinoza did not give us God.
The Buddha did not give us nirvana.
Plato did not give us Forms.
Finn does not give us Procedure.

They give us red herrings — procedural instruments whose sole purpose is to make old responses impossible and new ones inevitable.

And that is the ultimate meaning of the druid Finn’s saying:

“The meaning of a message is the response it elicits” — even when the message calls itself a metaphysics.

Home