While science often takes for granted the tools it uses to generate knowledge, philosophy goes further, questioning the very tools themselves and pondering about their limits. This is why I’ve always seen philosophy as the mother of all thinking disciplines, with all others—even the mighty “Science”—being her intellectual offsprings.
I’ve spent a significant portion of my life questioning the knowledge inherited from the outside world (see point 2 below) and contemplating the limitations of my brain in making good use of such knowledge (see point 1).
1. Computational Foundations of Intelligence and the Nature of Consciousness
I’m a self-proclaimed slow thinker—slow in general, really—and I’ve been piecing together (since August 2015!) a too ambitious work I call “computational philosophy”. This approach aims to offer a fresh, computational perspective on epistemology and the philosophy of mind, with representation learning and qualia at its core.
This work is a draft in progress, and I’m not yet satisfied with its completeness. The full version will take time to shape up in a way that reflects my vision. The real question is: who will finish this first—me or the upcoming AGI or ASI?
Zied Ben Houidi. (2015-2024) “Qualia as fundamental observational limits: A computational epistemological approach to consciousness” Draft available here
Note: Above is draft abstract and summary with more details, but the rest of the work is clearly not yet ready for public consumption.
Layperson’s Summary
We often take it for granted that everything around us is made of matter and then wonder: how did this matter create consciousness?
But what if our thoughts, feelings, and experiences aren’t just about matter at all? What if they’re actually a collection of “observations”—mental snapshots formed by our senses, memories, and imaginations? In this view, everything else, including matter, comes second, built upon these foundational observations.
I believe that our entire understanding of the world is based on these observations, stored in our minds and constantly reused whenever we think, speak, or act. They’re like the basic building blocks of existence, shaping our reality even before we think about physical matter.
Here’s the twist: we can’t fully explain what these observations are because explaining itself is just another form of observation—it’s like trying to see your own eyes without a mirror, or trying to bite your own teeth—no matter how hard you try, you’re always using the thing you’re trying to study.
This idea has deep implications for how we understand the mind, consciousness, and the very limits of human knowledge. If consciousness is both the tool and the subject of our study, can we ever truly understand it?
As I explore these questions, I’m excited to see where this journey takes us—though it’s possible that AGI might get there first :-)
2. On the benefits and harms of stubborn beliefs
Why is it so hard to change certain beliefs? Why were many revolutionary scientific discoveries initially resisted by scientists before they were eventually accepted? Could we reach the truth faster if we questioned our beliefs more readily? After all, aren’t the truths of today often the mistakes of tomorrow? What might happen if we dared to question everything we’ve inherited and started afresh?
Between 2011 and 2019, I spent eight years (mostly in my spare time) writing my first philosophical novel. This novel explores the harms and benefits of stubbornly held beliefs—those that are often accepted blindly and are difficult to change. It tells the story of a young man who methodically questions all his beliefs and those of his society, embarking on a journey that challenges the very foundations of his understanding.
Although I’ve completed the novel, I’ve never had the courage to publicly endorse it. Perhaps, one day, I will. And if it happens, this space serves as a placeholder.