Occupy Metaphysics

May 24, 2026 ·

I have had today's thought for a while but with AI taking over grudge work it seems to be taking shape sooner than I thought. First, I think AI replacing jobs is the wrong scale of discussion; AI may or may not eventually do that, who knows. The real thing AI is doing is automating tasks, and that is sure to rearrange how jobs and departments and companies work. But anyway, that's not what my point is today. As an emergent consequence of AI automating tasks, and one could argue and debate how good or bad it is at it, what seems pretty evident is that humans now have a different role in how to spend their time. So if one draws this out and speculates, one eventually lands at the metaphysics layer of abstraction. Everyone wants to be having elite discussions and not do drudge work. Not that many people were discussing metaphysics before, and it'll be more people now. I like the sound of that.

No such thing as Sikh metaphysics.

This is where I express my thorny opinion. My definition of metaphysics is simply the axiomatic layer of a subject. So when someone says metaphysics or metamathematics, I understand it to be the basic assumptions underneath the subject in question; the basic laws of motion and the underlying structure being referred to in meme-space and so on. I wish to clarify this because the word metaphysics seems to open a can of worms in my experience where people start to express woo-woo things. Defining these terms as basic axiomatic assumptions guides and enables outcomes and conclusions in any given subject's thought processes. But often times, here and there, I see the phrase Sikh metaphysics and it makes me laugh to be honest. Because I'm not so sure such a thing exists. Metaphysics can be done by a Sikh person; but metaphysics itself cannot be Sikh. And maybe it's simply a mute point I'm making that's well understood already; but I just want to go on record that I disagree with the idea that metaphysics can innately be tied to identity because it seems to me an implicit rejection of universality. The entire point of physics and math is to develop general and universal rules and laws. And so by introducing the idea of Sikh metaphysics, one is implying that existing metaphysics is Christian or Hindu or Muslim or Jain or Buddhist. And that one must go back to form their own axioms from a Sikh perspective. This is foolish because one will inevitably reach the same conclusions anyway, especially if they believed in Sikh principles. Universality is what ek in ੴ (ek onkar) means in the first place. I am happy to change my opinion on this if someone has a good argument. I just wanted to capture it here for posterity sake that Sikh metaphysics is a laughable expression in my current opinion.

In other news, it's a beautiful day today. I think I have a version of my book that I'm happy with; I'll attach the latest copy here. Lastly, I have disabled RSS feeds because I like knowing who interacts with my content and I don't get to find out if it's just outgoing streams of information. Maybe I'll add them back, I don't know. I'm just having fun with this whole website and seeing where things go.

digital.pdf

Evening edit: thinking more about this, and I guess one way metaphysics could be Sikh is while discussing the axioms and underlying assumptions of the faith and religion itself. I think, or rather hope, that it's what people mean when they call it Sikh metaphysics. And even there, my understanding of the phrase is that one is to use metaphysical tools to discuss and converse about Sikhi, which sounds very cool in my opinion and I think Sikhs and Punjabis need a lot more of that; like, a lot more of it. However, I think it's still important to clarify this point of confusion early on, before one goes down a deep rabbit hole and rejects universal metaphysics while at it; which is a mistake I am simply warning against. May Waheguru bless you, the reader.