Virtual Entity Trionism
[ I1 - I2 - I3 ]
- intra-psychic phenomenology - unspecified
- component analysis - tribe EPO; clan VET: the experiencer is a virtual entity co-generated by the I1 and the I3
- ultimate explanation - monistic or dualistic
§2: pronoun schema
the I2 is a virtual entity or phenomenon which is generated by the interaction of the I3 and the I1; and, which mediates that interaction.
§3: differential classification
as a virtual entity, the I2 is more like a phenomenon or an event than a thing or entity. it is transient; but, it is not a thinglike entity. it does not consist of any metaphenomenal reality (ie any substance, not even a borrowed substance), although such metaphenomenal realities were involved in its generation.
§4: family portraits
to arrive at a belief system consistent with this pronoun schema, the inquiring neutral skeptic must assume or conclude that there is an I3; and, that the I2 somehow emerges from the interaction of the I3 and the I1.
§4.1: cartesian interactive trionism: [ I1 ~> I2 <~ I3 ]
in contrast to the more traditional view of cartesianism as a conflated entity dualism, it is theorized that the interaction of the I1 and the I3 generates the experiencer, a transient phenomenon that mediates that interaction. in particular, the I2 experiences conscious willing due to the intentionality of the I3; and, this introduces a non-deterministic causal influence on the physical realm. thus the human individual possesses a free will.
in contrast to the official view of classical cartesian trionism, the identity of the I2 and the I3 is explicitly denied.
in contrast to the trialist view of classical cartesian trionism, it is denied that the I2 is the union of the I1 and the I3; although, it is held that the I2 is the product of the interaction of the I2 and the I3.
§4.2: quantum interactive trionism: [ I1 - I2 - I3 ]
in VET, the I2 is described as a virtual entity thru a metaphorical use of terminology borrowed from quantum mechanics; and, it is not clear whether a virtual entity could satisfy the quantum mechanical requirement for an agent of free will sufficient to collapse the wave function during a measurement event. if so, then VET would be distinguishable from quantum interactive dualism to the extent that it elaborates explanations of interactions not ordinarily thought of as involving quantum effects (eg. my apparently free choice between apples and bananas at the fruit stand).
advocates find it problematic to reconcile the viewpoints of clan TET with a belief in the survival of individuality after the death of the body. some may see this as a virtue; but, others see this as a defect. Descartes may have been motivated by the desire to contest this viewpoint and ended up conflating the I2 and the I3 to support the personal survival of the ( I2 ≡ I3 ) after the death of its body.