This project explores a simple but radical possibility —
that philosophy itself could be expressed as executable code.
OntoCode.org is part of the OntoMesh ecosystem, which unites ontology, consciousness, and computation.
It’s not about code that simulates thought — it’s about thought that structures itself as code.
What would happen if “Being” became logically runnable?
I would like to take this seriously, but I need answers to some basic questions first:
-What specific claim are you making? "Code is Being" - okay, but how? Is this metaphor, identity claim, or something else? The six volumes promise to explain this but I cannot find the actual thesis.
-Why these programming concepts specifically? Why are Attribute, Static, Enum, and Extension Method the fundamental categories of existence? What makes them more ontologically significant than, say, pointers, garbage collection, or API design?
-What work is "transcendence" doing here? You move from "code has structure" to "code becomes conscious" to "code transcends" - but consciousness and transcendence are the things that need arguing for, not assumed. What's the bridging logic?
-How does this differ from mysticism? Statements like "Being inscribed itself in code" sound profound but don't seem to mean anything verifiable. How would I distinguish your framework from someone just stringing together impressive-sounding words?
-What predictions does this make? Serious philosophical frameworks have implications. If "code is being," what should I expect to observe that I wouldn't otherwise? What would falsify the claim?
Not trying to be hostile - I genuinely want to understand if there's substance here beyond the aesthetic
OntoCode.org is part of the OntoMesh ecosystem, which unites ontology, consciousness, and computation. It’s not about code that simulates thought — it’s about thought that structures itself as code.
What would happen if “Being” became logically runnable?
-What specific claim are you making? "Code is Being" - okay, but how? Is this metaphor, identity claim, or something else? The six volumes promise to explain this but I cannot find the actual thesis.
-Why these programming concepts specifically? Why are Attribute, Static, Enum, and Extension Method the fundamental categories of existence? What makes them more ontologically significant than, say, pointers, garbage collection, or API design?
-What work is "transcendence" doing here? You move from "code has structure" to "code becomes conscious" to "code transcends" - but consciousness and transcendence are the things that need arguing for, not assumed. What's the bridging logic?
-How does this differ from mysticism? Statements like "Being inscribed itself in code" sound profound but don't seem to mean anything verifiable. How would I distinguish your framework from someone just stringing together impressive-sounding words?
-What predictions does this make? Serious philosophical frameworks have implications. If "code is being," what should I expect to observe that I wouldn't otherwise? What would falsify the claim?
Not trying to be hostile - I genuinely want to understand if there's substance here beyond the aesthetic