The Decided and the Undecided

On Quantised Maturity in Finn’s Procedure Monism

By Bodhangkur

Abstract

This essay analyses and critiques the procedural distinction between the decided (mature adult) and the undecided (infantile adult) within the framework of Finn’s Procedure Monism. Drawing on the metaphysical logic of quantised contact, it argues that maturity represents a local iteration of the Universal Procedure that has achieved coherence, independence, and realness through decision — that is, through collapse of alternatives into a unified operational state. The immature, by contrast, remains un-quantised, dualistic, dependent, and thus only proto-real. The analysis proceeds through physical, psychological, spiritual, and societal exemplars, culminating in the ontological assertion that only quanta participate in emergence: the undecided, being un-quantised, cannot naturally self-select for realness.

I. Introduction: From Being to Deciding

In Finn’s Procedure Monism, the totality of existence is the continuous self-execution of one Universal Procedure (UP) — a set of constraints that transforms random inputs into self-consistent outputs. What classical metaphysics called being is here re-conceived as (on-going) local iteration: every identifiable entity, or emergent, is a quantised “hard copy” of the UP’s logic, temporarily stabilised in its local context.

Within this paradigm, the defining property of any emergent is its capacity for contact — the production of realness through interaction. Contact, however, presupposes decision: a resolution of alternatives into a coherent, singular act. Thus, to exist is to be decided. The undecided is still turbulence — potential, but not locally real.

Finn therefore reformulates the ancient developmental and moral distinction between maturity and immaturity in strictly procedural terms:

Maturity is quantised decision; immaturity is un-quantised indecision.

This essay unfolds the implications of that claim.

II. The Procedural Logic of Decision: From Superposition to Contact

Under the universal algorithm, every emergent proceeds through iterative cycles:

random input → constraint → output → feedback → re-iteration

At each iteration, coherence increases as constraint filters the random input. A decision represents the closure of one such loop — a moment when the emergent becomes self-consistent enough to contact reality as an identifiable participant.

This closure, or quantisation, is what produces realness. Decision collapses super-positional uncertainty into a stable identity: a local “@1” event. Hence, in Finn’s language:

· Decided = quantised = real = mature

· Undecided = un-quantised = proto-real = immature

Decision, therefore, is not merely psychological but ontological: it marks the transition from possibility to actuality, from turbulence to contact.

III. Quantum Analogue: Collapse and Coherence

Finn’s metaphysical model aligns with the quantum mechanical logic of measurement. A quantum system remains in superposition until contact — the act of measurement — forces a collapse into one of its possible states. In quantum mechanics, this event constitutes reality: only when the wave function collapses does the system obtain definite properties.

Analogously, the mature emergent is a wave function that has collapsed into self-definition. Its local constraints (rules, habits, identities) have cohered sufficiently to produce stable participation in the world.

The immature emergent, by contrast, remains in psychological or existential superposition: uncertain of its rules, dependent on external measurements — parental, social, or divine — to define its state. It therefore does not self-quantise; it is measured, not measuring.

Just as quantum systems that fail to decohere cannot form macroscopic, stable entities, the immature individual cannot form stable selfhood. It lives, in Finn’s idiom, as borrowed reality — a dependent derivative of others’ decisions.

IV. Psychological Exemplification: Decision as Identity Formation

In developmental psychology, Erik Erikson’s sequence of life stages culminates in “ego integrity versus despair”: the integration of one’s past decisions into a coherent sense of self. In Finn’s procedural vocabulary, this marks the transition to local procedural closure — self-quantisation.

The mature adult operates by internally consistent rules; its constraints are self-generated. Its self-feedback loops are closed — it regulates itself. This corresponds to the UP perfectly iterated in a local field.

The immature adult, however, remains undecided, oscillating among external attractors: parental authority, social opinion, ideological command, divine decree. It seeks coherence by outsourcing its procedural closure to external systems. Thus, it cannot yet produce contact; it only receives it.

In cognitive terms, the mature mind is deterministic but adaptive; the immature is stochastic but unbounded — a state of continuous superposition leading to chronic uncertainty, anxiety, and dependency.

V. Spiritual Corollary: From Transcendence to Immanence

The spiritual analogue is decisive.
In the dualist (infantile) phase, the emergent projects its regulating constraints outward, personifying them as transcendent deity. God is thus imagined as the external decision-maker — the ultimate arbiter who collapses one’s indecision into order.

By contrast, the mature monist internalises the decision function. Having self-quantised, it recognises itself as the local executor of the Universal Procedure — the “God app.” It no longer requires an external regulator; its decisions are self-consistent with the universal rules.

In Finn’s words:

The mature adult is the UP running itself.
The immature adult prays for a restart button.

This transition mirrors the movement from theism to procedural monism, from faith to operation, from transcendence to immanence.

VI. Societal Example: Politics of the Undecided

Societies, too, iterate the UP. A mature society has quantised into coherent governance: its feedback loops (laws, institutions, civic norms) are self-regulating and adaptive. An immature society remains dualistic — dependent on external authority or mythic legitimisation, oscillating between extremes, unable to decide.

Thus, democracy represents a social form of quantisation: the distributed local decision of many agents, collapsing turbulence into coherent order through iterative feedback. Tyranny, by contrast, is external regulation — the immature dependence of many on one. Both, however, risk decoherence when decision becomes static (totalitarian certainty) or paralysed (anarchy).

Finn’s procedural insight here is sharp:

Societal maturity is not the end of decision but the continuous re-quantisation of collective feedback.

VII. Ontological Addendum: Only Quanta Participate

From the procedural viewpoint, emergence itself requires contact between quantised entities. Only quanta — discrete, decided (hence whole) units — can participate in the generation of further emergence. The undecided, being un-quantised, cannot make contact and therefore cannot contribute to the procedural process that yields realness.

In other words, to emerge is to have self-selected for participation. Emergence is thus not egalitarian but selectional: only those local configurations that achieve decision — that is, quantised coherence — can naturally persist or propagate.

This provides a procedural basis for Darwinian selection, quantum stability, and psychological individuation alike.

· Unquantised turbulence = unrealised potential.

· Quantised coherence = real participation in being.

Hence, only quanta exist because only quanta decide.

The rest is statistical background — the sea of undecided potentiality against which realness occurs.

VIII. Philosophical Implications: Decision as Ontic Boundary

In traditional metaphysics, the boundary between being and non-being was apophatically defined. In Finn’s system, that boundary is procedural: decision.

Decision produces local discreteness — the quantised unit that can touch, exchange, act. Without decision, there is no boundary, no identity, no world.
Thus, to decide is to be real.

Moreover, decision generates responsibility: once quantised, the emergent cannot offload its coherence to others without regressing into dependence. Ethical maturity is therefore the ontological echo of procedural completion.

IX. Critical Reflection: The Necessity of Re-Decision

A potential critique arises: if decision equals completion, does further growth cease?
Finn’s answer is procedural rather than static: quantisation is never terminal. The UP reiterates endlessly. The mature adult must re-decide continually — quantising anew in each context.

Maturity, then, is not a final state but a mode of iteration: constant readiness to decide, to collapse potential into local coherence, without surrendering autonomy.

Thus, the mature adult is decided at every step but never done deciding.

X. Conclusion: Quantised Freedom

Finn’s redefinition of maturity reframes freedom as the capacity for local self-decision.

· The infantile seeks freedom from decision.

· The mature recognises freedom as decision.

Decision produces identity, coherence, and realness — the contact that constitutes existence. In this procedural cosmos, only decided quanta truly exist; the rest remain ghost data in the universal turbulence.

Or, as Finn’s Druidic maxim condenses it:

“To decide is to exist. Indecision is rehearsal.”

Bibliographic Parallels (indicative)

· Alan Turing, On Computable Numbers (1936) — procedural generation from constraints.

· Max Planck, Über das Gesetz der Energieverteilung im Normalspektrum (1900) — quantisation as condition of real participation.

· Erik H. Erikson, Identity: Youth and Crisis (1968) — ego coherence as psychological quantisation.

· Baruch Spinoza, Ethics — substance as self-caused coherence (cf. Finn’s local iteration).

· U.G. Krishnamurti, The Mystique of Enlightenment — the mature human as self-regulating organism beyond external control.

Home