I’ve been thinking about the infinite regress problem in observational accounts of quantum theory. Treating observation as fact-generating seems to force either an arbitrary stopping point or an infinite hierarchy of observers.
What I’m still reflecting on is whether this regress is best avoided by reinterpreting observation as fundamentally passive, or whether the decisive move lies deeper—at the level of relational structure itself, where stability and coherence arise prior to any observer being singled out.
If so, the absence of regress may not come from where we stop the chain, but from the fact that no chain is required in the first place.
Are you using ChatGTP to generate these responses?
I do sometimes use tools to help with phrasing or to think things through more clearly. That said, the questions and positions I’m raising are my own, and I’m here in good faith to explore the ideas together.
I should also mention that I’m Japanese and not fluent in English, so I use ChatGPT to help translate my thoughts into English. Because of that, some phrasing may come across a bit unnatural.
Okay I didn’t consider the possibility you were using it for translation, my bad. I’m not sure if I really understand what you’re saying though because it sounds really vague and noncommittal in a very AI-specific sort of way. Could you try explaining it without using the chatbot for anything other than translation? Even if its not perfect thats okay, I can always ask you follow up questions to try and understand better 🙂