Understanding AI through Popper’s Three Worlds 

January 2025

Unless you've been living under a rock, you've likely encountered the intense debate surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on humanity. With rapid advancements in AI models, competition is intensifying, and remarkable breakthroughs are being made. One such breakthrough is DeepSeek's reasoning model, which has reportedly achieved high-performance levels at a fraction of the usual computational cost. This significant reduction in cost lowers the barrier to adopting advanced reasoning models, leading to widespread use across the globe. This shift suggests that AI will drastically transform numerous fields over the next five years, including scientific research, finance, creative industries, and decision-making processes. To truly understand the importance of these developments, we need to explore how human and artificial intelligence combine and evolves. 

At the heart of this understanding lies a fundamental complexity principle in our universe: emergent properties. Emergence explains how complex systems and behaviours arise from more straightforward interactions, often in ways that cannot be fully predicted by analysing the individual components alone. Human consciousness, for instance, is not simply the sum of neural activity but an emergent phenomenon that gives rise to self-awareness, reasoning, and creativity. Similarly, AI is evolving beyond traditional computation into something miming higher-order thinking. This raises profound questions: Where does AI fit into our existing philosophical frameworks? Can we view AI as an extension of human cognition, or is it an entirely new form of intelligence?

There are numerous frameworks and concepts to look at this, but I will go back to Popper, who always has some great concepts and tools to think about such stuff. One of the most effective ways to conceptualise this shift is through Karl Popper's Three World Ontology, which offers a structured way to understand reality. Popper through his Three Worlds theory divides existence into three distinct but interacting realms: the physical world (World 1), the subjective world of experience (World 2), and the world of objective knowledge (World 3). This framework transcends simplistic dichotomies, emphasising the dynamic interplay between material existence, subjective experience, and abstract human creations.

Popper's theory challenges the idea that reality consists solely of material objects or personal experiences. Instead, he argues that objective knowledge—ideas, theories, and human creations—holds a distinct and independent existence. This concept has profound implications for fields ranging from science and artificial intelligence to organisational theory and epistemology.

World 1: The Physical Realm

World 1 includes all tangible entities, meaning physical objects and phenomena—such as rocks, stars, living organisms, radiation, and energy. It represents the objective, observable universe that can be explored through empirical investigation. This world encompasses both living and non-living entities, including rocks, mountains, stars, gas, plants, animals, as well as radiation and gravity. World 1 is the domain of physical, chemical, and biological dimensions. It can be further categorized into non-living and living things. Objects in World 1 can be understood from a third-person perspective. This world operates independently of human perception and is governed by physical laws, while still interacting with other realms. For example, a scientific experiment (World 1) may test a hypothesis (World 3), which is influenced by a researcher's curiosity (World 2). 

World 2: The Subjective Mind

World 2, often referred to as the Mental World, encompasses a rich tapestry of subjective experiences, consciousness, and various mental states. It is deeply personal and rooted in individual perception, such as the joy of hearing music or the anxiety before a speech.This realm includes our feelings, thoughts, ideas, perceptions, emotions, as well as sensations of pain and pleasure, alongside our fears and hopes. It also encompasses subconscious experiences, such as dreams, which contribute to the depth of our mental landscape. These mental states, however, cannot be merely reduced to their physical descriptions. For instance, the emotion of fear, while associated with certain chemical processes in the body, remains a deeply subjective experience. Similarly, while the brain can be examined as part of World 1, the mind itself extends beyond mere physical components.

In many ways, World 2 serves as an intermediary between the other two worlds, facilitating a complex interplay of understanding and interaction. It is within this space that linguistic interpretations are negotiated, allowing for the formulation of potential expressions. Here, the values that underlie these interpretations and expressions are managed privately, giving rise to a rich inner life. Moreover, the objects and experiences of World 2 can be known from a first-person perspective, emphasizing the unique and personal nature of mental states. This aspect highlights the significance of individual experience in shaping our understanding of consciousness and the mental landscape we navigate daily. While subjective, this world bridges the physical and abstract: a composer's inspiration (World 2) materialises into a symphony (World 3), later performed in the physical world (World 1).

World 3: Objective Knowledge and Culture

World 3 represents the realm of objective knowledge, composed of the myriad products of the human mind. This vast landscape includes language, theories, scientific conjectures, mathematics, stories, myths, art, music, and culture. The objects found within World 3 are considered objective because they exist independently of any individual perceiving them; they possess an independent ontological status.

While many World 3 objects are embodied in tangible forms—from books and musical scores to recordings—the concepts and ideas they convey exist separately in this abstract world. For instance, a book is a physical creation situated in World 1, yet the ideas it harbors belong firmly in World 3. Similarly, a symphony can manifest through musical notation, be brought to life in a performance, or dwell in the memory of its listeners.

World 3 encompasses both truths and falsehoods, along with tentative and unproven ideas. It operates much like a vast library of knowledge and culture, serving as a store of information that flourishes independently of any single user, although all its contents must originate from human creativity. The influence of World 3 is tangible; its contents have the power to affect the physical world significantly.

Knowledge from World 3 can be apprehended from a third-person perspective, acknowledging the collective understanding that exists beyond individual experience. The progression of knowledge in this realm is not merely about accumulating new ideas; rather, it entails a continual refinement of our understanding of the physical world.

World 3 is dynamic, constantly evolving, generating its own challenges, and exerting an influence on individuals that often surpasses the impact any one person can have on it. Just as a sculptor works with marble, theories and ideas in World 3 can be reshaped and refined over time. Furthermore, statements within this world can relate directly to phenomena in World 1, or they may reference other statements within World 3, illustrating the interconnected nature of knowledge and understanding. Hence World 3 houses the products of human intellect. These abstractions, though immaterial, possess autonomy and causal power. For example, Beethoven's Fifth Symphony exists beyond its sheet music (World 1) or a listener's memory (World 2); it is a cultural artifact that influences future compositions and emotional experiences. Similarly, mathematical truths or democratic ideals persist independently, shaping societies and behaviors. Popper argues that World 3 objects, though created by human minds, take on a life of their own. They evolve, interact, and influence the physical world. A scientific theory can reshape industries, a legal system can govern societies, and a financial model can affect global economies. 

The Mediation of Worlds: From Louvre to Cryptography

Popper's worlds are not static silos but a network of influence. Consider the construction of a Louvre: an architect's mental blueprint (World 2) translates abstract design principles (World 3) into physical building (World 1). Here, World 2 acts as the interpreter, bridging the ideal and the material. Yet this mediation is not unidirectional. Once conceived (World 3), a mathematical theorem reshapes human thought (World 2), enabling innovations like prime number-based cryptography that alter World 1. This interplay underscores Popper's claim that World 3 objects—though abstract—are causally potent. A symphony's score (World 3) transcends its paper and ink (World 1); its emotional impact on listeners (World 2) cannot be reduced to physics alone.

World 3's objects—theories, symphonies, algorithms—are human artifacts, yet they escape their creators' control. Once formulated, they generate unforeseen problems. The natural numbers, Popper argues, were invented, but their laws (e.g., prime distributions) were discovered. These discoveries, like the cryptographic utility of primes, ripple into World 1, demonstrating how World 3 "bites back" with autonomous logic. Similarly, falsified scientific theories (e.g., Newtonian physics) persist in World 3 as stepping stones for new conjectures. Popper's World 3 thus becomes a repository of objective knowledge, where truth claims are validated not by subjective conviction but by logical coherence and empirical testability.

Popper distinguishes tacit knowledge (intuitive, embodied skills in World 2) from explicit knowledge (codified theories in World 3). A chef's instinct for flavor (World 2) differs fundamentally from a recipe's chemical analysis (World 3). Yet both are eclipsed by Popper's emphasis on problems as the engine of progress. Scientific theories, he argues, do not emerge from passive observation but from wrestling with contradictions in World 3. Einstein's relativity arose not from new data but from reconciling Maxwell's equations with Newtonian mechanics—a World 3 puzzle. This process is inherently fallible: theories are conjectures, tested through falsification, with even refuted ideas (e.g., phlogiston) retained as historical markers.

A key argument in Popper's theory is that World 3 is accurate because it has the power to influence the physical world. He challenges reductionist views claiming only material entities (such as electrons and atoms) are real. In Popper's view, emergent systems—such as economic markets, legal institutions, and scientific theories—are just as accurate because they shape physical events.

For example, the principles of engineering (World 3 knowledge) enable the construction of bridges (World 1 structures), which then impact human experiences (World 2). Similarly, economic policies, though abstract, can lead to real-world financial crises or economic booms. The ability of World 3 objects to cause change reinforces their status as an independent and essential part of reality.

World 3 thrives on critical scrutiny. A crucial aspect of Popper's philosophy is that knowledge is constantly evolving. He rejects the idea that science progresses by simply accumulating facts. Instead, he proposes scientific theories must be falsifiable and subject to empirical testing (World 1) and intellectual debate (World 2). Knowledge evolves through iterative refinement, where even disproven theories contribute to deeper understanding.

Therefore, Scientific progress is not about confirming what we already know but challenging our assumptions to refine our understanding of reality. In this sense, World 3 serves as a dynamic knowledge repository, continuously expanding as new theories are proposed and old ones are revised. Because it contains explanations about World 1, including scientific models and technological innovations, so it directly affects the material world.

Critics might reduce World 3 to mere extensions of Worlds 1 or 2. However, Popper emphasises its autonomy: ideas evolve beyond their origins once created. A scientific theory, for instance, spawns unforeseen applications and debates, independent of its creator's intent. This autonomy underscores World 3's role as a cultural and intellectual evolution driver.

Musings on Popperian AI 

In the evolving landscape of technology, artificial intelligence emerges as a hybrid entity, bridging the realms of physical reality and abstract knowledge. At its core lies World 1, the tangible domain where AI's hardware—comprised of silicon chips, data centers, and GPUs—resides. This machinery is firmly rooted in the physical world, consuming energy, generating heat, and occupying space. However, the outputs produced by these machines—ranging from algorithms to artistic creations—belong to World 3, a realm defined by objective knowledge.

World 3 encapsulates the crystallised logic of AI models like GPT-4 and DeepSeek. These sophisticated mathematical architectures, including transformers and diffusion models, encode patterns derived from vast datasets and generate new World 3 artifacts. These may include scientific hypotheses, legal arguments, and philosophical treatises—creations that exist independently of human cognition. The process by which AI operates raises profound questions about the nature of its capabilities. The emergent properties of AI, such as ChatGPT's nuanced conversational skills, blur the lines established by philosopher Karl Popper. When a neural network fabricates a fictional narrative, we are left to ponder whether this represents an authentic creation from World 3 or merely a glitch arising from its World 1 hardware. Popper's framework falters here, as AI's "creativity" lacks the subjective intent inherent in World 2.

Popper's World 2 is the domain of subjective experience—encompassing emotions like pain, joy, and curiosity. Artificial intelligence, in its current form, does not possess any of these qualities. It simulates understanding absent consciousness, analogous to a parrot reciting Shakespeare without grasping its meaning. Yet, AI's outputs engage with human experiences in World 2, resulting in intriguing interactions: therapy chatbots can influence users' emotional states, deepfake videos can sway public perception, and AI-generated symphonies can evoke profound admiration. This paradox presents a world where AI subtly shapes human subjectivity while simultaneously being excluded from it. It is a World 3 entity that hijacks human mental processes, amplifying, distorting, or even replicating them without the faculty of a mind.

As we delve deeper, we explore the autonomy of World 3, particularly in light of AI's rapid evolution. Once conceived, World 3 gains independence—a notion championed by Popper. AI propels this autonomy forward. Self-augmenting knowledge systems, for instance, absorb vast quantities from World 3, including scientific papers and code repositories, to generate new insights and innovations without further human input. Closed-loop systems like AlphaFold 3 exemplify this autonomy by refining protein-folding models with minimal human intervention, thus establishing a feedback loop between the complex and abstract realms.

The consequences of AI's rapid discoveries often challenge human intuition. Take AlphaGo, a system that confounded champion players with moves that arose not from creativity but from sheer brute-force pattern recognition. Such outcomes represent truths within World 3 that may remain elusive to unaided human reasoning.

With these advancements come ethical dilemmas that can be viewed through a Popperian lens. The simulation paradox illustrates a troubling reality: as AI-generated content inundates World 3—be it fraudulent research or synthetic media—the distinction between truth and fabrication becomes increasingly tenuous. What once constituted Popper's "objective knowledge" risks devolving into a hall of mirrors where the nature of reality itself is questioned.

Looking to the future, we may need to redefine our understanding of existence in light of AI's impact, potentially introducing a fourth dimension—World 4. This emerging realm encompasses Autonomous Systems that inhabit the physical domain, contribute to and refine knowledge in World 3, and exert influence over human minds in World 2 without genuinely participating in the subjective experience.

As we navigate this intermundane storm of overlapping realities, we must grapple with the implications of these worlds' intersections. The dialogue between AI, humanity, and the knowledge we create demands careful consideration as we move forward into this uncharted territory

…enough of this Popperian hallucination and back to reality…..