The Existential Limits of Reason

The Existential Limits of Reason

Vladislav Pedder

© Vladislav Pedder, 2025

ISBN 978-5-0065-5958-5

Created with Ridero smart publishing system

Preface to the English Edition

The importance of translating this book into English cannot be overstated, particularly in today’s intellectual landscape. As the Argentine philosopher Julio Cabrera once argued, “Philosophy outside the English language today simply does not exist.” This observation highlights the undeniable role English plays in the global dissemination of philosophical thought. To ensure that the essence of the original work is preserved, I have relied on the translations of quotations from books as I encountered them in Russian. This means that while the words may differ from their original counterparts, the essence of what I understood from these texts remains intact. Consequently, readers may sometimes find that certain quotes do not correspond directly to the primary sources.

This book is a tribute to the philosophy of Peter Zapffe, and its translation into English was an endeavor I took on immediately after its release in Russian. I hope that my thoughts will resonate not only with a Russian-speaking audience but also with English-speaking readers. The importance of this translation lies in its ability to convey the essence of the original text while making it accessible to a broader audience. I took Cabrera’s observation to heart, and in order to ensure the meaning of the original is preserved, I translated quotes based on how I read them in Russian. Here, the focus is not on perfect accuracy but on how I understood these ideas. This may sometimes lead to discrepancies between the quotes and their original sources.

I would also like to note that I was the sole editor and publisher of this book, and I did the translation myself. Because of this, I apologize in advance if you come across any errors in the text. I trust that the essence of the ideas presented will come through, despite any imperfections in the process.

Introduction

If you enjoy stories with happy endings, you would be better off choosing another book. This one will not bring you comfort on dark days when you feel down; there will be no joy here. I could suggest that you run to the bookshelf for a story about a “happy elf,” for example. But if you are not simply seeking peace at any cost and instead are looking for a broader perspective on the reasons behind your anxieties and fears, then this book is for you.

To begin, I would like to introduce myself to the reader. Though I am an economist by education, I have never considered myself a philosopher or a scientist. However, from an early age, I have been irresistibly drawn to the unresolved questions of existence. In my search for answers, I turned to religion, philosophy, and science. The existential crises I encountered led me to reflect on the meaning of life, the nature of death, and whether our existence has a sacred purpose. Over the years, however, I have come to realize that these questions remain unanswered.

Religious doctrines and many philosophical movements, such as existentialism, sometimes seemed to me overly optimistic in their view of the world. On the contrary, pessimists appeared to be much more honest realists. The result of these reflections was my immersion in the works of pessimistic philosophers and nihilists. Today, I am known in certain circles as a translator of the philosophical works of Peter Zapffe, including his On the Tragic, as well as articles dedicated to his legacy. Additionally, I have worked on translations of works by thinkers such as Emil Cioran and David Benatar.

My interest in their philosophy was driven by a sense of incompleteness. After reading nearly all the literature available in Russian, I could not shake the feeling that pessimism, however true it seemed, still left too many questions unanswered. These thoughts were reinforced when I became acquainted with the works of Thomas Ligotti. His work The Conspiracy Against the Human Race then struck me as a logical continuation of Schopenhauer’s ideas. It was through Ligotti that I discovered Peter Zapffe..

However, it soon became clear that there was almost nothing known about Zapffe’s philosophy in Russian, and only a short essay, The Last Messiah, had been translated from his works. The situation is only slightly better in the English-speaking world: Zapffe’s main work, On the Tragic, was only translated from Norwegian in recent years. When its English translation was published in 2024, I realized that waiting for a Russian edition was likely pointless. Inspired by the example of Ligotti, whose book is still only available in Russian in an amateur translation, I decided to begin my own work.

My translation of On the Tragic into Russian was completed in December 2024 and is distributed for free online. This book completely changed my perspective. I realized that the very sense of incompleteness that had haunted me in all existential philosophies stemmed from their limitations, from the boundaries they set for themselves – boundaries that Zapffe did not impose on himself.

During the translation process, I realized that the development of pessimistic ideas requires going beyond this worldview. Thus, my own book was born – not as a continuation of pessimistic philosophy, but as its opposition. It is an attempt to overcome the limitations of existential pessimism and nihilism by offering an alternative approach that can lead to a constructive understanding of life.

The goal of this book is to explore the nature of existential fears that limit our ability to predict, understand, and adapt to the complexities of reality. These fears are both biological and cognitive in nature. They not only define the boundaries of human experience but also give rise to profound emotions related to uncertainty, finitude, and meaninglessness.

A special focus is given to the concept of the limit of human forecasting – the point beyond which the mind is unable to integrate new knowledge into familiar models. Through this lens, key philosophical concepts, neurobiological mechanisms, and social strategies are analyzed, all of which help humans adapt to inevitable limitations. The acceleration of scientific and technological progress creates increasingly complex systems that are difficult to predict, and fundamental questions such as the finitude of life, the meaning of death, and the search for purpose remain central to human existence, despite scientific advancements. In the face of global crises – from environmental disasters to the threats of artificial intelligence – understanding our cognitive and philosophical barriers becomes vital.

This work is also an attempt to introduce Russian readers to the philosophy of the tragic by Peter Zapffe, a Norwegian thinker and environmental advocate. His ideas, despite being misinterpreted, are often seen as expressions of pessimism or nihilism, though Zapffe himself never subscribed to these positions. Analyzing his philosophy allows for a fresh perspective on questions related to the limitations of human existence and offers approaches to their understanding.

The book explores how the familiar world around us emerged from chaos, how we, as humans, and our ability to comprehend reality, came to be. It analyzes the mechanisms through which people avoid or struggle with reality. Finally, the work examines the challenges of the future, including the role of transhumanism, artificial intelligence, and scientific hypotheses that challenge human understanding.

This book is aimed at all those interested in philosophy, cognitive sciences, and the questions of human existence. It will serve as a guide in exploring complex issues, allowing for a deeper understanding not only of the limits of the mind but also of the ways to comprehend and overcome them.

Chapter 1. Blind Complication

This chapter will discuss the fundamental principles from which the history of the complexity of matter begins. We will explore how complex structures emerged from the primary forms of matter, leading to the rise of life, consciousness, and awareness. This chapter is dedicated to the origins of everything that exists and their role in shaping the complex world we observe today.

This narrative was necessary because all the topics discussed later began with the emergence of the first form of matter. Everything that followed was simply its complication, the result of natural development. Without understanding this, it will be difficult to fully grasp the philosophical and existential questions addressed in this book.

If you are already familiar with this story, or for some reason are not interested in it, you can proceed directly to the fourth section of the first chapter – The Existential Limit of Forecasting.

For many centuries, humanity has sought to understand the origin of the world and life. Early concepts often explained everything that exists as the result of the design of a higher power. In ancient times, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle sought order and purpose in nature, suggesting that the world was structured for some rational reason. The Middle Ages brought with it ideas of divine creation, where life and the entire universe were seen as the result of God’s creative act.

However, with the advancement of science in the modern era, these views began to be challenged. In the 19th century, Charles Darwin proposed his theory of evolution through natural selection, which overturned previous conceptions of the world and life. Darwin demonstrated that the diversity of life forms is not the result of any specific design, but rather a consequence of random mutations and selection, which ensures the survival of the most adapted individuals. Evolution, as he argued, has no ultimate goal and does not move toward perfection; it is a continuous process of change, where each generation adapts to changing conditions.

However, despite scientific explanations, many continued to search for purpose and meaning in the process of evolution. Science, armed with Occam’s razor, not only eliminated the idea of a divine design from the equation but also the very concept of a final goal. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, further developing this approach, uses the metaphor of the “blind watchmaker” to explain that evolution is not a purposeful process, but rather a random and unconscious mechanism that has no preordained goal or design, yet still results in complex and organized outcomes. He wrote:

Evolution has no long-term goal. There is no long-distance target, no final perfection to serve as a criterion for selection, although human vanity cherishes the absurd notion that our species is the final goal of evolution. In real life, the criterion for selection is always short-term – simple survival; or more strictly speaking, reproductive success. What, after geological epochs, appears retrospectively as a movement toward some distant goal is, in reality, always a byproduct of many generations of short-term selection. Our “watchmaker” – the accumulating natural selection – is blind to the future and has no long-term goals.

This is what we will discuss next.

1. The Emergence of the Complex World

1.1 Self-organization and the Absence of Purpose

The modern scientific understanding of the structure of the Universe rejects the idea of purposefulness or an initial design. Instead, the world as we know it is the result of self-organization and gradual complexity arising within the framework of physical laws. These processes were not caused by an external goal, but developed through the interactions of numerous elements over vast timescales.

Fundamental discoveries in physics and cosmology have shown that the Universe emerged as a result of the Big Bang around 13.8 billion years ago. The concept of the Big Bang was first proposed by Belgian scientist Georges Lemaître in 1927 and was confirmed in 1965 when Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered cosmic microwave background radiation.

In the early stages of the Universe’s existence, matter and energy were distributed chaotically and homogeneously. Over time, as a result of density fluctuations and the action of gravity, the first structures began to form: clusters of gas, stars, and galaxies. These processes were a natural consequence of physical laws, such as thermodynamics and gravity, rather than the result of any design.

1.2 The Role of Entropy and the Complication of Systems

A key concept explaining the increasing complexity of the Universe is entropy. According to the second law of thermodynamics, formulated in the 1850s by Rudolf Clausius, entropy (a measure of disorder) tends to increase in isolated systems. However, this does not mean that order is impossible. Organized structures can emerge locally, as long as it is accompanied by an increase in entropy in the surrounding environment. For example, the formation of stars and planets is accompanied by the release of energy and an increase in entropy in the surrounding space.

Thus, complex systems arise as a byproduct of the Universe’s tendency toward a state of equilibrium and maximum disorder. From simple interactions and processes of self-organization, more complex structures and patterns gradually emerge.

1.3 Chaos and Nonlinear Dynamic Systems

Further understanding of the emergence of complexity is tied to the study of nonlinear dynamic systems and chaos theory. In 1963, American mathematician and meteorologist Edward Lorenz discovered that small changes in initial conditions could lead to significant and unpredictable consequences (the butterfly effect). This explains how, from simple physical laws, extremely complex phenomena could arise, such as climate systems, galactic structures, and ultimately, chemical processes leading to life.

Chaotic systems, despite their apparent unpredictability, follow certain rules and can demonstrate self-organizing patterns. Examples include snowflakes, lightning, fractals, and turbulent flows. These processes show that complexity can arise spontaneously, without external control or purpose.

1.4 The Universe as a Chemical Complication

After the formation of the first stars, the process of synthesizing heavier elements from hydrogen and helium began. As a result of nuclear fusion reactions within the stars, elements necessary for the emergence of life – such as carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and others – were created. This process, known as stellar nucleosynthesis, was explained in the mid-20th century by Fred Hoyle and his colleagues.

When massive stars exploded as supernovae, these elements were scattered across the Universe, becoming the building blocks for new stars, planets, and, ultimately, living organisms.

Thus, the complexity of the Universe unfolded in several stages:

– Physical complication – the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets from primordial gas.

– Chemical complication – the synthesis of more complex chemical elements and compounds.

– Structural complication – the formation of complex molecules and, ultimately, conditions for the emergence of life.

These stages were not directed toward a specific goal but created the conditions for further processes, including biological evolution.

1.5 Conclusion

The emergence of the complex world is a story of self-organization based on physical laws. From chaotic and simple states, through billions of years of interactions and increasing entropy, the Universe emerged, rich in a diversity of structures and processes. This laid the foundation for the next stage – the emergence of life.

2. The Emergence of Life

2.1 Spontaneous Origin of Life and the Absence of Purpose

Modern science asserts that life originated as a result of natural chemical processes, rather than through purposeful action or a higher design. Approximately 3.5 to 4 billion years ago, the first signs of life appeared on Earth, and the process that led to this is known as abiogenesis – the spontaneous emergence of living systems from non-living matter.

The “primordial soup” hypothesis, proposed by Alexander Oparin and John Haldane, became the foundation for studying the conditions of early Earth that could have facilitated the emergence of organic molecules. The Miller-Urey experiment (1953) demonstrated that when electric discharges were applied to a mixture of gases containing ammonia, methane, and hydrogen, amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins, were formed.

These chemical reactions were not directed toward achieving any specific goal but occurred as a result of molecular interactions, governed by natural physical laws. Gradually, from these simple molecules, more complex structures began to form, such as RNA, capable of self-replication. This led to the “RNA world” hypothesis, proposed by Carl Woese and Leslie Orgel in the 1960s, which suggests that the first molecules of life could have been RNA, capable of self-reproduction without the involvement of proteins. RNA can serve both as a catalyst for chemical reactions and as a carrier of information, providing a basis for considering it the first step toward complex biological life.

The spontaneous origin of life and the absence of an external goal in this process supports the idea that the evolution of life is a random process, not aimed at a specific goal, but driven by the natural laws of chemistry and physics.

2.2 The Emergence of the First Cells and Evolution

The process of the origin of life continued with the formation of the first cells – primitive organismal structures surrounded by a membrane. These cells could facilitate the exchange of substances and protect chemical reactions within themselves from the external environment. In this way, evolution began its course. The formation of cells marked the beginning of living organisms capable of metabolism, reproduction, and interaction with their surroundings

In 1859, Charles Darwin, in his work On the Origin of Species, proposed the theory of natural selection. Darwin argued that organisms better adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and pass their genes on to the next generation. This process occurs without any purposeful intent or predestination; rather, it is the result of random variations leading to increased adaptation to a specific environment.

Evolution is a process of change and adaptation without a final goal or predetermined endpoint. It is a mechanism driven by random mutations, which lead to changes in populations of organisms, with death acting as the process of removing less adapted individuals. In this context, death is not the end of life but an inevitable part of it, necessary for more adapted organisms to continue their existence. Death, thus, plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance and progress of species, ensuring the “cleansing” of less adapted genes.

2.3 The Discovery of the DNA Structure and Genes as Units of Inheritance

The discovery of the structure of DNA in 1953 by James Watson and Francis Crick, based on X-ray crystallography data, marked a significant turning point in biology. DNA was decoded as a molecule that encodes genetic information passed down from generation to generation. Genes became the fundamental units of heredity, containing the instructions for synthesizing proteins that play a crucial role in the functioning of an organism.

Genetics further revealed how mutations occur, with random changes in genes leading to alterations in organisms. These mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful, and depending on their impact on the organism’s survival, they can be passed on to the next generation. The process of gene expression and their regulation through epigenetic mechanisms (such as DNA methylation) adds additional layers to our understanding of how organisms adapt to their environment. This intricate interplay of genetic and epigenetic factors shapes the evolutionary trajectory of life..

The significance of mutations and their impact on organisms is revealed through the concept of “negative selection,” which eliminates organisms with harmful mutations, and “positive selection,” which enhances the existence of those better adapted. The inclusion of epigenetics in the modern understanding of evolution allows for a fuller appreciation of how the external environment can influence genetic changes and species adaptation.

2.4 Theory of Multilevel Selection and Modern Understanding of Evolution

The theory of multilevel selection, proposed by scientists such as William Hamilton and Richard Dawkins, significantly expands our understanding of evolution. In his famous book The Selfish Gene (1976), Dawkins suggested that the primary units of evolution are not organisms, but genes, which strive for self-replication and spread. From his perspective, the organism is merely a vessel for genes, and evolution is essentially not about the survival of individuals but about the preservation and dissemination of genetic information passed down through generations.

According to this theory, evolution does not view the organism as an independent goal, but rather as a means for transmitting genes to the next generations. This leads to the concept of the “selfish gene,” where each gene acts as a kind of “instrument” concerned with its own preservation within the population. Thus, evolution operates at the level of genes rather than individual organisms.

An important aspect of the development of this theory is the concept of multi-level selection. Selection can occur not only at the level of individual organisms but also at the level of genes, groups, and even species. In this context, evolution can be seen as a process in which not only the most adapted individuals are selected, but also genetic combinations that increase the chances of survival of populations or groups.

One example illustrating multi-level selection is the phenomenon of organisms with similar traits, such as the “green beard effect.” Imagine a group of animals within a population randomly developing a unique trait – a green beard. This concept, proposed by Richard Dawkins, illustrates how traits that are disadvantageous at the individual level can be preserved and spread through group selection. In this case, individuals with a “green beard” (a symbolic trait that distinguishes them from others) may not have obvious survival advantages, but if such individuals form a group, their shared trait can promote cooperation and support within the group, thereby increasing the chances of survival for its members. Thus, this trait could be advantageous at the group level, even if it does not directly benefit the individuals. The green beard can be selected through group selection, where cooperation or even “signals” for interaction with other individuals emerge within the group, supporting the survival of the whole community. Therefore, group-level evolution can lead to the spread of this trait if it promotes cooperation and social interactions, increasing the chances of survival for the entire group.

Dawkins’ theory also considers the importance of altruism in evolution. He argues that individuals who act in the interest of the group can contribute to the preservation of their genes, even if their behavior does not bring them direct benefit. An individual may help the survival of others, such as relatives or group members, at the cost of their own risks. In this context, if an individual with a green beard helps other members of their group survive, their actions could improve the overall success of the entire group, and these traits would be maintained and strengthened at the group level.

Considering evolution as a process that occurs on multiple levels allows us to include not only organisms but also broader evolutionary units such as populations, ecosystems, and even species. For example, within multicellular organisms or communities of organisms with similar traits (such as behavior or physical characteristics), there is a likelihood that these traits will be maintained through altruistic behavior that promotes the overall success of the group. However, such behavior is important not only for the survival of individual organisms but also for the propagation of their genes at the population level.