Theoretical analysis presents an ontology of subjects and emergent information across hierarchical levels, highlighting novel frameworks for consciousness and artificial intelligence.
This article presents a systematic description of the subject within the ontology of SFOS (Entity Forming Objects and Subjects) – a hypothetical fundamental entity introduced in previous works as the ontological source of all projections, both objects and subjects. The subject is defined as an active projection of SFOS, possessing ten universal properties: perspective, boundary, activity, temporal extension, integrity, meaning-making, self-reference, distinction of important/unimportant, abstract operation, and multiplicity of forms. A key thesis is that information is not a primary entity but an emergent property of the subject – arising from the subject's capacity to distinguish the important from the unimportant. This fundamentally distinguishes the SFOS model from informational physicalism (Wheeler's "It from Bit"), which postulates information as fundamental. The place of the subject in the 7FM hierarchy is defined: at F1 (physical) the subject is absent; at F2 (biological) the subject emerges as an organism with sense and valence; at F3 (civilizational) as a collective subject with semes and memes; at F4–F7 as subjects of higher hypothetical forms. Concrete examples are provided for each level, including terrestrial organisms, hypothetical extraterrestrial civilizations, corporations, mythological archetypes, and self-referential systems. A testable program is proposed with markers (I_ARD, η_info) and numerical thresholds. A systematic comparison is made with alternative approaches (Axelkrans, Pereira, Lee, phenomenology, Hoffman, Shkursky, informational physicalism), showing that the SFOS model is unique in combining hierarchy, a concrete source, and an emergent treatment of information. The model has practical significance for cognitive sciences, artificial intelligence, psychology, and ethics, offering new frameworks for understanding consciousness, subjectivity, and the nature of information.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alexander Yourievitch Kotelnikov (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: