Interdependence Theory: The Cognitive Interface Theory of Consciousness and Matter — A Meta-Framework Reconstruction Based on System Agency Theory

A philosophical paper proposes Interdependence Theory, a new position of cognitive realism that aims to resolve the longstanding mind-matter problem. It argues that traditional materialism, idealism, and dualism are trapped in a self-referential loop because they mistake the 'cognitive world'—a product of the mutual dependence of matter and consciousness on a cognitive interface—for the 'absolute material world,' which exists but is inaccessible. The theory distinguishes between these two worlds and suggests the traditional debate is a pseudo-problem posed at the wrong layer. It further claims that Interdependence Theory dissolves the debate and mutually verifies with the core dynamics of System Agency Theory, such as layer emergence and survivorship bias.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Abstract The mind-matter problem—the relationship between consciousness and matter—is one of the oldest and most persistent problems in the history of philosophy. Materialism, idealism, and dualism each hold their ground, arguing for over two thousand years without resolution. This paper, grounded in the layered framework of System Agency Theory, proposes a completely new position of cognitive realism—Interdependence Theory. Interdependence Theory abandons the traditional inquiry into "primacy" and points out that the "world" that can be perceived, discussed, and acted upon by humans has never been a pure collection of matter, but a product of the mutual dependence and co-construction of matter and consciousness on the cognitive interface. This paper strictly distinguishes between the "absolute material world" (inaccessible yet existent) and the "cognitive world" (the interface of mutual dependence between matter and consciousness), argues that the traditional mind-matter debate is trapped in a self-referential loop, and further provides verifiable empirical pathways for several specific assertions of Interdependence Theory. Interdependence Theory not only puts an end to the mind-matter debate, but also forms a complete mutual-verification relationship with the core dynamics of System Agency Theory (layer emergence, Coherence, Survivorship Bias at System Level, irreversibility). Keywords: Interdependence Theory; System Agency Theory; mind-matter problem; cognitive interface; layer emergence; self-referential loop; Survivorship Bias at System Level 1. Introduction: Why the Mind-Matter Problem Needs to Be Redefined The mind-matter problem, also known as the "relationship between consciousness and matter," is one of the most central meta-questions in the history of philosophy. It asks: between consciousness and matter, which is more fundamental? Which produces the other? Around this issue, the history of philosophy has formed three major traditional positions: · Materialism: Matter is the fundamental reality; consciousness is a by-product or emergent phenomenon of matter. However, materialism cannot explain why "subjective experience" (qualia) exists; it cannot derive the first-person experience of "seeing red" from matter alone. This is the "explanatory gap."· Idealism: Consciousness is the fundamental reality; matter is a projection or representation of consciousness. However, idealism cannot explain the objective regularity of the material world—why can all observers agree on physical facts? It tends to slide into solipsism.· Dualism: Matter and consciousness are two independent entities, neither belonging to the other. However, dualism cannot explain how the two interact—if consciousness is non-physical, how does it act upon the physical body? This falls into the "interaction problem." Each of these three major positions has insurmountable difficulties. For two thousand years, the mind-matter problem has been continuously restated but never settled. This paper argues that the root of the problem lies not in a lack of sophisticated argumentation, but in the fact that the very formulation of the question already presupposes a mistaken framework. The layered model of System Agency Theory provides a completely new perspective for this. In System Agency Theory, the universe presents itself as an emergent sequence of layers from simple to complex: L0 (physical substrate layer), L1 (physical structure layer), L2 (chemical dissipation layer), L3 (life layer), L4 (social layer), L5 (consciousness layer), and L5-M (the meta-observation layer, i.e., System Agency Theory itself). Every higher layer is constituted by lower layers, but cannot be completely reduced to the rules of those lower layers—this is the essence of "emergence." This paper proposes a position of cognitive realism based on System Agency Theory—Interdependence Theory. Interdependence Theory points out that the core confusion in the mind-matter problem is this: traditional philosophy mistakes a "cognitive world" already constructed by consciousness for a purely "objective world," and then proceeds to ask whether this so-called "objective world" can be cognized by consciousness. This constitutes a hidden self-referential loop. Interdependence Theory aims to break this loop and reshape the relationship between the two on the cognitive interface. 2. Core Theory: The Division of Two Worlds The core insight of Interdependence Theory is a fundamental distinction regarding the concept of "world": 2.1 The Absolute Material World (Inaccessible yet Existent) There exists an absolute, self-existent material world that does not depend on any consciousness. In this world, physical constants, atomic structures, and spacetime geometry operate according to their own laws, requiring no observer to witness them. This world can be reasonably inferred, but can never be directly accessed. Because any "access" is already a cognitive act, and the cognitive act itself has already introduced consciousness. For a subject that has not yet achieved cognition, this world, even if existent, is meaningless. The universe existed for approximately 13.8 billion years before human cognition emerged; dinosaurs lived on Earth for 160 million years, none of which required human consciousness to witness. 2.2 The Cognitive World (The Interface of Mutual Dependence between Matter and Consciousness) However, any "world" that a person can perceive, discuss, measure, or act upon is already a version produced after the absolute pure matter and the cognitive interface have entered into mutual dependence. This world contains: · Our scientific descriptions of physical laws· Our narratives of history· Our experience of the "self"· All philosophical inquiries we raise, including the "mind-matter problem" itself The necessary condition for the existence of this world is the co-presence of the material substrate and consciousness. It is neither purely objective nor purely subjective, but a product of the mutual dependence of the two on their interface of contact. 2.3 Traditional Philosophy Confuses the Two Worlds When materialists talk about the "primacy of matter," what they have in mind is the absolute material world, but all their actions to argue this position—using logic, appealing to evidence, publishing papers—all take place within the cognitive world. The same holds true for idealists: they attempt to argue that "everything is mind," but their arguments rely on language, reason, and social interaction, all of which already presuppose the existence of a material substrate within the cognitive world. This is precisely the core insight of Interdependence Theory: both sides of the traditional mind-matter debate are trying, from within the cognitive world, to reach a conclusion about the absolute material world. This operation is itself a self-referential loop. 3. The Self-Referential Loop of the Debate on Origins 3.1 The Presuppositional Trap of the "Origins" Inquiry "Is matter primary or is consciousness primary?"—this question appears to be an inquiry into objective truth. But upon closer scrutiny, it becomes evident that: To inquire into "origins," one needs a subject capable of inquiry (consciousness). To obtain an answer about "origins," one needs tools (language, logic, evidence), and these tools are themselves products of consciousness within the cognitive world. To verify the validity of an answer, one needs to appeal to the consensus of other conscious subjects (opponents, peers, future generations)—which is again a conscious interaction at the social layer. Therefore, the "origins" debate has never been an objective inquiry into the absolute material world. It is, in fact, a collective narrative negotiation taking place within the cognitive world about "how we should understand our relationship with the world"—except that all participants mistakenly believe they are discussing "what the world beyond consciousness is like." 3.2 The Self-Reference and Self-Blindness of System Agency Theory Manifest Here Within System Agency Theory, this dilemma can be precisely described as: L5 (the consciousness layer) attempts to use its own protocols (logic, language, concepts) to inquire into the very substrate conditions of L5 itself (the material substrate of L0-L1), but L5's protocols cannot penetrate its own Self-Blindness—because any such penetration requires the use of the protocols themselves. This is why, according to System Agency Theory, the mind-matter problem is not "solved"—it is redefined as "a pseudo-problem posed at the wrong layer." Once the layer calibration is complete, the question itself no longer needs to be answered. 3.3 The Survivorship Bias at System Level of the Mind-Matter Debate Why have materialism, idealism, and dualism all been able to persist for two thousand years? Not because they are "correct," but because they have all "not yet collapsed"—each is self-consistent within its own logical framework, and the inherent undecidability of the mind-matter problem makes it impossible for any one side to be definitively defeated. This is a classic manifestation of Survivorship Bias at System Level in the history of philosophy: what we see are not "the correct theories," but "the theories that have not yet been eliminated." The emergence of Interdependence Theory puts an end to this persistence—not by defeating them, but by dissolving the cognitive ground upon which they depend for survival. 4. Mutual Verification with System Agency Theory Interdependence Theory is not merely an application of System Agency Theory in the domain of philosophy. It is itself a complete mapping of the core dynamics of System Agency Theory onto the mind-matter problem, forming a relationship of mutual verification and complementarity with its other branches. 4.1 Mutual Verification with Layer Emergence What Interdependence Theory deals with is essentially this: when L5 (