The Origin Problem

Can Information Exist Without Choice or Chance?

According to Joey Lawsin: Information can only be acquired in two ways: by choice or by chance. This means that a closed system, a universe where all knowledge must have a traceable origin, is created.

But past‑life memories, especially in children, introduce a paradox:

How can someone recall information they never encountered?

So let me break this down:

1. The Closed-System Problem

Lawsin’s Information Acquisition Theory asserts that:

• Information cannot appear spontaneously
• Information cannot be inherited but acquired
• Information cannot be transferred across lifetimes
• Information cannot exist without a source

This is a closed epistemic system, everything must come from inside the loop of experience.

However, if a child can describe events from a time they never lived through, especially something as specific as World War II, it feels like it points to something deeper. Across cultures, people have interpreted these experiences in different ways, including past‑life memories or reincarnation. This narratives challenges this system. This suggests:

• information entered the mind without choice
• information entered the mind without chance
• information entered the mind without exposure

This is the philosophical equivalent of a glitch in the originemology  matrix.

2. The Source Paradox

If a child knows something they never learned, we face a question:

Where did the information come from?

There are only three philosophical possibilities:

A. The information did come from choice or chance

…but the source is hidden, forgotten, or subconscious.

B. The information was constructed internally

The brain invented a memory using fragments of existing knowledge.

C. The information came from a source outside the choice/chance model

This breaks Lawsin’s Originemology theory. This is the philosophical “danger zone,” because it implies:

• consciousness may not be limited to one lifetime
• memory may not be tied to the brain
• information may exist independently of experience

This is where my next research goes next: reincarnation.

3. The Third Path Problem

If information can appear without choice or chance, then:

• Lawsin’s Originemology Caveman in the Box model is incomplete
• the epistemic system is open, not closed
• consciousness may have access to non-local information
• memory may not be purely biological

This introduces a third path: Information acquired through non-physical means. This means:

• consciousness may be continuous
• memory may transcend the body
• identity may not be bound to a single lifetime

This is not a scientific claim; it’s a philosophical implication.

4. The Ontological Shock

If a child truly recalls a past life, it forces a reevaluation of:

• what a “self” is
• what memory is
• what consciousness is
• what information is
• what life is

It challenges the assumption that: The mind begins at birth and ends at death.

This is called ontological shock, when a single experience forces you to question the structure of reality.

5. The Philosophical Fork in the Road

Here we end up with two paths:

Path 1: Preserve Lawsin’s Theory

Explain the memory through:

• hidden exposure
• subconscious absorption
• imagination
• confabulation
• cryptomnesia

Path 2: Challenge Lawsin’s Theory

Accept that some information may:

• originate outside physical experience
• be carried across lifetimes
• exist independently of the brain

This opens the door to:

• reincarnation
• collective consciousness
• non-local memory
• metaphysical continuity

6. The Real Question Behind All This

The real philosophical question isn’t:

“Is reincarnation real?”

It’s: “Can information exist without a physical source?”

If the answer is yes, then:

• consciousness is not confined
• memory is not local
• identity is not singular
• Lawsin’s theory is incomplete

If the answer is no, then:

• all past-life memories must be explainable
• the universe remains closed
• consciousness is brain-bound

This is where the core of the debate comes in.

7. The Episode Angle

“If information can only be acquired by choice or by chance, then a child remembering a past life should be impossible.

But if the memory is real, if the details are accurate, then the information came from somewhere.

And if it didn’t come from choice, and it didn’t come from chance, then where did it come from?”

Based on Lawsin's Caveman in the Box Theory:

1. “Mother Nature as the Database”

Based on Originemology:

“Information can’t exist without Mother Nature. It is a database of information.”

• Nature is the origin of all information
• Nature is the storage system of all information
• Nature is the processor of all information

In this model, nothing exists outside the natural system. Every piece of information — physical, biological, mental — must come from within the universe’s own structure. As we said this is a closed‑universe information model.

It’s similar to ideas in:

• Naturalism
• Pancomputationalism (the universe computes itself)
• Physicalism (everything is physical information)
• Inscriptionism (information is acquired by choice or chance within nature)

In all these frameworks, information cannot appear from nowhere.

2. If Nature Is the Database, Then Memory Must Come From Nature

If a child “remembers” something they never learned, then:

• the information must already exist in nature
• the child must have accessed it somehow
• the memory must have a natural pathway

But, of course, this idea of “past life memory” as something supernatural is not true. Instead, it claims: If the memory is real, it must come from the natural database. The question is: how did the child access it?

3. Three Naturalistic Explanations

If information can only come from Mother Nature, then unusual memories must come from:

A. Environmental absorption (chance). The child picked up the information indirectly.

B. Cognitive construction (internal recombination). The brain built a memory from fragments already in the natural database.

C. Non-local natural information (the controversial one). The child accessed information stored in nature but not through normal sensory experience.

4. The “Non-Local Information” Hypothesis

If nature is a database, then theoretically:

• information exists everywhere
• gnosis (consciousness) might access information beyond personal experience
• memory might not be limited to the brain
• the mind might tap into patterns stored in the natural world

This is not supernatural; it’s natural information theory pushed to its limits. In these frameworks, information is woven into the fabric of reality.

A child accessing WWII memories wouldn’t be reincarnation; it would be information retrieval from the natural database.

5. The Philosophical Tension

If Information cannot exist outside nature

Therefore, all memories must come from nature

Therefore, even impossible memories must have a natural source

Therefore, either:

• the child absorbed the information indirectly
• the brain constructed it
• or consciousness accessed information stored in nature in a non‑ordinary way

This is a closed‑system explanation that still allows for extraordinary experiences.

6. The Big Question

If Mother Nature is the database of all information, then:

Does awareness have more than one way to access that database?

It doesn’t require reincarnation. 

It doesn’t require the supernatural. 

It doesn’t break natural law.

It simply asks:

Is the human mind limited to sensory input, or can it access deeper layers of natural information?

That’s a question worthy of an entire book.

The Origin of the First Information Problem:

If Information can only be acquired in two ways:

1. By choice → deliberate learning, intentional exposure

2. By chance → accidental, passive, or environmental exposure

and, Mother Nature is the ultimate database of information. Humans cannot acquire information

outside these two pathways.

If so,

1. Where did the first information come from?

2. What was the source before any mind existed?

3. How did nature "choose" or "chance" the first data?

This is the classic Origin Problem, and Lawsin' Inscirptionism has resolved this problem. Inscriptionism is so powerful as long as information has a traceable source. That's why in his book Originemology, Lawsin claims that "everything has a beginning". If information can appear without choice or chance, then originemology has limitation.

Nature is the Information:

1. She doesn't acquire information.

2. She has the information stored in her.

3. She processes information.

Information is not something added to nature. Nature if Information.

This dissolves the origin problem completely. There is no "first information" because information is identical to existence itself.

Nature doesn't need Choice or Chance:

The Lawsin's Maxim: "Information is acquired by choice or by chance" applies only to humans, not to nature. Humans must (1) choose to observe, (2) or accidentally encounter. But Nature doesn't "encounter" anything. She simply is. This means: (1) Humans acquire information, (2) Nature is information. This is the distinction that resolves the origin problem.

This creates a two layer model of reality:

Layer 1: Nature is infinite, self-existing, not-acquired, not learned, not chosen, not accidental, but simply is.

Layer2 : Humans are the constructors of information. They interpret nature, convert patterns into meaning, acquire information through choice or chance, build concepts, languages , and symbols.

Humans don't create information. They translate nature into human constructs.

This explains why information feels "discovered" not invented. When humans learn something new, it often feels like: uncovering, revealing, discovering, noticing. Because the information was already there in nature.

Humans didn't create information. They simply accessed it from Nature.

Nature is the source of all information. Humans only acquire fragments of it through choice or chance. The origin problem is solved because information never began. It always existed as Nature.

"Humans don't create information. They translate nature into human constructs". ~ Joey Lawsin