Asking the Right Question: Supercomputer “Deep Thought” and the number “42” & Materialism as “the denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order” – Rene Guenon

Philo of Alexandria, an ancient theologian and philosopher, who emphasized logos and allegoric interpretation, observed that “The mind which is in each of us is able to comprehend all other things, but has not the capability of understanding itself. For as the eye sees all other things, but cannot see itself, so also the mind perceives the nature of other things but cannot understand itself.” I would add that Kenneth Gergen and Maimone advocate that a separate category for social knowledge is needed because human consciousness is different and distinct from the physical sciences. It is true that human history and society will never fit into a laboratory.

Are Materialist Methodology Questions Relevant?

What makes this analysis relevant is that sociological evidence is often completely excluded because of the materialist fixation with quantification. As Kay Deaux observed, the fixation of social psychology with laboratory experiments excluded “affective displays”[1] — which in the real world are both very prevalent and very influential. Kenneth Gergen observes, “Proper knowledge maps or mirrors the actualities of the real world!”[2] – but the social identity theory which is pivotal in social psychology does not properly map the actualities. Furthermore, Kant, Iain McGilChrist, and Muzafer Sherif emphasize that “real world context-evidence” is a prerequisite for a valid scientific theory. Materialist methodology creates a “value laden ideology” in Manheim’s sense – with academic-materialist norms and stereotypes. Materialism as it is today is not either philosophy or science.

Materialism is an ideology (with academic-materialist norms and stereotypes) — not philosophy or science – due to the bias in its methodology

1, Similarly, “Mannheim holds that historical and political thought is determined by the socio-historical location of the thinker and the political aspirations and material ambitions of the group or groups to which he belongs…Such thought is inherently value-laden, one-sided, distorted, and therefore false. In short, all systems of historical-social-political thought are ideologies!”[3] — Willard Mullins

2, In the same line of thought, Clifford Geertz states “The culture concept… denotes an historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life.”[4]

Severely restricted and limited in the analyses

As Claudia Nielsen pointed out, the psychiatrist McGilChrist states: “The scope of inquiry and understanding of the Materialist Doctrine with its rigid adherence to the actually arbitrary principle of quantification and over-emphasis on physiological characteristics [and laboratory experiments — Kay Deaux] is severely restricted and limited in the analyses that can be performed.”[5],

Researcher Bias: “the denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order”

Rene Guenon states that Materialism is “the denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order”, which of course be a serious “researcher bias” Guenon’s assessment appears correct. Historically, three important aspects of consciousness have been sidelined and marginalized: Symbolism, Social Consciousness, and Spirituality. Link to Researcher Bias for information and analysis[6]

a) Symbolism (p.6-7) 1) Rollo May, 2) Elzbieta Halas, 3) Clifford Geertz, 4) Emile Durkheim [Mustafa Emirbayer], 5) Ernst Cassirer [Norbert Andersch] (p. 11-14 Researcher bias) 

b) Spirituality (p.7-9): 1) “emerging field of study” 2) Joe Holland, 3) Geertz’s “universally accepted” definition of religion which left out community, spirit, and social consciousness 4) spirituality largely excluded from mainstream textbooks (p. 14-15 Researcher Bias) 

c) Social Consciousness (p.9-11); 1) Extreme Individualism; 2) Allport’s 1927 taboo; 3) social psychology fixation with experimental studies excludes ordinary emotional displays [Kay Deaux] (p.15-16 Researcher bias)

Asking the Right Question: Deep Thought and “42”

Deep Thought, from “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”, an international multimedia phenomenon is a supercomputer created by hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional beings. Deep Thought was designed to discover the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. When posed the question, Deep Thought decided that it would “have to think about it”, saying that it would take the computer 7.5 million years to calculate the answer to their Ultimate Question. 7.5 million years later, Deep Thought revealed that the Ultimate Answer was “42”. When the Magratheans expressed their dismay that “42” was the answer for which they had waited millions of years, Deep Thought chided them for not understanding what the question was.

Asking the right question is a profound insight in my view.

The Materialist Quantification Argument which emerged from the positivist – idealist debate dates back to 1877.  William K. Clifford stated “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence”. However, half of human consciousness is not quantifiable: art, music, dancing, dreams, imagination, ideals, true love, transcendence as well as symbolism.

It leaves the field of psychology all the poorer.

Perhaps Jeremiah Reyes has the best “description” of the materialist problem. Jeremiah Lasquety-Reyes, author & expert on Filipino ethics said, “Hi Charles, I completely agree with you that this extreme adherence to materialism is too restrictive and limiting, and frankly fails to capture so many richer aspects of human experience and psychology. It leaves the field of psychology all the poorer. I am myself looking for a framework that helps me confront it. Partly, I think an alternative metaphysics is needed, one that respects the reality and meaning of things like love, relationships, and the profound reality of other people as people and not just as a compound of atoms, chemicals, and neurons firing. Glad that we’re on the same page!”

If you are asking the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything — and limiting yourself to strictly quantifiable data and laboratory experiments — that would be the wrong question!

Relevance

Materialist Methodology automatically excludes sociological evidence and pretty much all of human history. For instance, Kay Deaux emphasized that the fixation with laboratory experiments excluded “affective displays” which are prevalent in the real-world. Historically atrocities, massacres, and genocides are prevalent and persistent throughout human history — but because genocides don’t fit into laboratories, social psychology just ignored this very important factor in human consciousness — literally totally excluded the factor that in some circumstances of conflicts with outgroups, horrifically powerful emotions can be triggered.[7]

How to cite this article

Peck Jr, Charles (2026). Asking the Right Question: Supercomputer “Deep Thought” and the number “42” in context of Materialism as “the denial of everything that is of a supra-individual order” Rene Guenon. figshare. Online resource. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31567258.v2

[1] Deaux, Kay, Kruglanski, Arie W., and E. Tory Higgins, eds. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. Guilford Publications, 2013. p.794

[2] Gergen, Kenneth J. Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Harvard university press, 2009.

[3] Mullins, Willard A. “Truth and ideology: Reflections on Mannheim’s paradox.” History and Theory 18, no. 2 (1979): 141-154.

[4] Geertz, Clifford. “Religion as a cultural system.” In Anthropological approaches to the study of religion, pp. 1-46. Routledge, 2013

[5] McGilchrist, Iain. The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the western world. Yale University Press, 2019.

[6] Peck Jr, Charles (2026). Researcher Bias: Critique of Materialist Methodology. figshare. Online resource. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31568989.v1

[7] Deaux, Kay, Kruglanski, Arie W., and E. Tory Higgins, eds. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. Guilford Publications, 2013. p.794