|
THE CATEGORIES OF METAPHYSICS
Anil Mitra, © August 2016—August 2016
Home
On categories in metaphysics
Plan
Discussion
A System
of Categories
Metaphysics
Preliminary
Categories
Pure
Pragmatic
Universal
On meaning
Being
Being
Experience
Power
Span of
being
Whole and
part
Parthood
Universe
and Being
Meaning
The Real
The actual
and the possible
The range
of the real
The
concrete and the abstract
Cosmology
Identity
and change
Identity,
extension and duration
Substance
Significance
Form
Form and
origins
Description
of form
Symbol
Shape and
size
Form and
function
Agency
The scope
of agency
Elements
of agency
Mechanics
of agency
Dimensions
of agency are the dimensions of identity
Elements
of identity
Nature
Civilization
Psyche
The
universal
Elements
of relation
Nature
Civilization
Psyche
The
universal
Elements
of process
Nature
Civilization
Psyche
The
universal
Further
elements of the way
Intrinsic
Instrumental
On
categories in metaphysics
Introduce levels.
Incorporate with the long document, its plan, and the
outlines. Abbreviate the system of categories in the long document. Eliminate
all except the long document. Apply the system of categories to the remaining
development in the long document
In this work, metaphysics will be conceived as is the
study of the world, that is of the universe and the place of sentient
entities in it and in relation to it. Among sentient beings, there is
emphasis on human being. Also the ‘universe’ of metaphysics is the entire
universe of all kinds and not just the empirical or physical universe.
Metaphysics has a number of fundamental problems among
which are (a) whether it is at all possible—especially if we ask that the
study be of the world as it is and not just as it appears and (b) how shall
we do metaphysics.
We will find that the answer to (a) above is a nuanced
affirmative. Item (b) is the question of ‘method’—but note that method may
include but is not the same as ‘strict method’ or algorithm.
In modern thought, metaphysics is frequently found difficult
to define—as though there is such a thing as metaphysics but that the thing
is difficult to specify. Is there such a thing? It is important to note that
the term ‘metaphysics’ has various uses. Here, (a) we fix on one particular
use and (b) show that this use specifies a definite and powerful sense. Thus,
while we have not eliminated other uses and nor should we, we find a specific
and potent use that should be distinguished from the other uses. Further
there is nothing vague about the sense introduced here. One reason for the
traditional difficulty is that definiteness of a subject is not to be found
until the subject has a definite theory or kind of theory. Physics, for
example, has theories that are regarded as well developed and definitive of
physics and so, while the term ‘physics’ is not completely unambiguous it is
widely regarded as quite definite. Hitherto, however, metaphysics lacked such
a theory. Here, however, a definite and definitive system of metaphysics is
found. It is therefore with justification that we can assert that there is a
clear definition of metaphysics.
Among the modern notions of metaphysics (and philosophy)
is that they are not studies of the world; rather, metaphysics is the study
of experience or the study of how to study; and philosophy is, e.g., a
therapeutic activity aimed at correcting the excesses of positive claims to
knowledge outside science or as in metaphysics. Here, we restore metaphysics
and, since the approach is significantly philosophical, we restore philosophy
to include the study of the world. We are not claiming however to challenge
or discredit the range of modern thought regarding the subject matter of
philosophy.
Another the modern notions of metaphysics is the
following—just as physics is the study of concrete objects, metaphysics is
the study of abstract objects. We will find metaphysics to include the study
of the abstract and the concrete.
It is noteworthy—and characteristic of metaphysics as we will
do it here—that the method and the instruments are in the world and therefore
part of the study itself. I.e., method and mind are part of metaphysics. Mind
would be part of metaphysics on two counts—that it is part of the world and
that it is associated with the instruments and methods. Also noteworthy is
that metaphysics is reflexive—it studies itself; thus there may be
metamathematics but no meta-metaphysics. We can also put this:
meta-metaphysics would be part of metaphysics.
How then shall we do metaphysics?
- In no such endeavor do we
actually begin at the beginning. Even for axiomatic systems we need
preliminaries on the language and universe of ideas to entertain.
Therefore we begin somewhere in midstream—all endeavor in life is like
that—and then, perhaps, build toward a foundation so that the structure
that we build may be more secure. Of course we are also interested in
the nature of ‘security’—for we may find that accepting some degree of
uncertainty and error provide the optimum security and outcome.
- For inspiration, we turn to
existing knowledge, our experience of and with the world, reason and
reflection, experiment, and action (experiment can be seen as a
kind of action). Let us tentatively label such a system the WELLSPRING
of metaphysics. We have access to earlier studies in metaphysics, reason,
science, and other fields. In science, which emphasizes the empirical,
we find the concept of matter, suitably understood, to be adequate. We
accept that regarding matter to be universal has limitations and we
accept that empirical study has limits of precision—the aim includes the
pragmatic. But the empirical may be a fraction of reality and the known
universe may be a fraction of the entire universe. Matter and mind may
be approximate kinds. And the approximation may result from being
specified and defined. How do we overcome this approximation?
- Being will be defined here as
that which is (i.e. that which exists—or existed or will exist). The
absence of specificity is what makes the concept of Being precise if
bland. The blandness is that it points out nothing in particular—except the difference between existence and
non-existence—and so it may well be that despite its precision, Being is
impotent as a concept to understand the world. It will turn out that, in
combination with other concepts, Being enables a potent and ultimate ‘pure
universal metaphysics’ that shows the world itself to be ultimate.
But a question arises. What could it mean that something does not
exist—for if ‘it’ doesn’t exist then there is no ‘thing’ in the
‘something’? A resolution lies in a careful conception of meaning.
- What is the justification of
meanings as introduced above and in what follows? It is that the system
of meanings results in a definite—and ultimate—explanatory system for
being, i.e. a metaphysics. It is important to note, then, that meanings
must be specified and that while this does not eliminate other meanings
it is important to not confuse the specified meanings with others.
- What is meaning? It is a concept
and the object (objects) to which it refers (and in the case that there
are no objects we say that there is no existing object or, colloquially,
‘it doesn’t exist’). This is of course referential meaning and this is
sufficient for the present development—i.e., while meaning is broader
than as defined here the present definition is sufficient to the present
development. Note further that in linguistic (referential) meaning a
sign is attached to the concept; signs may be simple or compound—as in
sentences; that the structure of compound signs may contain meaning; and
that a symbol is a sign and its associated concept.
- Having tentatively suggested
Being as a fundamental concept of metaphysics—indeed we will also
conceive metaphysics as the study of Being—what other ingredients might
we need to develop metaphysics? In the spirit of beginning midstream we
begin tentatively. We turn to the wellspring.
Consider science, particularly physics. Physics is the study of matter
and radiation (and, if we include cosmology, the history of their
distribution in the known universe). But to do physics we need further
concepts. There are matter and radiation but also space and time, force
or interaction and field—as, say, interaction-itself, and motion. These
are some of the fundamental concepts. They constitute an analogy for
metaphysics (a) in showing the need for a system of concepts and (b)
perhaps as analogy for specific metaphysical concepts. In the beginning,
however, the concepts of physics are too specific to provide a concrete
analogy. However, what we see in physics is that there are a number of
concepts at the level of the physical or just below the physical in
terms of their generality. A further point to the analogy (c) is that
the categories should not be but mere classes or ‘kinds’ but should
include concepts that contribute toward an explanatory system and
perhaps even a dynamic.
- To begin to develop an
explanatory system in metaphysics we introduce the idea of the
categories or classes of Being—a system of concepts at the level of
Being or just below that will be adequate to metaphysical explanation.
Aristotle was perhaps the first thinker to introduce categories; more
recently Kant and Schopenhauer also introduced systems of categories. The
system here will not be the systems of those thinkers. But how shall we
proceed. The origin of the system I present was arrived at via a rather
long incremental process. What I present are the principles rather than
the details. And after the principles I will present the categories
along with sufficient reason to show the system to be adequate to a full
metaphysics.
- Just as Being is, after all
embedded in experience as the idea of what is there, so we should at
least begin with experience—particularly, experience-as-awareness
or experience-as-consciousness. But reflect that we never escape
experience and that everything that we know is ultimately registered in
experience. Our world is a world of experience—but note that this is not
to say that existence depends on experience or to argue for solipsism;
however it is to say that experience is an important ingredient of the
real if not, as some thinkers might argue, the only ingredient. But
though experience may be not the only ingredient of the real, it is the
place that all significance is registered. In beginning to specify
categories, we conclude that Being and experience are coequals at the
highest level of the real.
- A further category—beyond
Being-experience—found, incrementally, to be of use derives from the
idea of ‘part-hood’. This system includes the ideas of whole, part, and
null (null is the idea of emptiness as an entity). And then, the
universe is all being, a being is a part of the universe, and the void
is the null being.
- Yet another category will be the
category of the real. This includes Being-experience—but its essence
will be the possibilities and actualities of the real—actuality is that
which does obtain, and possibility is that which can or may obtain. For
a given context the possible includes or is identical to the actual. For
the universe, the actual and the possible are the same.
- Note that Being-experience in
all its richness not marked by precision. Yet the idea of
Being-experience is precise. This precision is arrived at by abstraction
of the idea of Being and experience from the welter of Being and
experience. Thus as a concept, Being-experience refers precisely or
perfectly to its object. Such categories are labeled ‘pure’. The pure
categories will also include those experiential notions of identity and
change provided sufficiently abstracted and the idea of form.
- Now, we do not derive the laws
of science from data as premise via proof to the laws as consequence.
Rather, the laws and theories begin as explanatory hypotheses bases at least
in part on guesses (often inspired guesses from intuition mixed with
inference). In science, empirical data are among the real data. For
metaphysics which is understanding at a more inclusive level than
science, the ‘data’ includes science and other disciplines—while of
course also including experience. But in importing the ideas of science,
to do so a pure form we must abstract the notions first. As such laws
and theories of science may be among the pure categories.
- The ideas discussed so far will
enable a pure metaphysics that, it turns out, shows that the universe is
ultimate in that all logical possibilities are realized. But, while this
pure metaphysics reveals an ideal side to Being and while it enables
inspiration, it does not provide so much as an instrument of temporal
living. Here there are other instruments—science, technology, art, and
others—the wellspring. Perfect precision is
not their mark. But they provide an instrument in realizing the ultimate
revealed by the pure. The associated categories will be called
‘pragmatic’. But it is also seen from the pure universal metaphysics
that (a) there can be no perfectly precise pragmatic categories, (b)
they are the ‘best’ instrument of realization, (c) they are therefore
perfect as the best instruments. That is the pragmatic categories are
perfect as instruments of the real (realization).
- But the pragmatic as immediate
will be more than instrument. They will serve as models for the pure.
For example, the matter-interaction-motion paradigm from physics will
serve as a model analogy for ‘dynamics’ at a higher level for Being. But
it will not be sufficient to merely import and impose the analogy.
Rather, the analogy is inspiration but the application and its limits of
application must be derived and this will be done in considering
identity and change. The philosophical substances of mind and matter
will form an analogy for substance at the higher level of Being. But
again mere import is insufficient. We will have to show of necessity
from experience the nature and limits of substance at the metaphysical
level. We will find, to state the case in rough terms, that there is no
ultimate substance at all but the substance is always potential and
associated with significance.
- The pure and the pragmatic
combine in a universal metaphysics—in which the prefix ‘pure’ has been
dropped—that is perfect in dual but perfect epistemic criteria—the pure
that is perfect in the sense of (representational or correspondence)
truth, and the pragmatic that is perfect as instrument though imperfect
in the traditional sense of precision (but which may also be seen as
perfect to its role in universal realization).
- We saw above that the purity of
a category is a matter of perspective or abstraction. This is the case
for most of the pure categories. On the other hand consider science. In
the Popperian view of science approaching the universal, science—physics
at least—never reaches an ideal of universality or precision and is
therefore pragmatic in nature. On the other hand the sciences very
definitely reveal actual local patterns. Further there is an abstract of
the pattern that is pure—i.e., precise in abstract. In all cases the
purity vs. pragmatism is a matter of perspective or abstraction. Therefore
the classification of a category as pure or pragmatic will be in part a
matter of convenience. Of course we want the main entry of Being to be
pure (but it may also be entered among the pragmatic; and similarly some
categories may be entered more than once).. For reasonably obvious
reasons we will include the pure versions under Metaphysics below and
the pragmatic versions under Cosmology.
- In the categories below, I
present two schemes (i) ideal and (ii) practical—the practical will be
the convenient basis of a development. Rather than lay out the schemes
in sequence pure « pragmatic it
is more convenient to have them interlaced. Nonetheless, (a) there is a
pure framework and (b) the pragmatic drives and instrumentalizes the
pure.
- Finally, note that reason—as
logic, the necessary, and science and the contingent and more—are
included in the categories.
Summary: categories and ground
The categories
The aim is ultimate understanding of the world—the
universe and our relation to it.
We’ve seen that an ultimate understanding will have two
meshing parts
- A pure, universal and ultimate
part. This illuminates. It shows us what is possible and actual. What
can and what will be achieve. In itself it does not show us the ‘how’.
- A pragmatic, local, and
approximate part. Though rough, there is and need be no better. In that
sense it has its own perfection. It is the perfect yet improvable
instrument.
The ground
The source of all
things—the perfect, the pragmatic, content, and method—is our system of
experience. This is the ground.
The pure and ultimate
is obtained from the ground by abstraction.
The pragmatic and
immediate is the ground in its concreteness. It is improvable but pure
perfection is neither possible nor desirable.
The arrangement of the categories
An arrangement into the pure and the pragmatic is possible
but not desirable.
Study and reflection have shown that an interspersed
arrangement is best. There is no ultimate distinction between the pure and
the pragmatic—it is a matter of how much to abstract.
Therefore we choose that organization that leads to
optimum method, understanding, and action. It is possible to extract a
‘purer’ organization as suggested immediately below.
A natural division is into (1) Metaphysics that emphasizes
the general and the abstract and (2) Cosmology that continues the metaphysics
but includes an emphasis on the pragmatic and on detail.
A
System of Categories
BEING,
CATEGORY
CATEGORY OF THE PURE, METAPHYSICS
CATEGORY OF THE PRAGMATIC, TRADITION,
COSMOLOGY
CATEGORY OF THE UNIVERSAL (UNKNOWN)
REFERENTIAL MEANING, CONCEPT, PERCEPT, FREE CONCEPT, OBJECT, CORRESPONDENCE, TRUTH; LINGUISTIC REFERENTIAL MEANING, SIGN, COMPOUND SIGN, SYMBOL
BEING(2): EXISTENCE, EXPERIENCE,
EXPERIENCED, MEANING(2), TRUTH
DIFFERENCE, SAMENESS; POWER (CAUSE-EFFECT) , ACTION, AGENCY
LIFE, BIRTH, DEATH
WHOLE, PART, NULL
UNIVERSE, A BEING, BEING(3), VOID
Justification for the earlier discussion.
ACTUAL, CONSTITUTION, POSSIBILITY, STATE, LOGIC; FORM, PATTERN, NATURAL LAW, LIMIT, CONTINGENCY; REALISM, PURE METAPHYSICS
UNIVERSAL METAPHYSICS, PERFECT DUAL
FOUNDATION, NORMAL, PROBABLE;
PURE, LOGIC, PROOF, TRIVIA, NECESSITY;
PRAGMATIC, SCIENCE
CONCRETE, ABSTRACT, QUALITY, DEATH(2) , RECEPTACLE, DISPOSITION; POTENCY OF BEING
IDENTITY, RELATION, PROCESS, MECHANICS, MECHANISM;
BEING(4)-EXTENSION-DURATION,
SPACETIME, IMMANENCE
EXPERIENCE(2), SUBSTANCE: MATTER AS BEING-ITSELF,
MIND AS
BEING-IN-RELATION
SIGNIFICANCE(2), DESTINY, UNIVERSE OF SIGNIFICANCE,
UNIVERSE OF DESTINY,
PAIN, SUFFERING, JOY
FORM,
VARIETY OF
FORM (COSMOLOGY: PEAKS, EXTENTION, DURATION), MATHEMATICS, NON-FORM;
MANIFEST, POTENTIAL;
INDETERMINISM
(NOVELTY), DETERMINISM (FORM-ATION), EPOCH,
ADAPTIVE
SYSTEM, SINGULAR EVENT
AETERNITAS, BRAHMAN, PERFECT BUDDHA
LANGUAGE, QUANTITY, SYMBOL(2), ALGEBRA
SHAPE, SIZE, GEOMETRY,
ANALYSIS
SCALE; MICRO, CODE, MACRO; NATURE (PHYSICAL, DYNAMICS (OF RELATIONAL
IDENTITY), PHYSICAL CAUSATION, LIVING(2), FUNCTION, ADAPTATION, PSYCHIC-PERCEPTIVE-REFLECTIVE-ACTIVE—INNER-OUTER—BOUND-FREE)
, SOCIETY (FORMS, COMMUNITIES, CULTURE, COMMUNICATION, TRANSMISSION, POLITICS, ECONOMICS, TECHNOLOGY, IMMERSION, HISTORY, HUMANITIES, PHILOSOPHY (METAPHYSICS,
EPISTEMOLOGY, LOGIC, ETHICS), ART,
ART, ART, WAYS OF REALIZATION
(THE WAY OF BEING), CATALYSTS), LOCAL CIVILIZATION, THE UNIVERSAL(2), WEAK UNIVERSAL CAUSATION(2),
UNIVERSAL
CIVILIZATION
Alternate labels are The Categories of Agency, The
Elements of (Being and) Agency and The Mechanics of (Being and) Agency.
The ELEMENTS
of a way of being are primitive basis of a MECHANICS OF A WAY OF BEING
IDENTITY-RELATION-PROCESS (MECHANICS)
AGENCY(2), CHOICE, ELEMENTS, MECHANICS(2) (OF A WAY OF BEING)
DIMENSIONS
OF IDENTITY: NATURE,
CIVILIZATION
and SOCIETY, PSYCHE, THE UNIVERSAL
The elements of identity, relation, and process are
classed according to the dimensions of identity
These elements are also the PHASES OF GROWTH of an individual—i.e., the
natural, social, psychic, and universal
PARTICLE, CONTINUUM; ORGANISM, CLASS—SPECIES)
INDIVIDUAL, SOCIETY, CIVILIZATION
PSYCHE
The previous three are
often tied to PLACE
THE UNIVERSAL
ELEMENTS
OF RELATION
FORCE,
FIELD, FLOW, CHEMICAL; MATTER-ENERGY INTERCHANGE
for organisms, SYMBIOSIS,
COMPETITION-COOPERATION
among classes; of
COMMUNICATION:
BEHAVIORAL, LINGUISTIC
EXPERIENCE,
INTELLIGENT-PASSIONATE
COMMITMENT
ONE
and MANY; SENTIENCE-UNIVERSE, CIVILIZATION-CIVILIZATION
As foresight, experience and choice mediate identity and
process; the mechanics is incremental, and in large steps:
seeing-choosing-risking-acting and consolidating the significant and the
ultimate. It is self-examining-referential, ever under discovery, an active
part of the metaphysics. It employs-develops The Way, catalysts and ways.
ELEMENTS
OF PROCESS
MOTION,
FUNCTION, EVOLUTION
LOCAL
CIVILIZATION or POPULATION
of the world, and INSTRUMENTAL
MEANS: WAYS (revelation-illumination),
DISCIPLINES, TECHNOLOGY, ECONOMICS, POLITICS
COGNITION
(MIND-THOUGHT) and EMOTION (HEART), and ACTION; INTRINSIC MEANS: CATALYSTS (fracture-integration),
PRACTICES, IMMERSIVE ECONOMICS
and IMMERSIVE
POLITICS; and
ULTIMATE
and IMMEDIATE,
BRAHMAN and ATMAN—UNIVERSAL CIVILIZATION.
Universal and local cycles of BECOMING, PEAKING, and DISSOLUTION.
YOGA, MEDITATION, BUDDHIST PSYCHOLOGY,
VISION-QUEST, BEYUL
SCIENCE,
PHYSICAL COSMOLOGY, TECHNOLOGY, SCIENCE OF INFORMATION, NETWORKING AND COMPUTATION
An optional and repetitive part—to absorb to the above?
The disciplines
Tradition—whatever is valid in knowledge-action of all
cultures over all times.
TRADITION,
REASON (COGNITION), FEELING (GROUNDING), COMMITMENT, and ACTION, PATH, SANGHA as COMMUNITY.
Some elements of the traditions are the ACADEMIC DISCIPLINES,
especially the SCIENCES—NATURAL SCIENCES (PHYSICAL SCIENCES, LIFE SCIENCES), SOCIAL SCIENCES (SOCIAL SCIENCES, SOCIOLOGY, POLITICS, ECONOMICS, THEORIES OF EDUCATION),
and PSYCHOLOGY
(SCIENCES OF MIND)—and
MATHEMATICS, PHILOSOPHY, (general
and the main divisions—METAPHYSICS,
EPISTEMOLOGY, LOGIC, and ETHICS) HUMANITIES, HISTORY, and ARTS; CATALYSTS and WAYS of personal
transformation (e.g. aspects of RELIGION); TECHNOLOGY and ENGINEERING. The disciplinary modes include the INSTRUMENTAL and the
IMMERSIVE.
PERSONAL
HISTORY, HISTORY
OF THE WAY OF BEING, PEDAGOGY, INTRODUCTION, METATEXT, CATEGORY OF INCOMPLETENESS, PREFACE, GUIDE
|