|
JOURNEY IN BEING ANIL MITRA DOCUMENT CREATED OCTOBER 9, 2012 ELIMINATE THIS LINE AND MAKE THE NEXT LINE COMPLETELY VISIBLE IN 2013 Anil MITRA, © COPYRIGHT 2012—2012 FIRST INTERNET
VERSION JUNE 2003 |
||
|
|
Planning |
|
|
|
Essay formats—long, short… |
Left column for main and central points; right for elaboration—using (a) A table or (b) Left and right aligned paragraphs or (c) columns Arrangement—the details may be (a) aligned with main points (b) alternating or (c) mixed in alignment |
|
|
Dealing with long and short versions (and a reference version) |
Web—have (a) one version and text that may be hidden-shown by JavaScript or by links or a short and a long part or (b) two or more versions. The shortest version / part will be working-brief.html or even shorter Print—have (a) one version with left column for main points and right for details or with a short part and a long part or (b) two or more versions Journey in Being.doc or other as a reference version |
|
|
Headings and main TOC |
Two levels |
|
|
Secondary TOC |
To central points (another way of implementing long and short versions) |
|
|
Outline |
Check; improve |
|
|
Topics |
1. America etc (under politics) 2. Use ‘Realism’ for ‘Logic’; make this consistent; or make it depend on version 3. May enter some comments on method under individual points 4. The planning points under individual items below 5. Program—any greater detail than already present to use style ‘Personal’ 6. Glossary, word choices and capitalization alongside first / main use… andor at end 7. My influences—occasionally mention alongside main use when relevant but only on right (consider eliminating these); at end 8. Headings (optional elements for some versions) |
|
|
Editing |
General editing for essentials, style, brevity, eliminating repetition Shortening the long left column points by transferring material to the right and or by making further points |
|
|
Styles |
Central—for the very shortest version Main or Central 2—essential version, General, Detail, Academic—content and sources, and perhaps Academic 2, Explanation, Stem Hidden Character style Optional DEFINITION Planning, Personal, Comment—Courier |
|
|
Automation |
JavaScript; frames… Redo Eliminate Styles |
|
|
Sources |
Journey in Being.doc; Journey in Being-Essential.doc; Archive; the laws of energy.doc (the name of this document should be changed to ‘the conservation laws or something’) |
|
|
Site design and format |
Attractive but simple home and formatting… Quick loading |
|
|
Site contents in random order |
About | Author | Journey complex | Other topics | Marginalia | Daily tidbit (&web/log) | Slide show for ‘children’ |
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
1 |
‘Journey in Being’ is an account of a development of ideas and action in interaction. This version of Journey in Being balances precision with brevity |
The ideas are incomplete without action and transformation. While ideas have intrinsic interest, there is therefore an imperative to action (that does not minimize the ideas) Discussion and decisions about ‘versions’ must be deferred till this version is complete |
|
|
The primary goal of this balance is that it empowers ideas as well as action |
A narrative that does not question all things is insufficiently critical. One that ever dwells only in the questions postpones realization to a hypothetical time when knowledge has achieved perfection The developments of the narrative empower and require this translation In addition to the rational imperative to action (above), there is a personal decision to action and to translation-completion of the ideas in action In this the process of the narrative includes but is more than that of traditional thought (especially philosophy). However, although this difference reflects personal tendencies and values, it is not idiosyncratic. The use of reflection in action is time honored. Here it is required by the reflection |
|
|
Brevity empowers precision by encouraging careful statement and by showing the essentials without dilution amid a welter of explanation, caveat, and elaboration |
There will be some explanation, caveat, and elaboration—chosen to bring out meaning, precision, and power |
|
|
Another virtue of brevity is that it empowers the reader who, in virtue of access, is empowered to understanding as well as criticism |
|
|
2 |
The main ideas. The Universe is unlimited its variety, extension, and duration (this new, central and pivotal result is demonstrated later and named the fundamental principle of metaphysics or, simply, the fundamental principle (FP) |
The Universe is understood as all that there is over all extension and duration (space and time) Power will be conceived as degree of limitlessness; it will follow that the Universe has and is ultimate power It is crucial to understand the meaning of the fundamental principle. This meaning emerges in the essay The fundamental principle is the basis of a perfect, unique, ultimate, and universal metaphysics which may and will therefore be called the metaphysics (metaphysics is defined later) |
|
|
From its limitlessness the Universe must have Identity. Limitlessness implies conference of its power or limitlessness and Identity on all its elements and individuals |
One meaning of IDENTITY is sameness or sense of sameness of an object. Here the term is used in the related meaning of (sense) of sameness of person or self It follows that death is real but not absolute and that pain is real and unavoidable. Awareness of death may be catalytic in fullness of living and achievement in this life. Not all pain is avoidable; however a lesson of the metaphysics is that pain can be given meaning |
|
|
While in limited form realization—manifestation—of this inheritance must be in the form of a process that is endless in variety, extension, and duration |
While there is a choice whether to intentionally engage in this process there is there is no choice but to be in it Where to enter—one or two places—(a) that the modes are ideas and action-transformation in essential interaction and (b) the vehicles are Being and Civilization with Being enhancing Civilization and Civilization cradling and fostering Being (and note that this is a somewhat specialized use of ‘Being’ since, after all, Civilization is Being |
|
|
‘Journey in Being’ is an appropriate and descriptive name for this process of realization that is—and must be—grounded in the present and is without end |
…for it will emerge that Being as conceived here is pivotal to understanding the nature of individual and Universe and to demonstration of the metaphysics The primary connotation of a Journey is that it is neutral to goal or outcome or to single minded commitment; i.e. goals may arise and drive the process but there is no final commitment to specific directions, goals, or ideals… or to always having or aiming at goals The idea of Being is also significant as container for such a Journey for it does not restrict focus of transformation—e.g. to transformation of self andor context andor environment and world |
|
3 |
Meanings used in the narrative. When understanding and knowledge grow, new concepts and/or old terms with new meanings are acquired. Demonstration, understanding, and use of the fundamental principle requires introduction of new concepts and meanings |
‘Meaning’ itself has a number of different meanings. Two that are used here are (a) reference—the one to the left—especially concept or linguistic meaning, e.g. word, concept and sentence meaning and (b) meaning in the sense of significance or purpose |
|
|
Different uses and changing meaning are often a source of unclear communication. Clarity requires that the speaker or author inform listeners and reader when new meanings are being introduced and to specify those meanings |
The text in this column on the right provides meanings, elaborations, meanings and definitions. DEFINITIONS are marked by a font that uses small capitals instead of lower case letters. Some words will be Capitalized to indicate a special meaning |
|
|
Readers and listeners are informed that in this document, first, new and variant meanings are introduced and, second, the entire system of meaning stands together as a whole |
|
|
|
Being |
|
|
4 |
EXPERIENCE is conscious awareness |
Terms that are similar to the present meaning of experience are consciousness, awareness with subjectivity, feeling. The term ‘experience’ has a number of quite distinct uses—e.g. in the phrase ‘the candidate has ten years of teaching experience—of which some are uses are quite different than the one introduced here In experience we begin with what is most immediate and pervasive to the individual (e.g. human being). We begin with experience as such (not with kinds of experience) Experience is so basic that it is defined by showing what it is rather than defining it in other terms (conscious awareness an equivalent rather than a different idea). When I think I know something I may be in error but valid as well as erroneous ‘knowledge’ are both experience We are accustomed to defining words and concepts in terms of other words or concepts. However, this is neither necessary nor possible for all concepts Experience is a fundamental and named given Experience includes the qualitative but is not essentially qualitative for it includes shape, size, and quantity (though not instrumental quantity) Examples of experience are qualitative feeling as in the hue of a sunset but also shape and size—as in the apparent shape and size of the sun—and quantity as in how long the sun takes to set. We have experience in recollection, e.g. as in past sunsets; and experience occurs in perceiving and in thinking. While many experiences appear to be associated with real (external) objects and actions, some experiences are ‘pure’ in that we do not feel them to have direct connection to anything outside the experience. From the feeling that an experience is ‘pure’ it does not follow that it has no object. If there is an object to pure experience it is not a remembered object but rather the result of some current relation that is interior to the individual (more will be said on this later) We will find experience to be the fundamental characteristic of mind—and more, i.e. that experience is the primary occasion for the concept and naming of mind Later, in an expanded meaning of experience we will see an identity of Being and experience The previous sentence is repeated later under ‘Being’ Although it would be more efficient—though not more rational—to begin with Being, a beginning with experience is richer in (a) providing for connection between our (human) being and (all) Being (b) a ground for the understanding of Being (via what will emerge as intimate connection between experience and Being) Some thinkers begin an approach to Being via analysis of what is essential in human being. However, it emerges that it is more effective to postpone such analysis (beyond experience) till some general understandings of Being and experience have emerged and a need for such analysis arises in particular rather than only in abstract contexts |
|
|
As medium of both knowledge and error, experience is a given fact |
E.g. even if everything (else) is illusion, illusion is a case of experience The ‘method’ of this knowledge of experience as given is first by abstraction—experience itself is neutral to knowledge versus illusion—and second by naming the given Some thinkers—perhaps motivated by a materialist view of the world—maintain that there can be no such thing as experience (a related position is to minimize the significance of experience rather than to deny it). The basis of such views constitute an error of substance thinking in which ‘matter’ and ‘mind’ are held to be essentially distinct (this is shown later). It is in part the basic and all pervasive quality of experience for human being that combined with materialism has led to its minimization in materialist paradigms (there is a natural tendency to not notice what is all pervasive but instead to notice what has discreteness amid the pervasive; however even this ‘noticing’ is experience) |
|
|
Experience is the place of the most direct knowledge of self and world |
Of course, experience may be in error. However experience is the place of explicit knowledge including knowledge of error and its possibility and so its correction Perhaps the extreme position regarding error is solipsism which, in one of its versions, is the view that experience is the only ‘thing’ that surely exists and that ‘self’ and ‘world’ (sometimes called the external or real world) are at best illusions. An argument against this view is as follows. It is experienced that experience (i.e. the experience of what is experienced as self or individual) is limited. Then, the idea that there is only experience is either (a) relabeling of the world (and the selves that it contains) or (b) error (e.g. confusion of range of experience with world and experience of self with experience of the rest of the world). Thus there is self and real world (because the world is not truly external to experience I prefer the term ‘real world’). Note that this does not give us any detailed structure of selves and the world—it shows self as a center of experience and world including self as reference or ‘object’; this could be seen as criticism but it may also be seen as positive for it allows study and emergence of such structure as and when needed Note—the solipsism of the previous paragraph has merged what are called epistemological and metaphysical solipsism The significance of what may seem to be excessive doubt—as in questioning the facts of experience and real world—may be questioned. The value of such questions is that in answering them we are able to get a securer—and in some cases absolutely secure—grasp on facts which, though unnecessary for many common purposes, is critical if we are to generate a world view that may function as a basis of universal understanding and action |
|
|
Though not the entire world, experience may be seen as the theater of my world |
To continue the metaphor, theater is more than the play but without the play there is no theater |
|
5 |
A CONCEPT is any experiential content. The constituents of MEANING are a concept and its reference (object) |
More generally, a concept is any mental content. However, the only mental contents of which we can talk are those we have or infer in experience. In this meaning, a concept can be a pure experience, a perceptual experience, or thought-emotion. In this meaning a concept is different from other uses of concept as, e.g., in unit of meaning which may (and will) be seen to be a special case of the present meaning. Meaning includes pure experience in which case the reference is empty |
|
|
In order to refer, a concept must have and refer by virtue of some iconic quality |
A concept may include non iconic signs, e.g. words. However, it must have an iconic element which associate with the non-iconic and give the whole concept its iconic aspect. Some words are iconic; others are not. An arrangement of words may be iconic—e.g., as in a sentence. The association of the non-iconic with the iconic gives language its efficiency in thought and communication and (some of) its ambiguity The reference of the concept, word, or sentence is commonly called the meaning of the concept, word or sentence |
|
|
Meaning is stabilized by context but also derives flexibility in change and changeability of context |
Any lexicon is self-referential and must depend on—at least—some core of meanings that understood from use in context |
|
|
The decomposition of meaning into concept and reference and the necessity of an iconic quality are essential to the idea of meaning and the resolution of many confusions of meaning and paradoxes that result from such confusion |
The paradox of ‘negative existence’ discussed below is one example of a paradox whose source is a confusion due to inadequate attention to the nature of meaning. The famous liar paradox and Russell’s paradox may be illuminated by consideration of meaning (i.e. in terms of a concept which naïvely has an object but in fact does not). This does not negate the significance of the paradoxes but it does suggest that there may be an analysis in terms of meaning that is positive and proactive rather than negative and reactive in the way of Russell’s type theory and Zermelo Fraenkel set theory It is important that the significance of these comments and possibility of execution will become much clearer in the later discussion of objects. The comments on the liar and Russell paradox etc. may be eliminated from final versions if I do not improve the treatment |
|
6 |
EXISTENCE. The meaning of the phrase ‘X exists’ is that there is an (X) thing corresponding to the (X) concept |
Note that existence is related to the very common word ‘is’, a (present, singular) form of the verb to be… for to exist is to be. I.e., deep ideas are already built into language and this is of course good but may also be deceiving as to clarity of understanding It is also significant that the word ‘is’ has a number of uses. In the use just mentioned it indicates existence. In another use it indicates definition (e.g. a straight line is a line with fixed direction) The discussion of experience shows that there is experience, there are selves, and there is a real world What else is there in the world? Our common experience reveals an immense variety. However, the philosophical point to a careful answer—as will emerge in what follows—is that it empowers precision which in turn empowers real understanding and real power Since ‘everything’ exists, existence has been called trivial and therefore hardly worthy of analysis. However, it is precisely this triviality that will be found empowering (one goal of study is to understand the non-trivial and non-obvious and contentious upon in terms of the trivial, obvious, and non contentious). Further, in terms of our understanding of existence and meaning ‘everything exists’ is far from being known to be true |
|
|
‘X exists’ usually means that X exists somewhere at the present time. Here we also use a tense-less sense in which ‘X exists’ means that X has existence over some range of locations and times |
Space and time will be treated later |
|
|
Consider the assertion ‘Unicorns do not exist.’ If they do not exist then the word ‘unicorn’ would seem to have no meaning and so the assertion would also seem to be meaningless. This has been called the problem of the non-existent object. In terms of our understanding of meaning and of existence, ‘Unicorns do not exist’ means that there are no unicorn objects (things) that correspond to the unicorn idea or concept |
Careful analysis of meaning and of existence provides a trivial resolution of an otherwise non-trivial problem One resolution is to regard ‘existence’ as a higher order concept; this we now see as unnecessary Another—related—resolution is to regard ‘unicorn’ as a mental object. This is unnecessary—amusing—for it would mean that ‘tiger’ has a double existence as an idea and as a thing (which has been pointed out by other writers) |
|
|
Being is that which exists |
Being has been distinguished from existence in two ways. (1) Being has been thought of as that which exists-in-itself (and not in relation to other things). The fundamental principle implies that this distinction is empty. (2) Existence has been regarded as Being-as-known (in contrast to Being as such, i.e. Being-in-itself). Now if we regard Being-as-known as the concept, it has Being but it is not the Being of any intended ‘external’ reference. The problem, then—if there is one, is that Being-as-known is something we treat as a thing but when we do not know it perfectly it is not the thing. The problem with this thought is that the idea that there is invariably some being behind Being-as-known is false and the distinction is then a distinction between something that we know imperfectly and something that does not (generally) exist (and when the being behind the being-as-known does exist the distinction is unnecessary) At the level of generality of discussion it does not matter whether Being is thought of as noun, verb, adjective (entity, process, property…) and so on The important point is that Being does not refer to specific things but that it designates existence (and may designate existence somewhere and somewhen rather than at some specific place or time); thus an existing entity is a case of Being and alternately it has Being |
|
7 |
BEING names what is |
Being is neutral to substance, e.g. materialism, idealism, spirit, and even to the question of substance As noted above the concept of Being is neutral to entity-hood, process-hood, and quality-hood. It is further indifferent to simple versus complex or elementary versus compound. Since we wish to take advantage of the neutrality of the idea, it is desirable that it should not distinguish concrete from abstract entities or process or qualities (the term abstract is being used here in a different sense than earlier). A possible problem with not making this distinction is that we may be admitting fictions as real. Later, in discussing objects, we will see that Being does not in fact distinguish the abstract from the concrete This takes a step back from the distinctions of self and world. Development could have begun here. There is no loss in beginning with experience which provides ‘flesh’ to the abstraction of Being |
|
|
Being (and world) are known in experience |
Refer to the earlier discussion of experience for definition and some analysis of experience We have seen that (a) though minimized in substance materialism, experience is given and fundamental; (b) experience is the medium in which we know—and ultimately justify knowledge of—a rich and robust world; and (c) experience is the place of meaning and of our significant ‘Being’ Experience is neutral to mode of knowledge—as we shall see—to perception and the empirical versus conception and the rational, to discovery versus justification, to perfect versus imperfect knowledge; to pure experience versus experience of versus experience in action or will; to knowledge of body including emotion versus knowledge of world including cognition; and to primitive experience versus central-focal-acute consciousness At this point it is not said that experience is the only place of knowledge or that its only kind is knowledge Later, in an expanded meaning of experience we will see an identity of Being and experience The previous sentence is repeated from earlier, under the first treatment of experience |
|
|
The Being of experience is so immediate |
This suggests—and it will be seen—that Being and experience are essentially interwoven. This goes back at least to Adi Samkara in India and René Descartes in the West |
|
|
It needs no proof |
I.e. proof in terms of something else |
|
8 |
The Universe is All Being |
Introduces the universal and cosmological Universe as All Being is empowering (a) in avoiding the indefiniteness of materialism, idealism and so on, and (b) in assuring that all being is included and therefore in enabling the development of the theory of being (metaphysics) that emerges below On possibility. What is possibility? Something is possible relative to a context if it does occur or if it does not but its occurrence would not change the constitution of the context. E.g., an occurrence is physically possible if its occurrence is consistent with the laws of physics (perhaps with restriction to some specific location, e.g. our cosmos or this Earth). Occurrence is logically possible if the occurrence does not violate any logical principle (restricting the location or conditions would be more restrictive than ‘pure’ logical possibility). Given that the Universe is All Being over all extension and duration what is possibility relative to the Universe as context? There is no other occurrence (or larger context). Therefore to be possible the occurrence must be actual. Relative to the Universe, possibility and actuality are identical. The question of whether this enlarges the actual or reduces the possible is open (till later) |
|
|
Creation is a form of Being |
|
|
|
The Universe contains all Creation |
|
|
|
But is not created |
|
|
9 |
A pattern or Law has Being |
An example of the empowerment afforded by Being. In a materialist (or other substance) view the status of laws is inevitably vague An object is a pattern |
|
|
(A Law is a limit—it allows |
|
|
|
Some patterns, not others) |
|
|
|
The Universe contains all Laws |
A pattern of patterns is a pattern Facts and Laws are not essentially distinct |
|
10 |
The Void is the absence of Being |
This stanza proves that ‘everything comes from nothing and, therefore from anything’. Something from nothing is a special case |
|
|
It contains no Law and so has no limits |
|
|
|
Every pattern, Law, or object |
|
|
|
Emerges from the Void |
Further illustration of the power in using Being as fundamental and understanding the Universe and Void (nothingness) in terms of Being |
|
11 |
The Void is ever present with the Universe or any part of it |
Since the Void and the Universe are the Universe The ever presence of the Void will be questioned later |
|
|
Therefore the Universe has no limits |
This is the fundamental principle. This completes demonstration of the fundamental principle. Herein lies the foundation of general cosmology The actual expands its scope to that of the maximally possible |
|
|
There is at least one Void |
|
|
|
The number of Voids has no significance |
|
|
12 |
The Universe has no limits |
The fundamental principle of metaphysics is also a basic principle of general cosmology This principle is equivalent to what has been called the principle of plenitude. There is a variety of ways of stating this principle one of which is that anything that is possible occurs; as stated the meaning of the principle is not clear because it is not clear what possibility means in this context; further the truth of the principle is not at all evident. It has been observed that this principle is the opposite of Ockham’s principle of parsimony (Ockham’s Razor): if the existence of something is logically independent of our best knowledge then according to Ockham’s Razor we ought not to postulate its existence; according to the principle of plenitude we ought to postulate its existence. It is noted later—and I am not aware of its having been noted in the literature—that Ockham’s Razor applied to what does not exist is equivalent to the application of the principle of plenitude to what does exist. These issues are of course made moot by the demonstration of the fundamental principle |
|
|
But for the freedom of concepts |
I.e. referential concepts or propositions |
|
|
To disagree with facts or one another |
|
|
|
Every concept is realized |
This is the fundamental principle of metaphysics (FP) |
|
13 |
A scientific law or theory is a compound fact |
Scientific laws and facts are not limits Note that this interpretation of theory is an alternate to the so far not unconfirmed universal hypothesis interpretation formulated e.g. by Karl Popper. If physical theory approaches universality then the two interpretations are equivalent. However, the fundamental principle negates approach to universality for empirically based conceptual theories and therefore favors the compound fact interpretation |
|
|
Regarding a domain of valid knowledge |
Scientific ‘necessity’ is very high (conditional) probability; we experience these necessities as limits that we may call ‘normal’ rather than universal limits |
|
|
But implies nothing about the existence |
|
|
|
Or nature of what lies outside |
…or non existence |
|
14 |
If every concept of a system asserts a fact |
I.e. a true fact (this
is redundant) |
|
|
Conflict may make the system non factual |
I.e. conflict among the concepts |
|
|
The classical and modern logics may be seen as preventing such conflict |
A logic does not pertain to all forms of concept (proposition) |
|
|
The logics have limited domains of validity |
The logics are not limits |
|
15 |
Conceive Logic as the constraints for |
Conceive or reconceive? Logic or Logos? An alternate and perhaps preferable term to Logic is Realism Consider use of ‘Realism’ as alternative or parallel to ‘Logic’. |
|
|
Concepts to have reference |
A system of concepts in referential form is a concept in referential form |
|
|
Facts, sciences, and logics are part of Logic |
I.e. what is valid in fact, science, and logics The logics could be seen as part of science Thus Logic or Realism is factual (empirical science) and conceptual (traditional logic) |
|
|
Logic is not a limit on the Universe |
The object of Logic is not the Universe as such; the object is propositions or assertions about the Universe or parts of it. Logic is not even a limit on assertions that may be formed but is instrumental in labeling assertions ‘true’ or ‘false’ Logic is ultimate expression of freedom Though related to the logics and science, Logic (Realism) is vastly greater |
|
16 |
The object of Logic is the limitless |
Logic is permissive in the ultimate—Logic is not restrictive or limiting |
|
|
Universe in all its detail |
Relative to the Universe the possible and the actual are the Logical |
|
|
It incorporates science and logic but its |
|
|
|
Revealed Universe is greater than theirs without limit |
I.e. greater than the revealed universe of the sciences and logics |
|
17 |
Universe as object of Logic immediately implies much of great significance |
E.g., below starting with objects and Identity (Logic is permissive) |
|
|
Any difficulty is in their interpretation |
The logics could be seen as part of science |
|
|
But Logic harbors immensely more |
E.g. in terms of dynamics, variety, and structure |
|
|
Beyond the intellect of limited forms |
But limited form can know of and partake of the unlimited |
|
18 |
From the fundamental principle every concept within Logic has an object |
This assertion founds the theory of objects developed here. Regarding the object of which there is no concept at all we cannot even talk (the assertion that there is an object I cannot conceive at all is a contradiction) While it remains within Logic, the entire human tradition of knowledge has an object Reference the fundamental principle… and/or change the wording of the entry on the left Review Academic content |
|
|
This cuts through distinctions of kind and abstraction and incorporates all kinds and modes of abstraction under Logic (Realism) and so in the one Universe (the scope of cosmology is thus immensely increased) |
Kind refers to the distinctions of entity versus process, interaction, property, trope… and abstraction distinguishes the concrete versus ‘abstract objects’ such as number, value, and concept The abstract are of thought non causal, non-spatial but their precise nature is generally thought problematic. Here we see the abstract / concrete divide is according to whether the object is known via perceptual versus non-perceptual concept. The abstract are not essentially non spatial (or non causal) but spatiality and causality is or may be to the abstracted concept ‘Object’ may refer to something thing or process or interaction like. It may also refer to multiple things, to all things with a certain property, to certain aspects of things. The latter, in combination with our understanding of Logic, shows the arbitrariness of the concrete-abstract distinction. Our form perceives the concrete, conceives the abstract (and may be mistaken in both cases). However what is percept for human being may be concept for another form (or another human being); and what is concept may be percept for another form. That something is abstract (or concrete) to us—or to any limited form—does make it absolutely or universally abstract or give absolute meaning and significance to the term ‘abstract’ (or ‘concrete’) Thus, Mathematical objects are in the one Universe; they are not fictions or conventions—but may be studied as such; they do not lie in some special Platonic universe—but may be approximately understood as such; they are not essentially abstract—but may be understood as such; they are not mental objects—and such understanding is a caricature. Finally, the Mathematical objects are not concepts in them selves though we have (perhaps incomplete or approximate or inconsistent) concepts or conceptions of them. Thus there are Mathematical objects; and there are mathematical concepts; and the Mathematical objects that are amenable to study via mathematical concepts is very much dependent on the intelligence of the mathematician—human or other. We can now conceive mathematics as the study of objects whose form and structure is such that it is amenable to some combination of the intuition and symbolic capability of the mathematician—human or other; and, now, Mathematics will be the mathematics of the collection of all intellectual powers, i.e., of the greatest and unlimited intellectual power Many objects straddle the abstract-concrete divide (a) in their nature and (b) over history as one or other approach to study is more effective. Property is an example of an object that straddles the divide, e.g. in that redness may be thought of as a ‘Universal, or as an instance of collection of instances of a concept. In turn when we ask what is the concept of ‘concept’ the fundamental principle informs us that concepts must reside somewhere in the one Universe. An example of a changing type is that of number which began as concrete, became formulated as abstract and today—with the advent of computer study—may be seen as hybrid |
|
|
Identity is (sense of) sameness of self or object. Identity is an aspect of objecthood |
As sameness ‘Identity’ does not require being (perfectly). Identity is perhaps the essential aspect of objecthood |
|
|
Practical objects are included as concept-objects according to ‘good enough’ instrumental andor value criteria |
The resulting study may be called Applied Metaphysics whose further foundation is discussed later under method. Applied Metaphysics straddles the entire human tradition of knowledge and understanding The point regarding Applied Metaphysics is repeated below. Combine and minimize repetition (eliminate one occurrence of the argument / term?) |
|
19 |
The Universe has Identity |
Identity: wholeness, self-knowledge; part of objecthood ‘Cosmology 1’ The method or foundation of cosmology begins with the fundamental principle as enhanced in study of Logic (Realism) and extended in the study of objects, above. The first main problem is that of interpretation of obvious consequences of these principles. The obvious consequences are suggested by our experience (in the sense of accumulated and evaluated experience rather than in the main sense of experience of this document) knowledge, especially physical cosmology which, together with the principles, affords some interpretation. The second main problem is development of Logic / Realism / theory of objects which will perhaps be a field that shall challenge the limits of limited (e.g. human) intelligence and is of course already begun in the development of logics, mathematics, science and other studies and which are now seen as closed in depth but endlessly open in variety (to limited intelligence) |
|
|
It has acute, diffuse, and non-manifest phases |
I.e., the Universe and its Identity have acute… Should this point be explicit on the left? |
|
|
Its identity has continuity across the non-manifest |
Sameness is part of identity |
|
|
This continuity has similarity to ‘soul’ |
|
|
20 |
The variety and extent of the Universe is unlimited |
‘Variety’ means variety of Being in… ‘Extent’ means extension, duration, and any other coordinate of distinction ‘Cosmology 2’ |
|
|
Duration is associated with change in the same object; extension with distinct objects. Process is required by the fundamental principle; process is possible only in the presence of distinction and therefore of duration. Duration and extension are immanent in Being and therefore any space and time must be relative rather than absolute; however local regions may has as if absolute space and time |
Duration is a conceptual precursor to time and extension to space Here, ‘change in the same object’ may be replaced by ‘change or sense of change for a given object’ and ‘distinction’ may be replaced by ‘sense of distinction’ In regions where identity is vague, extension and duration (or their perception or measurement) are vague. Because sameness and difference are interwoven, so are extension and duration or space and time. A given region may have multiple space-times and, e.g., signal speeds. Since sameness and distinction are dual, so are space and time; there are no further coordinates of difference except perhaps for Being versus non-Being Becoming from the Void is hardly that of a single step from nothingness to determinate structure and though it is inevitable its instances may be and occur tenuously, tentatively, and precariously. Ask why we are not everyday affected by such necessary becoming. First, of course we are such; secondly, it occurs (see ghosts below); third, such becoming must have sensible interaction with ‘our world’. Now reflect on the normally tenuous process of becoming. It is easy to reflect that there are multiple simultaneous becomings; and that given one, it may be seed for others which may then be mutually sustaining. Here (and in ghosts) lies a possible source of the ‘uncertainties’ and probabilities of quantum theory; and of a source of multiple histories. And since process and extension are implicated as part of this becoming here, too, lies a possible source of unification of quantum-wave matter and extension-duration (space-time) Should this point and the next appear here? Perhaps for these are aspects of cosmology. If they remain here, justify their presence |
|
|
Cosmologies and Laws have no limit |
I.e. the number and variety of cosmological systems and Laws is without limit. (What is the meaning of ‘number’ in this context?) Knowledge of laws may grow (a) to new kinds in which case the laws need not contain the present laws as special cases; there may be overlap of some kind; the variety is without limit and universal law at specific levels is not expected (and though it is one of our ideals, such universal law is barred by the principle of limitlessness—at least to limited forms of intelligence) (b) to encompass the new kinds; in this case universality may be approached at the expense of specificity; the limit of this process is—or lies within—the Universal Metaphysics defined below The multiplicity of cosmological systems emerge against a transient background itself emergent from the Void (analogous to the quantum vacuum) There are ghost systems passing through ours even now with barely a whisper (to us) We may imagine Logically consistent and therefore real annihilator systems that annihilate a cosmos; however, every cosmos is in effect also its own self-annihilator; stability however requires that self-annihilation is normally rare From FP, every cosmos is an atom; every atom a cosmos; there are no finally indivisible particles; e.g., the indivisibility of leptons and quarks according to the standard theory is an artifact of symmetry and therefore stability to some but not all disturbances Imagine a novel, a biblical scripture, a work of art, a piece of music; provided they have referential interpretation and lie within the bounds of Realism (Logic) they are realized in the Universe; and if it does not lie outside Realism, their occurrence is repeated without limit; or, perhaps, Realism does not allow unlimited repetition—repetition may be finite or limited according to the case There is a cosmos with an ‘Earth’ on which ‘Jesus Christ’ caused to be made wine from water; and at another time he multiplied loaves of bread and fish. There is (within Logic) an otherwise (i.e. subject to the parables) limitless collection of such cosmoses. No support is given by this conclusion to the occurrence of such happening on this Earth Death is real but not absolute; with sufficient vision we might see beyond death For finite forms of intelligence, a successful science of the future will grow to emphasize immersion and participation—supplemented by current methodology Special cosmology—a Final Theory; Black hole thermodynamics, Holographic principle |
|
|
Mechanism. The production of stable cosmological systems normally requires symmetry, conservation, and symmetry breaking. Emergence of life normally requires the possibility of complexity of an appropriate kind, incrementally via variation and selection (and thus does not require ‘special creation’) |
Hyper and hypo conservative cosmologies are unstable and sterile, respectively; such considerations suggest conservation as a precondition for structure. Symmetry enhances the emergence of structure. Perfect symmetry is frozen; near symmetry is optimal for structure to emerge. Disorder and order are duals except perhaps in cosmological phases where the dominance of some particular force—e.g., gravity—is ordering However, the fundamental principle requires no mechanism and rejects universal mechanism—whether deterministic or otherwise There is no universality of mechanism or causation or determinism; however there may be and are limited regions of mechanism etc. From the limitlessness of the Universe, given Earth in one state there is no necessity to the succession of states or to any succession of states (there must of course be some succession). In other words, the state at any given future moment (as long as the region is one that has moments) is entirely undetermined as far as necessity is concerned (under our normal regime there is of course mechanism and causation and at least probable determination of future states). It may therefore be said that the Universe is absolutely indeterministic. However all states will occur and therefore the Universe may be said to be absolutely deterministic (in an unusual sense of determinism). Thus the Universe is both absolutely deterministic and indeterministic and each—of course—(Logically) implies the other The temporal definition of determinism is unavailable for the Universe as a whole because global time would violate limitlessness and therefore there is no global time. If we conceive indeterminism to say that no part of the Universe determines the whole and that determinism is the opposite—every part determines the whole and this notion is available in the absence of global time—then the Universe is indeterministic. This conclusion is not surprising since determinism of this type is very special; this notion of determinism is close to the usual definition in terms of time but both these definitions are very distinct from the notion of determinism of the previous paragraph The (atemporal) notion of indeterminism and determinism of the previous paragraph were suggested by William James in The Dilemma of Determinism, 1984 (in the Unitarian Review) |
|
21 |
The Universe is ultimate power, i.e. degree of limitlessness |
Power—i.e. the manifestation and non-manifestation, variety, extent… God cannot be other than some identification with the Universe |
|
|
The individual inherits and realizes the ultimate and its power |
Otherwise the Universe would be limited |
|
|
While limited this is endless process—of realization—or journey whose modes must be ideas and action |
Ideas are essential to effectiveness and appreciation but are essentially incomplete without action which must result in essential transformation of Being While in limited form, the journey is unlimited in variety, extent and duration of Being… and summits of Being (and dissolution), also of unlimited variety and magnitude |
|
|
In unlimited form realization is a single act of Being and perception |
Aeternitas or eternity in a moment |
|
22 |
What is the relation between Experience and Being? |
This is the general form of the issues of mind and matter An academic issue. This is mostly an academic point. Where should it be placed? What further detail should it have? |
|
|
If matter is an exclusive substance, mind is impossible and so must be material |
A substance is here understood as a uniform and unchanging stuff (or kind) that is the source or deterministic generator of All Being. A substance is understood as exclusive if it admits no other kind |
|
|
Experience is the essence of mind; its primitive form is effect; higher forms are built of the primitive |
Experience is the occasion for the term ‘mind’. Other aspects of mind have been labeled its essence. These include attitude and action. These however are experience together with some additional feature |
|
|
Relaxing the notion of matter as substance, the metaphysics allows the interpretation: matter and mind as first and second order Being, respectively |
The distinction vanishes because the metaphysics requires infinite divisibility. Being and experience are identical (at root). Pure experience is inner effect. Both may have spontaneous origin but not under certain orders of mechanism Since ‘third order’ Being has no significance, Spinoza’s theory of attributes stands meaningless An experience falls under Logic if it purports to represent, i.e. if it has referential form. If an experience has referential form Logic distinguishes faithful (true) from non-faithful (false) representation |
|
23 |
Metaphysics is Logic |
METAPHYSICS is understood as knowledge of Being as Being—i.e. knowledge of ‘things as they are’ |
|
|
This demonstrates a perfect, unique, and ultimate Universal Metaphysics |
Shown by construction Perfect—an actual metaphysics must be perfect Unique—as knowledge of Being, there can be only one metaphysics of any region or object Ultimate—the foundation is without substance or regress—every object may be seen as the substance of all objects and every object is its own form—every object is placed on the same status and the status of concepts is distinguished only by Logic; it implicitly captures the variety of the Universe which it shows to be ultimate and without limit That is, perfect knowledge is obtained in the direction depth. Knowledge and Being are ever open in the direction of variety (regarding which there is implicit perfection) Universal—it is metaphysical knowledge of the Universe |
|
|
We may therefore call it the metaphysics |
|
|
|
Trivially, metaphysics is actual and possible |
It is important to recognize that this is no claim to explicit empirical knowledge of every detail in the Universe. Rather it is an explicit claim of knowledge of the Universe as a whole and in some of its general features which includes implicit knowledge of detail that for explicitness to a limited knower requires endless process |
|
24 |
Doubt should have arisen regarding the demonstration of the fundamental principle even though it is internally and externally consistent. This doubt concerns the ever presence of the Void |
Internal and external consistency refer to conceptual or Logical Realism and empirical or factual and scientific Realism
|
|
|
In knowledge, admitting and investigating doubt are among first essentials to allaying doubt and on the road to what certainty may be possible. I.e. doubt and certainty are duals. Doubt is essential in metaphysics where the goal is more than practical for metaphysics is knowledge of the world as it is |
|
|
|
It is well known though sometimes suppressed that our most certain endeavors, e.g. established science but especially established logic, harbor uncertainty—except, e.g., for elementary regions of logic and mathematics. However, we allow such uncertainty since the goals of understanding include action as well as knowledge |
|
|
|
This admission of uncertainty is occasion for an existential attitude that is maximally productive of ideals—i.e. of outcomes of greatest value; this attitude, reflective and emotive, may be called existential Logic or Realism. It is reflective in allocating energies to action under uncertainty regarding an outcome of (immense) value and necessarily emotive (passionate) in its approach to goals |
This existential attitude is not nihilist. The Universal Metaphysics empowers an optimistic attitude. However, it seems that personal nihilism versus optimism are more a function of person and circumstance than of essence of knowledge and Being The balance between resources allocated to secure versus insecure outcomes of differing values may be seen as one of optimizing expected outcome |
|
25 |
It is useful to consider alternative demonstrations of the fundamental principle |
All demonstrations here have some kinship to the idea that a Law is not something that ‘applies’ to things but is part of thing-hood in the large (as far as is known) and, therefore, there are no Laws of ‘non Being’ |
|
|
If the Universe were in a non-manifest (Void, nothingness) state there would be no Laws and therefore every state would emerge. However, this Void state is present alongside the manifest Universe which is therefore limitless |
The purpose of this form of the proof is to avoid positing the existence of an actual Void as though it were itself a manifest state |
|
|
As absence of Being, there is no distinction between the existence and non-existence of the Void which may therefore be taken to exist |
Since the assertion applies at the point of doubt for the first demonstration (earlier) its power is to remove that doubt. However the effect of this ‘demonstration’ is perhaps a movement in the direction rather than achievement of absolute certainty |
|
|
If we apply Ockham’s Razor to the question ‘What does not exist?’ i.e., to ‘What does not have Being?’ the answer is that there is no (Logical or Realistic) concept that has no object |
This is a heuristic or plausible argument whose function is to give further force to the fundamental principle. However, it is not a necessary argument (demonstration) |
|
26 |
Because there remain concerns about the fact and meaning of the assertion that ‘this Void is present alongside the manifest Universe’ doubt remains. I.e. need for an existential component of Realism (Logic) has not been removed |
This remnant of doubt is especially important on account of the immense significance of the metaphysics |
|
|
Even if demonstration of the fundamental principle were certain, there is no guarantee of realization while in any limited form |
|
|
|
(If certainty is not possible) the dual of doubt must be that of existential attitude rather than certainty |
I.e. appropriate existential attitude which is in general open to context but includes degrees of certainty in special situations Absence of certainty is (may be seen as) a value Certainty would not be a value if it were guaranteed |
|
|
An alternative to demonstration of its certainty is to regard thought and action based on the principle of limitlessness of the Universe as an experiment |
In absence of (certain) demonstration of the principle, the experiment has risk and potential for outcomes of immense value |
|
27 |
Civilization and individual are vehicles of realization |
Academic issue. Need more on civilization! For example, civilization as matrix |
|
|
In its internal and external endeavors civilization provides disciplines or means |
I.e.
means of realization |
|
|
‘Science’ is metaphorical for the instrumental |
Word ‘Science’? |
|
|
‘Yoga’ will stand for disciplines of Being and becoming |
Science and Yoga are not distinct Word ‘Yoga’ Change ‘of Being’ --> ‘essential to Being’? Range of disciplines here? |
|
28 |
A discipline systematizes knowledge in some area |
|
|
|
It provides methods for established kinds of problem |
Generally the methods are tools that have been found and reasoned as effective; they do not ‘guarantee’ success |
|
|
Further, the disciplines themselves develop… and there are some approaches to such development—e.g., ‘scientific method’ |
Empirical study of logics; schools of art |
|
|
It may be useful to inquire of method in general. Since the metaphysics provides an encompassing framework it will be valuable to assess its method |
So far its method has been occasionally mentioned but a complete critical assessment remains implicit |
|
29 |
Method—the metaphysics. The foundation of the basic concepts—experience, Being, Universe and others—was first in analysis of meaning of the primitive ideas; then in abstracting from detail what is beyond projective distortion and is thus an absolute given; and finally in naming the given. The abstraction is an aspect of synthesis of meaning in that it fixes meaning and in that via abstraction the reference or scope of the ideas is broadened (often, maximally) |
Method—1st fundamental form and presentation—for Ideas Complete the list of fundamental objects Selection and evaluation of the concepts is also important. This selection is naturally a process of trial and error in interaction with the developing theory and in interaction with experience and the thought of others. This multifaceted process of horizontal interaction among ideas and vertical interaction between content and approach (method) may be called reflexive |
|
|
Extension from concepts to metaphysical system. Analysis of the ideas of Law and Void enabled deduction of the fundamental principle. Abstraction of the ideas of the empirical (science) and logic enabled a second form of the fundamental principle: the Universe is the object of Logic. Again there is analysis and synthesis of meaning |
Insofar as the sciences and logics are approximations to it, the Logic is far from empty. However, vast regions of Logic await discovery (while in limited form this must be eternal process) |
|
|
Assessment. In outline, the method of the metaphysics is analysis and synthesis of meaning. These are obviously conceptual in nature. Further, analysis includes already built in experience; to this, synthesis of meaning adds discovery, experiment, and imagination |
Concepts are defined so as to be perfectly known via abstraction and selected so as to form an articulated system of metaphysics |
|
|
Extension to the practical and imperfect knowledge. Analysis and synthesis of meaning may be seen to include the hypothetico-deductive method of science and the way of development of systems of logic and mathematics; these are components of a general theory of objects. Although knowledge of objects in general is never perfect, it is framed by the metaphysics |
Applied Metaphysics For science, however, the named givens (the basic concepts of a scientific theory) are not known perfectly and so the theories of science, when regarded as universal, are invariably hypothetical. However, the theories may also be seen as compound facts over limited domains From the metaphysics—i.e. from the unlimited nature of the Universe, the conceptual theories of a detailed empirical science can never be universal but, for limited form must be ever in process and in conjunction with participation and immersion (for unlimited form universal knowledge is an act of perception and Being) These ‘theories in process’ have ultimate or perfect form as instruments of process according to pragmatic (‘good enough’) and Valuational criteria Method is a mix of the perfect and the pragmatic Since meaning is not invariably representational, other endeavors (art, humanities) may be understood in terms of analysis and synthesis of meaning (which for art is especially iconic). This extension is does not, e.g., make art particularly ‘methodical’ but it does provide a way to interpret schools of art and ways in which subjective and objective rendering change in art Further, insofar as the non-scientific disciplines are representational—explicitly or implicitly, they depict the real subject to Realism (Logic). Then, analysis-synthesis provides an approach to assessment and improvement of Realism We may tend to think of method as remote. However we now see method and content as coeval. This is natural and necessary as there is no external authority and with knowledge as object method is content |
|
30 |
Are there method, goal, and meaning for the entire endeavor of civilization? We tend to think not |
|
|
|
However, the metaphysics provides meaning, value, framework, and in its method for ideas it provides a beginning and metaphor (model) for an effective method for the endeavor |
Breadth (variety) is ever open while in limited form. Here there is no ‘method’ except imagination, action, criticism, and correction. This is an existential value—introduced and justified above—which may also be necessary on account of (1) the normal limits of form and death and (2) doubt regarding the fundamental principle |
|
|
From disciplines to civilization and from civilization to Civilization and the ultimate |
|
|
|
(The metaphysics shows senses of perfection to the limited disciplines) |
|
|
31 |
For the journey what is most significant about human being is the tension between two elements of our nature—on one hand creative freedom in being and ideas and on the other the given aspects of our nature and circumstance |
‘Special topics’ Link to other documents that analyze human being in detail? This view of human nature stands in contrast between the extreme views of human nature as (a) entirely determined and (b) perfectly free in choice of self and life. The tension is essential in providing the occasion and the challenge. The occasion is freedom; the source of challenge is that the freedom is of course not absolute—there are degrees of determinism, rationality and will are at most incomplete and there are conflict and abuse regarding freedom Morals may be regarded as tendencies that further quality and continuity of Being. Organisms have what may be thought of as innate morals in tendencies to protect the young and cooperate with their kind (even though this is not universal). For organisms with freedom of the human type, there is also freedom to override innate tendencies. This is a source of adaptive power and therefore an origin of explicit morals (ethics and theories of ethics or meta-ethics). Because rationality and its application have bounds, there can be no final system of human morals and ethics (even though there are more or less universal aspects of human morals). Immersion and participation—not to the exclusion of reason, empirical and experimental study—are not merely essential but in some degree the only way. The universal metaphysics provides a framework for understanding morals and an ultimate morality—not to be above ‘mundane’ morals but to mesh with it |
|
|
What is significant in the social sciences—sociology, economics, and political science and philosophy—is the supplement of our best knowledge in these disciplines by participation and immersion, all illuminated by the metaphysics (of this narrative) |
Sociology: the delineation and study of human groups and human individuals in group contexts Economics: the study and dynamics of natural and social resources emphasizing those resources contained in and created by society Political theory: study and dynamics of group decision making and its relation to group process |
|
|
The concepts of religion and Religion are to be differentiated. The former is studied empirically; the latter is a concept. The former depends on the religions; the latter is conditioned by understanding the Universe as a whole and human relations to the Universe. A possible conception of Religion is that it is the attempt to understand the Universe in this lifetime (with an emphasis on what is real and what is of value) and to live accordingly |
Science as understood and practiced today does not address the concerns of Religion. Modern secularism addresses this concern but inadequately. The world religions address the concerns but are archaic in their understanding and have typically become corrupted in a variety of ways The idea of Religion is misunderstood if it is thought to refer to another (e.g. non-material plane) and if it is thought that it should be separate from the secular world (to say that would be to say that the secular world should focus only on a fraction of the truth, i.e. that universal truth has no place in the secular world) |
|
|
A powerful conception is that Religion is the use of all dimensions of (human) being in attempting to understand and realize All Being |
Clearly suggested by the universal metaphysics; inclusive of rather than separate from science and social process; for limited form this notion of Religion is necessarily manifest as a process—a journey—that is unlimited in Be-ing, i.e. variety, extension, and duration of Being In this conception, Religion may call upon cumulative, shared and recorded history and accounts of insight and becoming; and it may also recognize individuals with special ability andor achievement in these endeavors |
|
|
Journey |
|
|
32 |
The way of the Journey is |
Method—2nd fundamental form and presentation—for Being, Becoming, and action This ‘section’ requires review, excision of repeated material, and enhancement of essential material ‘is’ --> ‘includes’ |
|
|
Analysis and synthesis of ways—i.e. of the received ways and the forging of ways at the front of what has been achieved—i.e. analysis and synthesis of Being |
Define ways; here or earlier, include what is below; remark the generalization of the method of the metaphysics |
|
|
Of and in the disciplines and the metaphysics |
|
|
|
Under mutual illumination, guidance, and inspiration in the journey |
I.e. the disciplines and their inner and outer methods provide example and inspiration for the metaphysics which guides the disciplines, the metaphysics itself, and the journey The way is ultimately imaginative, experiential, experimental, and critical This point is repeated elsewhere. Eliminate the repetition |
|
33 |
Analysis of ways reveals knowledge, metaphysics, and morals |
Here, careful analysis of ‘analysis’ is needed Remember that there is no ‘outside’; the way of the ways is the way |
|
|
Practices and practice in action; and the instruments of exploration and technology |
E.g. the practices of Yoga |
|
|
Catalysts of transformation |
The catalysts are approaches to ‘shaking’ the individual—psyche and body—out of routine and into limits of perception and Being. Crises contain catalytic elements. The advantage is finite transformation in comparison to linear, incremental change. A limit of the catalyst in isolation is that its (e.g. neural) changes tend to impermanence |
|
|
Learning—imagination, action and experiment, criticism, and correction |
Incremental reason is effective. Together with consciousness it provides illuminated continuity for the discontinuous transformations of catalytic action |
|
34 |
Synthesis—individual and community. Ideas and action (transformation) are the modes of becoming. Here, transformation is change that includes essential transformation of Being. The vehicles of transformation are Being (individual) and Civilization (community). Being fosters Civilization which cradles and fosters Being |
Projects—below; careful detail to be provided here or in another document Project, experiment, and journey closure; reporting results This item ‘synthesis’ and the next require careful review and provision of detail, perhaps in another document or documents—one each for transformation and growth of civilization |
|
|
Ideas |
The metaphysics; method; system of human knowledge The ideas are relatively mature Provide hyperlinks to details / detailed but essential versions |
|
|
Being—transformation |
Spiritual practice—i.e. practice that recognizes the whole and responsibility to the whole; catalytic experiment; learning This item is detailed in the next item—coordinate to minimize repetition |
|
|
Civilization—organic and technological growth |
Detailed below; a synthesis ‘experiments’ and ‘social transformation’ |
|
35 |
Synthesis I—Being and its Transformation |
Transformation of Being. Emphasizing the Individual, grounded in this world—in Community The modes of Being emphasize Nature which includes organism and environment, Society (culture), and Psyche Note that this point already has timelines implicit. Make this explicit and extend to the next point |
|
|
Everywhere and when—Yoga practice and action; death and crisis |
Meditation on transience and wholeness. Meditation on death as final—as catalyst to completion of commitments… and for acceptance. Meditation on death as transient—previous lives, after death—gate to the limitless. Perceiving magnitude, variety, and Identity; dedication and affirmation |
|
|
Here and now: immediate—routine, write, exercise, diet, chores, honesty |
Home and community |
|
|
Culture—care and sharing; charisma and initiative; moral behavior; abandon |
Public speaking Travel. Intellectual and spiritual tour—walking, bicycle, and public transportation |
|
|
Nature—gateway to ultimate, immersion, inspiration, and catalyst |
Catalysts—e.g., fasting, isolation, exertion Immersion and action are essential and catalytic in spiritual and practical process |
|
36 |
Synthesis II—Civilization of the Universe |
Transformation of Being—Civilization and Technology or Artifact |
|
|
Organic—Civilization as matrix—individual transformation, sharing; communication and charisma |
Metaphor—islands connected in the deep Shared endeavor via participation, immersion, and in a research community |
|
|
Artifact and technology—theory—artificial intelligence and life; ontology, cosmology, cognitive science; design and construction |
Independent, adjunct and symbiotic; hardware andor software; designed, tinkering, and evolving; shared endeavor and research community |
|
37 |
Process of A Journey in Being—a description and ongoing report of this journey in process |
Synthesis of the following in principle and concrete form Program detail will require a separate and very concrete plan in an appendix or separate document |
|
|
Ideas. I find that the ideas are never complete. However, I feel maturity of ideas has been achieved |
As manifest above. Significance of the ideas includes (a) Perfect, unique, ultimate, universal metaphysics (b) Implication for the major disciplines and endeavors (the disciplines—especially logic, metaphysics, science, mathematics; endeavors—especially politics, religion, and real spiritual attainment) |
|
|
Transformation of Being. Ideas are a part of transformation. However essential transformation is at a beginning |
Here is an assessment of ‘work’ so far Discovery and development of a dynamic of transformation (the framework of the metaphysics) Yoga in action, self transformation, self healing, and focus Nature as inspiration for understanding and transformation of self (therefore of community). ‘Beyul’ (Tibetan for secret or hidden land) as map of Being This needs to be expanded, improved, then reduced to essence |
|
|
Civilization. All very much in a beginning and planning stage |
Yoga in work with community Institute / group Definition of spiritual, political, and economic agenda. Immersion and participation Artifact and technology—see above Word ‘Institute’ This needs to be expanded, improved, then reduced to essence |
|
38 |
The central achievements of the narrative are the universal metaphysics and the universality of realization |
Contribution |
|
|
There are numerous implications for and potential interactions with the disciplines of human knowledge and human endeavors. More than this, the ultimate and universal character of the metaphysics provides new and in some ways ultimate interpretations of Logic, Mathematics, Science and the Sciences, Metaphysics, Method—as analysis and synthesis of meaning and Being… its perfection for metaphysics in the direction of depth but openness in variety… and that it is coeval with ‘content’, aspects of the humanities and arts, Values; and Yoga interpreted as the transformation of Being and its ways and the values of meshing this life, this world with realization of the ultimate |
|