The aim of the way of being is to explore
and know the individual and the universe… [ ‒ ]
Plan—improve the ‘headings’; expand contract all with JavaScript? Print this for editing
|
… in terms of experience, reflection, and
action—ranging over all dimensions (e.g., extension and change or
spacetime) and their absence—beyond the worlds of humanism, empirical
science, speculative metaphysics, and mythic and religious cosmology, and,
so far as possible, to
know and realize the peak of being.
|
The exploration shall be via direct experience and its hypothetically conceived, internally
consistent patterns. That, we shall call empirical as long as the patterns remain consistent with further experience. We call it
rational if the direct experience is perfect and the patterns are its
necessary consequences (note that though there is similarity, these
conceptions of the empirical and the rational are not intended to coincide
with or capture other uses).
|
May the rational go beyond the empirical? Since
direct experience is not known to be of the entire real, the empirical may
be limiting, even in the extreme. Can the rational go validly beyond the
empirical so far? Yes, if further facts are encountered
in direct experience, if there is unrecognized experience, or if there is
admissible indirect experience. It is critical to note that though we talk
of ‘going beyond the empirical’, what the phrase means is
‘going beyond what is recognized as empirical so far’. There is
no going beyond what is empirically possible to some being. It will be seen
in a narrative of the
way, that there is nothing beyond the empirically
possible.
|
To go beyond the empirical in
the sense of the previous paragraph is achieved in
a narrative of the way, resulting in a rational system, based in
elementary and perfectly known facts, which goes limitlessly beyond standard
empirical and rational paradigms—beyond the empiricism of science and
humanism, beyond speculative metaphysics, and rationally and cosmologically
beyond most religious worldviews. It is ultimate knowledge of the universe
as ultimate, in the senses of ‘ultimate’ explained in
discussing foundations, below. This system may be seen as a container
for the empirical and the result is a real metaphysics,
with a rational or ideal and perfect aspect that reveals a limitless
universe and an empirical and pragmatic aspect that enables negotiation
within the ideal.
|
Questioning the rational development—Is
the real metaphysics well founded?
From a foundational point of view, if self-foundation were possible, an
ideal system would be self-founding. However, self-foundation would seem
and is generally to be thought impossible. But let us investigate.
Pragmatically, we begin with the present situation. It includes some degree
of foundation. We reflect on the situation, perhaps improving the
foundation. But rather than being truly founding in the ideal sense, there
is a process—the world as we find it ® reflection on values ® improvement of language, knowledge, and
foundation ® action and implementation ® repetition ® the world as we find it, afresh. At this level,
it would seem that world, values, linguistic meaning, knowledge, and
foundation, remain in interaction, fundamentally interwoven at root, never
detached, never ideal.
|
A foundation in retaining
only the perfect in the concrete or pragmatic—there is, however, a filter from the pragmatic to
simple perfect facts such as “there is the universe that is all
being” and “there is experience in itself and of the
universe”, and to simple perfect inference such as “given
statement of a simple perfect fact, it either obtains or does not”
and thus, the means of knowing, or reason, are not a priori to (do not come
before) knowledge. Rather, knowledge and its means emerge
together—the rational and empirical are not exclusive, even logic is
empirical while also rational. This leads to the rational system above
which is perfectly founded and reveals an ideal, relative
to which the pragmatic level needs only pragmatic but not perfect
foundation. Now, though that foundation is not perfect in terms of standard
criteria—e.g., correspondence or coherence criteria—it is
perfect relative to the value of ultimate
realization revealed by the rational system, for (i) there is no better
instrument (it is in fact the only instrument) and (ii) from the rational
system, it will realize the ideal (in moving from form to form, from cosmos
to cosmos, and so to the ultimate).
|
On the nature of the abstraction—is the abstract removed from the
concrete? Note that the filter from the concrete is
abstraction, but what results is not abstract in the sense of remote or
removed—instead, it is an essence of the concrete. The
abstract—what remains after abstraction—will
be sufficiently filtered that it is part of the concrete that is perfectly
known. Thus, the real metaphysics is perfect, and the sense of the
perfection is a dual of the ideal and the pragmatic.
|
Implications for the significance of science and
philosophy. It does not follow that the history of human
endeavor in science, philosophical understanding, or what is valid in
spiritual endeavor, are negated, or that in their local context their
foundational problems are resolved; rather they are placed in a new and
ultimate context; and in that ultimate context—
|
The issue of depth or foundation is settled, as it is for breadth relative
to limitless being, but
for beings, while in limited form, the question and realization of the variety or breadth of being remain ever
open—an eternal adventure.
|
On the identity of the universe and the
individual and their magnitude—In
the real metaphysics it is found that the universe is the possible in the
greatest consistent sense of possibility. Consequently, individuals inherit
this power. It is found that, with experience used in a sense more general
than above, the universe and individual are essentially experiential and
that experience, employed intrinsically and instrumentally, is the path and
means of realization. The real metaphysics entails that, except where there
would be inconsistency, limits thought absolute are not so, but may be
real.
|
Does the real metaphysics minimize the immediate
world? It might be thought that the real metaphysics
reflects a thought to minimize ‘ordinary’ or
‘everyday’ life. That is not the case. Rather, it is found that
the everyday is part of the way to the ultimate. The ultimate illuminates
and guides the everyday, and the everyday illustrates and is instrumental
toward the ultimate. Indeed, the immediate and the ultimate, viewed
properly, will be seen as one.
|
Resolution of the problems of pain and death follow—why there is pain, why pain is
unavoidable, and how pain and suffering are best addressed; and death,
though real, is not absolute, for it is a gateway to the ultimate. However,
an ideal, though rarely achieved gate is a path in ‘this’
life—as in yoga as
any way, traditional and modern, of living so as to realize the ultimate.
[
‒ ]
|
To live in the way is
to live, alive to the transience, pain, and joy of the present moment in
itself and as shared discovery and realization of the ultimate.
Resources—précis narrative (outline for
complete version, minimal version) every
day path template, universal
template, field
manual, suggested reading, site plan, and useful links for the way.
Contact—amitra@horizons-2000.org | Anil Mitra, 902 N Street, Eureka, California
95501-2045, USA | 707 407 9501. I invite inquiry, discussion, and
contribution to the site and its support.
|