Vehicles of exploration begin with the human—the individual, psyche, and civilization6. We are interested in the individual, civilization and destiny 7

Significance of the term ‘Journey’

The ideas of this essay developed over many years and through multiple interwoven paths. I began to see the process as a journey. The term ‘journey’ has metaphorical content. However some aspects of it—that it has no end, that there may be goals but the outcome is not predicted and there is openness to opportunities that are goal changing—are intended literally

The narrative develops a view of life which includes a conception of the greatest ends for individual and civilization and shows that this greatest realization must be an endless and intelligent but serendipitous journey. This view is developed in the essay and outlined below in A Worldview

Significance of Being

The objectives of the essay emphasize the human—the immediate—and the most inclusive. The human form has limits. While remaining human there are limits to the form and its knowledge of the Universe and of its own form. There are limits and confusions regarding the kinds of thing in the Universe. There is, therefore, need for a neutral term to refer to the variety, structure, and form in and of the Universe. The term used in this essay is ‘Being 8’; whatever is in the Universe has Being and the Universe is all Being. Journey in Being is an exploration of Being

Contents of the Narrative

There are two main divisions, Ideas and Journey

The first main division Ideas develops understanding of the Universe in general and particular aspects. The general aspect is a metaphysics 9 and its applications. The particular concerns our cosmological system and, particularly, human being and the human world. This division is at a far more complete and mature stage than the next

Division Journey takes up approaches to and concrete plans for the exploration; it also reports on the exploration so far. The explorations so far and designs for further exploration are at a relatively early stage. This is essential in that for a Limited form exploration will be seen to always be ‘beginning’. However it is factually true in that the present is a time of transition from ideas to acting out those ideas. While the exploration so far and designs derive from the ideas as well as the traditions of ideas and exploration it remains necessary, even while committing to concrete action, to remain open to the visions revealed in the Ideas

The final division Resources has supplementary commentary. Its contents are (a) Stories or examples of process (b) Sources of inspiration (c) An estimate of the contributions of this work and (d) A glossary and partial list of sources for the work

A Worldview

An exploration needs a map. At the core of the ideas is a large scale map or worldview. What follows is a brief description of this view

Foundation

The metaphysics or worldview of the narrative is central to the development. It will be worthwhile to give a brief constructive demonstration 10 of the metaphysics. Brief demonstration11—Being is that which is there, over some ranges of time and space 12; this is a definition and therefore allows that there is, in fact, no Being. If there were no Being there would be neither Experience nor illusion of Experience; therefore there is, in fact, Being 13 (i.e. there are existing ‘things’). A law is our reading of a pattern; the actual pattern is the Law; Laws have Being. The Universe is All Being—over all time and space; it therefore exists. A law is a reading of a pattern; the actual pattern is the Law; therefore Laws have Being and the Universe contains all Laws. If from a state of non-Being 14, there were some state that cannot emerge that would be a Law in the Void; however, in a state of non-Being there are no Laws and the alleged non-emergence would be a contradiction. Therefore, every state would emerge from non-Being. However, non-Being is ever present either as the Universe in its non-manifest states or alongside the Universe in its manifest states. Therefore, every state emerges—i.e., The Universe has no Limits. This ends the demonstration15and we now turn to its interpretation

The Worldview and Some of its Consequences

The Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics, abbreviated FP 16, lies at the center of the metaphysics. One form of the principle is—The Universe has no Limits. It is essential to understand the meaning of the statement and understanding may begin with its demonstration and deployment which are undertaken 17 in the essay. Here, some consequences of the principle will illustrate its meaning and bring out the flavor of the developments. Note that, given FP, the consequences are trivial. Some consequences are cosmological—the Universe is without Limit in extension, duration and variety, e.g., there are cosmological systems without Limit to number and variety of form including the forms of ‘physical law’. Some consequences concern manifestation and Identity—the Universe has manifest and non-manifest phases; it has Identity which has acute, diffuse and non-manifest phases; however there is continuity of Identity (soul 18) across the non-manifest. Some consequences concern parts of the Universe, especially the individual—except for conditions of coexistence, individuals inherit the Limitlessness and Identity of the Universe (else the Universe would not be Limitless). These conclusions have consequences for the shape of exploration of the Universe, i.e. of Being: while the individual remains in Limited form, realization must be an endless process of summits without limit to elevation and variety—and of dissolutions—and the process may therefore be described a journey of ever-freshness 19; however, the individual is not limited to Limited form and realizes the ultimate and (as in this statement) may and therefore will have knowledge of this ultimate even while in Limited form, which knowledge may occur in varying degrees of acuity, completeness, and intensity—in cognition and in affect (i.e. intellect-meditation). Civilization may be described as an intermediate phase: that of aware individuals and cultures growing in magnitude and conscious and other linking across time and space with others; one, many, civilizations come to an end; Civilization itself grows (and contracts but Civilization itself maintains links over non-manifest phases)

To the extent that these conclusions are true, exploration of the Universe and our relations to it shall be an exploration by and of Being and may derive guidance from the metaphysics of the essay

It will emerge that the metaphysics of the narrative is a unique, ultimate, and Universal Metaphysics 20

To what extent can we find the Fundamental Principle and its foregoing consequences to be valid?

Criticisms of The Worldview

Criticism is essential. A motive to criticism is doubt which arises when we are concerned with validation and certainty. A first virtue to criticism is that it enables validation and estimation of degree of certainty. Responding to criticism is more than validating—it is empowering for in responding to criticism we may see the truest meaning of what we criticize and find its most effective and powerful formulation

Since the Fundamental Principle and its conclusions have been demonstrated, the concern regarding validity falls on validity of its demonstration and on potential conflict with other areas of human knowledge. It will be effective to address the issue of conflict here and to defer criticism of the demonstration to the essay. FP and its conclusions may be counter-intuitive especially to those enculcated in materialism and pragmatism, not excluding ‘common experience pragmatism’. For example, FP and its consequences might appear to violate what we know from science 21. In the emergence of the metaphysics and its consequences I have been struck again and again by its apparently counter-intuitive and even contradictory character. It is therefore important to note that the metaphysics has been demonstrated; it is not a ‘speculative’ metaphysics; this constitutes special motivation to resolution of potential paradoxes. Resolution may occur in the following stages (1) Showing that there is no actual contradiction between (a) science in its valid domains and the metaphysics and (b) between various critical philosophies and the metaphysics (2) Showing that the metaphysics in fact agrees—and must agree—with science in its valid domains and that it extends beyond those domains. If there is no contradiction as contemplated in item 1, then the agreement with science in its valid domains is obvious and the extension 22 beyond those domains is obvious from the discussion of FP and its consequences. Therefore item 1 is critical to resolution of potential and obvious 23 paradoxes. We take this up in the next paragraph in terms of ‘Standard limits to the Tradition’ where Tradition will mean the sum of valid knowledge from the entire tradition of human culture and civilization from beginnings to the present

The Tradition

In this essay ‘tradition’ refers to the sum total of human achievement so far. The meaning of tradition is similar to that of culture. The tradition includes science, art, literature, technology, religion, the humanities as well as other endeavors that make up our world civilization

The significance of the tradition is (a) It is necessary to see that the metaphysics is consistent with what is valid in the tradition (b) The interacting join of the tradition and the worldview of the metaphysics will be mutually enhancing

The Human Tradition and its Standard Limits

The Human Tradition and its Standard Limits. I call the limits of which I speak ‘standard’ not because they are not held by all persons including thinkers or because they are inherent to all points of view but because they are sufficiently widespread to constitute one standard view. I first focus on science. Science describes a universe of a certain size and age and with certain elements. Some thinkers with a ‘positivist’ bent hold that we should not talk of anything else and others say that there is essentially nothing else. It is interesting that this view should be explicitly maintained today for it was shown to be invalid by the philosopher David Hume whose writings from the eighteenth century are prominent in the history of western thought. Hume observed that there is no necessity to theories that arise from generalization and/or projection. We can understand why we might subscribe to such necessity as a practical matter; however there is in fact no such necessity. What lies outside the valid domain of science; what is the size and duration of that domain and what is the variety of things in it? According to its inductive ‘logic’, whether mere or projective generalization, science has no purchase on the ‘size’ (extent, duration) and shape of its ‘outside’—i.e., from that logic, as Hume pointed out, we can make no necessary deduction regarding that size and shape (variety). If we think that size-variety is little to nothing, it is because we mistakenly allow science (so far) to define our world view. It is of course reasonable to expect continuity into the near regions of extent, duration, and variety. On the other hand, the same standards of reasonability make it unreasonable to project into the far regions or even to project such regions (except perhaps to the vicinity of the domain of validity). In other words, science is neutral, not persuasive, regarding the existence and extents of its outside or ‘complementary’ region. Therefore a metaphysics that agrees with science in its valid domains has no conflict with science. We have lifted potential limits to the metaphysics from science and simultaneously made clear contingent limits of today’s science. Are there any requirements on the complementary region? Science requires no limits and FP shows that there are no Limits 24! What if that is interpreted to assert that logical contradictions can obtain? Obviously this cannot be allowed if the logics we entertain are valid. However, not all logics are known to be valid; nor are the field of logics known complete (however, there is of course an immense core of logic that we hold certain). We therefore introduce a new conception, ‘Logic 25’, the requirement that our referential conceptions have actual reference; this Logic is a constraint on conceptions but not a Limit on the Universe and we may extend it trivially to require that referential conceptions cannot contradict empirically known facts 26

Critical Philosophies and their Limits

Critical Philosophies and their Limits. To more completely address concerns of the tradition it is necessary to address the critical philosophies. A first critique is empirical: if metaphysics is not based in Experience how can it claim validity? We respond to this criticism by noting that the brief demonstration above began in Experience as an essential case of Being and remained in Experience (All Being and existence of pattern). Another critique is that metaphysical systems are speculative. This is of course true of many metaphysical systems of the past; however the present system, though suggested by imagination, is firmly founded in Experience and demonstration. A third critique of many metaphysical systems especially the Platonic and those of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were idealist—i.e. their ultimate reals were ideal 27 in nature. The present metaphysics posits neither mind nor matter and in this regard is superior to any substance metaphysics; nor does the present system arbitrarily deny substance, it finds it untenable. Another critique is that of post-modernism. Coming from failure of the grand systems of the past, e.g. Hegelianism, and their political derivatives, e.g. Marxism, post-modernism posits that ‘grand narrative’ systems are untenable. The general critique is true for many but not shown true for all possible systems. In any case the present system is neither speculative nor grand nor systematic in the sense of something imposed rather than emergent. Another criticism is that today, in the twenty-first century, metaphysics has come to acquire other meanings such as metaphysic of experience and study of abstract objects 28. These are of course valid studies however their motivation as metaphysics is in part that they continue aspects of the intent of older meanings of metaphysics while responding to its criticisms; here however we have refuted the putative demise of the older naïve metaphysics

The approaches from science and philosophy lie at the center of the tradition called secular humanism. In the modern world the major complements to secular humanism are the approach from traditional religion and the ‘non approach of non commitment 29’

Religion as an Aspect of the Tradition

To complete discussion of the tradition it is necessary to say something of religion. One of the original values of the religions is that they were cultural systems that bound people to culture and society, and people to nature, and people to the idea of a larger world (which is still a valid notion). New religions arose in response to corruptions and changing needs 30. Today we tend to find systems that address the same functions elsewhere, if anywhere at all. Today, religions continue to have a strong base; however that base has been eroded significantly by science, education, and better economic circumstance. However, religion continues to provide allegory; and it remains perhaps to find adequate replacement. The secular literature of today is based on a largely materialist world view. However, the metaphysics reveals the immense inadequacy of this perspective despite its practical values. There is need therefore for a new ‘allegory’ that is simultaneously true and possessed of poetry and that may be based in the metaphysics. This could perhaps be called Religion 31—search for all Being by beings in all modes of Being. Despite all criticism, one value of religion is that it has not abandoned this search even if it continues it in grotesque form

Conclusion. The Worldview and Tradition

What may we conclude regarding the mutual criticism and interaction of the metaphysics of the essay and tradition (the history of culture including science, metaphysics, and religion)? We have found that the interaction is mutually corrective and constructive in showing the nature of the boundaries (limits) of tradition, in refining the metaphysics, and in showing that the metaphysics continues tradition beyond its boundaries to the ultimate

The Journey and its Goal

Journey in Being is a conceptual and experimental exploration in and of all modes of Being and its transformations. Its interest is in Being as such. Its first vehicles are the immediate ones—the inert modes of course (matter and so forth to the extent that our conception of matter has Being) and then those of agents, i.e. of individuals and civilization. The process starts in the ground of the present and its goal is discovery and realization of the ultimate

The division Journey takes up the experimental exploration. Its values and approaches derive from the ideas, especially the metaphysics and its application. It also derives from the tradition 32, e.g. in ideas of and approaches to civilization, e.g. in traditional and modern approaches to transformation. In some ways the traditional are more pertinent to the narrative—meditation, for example, concerns the Being of the individual while science and its related technologies so far emphasize the material and the instrumental. What is emphatically important is that the approach should remain open to these considerations and to the experimental for (1) I (we) remain at the beginning and (2) Approaches from the tradition, especially those of self-transformation, sciences of society, philosophies of civilization have been overcommitted to premature concrete forms

IDEAS

The central goals of the Ideas are knowledge of ‘Being’ and Universe and recognition that this knowing remains and must remain in process

In the tradition there are practical approaches that sacrifice full precision and completeness for results. Complementary approaches, e.g. metaphysics, which attempt precision and completeness are important; they are neither more nor less important than the practical: the perfect and the practical complement one another. Metaphysics—ancient through recent—is generally agreed to have had limited success. Here, we take up the suggestion initiated in the Introduction that powerful positive metaphysics is possible and may be developed

The goals of the Ideas include the perfect, the practical, and their union. Chapters Being and Universe focus on the perfect; the chapter World reviews practical knowledge and its union with the perfect

Being

The intent of this section is to study and to motivate study of Being. A central motive is that ‘Being’ is a container concept for what we do not know and therefore allows and encourages emergence of knowing from un-knowing

Since the intent is to found an understanding (knowledge) of the Universe as it is, it is essential that the foundation be more than ‘practical’; perfect or metaphysical knowledge is essential. In fact, given the object perfection is practical. Is perfection possible? This is part of the development

It is convenient to begin the discussion with some preliminaries rather than with Being itself

Meaning

A concept is, roughly, a unit of meaning; the statement is rough because we have not yet defined meaning and because it is not clear that meaning has units; practically of course we may take some starting point as the measure of the unit

A Concept is any mental content; concepts are or may be realized as Concepts. We will see that Concepts are examples if not units of meaning; however it will be seen that there are no absolute units therefore the distinction fades

A concept is a collection of icons of which some may have empty iconic character and thereby be designated as ‘signs’. Here concern is with referential concepts (non referential concepts may be brought under the referential umbrella by understanding the concepts-in-themselves and some may be brought under that umbrella by finding implicit reference); therefore the linguistic phenomenon that not all concepts or utterances refer (at least explicitly), though interesting, is not pertinent to our purpose

In order to refer, a concept must have iconic character. Consider ‘there is a tiger’. Unless the word tiger is associated with some iconic character, circumstantial or intrinsic, it cannot make reference to anything—it has no content. A compound referential concept may have non iconic components in association with the iconic. Words, at least some of them, are non-iconic and serve as efficient ways to represent, think, and communicate complex concepts (which requires that speaker and listener have the same associations, e.g. by belonging to the same context). Sentences are arrangements of words in which the arrangement may have iconic character regardless of the iconic content of the individual worlds; we could but need not generalize and say ‘sentences are concepts arranged so as to be in referential form’

A concept (sense) referring to an object (reference) constitutes meaning. A concept and all its objects defines an intension and extension and constitutes complete meaning (when such is possible)

Contexts, therefore meanings are not fixed. For completions of meaning a complete context is necessary. An example of such a context is the metaphysics to be developed. Perhaps there may be perfect lesser contexts. We will also see that ‘good enough’ reference, in addition to practical utility, is perfect in some senses (even though referentially incomplete andor imperfect). Generally, meaning must be fluid; this enables accommodating the multiple contexts of our world context and exploration which is context expansion. For usefulness meaning must have some degree of fixity. ‘Optimal’ meaning is some balance between fluidity and fixity

It is essential to remember that meaning is and requires a concept in relation to its objects; the case of empty reference is of course not excluded

Existence

Definition

To exist is to be; whatever is there has existence

Problems of the Concept of Existence

Some of the following problems seem technical and theoretical at first glance. What is their relevance and to what are they relevant? This emerges in the discussion

1. ‘To be’ is undefined; definition would finally come back to ‘existence’ and so be circular

The problem of definition being finally unfounded or circular is quite general. A term in a dictionary—even a ‘perfect’ dictionary—must cycle back to itself or be undefined. How then do we understand dictionary definitions? It is because somewhere in the circle of definition, reference to our common context, the one of our enculturation, is made. The context is in general roughly defining and so dictionary definitions are in general rough. However, there may be some aspects of the context that are precise. There is some context. There are objects or if not then at least conceptions and their relations to the world. These are perfect examples of ‘to be’. Ostensive definition is definition by pointing and naming; and we have just seen a perfect ostensive definition of ‘to be’

2. Given illusion, does anything exist?

If I have the Experience of perceiving something, it may be an illusion; however, either the ‘thing’ or the illusion exists

Therefore the concept of existence is not empty

However we may be concerned about robustness. What is robustness? The things of our world seem to have solidity that is here is in question. This concern will be addressed in the discussion on projection

3. Given projection, i.e. the fact that in knowing something our minds contribute to the thing as known, does anything exist as we see it? Does anything exist in itself?

We have already seen that at least something exists in itself, i.e. the thing and/or the illusion

Regarding projection we will find in the section on Experience and continuing through the narrative that there is immense range of ‘perfect objects’ that are not subject to projective distortion or incompleteness and that objects as seen in projection, which may be called practical objects, can also be seen as or defining objects in themselves in some clearly defined senses

Thus we may say that existence is rich or varied

The discussion also begins to show robustness. The emergence of robustness continues in the narrative. As is common in questioning ‘common sense’ we find that the common sense notion of robustness has validity in some common context but does not extend further than that. Beyond that range the common notion breaks down and that is good in so far as it is good to know the truth. What is the nature of this ‘goodness’? It is essential in discovery and knowledge of the Universe as it is. This does not imply that any one version of knowledge—metaphysical, scientific, or common—is better. In the end these ways of knowing are in communication, interaction, mutual correction, and synthesis

4. On this account we do not know what exists and it seems that it is possible that none of the things we normally ascribe existence do in fact exist

The problem is to show that existence is rich, i.e. that there are more than Experiences and illusions and that the range of existing things is varied. This is demonstrated beginning in the section on Experience and continuing through the essay. We will see that there is an immense range of ‘perfect objects’ and, as already noted, the practical objects which are not objects at all in a pure sense are objects in some appropriate sense

5. Existence applies to all things and so is empty and trivial

Precisely existence pertains to concepts and their objects (the extension, i.e. all the objects, may be empty). If the concept, e.g. of a tiger, has objects we say tigers exist. If the concept, e.g. a square circle in a Euclidean plane, has no objects we say it does not exist 33

6. Consider the statement ‘unicorns do not exist’. If in fact there are no unicorns, then the term ‘unicorn’ in the statement has no meaning and therefore the meaning of the statement itself is unclear. This is the problem of the non-existent object

This objection is addressed in principle by our considerations of meaning and the example of the tiger. ‘Tigers exist’ means there are things that correspond to my concept of a tiger. ‘Unicorns do not exist’ means that there are no things that correspond to the concept of a unicorn (formed, e.g., from mythic accounts)

Commentary

One objection to objections, i.e., doubt regarding doubt, is there is an important place for deferring doubt till solid development has taken place. This is not an objection to doubt as such. However it concerns when to doubt. That we might defer doubt till conceptual development enables us to understand the doubt is optimal use of doubt in understanding. A practical doubt regarding doubt is that there are times that call for action and attitudes conducive of action (of course any course of action too can be taken to extreme so even in presence of ‘positive attitude’ there is role for the element of doubt and equanimity)

Objects

An Object is that which has existence

Discussion of meaning has prepared us to evaluate this statement. If I say ‘there is a tiger’, my practical meaning is clear. However, if I imply that the tiger is exactly as I see, I am likely in error; and the error is not serious if I restrict discourse to the practical but it is in immense error if I universalize and so ignore projection

Existence is a perfect object. Demonstration. Perhaps tigers are not real in the above sense. However, the reality of tigers is either a fact or an illusion; if nothing existed there would be neither fact nor illusion

Result. There is existence

The principle of this demonstration is that there is Abstraction from the world of experience to what in experience is beyond projection. Thus the approach or method is that an aspect of experience that is projection-free has been abstracted, pointed out and named (existence)

Experience

Definition—A Preliminary Conception of ‘Experience’

Experience is subjective awareness

Commentary

The term experience will be used in a number of informal ways in the essay. Therefore the defined concept will be written in capitalized form—Experience

Later we will attempt to broaden the root meaning of Experience within bounds of realism

Examples

The sensations of the brilliance of a sunset, in the sunset—the feelings that constitute the shape and size and color of the sun and of the scene over which it sets which also constitute the perception, the feeling in having a thought that also constitutes the thought and its contours, the feeling in having a memory that also constitutes the memory and its contours

Problems and Resolutions

1. Is there Experience?

Why is this problem significant? The concept is significant though not directly founding in the metaphysical development. Even though not essential we would therefore like it to be secure. A second reason to consider the problem is that since Experience is difficult to explain in a materialist view and many modern philosophers and scientists have problems with the concept and some minimize and others even deny it; the issue will be further considered in Cosmology

However, the fact of Experience is not problematic. Experience is so fundamental and so ever present in human being that it can be denied no more than we can deny our own Being. This too has criticism—perhaps human being and Experience are illusions and the response is that illusions are Experience. It might now be argued that on this argument Experience is real but the reality is thin. That too is not valid; we have the richness of all our experiences; perhaps, though, it is not robust in the sense that even though rich it has no object 34. We will shortly see however that Experience has a rich object world

2. Perhaps there is nothing but Experience

Given the richness of Experience and the notion of a Limited individual incapable of having the entire range of Experience the following possibilities arise. (1) The Experience in question is that of a Limited individual who knows a rich real world 35. (2) Experience is the world. The Experience in (2) is either the sum of individual Experiences (and a somewhat common real world) or the relabeling of the world as the Experience of a Being (e.g. the world itself) of (far) greater than what we think individual capacity to be 36

There is a rich real world. The reality of the world revealed in Experience shows the robustness of Experience. Thus Experience is rich and robust. Richness of Experience alone does not entail richness of a real world (existence whose fact and quality are independent of Experience even though our first knowledge of quality in Experience is not identical to objective quality). However robustness of a rich range of Experience does indeed imply richness of existence

3. Experience has little significance

The following are preliminary to discussion of Being

Primary—Human Theater and its richness. Metaphorically, Experience is the ocean of Being; the framework that is so immediate as to not be seen; Human Being is the being that can ‘see’ Experience (and therefore the mistake that the being of Experience is subjective)

Other—from the resolutions to the problems

The primary significance of Experience is for the richness of the ‘human theater’. Metaphorically, Experience is the ocean of Being; the framework that is so immediate as to not be seen; Human Being is the being that can ‘see’ Experience (and therefore the mistake that the being of Experience is subjective)

A secondary source of significance lies in the resolution of the problems of Experience and Existence and their manner of resolution

Being

Introduction

This chapter on Being did not begin with explicit discussion of Being. Explicit discussion was deferred so as to first set up a mode of perfect argument (analysis of meaning, abstraction of perfect meaning, naming); to provide as example two primary cases of Being, existence (itself) and Experience; and to anticipate ‘reality’ of Being (the reality of existence and of Experience exemplify the case that there is Being), robustness of Being (as shown by robustness of existence), and richness of Being (shown by the richness of Experience and that reference to a rich external world)

Why Being? We can add to earlier responses to this question. The neutrality of the concept will be empowering. From neutrality there are further but no other uses. As the most neutral or general of concepts, it is necessary that other valid concepts should lie within Being. Harbored within the idea of Being is not just a neutrality toward different things and aspects of things and toward different kinds but also to our modes of knowing this may be seen as necessary when we reflect that our concepts are also in the world; this will be seen more clearly and vividly as understanding of the Universe emerges in the metaphysics to be developed. Further empowerment is obtained from these further uses both in this essay and in other writing and thought

Definition

Being is that which is there

Note that Being is so general that it may be used as verb, adjective, or property; and thereby as container for all ‘beings’; however, as noted in the literature, Being does not refer specifically to particular beings or even all beings regarded as entities

Nature of the Definition

The definition is again perfect ostensive definition

Problems of Being

Problem of Distinction from Existence

Existence has been thought of as ‘being-in-relation’ in contrast to Being as ‘being-as-such’

Since objects are known they appear to be a case of ‘Being-in-relation’

For pure objects, however, the distinction ‘Being-in-itself’ and ‘Being-in-relation’ is empty. For non-pure—practical—objects, there is an empirical distinction that will vanish in the conceptual understanding of the Universal Metaphysics

In Chapter Universe it will be seen that the only eternal entities-in-themselves are the Universe, because it is all Being, and the Void because, trivially, it has no manifest Being to be not-in-itself

Problems Similar to those of Existence

Therefore the problems of Being are the essentially as those of existence treated earlier. For issues of triviality see the discussion of existence. For the fact or givenness, richness, and robustness and the meanings of these terms of Being see discussions of existence and Experience

It is important that richness and robustness (and its nature) have just begun to emerge

A Special Problem of Being

Being has been used with special connotations. We will want to consider some of those connotations. We will want to use some of the valid connotations—those that are significant to the goals of the narrative—and dispense with invalid ones

The preliminary neutral treatment of Being will facilitate these goals

The special nature of human being will be taken up later. The preliminary discussion of Being does not depend on the discussion of human being

The meaning of divine Being, whether it has objects or not, is illuminated by the preliminary neutral discussion of Being and development of a neutral metaphysics

What do thinkers mean by ‘Non-being’ as a case of Being? The notion sounds contradictory. However, when I die I may be at least metaphorically said to have non-Being. The metaphysics to be developed gives this concrete meaning, e.g., in terms of potential Being. The terms ‘non-Being’ and ‘potential Being’ are not new but the development of ideas in this essay gives them clear and concrete meaning. The present development, one of whose aspects is initial non-commitment, clears up much vagueness of traditional discussion. The initial non-commitment allows commitment to emerge naturally rather than suffer errors of premature and forced commitment

Why is there Being?

This has been called the fundamental problem of metaphysics. The resolution of the problem is trivial in the present development

The issue of what has Being, especially in the form ‘What concepts perfectly point to objects (that have Being)?’ emerges as the fundamental problem

What has Being?

It has been shown that the following have Being: Experience, concepts, objects, existence, and Being—yes, Being has Being

The following will also be seen to have Being—Universe, Domain, Law, Void… and Logos

The sense of the following will become clearer in chapter Universe

If there are Gods, if there is creation, if there are ideas, if there is joy and pain, if there is mind, if there is matter, if there are entities (things) and processes and interactions, if there are Laws, if there are readings of Laws (called laws), if there are time and space, these have Being... Being is not in or of time but time, such as it may be and in what it may obtain, is in and of Being: we may put it this way--being is in time but time is in Being… Being is not created; creation and be-ing and destruction, such as they are, are in Being

Extension and Duration

Sameness and Distinction are fundamental

What is sameness? It may be recognized if we can identify a part of Being, of the Universe that maintains identity through change

Sameness is not absence of change but maintained identity through change. Sameness is possible only on conditions of sufficient stability of Being; and recognizable on the additional condition of sufficient acuity perception

Duration is marked by degree of change in the same object (intrinsic duration or time requires this for a pure point has no change). This is not sufficient for universality of time but it does give time a certain local objectivity

Extension is marked by different parts of Being at the same time. Some rough local universality of time is required to have Extension

Such stability and locality may be rough; and to the extent they obtain they are not necessarily possessed of refinement without limit

This sameness and distinction are of Being, shows the immanence of extension and duration in Being (which contrasts to imposition upon)

Where structure is insufficient to allow identity (or perception of identity), extension and duration have no being (or measure)

Duality of sameness-distinction results in incomplete separation of extension-duration

The Verb To Be

The verbs ‘is’, ‘was’, ‘will be’ specify tense. ‘Was’ refers to the entire past without specifying a particular range of past. ‘Is’ refers to the present, perhaps a small moment surrounding an instant; it allows that the location of the thing that is may be any location or range of locations

We may use ‘is’ and ‘has’ in enhanced meanings that refer to some ranges in duration and extension. In this sense the meaning of Being becomes clarified but not essentially changed

Universe

Definition

All Being—over all extension and duration

The Universe has Being

That the Universe is All Being shows immanence of and relative character of extension and duration but possibility of local as if absolute character

One source of power of this definition is that it omits no kind (from the term ‘Being’) or thing (from the term ‘All’); this eliminates confusion that is not particularly problematic in practical contexts but would be debilitating to metaphysics

Domains and Complements

Definitions

A Domain is a part of the Universe. The complement of a Domain is the part of the Universe that contains no part in common with the Domain but which contains every part other than the Domain

Results

If a Domain exists, it has a complement that exists

The complement of the complement of a Domain is the Domain

A Domain and its complement constitute the Universe

Law

Definition

A law is our reading, i.e. a concept, of a pattern

The Law is the pattern

Laws Have Being

If a Law obtains it exists; if it exists it has Being

One Universe

No Being outside the Universe; therefore contains all Concepts, Experience, Objects, Domains, Laws

I.e. Universe, Concepts, Experience, Domains, Laws, Objects are all Objects

Possibility and Actuality

If something obtains (is actual) it is possible. What does it mean that something, e.g. a conceived state of affairs, is possible when we do not know that it obtains?

There are different notions of possibility. However, the use of the word ‘possibility’ is generally not intrinsic to the concept or absolute but relative to a context. An occurrence is logically possible if the occurrence does not violate any logical principle: that is a core notion of logical possibility. However, we might choose to regard some facts as given and then we might use ‘logical possibility’ in a restricted meaning in which neither logical principle nor the given facts can be violated. We might define physical possibility as the set of occurrences that do not violate physical laws; and we might similarly restrict it as in the logical case, e.g. the given facts might be ‘the universe as it is’. Still both notions are indefinite. We are not confident of all our logics and physical laws and there is little doubt that the logics and physics are incomplete. Practical notions of possibility are intuitive mixes of experience, logical and physical possibility and perhaps sometimes the idea of feasibility affects the intuitive notion of possibility. For example, given all the resources available to us on earth, it might be impossible to move Mt. Everest to Australia and we might say that the move is impossible without referring to the conditions of impossibility; given greater physical and intellectual resources, the same move may be possible. Thus in common use, possibility is an imprecise term which of course is useful even in its vagueness. However there is also a need for a more precise meaning or meanings of the term, especially in metaphysics and any other subject or discussion in which precision is essential

Let us consider what possibility might mean relative to the Universe, i.e. relative to All Being. If something has no occurrence in the Universe then if appropriate changes were made and it occurred it would be possible. However, the Universe is All Being over all Extension and duration and therefore any changes are already in it. I.e. if its occurrence is not in the Universe it does not happen. It is not so much that it cannot happen but that the meaning of its not happening in the Universe excludes its (ever) happening. For the Universe not being actual, i.e. not obtain, is being impossible. Obviously being actual is being possible

Therefore relative to the Universe, possibility and actuality are the same. I.e. relative to the Universe the word ‘possible’ loses the significance that it has in particular contexts

What kind of possibility is this? I.e. is it or can we liken it to physical possibility or to logical possibility or to physical or experiential feasibility? As we have seen, it is possibility relative to the Universe. If the Universe were as described in physical law then provided physical law is interpreted to include initial and boundary conditions, it would reduce to physical possibility. However, we know only that the empirical Universe has an at least approximate description in physical law, e.g. ‘classical quantum cosmology’, and we do not know at all that the entire Universe as a whole is described at all by that cosmology. Still, if we loosen the notion of the word ‘physical’ mean something like ‘describing the entire Universe’ then the possibility we have described would be physical in the loosened sense. The sense of physical possibility would be clear but we would not be able to compute the story of the Universe with it because we do not as yet have the sense specified in sufficiently definite terms. Thus far, it is best to simply to refer to this (Universal) possibility as possibility-relative-to-the-Universe

Cause and Creation

Universe has neither cause nor creation (nor creator)

One domain may be implicated in the cause of another

The sense of the following will become clear in chapter Universe

As the Universe is All Being it contains all Gods, all creation and all creating; the Universe is not created; there is no God the creator; there may be gods; there may be God the greatest power / principle / being; which may be external to us or inclusive of lesser being; and we may realize this ‘God’ without violating the ideas of Being and Universe

Void

Definition

The Void is the complement of Universe

Properties

Since the Void is the complement of the Universe and the Universe contains all Being, the Void contains no Being. Particularly, the Void contains no objects or Laws

If there is a Void then it is not a violation of logic for there to be multiple Voids

As the complement of the Universe, the Void exists

However, this is not clear; it might be (the) one exception to existence of complements

We cannot yet say ‘The Void has Being’. A demonstration of the Existence of the Void is given in Chapter Universe. The problem of existence of the Void will remain open. This is important in the development

Metaphysics so far

Doubt Regarding Metaphysics and its Resolution via Clarity of the Concepts

The crux of the doubt is that metaphysics cannot be based in Experience because of projection of various kinds

However, we have seen above that an at least elementary metaphysics does arise from Experience via abstraction of some elements of Experience immune to projection distortion andor corruption. This perfect empirical knowledge is not the result of a feat of knowing but rather of clarity in distinguishing what is immune to projection

Articulation of the Concepts

Another aspect of the metaphysics that is emerging is careful choice in the concepts and their articulation. Being is fundamental; Experience gives it richness and significance. The Universe is All Being; therefore extension and duration and Law are immanent, i.e. of the Universe. Since Laws have Being they must reside in the Universe—therefore there are no Laws in the Void; this conclusion will be pivotal in the development of metaphysics in the next chapter

In what follows this elementary beginning is extended to a unique, ultimate, and universal metaphysics

Universe

Metaphysics

In the Introduction, Metaphysics is knowledge—and study—of things as they are. In modern and recent thought serious doubt about metaphysics has arisen—what is it in the traditional sense, is it at all possible, what should it be today… These concerns are addressed in the Introduction and the previous chapter Being. From these preliminaries, the naïve conception of metaphysics stands as valid and significant. Other notions of metaphysics—a map of Experience, study of abstract objects, there is no metaphysics but for logic and science—are incorporated under this conception

Note that if we are in fact in possession of a metaphysics of some Domain, it must be unique; however, it may be expressed in more than one way and developed in different degrees of detail

From the preliminaries the first definition of metaphysics may be modified

Definition

Metaphysics is the study and knowledge of Being

Fundamental Problems

The nature of metaphysics in the above sense and its possibility have been affirmed. Its study is begun in Chapter Being and is continued here and subsequently

What has Being? Examples have been given but the list so far is incomplete in kind and exhaustiveness. Perfect determination of what has Being is an essential problem of metaphysics and we will find that it deserves the title fundamental problem of metaphysics 37

On Demonstrations So Far

Approach to demonstration so far has been—analysis of meaning which already contains the empirical (Experience), abstraction of what is beyond projective distortion (leaves out distortable detail), and naming the resulting given; this extends to the following development of the metaphysics; and, with interpretation, even to the development of Logic in the metaphysics

The Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics

Demonstration

If the Universe were in a state of non-Being 38 in eternity 39 there would be no Law. If from that state, there was a manifest state that did not arise, that would be a Law. Therefore, from a state of nothingness, every state must arise. From non-Being, manifest Being must arise 40

However, a state of nothingness is ever present, even in manifest states of the Universe, for it adds nothing to the Universe 41. It may be identified with the Void. The Void may be regarded as ever present with every ‘particle’ of Being

The Void exists 42 and is present in manifest states of the Universe. Except that there is one Void, the number of Voids is without relevance

Therefore from 43 manifest states, all states—Objects—arise (from the Void or Voids); and consequently any state or Object arises from any other

I.e., the Universe has maximal freedom or Absolute Indeterminism—if the Universe is any state, it will 44 also be in any other (or same) state: there is no restriction other states in which it will be

If the Universe has maximal freedom it follows that there will be contingent (e.g. observed) relations, if of sufficient regularity, may seem necessary; we may call this Normal (e.g. physical, experiential) necessity. Similarly, from a given state, some states may be contingently or Normally ruled out and may therefore seem impossible; this may be called Normal impossibility

Further Consequences Regarding the Void

The Void is absence of Being; it contains no Gods, no Being, no creation, no Laws, no Cause; yet from the Void comes All Being—it comes but is not caused; and the coming is without explanation except as the fact of the coming constitutes its explanation

Objection to Indeterminism; Reply

Perhaps the essential objection to indeterminism comes from realism: there is structure and in the world and this is expected only on a determinist account. In fact, however, absolute determinism requires order and structure to arise for unlimited but not eternal durations. Under absolute indeterminism, some structures that emerge are not contained in prior states: these are essentially novel structures. It is determinism that fails regarding order and structure for on determinism, only structure that is already actually or implicitly present occurs

It is remarkable that absolute indeterminism is equivalent to a kind of absolute determinism: from a given state, every state will follow; this, however, is not the usual meaning of determinism

The Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics

That any state may emerge from a given state implies:

The Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics—The Universe has no Limits. An abbreviation is fundamental principle or FP 45

Note that the method of demonstration is built on concepts and assertions established in Chapter Being

The meaning of ‘Limit’

It is crucial to understand the meaning of the term ‘Limit’. It includes but is not restricted to limitlessness in extension and duration

Here are some illustrations of Limitlessness that concern cosmology, Identity, and Individuals of Limited form. There is no Limit to the variety, extension, and duration of Being in the Universe. There is no Limit to the variety of cosmological systems and physical Laws. The Universe has Identity. The Universe and its Identity have acute and diffuse phases of manifestation and phases of non-manifestation; there is continuity (soul) across non manifest phases. Except for conditions of coexistence, every Domain and Individual inherits this Limitlessness (in Unlimited form Individuals realize Universal Identity). For Limited form this realization is a process without Limit in extension, duration, and magnitude of Being and Summit (followed by dissolution). Summit (and soul) gives meaning to ‘fractured’ being. As in these examples, however, Limited individuals can know of the Unlimited and some of its aspects; the examples so far have been cognitive; such knowledge, where it is valid, in mysticism and yoga and meditation has an affective component

Full meaning of FP cannot be brought out by out by examples alone. Understanding its demonstration and careful elaboration and application is essential

On Demonstration and Interpretation

In the foregoing examples, even though the results are non-trivial, demonstration is trivial while interpretation of results requires careful reflection and squaring with experience

In much of the following we will state consequences without ‘demonstration’ but will provide interpretation

It will be seen, however, that FP provides immense scope for technically non-trivial demonstration

A Doubt

In development of the metaphysics, an earlier version proved the existence of the Void as a preliminary step. Although the proof above does not assume the existence of the Void, it would be more satisfactory if existence of the Void could be proved. Since FP has such immense consequences it is desirable to prove existence of the Void

Existence of the Void

The Universe is a Domain; the complement of a Domain Exists; therefore the Void Exists

I.e., the Void Exists & contains no Being—i.e., no Object, e.g. entity or Law (Law is a—complex—entity)

The demonstration of FP now goes through as before

However, doubt has not been eliminated for while the complement a Domain that is not the Universe itself clearly Exists, it is not clear that the complement of the Universe itself Exists

Alternate Proofs

A possible proof. The Existence of the Void is equivalent to Non-Existence. Therefore we may assume Existence. This idea is implicit in the proof of FP in this version of the narrative

On account of the power contained in the Void (that it contains no Law implies Unlimited potency), doubt remains imperative; non-constructive proofs such as this must remain in doubt

A suggestive plausibility proof. Ockham’s Principle applied to the question ‘What does not Exist?’

Another plausible proof of FP. Known Laws are the Laws immanent in the world. Therefore no Laws obtain in the ‘zero’ region outside the world. I.e. this region is unlimited in its potency. Alternately, Laws apply to what is ‘substantial’; not to ‘what’ is insubstantial; the doubt here is Even if observed Laws are observed only for what is substantial, why should there be no Laws for what is insubstantial

Though suggestive, plausibility is not proof

Therefore essential doubt remains. This and other doubts, some obvious, are now taken up

Realism

Realism. The doubts are (1) Internal. Agreement among the consequences of FP; this doubt concerns consistency, i.e. Conceptual Realism (logic) (2) External. Agreement with science (and experience) (3) Intrinsic. Truth! What shall our attitude be until FP is certain (or certainly false)? I.e., what are appropriate and desirable existential stances?

Conceptual Realism 46

‘The Universe has no Limits’ in conceptual terms is ‘Every Concept 47 has reference. However concepts whose structure is illogical, e.g. contradiction, have no reference (unless empty reference is counted as reference). Is this a Limit? It is not for logic is a constraint on concepts and not a Limit the Universe

Still we know that not all logics are perfect and likely no non-trivial logics are a priori true. Therefore define Logic as the requirement that our conceptual system have reference (this will include of course not only the logics but also mathematical systems in as much as they harbor no illogical feature… or as approximation)

In this conception, Logic includes the logics as approximations and is therefore non-trivial in content; it has and will continue to be seen, numerous consequences of immense magnitude; but it remains immensely open to development of, e.g. cosmological, scenarios and detail (which will 48 occasion immense advances in mathematics, the logics, and their interpretation). Conceptual Realism under FP is the occasion for a new overarching concept of Logic (which includes the logics and the disciplines of mathematics)

What is the status of this Logic? In terms of our ability to use it we must, in the beginning, fall back on the extant logics. However, although certainty in logics is perhaps our highest formal certainty, they are not, in general, known to be certain. The logics are empirical over propositions and except in elementary cases consistency proofs are not available

Are the logics empirical? Are they certain? And what of Logic. Remember, first that there is nothing outside the Universe; there is no other Platonic world. Therefore Logic and logics are of the world (Universe). How do they arise? The following are the possibilities (1) The Universe bears their imprint (2) The logics and Logic arise somewhere in the process of manifestation

However, the Universe occurs also in the Void state which has no imprint at all. In any case ‘imprint’ is from something outside and therefore there is and can be no imprint on the Universe. What is left is item 2 above. How / where may Logic / logics arise? In manifestation. Where there is Logic / are logics the condition of the place (e.g. cosmos) must allow their formation; e.g., there must be minds of sufficient capacity to hold what is manifest. How do these minds come to hold Logic / logics? It must be imprinted from the manifest world (e.g. cosmos) in adaptation 49 andor in discovery by beings, i.e. individuals. How do the individuals discover logics? Perhaps we do not know the precise or detailed stories. However, it must be in some kind of trial and error or perhaps sudden insight into icons and language from an earlier adaptation (likely both). We can picture scenarios from the pale but perhaps reflected in a child or thinker playing with words. The child sees an object ‘there’; then it is ‘here’, not ‘there’; its absence from ‘there’ may be surprising; somewhere / how, the child realizes, if only intuitively, that for normal objects ‘here’ and ‘there’ are exclusive. Somewhere along the way a thinker or a shaman turns this exclusivity into a rudimentary form of the principle of non-contradiction. The scenario is only suggestive and meant as such. However, the ‘logic’ of this paragraph is that logics / Logic must arise empirically in this sense; i.e., not by observing physical objects, but by play with and then analysis of words, sentences, other linguistic forms (similar considerations arise for the forms themselves); and of course we allow that manifestation and adaptation are empirical in some sense for they, as seen above, do not bear the imprint of an a priori (i.e. another ideal world). Discovery of logics / Logic is empirical in the foregoing senses

How does this conception of Logic square with logic as deduction? It may be seen to do so by considering related propositions in relation to the requirement of reference. The idea will not be developed in detail here but addressed as part of a more general concern in Relationship Between Logic, logic, and Science

External or Empirical Realism

Science has a domain of validity within which it is known to be factual 50. It is inherent in its method (generalization) that it is silent on the extent, duration, and variety of Being outside this domain (we may think the domain outside science vanishing but this is only if we found our view of the world on the science of ‘today’; Hume’s argument shows this invalid; it is reasonable to expect continuity with today’s science in the near reaches of but not in the far reaches beyond the empirical domain). However, that science has a valid domain, e.g. that the cosmos is the way it is, is not a Limit and does not contradict FP

Empirical Realism is occasion for appending or adjoining science to Logic

At the beginning of the modern era, induction and deduction were grouped together; early modern thinkers sought an induction that would bear the imprint of necessity that is apparent for deduction. As the differences between scientific method (inductive theory formation) and logic (as deduction) came into clear relief, the two became separate. Now that we can see science as a series of facts, which we must for FP shows that no detailed science for a Limited form can be universal, we can append this interpretation of science to Logic without confusion of induction and deduction (and recall anyway that deduction is but relatively certain)51. This also implies a new view, that of Science as progressive but, for Limited form 52, ever incomplete; and for which, as in anthropology and some social science today, the sciences (natural 53 and social) of the future will require immersion and participation (for limited forms 54 of individual)

Recapitulation

The metaphysics and Logic and the tradition 55 (e.g. science) appear separate

In initial reflection on their potential relation there is apparent contradiction

Therefore resolution of potential contradiction is paramount

Mutual accommodation of the demonstrated metaphysics / Logic and the reason of science (tradition) do more than resolve contradiction

First, the accommodation provides a positive interpretation of the metaphysics as Logic which also includes science 56. Second, it provides an at least in principle extension to science; actual extension awaits development in science / Logic. Third, there is a border between metaphysics / tradition where the two may interact 57 (1) From the logic of the metaphysics we will often be able to analyze which concepts from pre-Universal Metaphysics thought are or may be rendered perfect (2) Other concepts remain imperfect though practical and this practical nature may be interpreted as perfect in non-epistemic ways 58

Since Logic is necessary and sufficient for reference, Logic and Metaphysics are identical. To the extent that mathematics may be subsumed under logic, it too is metaphysics. Care is needed in such assertions especially because the metaphysics requires or is occasion for reinterpretation of all disciplines

Note that the approach to Logic is via abstraction from the concept of logic

Existential realism

Though we have good reasons to believe its truth, including formal demonstration, and though it contradicts neither science nor logic, we do not know the absolute truth of FP. Further, from considerations of certainty above, Logic itself is not entirely above doubt. However, this situation is not new; it is true also for the endeavors we regard most certain—logic and mathematics. There is nothing significant in the human endeavor that gives absolute certainty. However, we have various directions of emerging truth. What shall we do? We are a species whose endeavor is marked by ideas and action (as interaction). FP shows that ideas are ever incomplete and only complete in action. Our attitude is to navigate to the greatest future. In absence of complete information this requires putting effort (allocating resources) roughly in proportion to magnitude of outcome but inverse proportion to likelihood (and the allocation need not be the same for every individual or sector of society). We would therefore engage in the Journey in Being envisioned under FP (ideas are the place of appreciation as well as efficient action 59). Our attitude will include one of experiment, risk—even abandon at times, reflection, criticism, and Existential Faith as that confidence that enhances our action

This situation is not at all new. ‘Existential Faith’ is a significant reaction to situations regarding uncertainty (but not of bona fide absurdity or paradox)60. A first reaction may be that it applies or has applied primarily in cases of physical exploration into the unknown and that it applies in deviant manner to religious faith. However, precisely this situation obtains for significant portions of logic and mathematics

Existential Logic

Since Logic so far is not certain we may append to it an Existential Attitude. The attitude does not disturb the idea of Logic for it is a complement and not a replacement (we do this anyway for when contingencies do not permit time for ‘computation’ we must act and for this action there is a proper attitude that maximizes our experience and intuition of the situation). It would be prejudicial however to insist that one is the body and the other the appendage; we make no such insistence. The essence of the appending is that Attitude makes no incursion into Logic proper but provides Existential interpretation of Logical process and outcome and appropriate Attitudes where our psychic power is insufficient to Logical calculation. In complex multistage situations ‘logic’ takes us so far and existential adjustment may be required before appealing to logic; and the process repeats; we do this anyway without necessarily giving the process a name

In the future, however, there may be inroads of Logic and Attitude each penetrating the other just as there is already a bond at all levels between cognition and feeling (e.g., trivially where calculation is multistage and one or more stages stumble for lack of power of calculation)

Supplement—Five Common Errors Regarding Foundations

This section is a summary post-view of five common errors widespread in modern thinking that may block development of thought (and acceptance of the metaphysics). These blocks have been anticipated and dealt with in the development so far. However, the responses are recapitulated below

1. Science provides a worldview that is necessary and essentially complete

This view is held explicitly by at most a minority of thinkers. However, the view is tacitly widespread because (a) Before the twentieth century there were obvious areas of ‘being’ that were at most incompletely the domain of science. In the twentieth century, however, science had extended so far that the residue seemed as though it must be more of the same (b) There is no generally acceptable alternative to the worldview from science. Further many who do not hold that science provides a complete worldview hold that any final worldview must come from science

Regarding (a) we may recollect the late nineteenth century situation in which physics appeared to many to be essentially complete but this was shown essentially wrong by the development of relativity and quantum theory. Thus even if there are no new fields for science to enter into, history suggests that physics may be wide open

Arguments given earlier show that science itself gives us no information—except that it is probable not zero—of the size and shape (variety) of Being outside the known domain of science. If we conclude that that domain is small it is because we tend to conflate the framework of what there is with the framework of what we know and that latter, since we do not see outside it, may be difficult to see through. And although there is no generally known alternative to a world view based in science 61 the metaphysics of this essay shows that the region outside the valid domain of science is without limit

Regarding the attitude that any future worldview must come from science it may be remarked that (1) At a fundamental level science and the metaphysics are not distinct; the former emphasizes detail and sacrifices precision; the latter emphasizes precision and sacrifices detail (2) From considerations of science and metaphysics any future complete and detailed view for a Limited Being must lie in participation and immersion, i.e. in a process (for Unlimited Being complete knowledge is an ‘act’ of perception and Being)

2. The empirical, logical, and historical arguments against metaphysics are devastating

The empirical argument is that all knowledge must originate in experience. The response is that the foundation of the metaphysics is intensely empirical

There is a variety of ‘logical’ arguments against metaphysics. (a) All metaphysical knowledge should be directly empirical (I will ignore that the foregoing statement has metaphysical content). Surely the criterion should be that all metaphysical knowledge should have demonstration sufficient to its claim of certainty and precision; if this is given then the argument must be that non-empirical knowledge is insufficient to the claim. The point is addressed directly in item 3 below. Here it may be noted that the argument regarding sufficiency is a central part of the demonstration of the metaphysics (b) Metaphysics postulates substance or must suffer infinite regress. The present metaphysics has explicitly eschewed (and rejected) substance but, via demonstration, suffers no regress

The historical argument concerns the failure of idealist, systematic, and sweeping metaphysics centered on some insight and related political ideologies. A history of failures is, logically, no more than a history of failures; entailments are suggestive rather than necessary. Further history suggests alternative approaches to metaphysics as much as alternative such as piecemeal analysis and local narratives. The present metaphysics has origins in insight—of course—but its foundation is not dependent on such insight

3. The positive foundation of knowledge, if there is any, is based on one kind of knowing as all knowing and upon critical theories regarding knowledge as based in one type of criterion applying to all knowledge

In empiricism, for example all true knowledge is empirical and the rest is tautology. Further, since perception has projective distortion all knowledge is tinged with distortion. Response. The foundation of the metaphysics accepted only those concepts that via abstraction admitted no projective distortion

Rationalism is a range of views associated with the idea that reason is a source of knowledge. Strict rationalism may be called the view that the criterion of truth is deductive. Response. The metaphysics is against substance and by analogy its method is against any essential view of the source of knowledge. However, this is far more than analogy for method and content are allowed to emerge and though we must begin somewhere it is not given that any presupposition made initially will not and cannot be eliminated. The view that emerges deploys the empirical and the rational where and how they may emerge as obtaining

For the pure metaphysics there is but one effective criterion and this is the criterion of perfection. However, the criterion and its possibility and application were not imposed; they emerged in development

For the Applied Metaphysics (below) other criteria will be found appropriate; these are not the criteria of perfection and this is found to be good in so far as there can be no better and in so far as when there can be no better it is not an occasion for regret even if we had hope for more (in fact it is occasion for celebration because it reveals directions for unlimited discovery in the world and in human or perhaps other resources for discovery)

4. Foundations, if there are any, are axiomatic-substance or infinite regress

This thought is embedded in our western thought at least since Aristotle. It is the analog in epistemology of substance in metaphysics and though some twentieth century philosophers argued that fundamental philosophy should abandon substance, its epistemic analog remains with us. The development in this narrative accomplishes (a) Completion of the rational-empirical overcoming of substance (b) Simultaneous overcoming of substance / axiomatic foundation for metaphysics (c) Seeing and showing metaphysics and epistemology are bound together, e.g. as content and method which are both part of the world, and should and shall together transcend their putative but unfounded limits

5. Logic is not empirical

There have been modern views of logic as empirical 62 and other views known as ‘psychologism’. However, the thrust of modern development of and thought regarding logic is that it is not empirical 63. In the modern era, logic the field or object of logic is abstract objects called propositions and therefore logic cannot be empirical

To claim that logic is empirical it is necessary to simultaneously address the issues regarding its supposed non empirical character. The issues are tacit and explicit. The tacit issue is the sense of the a priori character of logic. The explicit issues are those noted in the previous paragraph. The tacit and explicit are related

Sources of the sense of the a priori character of logic are those of its necessity (how can what is necessary be empirical) and that it is received (and so its origins are not transparent to us). Accordingly the objects of logic are variously described as elements of intuition or as objects (Forms, Ideas) of a Platonic (Ideal) world

In the present development we have found that there is one Universe and that abstract and concrete objects reside in this one Universe. Therefore, even though we study logical objects 64 as abstract, they reside in the world. Even though we do not study them empirically as we study material objects, the abstract objects are studied or received in intuition via their application to our symbolic studies of the abstract

In seeing that Logic and its objects are in the world we achieve understanding of the nature and simultaneously remove it from the realm of the a priori into the clearly investigable, we remove its certainty in favor of its reality. This does not change the fact that areas of Logic are tinged with perfection; it sheds light on the nature of that perfection; and it shows that there are vast realms of Logic, some already partially known, whose study by a being of Limited form must be empirical. Further while the form of this empirical study may be different from the study of physical objects its nature is the same in that the objects of physics and Logic lie in the same world

On Doubt and its Functions

Degrees of doubt are significant where degrees of certainty are relevant 65. Practical doubt accompanies practical certainty. Metaphysics is that discipline where certainty in knowledge of the world is taken to its extreme. It is not that this must apply to all knowing; not at all. However, there is a place for such a discipline and metaphysics the broadest of such disciplines. There was a place for metaphysics; certainty—reason applied to itself—displaced it; the present development restitutes metaphysics in this place

The functions of doubt are positive and specific

In the foregoing, doubt as criticism, has resulted in the following. Clarification, i.e. analysis of meaning (Concept, object) and consequent problem and paradox resolution, e.g. the nature of meaning itself, the nature of the non-existent object, the possibility of metaphysics, the nature of Experience, the ‘meaning’ of Being 66. Establishment of degrees of certainty—and to the extent not obtain develop and maintain an appropriate existential attitude. Develop method as coeval with content, e.g., method arises in analysis of particular cases, method is revealed as content itself (knowledge is in the Universe), method is not a priori, there is mutuality rather than separation of metaphysics and epistemology 67

Epistemological Doubt

We doubt appearances because we may be mistaken. Thus in considering Being we considered whether there was Being, whether there was Experience, whether there was anything but Experience. These seem a little like ontological doubt but a little reflection showed that there is Being and Experience. These epistemological doubts proved useful and clarifying. Whether there is anything but Experience seems a little more ontological than whether there is Experience but this doubt too is epistemological because it is based on a mistaken way of seeing. Epistemological doubt is significant in clarifying but is not otherwise fundamental

Ontological Doubt

In view of the previous discussion we may wonder whether there is any ontological doubt, i.e. is not all doubt epistemological?

What is Being? This is an ontological question. What things have Being? This is a fundamental ontological question. Its answering may take us into epistemological considerations but it is ontological because it concerns what is and how we know is a tool in its answering; perhaps in the case of ‘practical objects’ it straddles the epistemological and ontological; perhaps the practical case may be reformulated as ontological by seeing knower-known as an object 68

The Universal Metaphysics

The Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics and Realism combine in a metaphysics that, since it is about the Universe, we call the Universal Metaphysics. As we have seen, it must be unique; we therefore also refer to it as the metaphysics.

The Metaphysics is Foundation of Understanding of the Universe. Substance

Since the metaphysics founds understanding of the Universe in the Void (absence of Being), it is a non-relative foundation without substance; and since the Universe is absolutely indeterministic, substance and its permanence is impossible as foundation; these conclusions go against the modern thought that metaphysics must be either relative (with infinite regress) or non relative (based on axiom or substance). The foundation is ultimate in depth (while also very finite in depth)

The Metaphysics Implicitly Represents All Objects

Since every Object emerges from the Void, the metaphysics is ultimate in breadth (but implicitly so because though we have a good idea of what Logic is, we know little of what it predicts: this is the occasion for the endless journey for forms while Limited

The Universe is Shown to Be Ultimate

And, from Logic we see that the Universe itself is ultimate (it has no Limit). We knew no necessity to science; now we know there can be no universal necessity to science as we know it

The metaphysics is unique, universal, and ultimate as metaphysics and in its revelation of Being and Universe

From the definition, there is and can be only one Universe

However, it is conceivable that there should be two never interacting Domains; each would therefore effectively be a ‘Universe’

From FP, every particle of Being interacts with every other part

Therefore except the Universe itself, there are no Domains that are ‘ultimate effective Universes’

Forms of FP

1. The Universe has no Limits; the meaning of ‘no Limits’ is crucial

2. The Universe is the Object of Logic; in anticipation of the section Logos, The Universe is the Logos

Logic is understood to include (known) facts (thus separate mention of conceptual and empirical consistency is not required). We have seen that there is gain and no loss in admitting facts to Logic

3. The Universe is Absolutely Indeterministic; note that Absolute Indeterminism implies Absolute Determinism (on a non-standard interpretation of determinism noted earlier)

4. The Void which exists is the absence of Being; specifically it contains no Laws

5. The Void is equivalent to every state; i.e. from the Void, every state of the Universe will emerge; in the foregoing, ‘Void’ may be replaced by ‘any state’

Deduction and Interpretation

Many deductions in and from the Universal Metaphysics are trivial. It is their inspiration and interpretation that require effort of thought

However, the development of Logic, which is emerging as ‘universal study’ will require immense capability—psychic including intellect and organic-physiological

Fundamental Problem

What is the object of Logic? The entire answer to this question is that it is the Universe, All Being, in all its detail

Therefore, the fundamental problem of metaphysics can only be the issue of What has Being

Why there are beings rather than nothing… This has been called the fundamental problem of metaphysics; however it is a component of the problem What has Being

Journey

The Individual

Journey in Being—every individual realizes identity with the Universe in all its phases, especially the phase of acute Identity and manifestation; since the individual inherits the Limitlessness, realization is as such (in un-Limited form); while in Limited form, however, realization is given as—and must be and can only be—endless process in extension, duration, and variety and magnitude of Being and summit, each precursor to dissolution… This realization is given; it requires transformation of Being not limited to ideas (in the ‘lower’ meaning of ‘idea’); however, ideas are the place of appreciation and effectiveness in realization; and even in Limited form the individual can know of Limitlessness and Identity (with the Universe) as seen here via cognition; some ways that give this knowledge an intuitive and affective component are mysticism, yoga, and meditation; approaches to realization in knowledge and Being are explored later, especially in the next division Journey which focuses on transformation for the individual and groups (especially civilization)

Civilization

From the Introduction—‘A first meaning of civilization shall be the collective human endeavor over time and space. The metaphysics developed later will enable a second meaning as the matrix of Being across the Universe in collective endeavor’. This idea, anticipated earlier, is a consequence of considerations in section Metaphysics. This linked endeavor, a linking of identities, is not only psyche moving outward and occupying the Universe but is also a continuation of the individual psyche and thus it is more than the notion of legacy that is significant in secular thought. It includes the idea that death is not absolute; there is forgetting but individual awareness knows no final obliteration

Civilization too experiences realization as a journey—process—while in limited form. In un-Limited form Individual, Communal, and Universal the same in Being and Identity

Limited and Unlimited Form

The tension or give and take between limited and unlimited form is a driving force in realization

Logic 69

Realism

The formal aspects of realism are empirical and conceptual realism. Empirical realism is agreement with fact; this includes agreement with the theories of science as compound facts that are valid over limited domains. Conceptual realism is consistency among concepts (of referential type or intent)

We found that Logic as conceptual and empirical consistency is necessary and sufficient for reference. We found, consequently, that in Logic, induction is reinterpreted and then reintegrated with deduction (i.e. joined as imagined by thinkers in the early modern period 70 though not in the way imagined). In this conception, the creative process though important is suppressed, and conceptual and empirical realism or consistency are placed on par; they are both essentially tautologies, at least in so far as necessary, and the tautology of the empirical side is the most trivial possible, i.e. every fact implies itself

Outside the known world, this allows immense freedom, e.g. in the existence of cosmoses unlimited in form and variety beyond ours. For a Being that perceived the entire Universe—such a Being would be commensurate with the Universe—Logic would reduce to fact, i.e. perception

The Existential aspect of Logic is concerned with Limits. It is an attitude that leads to greatest outcome. It is nominally positive; however, obviously doubt and ‘demons’ cannot be avoided; and, their acceptance (rather than suppression or mere cultivation) is positive; the Existential aspect is effective only for Limited forms of Being

Abstraction and Empiricism

The Universe has no Limits (FP) implies the realization of all states. What does it mean that a state is realized? If I say, state A is realized what do I mean? It means that I have a Concept of a state that I recognize to have been realized. Every state is realized seems then to imply that every Concept of referential type has reference. Strictly, if we regard illogical forms to not be Concepts, this is true. However, it is useful to admit illogical forms as Concepts for then our concepts must satisfy logic in order to have reference. In a sense this is a bookkeeping device. However we reinterpreted this bookkeeping to read ‘Logic is the necessary and sufficient condition for reference’. The system of logics is no more than a part of Logic and, further, many logics must be approximations (all this has already been seen)

Thus the conception, Logic, is new and immensely powerful

It is pertinent to enquire again into the essence of the process of arriving at a Concept of Logic from FP and the logics

The process is one of abstraction 71 from the logics—i.e. from the notion of what it is that is being done in the logics. Thus while the sense of Logic is definite, its extension is largely implicit. This is its weakness (it is still immensely incomplete) and strength (the immense scope for being in a process of completion)

Thus Logic is empirical in two ways. First is the way in which logics are empirical, i.e. experiment with propositions and their forms; for details see the discussion in Section Conceptual Realism. The second way will be lie in the future of Logic will be empirical in the first way (of course) but also empirical in that it is discovery of the Universe. Since propositions (language forms generally) are in the Universe, the two ways are formally but not essentially distinct

Logos

Logos is defined as the object of Logic. Logos is the Universe in all its detail

Although deduction here has been trivial, the possibilities for knowledge of Logic are without Limit

Working out the Logos is the problem of Logic

Induction and Deduction

Formal Logic is deductive. However it is important to consider what tools we have to create and compute Logical relationships

What tools do we have to actually create and compute Logical relationships? In a word, the tools are creative and critical. Some formal vehicles that embody creation and criticism are logic, mathematics, science. Discovery and justification—creation and demonstration—are often and perhaps putatively thought to be essentially different; however, uncertainty, even in logics, is one source of breakdown of the distinction. From the definition of Logic, the only fiction is the Logical contradiction. Therefore the arts, especially where imagination and realism meet, are significant in approaching Logos. The extensions of all these disciplines in participation and immersion must, for Limited form, be an unending journey whose enjoyment and effectiveness are enhanced by an existential attitude. this attitude includes risk—even abandon at times, reflection, criticism, and existential faith. It is action in light of the fact that object of metaphysics is Logos or Universe 72

Logic and Metaphysics

Logic and Metaphysics are identical

We have seen how many conclusions of immense magnitude are trivial deductions whose main problem is interpretation; how Logic and Logos show the immense openness of the Universe; and how beyond the trivial there are immense domains of undiscovered Science and Logos

Possibility, Necessity and Actuality

In Possibility and Actuality, possibility was seen to be relative to some context. An occurrence or state is possible relative to a context even if it does not occur or obtain if its occurring / obtaining satisfied the defining conditions of the context. Since the Universe is All Being there is no other context, i.e. any ‘other’ context is in the Universe, the actual and the possible are identical. This is the most inclusive notion of possibility and we may use possibility to refer to this notion; for any other notion we should then append a conditional term as in ‘physical possibility’ and ‘practical impossibility’

It is now seen that possibility and Logical possibility are identical. If we interpret physics to be the law of the Universe then the meaning of ‘physics’ is not identical to the cultural meaning of the term and the closeness of the present interpretation and the cultural one would depend on how liberal the cultural meaning is or shall turn out to be. On the present interpretation possibility, Logical and physical possibility are identical

The idea of a necessary truth is something that must be true. This idea can be formalized—A necessary truth is one that is true in all contexts (possible worlds). Relative to the Universe however Logic is the condition of obtaining. All Logical concepts are true in the Universe. What of the special logical truths in so far as they are subsumed under Logic. The traditional logics refer to no particular context, i.e. they refer in an empty sense to all (possible) contexts. Therefore insofar as they are true they are necessarily true. The two meanings of necessity are related though of course not identical

Art

Art is seeing-feeling, expression, communication, and reception of what is deep in (human) Being and Universe

In some attempts to define art, focus has been placed on ‘feeing’ which is of course important. The idea confuses the nature of cognition. Cognition and feeling (emotion) are bound together in a number of ways which we tend to deemphasize. Reason and emotion are both important and in defining them we tend to separate them just as we tend to think of male and female as poles. Cognition and emotion are bound at a low level where every moment of cognition and emotion infuse one another; cognition gives emotion shape, emotion gives cognition binding and compass; at a more intense level, passion drives cognition and cognition provides a place for passion to go (we think of higher thought but shall not make the mistake of emphasizing only higher thought: when we recognize a person, emotion is a driver in interaction)

This definition could say ‘what is deepest’ instead of ‘what is deep’; I have used the more permissive version so as to permit a lighter side and to not be too exclusive. I want to avoid the modern tendency to specialization and to secularize all things, specifically to reduce art to something apart from the main stream of life, e.g. art is something we do on Saturday afternoons at museums or that what we do at midnight frenzies is not art

Art includes the arts—the iconic arts, literature and poetry and the dramatic, the arts in which form meets function such as architecture, the aural arts—music as dynamic, the multimodal forms such as opera, cinema—its modality is variable—and modern syntheses

However, this categorization is a list of modality; it does not constitute what art is about

There is art but talking about it already detracts from it; still, talking about the experience and the activity is a part of communicating and a part of the beginning of inspiration

Art is search—labor, inspiration, questioning and criticism—for, expression, representation, and communication of what is deepest in Human Being. Thus art is simultaneously grounding and transformative. As such it is essential in our journey

Thus—overlap of art and religion

To ‘everything’ there may be ‘artistic’ form, e.g. doing—and it is not of the essence that the doing should be pretty 73—and writing science and philosophy, charisma and leadership, living

Art is an element of Logic—it enables or includes the enabling of vision—though not of the logics. The assertion will probably ring untrue to many; however, it reminds us that Logic is greater than the logics; and that while the logics do not have an existential component, Logic does

Thus art in religion; and thus scientific doing and writing as art form

Art can be seen as—contributing to—an imaginative side of the journey and with suitable extension the imaginative side. It clearly overlaps the empirical sciences (natural and social) and symbolic sciences (logic and mathematics); and imagination soon wants to know its own significance (art criticism) and faithfulness (empirical and conceptual which shows inclusion of the sciences)

In art we find a great source for the journey. It is an imaginative-active side and with suitable extension, the imaginative side

Art is an element in realization in revealing the ultimate and showing and being ways to it. When it is seen that the ultimate includes the present that can be the only function—as far as revelation is concerned—for it includes all others 74

Religion

The primary goal of this section is to assess the value of religion in realization—i.e. being in the process of realization from the present on the way to the ultimate

To effectively achieve this goal it will be necessary to understand the nature of religion. It will be helpful to understand the nature and motives to seeking spirituality and its relation to religion. It will also be helpful to understand the place of religion in the total context, i.e. the relation between religion and secular activity. These aims are preliminary goals that will enable achieving the primary goal

Principles

Given considerations so far, the following principles are self evident

1. The religions are examples but do not, even taken as a whole, define religion. Examples are necessary and useful but not sufficient to understanding. This is because the known past is relevant to but does not define the human future; and because realization is concerned with the ultimate and therefore requires the metaphysics 75 to know what is necessary. The insufficiency of examples may also be seen from analysis: religion the object and religion the concept; the concept is not a collection of objects, e.g. the particular religions

2. We tend to see religion as concerned with the sacred and the divine—another world—and so on even though we do not know the fact and nature of these things. However, the search for the ultimate must consider, not divisions of the world but the world as a whole. If we think of Religion as container for this entire search then it must be concerned with the whole world as a unity. Therefore Religion may be conceived as All dimensions of Being deployed in discovery and realization of All Being; the process and learning will be cumulative, may be recorded, and may draw on charisma to be effective

3. In this conception, Religion will be a communal, i.e. shared action; it will integrate the elements of human endeavor, ideas and action, with the metaphysics and metaphysical action. ‘Ideas and action’ will include all pertinent aspects of endeavor including what is relevant in art, science, and what is called spirituality

4. It is not clear that ‘Religion’ is a good name for the endeavor. We are in a process of the activity, of learning its nature, and of naming it

5. Although the world religions contain elements of corruption on more than one front, they contain elements of value. One value to the activity as a whole today, despite grotesque form, is that religion does not capitulate to secularism (the human endeavor itself shows its own incompleteness including that of secularism, and received religion; and the incompleteness is shown concrete by the metaphysics). Another value to this activity is its iconic representation, often well hidden, of human incompleteness (ignorance) which stands against the masquerade of the secular stance (delusion) of its own essential completeness 76

6. Although Religion cannot revert to the religions, the latter contain useful elements

7. The metaphysics as metaphysics of action embodied in a journey in being is an ideal vehicle for the search, discovery, and realization of Religion

Discussion and Conclusion

Reasons to consider religion have been given. One reason to consider a variety of activities is that it is not clear what activity will emerge as useful. This reflects the approach of the present narrative. It contrasts the eclectic approach by being systematic; it contrasts the systematic approach by being also eclectic; it complements both by having potentially useful elements that complement its own system; where so many treatments (e.g. books) present a sense of closure and are thereby incomplete, the present treatment presents closure in some directions (depth) but openness in the complement (breadth)

Religion is the deployment of all dimensions of Being by beings—individuals and groups—in the realization of All Being and in Be-ing

The entire Tradition, including religions, is source for Religion; these sources join with the following

The following are elements of transformation: the metaphysics and simultaneously emergent method; and the related dynamics, i.e. the metaphysics applied to ideas and action; and reflection, experiment, criticism, learning, and incremental and significant step advance in ideation and transformation

Science

The logic of the scientific method applied to scientific theories allows that, unless shown otherwise, the theories may be incomplete. I.e., while the theories have a phenomenal domain 77 of validity, science itself is silent on the size, duration, and variety of the complements. History of science suggests the truth of the foregoing

The metaphysics confirms this truth

It reveals that an improved interpretation of scientific theories is as a series of compound facts. These series of compound facts are an aspect of being ever in process while in Limited form

The method of science, such as it is, concerns discovery (induction) and practical justification of these facts. The method of the metaphysics, the Logic, includes empirical realism in its trivial agreement with theories as compound facts. Its conceptual realism, Logic as abstraction from the logics and the traditional idea of logic, is a container for the ever in process of science for Limited form of being. Superficially, at least, induction and deduction, which have been sought in the early modern period to be joined, are distinct. However, uncertainties in deduction, which we sometimes think to be perfectly secure, blur the distinction not by upgrading induction but by downgrading deduction 78

The approach of Science of the future will not reject its current methods but enhance them to include experimental participation and immersion

There is no need to join the elements, e.g. science and religion, of human endeavor; what is valid in them will join as one

Objects

The Idea of the Object

The entity is a first paradigm or metaphor for the idea of the object

I picture myself picturing the object; that is a first paradigm of my knowledge of the object. The foregoing statement is, however, not true. The first paradigm of knowledge of the object is the intuitive one in which I conflate concept and thing. Later, I recognize that there is something out there but my knowledge is not entirely of a thing. Rather it, my knowledge, is a joint product of my mind and the world. My knowledge is not the thing and the properties and even entity-hood that I attribute are of my mind and the world. Surely, since I am able to negotiate the world—since I am adapted to my environment—there must be some kind of ‘faithfulness’ to the world. However, on account of projection (my contribution 79) not only can I not say that my knowledge (the concept) is not given to be (perfectly) faithful, I do not even know precisely what ‘faithfulness’ means. Knowledge, i.e. the Concept, is not the object. Therefore in the concept there may always be corruption andor projection

It is a common error, however, to suppose that the contribution of mind to knowledge can never be eliminated. However, elimination must be demonstrated on a case by case or perhaps on a kind by kind basis

We have seen, for example, that Experience and Universe are perfect objects and existence and Being indicate perfect aspects of objects that may be otherwise known imperfectly. We may speak metaphorically and say ‘existence’ and ‘Being’ are perfect objects

Particular or Concrete Objects

In the perfect object projection is not removed but it has no contribution to the concept. Examples are existence, Experience, Being, Universe, and Logos. In these cases we argue that we know these objects perfectly via abstraction in such a way that what we abstract, though it is conceptual, is not distorted in forming the concept

Practical objects allow imperfection but knowledge is effectively ‘good enough’ for practical or value purposes. For example in an unlimited context the practical concept may be perfectly useless but the practical interest may be in limited contexts. ‘Good enough’ knowledge may be regarded as perfect for appropriate purposes

From the metaphysics, every realistic (Logical) Concept has an object (a Concept may have many objects but the objects constitute an object). These include the concepts of process and interaction which may be regarded in particular cases as ‘good enough’ or, with appropriate abstraction, as perfect. We might know process or duration only in a good enough sense but we may know the fact of process precisely

I.e. the ‘entity’ metaphor is limited. A process, an interaction, a property of an object, and combinations of these are objects. Such things as these specify what is called a concrete or particular object

Abstract Objects

Although one book is concrete, what is the nature of the number ‘one’ abstracted from one book or one car? Numbers may be regarded as abstract. From long experience with reflection on the world and concepts regarding the world there is a modern consensus that objects fall into two classes, the concrete and the abstract. Concepts formed by abstraction are thought to define abstract objects. Examples are properties, concepts, propositions, values, and mathematical objects—e.g., the number one; these are varied in their nature. Examples of particular or concrete objects are a Concept as mental content, propositional sentence written in chalk on a blackboard, an emotion that serves as a value, and one book. From these examples it seems as though abstract objects are known via concepts while concreta are known in themselves. However, this is mistaken in that, as we have seen earlier, concreta are also known via concepts

Whereas concreta are thought to be causal and reside in space and time, abstracta are thought to be non causal and to not reside in space or time

Unification of Concrete and Abstract Objects

The concept of an abstract object must of course be Logical. Therefore from FP, abstract objects reside in the one Universe. They are not non-causal and not non spatial or non temporal in ‘essence’. Rather, in their conception only non causal and non spatiotemporal aspects remain—these aspects are omitted from the conception via abstraction

Thus there is no essential metaphysical difference between abstract and concrete objects. The abstract object is known conceptually, the concrete object is known primarily in perception

Number begins as concrete; in the history of mathematics it becomes concrete; today it is mixed for we use computers to assist us in number theory

A concrete value is a tendency; an abstract value is an answer to the question What should our value be in the general or abstract context

A particular property, e.g. a trope, is concrete. As a conception, property is abstract; but it has an object; what its object is may be seen to be the collection of instances (there is no ideal world in which properties or other abstracta live)

Let us look closely at the nature of the concrete object. What constitutes the concreteness of the ‘concrete’? The perfect (concrete) is simultaneously the object and the concept (in that the concept is perfect). Consider the practical concrete, e.g. a cube of metal. We choose a simple object rather than, say, a sculpture or a tree to avoid distracting connotations and complexities. What do I mean in talking of the ‘cube of metal’? Let us imagine that it appears to be a perfect cube. There is a certain perceptual abstraction in the appearance for it is in fact immensely grainy and dynamic at the atomic level. It has mass and if subject to a force will accelerate. It resides in space and time. Or does it? If I approach the block analytically the analytical object ‘block’ need not have temporality; temporality may be added on in synthesis. I am always going back and forth between ‘thing’ and ‘idea’; this constitutes what I think of as reality. In other words even the so-called concrete objects have abstract characters; the word ‘concrete’ metaphorically refers to the fact that it is part of the same dynamic fabric to which I (my body) and the concreteness is either intuitive or assigned. The distinction between the abstract and the concrete is blurred from the side of the concrete

The result is a unified theory of concrete and abstract objects. There are distinctions but they are practical

Applied Metaphysics

The Logos is the object of Logic (FP). Thus we know that the Universe is without Limit; and this is perfect knowledge even though we do not know it directly. It is knowledge that there is something rather than knowledge of something; it is conceptual rather than perceptual. I have not been to Australia; I know that there is a place called Australia and this knowledge, for me, is similar in kind to my knowledge that the Universe is without Limit (the way I came to have knowledge that the Universe is Limitless has differences from the way I came to have knowledge that Australia is a real place)

The development of the metaphysics and an entire cosmology 80 and other topics has stemmed from fact of the Universe as the object of Logic. However, the bare metaphysics is not the only source of the development. The foundation of the metaphysics began in Experience. In Chapter Cosmology many general features of cosmology are suggested by modern physical cosmology (and other considerations) and the features of mind and matter suggested by studies in the philosophy of mind and psychology as well as reflection on the nature of Experience. Provided that the conclusions are kept sufficiently general, they are perfect; otherwise they are subject to the same kind of distortion or imprecision as their source. This entire range of study may be called Applied Metaphysics

In applied metaphysics we have the following degrees of perfection. In some cases the perfection of the metaphysics is not affected by specifying field of application since the development is kept sufficiently general or abstract. In the remaining cases we face the same concern that we face, say, in science. Some contexts have inherent limits on knowability, perhaps because there are limits on the definiteness of the objects; perhaps the apparently different case in which the objects seem to have precision of being but there is a limit on knowing may be a particular case on the limit of definiteness on objects (where knower-known form a compound object)

Relationship Between Logic, logic, and Science

The valid logics (and mathematics) and sciences (together with defining data) encode the known world. However, what lies outside the known world without Limit

Therefore while Logic must include the valid logics and sciences it must also contain a further Limitless ‘world’ (there is of course one constraint on this further Limitless world—i.e., the further world and the known world constitute the Universe)

Prior to their inclusion in Logic, we may have had various ideas about logic and science and logical statements and scientific. It may now be seen that the distinction concerns degree of abstraction

Inhabiting Abstract Objects

Abstract objects are ‘inhabited’ already

Still there is interest for the individual or civilization to inhabit abstract objects. Which such objects are of interest? The ones of interest are those not known directly in perception but, instead, known primarily in conception. I.e. the Universe revealed by the Universal Metaphysics

Method and Meaning

The object of knowledge is the object; which we know by ideas or concepts

The general object is not in-and-of-itself: it lies at the intersection of knower and known and the knower contributes by projection. The projective contribution leads some thinkers to conclude that there is no knowledge as such: projection is always present. However, that it is always present does not mean that it invariably results in error. There are perfect cases in which though present projection is not relevant to faithfulness. Furthermore, the practical case may be interpreted as perfect though not in the sense of faithfulness; the ‘perfection’ of the practical case is that of ‘good enough’ and of value and function of knowing; among other things this practical perfection asserts that we shall not be bonded to the priests of the universe or of knowledge

Ideas are incomplete action; complete action is that of the whole being

Referential Meaning

Here ‘meaning’ and ‘concept’ generally refer to referential meaning and referential concepts. A referential concept is one that has form / intent of reference. Concepts are simple and compound sign-icons (a sign is an object that stands for reference but which by itself is devoid of icon). Reference requires icon; pure signs have no intrinsic referential nature. Meaning lies in concepts and their objects, i.e. in intension and extension, in sense and reference

Meaning obtains in contexts where it is stabilized by use; contexts change; and there is no one context; contexts are myriad; but all contexts are in the One Universe

Meaning therefore has stability and fluidity in balance; fluidity includes new meaning which is required inasmuch as new contexts are available; for Limited form, FP requires ever-newness; even for Limited form, the metaphysics implicitly encompasses all potential meaning

Meaning incorporates experience; it is empirical; it may be actively empirical in all endeavors and contexts; some endeavors emphasize the actively empirical; in all endeavors, meaning is also and essentially empirical

Method is inherent in meaning. In the broad sense and activity of it, meaning includes method

The concept is of the world; therefore, method and content emerge together 81; knowing is a concept: content is method; there is no option; the Universe is All Being; method lies in it

The sense of a priori method is due to its remoteness—conceptually in ‘Ideational Space’ and practically in time and human adaptation

Meaning lies in interaction with participation (use) and immersion (becoming, essential transformation of Being)

Method

The establishment of results is conventionally divided into discovery and justification. Discovery is a creative phase in which results are suggested. In justification the validity of the results is shown

This section begins by identifying these phases in action in the establishment of ideas in the essay. This is followed by general reflections on the net process of discovery and justification

Justification

Essential approaches to demonstration of metaphysical knowledge established implicitly in so far in Chapter Being include analysis of meaning which already contains the empirical (Experience), abstraction of what is beyond projective distortion (of which error is a trivial, e.g. instrumental, case), and naming the resulting given

In this chapter we have arrived at a concept of Logic also via abstraction in light of the fundamental principle of metaphysics; this conception of Logic includes the valid known logics and is therefore not empty; further we have seen that Logic is empirical not in the sense, say, that physics is empirical but in that the object of Logic is referential concepts (e.g. propositions) and therefore open to inspection in the finite case but therefore, in absence of accepted proof, open to question in the infinite case. Further, the logics and their relatives, e.g. trial and error, are not received from some Platonic a priori but must by some actual process have been arrived at

The foregoing is justification; the way included discovery

In the Applied Case, method also requires discovery even though it is suppressed in the traditional presentations of it

Discovery

Discovery includes imagination and intuition, concept formation, exploration, metaphor, suggestion, comparison with the world; discovery includes conscious and unconscious processes; thus discovery intersects a private realm of thought; justification lies in a public realm. It has been argued that justification is essentially public and certainly dialog contributes to the concept and technique of justification; however the essence of justification is demonstration of validity which entails being open to inspection and criticism (i.e. of both the particular demonstration and the method of demonstration)

Discovery and justification work together in interaction and in each being suffused in the other

A traditional view is that discovery finds, justification ‘validates’; the question of whether they are and can be perfectly separate is taken up below

The ways of discovery include neutrality, emergence; applied reflexively, i.e. to itself, requires timely commitment and judgment that a conceptual system is of application

Reflexivity, discussed in detail below, is self and cross application of ideas. Horizontal reflexivity is application across concepts; vertical reflexivity treats concepts as objects which is useful even though the horizontal-vertical distinction is somewhat artificial

Discovery / Justification

In some accounts discovery and justification are fully separate; here, from multiple perspectives—that there is no final certainty even in logic, and since discovery and justification are ever in process or never complete—are now seen as incompletely separate; this is of course not a new thought

In pure metaphysics, some elements of discovery are justification; not because they are discovery; but because this is seen as manifest during the fact or, if missed during the fact, seen after it; and the manifest character of the fact lies in the elements noted in the foregoing section on Justification

A frequent scenario in logic and mathematics is that we conjure a result and a proof, from some combination of intuition and analysis. We then take up to rigorous proof. In some areas of mathematics consistency is established but others may harbor contradiction. Discovery-justification, even in logic and mathematics, lie on a continuum

In discovery of the Universe, before we can get to the idealization of a particular case we are pressed by events and our own impulse to discovery into new cases. Should we wait for certainty before we proceed? Perhaps then we would have remained tree shrews hanging by tails (which of course is not intended to as a put down to the shrew)

Existential Attitude

Should we hesitate to act where we have incomplete knowledge—of necessity or contingently? The answer is obviously ‘No’. The question is relevant because there is an implicit intellectual sentiment that suggests that the answer should be ‘Yes’. It is not essentially intellectual; it is the preoccupation of the conservatism which should remain in balance with liberalism

There is no absolute certainty regarding the Universe; there is residual doubt regarding the metaphysics

There is uncertainty about degrees of certainty and uncertainty: we do not know how certain are the metaphysics and the sum of our knowing

This may be seen as good. It is challenge calling for action and risk. The metaphysics, even if uncertain, illuminates or may illuminate our knowledge of and action in the Universe

An existential attitude that emerges—appropriate doubt and faith toward action and risk as the attitude that optimizes—at least perhaps only makes better—outcomes and realizations

Reflexivity 82

Introduction

Consider the assertion that there is no knowledge83. The assertion purports to be an example of knowledge. Therefore, insofar as knowledge is that which is true, it is untrue and therefore not knowledge. Application of an assertion to itself may be called reflexive

Here the meaning of reflexive thinking generalizes self-application of ideas in the following ways (1) Self-application generalizes to cross application and—if entailed—to integration. This may occur at various levels, e.g. the concepts within a theory, different theories (2) Interaction among ideas and actions (3) Vertical reflex in, e.g., in treating a theory as an object 84, e.g. in asking a question asking what it is that one is asking or what the question means. For example, in general ‘What is X?’, especially when kinds or categories are in question we may also want to ask “What am I asking when I ask ‘What is X?’”; thus ‘What is X?’ generally has the component question ‘What is the meaning of X?’ but in some cases the two questions are effectively identical. A trivial case might be when X = ‘What is X?’; a non trivial case is X = Being

An Example—Explanation

Consider the notion of explanation; it has various conceptions; in a commonly accepted meaning it requires identification of causes. Therefore, in physics, action at a distance and correlations in general are not seen as satisfactory sources of explanation. Surely, however this makes sense only if the world is such that cause is more or less pervasive. Our intuition and experience suggest such pervasion; i.e., the Universe is causal on the model of intuition and experience with science. However the metaphysics reveals the Universe to be non causal in general. The Universe comes from the Void; and this becoming is not causal in the usual sense of there being some transparent connection between initial and outcome states. Therefore, given the pervasion of absolute indeterminism there is a place where non causal explanation might well be taken as a paradigm of explanation—especially since so much is gotten from the Universal Metaphysics. I have found that resistance to the equivalence ‘Void º Universe’ or ‘Something º Nothing’ is significantly due to the pervasion of an intuition of the necessity of causal explanations and the invalidity, at any fundamental level, of non-causal explanations. Accordingly we may consider ‘cause 85’ to have a far wider meaning than is extant; and the extant meaning will then be a particular case of the wider meaning

An Example—Dreams

Consider the meaning of dreams as in the assertion of ‘Dreaming of a snake is a sex dream.’ Surely this interpretation is colored by a cultural background in which sex is thought to dominate development and in which snakes are naturally feared; still, given this background and an adequate theory of the unconscious this interpretation may make sense. In a similar vogue, approaches to the meaning of dreams are myriad

However, it seems to me that there are two questions that should be asked before going into—or perhaps in parallel with—the question of interpretation. The questions are ‘What are dreams?’ and ‘What is the nature of the meaning of a dream?’

What is a dream? A typical dream seems to be a collection of (mostly) visual experiences while asleep; the experiences may be familiar or bizarrely unreal and unfamiliar; they do not seem to be under control; and for the most part they have no immediate reference to an object. This suggests that there is some connection with an unconscious facility. Perhaps, however, the term ‘unconscious’ may be taken too literally. Perhaps dreams are just the result of the brain losing conscious focus in relaxation and are just random acts of unfocused memory and, perhaps, in explanation of the completely unfamiliar, enhanced by random acts of unfocused creation. The notion that ‘dreams are just the result…’ however deserves criticism. Perhaps the random aspect, even if true, is the origin of dreams in the individual mind and in evolution—the byproduct of something else not in itself adaptive, e.g. the defocusing of the mind on the way to the non-consciousness of full sleep

This however does not imply that that is all that dreams have come to be 86 and it is here that the question of the meaning of dreams naturally arises. Perhaps in a stage before powerful conscious human thought, dreams came to be a source of creativity; in this case adaptation may have resulted in dreams acquiring function or growing beyond their original function (a non-function on the above hypothetical account) just, e.g., as fins became limbs

It seems that most dream theories focus on cognitive content and on interpretation. However, some dreams are so intense that they constitute their own meaning (in some sense) without need for interpretation. A dream in which one has a musical experience so deep and profound as to result in an awake state as if one had been to a great concert—what is the ‘meaning’ of such a dream? Interpretation might say ‘You are meant be an artist’; inherent meaning might go ‘you already are an artist’ (latently perhaps). The dream carries its own meaning which may be expressed cognitively but which is not primarily cognitive

Add to this the notion of the hypnagogic (wake to sleep) and hypnopompic (sleep to wake) states; phenomena that occur during this ‘threshold consciousness’ include lucid dreaming including dream-wake conversation, hallucinations, out of body experiences and sleep paralysis. Consider further the phenomena of dream cultivation, power dreams, dream themes (e.g. all night long or multiple nights sometimes separated in days or even years) and dreamscapes (places or environments repeatedly visited over the years with their own ‘realities’) and inspiration dreams (dreams so vivid and or powerful as to spark an avocation). Consider that not all indirect meaning is interpreted but may be suggested and assigned; what this means is that we need not treat dreams as in and of themselves but also see them in interaction with waking thought—the point being made is not only the obvious one that there is interaction between dream and waking thought but that net meaning lies in the interactions of meanings

These considerations suggest a wealth of meaning that is easily overlooked in superficial approaches to meaning. The suggestions include that meaning is wider than often thought and is not necessarily understood indirectly via interpretation

It is valid to say that dream theory and dream use are primitive and a potential instrument among others as catalytic in creative process

Creation and Criticism

As in and in parallel to the discovery / justification pair, creation and criticism are often thought to be distinct. Creation comes first and is largely private, criticism provides proof (or disproof) and is public in the sense that there are in any culture approved methods of proof

In some ‘models’ of creativity, brainstorming is a phase in which criticism is suspended and one comes up with as many ideas as possible. Regardless of the utility of brainstorming the notion of suspension of criticism is a caricature. Suppose I am designing a building; I could use a rainbow as the door; a lake as a window; and uncle Scrooge as the lock to the front door; but I do not. There is a certain amount of background critical common sense that is not inhibiting but is in fact enhancing of creativity

Similarly, I often need to be creative about criticism. The great example is that method and content arise together; we have seen this process in this essay; and we have noted the likelihood that the duality of the origin is suppressed or lost in pre-history. Even today, the development of logic and logics is a creative endeavor

Thus creation and criticism (or discovery and justification) are more than mutually conditioning; they are ultimately enmeshed

Discovery

In the discovery of new ideas many other areas of thought may serve as analogy; it may be necessary to synthesize what have been thought to be separate fields. Breadth of experience and thought are useful

Intuition

Intuition begins as perception and conception. For example, perceive objects but we are not in control of the neuronal dynamics of the perception of the object and its form. When I see a mountain the experience is conscious; however, the neuronal process in which that conscious image appeared is not conscious

When we study mathematics we learn its symbolism and the meaning of the symbols. The learning is at first conscious 87 (except of course that we use words whose senses depend on intuition). Later intuition enters in two ways. The first meanings of the symbols of mathematics lie in reference to the world. Later we formulate abstract meanings and develop axiomatic systems. However, physical intuition remains useful. Intuition enters in a second way: we develop intuition of the symbolic system itself. There is a reflexive interaction of formalization and intuition

Informal reflex

Examples of informal reflex are using and deploying one’s intelligence, disposition, and even weaknesses; adjusting daily routine and habit (or not or suppressing any routine); asking, e.g. when doing physics or art—what am I doing, what is physics doing / contributing to society… to civilization… (it is not suggested that these are essential to performance but that they may be, e.g. in a period where advance becomes difficult)

Reflexivity: Summary

The notion of ‘reflexivity’ is an idea that I have espoused and I should therefore not be merely enthusiastic in pressing its case. In individual and cultural growth we do not begin at the beginning; we are born into cultures; at any point culture is a mix of received ideas and ideas under consideration and in flux. The attitude of reflexivity has primitive origins in this process and is part of it; its further expansion grows out of the primitive but is not determined by it; and it becomes conscious and formal

In looking back on my thought, however, it is not an idea that presented itself to me in an instant and which I subsequently projected on to other activity. Rather, it arose as a noticed pattern which then, through cultivation and criticism, deepened and broadened. I have read very widely and this contributed to discovery. However, idea of the ‘meta question’ arose slowly not because it was difficult to see but because it first required existence of a pattern to be noticed and then it required parallel deepening on multiple fronts before its significance emerged. I believe it is fair to say that formal reflexivity and intelligent informal reflexivity have been immensely useful in the process of development of the ideas in the narrative of this essay

Reflexive thinking has been useful in a number of developments of the essay which include the following. (1) In the dual emergence of content and method for the metaphysics (2) In selection of the basic concepts of the metaphysics (3) As a model of the creative-critical process. There is a fair literature on the creative process. However, creation is singular, it has no formula 88. Still it seems to me that the use of reflexivity as described here might be useful as an example (4) In many activities in mathematics and science discovery and justification are separate. However, in the ongoing process of the disciplines the distinction becomes blurred. For example, the development of the concepts of justification, demonstration, and proof, has required and will continue to require creativity. Thus while it is not formal method, reflexivity lies on the boundary of formal method (5) Further, the Universal Metaphysics shows that there can be no final formal method available to Limited forms (individuals). Since the object of Logic is the Universe, there can be no final formalization of Logic. Since the Universal Metaphysics dissolves the distinction between abstract and concrete objects, the projective distortion of the latter extends to the former and it is only in certain cases that we can argue that the ‘quantity’ of distortion is zero. There is no final formalization of knowledge for a Limited form; however, exploitation of formalization and precision where it emerges is positive, provided of course that it does not unnecessarily inhibit activity in domains that are not yet known to be capable of formal precision (6) In the incompleteness of ideas revealed by the Universal Metaphysics and in the necessity of action and transformation for full completeness. Particularly this shows that for Limited forms of being and intelligence the methods of science on the way to fullness must be supplemented by immersion and participation. To know it we must participate the Being of the Universe

Aspects of Reflexivity in Further Development

Reflexivity has of course touched the development of ideas in the narrative. However, the essay is also about action and transformation—the content of, Journey, the next division of the essay; and while science and technology are important agents of change, the being of the individual and of civilization are crucial agents and objects of change. The most immediately available empirical object of such transformation available for my study is myself, my being (therefore in experimenting with myself I am not being particularly personal but I recognize that if any outcome is to be regarded as more than singular adequate arguments will be required)

It is therefore crucial that I should be reflexive on a number of fronts

First—the questions, what am I doing, what is its meaning, where shall I place my energies? These are questions and meta-questions regarding my life

And second—especially regarding transformation—how shall I place relative emphasis on the modern paradigms which are mostly external to the individual versus the paradigms which do emphasize the internal aspect but which are today often thought to be of earlier and less than scientific traditions?

A present answer to this second concern is that (1) The approach of shall first be that of the Universal Metaphysics which is a distinct and demonstrated paradigm 89, for which ancient and modern paradigms as well as experience, imagination, and criticism may be used as necessary where necessity can be shown and can otherwise be used as suggestive, and (2) Regarding any claim, traditional or joint with the metaphysics, ancient or modern, received or experimental, intuitive or reasoned in form, where there is doubt the dual approach of rational and empirical investigation is ever open

Philosophy

The earliest works that are recognized as philosophy in the west emphasized explanation of the world that were (a) in terms of natural rather than non-natural elements and (b) in simple terms and were therefore in some sense real (thought not necessarily true) explanations. The mode of explanation is a precursor to the development of science. According to Thales of Miletus c. 624 BC - c. 546 BC the world started from water. Although the explanation appears simplistic to us, the idea marks a turn away from mythological explanation. In any case, on account of the plainness of the ideas and perhaps even by intent they are open to inspection and to development of conclusions—i.e. of a world picture

If we move forward in time it is perhaps natural that such thought should have become more sophisticated on a number of fronts. (1) Improvement of the empirical content perhaps by trial and error so that by the time of Newton the world was not water but particles under the influence of universal gravitation moving in space according to definite laws (2) Sharpening of the instruments of explanation and prediction which included the geometry of Euclid around 300 BC, the algebra and geometry of Descartes, and the calculus of Newton and Leibniz (3) Self criticism of the instrument, i.e. logic

This did not bring the tradition of metaphysical theories of the world to an end but it placed them apart from science. From the success of science (external consistency e.g. prediction and coherence of the concepts) metaphysical theories acquired a niche role

From the beginning, philosophy had been about more than metaphysical theories. Its interests were wide ranging and included politics, ethics, early physics and biology, theories of the nature of the psyche. What characterized philosophy was careful thought

Today, many of the fields that were once the concern of philosophy have acquired an empirical character and have separated from philosophy

Philosophy acquired a number of forms and for convenience I will mention only its western forms. In the analytic form it came to include the careful analysis of ideas not yet subsumed by science or to be foundational to science. In continental philosophy thought was similarly displaced by science but where its strokes were bolder than those of analytic thought its criteria have been thought to be less rigorous

Philosophy was displaced from the center it once occupied. It was no longer about the world; that was the business of science. However, it could study the disciplines themselves, e.g. philosophy of science, of physics, of art and so on. Even here however philosophy retreated. Physicists for example needed no definition of physics and since education in philosophy had become specialized, philosophers were not in a position to provide a definition

Apparently in this development there was no overarching discipline whose subject was the world which would be all encompassing in that first, its interest would be the whole world but second in that it would see the disciplines themselves as part of the world

The present development shows there is a place for such a study that is more than an accumulation of separate disciplines each self-contained

I call that discipline philosophy

Logic and Mathematics

In the view in which the object of Logic is the Logos, the Universe in all its detail, Logic includes all valid logics, mathematics, and science

Although the definition is different from what is current, it is a consequence of the metaphysical development. Further, given two propositions that refer to the same state of affairs, the requirement that compounds of the two also have valid reference leads to logical relations between them

Now Logic is the requirement on concepts of referential form andor intent to have reference (under FP). Under this conception mathematics would be the study of specialized symbolic structures; it is not clear whether such structures should be introduced from intuition, formally, or by specialization from Logic itself and clearly the three cases are not entirely distinct

This is a beginning

Science

Theory

It will be sufficient to summarize what has already been seen

It is convenient to focus on physics since it has claims to universality. The history of physics shows a succession of conceptual systems. Each system has a domain of validity and a boundary region at which, as experimental and conceptual boundaries are pushed out, phenomena are discovered that do not fit within the framework. A new conceptual system is put forward. To be accepted it should agree with the older system in its domain of validity; it should be able to accommodate the data that is exceptional in the old system; and it should predict new data that should agree with experiment. We may view the progression of theories as being on the way to universality. However, the Universal Metaphysics suggests that this ‘universalization’ is a process without end except perhaps for unlimited mind for which theory is unnecessary because its mode of knowing is perception. An alternative and equivalent view of the progression of theories is to see them as sequence of compound facts

Since biology concerns life on earth (so far) it cannot be quite accommodated into this framework. However, the series of biological theories and their improvements may be seen in similar light. Further, the Universal Metaphysics shows the existence of life forms without Limit. If and when such forms are discovered—perhaps when they discover us—some new mechanisms of life and its origins may be discovered and may require adaptation or modification of current biology

Practice

As we have seen, the future of science will require participation and immersion. It is not particularly relevant whether future methods of science will be seen as supplementary or replacements for present for the present methods are not alien to participation and immersion for there is some artificiality to the separation of science and its application

Art

We have conceived art as follows. Art is seeing-feeling, expression, communication, and reception of what is deep in (human) Being and Universe

We argued that art is an element in Logic. It concerns at least the imaginative side of Logic; there is an intense need for such imagination (and it is not particularly important whether that imagination shall come from scientists, artists, writers, poets…)

These activities will be a part of discovery. They will also be an aspect of the discovery side of justification and perhaps to a merging of discovery and justification

What is the method of art? It is perhaps a side of human activity that knows no final method; and this may be because it lies at a depth below what has emerged as method and because its subject lies at the edge of the not-yet-familiar

Religion

Therefore Religion may be conceived as All dimensions of Being deployed in discovery and realization of All Being; the process and learning will be cumulative, may be recorded, and may draw on charisma to be effective

The case of religion is similar to that of art. I hesitate to specify a method if method means algorithm

However, the approach of religion intersects the activity of discovery, development, and transformation of the main divisions, Ideas and Journey, of this essay

Cosmology

Introduction

The Concept of Cosmology

The subject of cosmology is the duration, extent, and variety of Being in the Universe; the boundary, if there should be one, between cosmology and metaphysics is porous

Is perfection required as it was in metaphysics? We are interested in all levels of perfection. What is important is that different levels should not be confused. It is probably most effective to begin with perfect or ‘metaphysical’ cosmology. Today, cosmology is commonly thought to be physical cosmology 90; however, it is obvious from the metaphysics that there is far more to the universe than seen in physical cosmology

The section begins with the most general material which could be labeled ‘general metaphysical cosmology’ but we will use the term cosmology

‘Special cosmology’ will be the name for those aspects of cosmology that are concerned with special kinds of being, e.g. from myth, religion, theology, literature, art, dreams, unfettered imagination, and intuition. The aim in special cosmology will be to see what special kinds—with appropriate modification if needed—satisfy the criteria of (metaphysical) cosmology

Significance of Cosmology

In illuminating the variety in the Universe, cosmology provides the largest scale map scale map for (a) Any exploration of Being via identity and through ‘death’ (b) Any physical cosmology

Method

The Universal Metaphysics—its content and method—shall be the core approach to cosmology. Briefly the criteria are those of Logic

Cosmological scenarios shall be suggested by imagination and tradition and, subject to Logic, may be accepted into cosmology

Since cosmology has concern with the variety of Being, the section Objects is pertinent since it finds abstract objects to be in the (one) Universe

General Cosmology

Duration and Extension

The nature of duration and extension have been considered in Chapter Being

The significant conclusions were (1) The bases of duration and extension are in sameness and difference, respectively (2) For duration and extension to obtain in a region, there must be sufficient regularity to permit sameness and difference (3) For perception of sameness and difference to obtain there also must be sufficient regularity of the internal effect on a perceiver—see the discussion in the section Mind and Matter below; it is not clear that there is an additional requirement for the most elemental ‘perception’ over and above the ‘being’ of sameness and difference; it would seem that for perception with acuity, however, there should be sufficient regularity to permit some sufficiently faithful effect of sameness and difference in the ‘perceiver’ (4) From the interwoven nature of sameness and difference follows an interwoven nature of extension and duration

Necessity of Duration and Extension

A single point (something without internal structure; or less than a point, i.e. nothingness) can have no process or duration. Extension (structure) is necessary for duration

Without duration, the Universe would have a single ‘eternal’ structure. It would have no mechanism of becoming or even of be-ing; it would have neither life nor mind nor possibility of significance. Duration is necessary for significance

Clearly Extension and duration are necessary for significance

From FP, Extension and duration are both necessary

Space, Time, and Matter

Since the Universe is All Being, there is nothing outside it; there can be no imposed grid; space and time are immanent, i.e. relative but for a part of the Universe may be as if absolute

Here ‘matter’ does not refer specifically to the matter of our cosmos. In our cosmos there appears to be one mode of matter, i.e. (apparently) forged in the same ‘hearth’, constituting a symmetry (more or less), and interactive (more or less)

Here, matter will mean Being-in-itself or first order Being. These terms will be explained in section Mind and Matter, below

While there is one mode of matter in our cosmos, in other perhaps less structured or multiply structured cosmoses, there may be more than one mode of matter. The (informal) meaning of ‘cosmos’ requires these modes to be in interaction; the meaning of the term ‘mode’ suggests that intra-modal interactions will normally be stronger than inter-modal interactions. These strengths and their relative magnitudes may and therefore in some situations do change over time

As an alternative to manifestation in a loosely bound cosmos, multiple modes may manifest as loosely interacting cosmological systems which may appear as ghost systems. The distinction is blurred

Although distinct, the different modes may be similar. In the case of interacting cosmological systems the modes may be identical or near identical

The foregoing is analogous to a many histories model of a cosmos

Form

There is no necessity to uniqueness or sameness or pervasiveness-in-the-large-or-small of a ‘material’ form (e.g. as in the standard model of particle physics), a measure of time, measure and dimensionality of space, or speed. Sameness suggests common local origins. Uniqueness suggests opportunism, i.e. perpetuation of the first optimally symmetric form (optimal symmetry reflects tradeoff between greater symmetry and so greater stability and duration of existence of e.g. particles versus less symmetry and so fecundity)

Variety of Being

Examples of variety were considered in an earlier section The meaning of ‘Limit’ and subsequent discussion. Some further examples include parallel cosmological systems, annihilator systems (every system may self-annihilate since it is associated with a Void), ghost systems. If two cosmological systems have no interaction the meaning of their separation in space would seem to have no meaning; therefore ghost and parallel systems may be candidates for many histories interpretations

FP is the source of determination of the variety of Being. Pertinent forms of FP are The Universe has no Limits and The Universe is the Object of Logic. Variety is implicit in the former and explicit in the latter to the extent that Logic is explicit

Some aspects of variety significant to realization are those of cosmology, identity, and the individual. The following sample is selected as a useful beginning

If the Universe is Void, every state is realized; but the Void is universal; therefore every state is realized; the Universe has no Limit—this implies Logic, the requirement on intentional reference for actual reference which is (a) factual or empirical: a given domain must be in some state, facts are given, i.e. contained in the Logic in the trivial but not insignificant sense that any assertion p implies p; (b) conceptual, i.e. Logic sets limits on concepts in referential form to have reference; Logic is not empty for the logics are approximations to Logic (c) existential, i.e. the gaps in our Logical ability are to be filled with proper Existential Attitude (including Death and crises as essential catalyst to fullest realization for Limited form)

From Logic, our cosmos is one of an unlimited variety of form (physical Law) and actual configuration against a transient / Void background; the Universe and Identity are unlimited in variety, extension, duration; Being and Identity of Universe have acute, diffuse, and empty or non-manifest phases across which soul is preserved; except conditions of Being and co-Being individuals inherit the Being (Power, Identity) of the Universe; this life is image and ground for the Universal; Ideas—which include partial knowledge of options in relation to outcomes, choice, intention, execution, learning from comparison of actual with intended outcomes—and Action are the modes of process for Being as an agent—Ideas are a form of Action; they occasion freshness, enjoyment, engagement, and effectiveness; as Action, Ideas are incomplete; completion requires the full Transformation of Being via Ideas and Experiment (and learning which is a form of Idea and continuation of this cycle); for Limited form realization is limitless process in extension, duration, variety, magnitude and quality of summit (followed by dissolution); Limited form can form images of the Limitless as in this account and, e.g., as in yoga which cover the cognitive, the affective, and the body; un-Limited form is open to the individual form but again there is dissolution

The nature of the un-Limited or minimally Limited is not clear from these considerations. We can speak of Aeternitas as the Limitless out of time but it is not clear that this is consistent with FP even though we can imagine it. Perhaps in some sense being in a series toward Aeternitas we are in Aeternitas; perhaps at some point which would seem to be beyond human capability, the process may be accelerated or perhaps the individual may simultaneously inhabit Limitlessness and limitedness. The purpose of these speculative notes is twofold. It is first, a beginning to further investigation

The second purpose of the remarks is to note that whatever the ultimate may be, it is open to the individual

One goal of the journey is to attempt a stage of realization at which the individual is positively on course to the ultimate so that the trials are not mere hops but are flight 91

Mechanism

From FP, every state occurs. The meaning of ‘state’ is general. Thus if A is a ‘configuration’ A is a state; however the history of A is also a state in this general sense

Therefore every configuration occurs; if the configuration suggests mechanism, e.g. our cosmos, then mechanism must be present in some occurrence of that configuration; however there will also be occurrences without mechanism

It is reasonable that the occurrences via mechanism are (much) more likely than those without mechanism. Mechanism is natural but not necessary. We may say that mechanism is normal

Not all configurations suggest mechanism. Perhaps there is an immense population of transient states with Void as background

However, the normal cosmoses—those formed by natural progression called mechanism—probably dominate others in population in virtue of an optimal product of longevity and fecundity

For examples of mechanism we may look to variation and selection in biology; in physics there are models, still speculative, of formation of cosmoses by selection. An example is that of Lee Smolin in which cosmoses of our type produce further cosmoses ‘on the other side’ in black hole collapse. Each cosmos therefore gives rise to as many new universes as it has black holes. The population of cosmoses will peak around those values of the parameters that are optimal in terms of longevity and fecundity which are also the conditions for symmetry optimal to complexity and complex life

Special Cosmology

Examples of special cosmology are the cosmologies of theology and religion. What is their status in the metaphysics? FP requires their occurrence, subject of course to Logic. For occurrence, therefore inconsistent elements must be removed; this includes that no such special cosmology can be eternal. However, subject to this requirement occurrence is given

The questions of a special cosmology are therefore concern its occurrence on earth and its universal occurrence

FP, the metaphysics give no support to occurrence on earth even with inconsistency removed except to suggest that the charge of absurdity should be changed to (a) improbability and (b) requirement that empirical evidence (e.g. that of anthropology) be satisfied

FP requires infinite occurrence in the Universe. From the discussion of mechanism we expect that ‘natural’ systems formed by natural mechanism will have a far greater population. Perhaps this will be to such an extent that the ‘unnatural’ cosmologies will be insignificant

Mind and Matter

Interest is in the general case of Being but it is convenient for discussion to begin with a form of materialism. We know that substance is untenable for the Universe as a whole. However, some form of materialism may approximate our local situation. By beginning with materialism we will uncover some errors of materialism, learn from the errors, correct for them; this will prepare the analysis for the general case of Being. The materialism that we assume is that the world is material and that mind is not among the elements of matter

Experience is not material and therefore, if mind is not among the elements of matter, has no explanation in terms of the material—brain-body—structure and process. However, the material—neuro-physiological—correlates of Experience can be explained; and behavior, since it is also material, can be explained; the explanations would lie in the elaborate structures and processes of the brain and its interactions; explanation would be complex and perhaps beyond our present capacity but since the explanation is from the material to the material it is not ruled out by principle. Explanation of Experience, however, is ruled out by principle

How then might Experience occur? How might it be explained? Some thinkers have asserted that it is a biological property of the organism. Today, however, we accept independent biological explanation but generally hold that such explanations are material at root—i.e., the stuff of life is matter even though material explanation of biology is far too complex to compete with explanation at the level of cell, organ, and organism. Therefore that Experience is a biological property and that mind is not material are contradiction

Materialism leads to a blind end 92

What are the alternatives? Experience must be real. Here a number of options occur. (1) Matter and mind (Experience) are distinct. This results in dualism which has the problem of how mind and matter interact and effectively eliminates dualism as a natural explanation for possible explanations are, first a third kind that coordinates the two which has the same problem of interaction and, second, that are distinct but same which essentially contradictory (2) Mind and matter are not distinct. They cannot be merely be bound together for that would be dualism. Experience and mind on the one hand and matter on the other must be part of the same kind except that this ‘two sided’ aspect is something that is tend to or do not recognize in what we know or that it is not in what we know (or combinations)

Given creativity in mind, any material side description is incomplete. For completeness, any material side description must be complete. There is debate as to whether quantum theory is deterministic. If it is it cannot be complete 93

We now revert to the general case of Being. What is mind? Experience marks our ‘experience’ with mind

What is the structure of Experience? We have already defined its ‘constitution’ in Chapter Being. However, we are now asking how it is that an organism has Experience of something. Experience is in the experiencing organism but it is of the experienced thing. Its manifestation must be some change in the experiencing organism that is due to interaction, i.e. action of what is experienced upon the experiencing organism. Thus while Experience is in the organism its material side is change in the organism that marks the action of the experienced. Briefly, Experience is alteration in interaction. An apparent exception is pure Experience. However, even pure Experience is internal interaction, e.g. the result of memory, or recombination of memory elements together, perhaps, with indeterministic neural process (i.e. re-combinatory together with pure originality)

Since this goes down to the elemental level, the element of Experience at that level must be the effect of interaction in the element (e.g. particle). In a pure particle Experience is impossible. However, from the metaphysics every atom is a cosmos (and every cosmos an atom), therefore impossibility does not arise. Going down to the elementary level is necessary from the argument regarding materialism. However, it is not the case that ‘Experience’ at the particle level is like our Experience. Our Experience is the result of structure and process—specialization, combination, elaboration, layering—from the lowest level up

Thus it is not Experience that originates in evolution / adaptation. Rather it is its particular forms. In the human these forms are central consciousness and peripheral awareness down to body process, even non-neural, which have elementary feeling that may never or barely function as such relative to the central. Awareness of central consciousness becomes possible because awareness becomes reflex, e.g. as in memory or mental content that persists; and may be specially cultivated in culture and language. Conscious is not non-spatial since it is distributed but the coherence, unity, of central consciousness make it seem non-spatial (in any case its spatiality is not the appearance of spatiality of the world). Therefore Spinoza’s idea that (the) two attributes known to human mind are thought and extension is erroneous; and the idea of the series continued (third order being) has no clear significance as another attribute. By extension Spinoza seems to mean the material attributes of a body; thus thought and extension are roughly mind and body; which are one ‘attribute’ that we have, in our understanding, split into two

Thus while there may be Limitless kinds, there is only one attribute that we split into two

Various well known phenomena can be explained. Awareness without (central) consciousness (which is especially marked in individuals in whom the corpus callosum is severed). The apparent on-off nature of consciousness: awareness of central consciousness is on-off even though consciousness is a continuum

Since we are now (having only temporarily adopted the attitude of materialism) concerned with the general case of Being we may imagine that given a matter like situation, mind can arise spontaneously but reach ‘down’ to unify with matter (and perhaps vice-versa).

However, from the nature of mind as fundamentally Experience the following considerations arise

~~Note that kinds of matter is already noted in cosmology~~

~~In mind--mind = effect in interaction; effect in interaction --> mind? 1. always potential 2. if sufficiently regular~~

~~But what does sufficiently regular mean? stable pattern? reach down?~~

In the general situation we may define ‘matter’ as Being-in-itself or ‘first order Being’ while ‘mind’ (Experience) is Being-in-interaction or ‘second order Being’. However, these are fully integrated and intertwined. The distinction is not that of objective versus subjective; however, when in interaction the effect of known on knower need not generally amount to full information regarding known

In our cosmos there appears to be one mode of matter. As seen in Space, Time, and Matter (General Cosmology) there may in general there may be multiple modes of matter, i.e. of first order Being and therefore multiple modes of mind as second order Being which is Being-in-interaction. There is room here for phenomena such as spirit, ghost, even ghost cosmos

Thus while there may be an unlimited number of kinds, even in a given cosmos, there is but one attribute in the sense of Spinoza

What are the root origins of mind and matter? It is not given that elements-of-Being-in-themselves are original. If they were we might say that matter is the root. We have seen that every atom is a cosmos, every cosmos an atom; therefore we cannot assert the primal nature of one of mind and matter over the other. We can say this (1) Without mind there is no significance for mind is the place of significance; and from universal interaction matter and mind are each just as much the fundamental constitution of the Universe as the other and (2) In any domain one of mind and matter may present as practically primal; the practical case of course pervades the practical context—but the practical case is not and cannot be eternal; and even though one may effectively pervade, this is reversible (3) If, as in our cosmos, we think of the elements of matter as fixed and therefore substance-like, it is essential then that the elements of mind are already material at that level

Death

Two extreme views of death may be called the secular and the eternal. Even though there is exaggeration to the following formulations, the exaggeration is a good place to start

In secularism, death is the eternal end of individual consciousness. In a contrary view, individual consciousness transcends death and in the extreme version of this view individual consciousness is unlimited (in time and extension, i.e. individual consciousness approaches universal consciousness). Actual views lie on a continuum between these extremes. There is a rather wavering ‘third’ point of view; it is that death is ‘real’ but that we leave legacies. Legacy is not unimportant; if we care for others we want our legacy to be significant and good; however the wavering element lies in the suggestion that we somehow continue on in our legacy. I may be in part the consciousness of my ancestors but only when it becomes manifest that this is in fact the case, i.e. when it is clear that there is in some sense one eternal consciousness, will this be clearly the case. If it is the case there it a question of evolution or recognition (which may itself require evolution) or, if change in form and change in memory are different, perhaps both

The purpose of this discussion is to cast a wide enough net to provide perspectives that will be brought together in considering death in more concrete and personal terms a later section Death and Existence in the second main division Journey

Death is a significant event

That it stands over life is given in its significance; however, to be worthy of discussion, it is necessary that it should be instructive (learning that we can do something in terms of accepting / facing it for self / other is part of instruction)

Death is a significant cosmological event; however from its significance to Limited form, it deserves special treatment

What is Death?

Secular Thought

In secularism, death is the end of individual consciousness

However, its significance is that of its experience in life through the death of others and through our knowledge of our own death to be

Thus, death is a part of life; actually and in experience

In secular thought we take nothing with us; neither baggage, nor self, nor ego

An initial answer to the ‘problem’ of death is to live well

We leave legacies; but the meaning of legacy lies in living this life well

The Metaphysics

Death is not the end of individual consciousness. The metaphysical concept of death, according to the metaphysics, is: end of all things except soul (whose actuality lies open)

However, it retains the significance of death in secular thought

The metaphysics adds to this significance; we want to know how we connect across death

We may be interested in establishing this connection

Again, a parallel with the secular significance. It is important to the connection to live this life well

We leave more than our mark; but the meaning of ‘mark’ and ‘more’ lie in living this life well; but more: in establishing connection; that too is part of ‘living this life well’ but now the meaning of ‘this life’ and ‘well’ are enhanced

What Can we Learn From Death?

…of course, as a part of life

In Secularism

We take nothing with us

Human Being is always existentially incomplete; we have the potential to be more; many of us feel the desire to be more; what of those who do not?—this is a good existential attitude but if there is no inner attitude of even being-more-in-time, we are as good as dead

However, the desire to be more ends at death; it is the end of all incompleteness, including the existential incompleteness

Death therefore teaches us of bringing projects to a close; this is in a personal sense: it does not exclude their continuation with others whether by direct or indirect / explicit or implicit influence

In youth there is the luxury of approaching projects with the attitude of as-if-I-will-live-forever

We can continue this attitude. However, if we wish, e.g., to complete projects, i.e. bring them to some completion, Death modifies our attitude to them

We can learn this by example from others, e.g. others who died in midstream or outset of projects; and from crises which may teach us resourcefulness, existential attitudes and, especially, the careful use of resources of energy and time, in executing projects; and a first lesson may be: excision of the inessential (which means also excision of this attitude as too rigid)

We can imagine this as an infinite series as we approach death; at every sign of a new phase in aging, we telescope our ambition and commitment even while in interaction with others we sustain projects

However, the fist term of the series is the most significant; for we are always at a first term; and we only learn better what we have already begun to learn

‘Today is a good day to die; I accept Death” are nice attitudes; facing Death is accepting and transcending by appropriate action, the limit of Death

Those attitudes are actually more than nice; for Death is not always ‘timely’ even though it is in a sense never untimely; they are good attitudes; but we can overdo them; we should live today as though it is the last should / may be complemented by live as though I will live forever; an ideal image: facing death, life, knowledge, and ignorance… without facing them… life as action amid meditative stillness

Under The Metaphysics

All the foregoing supplemented by setting aside a pool of resources dedicated to discovery and anticipation of the Unlimited

‘Death as Gateway’ is a topic in Cosmology; though there are special developments, it lies under the transformations that conserve ‘soul’

Power

The Nature of Power

Power is degree of Limitlessness; the Universe is ultimate power; except conditions of coexistence, individuals inherit ultimate power

A problem of power is what we should and may do in view of its ultimate nature? Given the potential gain, it seems that there is immense value in some attempt to discover and realize ultimate power. Perhaps risks 94 outweigh gains; therefore any approach to the value of seeking would have an empirical element as would the search itself. However, the search and its nature are illuminated by the metaphysics and tradition

The Universal Metaphysics does with some degree of rationality reveal power without limit. Together with tradition it suggests some approaches to realizing this power; these approaches are a combination of reason and experiment and taken up in the division Journey

The question of God is somewhat peripheral to the issue. The metaphysics reveals that there must be God as ultimate power but it is not clear that in the probable case (immanent rather than imposed concepts of power and god) this would be more than mere naming. We may take an empirical approach to this question 95

Mediate Powers

The power of the Universe is not entirely and immediately available

Approach to power is first via mediate powers. However such approaches may be undertaken in light of the contemplations of the metaphysics. Common experience, tradition, and the metaphysics may suggest various mediate powers and approaches to their use

See § Powers below for details

The concept and nature of Logic

The concept and nature of Religion

The concept and nature of Science

The concept of the object. Unified theory of concrete and abstract objects

The interwoven nature of the concepts of method and meaning

Development of and parallels among method for metaphysics, Logic, science

The idea and concept of General Cosmology

Methods and topics of General Cosmology—Duration and Extension and their necessity; space, time, and matter

World

The dominant secular view of the Universe today is one that emerges from modern physical cosmology. In this view our world lies within and reduces to physical reality even if we cannot describe it in physical terms 96

The view demonstrated here sees the Universe as greater without Limit than the cosmos of modern physical cosmology. Under the Universal Metaphysics the study of our world must integrate the metaphysics and the tradition of human knowledge and experience

The subject of this chapter is ‘our’ cosmos and its varieties of Being from the physical to life, human being and mind, and society. The general material on human being would likely apply to any community of intelligent agents of Limited form

Interest in this subject is (a) General, i.e. intersection with and contribution to human knowledge and (b) Material that is significant to the Journey

Introduction

Subject Matter of ‘World’

The first chapter Being set up the metaphysics; the next chapter Universe developed and explored the metaphysics

In a sense there is no pure metaphysics. This is the sense in which we refer to (our) Experience to the necessary inference via abstraction of some of its ‘essential’ characteristics and the fact of Being. The givenness of Experience and of Being is a part of that part of Experience that is not subject to projective contribution and the outcome is necessary or perfect. We might therefore call this quantitatively small development ‘pure metaphysics’

In going beyond pure metaphysics in this sense we appeal to our knowledge of the world which may come from direct experience or indirectly from some other source, e.g., science and logic. However, the development is not necessarily subject to imperfection, e.g., projective contribution. Provided we understand the terms ‘mind’, ‘matter’, ‘space’, and ‘time’ appropriately we may, for example, make some significant conclusions mind and matter and matter and space and time that are perfect. This defines a larger scope for pure metaphysics. The chapter Universe was devoted primarily to developments in pure metaphysics in this larger sense

In this chapter we consider a still larger scope of knowledge that lies at the intersection of pure metaphysics and the imperfection of ‘practical objects’ that may however be considered perfect in a practical sense and in a wider ranging value sense. We lose precision but gain significance; we thus affirm life and give and take between idea and reality; we gain in existential attitude

Kinds of Interest

General

Human knowledge

Journey in Being

Material that is probably significant to realization

Scope

General

More complete versions of the essay attempt a comprehensive coverage of the range of topics of significance. These topics include the nature and sciences of matter and energy, physical cosmology, earth sciences (possibly), the study of life and its evolution, the study of human being and human mind, the social sciences, and an entire range of disciplines that fall under the arts and humanities, and religion

This Version of the Essay

This version of the essay focuses on the Journey rather than the general emphasis

This version will therefore emphasize 97 (individual) human being, mind, and the cooperative endeavor of being that we will call civilization 98. This version of the essay will focus on those aspects of these topics that I judge to be important to the essay

Discussion and selection of topics for this version emphasize those important to human being and the human endeavor; and to the journey in being

Method

Here ‘method’ refers to an approach to development within a discipline of focus

Discussion is not explicitly of the growth of or modification of the disciplines. However, some discussion of this topic must be at least implicit since the levels of method are interactive and conceptually intertwined

As discussed below Applied Metaphysics provides enhancements

Topics

Significant to Universal Action in Ideas and Transformation 99—Human Being

Significant to local action 100—Organic and Symbolic Being. Civilization

Method

In this version description of method is brief and deployment is informal

Threefold way

Phenomena, elements, explanatory framework

Applied Metaphysics—Enhancements of Method and Content

Method

Include participation and immersion

…

Content

Case by case

The three fold way—phenomena, elements, explanatory framework

… (any particulars)

Human Being

This section serves as part of the foundation for the section Transformation in Journey. Since transformation concerns Being and civilization, this interest is perfectly general

Elements. Freedom and necessity. Culture and value

Material and animal being. Necessity and freedom. Animal. Experience, idea, action. Embedded and layered; material level feeling on up. Central and peripheral consciousness and incomplete communication. Modes of action. Origin of free and linguistic-iconic thought and communication

Human Being. Embedded and adapted. Parameters—sensory modalities. Memory, freedom, concept creation: freedom and necessity. Experience, intentionality, action. Cooperation and communication

Psychology

Psychology may be developed according to a number of essential distinctions: nature—culture, inner—outer, afferent—efferent, bound-free, freedom—determinism, and time—timelessness

Nature—Culture

Nature determines sensory and motor modalities. The culture of the group (of society), though it possesses determinate elements, is a context of freedom

Inner—Outer

This is a metaphorical reference to body-locus of identity and direct action versus environment and locus of instrumental action. The ‘inner’ is largely feeling—basic emotion—(quality and intensity) dominated while the ‘outer’ is largely structure (shape, size, quantity, quality, and degree; degree may be experienced similarly to affective intensity in extremes) dominated. The outer is standard perception-conception; the inner may be thought of as inner perception (and possibly conception). The two are not independent in their origin or interaction: thus the connection of cognition and emotion and emotional bonding and conditioning in relation to others and the group. The modes of feeling are body modes (and include traditional feeling and the kinesthetic). The modes of cognition are environmental modalities (light, sound, contact, chemistry)

Afferent—Efferent

I.e. being affected by (sensing) and affecting (action) the environment. Note that the body is part of the environment. The afferent—efferent dimension is incomplete from the point of view of identity and this will be seen in the discussion of the bound-free ‘dimension’

Bound—Free

The ‘bound’ refers to the fixing, e.g., of perception according to nature of stimulus; it is also associated with body perception or feeling. With memory, the ability to have recall which is reconstruction, comes the ‘free’ image. This is the source of thought and ‘free’ conception. It is natural that feeling should be quite bound to context; however, it is an error to think that emotion is altogether bound for it has loops with cognition which may be modified therefore modifying emotional response but, further, emotional responsivity (intensity, reactivity, quality) may change with patterns of response and changes in the body (development and age). The freedom of psyche—cognition-emotion—adds a third dimension to the afferent—efferent continuum, i.e. that of pure experience and thus we may write the continuum as afferent—internal or pure experience—efferent. This suggests that ‘attitude’ and ‘action’ are not separate dimensions of mind as suggested by modern analytic philosophy but are experience associated with afference and efference respectively. It reconfirms the idea that experience is basic to mind

Freedom—Determinism

This corresponds roughly to the free—bound continuum at a level of personality. From context—environment, body, received culture—we are determined. However, we are not entirely determined. We conclude this from differing responses to the same situation; we may conceive new responses. We have the capacity for essential newness, else there could be no significantly—i.e., not randomly new response. We are thus a balance of freedom and determinism. This is the source of two great errors. One is the error of the determinists such as Freud who conclude determinism from the fact of determined behavior (a further motivation to determinism is the erroneous thought that indeterminism does not allow structure where in fact it is determinism that does not allow structure for it allows nothing truly new, i.e. it allows only what is essentially eternal structure). Freud understood determinism but was mistaken in thinking that all psyche is determined and determinate. Jung understood freedom and the ideal of integration. The great error of supporters of freedom is characterized by the existentialists who think that freedom is a act of will based on choice and the liberal empiricists and analytic philosophers who seem to think that freedom is mere choice. We are significantly determined at least normally and therefore expression of freedom is difficult. It is difficult first to see choices and not only because they are not visible but also because it is required to conceive them. Secondly it is difficult to execute them because it may go against what feels to be our nature. However, it is further difficult because creation-execution is iterative and learning may be difficult and slow

Time—Timelessness

It is over time that we learn of life and value, grow, understand-create-make choices, develop commitments and values, act, and continue to learn and grow…

It is in time that we know death grow into some understanding of it and what it means for this life regardless of our ‘theory’ of death—i.e. as absolute, as gate to the ultimate, or as one of a series of steps, e.g. karmic steps. In all cases our death is very real even if not absolute or eternal… and it is available to teach us something crucial even if we resist or do not see. What does it teach us? Of course, the importance of this life in its singularity or its eternal return or its nature as gateway or step. If life is growth, death is the end of a certain phase of growth if not of growth itself. Growth is looking beyond to what we are not and death gives us valuable information on this looking beyond. It does not say ‘stop it’. Rather it gives us two urgencies. The first urgency is a non-urgency urgency: every day is valuable. The second is an urgency-urgency. Although commitments are ever open we can bring them to closure not merely by acceptance but by realizing that there is a certain deceptiveness to the every-openness of youth even though that ever-openness is wonderful, powerful, and lovely. The deception is that it is a necessarily eternal state. I find, over and above any acceptance as closure and over and above any flailing railing against finitude (abandon however can be a good thing), it is possible to have knowledge of and be in and be in the process of the unlimited in this finite form. Do it

Personality

Personality may be understood as integration of psyche in relation to psyche itself, body, culture, environment, and universe; and growth and change and constancies of this integration over time

Organic and Symbolic Being

This section serves as part of the foundation for the section Transformation in Journey. The interest in this section is specific and instrumental. It is complementary to the general interest of the previous section

Modes of Being and Process. Psyche—powers and modes—and Soma; Ideas and Action

Range. Cell to organ; Organism and Individual; Individual to Society and Civilization; Earth to Cosmos; Universe

Modes of Mimesis. Construction—material, organic (organism, ecosystem, and world in evolution)—analog and emulation. Iconic and symbolic simulation and emulation. Science, art, metaphysics. Mathematical modeling: qualitative, quantitative; exact and approximate; numerical. Digital modeling (e.g. based on mathematics and other symbolic models) and digital emulation; programming. Acting—as if; emulating—inhabiting

Civilization

Civilization and the Individual are two main vehicles for the ‘Journey’

The functions of this section are first to conceive and briefly define a meaning of civilization consistent with world civilization and the ideal of realization; and second to constitute part foundation for the corresponding section Civilization in Journey

Civilization is the community of agents across the Universe—expanding and filling, contracting and isolating—mind in dense unity as well as sparse community. Thus ‘civilization’ refers to community and to process. The process may be called ‘mind the Universe’ or ‘civilizing the Universe’

The approach to the future and destiny of civilization must be open, i.e. to the conception and process of civilization and against commitment to any narrow or rigid focus such as Hegelianism, Marxism, Capitalism though not against the ideas as suggestive and experimental; still we must consider specifics of our world; foci: civilization, the individual, culture, politics-economics

The Concept

Civilization is a term with multiple connotations; some connotations emphasize technology, others emphasize culture; some connotations emphasize superiority of the ‘civilized’ group, others emphasize community and group process

At outset we must be open to the meaning of civilization and the vagaries of process; but we must also be open to some combination of recurrent growth and dissolution without limit to summit

Here, civilization will be moving toward universalization of mind (‘minding the Universe’) and its processes will include moving outward from apparently isolated centers as well as a matrix of mind across the Universe which we may see as being in metaphorical analogy with islands separated by Ocean though connected under the surface

Its process includes organic as well as synthetic unity

Foundation—Constitution and Process

The Individual. Freedom of ideas, action, and experiment

Society, communication and cooperation. Institutions—culture; economics; politics—group dynamics, charisma, participation and immersion; person and community…

Culture and process of civilization. Individual and society. Ideas—knowledge; literature, art, humanities, history… Action—communal, exploration, transformation and technology… Process. Cultivation and conservation of individual freedom and institution; preparation, planning, action, sharing ® civilization ® expanding frontier ® individual and institutional growth: minding the universe

Modes

Civilization as such. Institution and process

Organic. Mind and body. Adaptation

Science and technology. Cosmology, life as information, technology of space travel and population of organic and information modes

JOURNEY

Introduction

Outline of Contents

Ideals

We have seen the necessity of realization—i.e. the fact of realization of the ultimate by all individuals is given. However, enjoyment and effectiveness require knowledge, choice, intention and action. The values that guide realization are ultimate and mediate (including proximate). Engaging in realization brings, interactively, the mediate and the ultimate into focus. The process inspires ultimate ideals (values) and illuminates and transforms (‘corrects’) mediate ideals (ethics)

Powers

The powers, mediate and ultimate, are means of process in realization. The mediate powers are those that are normally accessible; they are effective in the early process and in accessing ultimate power

Ways

The ways are, roughly, generic approaches to realization. They include the traditional and the experimental. The traditional ways are often associated with a theory, metaphysics, andor psychology, e.g. Yoga with Samkhya. I recognize the accomplishments and examples as instructive and useful but not as final authority—with regard to the concept of a way (e.g. ‘What is discovery?’, ‘What is meditation?’) or practice

The ways are an amalgam of tradition, the metaphysics, experiment, incremental transformation, and learning. A foundation or ground lies in practice deployed toward mediate and ultimate transformation (practice, practice in action, and transformation)

Action

In longer versions this section presents a detailed program emphasizing conceptual completeness. In this version the program is merged with the material of Journey ® Action

Experiments

A minimal program of experiments designed for execution

Review of Pertinent Developments

From the development so far, this part inherits

Nature and Concept of the Journey

Journey in Being—all individuals realize the Universe in all its phases, especially the phase of acute Identity and manifestation; realization is as such; while in Limited form, however, realization is given as endless process in extension, duration, and variety and magnitude of Being and summit, each precursor to dissolution… This realization is given; it requires transformation of Being not limited to ideas (in the ‘lower’ meaning of ‘idea’); however, ideas are the place of appreciation and effectiveness in realization

Aspects of Approach to a Journey (‘Method’)

Metaphysics and Tradition

Ideals

Ultimate

Knowledge

Knowledge (Jnâna) of Aeternitas

Knowledge of the ultimate and its inclusive relation to the mediate

Aeternitas

Icon

Knowledge (Jnâna) of Aeternitas

For Being in Limited form, iconic (body) representation, being-in-the-present

Aeternitas as Such

Aeternitas—knowing and Being the Universe in a moment

In form without Limit

Mediate

Being in The Way of Being

Being in The Way of Being recognizes that we have binding to this world as well as to the larger world—necessarily because this world is not separate from the Universe and, therefore, pragmatically because being whole in this world requires attention to the larger, and existentially because wholeness requires living and acting in the larger world

I.e. not being in the fractured modes implied by the opposition of the secular and the religious (including the emptiness of what is today called ‘spirituality’)

The dimensions of the spiritual and the real are identical: knowledge of Being (Universe), world, self, and their relations; consequent value; and action and transformation in light of this knowledge; and reflection in knowledge

Ideas and Action

In the Ultimate

In form without Limit, Being-the-Universe is perception

In knowledge of and living this world and the ultimate

In the Immediate

Being-on-the-way is Being-in-incompletion; ideas—perception and conception 101—require action for their completion

I.e. enjoyment of the present as inclusive of the ultimate and aiming at and being in the ultimate as illuminating and completing this world

In overcoming the limitation of the normal self (not merely deficiencies relative to the normal)

In Sharing this Endeavor

Sharing includes the attitude of sharing—being in service toward immediate life and the universal

In sharing, there is enjoyment which includes self, other, and world; and being-on-the-way-to-the-ultimate

Powers

Ultimate

Knowing, reaching to, and becoming the ultimate—via abstraction of meaning (and Experience); Vision Search; Jnâna (the ultimate and the instruments of meaning); Raja Yoga (psycho-physical 102 preparation, practice, and action)… Tantra 103 (Being in Being by embrace of all things, especially fear, disgust, and transitoriness)

Objects of Yoga, meditation, and contemplation. The Yogas achieve a variety of psycho-physical states; they combine way (e.g. the quality of the state) and object (reference of a psychic state, transformed physical state). There is no point to saying, e.g., ‘meditation has this or that object’ or ‘meditation has no object’. In Yoga the ideas of ‘quality’ and ‘object’ are dual (in the end they have identity). The achievement of quality is in-and-of-itself as well as preparation for further realization; the process is on going till its end in being on the way and perhaps finally in realization to be followed by dissolution. Where the object is realization, preparation includes emotive and cognitive awareness of being part of a larger ‘body’ and the way to transcending into such bodies as may come into knowledge. Objects of meditation in Tantra are to overcome separateness by sitting with what is separate (e.g. due to repulsion); in mystic meditation we may seek awareness of other being including perhaps other manifestations of self (past, present, and future i.e. PPF)—we search awareness of other PPF lives

Mediate

Individual—psyche (all aspects including spirit and body), and action

Society—persons; culture and tradition; secular and religious institutions and functions—religious, political, economic, material and technological

Process— Experience and enjoyment (patience is the state of enjoyment of the present and action toward goals without distinction) ® Idea (Imagination, Realism—e.g., criticism) including knowledge of actuality and alternative… value and choice, goal, means, and execution ® Act (Execute) ® Review outcome compared to goal, estimate its source, learning regarding these elements ® …

Ways

The ways emphasize the interactions (1) Ideas-thought-knowing and action-transformation-Being (2) Practice and action

Ways

On received ways—there is no final end or way despite proclamation ‘this is the way’ (of course the received ways contain treasure, their benefits and goals stated, unstated, or denied are not ultimate); the concept and object of present and ultimate Being (goal) are open; the way must be experimental, rational, and learning; the way interacts with the goal. Similarly there is no final meaning to words such as ‘meditation’, ‘contemplation’, ‘prayer’, ‘affirmation’, ‘mystic’, ‘spirit’, ‘religion’, ‘science’… In most contexts clarity and sufficient contextual completeness are important and this is achieved in part by (a) being clear and consistent in use regarding terms and their combinations and (b) having the range of meanings of the terms cover the domain of the context

Ideas and action—knowledge and Being—dynamics 104—The metaphysics, tradition; experience, experiment, learning (knowledge, choice, intention, action, outcome, comparison with intention, estimation of source of difference, correction), reflex… recognition and cultivation of transformation (transformation is not an action but is the result of knowledge… action… etc.)

Practice, Action, and Practice in Action—knowledge of the ultimate in Experience (metaphysics)… Shamanic Vision Search (quest)—communally guided and interpreted with / without traditionally prepared plant derivatives… Indian systems Jnâna (mediate and ultimate knowledge and its instruments especially of meaning) and Raja Yoga (psycho-physical preparation, practice, and action)… Tantra (embrace of Being by embrace of fear, disgust, transitory being…) Western systems—Greek, Christian, Jewish, and Islamic mysticism and related practices concerned with transformation of vision and Being, hypnosis, EMDR, psychoanalysis / dream analysis, psycho-behavioral re-education (REBT), 12-step logic

Resentment—After a period of being resentment-free, I have a corrosive resentment and I have been trying to overcome it by ‘forgiveness’ and ‘affirmation of intent’ (prayer is difficult in this connection) but the resentment remains. I have tried to overcoming by minimizing and explaining the others behavior (ego involves ‘give and take with reality’ and in this case there is a dual absence of feeling and preponderance of adjustment of the real to suit the ego rather than balance). Proposed solution (1) Work on myself; humor (2) Avoid

Approach—eclectic and experimental; meditation and isolation of psyche and body, suspension of judgment; exposure to and intuitive integration of archetypes through dream-symbol-Art-myth-Faith…and induction of states by contemplation, via shaman and equivalents, and in groups; grounding in the real—sacrifice and commitment to a higher end

Progress—movement toward the ultimate; intermediate—civilization as matrix, e.g., as islands, separated yet connected

Catalysts

Catalysts are means of transformation of psyche (with body) in transformation of Being, understanding, and perception

A variety of states. (1) Psyche—normal, conscious and unconscious; dream, hypnotic, trance; meditative vision—world / self; hallucination and other states in which normal bound aspects of psyche are freed; enhanced kinesthetic focus (2) Body—direct induction of the following may complement activities such as meditation—brain states β (13-40 HZ) alertness, cognition α (7-12 HZ) visualization, creativity, θ (4-7 HZ) meditation, intuition, memory, δ (0-4 HZ) detached awareness, healing, sleep; physiological-psychic states of flow

Catalytic use—focusing dreams etc; cultivation and integration in awareness over time; sensitivity to, cultivation of opportunity

Sensitivity—use of dissociation and splitting to reintegrate via exposure

Study and research needed (1) Actual nature and variety of states (2) Relation between states described psychically and states described physiologically… (3) Activity and sensory stimulus—e.g. audio/visual—based induction; consider mono-aural, bin-aural, and isochronous audio files (4) Perform activity (5) Download, obtain stimuli, e.g. ALPHA.AVI (6) Write in matrix form

Significant catalytic activity. Rhythm and repetition, dance, march, and breath… Exertion, exposure, extremes in environment and dedication… Physical isolations and inaction… Focusing on breath and other meditative focus… Presence, fear, anxiety, crisis sense and death awareness—imposed and volitional, shock, trauma, and opportune action… Altering perspective—nature, cultures, micro-cultures, handedness—e.g. writing and drawing with non-dominant hand, risk… Fasting, diet, psychoactive substances

Action. Action toward the goal, especially in nature and the cultural milieu—and failure, familiarization, and improvement—is self-catalytic. Charismatic action—moving self and other (1) Action, risk, word, self-exposure, drama as catalytic (2) Practice for encounter, contingency, develop psychic and physical energy (3) Care for and insight into others (4) Magic as the use of words and ideas for action and deep understanding… Acting and drama—acting as if (e.g. there is immanent power, assumption of charismatic personality) as catalytic of self and other Ritual—including sacred ritual… ritual reinforcement and inducement of ways and catalysts

Place—‘sacred’ place as conducive to receptivity and engagement—nature… chaos… culture. Place, especially nature as (1) Ground and Gate to the universal (2) Meditative (3) Place of catalytic practice and action (4) Beyul—map of psyche. Chaos as (1) General practice (2) Tantra. Cultural institutions as conducive to reception and action (1) Churches (2) Minimal-Aesthetic living space (3) Architecture for civilization

Sacred text and magic of words and symbols—sacred texts reveal by poetry and educate by cumulative wisdom (expressed literally or otherwise). There is magic in words, in charisma, in science; the magic of words is the powerful use of words to induce mental states in others (or self), the magic of charisma includes that of words… of presence… and of deeds, and the magic in science lies, e.g., in the discovery of forces originally hidden so that use of such forces might seem magical to someone who did not understand them

Method

An Example

The goal of Bhagavad-Gita has been said to be mastery of self (which depending on the notion of self has as its outer Limit realization of All Being). The Yogas of the Gita are ways of action based on certain insights

How did the Gita originate. I can only speculate but it must have been an interweaving of developing ideas or insights (metaphysical which includes the psycho-physiological and moral) and patterns of action

Approach to Development

It is implicit that since the system itself is in the world that it is reflexive on multiple fronts. Since ideas include morals and psychology, they suggest action aimed at moral outcomes. Ideas are themselves reflexive but a further loop exists because we can compare intended and actual outcomes and make corrective adjustments 105

Briefly, the approach is the reflexive interaction of ideas and action

Parameters

The parameters of action are those of mind and body. These are reflected in the ways and catalysts

How are these related and how may the relations be determined? Approaches are experimental-theoretical and of course combinations. This is at least implicitly built into the received lineage of systems

Today there are a number of enhancements that are available in the process of development of ‘ways’. (1) The Universal Metaphysics is of course not the only ‘system’ but as we have seen it is unique and ultimate; since it is demonstrated and ultimate, other systems may fall within it but not outside (2) Today’s psycho-physiology is more detailed and ‘particulate’; what it loses in sweep it gains in detail; and the loss in sweep is not a real loss for unless we choose to be purists, the detail of modern psychology can always joined with the sweep of other systems (3) Today we have more detailed information on the causal-correlative relations among body (brain), environment, and mind states

#1 Reflect

#2 Some Items. Body; neural path; alteration; how? action--physical, mental;

Resources

The resources are the materials of the main divisions—the present division Journey and the previous division Ideas

Action

The goal of action is realization in Limited and Unlimited forms

Following is a minimal program of practice, action, and experiment and its design

Design

Meditation and review of aims and ways are essential because we are always at the beginning

Principles

Framework—Dynamics—the metaphysics: fundamentals and method; elaboration and interaction with tradition; continuation into action with transformation

Process—incremental and significant step— experience, imagination, experiment, realism; reflex; learning—foresight, action, comparison with outcome, and correction

Design, planning—are integral to ideas, action, and transformation; review, reflection on and selection of possibilities is continual

Realism and Imagination106—action must be imaginatively realistic; this is cultivated; it lies within method and reflex; it is within this frame that risk is relevant and crucial

My Ideals and Inspiration

Ideals and inspiration—people, ideas, nature, stories, travel, places for living-inspiration-experiment-sharing

Sources of energy—health, commitment, action and transformation

Celebration—Farmer’s Market. Birthdays. May 5, July 4, Fall Fair Arcata, Oct 31, Thanksgiving, Christmas

Death and Existence 107

Death is an aspect of the real whose consideration 108 illuminates and sparks completion 109 in and of life, i.e. of form Limited or Un-Limited. Death is catalytic as are other crises

Because its time cannot be anticipated, limitedness, e.g. finiteness, (whose ultimate indicator is death) illuminates and breathes life into every moment; first in view of potential loss; second in view of the value of each moment; and third in accommodating 110 the idea of loss and pain

In that I do not know the nature of death entirely—from the metaphysics we think it not absolute but we are not certain of this or the nature of the non absoluteness—it is occasion to incorporate uncertainty into attitude toward life

In a normal approach to Death, there is opportunity to bring completeness to ambitions and commitments by finding representation of the Un-Limited in Limited Ideas and Action

The occasion may arise to choose time, place, and conditions of Death

Practice, Action, Use of Ways and Catalysts

Practice in action is integration of practice with action. It begins with and completes regular practice and review. Regular practice is perhaps essential but not an end in itself

Daily / regular work on commitments—Ideas-writing-publishing-networking-public speaking-cultivate charisma | Action-practice-experiments in transformation

Regular practice and review. Review includes attention to place, time—e.g. daily, and purpose. The purpose may be intrinsic, i.e. cultivation, or external e.g. living through a difficult situation whether external or internal

Material

Health. Dentist, dental insurance. Cleaning, maintenance, and nerve diet. Living will

Finances, taxes, work—useful and enjoyed

Chores—Review | bills | laundry-clean | supplies | cook

Place. Decisions—(a) Apartment / travel / nature (b) Where—e.g. nation-state / town vs. nature / spiritual place (c) What—spiritual tour / nature-experiment-practice / academic involvement Preparation—(a) Minimizing possessions—essential on hand, pare and eliminate, store (b) Information and assistance finding a place Moving—mechanics and finances Transportation; DMV; state and country reciprocities

Retreat and Travel

Preparation—Humboldt County wild places and bicycle rides. Nature-culture-spiritual bicycle tour; tour bike, panniers, rain gear; bike repair; routes; surlybikes.com, adventurecyclist.org; SCHWALBE tires

Outdoor and photography—Western plants and wildlife. Camera—functions, themes

Meditative trip and retreat—bus and transportation to Weaverville, Willow Creek and Weaverville motels, Hikes from Willow Creek

Projects and Commitments

Journey in Being—Designs—for Ideas and publication; system of minimal experiments and execution; organic-mechanical-symbolic Being; civilization

Dictionary of terms, especially for my essays. English to Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, German, French, Spanish

See Internet articles

Develop references including links for metaphysics, mathematics, logic, physics, biology, perhaps chemistry and geology, and other topics. Use the Internet, specifically Google Search, Wikipedia, and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Complete physics.html and build similar compilations

Complete the section Inspiration

Journey in Being—Communication—Web design, sites, book | How to publish

Ideas

Program

Develop study resources in parallel with the following

The metaphysics—development of the foundation, three aspects of realism, method, and character (depth, breadth, equivalence to Logic—justify the concept of Logic—see Relationship Between Logic, logic, and Science, endeavor and action), elaboration and application (Logic, System of Endeavor including the Disciplines. Art, Religion, Science, Objects, Method, Cosmology and Death, Power, Applied Metaphysics and World, and Journey)

Method (intersects metaphysics above and science below)—Problem of certainty (1) Value of certainty is dependent on values and activity. Is there givenness of absolute or even definite certainty (i.e. eternally) in any significant endeavor? (2) Certainty itself and its degrees generally lie in interaction with process (3) Certainty and doubt are duals—each the occasion for and affecting the other. Axiomatic method—according to Aristotle “Every demonstrative science must start from indemonstrable principles, otherwise the steps of demonstration would be endless. Of these indemonstrable principles some are (a) common to all sciences, others are (b) particular, or peculiar to the particular science; (a) the common principles are the axioms, most commonly illustrate by the axiom that if equals be subtracted from equals, the remainders are equal. In (b) we have first the genus or subject matter, the existence of which must be assumed.” Here of course that this obtains in some endeavors is not in question. What is in question is that it holds for all ‘science’. The beginning of the way out from the—alleged—inexorability of the indemonstrability of first principles is that some are not indemonstrable as in the beginning of the metaphysics of the essay. The problem of the axiomatic method here is to ground it with respect to both ‘axioms’ and ‘postulates’ and to simultaneously find better approximations for the domain for which this is possible; to develop the science of this domain; and to develop integrations with other disciplines. This is of course begun in the metaphysics; the problem is to work it out as well can or may be; to found the approach itself and to show that it is as worked out as well as can be or approximation thereof

Science and the sciences. Method—science as universal hypothesis versus compound fact over a limited domain; science and metaphysics; future of science—necessity of immersion and participation for a limited form. Sciences—consequences of the metaphysics (especially cosmology and physics, biology, science of psyche, science of social systems)

Cosmology and Physics. Mutual development of The metaphysics and physical cosmology, quantum theory—indeterminism… the void and the vacuum, relativity… space-time-being. Quantum theory and variations as foundation for the Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics. Relationship of The Metaphysics and an eschatology based in modern physical cosmology. The Universal Metaphysics has close parallels to ‘classical quantum cosmology’ except that where the latter assigns probabilities to paths, the former does not (given a classical case it is reasonable to suppose something like normal / probabilistic behavior in some realms). However, the two might be brought closer either by abstraction from the quantum case or, and this is more desirable in some ways, by careful considerations of the conditions of being at a variety of levels of definiteness, e.g. levels at which Extension and duration have meaning. There is another difference between the Universal Metaphysics and classical quantum cosmology in that in the former the indefiniteness of space and time is far greater then even in non-classical quantum cosmology. One of the difficulties of quantum gravity and non classical quantum cosmology is the immense conceptual and technical difficulties that will likely go along with quantization of space and time. A merit of the Universal Metaphysics in this regard is that (a) It is in some respects extremely simple and (b) It achieves this simply not by not going far enough but in some senses in going as far as is possible (in relation to what is assumed of the background: Universal Metaphysics assumes nothing)

Biology. Mutual development with The metaphysics. The logic of evolutionary biology; the new synthesis; the concept of life; complexity and self-organizing systems e.g. far from equilibrium (as exemplified by the work of Stuart A. Kauffman). Form and adaptation; other ‘worlds’. Evolution as paradigm for modern physical cosmology and as paradigm of frequency for The metaphysics and its cosmology. Implications of The Metaphysics for actualities and probabilities for living forms and their origins in general

Study of mind. Implications of reason and The Metaphysics for mind and matter and their natures; mental causation; the nature and meaning of consciousness and awareness; Experience; the elements and integration of human mind and personality. The contributions of the disciplines of cognitive science including psychology; contributions from ‘world psychology’ e.g. the psychology of the Bhagavad-Gita

Society. Implications of The Metaphysics for societies and their futures; civilization; value and destiny

Art—expression and communication of what is deepest in human being and capability… Practice—goal—seeing, absorbing, representing, communicating… and, especially, development of intuition

Religion—as the deployment of all modes of being of individual and group in realization of All Being (and Value and its meaning)

Journey—concept and action; interaction of ideas with experience and transformation, especially learning

Expression and Communication

Narrative form. Clarity, poetry of precision, presentational form (vs. discursive)

Writing. Integrate journey—experience, transformation—to narrative

Speaking. Cultivate charisma. Formal—venues. Informal—exposure, anticipation and practice, critical sense

Networking. Informal—practice and action. Formal—research, practice, and action

Publication. Self, specialty, mainstream

Transformation

Mediate—ultimate

Psyche

Includes spirit, body, Being; emphasizes—begins with—local action, Spirit, Body / Being

Emphasis—the world and the ultimate

Practice and action—Ways, e.g., yoga, meditation…(see Ways) as training in focus (1) In being present to the world and self (2) In action in action (3) In transformation and transition to transformation

Catalytic practice—see Catalysts above (1) Emphasize presence, crisis sense, exertion (nature), inaction (breath and meditation) over entertainment (2) Death and Critical Sense (3) Place (4) Tantric practice (5) Meanings in Sacred Texts (i.e. textuality; select the greatest examples) (6) Charisma—(a) Practice expression and motivation in action; repetition (b) Practice encounter (c) Insight into motivation (d) Cultivate psychic and physical energy (7) 12 Step logic

Self, Culture, Society and Charismatic Action

Emphasizes action in society; see also Civilization

Self. Right living in relation to self; thinking and activity in relation to others; place of society and culture in the ultimate (social engagements not connected to the ultimate and realization are secondary until this phase matures). Physical health; endurance; flexibility; strength; diet for these purposes and to cleanse

Charisma. Charisma is risk, energy, generosity and patience… also see immediately prior and earlier sections… and acting and drama (under Catalysts)

Action toward the following ends. Human Endeavor—Realization Is and Requires Distribution and Immanence of Power. Areas—Knowledge (immediate, ultimate), and organization of action (political, economic). Local material self-sufficiency in balance with globalization

Nature and Catalytic Practice

Preliminary—the idea of nature. Here, nature is seen as source, ground, and contact (to the universal)

Planning… and plan—Act on, review, and reformulate the following… define intentions

A list of approaches

Be-ing
Contact with the Real; elements—places, earth, earth forms, water, weather, elements, plant, animal; ground, gate to, image of the ultimate—sacredness of place: conducive to receptivity, engagement
Attunement—body and psyche
Source of ideas
Reflection, review
Catalytic activity—walking, rhythm, repetition; environment inducement; alterations from exposure, extremes in environment, exertion and depletion of internal resources; fasting, isolation
Ways and practice—shamanic vision search; Tantra; places (Beyul), animals, and other elements (see Contact with the Real, above) as gates (portal is an overused word) to and maps of inner and ultimate reals
Contact, catalysts, yoga (meditation—Raja Yoga, Jnâna Yoga)

Universal

A role for reflection on and being in abstraction, abstract action, and inhabiting abstract Objects

Organic and Symbolic Being

Sources

Study and Research

AI and artificial life or ALife, robotics, adaptive and self-replicating systems, ontology, physical eschatology, theology, cognitive science, computation and information theory...

Design and Development

Systems—symbolic including software, mechanical, mixed

Approaches—design, fabrication, experiment (systematic and ad hoc or ‘tinkering’), adaptation

Civilization

The following repeated from the section Civilization in Ideas, World

Modes

Civilization as such. Institution and process

Organic. Mind and body. Adaptation

Science and technology. Cosmology, life as information, technology of space travel and population of organic and information modes

Ground

Our world, the individual, community; problem and opportunity; value and action

Universal aspect

Ideas—metaphysics, dynamics, journey… Action—from ground to Being—experiments in community and transformation

A Minimal Program of Experiments in Realization

This topic transforms the content of Action into a program

Introduction

Ideas and transformation (action)—the modes of endeavor and realization—are essential to realization. Realization is impossible without ideas and incomplete without transformation. These define the essential phases

Ideas and thought constitute the first essential phase. The metaphysics is its main result; and the metaphysics is central in defining and illuminating the journey. Metaphysical content centers on foundation review, development, cross-application with and among disciplines and endeavors

Transformation of Being is the second essential phase. The approach begins with standard systems—their metaphysics and ways. It analyses these into practices and practices in action, and catalysts. It experiments with these eclectically, toward incremental and step realization; this naturally includes learning—and synthesis and evolution of systems; the process is illuminated by the Universal Metaphysics. It proceeds everywhen—in the present, i.e. in inspiration and pain (pain is inspiration) and in the conceptual future; and everywhere—at home, in culture, and nature; and learning, change and synthesis of approach

We choose two complementary but secondary phases as follows

Development of artifactual Being—organic, mechanical and symbolic—to assist understanding, implementing, and complementing transformation

Understanding and deployment of civilization as a vehicle of realization is the second complementary phase. This phase is one of community and charismatic action and sharing. The approach requires openness to concepts and processes of civilization and destiny. This openness is essential from local indeterminism and the need to balance conservatism and liberalism; and from guiles of utopia. In realization Civilization is the matrix of civilizations across the Universe—a pictorial analog to islands superficially separate, connected in the deep. Modes of approach include those of civilization itself—of culture, immersion, and participation; an approach that cultivates organic adaptive community; and an instrumental approach to Being from science and technology

Ideas

Content—All Being which includes all knowledge, i.e. Metaphysics and Method or Ways. Here method emphasizes transformation of implicit to explicit knowledge

Process—development of content and method

Method—content « method « Method (Ways)

Transformation of Individuals

Objectives—universe; individual, body and person, charisma

Practice—meditation for centering, focus, reflection on means and objectives. Action—presence, accept anxiety and doubt, focus on care and goal, charisma

Practice—nature presence, catalyst—risk, exertion, isolation. Action—deploy mind-body toward ground-ultimate

Practice and Action—right thought and action in the present and toward the ultimate; set up of and presence to opportunity

Transformation of Civilization

Objectives—work toward reflexive defining and realizing potential of this civilization; setup for individual expression; search for and communication with other civilization; population of universe

Approaches. Civilization as such—definition, potential; charisma and communication; science (social, e.g. political-economic), participation, and immersion. Organic—transformations of the individual. Science and technology—cosmology, life as information, technology of space travel and population of organic and information modes

An Institute—I have long had an interest in founding a research group dedicate to the goals of the journey. There would be workers in relevant fields. The common purpose would be the goals of this program. In addition to special interests, general interest, cross communication, and synthesis would be required. The ideal would be that every worker would be a generalist and a specialist. Years ago I wrote a plan and estimated a budget at Institute.xls; this needs much change for in its original version the emphases were modern, secular, and academic. The original emphasis is now one emphasis. Older traditions are now important for their suggestive character and understanding of psyche and a world outside the secular (the older views may be incorrect in their picture of that world but are correct in thinking that there is such a world). Further, the metaphysics of the narrative introduces a new and encompassing perspective

Transformation via Artifact

An artifact is a construction. It may be organic—bio-physical—and symbolic. An artifact may be stand-alone or symbiotically integral with (human) being. This section details aspects of science and technology in transformation of civilization

Objectives—understand sustained Being; build artifacts that will populate the Universe with soul andor assist (human) being in this population

Study and Research—Develop and assimilate source material from cognitive science and related material (AI and artificial life or ALife, robotics, adaptive and self-replicating systems, ontology, physical eschatology, theology, cognitive science, computation and information theory...) Develop concepts (theory) in relation to the objective

Design and Development—Systems may be symbolic including computational, mechanical, and mixed. Approaches may include design, fabrication, experiment (systematic and ad hoc or ‘tinkering’), adaptation

Program

1. Ways. Design ® Action ® Learning and modification of Ideas, Ways, Transformation approaches ® Ongoing review (implicit in ways)

2. Aspects of Being—sequence. Individual—fall 2012. Proceed sequentially and in parallel as groundwork is adequate ® Civilization ® Artifact (interactions are three-way)

RESOURCES

Stories

The stories that follow illustrate some principles of the journey (process, approach, method) in action

Discovery of the Universal Metaphysics

Introduction

This story is about the complex and open path to discovery of the metaphysics. I felt I was open at the beginning however I found again and again that I would think I had achieved completion I would find that I had not. Sometimes the incompletion was clear; at other times a quiet voice would suggest a need for ‘something more’. As far as my conscious thought was concerned, therefore, even though I sought openness it still had to force itself on me. It is therefore a story of a discovery of the nature and discovery of openness. The nature of the openness, I found, was not that of some bland openness to ‘everything’. Rather it was a process. Given a fragment of metaphysics, openness would suggest an improvement and motivate development of that improvement which required commitment. Openness requires, yes, real openness to new ideas but also commitment to the new ideas to develop their consequences so the ideas could be subject to criticism and be improved upon. Although I valued openness, I had to learn how to and how much to cultivate it explicitly. The history of the process suggests that the learning is not over and the metaphysics shows it must (for realization for a finite form) be ever in process and in balance with commitment—i.e., commitment and openness are aspects of one another

This story is not just a story. The Universal Metaphysics has now achieved relative maturity on a number of fronts—sophistication and foundation, application to the tradition including traditional metaphysics, revelation of new issues and resolution of some of these. However, with every advance I sense that there is more in store in the development of ideas, application, sophistication, foundation. Some thoughts along these directions are outlined in Ideas. Developments will require openness on multiple fronts: accepting the incompleteness of the ideas, acknowledging the need to go back to basics and study the literature, openness to going back to beginnings—i.e. to not resting on the developments so far, balancing the impulse to further develop the ideas with my commitment to action and transformation

This story is not just a story. Recently I have been asking myself again ‘What will it take to be solidly in the process of transformation?’ It will take perhaps a number of things. I will have to move away from various comforts; the main existential comfort is the thought that I have developed a mature and powerful metaphysics that reveals the Universe as the ‘greatest’ which informs me that realization is inevitable. I will have to move away from this out of ambition and recognition of limited form but also from the knowledge that involvement in the process is essential to its enjoyment and effectiveness. Above all I have been having the simultaneous thoughts ‘I must be open to openness and commitment’ and ‘What is the nature of this openness?’. It seems to me that part of answering this question is to review the process of discovery of the Universal Metaphysics. It is probable that this will not in itself answer the question but will suggest answers and attitudes

Discovery

In 1986 I wrote an essay ‘Evolution and Design’—an attempt to understand our world—cosmos, life, human being—in evolutionary terms. It was the result of long interest and reading in these topics; it was based in a paradigm that was primarily evolutionary and implicitly but not essentially materialist. I felt satisfaction at the time but in retrospect, its value lay in the effort and in what I learned in the process. Some significant aspects of the process are (a) Periods of extensive reading and reflection (b) Major insights and formulating frameworks occurred over extended hiking trips of two weeks and more in mountainous areas (c) Details and writing would take place on return to my normal life of living in town, work, and enjoyment

In 1991—1992 I had begun to feel dissatisfied with the evolutionary paradigm. I began to think along the lines that fundamental explanation might be ‘absolute’ and ‘atemporal’. I entered into a long period of experiment with metaphysics. I tried materialism, idealism, I experimented with the ‘as-if-ism’ of Hans Vaihinger wondered about the nature of the ‘object’ under the influence the thought of Alexius Meinong. I did special studies in which was now in vogue after have banned from proper science by behaviorism. I was concerned by the possibility of metaphysics at all and its relations to science

In connection with the possibility of metaphysics I continued to study philosophy and metaphysics, especially the work of David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and the post-modernists. This reading enhanced my appreciation of the difficulties of metaphysics on multiple fronts—the question of the possibility of metaphysics and of the difficulty of completeness of metaphysics which would perhaps require some kind of systematic approach

In connection with the concerns with science and its relations to metaphysics I continued to study and reflect on science and its philosophy and entered into prolonged meditation upon (1) the validity and completeness of science and (2) science as a metaphor for metaphysics. I began to appreciate that science, though it is the basis of one of our dominant worldviews, might be immensely incomplete as foundation for a worldview. I also began to explicitly appreciate, despite this limitation, ways in which science might constitute inspiration and metaphor for metaphysics. These ways lie especially at the intersection of the paradigms of science, e.g. the deterministic paradigm of Newton versus the possible indeterminism of quantum theory and the necessary indeterminism of origins and evolutionary biology; and the absolute and continuous space and time of Newton versus the interwoven space, time, matter of Einstein’s theories versus the possible discreteness of space and time at small scales of, say, quantum gravitation (which remains in incomplete development)

In search of a entry point into metaphysics I was impressed that since gravitation has negative energy the coming into being of a universe need not violate conservation of energy (if the E=mc² energy of matter balances the negative energy of gravitation). I saw that if the Universe was in some sense equivalent to the Void, this might constitute a foundation without substance and without need for temporal description. I thought some proof of the equivalence might emerge from science. This however was not how the proof finally emerged. The Vedanta philosophy of India claims the equivalence of Self and All Being. The intuitive principle of plenitude from western thought suggests that the Universe is in some sense the greatest possible universe (the principle leaves open the precise meaning of possibility and though intuitive is not proven in the literature). In 1999 I had a strong intuition while hiking in the Trinity Alps of Northern California that All Being is one and equivalent to emptiness. This further motivated my attempt to prove that the universe we see is equivalent to nothingness, i.e. the Void. I was unsuccessful in this attempt until in 2002, again in the Trinity Alps region, I had an insight that I should focus on the Void and its properties rather than the Universe. I recognized that I should see (a) The Void as the absence of Being (b) That Laws have Being (c) That the Void contains no Laws and (d) That the Void exists. This was the realization that enabled the development of the Universal Metaphysics (which required much more including careful attention to selection, development, and definition of concepts and of methods of proof)

What is the nature of the openness of the process? Here are some preliminary thoughts. (1) Use all sources—classical and modern physics suggest equivalence of Universe and Void; Buddhism and many other traditions suggest significance of ‘emptiness’ or Void; western thought suggests the idea of plenitude; the Indian Vedanta suggests Self º‘Atman’ = ‘Brahman’ º All (2) Reflect (3) Be intuitive in imagination and in seeking methods of proof (final proof of course should eliminate dependence on intuition and imagination; however, even the classical distinction of discovery and justification shall, should, and did come under criticism; still, as far as possible the distinction should retain its significance) (4) Seek extra-academic and extra-intuitive inspiration—in my case the forest (I experience—and see—the forest and mountains—nature—as ‘portal’ to Being; I would now seek nature again) (5) Pursue commitments, e.g. Universe ® Void for even if ‘wrong’ there is learning… but be open to changing the course of commitment, e.g. Void ® Universe (I would be open to and shall seek other portals such as but not limited to those of Journey) (6) Reflect on the role of the ego; ego drives healthy relations between self and the real (colloquial reference to ‘ego’ is often a reference to distortions of the ego, e.g. excessive and perhaps compensatory and non reality based inflation of the ego)—I wrote these words some time ago: ‘Especially when the ideas are original, and even though I have devoted much study and thought and sought much inspiration, I sometimes feel that I have accidentally stumbled upon the ideas rather than developed them or found them as a result of a careful or systematic search’ (I remain acutely aware of problems and issues of ego). The openness is a balance between recognizing truth when seen and therefore making commitment and also remaining open even in absence of explicit knowledge why I should remain open and for what

What is the openness that will facilitate the process of transformation? I don’t know the answer but I must focus on the question and its meaning in parallel with attempting answers and approaches. It is important to hold that not-knowingness in mind. I must meditate upon it; in practice and action; and I must live it in parallel with commitment using the ideas of Journey and, e.g., this story as inspiration

These thoughts constitute arguments on reasons for and ways of openness for the whole endeavor of transformation from Individual to Civilization

Evolution of Method in the Metaphysics and Related Developments

What is Method?

A method is how to do something

Education sometimes fosters the idea that the ‘something’ is given and that the outcome is guaranteed

In general, e.g. in scientific discovery, the outcome is not given in advance and an outcome is not guaranteed

A Conversation With the Universe

Imagine the following conversation between a metaphysician M and the Universe U

M. What is the method?

U. A method is the how of something. What is the method of what?

M. (Repeats the question.) What is the method?

U. Oh! You mean a method without specific content, i.e. method that applies to ‘everything’.

M. What I mean is explained by the following questions. What (compound) question should we ask and how do we know it is the question? How shall we answer these questions?

U. The answer is to live. The question is ‘What is the way to universal life?’. It is the question because it contains all existential questions and because the answer contains all answers

M. Just living is inefficient.

U. But it’s enjoyable. And it’s especially enjoyable if you live ‘intelligently’. Living is the way to universal life and living intelligently is enjoyable and effective. In living intelligently you may find the way. And this includes asking what is meant by living intelligently.

Examples

Science

A scientific theory entails methods. The method is to apply the theory to given data. Generally there is no algorithm. However, with experience the approach may be made systematic. A scientific theory may reformulated so as to make it more method oriented

The ‘scientific method’ is an approach to developing and establishing scientific theories

In science, then, method occurs at two levels—development of theory and application of theory

Education sometimes fosters the idea that scientific method is received but theories—and their application—change

Review of the history of science shows that our ideas of scientific method and theories evolved together. This mutual evolution was not a perfect harmony. Early, some thinkers likened scientific theory to the application of logic and expected an ‘inductive’111 method that would be as necessary as the deduction of logic. Later, especially in the twentieth century, we realized that the scientific method was one of hypothesis to fit data, testing of hypotheses, and acceptance or rejection according to whether predictions were confirmed or disconfirmed. We learned that acceptance is always tentative because there may be later disconfirming data but that, if sufficiently upheld, rejection was permanent. In the hypothesis and deduction 112 model it is implicit that the goal of theory is universality. However, the Universal Metaphysics reveals that universality is impossible for Limited forms of intelligence and therefore a better interpretation of scientific theories is as compound facts

Although we may tend to see scientific method as received, we can now see that the method and scientific theories evolve together. The observation may be reformulated scientific method and content emerge together, i.e. they are co-evolutionary and roughly coeval

Logic

A logic such as the propositional calculus provides a method to proceed from premises to conclusions. The characteristic logic is that it is deductive, i.e. the conclusions are necessary in that if the premises are true the conclusions will be true

We have seen that the deduction of logic has been compared to the inductive method of scientific discovery and that early in the scientific era there was a hope and perhaps expectation that an inductive method would be found that was necessary as was deduction. Today we recognize this hope as false

However, the thought to compare deduction in logic with induction in science can be seen to be based in poor judgment

Given a theory and data of the type to which the theory is relevant, deduction from the data is as necessary deduction in logic

Conversely, just for discovery of scientific theory, the search for a system of logic has neither deduction nor guaranteed outcome

Discovery of systems of logic is just as inductive as is science. And while each system of logic applies within its own ‘universe’, no system of logic (so far) applies to the possible universe of logic

Here, too, however method is found at two levels—development of logics and application of the logics. However, there is no general term for approaches to development of logical systems

Mathematics

One view of a branch of mathematics is that it is an axiomatic system together with an appropriate logical calculus

In the philosophy of mathematics called Logicism, mathematics is reducible to logic

However even if we do not accept Logicism, the similarity between mathematics and logic is such that the conclusions for logic hold also for mathematics

I.e. in mathematics, too, however method is found at two levels—development of mathematical systems and application of the systems. However, there is no general term for approaches to development of mathematical systems

Logic versus Science

From the discussion of mathematics, to the symbol ‘logic’ in the following paragraphs of this section the symbol ‘and mathematics’ may be appended (for ‘logics’ the symbol to be appended is ‘and mathematical systems’)

It would seem, then, that the development of logic is empirical and inductive just as is the development of science. However, while science applies to concrete objects, logic applies to abstract objects, e.g. propositions and referential concepts. It is in this sense that logic is empirical. However, there is a thought that the objects of logic reside in some kind of perfect, ideal, or Platonic world or—alternately—in intuition. Therefore it is commonly thought that logic and mathematics are not empirical. What the analysis has shown is that logic is not empirical over the same kinds of thing as is science and that if logic is empirical what form this empiricism takes. The Universal Metaphysics, in revealing the Universe as the object of Logic and the dissolution of the distinction of abstract and concrete objects, shows that the logics must be empirical and that insofar as idealism and intuitionism are valid for logic their premise of a ideal or intuitive world is an approximation to the oneness of the Universe as revealed in the metaphysics

Although we may tend to see logical systems as received and methods of development of logic as ‘beyond the pale of the transparent’, we can now see that the method and logics and the concept of logic together. The observation may be reformulated for logic method (development) and content (logics) emerge together, i.e. they are co-evolutionary and roughly coeval

Philosophy

Philosophy is not as well defined as logic, mathematics, and science. Therefore the discussion for philosophy is likely to be more complex and less definitive

History reveals this to be the case. Historical examples show that when a body of knowledge within philosophy acquires definitiveness of method or content it tends to break off from philosophy as a distinct discipline. The early ‘methods’ of philosophy, e.g. the metaphysics of Thales ‘world as water’ may be seen as groping; however there is ‘method to the madness’ for such early metaphysics was a first attempt at explaining the world in terms of some simple substance that was of the world

I cannot do justice here to the history of philosophy. In some situations philosophy became a servant of the church. However, what stands out from the history is an attempt to break away from modes of superstition and to find order in using reason that is careful and often immensely clever. Such reasoning even if not successful is often the basis of later thought. For example in the interpretation of modern cosmology there is much in the thought of Leibniz and many others that is intensely illuminating and suggestive

Today there are the main streams of analytic and continental philosophy. This division of modern western philosophy is perhaps simplistic. However, the analytic school tends to careful analysis of the ‘carefully analyzable’ and continental thought paints pictures in broad strokes in an attempt to find significance (even in retreat from the grand systems of the past)

In my work I find that there is a powerful method in the analysis of meaning for meaning embodies the empirical on concrete and abstract fronts (thus encompassing the empirical and the rational). Further the meaning of ‘analysis of meaning’ itself is not fixed; it may mean analysis of received meaning or dual analysis of the meaning of meaning and the possibilities of meaning in view of experience and thought

I am not sure that I discern a single method. However, the strands of methods and contents are interwoven

Art

Art can hardly be said to have a method

However there are schools and styles in art, here and there we find ‘improvement’, and occasionally the inspiration of one artist shows how we may delve into depth. Let us call this ‘method’. Then, again, the strands of methods and contents are interwoven

Method and Metaphysics

As described in Discovery of the Universal Metaphysics I sought a metaphysics that would encompass All Being

Along the way I would find that at times—at crucial points in the development—I did not know how to proceed. I would appeal to reflection and to ideas and approaches of many thinkers and schools from philosophy and other disciplines. I found that content (primarily the metaphysics) and method (abstraction to eliminate the contribution of projection, naming of the given, analysis of meaning) emerged together. From the primitive concepts of Being, Universe and so on there emerged via this early method the fundamentals of a metaphysics (chapter Being). Here we see method and content emerging together

These fundamentals led to the fundamental principle from which we were able via abstraction to conceive the Universe as the object of Logic and this was the pivot point for the development of the Universal Metaphysics. This Universal Metaphysics is a powerful system of the world and of interpretation of specific disciplines and their ‘methods’

Method and content continues to emerge together

Further, method turns back on itself and shows explicitly—not just in concept—method as content, i.e. method leads to Logic as content while Logic encompasses method

Which is as it should be for the object of method is doing and thinking; and doing and thinking are in the world

Method and Reflexivity

In these enmeshments and separations of method and content we find further illustrations and extensions of the idea of reflexivity

Conversation with Universe Revisited

The development of the metaphysics and its use reflects the conclusion of the discussion

That conclusion—live intelligently while asking the meaning of intelligent living—reflects the dual emergence of method and content

Inspiration

Art and Music

Rising Appalachia

Literature and Poetry

Ideas

Action

An Estimate of Contributions

Introduction

It is useful for a writer to estimate the contribution of his or her own work. For audience and writer alike this points to what is significant, what—in the author’s estimation—needs criticism, and what may be basis and impetus for further work. In this spirit the estimate is intended to invite rather than displace criticism (and appreciation)

The contributions fall under metaphysics, other disciplines of knowledge, the human endeavor, and potential

Metaphysics

The Possibility of Metaphysics

Method of abstraction (see method below)

The Universal Metaphysics

The system of concepts—Being, Universe, Law, Void, Logic, Logos and others and their clarification

The metaphysics itself—The Universe has no Limits

Equivalent forms (1) The Universe is the object of Logic (2) The Universe is absolutely indeterministic

The metaphysics is unique

The metaphysics is ultimate in its foundation in the Void or, equivalently, in any state. It is a foundation without substance or infinite regress

The metaphysics shows the impossibility of substance as foundation of Being but needs no universal substance. However, every object may be regarded as its own substance or form

The metaphysics is ultimate with regard to the variety of Being—i.e., it implicitly captures this variety

The metaphysics shows the Universe to be ultimate in that the variety, Extension, and duration of Being have no limits

The metaphysics shows the Universe to have Identity and that the Universe and its Identity experience acute and diffuse phases as well as non-manifest phases; and that Identity has continuity across the non-manifest phases

Individuals (and civilizations) inherit all powers of the Universe above; for Limited form, realization is endless in variety, Extension, duration, summit, quality and magnitude, dissolution and re-manifestation; in Unlimited Form the Individual and the Universe merge in a single eternal but not Unlimited moment of Being and (self) perception (and between the very finite form that we seem to be and the Unlimited there is a range—perhaps a continuum—of intermediate becoming or realization)

The metaphysics suggests the idea of living and realization as a Journey in Being; it shows that we are in fact in the process of a journey even if unaware of the fact; it shows ideas are a necessary aspect but incomplete form of realization and that completion requires action that results in transformation; and it shows that while realization is given, its appreciation and effectiveness is enhanced by ‘reflexive’ intelligence

Method of Development

Elements—abstraction, naming givens, analysis and synthesis of empirical and conceptual content of meaning

Deployment—permits abstraction of foundation and Logic and so method of application of the framework

Reflex use of method of application to itself—nature and necessity of simultaneous empirical-conceptual character of the metaphysics and Logic

The Discipline of Metaphysics

Provides clarity regarding the concept of metaphysics

Resolves what has been called the fundamental problem of metaphysics, i.e. why there is something instead of nothing

Shows that the problem of what has Being is the fundamental problem; shows why this is the fundamental problem—when the issue of ‘what’ is carried to its conclusion it is a framework for metaphysics and therefore all sub-problems

Provides resolution for many standard problems of metaphysics—e.g., the concept of metaphysics, the categories of Being (as the study of objects and the resolution of the problem of the nature of abstract objects in the unification of concrete and abstract objects), the problem of why there is be-ing above, mind-body problem and related issues, problem of substance and foundations of metaphysics, problems of space and time and matter, the mental and the physical, and the questions of determinism and free will

Disciplines

Logic and Mathematics

The concept and nature of Logic and, derivatively, of mathematics; and regardless of the nature of these disciplines the unlikelihood that they will in their present forms be capable of describing the Universe, i.e. All Being; which suggests a permeable interface between logic, mathematics (and science as currently understood) and existential attitude and action

Art

Thoughts on the nature of Art in light of human depth and the metaphysics

Religion

The concept and nature of Religion

Science

The concept and nature of Science

Method and Meaning

The interwoven nature of the concepts of method and meaning

The concept of the object. Unified theory of concrete and abstract objects

Clarification of Levels of Method

Every discipline and systematic endeavor provides methods for restricted classes of problems and activities; such methods do not generally guarantee outcomes—they are only occasionally algorithmic and when not algorithmic require creative thought and intuition; selection and definition of specific problems and applications requires creative insight

At a level above problems within a discipline lies the development of the discipline itself. At the beginning of the scientific era some thinkers, e.g. Francis Bacon, sought a method of induction in development of scientific theory that would have the same necessity that is attached to deduction according to logical principles. Isaac Newton’s Principia bears a mark of necessity of the laws of motion from the phenomena; however Newton has awareness, e.g. of the fact that the properties of gravity do not follow from the phenomena. This illustrates the fact that induction is not mere generalization but is in some sense the best system of conceptual hypotheses available at the time. Still, especially since the revolutions in science of the nineteenth and twentieth century we have become intensely aware of the hypothetical nature of science. With this awareness in mind it remains common to relate induction in science to deduction in logic but now by contrast rather than similarity

The occasion for this contrast is misplaced for what we should be comparing is the development of the logics with the development of the sciences; and the solution of problems within the logics solution of problems within the sciences

Thus, comparable to the revolutions in science there are revolutions in logic also peaking in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. However, we tend to be less aware of the revolutions in logics; we tend to still think of the logics as received from some pre human agency, e.g. the structure of Being

In general there are methods within the disciplines which, though not algorithmic, are algorithmic like. Above this level, though not completely insulated from it, is the way of development of the disciplines, e.g. the ‘scientific method’ corresponding to which there is a way of development of logics but which apparently remains unnamed. There is, however, similarity between these ‘methods’. Just as science is empirical over the ‘material’ world, logic is empirical over, e.g. thought. Since science and logic and their development are in the world we have a certain conflation of content and method

Metaphysics

Development of and parallels among method for metaphysics, Logic, science. Application of developments in method to the particular methods and their interpretation

General Cosmology

The concept, nature and methods of General Cosmology

Topics in General Cosmology—Extension, duration, and Being (may be roughly read as space, time, and matter); form; variety of Being; application to special cosmology (as presented, e.g., in myth and theology); application and relation to physical cosmology; mind and matter as a topic in cosmology

The Human Endeavor; the Endeavor of Being

Is there a method for endeavor in general? Some thinkers would recoil from the idea

However, what the metaphysics reveals is that there appear to be directions in which method has significance and others—variety—in which Being is ever open

We may say, however, that the doings of Being are illuminated and directed by an ultimate value of realization of All Being by lesser being. Even if there is no method there may be a sense of direction

Human Endeavor

Human being and civilization—nature, value of, values and destiny

Reinterpretation of Religion

Ways of realization

An in process program of realization

Potential

Potential contribution is implicit (‘peppered’) throughout the essay

For some explicit potential contribution see the section Ideas of Action of Journey

Sources and Partial Glossary

Introduction

I have read and absorbed so much that it is impossible to identify all sources. The main purpose of the section is to direct attention to some of the main sources (my reading is far more extensive than the following list might suggest: see, e.g., my Journey in Being Website and click the link ‘Sources-biblio’ or see General Bibliography). I further hope that the following constitutes acknowledgement that I owe an immense intellectual debt

Since I have developed the system of the narrative, the meanings of the ideas are at least partially my creation (this is neither assertion nor denial of priority of publication). In many cases my meaning is significantly different from or enhanced over my reading of the literature. In many cases the source was a positive spark to my thought; in many other cases I have had to construct my own meaning or argument because I disagreed with a source; and in yet many other cases I had developed my own ideas when I came upon the source. The sources constitute a minute fraction of my reading. The following therefore will not enable a reconstruction of my thought

Where I have noted no external sources, the explicit sources in my use are my own thought. In almost all cases there are sources in my thought that, even if not mentioned here, are developed in the narrative

The list of sources does not distinguish primary from secondary literature. The sources listed are my primary sources

Sources and Glossary

Entries are listed roughly according to order of occurrence in the essay. Sources begin on the same line as the entry; glossary entries follow the sources in a separate indented paragraph

Meaning—Wittgenstein, Meinong

For purposes of the main development, particularly the metaphysics, we need consider only referential meaning and referential concept; therefore ‘meaning’ and ‘concept’ will generally mean referential meaning and referential concept

What is a concept? A concept is a mental content (higher concepts, e.g. units of meaning, are particular cases of concepts). A referential concept is one that is intended to refer to something or whose form is the form of reference. Perhaps there are ‘atomic’ concepts; however, most concepts are compound; they are compounds of associated icons and signs. In order to refer a concept must have some iconic character, e.g. in a image andor in the arrangement of its signs

A concept (sense) and its objects (reference) constitute meaning. The concept of meaning as a concept and its object(s) is fundamental to the analysis (though not pertinent to the needs of metaphysics it is perhaps the case that even in the case of non-referential meaning there is some implicit reference)

Its positive contribution is that it shows that while signs are merely conventional, meaning encodes empirical information; analysis and revision of meaning is thus a source of actual knowledge. Further, it is found that a number of paradoxes are the result of confusion of concept or word and object

Abstraction—reflection on the projective contribution of mind to knowledge and the question ‘In what cases, if any, does the projective contribution vanish?’

A concept lies at the intersection of mind and world. Consequently it may be questioned whether there are objects in themselves. Two examples of such objects were seen to be Experience and Being. There in-itself objecthood does not result from the object being directly known. Instead the concept ‘filters’ out all parts of a common object that are subject to projective distortion. The use of ‘filtering’ is metaphorical; in actual cases it must be clear (or shown) that the object is perfectly rendered in the concept. Abstraction is the term for the metaphorical filtering

Naming the given—Russell (his notion of ostensive definition), Sellars (for his attack on the ‘myth of the given’ in his 1956 essay The Myth of the Given: Three Lectures on Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind)

How do we define words or concepts? Commonly we define a concept in terms of other usually more familiar concepts. If this were the only kind of definition we would be faced with infinite regress of definition. In our first encounter with language we have no language and cannot learn this way. We learn—in part through mimicry—by associating (common) words with (common) things; this pertains to referential as well as non-referential meaning; roughly, then, this early vocabulary of our cultural context forms a basis for further words. In discussing abstraction it was seen that there are ‘givens’ beyond projective distortion. One approach to metaphysics is to found it in named givens

Analysis of Meaning—Analytic Philosophy, Wittgenstein

In naming the given above we saw that we first learn by assimilation from the cultural context. What is the origin and basis of the cultural context? Words, concepts, and there uses arise along with the origin of language in adaptation. The context is the source of meaning and its stability and fluidity

The present analysis of (analysis of) meaning may be completed by repeating a paragraph from the glossary term Meaning:

Its positive contribution (i.e. the positive contribution of meaning as concept and object) is that it shows that while signs are merely conventional, meaning encodes empirical information; analysis and revision of meaning is thus a source of actual knowledge. Further, it is found that a number of paradoxes are the result of confusion of concept or word and object

Experience—Samkara, Kant, John Searle (The Rediscovery of the Mind, 1992), Samkara

The concept of Experience is that of subjective awareness in the sense of consciousness. ‘Experience’ is perhaps most effectively treated as a named given; experience is reflexive, i.e. it is known in Experience. Experience includes Experience in feeling, shape, quantity, thought, memory; and while these are not all entirely objective Experience of Experience is itself objective (named given). Though not everything, Experience is the theater of (human) being. While it is certainly not the source of (all) significance, it is the place that significance occurs—Experience is the ‘medium’ of significance. The richness of Experience implies, as was seen in the main narrative, the richness of Existence and of Being (there is an additional problem of objectivity which was also addressed in the narrative)

Existence—Frege, S. G. Williams (article on Existence in A Companion To Metaphysics, eds. Jaegwon Kim and Ernest Sosa, 1995)

The concept of existence is ‘that which is’. It is a named given. There is something trivial about named givens; however, as we saw in the case of Experience, this triviality may be no more than superficial. However, it seems (to speak colloquially) that ‘everything exists’ and, therefore, ‘exists’ seems super-trivial to the point of being altogether superfluous. However, it is non-trivial in (at least) two ways. First, we must first have the concept before we can know it is trivial; therefore, surely every education in philosophy should include acquaintance with existence if only to serve as an example of a trivial pursuit. Secondly ‘existence’ is profoundly non-trivial and this non-triviality lies in its triviality. It is trivial in applying to everything. However, unlike the possibly error laden concepts of mind and matter which may therefore have fictional elements, existence applies only to actual ‘things’. Its neutrality allows emergence of what things and kinds there may be and this is the (or one) source of its power

The analysis of meaning applied to Existence forestalls the paradox of the non-existent object, i.e. of negative existence (and for those who may be concerned it forestalls the issue of what kind of predicate ‘existence’ may be). That there is existence (and Being) follows rather thinly from the fact that though these words may be illusion without existence there would not even be illusion. The richness of existence (and Being) is addressed as indicated in the glossary entry for Experience

Being—Plato (for the thought that being is that which has power in the sense of having effect), Aristotle, Spinoza (that which ‘is’ without qualification), Heidegger

Being is that which is

Being knows no distinction (this statement is inserted here; however its meaning will become clear (clearer) in the entry on Duration and Extension below)

In the history of the idea, Being has been differentiated from existence in conceiving Being as ‘existence in itself’. However, it is not a priori that Being and existence are distinct; and it is found in the development that the distinction is empty

Clearly, Being inherits the triviality, neutrality, and power of the concept of existence. However, Being has further connotations which give it the potential for further power but also for error and paradox. The introduction of Being as neutral allows for the emergence of truth (within the present concept) of the valid connotations and falsity of the invalid ones

Being is that which is. At the level of abstraction (generality) that we would like to intend it should make no difference whether Being is a noun / thing, verb / doing / process, adjective / adverb / property / quality, relation / imprint / interaction. I.e. we would like to intend that while these distinctions are real, they may be found in Being but are not of Being. The distinctions are not a priori; and the metaphysics finds them to be ‘immaterial’ (objects) even though practical

It is worth repeating that ‘If there are Gods, if there is creation, if there are ideas, if there is joy and pain, if there is mind, if there is matter, if there are entities (things) and processes and interactions, if there are Laws, if there are readings of Laws (called laws), if there are time and space, these have Being... Being is not in or of time but time, such as it may be and in what it may obtain, is in and of Being: we may put it this way--being is in time but time is in Being… Being is not created; creation is in Being’

Verb to be—Frege, Wittgenstein

In English, word ‘is’, a form of the verb to be (it is the third person singular present indicative). It is a basic and apparently simple word. As seen above it is this simplicity is not merely apparent. However, the simplicity is beguiling in that it lies on the surface of depth

It is worthwhile, therefore, to distinguish various uses of ‘is’. The following Frege-Russell distinction between four meanings of ‘is’ is taken from Existence (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (with paraphrasing)—“the ‘is’ of existence, of identity, of predication, and of generic implication (inclusion)” are “illustrated below.

‘Socrates is’, rendered in regimented language as: there is an object such that the object equals Socrates. — ‘Cicero is Tully’, rendered as: Cicero equals Tully. — ‘Socrates is wise’, rendered as: Socrates has the property of being wise. — ‘Man is an animal’, rendered as: For all objects if the object has the property of manhood it has the property of animalhood.”

In ‘Being is that which is’ the term ‘is’ is the ‘is’ of existence

Duration and Extension— reflection on identity, i.e. on sameness and distinction; numerous sources in the literature point out the idea that distinction is fundamental

Duration and Extension have basis in sameness and distinction (i.e. in identity). Duration is distinction for a given (same) object. Extension arises for distinct objects. It is not at all clear that duration and Extension obtain in all elements of Being; and it is not clear that they are not interwoven. Certainly it is clear that they do not constitute independent manifolds in which Being resides; where they obtain they are of and immanent in Being. This opens up a whole basis for discussion of space, time, and being (lower case). And it is therefore that while it is tempting to say that the Universe is All Being over all Extension and duration it is preferable to say that from its (concept) nature Being knows no distinction and then the Universe is All Being (period)

Universe—Eriugena

The Universe is All Being. We might say, with Eriugena, that the Universe is All Being over all Extension and Duration (i.e. space-time). However, Extension and Duration in as much as they obtain are immanent in Being and in the interest of neutrality and precision we simply say that The Universe is All Being

The definition is essential to realization of the Universal Metaphysics in its most clear, potent, and revealing form

Law—Plato, Whitehead

The concept of a Law is that of a pattern within Being; a law is our reading of the pattern. All Laws have Being

Void—There is an extensive literature on the Void (nothingness). However, my primary inspiration for the Void and its use is the insight from physics that energy may be conserved in the spontaneous creation of matter in gravitational interaction from nothing

The concept of the Void is that of the absence of Being. Therefore the Void, if it exists, contains no object or Law

In the proof of the fundamental principle of metaphysics I have used the Void as a ‘virtual object’, i.e. the demonstration begins ‘if the Universe were in a non manifest phase)

I prefer the proof based in the Void as an actual object because it opens up the discussion to doubt and if the doubt is grounded it shows where it should lie, i.e. with the existence of the Void (the doubt concerns the validity of proof and not any irrationality or absurdity of the idea of existence of the Void). The doubt is (1) Spur to further careful analysis (2) Source of an existential attitude to the fundamental principle and its consequences, especially the ultimate nature of the Universe and the necessity and fact of realization

The fundamental principle implies that the Void is or may be seen as ‘source’ without being cause or creation in their senses in which they mean something over and above the neutral meaning of source

Object—Kant, Meinong; the concept of object in the in this essay depends first on the analysis of the concept of meaning; the Universal Metaphysics enables firming up and extending this concept to the abstract and applied (practical) cases

From Kant and Meinong the object is not the object in itself. For Kant it is the phenomenon as projected; for Meinong the object is the concept (including compound concepts such as states of affairs) and this is a rather practical solution to the problem of projection

However, from abstraction there are objects-in-themselves and the metaphysics concerns such objects which also reduce to objects in the sense of Meinong. The concept of ‘object’ is extended to that of ‘practical’ object in the sense of ‘good enough’ or, more generally, of value; these do not meet the requirements of epistemic perfection but may be regarded as existentially perfect (any advance is almost assuredly subject to retreat and often to apparent standing still which are worth appreciation in any case—what we would eschew is the thought that these are the only values)

Scientific Method—Hume, Kant, Popper

The scientific method refers to the ‘how to’ of developing and, especially, of verifying scientific theories. An earlier view was that theory follows from data just as conclusions follow in logic from premises. It was thought that the Newtonian system followed thus as a universal theory from known facts. We now know that there is an element of projection in theories but such projection is not mere data fitting: from the elegance and perhaps also from the power of theories they must have captured something of nature though obviously, today, not everything

In this essay it is seen that an alternative to universality is the interpretation of a theory as a compound fact (i.e. theory as valid over some domain but not necessarily the Universe)

The comparison of scientific method to deduction in logic is a common one but not a good one. A better comparison is that of scientific method to the development of a logical system and, in the same light, deduction from data according to a theory is comparable to deduction according to a system of logic

Void-Universe Identity—Vedanta, Bhagavad-Gita, and see the entry Void

The identity of Void and Universe is an implicit formulation of the fundamental principle of metaphysics

Metaphysics—Thales (the ‘first metaphysician’), Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant, Russell (criticism of idealism especially of the Hegelian type), Nietzsche (criticism of systematic philosophy), post-modernism (critique of ‘grand narratives’)

The concept of metaphysics in this narrative is knowledge (or study) of things in themselves. The concept may sound naïve on a number of counts, particularly in that it is not clear that metaphysics according to this conception of it is possible and in that it should seem desirable to specify what kinds of thing are studied in metaphysics. There is a history of concern with these issues. This history is addressed in the narrative. Abstraction is the key to knowledge of some but certainly not all objects-in-themselves (and in the latter case it is not given or assumed that there are such objects). Regarding the specification of what metaphysics does or can study, this is left almost fully open in the beginning and determination of the kinds and particulars and their properties etc. is part of the program of metaphysics. This is the pure metaphysics which is extended to practical objects in the Applied Metaphysics where it is noted that these are not objects-in-themselves and therefore, strictly, Applied Metaphysics is not metaphysics at all. However, the magnitude of what falls under metaphysics is the Universe (not known directly); and the Applied Metaphysics includes traditional knowledge in enhancement (where possible) in interaction with the metaphysics

Fundamental Principle of Metaphysics—I.e. The Universe has no Limits. Although there are intimations of this idea in the literature, the insight and its formulation and proof and equivalence to Logos as object of Logic are original

The meaning of the fundamental principle cannot be appreciated without knowledge of its proof. A common reaction is to think it means that the Universe, which is tacitly taken to be our known cosmos, is infinite and further, if the individual is cosmologically inclined, to think ‘but our cosmos is not known to be infinite’. However, the meaning is neither that the cosmos is infinite or that it is finite. The cosmos has to be some way e.g. to have certain laws of physics and not others (even in quantum cosmologies which allow other laws the cosmos is such that the classical evolution is the most likely)

From the demonstration of the fundamental principle it turns out that the only constraint on concepts to have reference (in the Universe) is that of Logic. In this conception, Logic includes our valid logics but has far greater logical scope. We can see that Logic does not concern the Universe as such; it concerns constraints on our concepts for them to have reference; it arises because we have the ability arising from our ability to conceive, e.g., contradictions. Thus Logic is not a limit; the ‘requirement’ of Logic is in fact a statement of Limitlessness, of maximum freedom. In the essay we find that scientific theories in their valid domains are included under Logic. What then is the difference between the logics and the sciences? Under the facts of interpretation of science as compound fact and the interpretation of abstract object as real the difference must be degree of abstraction or, equivalently, degree of universality (the logics being more abstract and more universal). The Universe is Limitless in that it has no true Limits (it is important to remember that Limitlessness includes that the Universe is far greater than our cosmos, e.g. there must be, under Limitlessness, an unlimited collection of cosmoses of unlimited variety all against a transient-void background)

We experience Limits. Where and how do they arise? They arise in the first place because we inhabit a restricted region of the Universe whose existence as it is has certain conditions. Restriction to a limited region would be a limit if eternal. Readers are referred to the narrative, especially the sections Metaphysics, Logic, and Cosmology of chapter Universe for a more complete discussion of the fundamental principle. The discussion of Realism is particularly interesting in that it shows that realism is clarifying of the meaning of Limitlessness rather than a restriction on what obtains

Limits—Almost all of human experience suggests limits to Being and, especially, human being; this required me to square this with the fundamental principle of metaphysics and to understand the nature of limits

See the entry on the fundamental principle above

Limitlessness—Principle of Plenitude, A. O. Lovejoy (The Great Chain of Being, 1964)

For discussion of Limitless see the entry on the fundamental principle above

I was aware of this principle before my demonstration of the fundamental principle but prior to that regarded it as a curiosity. One version of the principle is that anything that is eternally possible will obtain. Kant regarded it as true but unprovable in principle. In fact it can be shown false; if numbers are picked in a random sequence from the real line it is possible that any pre-chosen number will be picked but the probability is zero (since the cardinality of the reals is greater than that of any sequence); therefore even in an infinite sequence (time) whether the pre-chosen number will be picked is not determinate

The principle of plenitude is prescient of the fundamental principle. However, the latter has far greater scope and significance because of (1) its formulation and (2) its demonstration which gives confidence and (3) method which leads to immense implication, elaboration, and application

Aeternitas—Unlimited Form, Aquinas (discussed in Frank Tippler’s Physics of Eternity, 1994)

The concept of a being who can perceive eternity in a moment, i.e. as Aeternitas, is due (as far as I know) to Aquinas. I used to distinguish finite and infinite forms. The notion of Aeternitas has been helpful in crystallizing the distinction as that of Limited versus Unlimited form

Realism—see entries on science, logic, and existentialism

My use of realism in the context of these entries is different from its classical use in philosophy

The present use starts with the raw form of the fundamental principle. This is translated into conceptual form ‘every referential concept is realized’. The Universe cannot go astray—it is what it is; however, our concepts can be subject to various errors. Realism is (1) Corrective—kinds of errors (empirical, conceptual, and existential) are identified and appropriate corrections found (2) Expressive—along with the freedom of the fundamental principle and the corrections what appears to be its (it is reasoned though not certainly) most potent but necessarily partially implicit form is found

Universal Metaphysics—my derivation of the metaphysics was careful thought on the nature of Being, Universe, Void, and Law; see the related entries

The Universal Metaphysics is unique, ultimate, and Universal. It is Universal in applying to the Universe and in revealing its ultimate nature; and this is one way in which the metaphysics is ultimate. It is also explicitly ultimate in foundation (neither substance nor infinite regress) and breadth (implicit capture of All Being as well as explicit capture of unanticipated variety). It is unique because metaphysics must be unique (it is knowledge of things as they are) for any given context except that it may be expressed in different forms and developed in differing degrees of detail

Applied Metaphysics—interaction and weaving together of knowledge of our world (cosmos), especially science, and the Universal Metaphysics

See entry on metaphysics

Substance—Aristotle, Heidegger, reflection on the nature of substance as explanation in light of the Universal Metaphysics leads to impossibility of universal substance; on the other hand every entity may be regarded as its own substance (or form); equivalently the Void (or any state) can be seen as universal pseudo-substance

Classical substance is universal and unchanging. An appeal of the idea that would satisfy an urge to simple explanation (and theory). If there is one uniform-unchanging substance that generates all variety and change that would indeed be a simple explanation. To satisfy the requirement of being an explanation substance must be causal. However, discussion has shown that Universal explanation cannot be causal. The Universal Metaphysics finds classical substance to be impossible but also unnecessary. It also shows that any single source of knowledge epistemology (empiricism, rationalism) is untenable and unnecessary

Logic—Wittgenstein, Haskell B. Curry (Foundations of Mathematical Logic, Dover Ed., 1976)

The concept of Logic is that of the requirement that concepts in referential form should in fact have reference. Its relation to logic and the logics is discussed in the essay; the logic is a variant concept and the valid logics are parts of Logic. One way to state the importance of Logic is that its object is the Universe in all its detail. Thus Logic is identical to (the Universal) Metaphysics

I first encountered the idea of the identity of logic and metaphysics in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1922). A difference between Wittgenstein’s view and mine is that where Wittgenstein posits a picture of the world (the totality of facts), I derive the picture of the world; if I were to use Wittgenstein’s language the derived picture of the metaphysics of this narrative would assert that the totality of facts is without limit. Thus while the Logical picture of this narrative reveals the Universe as without limit, Wittgenstein’s logical picture does not (it does not refute the limitlessness; however, Wittgenstein’s survey of knowledge is standard and therefore suggests the standard limits)

Curry’s work cited above confirmed my thought that logic must be empirical (over things like propositions and unlike science which is empirical over material-like facts). I am aware that the preponderance of the modern view of deductive logic is against its being empirical (there are a number of twentieth century thinkers e.g. W. V. Quine and Hilary Putnam who have argued that logic has an empirical aspect). Analysis of the development of logic suggests what its empirical nature will be if it is empirical; study of the development of logics corroborates but does not prove this; the Universal Metaphysics confirms both the form and fact of its empirical nature. The point is discussed in detail in the essay

Logos—the Logic of the narrative may be seen as realization of the classical idea of Logos; here, however, Logic and Logos are equivalent and I use Logic as the concept (word) side and Logos as the object

Abstract and Concrete Objects—Abstract Objects (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

The metaphor for the idea of the concrete object is the entity; this idea may be extended to include interaction, process, and particular properties of particular things (sometimes called tropes)

One metaphor for the abstract object is the mathematical object, e.g. number which of course begins empirically but then becomes abstract, e.g., by axiomatization. Where do numbers reside? Apparently not in space or time. Are they causal? Apparently not

Properties, e.g., redness have a ‘universal’ character and have been called universals (philosophical realism is the idea that things like redness are real). We find red things in the world but where do we find redness? The character of abstract objects is regarded as problematic. However, note that property finds its way into both concrete and realms. This suggests a connection

Every referential concept has reference in the One Universe; this consequence of the fundamental principle implies that all objects ‘reside’ in the Universe. On analysis we find that abstract objects are not atemporal or a-causal but rather there temporality or causality does not figure in the abstracted form. On the other hand concrete objects are not universally concrete, i.e. causal or spatiotemporal but only so in our experience. A practical way the distinction is that we study / know concrete objects in perception and abstract objects in higher concepts or thought

Art—Tolstoy (I learnt from Tolstoy’s discussion of art because it suggested to me a wrong headed approach to art; what I have learnt about art is mostly from my experience with art that speaks to me); Blake (and many others: art as metaphysics)

In this essay art is the search for, expression, and communication (two way) of what is (most) deep in (human) being. This is important to the metaphysics (Logic) and the journey of realization

Religion and its Functions—most analyses of religion, formal and informal, seem to me to be one dimensional and either enthusiastic or reactive; I have learned primarily by my own reactions to the analyses, form the religions themselves, and by considerations of the limits of our fractured (secular / fundamentalist) civilization in light of the Universal Metaphysics

In this essay we argue that religion is not known only by empirical study of the religions of the world. We find that despite the distortions of the religions (some of which may have been appropriate to some stage of history), there is a role for a idea and action driven search for the highest principles, objects, and life which is not satisfied by science, secularism, spirituality as commonly conceived, spiritualism, the religions, or the empirical religion of psychological and anthropological study

I am not decided what to call this search. If I call it Religion (X) I will define it as follows. In this conception Religion (X) is the use of all dimensions of Being by individuals and groups in search of All Being; it may be historically cumulative, i.e. it may have a record of its own endeavor; and it may appeal to the insight of charismatic figures (whose charisma consequence should derive from power of insight and not merely from power of person)

Method—see the entries for abstraction, naming the given, analysis of meaning, nature and limits of science, logic

Method is ‘how to’ but not a guarantee of outcome

If we regard a scientific theory as ‘content’ then the how to of science (scientific method) as ‘method’ then it seems as though we receive method to develop content. However, reason and history show that method and content develop together. It is seen in the narrative that this is also true for logic, mathematics, philosophy, and art (in so far as art has any method)

The method of the metaphysics begins as abstraction, naming the given etc. It then develops as Logic which turns back on the metaphysics itself and shows explicitly—not just in concept—method as content, i.e. method leads to Logic as content while Logic encompasses method

This derives from but also generalizes the interaction of method and content. It shows their identity in kind—which is as it should be for content is in / refers to the world’ and method is the how of doing (or knowing or representing) which is also in the world

Mathematics, foundations—Russell (Logicism), Hilbert (Formalism), Intuitionism (secondary literature), Platonism (Gödel, Penrose)

See the entry for Logic

General Cosmology—Kant, Universal Metaphysics

General Cosmology is the study of the variety, Extension and duration of Being. The modern secular view is that it is roughly the same as modern physical cosmology with a cultural overlay. Universal Metaphysics shows that cosmology is far greater than physical cosmology. However, general cosmology derives inspiration from physical cosmology. It also reveals close analogs, e.g. the multiple cosmoses consequence of general cosmology is a super-case of a multiple histories quantum cosmology

Physical Cosmology, space, time—extensive reading and study in the literature from Newton to today: Einstein; developers of quantum mechanics, interpretations, quantum field theory, quantum gravity, quantum cosmology

Important as inspiration and some subject matter ideas for general cosmology, physical cosmology is also illuminated by general cosmology. There is immense potential for interaction

Mind, matter—I have read and absorbed so much that I cannot remember all influences; the fundamental insight into the nature of mind comes from Leibniz struggle to consistently in ‘corporate’ mind and matter in a single organism

Death—Existentialism, Hinduism, Heidegger

The secular concept of death is that of finality. The Universal Metaphysics reveals roughly the opposite—the individual has eternality. However, death is still immensely significant from human, compassionate, and existential standpoints

Existential Attitude—Nietzsche, critique of certainty and attitude thereof (essay)

The occasion for existential attitude arises in the essay in connection with death. In connection with uncertainty it is found that there are varieties of uncertainty where we might think we have final certainty. The existential attitude is a weaving together of the gaps, of making a continuum in the midst of discreteness

Power—the Universal Metaphysics

Power is degree of Limitlessness. The Universe is absolutely Limitless. If there is God this is his / her / its extremum. The individual inherits this Limitlessness. The Journey is the way of realization

World—intersection of Universal Metaphysics with Tradition

Important as ground to the journey

Explanation—Hempel

A common concept of explanation is that of finding a cause. Hempel explained explanation as cause in the context of a (scientific) theory (which I think he presumed to be causal). The concept of explanation is used in the chapter World. It argues that causality is good where it obtains but that it does not always obtain even if only because of ignorance

This notion of explanation is, however, a block to accepting / understanding the Universal Metaphysics. The metaphysics shows however that causation in its received meaning even in quantum mechanics where it loosens some of its necessity, is and cannot be the order of the Universe

Life, Evolution—Darwin, Mayr, school of complex / self-organizing systems theory

I have learned much from Darwin and Mayr (a great biologist and excellent interpreter of Darwin) and other biologists. The theory of evolution is an analogy for developments in and applications of the Universal Metaphysics. It is seen that the evolutionary mechanisms (incremental, variation, and selection) are not necessary but are arguably or probably most probable

Human Being, Freedom, Mind—reading, reflection

What is the essence of human being? Of course I do not know. Language and technology are important. It is important to recognize our material and biological basis. Freedom of concept formation is important. For purposes of the journey freedom of choice (of which concept formation is a part and special case), learning, incremental development, commitment, and risk are important. These are all aspects of freedom

Civilization, Society, Culture—reading, reflection

For the journey civilization is the group vehicle and complement to individual. I see civilization as groups and communities in communication, even across skies, as civilization on the way to realization. A favorite metaphor is that of Islands separated by Ocean and connected in the deep. Society and culture and other institutions are important as aspects of civilization

Journey—Shamanism, my life and ambition, Universal Metaphysics shows universality of journey as fact and suggests universality as a value

The journey is the journey of realization. It is given. For Limited form it is endless in variety, duration, Extension, summit, elevation, and dissolution; pain is neither avoided nor sought; intelligent endeavor critiquing itself is at the core of enjoyment and effectiveness in realization

Ways (of transformation)—traditional literature on yoga, meditation, mysticism; modern literature on technology and information; modern literature on extraordinary performance and charisma

Some traditional ways are listed above these; these may function as ways for individual and group process. However, they are like science and logic in the suggestion that ‘the way’ has been found; however, as in the disciplines, method and content remain ever in process (for Limited form). The individuals and groups use ways in experiments in transformation—this is ‘content’; but must also reflect on experiment and experiment with given or received and enhancements of or, perhaps, new ways—this is ‘method’. In this process, the traditional ways and their ‘logic’ (e.g. the Samkhya as a metaphysical grounding of Yoga) are resources

Practice and Action—literature on yoga and meditation

In yoga practice is the practice of the particular yoga induces psycho-physiological states and growth. Practice in action is carrying on the practice in the midst of life—ordinary and not ordinary. This in turn may affect practice. This is practice in action. From the entries on journey and ways, this extends to and joins with experiments in transformation on the way to realization

Catalysts—literature on factors that lead to exceptional psycho-physiological states

The concept of catalyst is that of factor in exceptional states. Details are in the essay. Catalysts are parts of ways. I have listed them separately to encourage use and experimentation, especially reflexive (cross) experiment

Experiments (in transformation of Being)—personal experience, Universal Metaphysics

The role of the experiment and action is that they complete the ideas. I.e., ideas are an incomplete mode of realization. This contrasts to the thought that ideas should have uses (of course they should but ‘using an idea’ is not the appropriate description of the entire process)

Participation and Immersion—necessity of these in science and experiments in transformation of Being follows (for finite form) from the Universal Metaphysics

Another way of stating the incompleteness of ideas, participation and immersion are terms suggested by anthropological participation (versus remote objective observation) and, from Universal Metaphysics, seen as necessary complements in the development of scientific method if / as science becomes truly universal

Realization of the Ultimate—Form and possibility / necessity of—Vedanta (Adi Samkara), Bhagavad-Gita (traditionally assigned to Vyasa also called Veda Vyasa and sometimes referred to as Maharshi 113 Vyasa), Universal Metaphysics

Vedanta and Gita suggest identity with the ultimate; provide pictures of the ultimate, show ways to get there in this life and the ‘next’. They are an inspiration in my search for understanding and way

Universal Metaphysics complements their pictures and completes them in some ways. It provides demonstration; it is not as poetic but may learn from their poetry; it is enabled by its conceptual strength to immensely expand their pictures on the largest (and smallest) scales (for a Limited form there is no largest or smallest). Universal Metaphysics, science, technology, and tradition combine in the Journey in realization of Being

Alphabetic List of Authors

Aristotle, 384 BC-322 BC	Kant, Immanuel, 1724-1804	Russell, Bertrand, 1872-1970
Blake, William, 1757-1827	Leibniz, Gottfried, 1646-1716	Samkara, Adi, 788-820
Darwin, Charles, 1809-1822	Lovejoy, A. O., 1873-1962	Searle, John, 1932-
Descartes, René, 1596-1650	Mayr, Ernst, 1804-2005	Spinoza, Baruch, 1632-1677
Einstein, Albert, 1879-1955	Meinong, Alexius, 1853-1920	Thales of Miletus, c. 624 BC-c. 546 BC
Eriugena, Johannes Scotus, 815-877	Newton, Isaac, 1642-1727	Vyasa or Veda Vyasa
Gödel, Kurt, 1906-1978	Nietzsche, Friedrich, 1844-1900	Whitehead, Alfred North, 1861-1947
Heidegger, Martin, 1889-1976	Penrose, Roger, 1931-	Wittgenstein, Ludwig, 1889-1951
Hempel, Carl G., 1905-1997	Plato, 424/423 BC-348/347 BC
Hume, David, 1711-1776	Popper, Karl, 1902-1994

NOTES

1 This title has been used for many versions of this essay since 2002. Some reasons to consider change are that the title may be more suggestive regarding the main goal and that the essay contains much material that the title does not suggest

Options to deal with these issues are (1) Change or enhance the title (2) Add subtitles or (3) Write the narrative as a main essay and a series of ‘monographs’. For now I will adopt the second option. An example is ‘Journey in Being—A Way of Discovery and Realization: A Program of Metaphysics and Action’

2 The connotations of the term ‘journey’ for this narrative are given in what follows. One of those connotations is process. This, however, is not the primary connotation. The narrative emphasizes the importance of a process perspective but does not espouse a process metaphysics

3 Some readers may wonder whether this is to be an exploration in material andor spiritual realms. The response is, first, that it is intended to be in all realms and, second, that I hold that ideas of ‘matter’, ‘spirit’ and so on and their distinctions are approximate. The distinctions are a substitute for incompleteness of understanding; they may have practical use; however the terms and distinctions are not absolute. In particular I do not think that there are separate or separate-but-interacting material and spiritual ‘planes’; I think, and the developments of the essay show, that there is one world—one Universe. The ‘one Universe’ idea depends on what is meant by ‘universe’; however it will be seen that defining the Universe as All Being eliminates much confusion and introduces clarity and power of thought. One reason for choice of the term ‘Being’ is to avoid falling into errors associated with concretizing the ideas of the material, the spiritual and their distinctions

In this essay, Being is chosen as a neutral term to refer to what there is in the Universe. Thus, the present use Being does not have all of its connotations, formal or informal, from the history of thought and day to day use. Some of the excluded connotations are those of essence and ultimate or divine being. As used here Being is neutral to whether the constitution of the Universe is material, ideal, or other; or whether there is a constitution. In the essay neutrality emerges as immensely empowering

The development in the essay requires that its significant concepts be carefully selected and defined. Definitions and reasons for selection of the concepts are given in the main divisions of the essay

The terms used to indicate these concepts have often had varied histories of formal and informal use. I have used capitalization when the use of a term in this essay has significant distinction from other uses

To understand the development, it is crucial to be aware of and attend to meanings as defined here. Because, the development is new and in some ways ultimate it may at first be counter-intuitive. Factors of meaning and intuition imply that absorption of the material will require attention and reflection. The reader’s own meanings and experience may contribute to richness of the experience of reading and may of course contribute to disagreement with the theses of the essay

Some of the significant general concepts are meaning, Concept, object, existence, Experience, Being, metaphysics, Universe, Law, Void, Limit, Logic, and logos

4 The essay uses capitalization to indicate a term that has a particular use in the essay that may be confused with its general connotations

5 Ideas are a form of action but not all action is in the form of the idea in its limited senses. Ideas and action are the modes of exploration for an ‘agent’; they include (incomplete) knowledge of world, self, options, values, choice, decision, execution, comparison of expected and actual outcomes, and learning. Though it is not emphasized, the ‘material’ mode enters in two ways: the agent has a material base and may use the material level as instrument, e.g. as in technology

6 ‘Civilization’ is an important concept in this essay and so it is important to explain what I mean by it. This is especially true since the term ‘civilization’ has some controversial uses which include (1) Intent to differentiate civilized from primitive human being and thus justify abusive treatment and (2) Emphasis on use of technology which is peripheral to the intent in this essay

I suppose at outset I should rail against the kind of thought that wants to pin down precisely what such ‘large’ ideas mean. We are concerned with the ‘future’ more than the known past and we will see that the future is far greater (on some views, e.g. a cyclical one, the future is no greater or lesser than the past; not however that that the contrast is between entertained future and known past). We are not looking therefore for the empirical determination from history and the history of thought, even if that were a good idea for some purposes, of the notion of civilization. As readers become aware of the Ideas of this essay, they will recognize the need to create ideas rather than derive them from the world to the present. This is of course not the case for all ideas of the essay but when contemplating the vast, and as we shall see Limitless, future, it is essential. We must therefore approach some of the notions regarding the future with openness and poetry in addition to critical thought. The developments of the essay will provide both in appropriate interaction

The great mystery is not that we should have been thrown down here at random between the profusion of matter and that of the stars; it is that from our very prison we should draw, from our own selves, images powerful enough to deny our nothingness—André Malraux, Man’s Fate, 1934

A first meaning of civilization shall be the collective human endeavor over time and space. The metaphysics developed later will enable a second meaning as the matrix of Being across the Universe in collective endeavor. Civilization is a matrix—a collection as if of islands, apparently separate yet connected below

Images—mountain tops in mist, lights from villages across a land seen from a plane, drums across a canyon celebrating Easter at night

7 Use of the term does not here imply that there is a definite destiny. It means the future as it emerges from understanding and in time. Having a sense of destiny does not imply a sense or expectation of some specific and given outcome; it may imply a sense of participation in and toward significance

8 It will emerge that using such a term is immensely empowering. This empowerment is similar to that of the use of a symbol such as ‘x’ to designate an unknown quantity in elementary algebra. In elementary algebra the nature of x is known but its value is not. If, however, as in higher algebra, we were to need an x of unknown type to satisfy a certain need then x might be unknown with regard to type and value. This is similar to the situation regarding Being: it is a name that stands for unknowns in type as well as value

9 In this essay metaphysics is knowledge of things as they are. This notion will appear naïve on a number of counts. There will of course be provisos; however this apparently naïve meaning will be restituted and empowered in the development

10 A constructive demonstration of a metaphysics shall be one that builds the metaphysics from actual givens and therefore shows possibility by actually producing a metaphysics

11 For details, problems, objections etc the reader is referred to the essay

12 ‘Space’ and ‘time’ are used informally in the introduction. The formal treatment does not begin with the position that space and time is given; their nature, the conditions for their emergence, and their precursors are topics that will be developed in the main divisions of this essay. Given this proviso, this explanation of the term ‘Universe’ is effectively its conception in the essay. The conception of Universe as All Being is crucial with regard to the terms ‘All’ and ‘Being’. The combination of the two terms eliminates confusing and unnecessary vagueness that is often associated with the term Universe. Is the Universe made of matter? The present definition neither confirms nor denies that the Universe is material or partly material or mental or partly mental; this eliminates from the early development of metaphysics, debate that would be premature and perhaps confusing at that point. It leaves the question open to discussion later when the metaphysics achieves mature development and may therefore illuminate and interaction with questions of substance and kind; this approach has power for we will find that the metaphysics is able to resolve the question of substance—it shows that ‘universal substance’ as uniform and unchanging from which the world emerges deterministically is neither possible nor necessary (on the ‘stuff’ or axiomatic interpretations of substance; and note that non-deterministic emergence contradicts the standard notion of substance). Are ideas in the Universe? Of course, we must first make the following inquiry—What are ideas? Whatever they are, if they are actual things in the brain and if brains are actual things then ideas have Being and therefore are in the Universe. On similar considerations if we conceive mind and matter with sufficient latitude, they too have Being and are in or of the Universe. The essay will provide further illumination on these issues

13 I.e., there are existing ‘things’. This Descartes' famous proof— I think therefore I am—adapted to the case of Being. Demonstration that there are actually objects of (some) Experience is taken up in the essay

14 In the essay the Void is the absence of Being

15 I call this demonstration to distinguish it from proof from premise to conclusion. We commonly think that there must be some assumed or posited, i.e. unproven premise or axiom. However, we found the fact of Being to be given and not requiring assumption or positing. In the demonstration there are no unfounded axioms or premises. Later in the Introduction we see how to specify states. This will require a new conception of ‘Logic’. Showing the fundamental and founded character of this Logic will be taken up briefly in the Introduction; demonstration and detail is deferred to the essay

16 The name of the principle will be abbreviated FP. In previous versions of the essay I have called FP Principle of Being, Fundamental Principle, and Fundamental Principle of Being. This principle is central to the metaphysics developed in the narrative. Understanding it is crucial to understanding the metaphysics and its application. The principle has several equivalent forms which contribute to understanding and using it effectively. The principle has appeared in a variety of primitive and incompletely developed forms in the history of ideas. Here the following are new—(1) The forms of the statement and their definiteness (2) Demonstration of the principle (3) That the forms and the demonstration enhance understanding of the principle and method for its deployment (4) Consequent development of a unique, ultimate and Universal metaphysics; note that the terms ‘unique’ etc are explained in footnote 20 (5) Application to an impressive range of problems and issues in metaphysics and philosophy; these include not only major outstanding problems of metaphysics but also the nature of metaphysics and philosophy (6) Application to and in some cases reinterpretation of a range of disciplines and human endeavors, e.g. Logic, theory and nature of objects, cosmology, science—its nature and method, the sciences, religion, and the endeavor of civilization

17 Over and above brief treatment in the Introduction

18 This is effectively an initial conception of ‘soul’ which, however, does not play a significant explicit role in the essay

19 This is one source of the title Journey in Being. An informal source is in personal experience of discovery and exploration as a journey

Note that it is not suggested that there is no pain, difficulty, and challenge to the process; there will of course be pain and difficulty which, in without details of particular situations, are neither avoided not cultivated. There will be immense value—in terms of enjoyment and effectiveness—to seeing and undertaking intelligent enterprise and engagement

20 Since metaphysics is knowledge of things as they are, i.e. knowledge of Being, the metaphysics of any domain must be unique even though it may be expressed in different ways and developed in different degrees of detail. It may be seen as follows to be ultimate in depth: from the notion of Logic, it will be seen, first, to have foundation without reference to substance or greater depth; also from Logic what is outside it cannot have Being; and from Logic what is in it has Being whose variety, extent, and duration have no Limit. I.e., the metaphysics also reveals that the Universe itself is ultimate or Limitless. Finally, since the metaphysics is of the Universe it is Universal. Since it is unique over the Universe, it may will be called ‘the metaphysics’

21 Which, for convenience, will be taken to include reflective common experience

22 Note of course that the extension is not detailed and directly empirical for which the metaphysics would await further exploration

23 It seems to me that the ‘obvious’ potential paradoxes are the main ones. Various potential paradoxes have occurred to me over time and many of these are raised and addressed in the essay. Long versions of the essay have more complete accounts of ‘objection and resolution’ of issues

24 Since the Universe has no Limit, we cannot expect it to be captured in the science created by any Limited form. Un-Limited form requires no science

25 This Logic is shown in the essay to have equivalence with logic as deductive. Further, even though introduced via definition, it is explicitly non-empty since it contains traditional logics at least as approximations. However, it is clear that, from its connection with FP, it goes far beyond traditional and modern logics which therefore constitute a beginning to Logic

26 Thus if we interpret a theory of science as a compound or complex fact over some domain of validity instead of as hypothetically universal, Logic includes facts and theories of science as compound facts (but does not directly concern the ‘method’ of induction)

27 The ideal and ideas have multiple senses that may be seen as centering on the idea as mental. Thus idealism may be a substance theory in which the Universe is mental in nature. However we may also talk of Ideas which are, e.g., ideal forms that are mental because they are conceived andor perceived in the mind

28 The metaphysics of this essay enables a unification of abstract and concrete or particular objects; a mature treatment of objects; an understanding of the nature of abstract objects and why they should seem to have various properties—e.g. non-causality and a-temporality—that distinguish them from the concrete

29 Inasmuch as the ideas of this essay illuminate the nature of the Universe and suggest but do not require action they overlap this ‘approach’

30 Precisely what these needs were is a matter for anthropological, psychological, and historical study. If we look at religion today we may be tempted to think with Marx that religion is an opiate. If true, this is not necessarily the essence of religion today; and the essence would not be discovered by statistical study for that essence if any is in part determined by singular psychological and other factors. Further, even though some anthropologists, e.g. Weston LaBarre in The Ghost Dance (1990), have held that the origin of religion is in crisis the conclusion does not extend to primal origins (even if significant in known cases); is subject to singular, e.g. charismatic, factors; and what is true of origins—or appeal—is not necessarily true of the nature of religion

31 The development of the essay further shows the need. Perhaps, however, the connotations of ‘Religion’ make the term a poor choice. Recall that the metaphysics of the essay reveals that the shape of the Universe is the shape of Logic. Therefore the only fictions are the Logical fictions. Thus literature may be one source of an approach to active metaphysics; obvious examples of the kind of literature that may be useful are the writings of Plato, Dante, Nietzsche, Borges, and Thomas Pynchon. Science and philosophy will of course be another source; that they have empirical and literal foci does not disbar them from contribution to active metaphysics. Poetry, art, and drama provide possibilities for emotion, visualization, and ritual to be incorporated into an active metaphysics. Social and political action may also be incorporated. Religion may provide allegory. However, from the metaphysics, this sum of modern secular and religious cultures leaves something lacking which is not provided by the religions. This ‘something’ which has begun to be revealed in the division, Ideas, is a primary concern of the division Journey. It is the use of all dimensions of Being in discovery and realization of All Being; it focuses on being in process of realization; it may make use of historical and charismatic sources; naming it is in process

32 In Ideas and Journey what is sought is an interacting amalgam of the developments of the essay with tradition

33 It is possible to ascribe such things as square circles two kinds of (semi) existence, first as concepts, and second as the non-object or potential object to which the concept refers. What might a potential object be? One possible meaning is as in ‘circular regular polygon’; in the case that the number of sides of the polygon approaches infinity, the polygon approaches a circle and so approaches existence

34 That too is not quite correct because we know that we know of Experience in Experience which may be we know of illusion in illusion

35 Some times called the ‘external world’. I do not like this term because it is not external to anything, i.e. it is not outside the brain and, given Experience, and it is not strictly other than Experience. It is true of course that Experience plays two roles, those of concept and of object

36 Note that to concretely see the world as the Experience of a single omniscient Being the meaning of Experience must be extended and we can then see one example of such a Being to be the Universe

37 The philosopher Heidegger regarded the problem of why there is Being at all as the fundamental problem. In the essay this problem is resolved trivially. The problem of what has Being is fundamental because it opens up the study of Being in the Universe and because determining that something has Being entails also determining its nature and behavior

38 Absence of Being, nothingness is the intended meaning of ‘non-Being’ here. However there is another meaning that we do not emphasize in which, e.g., before an individual is born he or she has a kind of potential Being called non-Being. The latter notion is vague but may be given precise meaning in terms of the metaphysics under development

39 I.e. Aeternitas, a term used by Thomas Aquinas to refer to eternity-in-itself or as-an-object

40 This is the trivial resolution of what Heidegger called the fundamental problem of metaphysics

41 …and it is the only state to add nothing to the Universe

42 Effectively

43 The word ‘from’ does not have a causal meaning; it does not mean that a successor state is contained—e.g. causally and or deterministically—in the prior

44 If the Universe or any part of it is in a temporal phase, then ‘will’ may be interpreted temporally. In the temporal case the statement regarding maximal freedom is from any state any other (or same) state will follow

45 As noted, I have previously used a variety of names for this principle—e.g., Principle of Being, the Fundamental Principle of Being, and the Fundamental Theorem of Metaphysics

46 I am not using ‘conceptual realism’ to refer to the reality of certain things that at first glance seem to be nothing other than creations of mind, e.g. Plato’s Idealism in which Ideas have reality (in the later section Objects abstract objects will be seen to be real but in a sense unanticipated in traditional notions of ‘realism’; the nature of this realism will be so direct that it cuts through the realism versus nominalism debate: it gives a ‘this one world’ foundation to realism that makes the positing of ‘other worlds’ unnecessary—and contradictory—so that a nominalist response to realism becomes unnecessary) . Here, conceptual realism refers to the property of referential concepts to have actual reference. If it were not for FP, ‘actual reference’ should be replaced by ‘possible reference’; however, as we have seen, in a Limitless Universe the actual is the Logically possible.

47 It appropriate for the present purpose to consider only concepts that are referential in form. Non-referential concepts are not excluded from consideration because the concepts themselves are objects (e.g. in the brain) and because, with appropriate interpretation, many such concepts may be rendered referential. Working with Being and Universe as All Being makes this clear where working with typical categories of substance and an ill defined and indefinite universe leaves vagueness. Whatever has Being is in the Universe; if a concept is a concept at all, whatever it is—in the brain or abstract or both—it must have Being or be nothing at all not even a mere concept. The pertinent issues will become clearer in the later section Objects

48 (or may)

49 Evolution seems to me to be the most reasonable mechanism even to the point of practical necessity; however the reader may prefer to hold that this imprinting was that of some God; that reader is faced, in the practical case, of squaring this God with evolutionary mechanisms of adaptation

50 It is only if we regard the (latest) theories as potentially universal that we may have to regard them as tentative

51 This is a prevision of the unification of concrete / particular and abstract Objects

52 A Limitless form requires no science; for such form all knowing is perception

53 Physical, life, mind

54 ‘Limited form’ shall mean limited form of Object or Individual. Of course, from PB, such Limits are necessarily contingent to certain Domains; we call such Limits ‘Normal’ for there is ultimate merging of all Objects and Identity. As noted earlier such Limits are transcended. Also, though even while Limited and individual can form some image, cognitive-emotional / mind centered and body centered, of the ultimate

55 See the Introduction

56 The immersion and participation expansion of science corresponds to an expansion of metaphysics to include action

This extension emphasizes the inclusion of theories of science as compound facts. It suppresses the inductive / creative endeavor. However, there are parallels between creativity in logic / mathematics and science

57 The corresponding subject matter may and will be called Applied Metaphysics. In a narrow use, Applied Metaphysics will be the border region. Inclusively, it will be the interactive join of metaphysics / tradition

58 These ways will include recognition that a context has inherent limits, the notion of ‘good enough’ knowledge, and the notion that the attempt to know is an ethical value of which ‘good enough’ is an example

59 Thus we will deploy incremental adaptation but not only so; we may employ science and technology but not only so. We will be required, starting with Earth and Human Being and Culture and increment as ground, to engage in transformation of Being in light of tradition, the metaphysics, experience, experiment, reflection, and learning

60 Another significant and conservative reaction is that when doubt obtains we should do nothing, e.g. make no change at all

61 Since religions present distinct cosmologies, they do not constitute a generally accepted worldview. They do provide a view in that they stand against the secular view and in this the metaphysics finds them to be valid

62 E.g., John Stuart Mill’s philosophy of logic

63 There are exceptions to this attitude e.g. the view of Haskell B. Curry, Foundations of Mathematical Logic (p. 16, in comments on certainty of mathematics), Dover Ed., 1976, and the ideas of Hilary Putnam, ‘Is Logic Empirical?’ Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 5, eds. Robert S. Cohen and Marx W. Wartofsky (Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1968), pp. 216-241

64 These objects are not concepts but they may be studied as concepts for in the putative ideal case concepts and objects are ideal and equivalent. Here, in light of the metaphysics, we find that there is only the real or ‘one Universe’ case and, again but for different reasons, there may be perfection and effective identity of concept and object. Further, concepts are also objects (but not mental objects) as will be seen in the section Objects

65 Incursion of doubt where certainty is irrelevant may be obsessive. However, there is probably always doubt where the boundary of relevance of certainty lies

66 Examples not given in this short version. Examples (1) Liar paradox (2) Paradox of non-existent Object

67 This mutuality is apparent in the foregoing development

68 This might be recursive since we then know knower-known; however, we might cut this recursive loop by considering different ‘kinds’ of knowing, e.g. perceptual versus thinking

69 See Method for further discussion of Logic

70 For example from Francis Bacon to Isaac Newton

71 Which is parallel to the earlier idea of abstraction as sieving out only those details of Experience not subject to projective distortion

72 The concept of the Universe is the metaphysics

73 Still there is an art to doing. The statement that art need not be pretty refers both to pettiness and agony in ‘service’ of art. This is not an excuse for pettiness and we suspect that if it were a mere excuse the art might be minimal

74 Plato’s criticism of music is understandable. One can understand the criticism and not agree with it

75 A valid view of the universe as the whole is necessary; the Universal Metaphysics meets this need. Of course, other elements may be needed

76 I.e. secularism asserts that its kind of activity and value is complete though the actual activities and values remain in process

77 Defined by spatiotemporal and other parameters. That there are such domains does not mean we know them precisely. Further, ignorance of the limits of the domains approaches completeness at the far reaches of space, time, and kind of phenomenon. The space time limits include the very large and the very small

78 Which may be seen to be a good thing in terms of existential attitude and the value of truth

79 It is of course not clear that ‘my contribution’ is separate from the ‘thing’

80 In a later chapter

81 We have already seen this in ‘examples’: the method of pure Experience in Chapter Being, of its abstraction to Logic in Chapter Universe

82 It is important to be clear about the meaning of the term ‘reflexive’. Generally it suggests some thing that turns back on or refers to itself. The reflex arc of stimulus-response is thus reflexive. Here, however, the turning back on itself first refers to conscious thought turning back on itself. If thinking begins as thinking about the world then thinking about thinking may clarify and improve the quality of thinking. This is an example of reflexive thought that shows a reflexive origin to method. In sociology reflexivity refers to a relation that is circular with regard to cause and effect, e.g. in so far as a theory is a social artifact (this is not the same as say that its truth is relative to the culture), a social theory should apply to itself. A reflexive individual would understand that his or her personality is in part the result of conditioning and is not fixed nature and could use this to modify behavior and parts of personality that might otherwise be considered fixed. The present meaning of reflexivity has similarities to the meaning in sociology but not derived from or dependent on the sociological use

83 This is an extreme form of the position held by relativists in epistemology (in this use of the term ‘relativity’ there is no reference to Einstein’s theories)

84 An example of treating a theory as an object occurs in the idea of meta-mathematics where, e.g. the structures of proofs become objects of interest and we may thereby be able to prove theorems or decide whether proofs are possible by studying proof structure. The proofs of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems are a creative use of this idea in which statements of number theory and their properties such as truth, falsity, and provability are represented by natural numbers—Gödel numbers—and their properties which results for any sufficiently expressive theory T in there being a (Gödel) sentence ‘this statement is unprovable’ named G for which the Gödel number of ‘G is unprovable’ is the Gödel number of a true statement. Therefore G is true but unprovable in T

Gödel's proof begins with a system T (sufficiently powerful, e.g. to contain arithmetic). The proof (1) Creates a sentence G that is shown (2) In one (Gödel numbering) interpretation to say ‘G is unprovable in T’ (3) Proves that G and ~G are unprovable in S, and therefore if T is consistent, G (and ~G) are undecidable in T which shows that (4) G is true (in some interpretation) but unprovable in T (5) Therefore (a) T is incomplete and (b) This shows the difference between truth (in some interpretation) and provability; further, if we enhance T to make G provable, then, by the same reasoning, there is a G’ in the enhanced T that is unprovable. This is in fact Gödel’s first incompleteness theorem that any consistent T of sufficient power is incomplete (has a true but unprovable statement). Now let |—, and T-con read ‘provability’, ‘implies’ and ‘T is consistent, respectively. Then (1) T-con É G (1^st theorem) (2) |— T-con É |— G (rule: (AÉB) É (|— AÉ|—B)) (3) ~|— G (1^st theorem) (4) ~|— T-con (from 2, 3, modus tollens). In other words if (a system of sufficient power) T is consistent, its consistency cannot be proved in T. This is the second incompleteness theorem. Thus not only are there some truths that can never be proved or disproved, even by enhancing a T of sufficient power (e.g. arithmetic) (consistently), any our confidence in a given T cannot be perfect. In other words, the age old ideals of completeness and perfection of any sufficiently powerful system are destroyed by Gödel’s theorems. I still other words, arithmetic is so complex that no system that captures part of its essence can be complete or capture its own consistency

85 Since the uses of ‘cause’ are so widespread there is bound to be con-fusion of meaning. Aristotle considered four causes of which the efficient cause is the closest to the modern extant meaning. In Aristotle’s use the efficient cause is the source of motion or rest. It has been observed that presence of an efficient cause for motion, e.g. of a table, does not necessitate motion of the table. Therefore efficient cause is not sufficient cause for the being of the object (the table). However, the motion of the object and the object are not the same thing; and the sufficient cause for the motion of the object is the sum of the efficient causes which lie in a different category from the sufficient cause for the being of the object

86 To think that origin is function is an example of what is called the ‘genetic fallacy’

87 The words we use of course have a meaning that lies at least in part in intuition. This is necessary in the growth of mathematics and in learning. Later, with maturity, axiomatization enables transcending this intuitive aspect and so entering into a fully symbolic realm where full clarity and certainty seem achievable

88 Poincaré's account of his own creativity in The Foundations of Science, 1908 is an interesting example of the role of the unconscious in creativity

89 It is paradigm as well as meta-paradigm

90 In long versions of the essay, physical cosmology will be considered in Chapter World

91 Note to John McManus

92 Since materialism is a dominant paradigm the options are to reject mind or to live with the contradiction it entails

93 Indeterminism of course would not imply completeness

94 The risks include doubts regarding the metaphysics

95 Regard God as a great or Limitless power. If an atheism is knowledge that there is no God of any particular kind, there are no rational atheists. If theism is knowledge that there is a God of some particular kind in our cosmos, there are no rational theists. If an agnostic says that it is impossible to know God or the non-existence of God there are no rational agnostics. It is desirable to dissociate the ideas of God and belief

96 I.e. the dominant secular view amounts to ontological but not epistemological reduction to the physical

97 These emphases will be occasion for brief consideration of some topics from the sciences, and the arts and humanities, and religion

98 This is of course not at all a new idea. However the idea has come to acquire some negative connotations. In this essay we use it with a specific meaning

99 Universal or main phases

100 Local or secondary phases

101 With sufficiently flexible interpretation, perception=conceptionÉemotion

102 Psycho-physical is mind-body or simply Body or Being

103 Tantra has many manifestations in Indian and Tibetan practice. Here it will mean Chöd in the sense of embrace of Being without qualification, especially the aspects we tend to avoid—which results in avoidance of all Being—e.g., fear, disgust, transitoriness

104 Dynamics of Being

105 This process is reflexive. At a low level the adjustments may be intuitive guesses or perhaps even random. However, the modified outcome now suggests how to adjust. If the ideas have incompleteness, this process is one input toward enhancement or correction and the corrected ideas suggest new action or adjustments to action

106 Identification of Realism and Logic is discussed earlier. Here realism concerns the problem of action and risk

107 Existenz—Jasper’s term meaning philosophical thinking that might elucidate the meaning of human experience and existence;… note that the term ‘philosophical’ is unnecessary

108 The issue requires care. It can be killed by pedantry. It may become morbid via projection of an inherited or obsessive morbidity. It is significant, though, that one approach to light is to not avoid exposure to morbidity, as in abreaction—reliving—and exposure therapies … to embrace it as in the Tantric practice of Chöd. It may, in an excessive or inopportune approach, displace joy. Death is part of life and as such may be experienced as a crisis. As for most crises, the pressure and pain may be real. However, there is an opportunity to bend rather than break; an opportunity to relearn and advance our aims. There is an element of chance in crises. We do not predict them. They come as a surprise, as a jolt even when we are prepared by understanding the nature of crisis and by having survived before. Every crisis is an opportunity from which we may learn not only life but also resilience. And there is no reason that in teaching life we should not give some attention to the meaning of crises

109 Completion is more than cognitive and emotional closure. There are situations where the best completion is such closure

110 Accommodation should perhaps be occasional rather than one time, casual rather than heavy, brief rather than lengthy, and incomplete for it may never be complete

111 Induction involves but is more than mere generalization

112 ‘Hypothetico-deductive’

113 Great seer

INTRODUCTION

A Worldview

IDEAS

Being

Problems Similar to those of Existence

Universe

Possibility and Actuality

Universe

Metaphysics

The meaning of ‘Limit’

Conceptual Realism46

Logic69

Realism

Logos

Religion

Discussion and Conclusion

Objects

Applied Metaphysics

Relationship Between Logic, logic, and Science

Method and Meaning

Cosmology

General Cosmology

Space, Time, and Matter

Conceptual Realism 46

Logic 69