The way of being Anil Mitra, Copyright © August 24, 2021, rev February 11, 2022 Contents introduction >> the aim of the way > our world > being > reasons > laws > universe >> the greatest universe > the fundamental principle of metaphysics > cosmology of limitless identity > pathways > the real metaphysics >> the way aim of the way >> this division >> origins > destinations > meaning >> this edition—‘bare content’* >> the ‘very bare content edition’ >> development being and beings > being, foundations, and grounding > concept meaning, knowledge, logic, and science > kinds and varieties of being > possibility and laws of nature > reasons > the universe and the void >> introduction to the fundamental principle of metaphysics > existence of the void > the fundamental principle > consistency of the principle >> the ultimate introduction >> metaphysics > the real metaphysics > consistency of the real metaphysics > doubt and attitude >> experience and significant meaning > universe as field of being >> dimensions of being > metaphysics, cosmology, and physics > about religion >> the range of metaphysical thought* the concept of cosmology >> general cosmology > cosmology of form > kinds of ‘cosmos’ > our cosmos >> dimensions of being introduction >> the meaning of reason > developing reason for the way > what the foundation in reason says >> on reason and meaning* > reason in general* aim of being > paths > ways >> introduction to the path templates > design of the templates > every-day template > dedication > affirmation > universal template > the instrumental vs the intrinsic >> return to the world concepts >> concepts—details* >> resources > resource system >> resource system—details* >> general resources >> general resources—details* >> knowledge resources >> knowledge resources—detail* >> developing and executing the way* > development of the way as a resource* > reference* preview > about the way > being > metaphysics > cosmology* > reason > pathways > resources
previewin the preview, dark font shows a summary or key statement introductionthe preview is a rapid overview of the way; the whole view is the narrative, p. 3 quick viewthe universe is shown to be limitless; therefore, all beings realize its power; the process of realization begins in the immediate, is given for all beings, though not in any particular life; thus, it is imperative to follow a path to the ultimate; while paths are developed in ‘the way’, to be on a path is not just to follow, but share in the intelligent development of paths and negotiation of the way core materialthe core of preliminary understanding is the aim of the way, p. 4; a quick assessment of our world, p. 4, in terms of the aim; the cosmology of limitless identity, p. 7, which describes what will be achieved; pathways, p. 7, which is about the practical ‘how’ of achievement; and the way, p. 8, which is the essence of the process the remain sections of the preview, elaborate and deepen preliminary understanding and are essential to effective realization of the aim of the way foundationthe foundation is in the sections being, p. 5, through universe, p. 6 principlesthe essential conclusion from the foundation, the fundamental principle of metaphysics, p. 7, is demonstrated in the greatest universe, p. 6; though the demonstration may be omitted on superficial reading, it is included because it is essential to deep understanding of the way the fundamental principle is abstract—it shows what will be achieved, but not how; the real metaphysics, p. 8, which provides the how of achievement, is a pragmatic enhancement of the fundamental principle, enhanced by synthesis with concrete knowledge conceptsultimate achievement, dogma, secularism, transsecularism, a being (plural: beings), being, a reason (plural: reasons, related to but distinct from ‘reason’), kind of reason (necessary, logic, argument, unconditional, independent, null, absolute), law, universe, the void, creator, existence, fundamental principle of metaphysics, identity, peak being, the individual, death (is real but not absolute), pleasure, pain, enjoyment, path to the ultimate, therapy, imperative, sharing, experience (in the sense of awareness), meditation, the body, material world, science, the sciences—concrete and abstract, technology, the arts, the humanities, yoga the aim of the waythe aim of the way is shared discovery and realization of the ultimate in and from the immediate our worldwhat is our feasible and ultimate achievement? two common dogmas and their opposition limit our views and progress—(i) that experiential or scientific secularism reveals the universe (ii) religious and other transsecular dogmas what is the way forward? beinga being is that which can have a direct or indirect effect on awareness; being is the characteristic of beings if a being is defined with limited concrete detail (i.e., abstraction), it may be known perfectly; other beings are known pragmatically (usefully) reasonsa reason is a cause in the most general sense; if what is caused is certain the reason is called necessary; if a state holds unconditionally, it is necessary with the null reason or, in other words, without a reason if, given A, then B obtains with some degree of certainty, then A is called a reason for B; B is a state of being; A is more general and may be an argument; thus, reasons are not restricted to physical or temporal causes; the state B, is more general than ‘effect’ and need not follow A in time; if the outcome is certain, the reason is necessary; if the reason is another being or state of being, the reason is ‘real’, e.g., physical; but if A is conceptual, e.g., an argument that is independent of the state or nature of the universe; a conceptual reason that is necessary is logical note—an argument is establishment of a conclusion by (i) establishing a premise or ‘base fact’ (ii) inferring the conclusion from the premise (if the inference is necessary, e.g., deductively correct, the argument is called ‘valid’ and if, in addition, the premise is true, the argument is called ‘sound’) if existence of a being or a state of being is unconditional (i.e., if there are no circumstances in which it does not obtain), it is necessary; and its necessity must be dependent on another or not dependent; if independent, the reason would be a ‘self’ reason, with or without content; in the latter case it may be called null; can a reason be null and necessary (an absolute reason)? though it might seem absurd, it is not—as will be seen in the greatest universe, p. 6 lawsa law is a reading of a pattern (e.g., in our cosmos); the term ‘law’ will refer to the pattern; laws are immanent in the being, e.g., of the cosmos, and therefore have being—i.e., laws are beings universethe universe is all being; the void is the being that contains no beings the creator of a being is another being that causes its being (existence); for the universe, there is no other being—therefore the universe has no creator the greatest universein this section, it is shown that every possible state must obtain somewhere and when in the universe the proof below shows that a reason may be absolute (necessary and null); it may be conceptually difficult; if readers are not interested in the proof, it may be passed over to the conclusion, the fundamental principle, p. 7, (the main narrative has alternate proofs, heuristics, and discussion of doubt) and attitudes to the fundamental principle if the universe is eternal, its existence is unconditional and so necessary with the null reason; by symmetry, therefore, every possible being exists somewhere and when in the universe; and the possibility must be the least restrictive or greatest possibility; since possibility inherent in things is contingent, the possibility must be logical on the other hand, if the (manifest) universe is not eternal, it must enter the void state, then every possible being must emerge from the void—for the contrary would be a law of the void; and, again, every possible being must exist somewhere in the universe the fundamental principle of metaphysicsthe universe is the greatest possible (this statement is called the fundamental principle of metaphysics); that is, every possible state obtains somewhere and when in the universe therefore, the universe phases between the void and the manifest; as it is derived from perfect (abstract) and necessary ideas, the principle is perfectly known cosmology of limitless identitythe universe, which has identity, is limitless; all beings realize this ultimate in elaboration—the universe has identity; the universe and its identity are limitless in variety, extension, and peak of being (which includes any gods, but requires that the concept of ‘god’ must be very different from most of our conceptions); every peak has a dissolution; yet the void has recollection of identities; there are arrays of cosmoses limitless in magnitude, number, arrangement, and kind of physical law; all beings—individuals—inherit the power of the universe for the contrary would be a limit on the universe (that two beings inherit the power of the universe is not a contradiction, for if the peak is local, the inheritance need not be at the same time; and if the peak is absolute, the beings merge as they inherit the power); and death is real but not absolute pathwaysif enjoyment is a value, it is imperative to be on an intelligent path to the ultimate pleasure and pain are unavoidable; enjoyment is the appreciation of pleasure and pain; there are intelligent paths to the ultimate—paths in which enjoyment is optimized and which begin in the immediate world; pain is not to be avoided—its best resolution is a combination of therapy and being on a path, pleasure is good when it is pleasure in being on the way, i.e., not merely for its own sake; to be on a path is desirable (‘imperative’) to the degree that enjoyment is a value; to be on a path is not to avoid this world—paths begin in the world; to be on a path is not merely to follow but to share in understanding, and pathways, and their development the real metaphysicsthe fundamental principle, p. 7, shows what is possible but not how to achieve it; the ‘how’ is presented in the main narrative (i) in terms of a real metaphysics, p. 27, that is a join of perfect and pragmatic knowledge that is perfect relative to values revealed by the perfect and (ii) pathways, p. 46, to the ultimate and path templates, p. 49 the waythe core of the way subsumes what is valid in human culture, seen in light of the fundamental principle, which, in turn, is subsumed under an enhanced concept of yoga in the way, ‘experience’ will refer to awareness in all its forms (readers who have questions about experience in this sense are referred to experience and significant meaning, p. 29) where the paradigm of materialism holds sway, experience is often thought of as having lesser importance and a lower grade of the real—or even not real at all however, experience will be seen as ultimately real, as the place of all significance (though of course not of all that is significant), the place of all language and concept meaning—and of knowledge; experience will be found to be the place of our being and of the real thus, meditation is essential in the process and place of realization; this, however, does not minimize the role of our bodies or the ‘material world’, for they are real places in experience; therefore, effective meditation requires attention to the body and various aspects of the material and the secular world, e.g., science, the concrete sciences—natural, social (such as politics and economics), and ‘applied’—and technology, the abstract sciences (which include mathematics), the arts (including literature), and the humanities (which include philosophy, history, and true religion and its understanding); all this may be subsumed under an enhanced concept of yoga about the wayto know and realize the real aim of the wayconceptsaim of the way contentthe aim of the way is shared discovery and realization of the ultimate in and from the immediate; the aim of the way is shown to be aim of being, p. 47 the way is intended as a contribution to understanding of and living in the world; it builds on historical sources, but is not a compendium or representation of them; it is not intended as a textbook this divisionan informal division—‘prologue’; formal discussion is in divisions being, p. 13, through pathways, p. 44, (pathways > section return to the world, p. 52, is also informal) originsconceptsorigins, significant meaning (‘meaning of life’), becoming; sources—ideas and action—history and individual experience contentorigins of the way are in pursuit of significant meaning (roughly, the ‘meaning of life’) and becoming in the immediate and beyond; in finding order amid chaos, permanence amid transience; the aim of the way is the aim of being, p. 47; sources of the way are in ideas and action—their history and individual experience, see resources, p. 53 destinationsconceptsdestinations, the ultimate, the present or the immediate, the real metaphysics contentwhat is our destination? it is found that while we approach and arrive at the ultimate in some ways, we remain in the present or immediate—this is both good and true; in approaching the ultimate, the paradigm of the way, named the real metaphysics, p. 27, goes beyond common received paradigms—it shows the nature of the ultimate and that it is achieved; this and that it may take effort to bridge the paradigm gap will aid understanding the work meaning‘meaning’ will be used in two senses—(i) ‘significant meaning’, p. 29, and (ii) word and concept meaning, p. 16; in this section, meaning has the latter sense conceptsconsensus experience, concept meaning (‘linguistic’) contentthis is a preliminary discussion—for more, see concept meaning, knowledge, logic, and science, p. 16; in approaching the ultimate, the way moves beyond received or consensus experience in an essential way, and so word and concept meanings (aspects of linguistic meaning) must change; therefore, attention should be paid to the meanings given here; but what of received meanings? naturally, to be recognizable, new meanings have continuity though not identity with the old understanding the text*while attending to given meanings, it will be useful to temporarily suspend received meanings and to note but not be upheld by criticism, which may then be taken up as intuition of the paradigm of the text is built; subsequently, received meanings may enrich understanding of the world seen through the lens of the new paradigm concepts are treated at more than one level*pre and post metaphysics—aim and destiny, foundations, being—what objects and kinds have being, experience (its interpretations and dimensions), logic (process vs theory of the universe, a logic as the theory of a mode of expression, logic as covering the logics and the sciences—abstract and concrete), reason, free will levels of detail and sophistication—minimal (field manual, common reader), significant (academic, agent) perfect vs pragmatic final vs tentative this edition—‘bare content’*the document is a skeletal framework for the way and a source for other versions—(i) a final long version of essentials and elaborations and (ii) a ‘very bare content’ edition sections marked with a star* and their starred or unstarred subsections are not for inclusion in the brief, very bare content.html, version; such sections are at various stages of development the ‘very bare content edition’making the very bare edition*all the content for this edition is unstarred at all levels; when making the very bare edition from the bare edition (i) eliminate all starred sections (ii) eliminate subtitles ‘concepts’ and ‘content’; place concepts in the final concepts division conceptsimagination, originality, foundation, self-foundation, axiomatic approach, informal vs formal development, application, introduction, preview, principles of organization, flow of ideas, motive, explanation contentinitial development is informal, imaginative, and, in building on and going beyond sources, it aims at originality; as far as possible, the work would be self-founding; for this an exclusively axiomatic approach is inadvisable—foundation may best occur after significant informal and semi-formal development but before formal development and application; foundation is found in reason, p. 35; for rigor, origins, ground in history (in this edition, treatment of a number of pertinent problems of thought, particularly of philosophy, by incorporation or resolution, is implicit), elaboration, application, and consequences, follow resources, p. 53 this edition has no further introduction or preview; its main principles of organization and flow of ideas are not external to the work and its development, but, rather, are inherent in it; they are informal (development of the metaphysics from its intuitive origins to the formal outcome so far, which is reflected in this division, about the way, beginning above, p. 3; and the arrangement of the text, reflected in the contents, p. 1) and formal (metaphysics, p. 26, particularly the real metaphysics, p. 27; and reason, p. 35); there is some motive and explanation above, but since motive may be slanting, the main motivation is the development, especially in the fundamental principle, p. 22, through metaphysics, p. 26; see resources, p. 53, for explicit introductory and explanatory material developmentintroduction*most of the material in this section is temporary; also use plan.html; when what remains is permanent, then, since the way should not refer beyond itself, the material may be placed in one of the divisions, pathways, p. 46, through resources, p. 54 conceptsno concepts introduced before “in-the-world”*i. Do essentials; move rest to “in the world” ii. Main statements; perhaps for use in mini; perhaps only for preview iii. Revise iv. Format the secondary material in an effective and consistent manner v. redo the concepts division, using the concepts sections in the main narrative as source in-the-world, i.e., the fieldi. streamline the material; add missing material from resource documents—see plan ii. New words—res for ‘being’, a res for ‘a being’, logical causes for reasons, entire for ‘universe’, the absence for the void… select a list of main concepts for which to do this
beingto be real being and beingsconceptsbeing (the verb to be), a being (plural—‘beings’), characteristic contentbeing is existence—the quality of that which is validly described by combinations of possible forms of the verb to be; a being is that which has being (noun, plural—‘beings’); knowledge is implicit in the concept of being—an improved an improved characterization is given in experience and significant meaning, p. 29 the definition of being, implies that there is being, for if there were not, these deliberations, even if illusory, would not be; and, since knowledge of being, even if illusory, requires distinctions, there are beings being—neutrality and criticism*neutrality of the concept of beingthe neutrality is manifest in the definition and is essential to its use below; it is neutral to kinds and varieties of being, p. 17; the concept of being will be developed as neutral even to manifestation vs non-manifestation criticism of the concept of beingit has been criticized as being trivial, not even a concept; however, it is the trivial concept that makes no distinction; and this, as will be seen, is essential to its power the problem of negative existentials—“if an object does not exist, what is it that does not exist?”—is trivially resolved by analysis of meaning, p. 16, for a being is specified by the concept, and “the being does not exist” is strictly senseless but can be given the meaning “the concept of the being has no referent being, foundations, and groundingconceptsfoundation, grounding, anthropomorphism, cosmomorphism contentthis raises concerns (i) significance of ‘being’, especially for foundation and grounding of the individual in the world for foundation, see reason, p. 35 (it is essential that our intelligence, p. 47, and experientiality, p. 29, are means of discovery of being and that they are important examples of being; to not do so would be, roughly, a narrowness of perspective that would lead to an erroneous materialism, p. 31; however our kind and knowledge of being should not be mistaken as templates for all being, for this would be the errors of anthropomorphism and ‘cosmomorphism’, i.e., universe in the image of man or of our empirical cosmos) (ii) what existence is (‘what it is’ means ‘what it is in terms of another category such as mind or matter’ which is found unnecessary for being sufficient for foundation and grounding, while foundation in terms of mind or matter, would be confusing as they are incompletely known), (iii) whether existence and being are identical (though existence is sometimes thought of as ‘being in relation’, being itself is essentially relational; thus existence and being are identical and it is not necessary to introduce existence as a distinct concept) (iv) whether existence and being are elusive (they are elusive when seen as detached from knowing beings—but we find that such detached foundation, though appealing as objective, is impossible and unnecessary); for such considerations for all concepts of the narrative, follow the resources, p. 53 on foundations*foundationalisma basis for truth of assertions why foundationof assertions, we want to know their truth and, therefore of reasons for truth assertions may be ‘single’ facts and theories of things and values, we want to know their ‘kind’ and reasons, and whether things and values are distinct of our own being, we want to know its nature, place in the world—the scheme of things, its significant meaning, and potency for becoming the how of foundationsan assertion is known true (a) directly (‘understanding’) (b) inferentially (‘reason’) and therefore (at least seemingly) depends on some statement known true foundations—classificationneutralregress pragmatism transience cartesian skepticism coherentism negativeanti-foundationalism pyrrhonian skepticism positivesubstance what (positive) ‘depth’ pro, con alternatives being the foundational character of being is that, unlike substance, it is not a posit; it is the unknown of a metaphysical algebra; and the power, then, is it allows and levers unfolding of metaphysics as study of the real and, further, since being is ‘that which is’, as study of the immediate and the ultimate being is optimally foundational relative to metaphysics, epistemology, values, and existenz; in plain terms— being is the best foundation for the real, for knowledge, for values, and for being authentic on substancesubstance theory is rejected, but taken up as an aid to analysis of the place of experience in the world; as it was earlier taken up to showing being as truly fundamental a substance is a particular that exists independently of other beings thus, substances may found the existence of all beings on ontologically independent beings and if the behavior of all substances can be described and known, so can that of all beings (in principle)—i.e., substance would be epistemically founding in this role, substances are (i) unchanging, for if changing indeterministically, they are not epistemically founding, and otherwise they are reducible to the unchanging (ii) describable (simply) in their being and changes (iii) non-interacting, for if interacting and describable they are reducible to one substance (iii) but one in number if ontological independence includes causal independence, only self-caused entities like Spinoza’s God can be substances; though this can be gotten around (the void is self-caused), it is an unnecessary sophistication—and from its complexity and power, Spinoza’s God is unfounded, as are all substances shortfalls of substance are (i) a substance is a posit (ii) a substance is inadequate to variety and, most definitely, to possibilism (iii) in the dualist case, substances do not interact dualist foundation is incoherent; substance foundation must be monist a strict material cosmos is one in which matter is the only substance and experience (‘mind’) is no part of matter therefore, our cosmos cannot be a strictly material cosmos; it is at least approximately substance, but the substance must be experiential—and as experiential to have form and change which is experienced as ‘material’; but this is no foundation because as a strict monist world there is no explanation of its being a possibilist cosmos is one in which the greatest possibility is realized in a possibilist cosmos, experientiality may reach down to the root it is later seen that the universe is possibilist being is experiential-relational, where the experientiality down to the root is of the same kind as conscious awareness but of lower degree; and also extends up to the greatest being (whether an actual being or an open hierarchy) how is being itself knownfrom the concept, to be being it must be knowable; and the known beings are beings; but the question of ‘how’ remains ontology defines the study the study of being note—much of the development above and below is ontology relation to metaphysics— metaphysics is study of the real as it is (pragmatic metaphysics may be admitted) and includes the question of the nature of the real (admitting that in that there is nothing more real than the real, there may be no ‘nature’ of it, beyond that which is known to be known—perfectly or pragmatically) ontology, a branch of metaphysics, deals with being—what it is, its nature, its characteristics, its Form (form-formation) … abstraction to abstract is to delete some details from a concept either to focus on the essential or to leave only the undistorted or ‘perfect’ thus, objects may be labeled ‘abstract’ or ‘concrete’, but lie on a continuum—are not fundamentally or ‘metaphysically’ distinct; thus ‘abstract’ means neither ‘abstruse’ nor ‘remote’—but is most real and most immediate the abstract is often defined via free, especially linguistic, concepts (‘concepts’) and the concrete by bound concepts (‘percepts’), which renders the abstract suitable for correspondence perfection and the concrete inclined to pragmatic sufficiency later we develop a join of the perfect and the pragmatic in a real metaphysics that is perfect in a way that will be defined the abstract inhabits the concrete; the concrete populates the abstract abstraction enables perfect knowledge, e.g.— “there is being”; and— abstracts this shows the power of the concept of being pragmatics if a concept pragmatically identifies an object characteristics of beingthe characteristics specify what the referent, in this case of ‘being’, is existence, be-ing defining, but not another concept—ostensive, because fundamental real removes ‘mystery’ regarding what is real—given that something has being, there is no further question of its reality (e.g., is it material, is it transcendent…) … but does not remove the experience of the real as mystery there is of course the question of how being-hood is determined, and this is taken up in considering experience, below experientiality a general characteristic in that being is essentially experiential; the meaning and truth of this assertion are treated beginning with the section on experience below a hierarchy of experiential being is described in the section on kinds and varieties below interaction power power is the capacity for interaction—i.e., to enter into cause and effect, including self-cause and self-effect the being that has no power at all does not exist a being that has no power, direct or secondary, on a knower, cannot be known by the knower the following employs the meaning of experience given later—a being that has no direct or secondary effect on a knower’s experience, cannot be known by the knower power is a measure of being a generalization of the concept of power is that of a reason (distinct from reason) a need for this generalization is the fact that it is conceivable that there are states of being that have reasons for their being that are not ‘material beings’ just above ‘may be’ ought to have been used instead of ‘are’, but we will later justify use of ‘are’ power and experience experience is interaction, seems to be but a case of interaction, but interaction will be found to be essentially experiential reasons a reason is that which has entailment in the world; power is a case of reasons state a set of characteristics (properties) in terms of which a being is partially or fully known form the knowable characteristics of a being all beings have extensional form—which entails spatiality, i.e., which specifies spatiality rather than fitting an otherwise conceived notion of spatiality exception—the void or absence of manifest being similarly, if the ‘material’ is to have an ontological meaning, it ought not to be sought in the ‘physical’; rather it ought to be sought in form—e.g., occupying space, or having power (see below) non-durational, changeless, or static form is conceivable, therefore logically possible; later we will see that the logically possible is realized, therefore there are static cosmoses, which are of limited significance and cannot support sentient beings while change is not entailed by form alone, it will be seen to be entailed by experience; and change is an aspect of formation which is entailed by the fundamental principle of metaphysics, demonstrated later formation may be seen as an aspect of form; it entails temporality there is no third form related characteristic beyond form and formation—i.e., no third kind of coordinate beyond space and time (but a world with two measures of time is not logically impossible), abstract or concrete, except, perhaps, the absence of form and formation sometimes ‘form’ will refer only to extensional or spatial form; thus, we could write Form, which has aspects of form and formation becoming becoming, e.g., origins and change, where there are any, entails duration—immanent temporality thus, being includes becoming, action, relation… non-characteristics of beingI.e., characteristics as sometimes conceived but not as conceived here “what being is not”—some other uses of ‘being’ being does not refer specifically to the special—e.g., ‘higher’, ‘spiritual’ – or ‘material’, ‘essential’, ‘independent be-ing’, ‘human’, ‘sentient’… includes these modes, as far as real—i.e., though being is neutral to these non-characteristics they may lie within or constitute sub-divisions within being concept meaning, knowledge, logic, and scienceconceptscontentif what a referential concept refers to is in the world (for example, effective in its change which includes maintaining the world as it is), what it refers to is a being let us consider conditions for a concept to refer; an iconic (picture like)-concept-with-associated-simple-or-compound-sign (e.g., linguistic, i.e., in terms of language), constitute a symbol or concept-symbol; the symbol and its possible referents—existents—constitute meaning (“of the sign, symbol, or concept”); note that even in the known, there is no fixity of meaning—in moving into the unknown, meaning must ‘grow’ (and as noted by A.N. Whitehead, precision and fixity are possible only on the basis of a definite metaphysics) and that here we are not concerned with the issue of precision which is take up and resolved later in the real metaphysics, p. 27, (whose system of meaning and knowledge was arrived at by trial and error—and then shown to be perfect; as noted earlier, to follow the narrative, it is essential to follow meanings as stated) we continue to consider conditions for a concept to refer; meaning realized is knowledge; a concept may fail to refer (i) when its structure does not permit reference at all—rules for form of structures that do not inherently rule out reference constitute logic and the absence of reference is necessary, (ii) when reference is possible but it does not refer and the absence of reference is contingent, i.e., on account of the structure or the world, the constraints on reference are factual, i.e., science; thus logic and science constitute knowledge (this does not imply that our logics and sciences and their methods and methodologies are proper logics or sciences or that they are the only logics or sciences—e.g., under these conceptions, it will be found that art and value fall under knowledge); thus the central concern with reason includes concern with art, feeling or emotion, and value; this discussion is revisited and repeated later in what the foundation in reason says, p. 43 kinds and varieties of beingconceptskind, correspondence (this concept and the next concern the nature and criterion for validity of knowledge), pragmatic contentin contrast to the use of some thinkers, here ‘being’ is neutral to the richness and depth of being-in-the-world; as noted, this is its conceptual strength; here, kinds and varieties of being are container for depth and richness the following is a list of examples and kinds of beings (as far as not illusory), which may be passed over on casual reading; development of kinds and varieties continues beyond this section reasons—see below, p. 19, power, p. 20; sentient or experiential beings, p. 29; facts (including fact of existence or being), states of affairs or being, events, objects, processes, interactions (i.e. cases of power; relations); laws (and patterns as defined below)—i.e., laws of nature; abstractions from beings, p. 41—i.e., by removal of aspects of the concept, being itself, objects anywhere on a concrete-abstract continua, beings known perfectly or pragmatically (tentatively conceive perfect knowledge as the case when the concept is faithful to the object, which is roughly, a correspondence criterion, and pragmatic knowledge as good enough for purposes at hand; these notions will later be improved upon); ideas, concepts including linguistic concepts, signs, letters of alphabets, parts of speech, clauses, sentences and other linguistic constructs, universals (e.g., redness, which is universal to all red existents), particulars (e.g., a red ball), tropes (e.g., the redness of a red ball); beings as defined in the universe and the void, p. 20—the universe, creators, the void, and a cosmos enumerating beings and kinds of being*principles of validityif knowledge is not illusory, it specifies a being following Cartesian methodology, some knowledge is shown to be ‘real’ once the real metaphysics, p. 27, is shown, its entire knowledge system is seen to be valid—i.e., perfect in the sense to be specified there principles of enumerationΣ other sites: (i) Mereology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (ii) Mereology - Wikipedia briefly, the development of the metaphysics itself; beings vs kinds; build-up from sameness, difference, identity to a cosmos and the universe; abstract-concrete continuum, and form (as form and formation); part, whole, and null; power and reasons; experiential beings—intelligent, feeling, agents (free will), to gods (remote vs immanent, separate vs immersive, to Brahman) and creators (the universe has no material creator); actual vs possible possible beingthe reality status of ‘possible being’ and examples of possible beings are discussed below greatest conceivable (logical) real (natural, experiential, universal) possibility and laws of natureconceptspossible being, pattern, law of nature, law, cosmos, necessary logic, logical possibility contenta possible being is one whose concept alone does not rule out its existence; as in the ultimate, p. 25—peak being(s), individuals; a necessary being is one whose concept alone requires existence (since existence of manifest being does not seem intrinsically necessary, it would seem that there are no necessary beings; however, we will find in the fundamental principle, p. 22 that there are necessary beings) a pattern for a being obtains when the data to specify the being is less than the raw data a law of nature or just law is a pattern that is identified as important, e.g., for a cosmos (an informal concept—defined, e.g., by coherent form and characterized by a system of laws of nature) a law does not rule out existence of a possible being, for the being could exist in another cosmos in repetition of an earlier assertion—that which rules out possibility altogether is named necessary or deductive logic as defined above, possibility is logical possibility; it is the greatest or least restrictive real possibility reasonsconceptsexplanation (general), a reason (noun, plural—‘reasons’), logical reasons, possibility, probability, explanation (explanatory reason), necessity, material reasons, power, material cause, self-cause contenta cause is commonly thought of as something that results in something else; yet, when we read cause-effect, it is done on the basis of analogy (human effort), correlation, or underlying theory (e.g., scientific, which always has an element of hypothesis); it lacks validity to entirely eliminate observation or interpretation as a variable in the fact or nature of causation; however, we can subsume cause and interpretation of the world as having causality under the idea of explanation, especially explanatory mechanism a reason is an explanation examples of reasons—reasons for existence of a being, e.g., or any of the examples of beings above categorizations of reason include (i) logical, recognized in thought but of the real—possible, likely (probable as well as explanatory), and necessary (ii) material, recognized as of the world—power—i.e., material cause (and effect), also called effective cause or just cause, including self-cause (the concept or a reason generalizes that of power) the universe and the voidconceptsuniverse, creator, the void contentthe universe is all being the definition of the universe requires its existence (given that there is being) a creator for a being is the effective cause of its existence the universe cannot have a creator but may have a reason for its existence—and since it is clearly possible and probable, the only reason worth consideration is a necessary reason the void is the absence of being the definition of the void does not entail its existence introduction to the fundamental principle of metaphysicsconceptsno concepts introduced contentthe fundamental principle is the central result that shows (i) the universe to be the realization of the greatest possibility and (ii) so to be greater than in the standard secular-scientific and transsecular views; the principle is a consequence of existence of the void, which is now shown; the abbreviation FP will be used for the principle existence of the voidconceptsdeterminism, indeterminism contentthough ‘metaphysics’ has not yet been defined, the foregoing development beginning with being, p. 13, is part of the metaphysics of the narrative; the material so far has been metaphysically self-evident; the demonstration of existence of the void is, however, an ontological argument (i.e., it derives from the nature of being), regarding which issues are raised and addressed below and in doubt and attitude, p. 28 given a being, the void is there with the being, therefore the void exists; heuristically, the existence and non-existence of the void are equivalent; also heuristically, since the void joined to a being is the being, the void is there with all beings the void contains no beings; particularly, it contains no laws; therefore— if from the void, there is a possible being that does not emerge, that would be a law of nature all possible beings emerge from the void; this entails that the universe and its parts are mixes of determinism (a part, often but not necessarily a temporal slice, determines the whole) and indeterminism the fundamental principleconceptsthe fundamental principle of metaphysics, the principle of plenitude, manifestation contentthe universe is the realization of (the greatest) possibility (i.e., of logical possibility) since proof of existence of the void was ontological, therefore the proof of the fundamental principle is also ontological because there will be doubt about these proofs, an alternate proof and supporting heuristics are presented here; later, we present doubt and alternative attitudes, p. 28, to the fundamental principle and its consequences that the universe is the realization of the greatest possibility is named the fundamental principle of metaphysics (abbreviated fp); this idea appears in the history of thought under the name, e.g., the principle of plenitude; what is new here is the proof and development of the meaning and application of the principle equivalently, the universe is limitless; which refers to more than limitlessness in space and time, but also to kinds of extension (e.g., space and time), and ‘things’—i.e., if a being is possible, i.e., if its concept does not violate logic, the being exists in the universe at least once (and as many times and places as not ruled out by possibility) the manifest existence of the universe is necessary; the universe necessarily phases between manifest and void being alternate proofs and heuristics for the fundamental principle*alternate proof (i)—whatever is unconditional (e.g., eternal), is necessary; and if the being—manifestation—of the universe is necessary given that there is, it must be so for the null reason the unconditional and necessary are the same (the unconditional non-occurrence and the impossible are the same); if unconditional non-manifestation of the universe were possible, it would be actual; but that is contradicted by the manifest manifestation; so, the universe is necessarily manifest at least once; but by symmetry of unconditional necessity, if one possibility occurs, all possibilities must occur (this is in fact also an ontological proof); this can be stated simply; now, since all states are possible, exclusive being in any limited state is impossible; hence the realization of the greatest possibility; though in the form of proof, just as for the first ontological proof above, there ought to be doubt; an improved form of this proof follows alternate proof (ii)—that which is unconditional (e.g., eternal), is necessary; if the existence of the universe is unconditional, the necessary reason must be the null reason, for there is nothing outside or beyond the universe; now consider the premise: the universe never enters the void state; it follows that the manifest being of the universe is necessary; which must be a null reason; and, by symmetry of the null reason, the universe must visit every (logically) possible state; which includes the void state—which is a contradiction (of the premise) and therefore the premise is not true; i.e., the universe does enter the void state; and now the fundamental principle follows without assumption of existence of the void; this, too, is ontological, but doubt, if not eliminated is significantly lessened (but remains regarding the unconditional being necessary, the null-ness of the reason for the being of the universe, and the symmetry of the null reason) alternate proof (iii)—a variation on proof ii, which is currently presented in the preview—the universe is (a) eternal or (b) enters a void state; if (a) eternal, its existence is unconditional, therefore necessary with the null reason, i.e., absolute as defined in the preview; from symmetry of that reason, every possible state must be realized; if (b) it enters the void state, the main proof earlier counts as showing the fundamental principle; since (a) and (b) are exhaustive, the principle is proved; note that if every possible state is realized, the void is realized, which may seem to contradict the assumption that the universe is eternal but does not since the void exists heuristic argument (i)—the heuristics in existence of the void, p. 21 heuristic argument (ii)—since the picture of the known part of the universe (the cosmos) is empirical (data and their induced patterns or theories), that all logical possibilities are realized somewhere and when in the universe is consistent with reason; the magnitude of this possibility space is immense and it is therefore immensely unlikely, i.e., the probability is negligible, that the universe is not endlessly greater (in terms of realized states) than the cosmos; of course, this is heuristic because the ‘possibility set’ is not known to be an actual set heuristic argument (iii)—consider the next fundamental theory of physics—it can be guessed at; but subsequent theories become harder and harder to guess; however, the limit of all theories requires no guess—it is logical possibility heuristic argument (iv)—possibility and actuality are distinct relative to limited contexts: for the universe possibility and actuality are identical; but actuality for the universe is real possibility; therefore, real possibility is the greatest possibility; it does not follow but it does suggest that this greatest possibility is what is recognized as logical possibility consistency of the principleconceptsno concepts introduced contentthe principle is clearly logically consistent, but is it consistent with science? as it is efficient to do so, consistency with science will be shown in consistency of the real metaphysics, p. 28—except, note: that we do not see all possibility in our cosmos is not a contradiction, for our cosmos is not the universe the ultimateconceptsidentity, cosmology of identity, peak being, the ultimate, the individual, realization, death contentidentity is sense of sameness of self or object; here is a brief cosmology of identity the universe has identity; the universe and its identity are limitless in kind, variety, extension (spatial), and duration; e.g., there are beings and cosmoses with variety in kind and physical law, without limit; there are peak beings without limit and the ultimate is the greatest of these—whether a state or process—Brahman; all beings, particularly individuals (beings with sapience), inherit or realize this power of the universe (the contrary would be a limit on the universe); individual beings inherit the limitlessness and power of the universe; realization occurs by transformation from the limited forms of beings; it occurs necessarily; death is real but not absolute; all these are in transaction with the void and so at least indirectly with one another; the fundamental principle implies a cosmology of limitless identity metaphysicsthough the previous division is metaphysical and the discussion in reason, p. 35, are ‘metaphysics’, it is convenient to mark off the material that flows from the fundamental principle as metaphysics introductionconceptstradition contentthe fundamental principle shows the peak of possibility; details and paths are left open (i) to imagination, action, criticism—rational and ethical, and correction and (ii) tradition, interpreted as cumulative human culture from ancient times to the present moment (it carries with it its own meanings and applications of ‘value’ and ‘validity’) metaphysicsconceptsmetaphysics contentmetaphysics shall be understood as knowledge of the real; the real may be understood as the valid referents of ideas (of some being)—i.e., to what is definitely knowable the concept of metaphysics*metaphysics began with being, p. 13; explicit development now begins and continues through reason, p. 35 though metaphysics is an active endeavor today, consensus on what it is and whether it is possible is not full, especially since perfect knowledge of the real is often questioned with regard to knowledge—what it is, whether it is possible at all, and whether the gap between knower and the real is bridgeable we take the somewhat unusual position of defining metaphysics at outset; we then continue, showing it is possible (this has already been done with regard to being and other concepts), showing it to be powerful (this has begun and will continue), and showing that metaphysics as conceived here covers essentially all that is said to be metaphysics today (and more, e.g., as in the real metaphysics, p. 27)—see the range of metaphysical thought, p. 35 the possibility of metaphysics*how is metaphysical knowledge possible? firstly, as above, by abstraction; and secondly, as in the real metaphysics, p. 27, by arguing from the value revealed to a reconception of knowledge and its criteria in dual terms—perfect-pragmatic—and so to the perfection of the real metaphysics the real metaphysicsconceptsreal metaphysics contentthe real metaphysics is a system comprised of ideal knowledge derived from the fundamental principle, and pragmatic knowledge of traditions; the ideal illuminates and guides the pragmatic; the pragmatic illustrates the ideal, for which it is instrumental; the criteria of this system appear to be dual—‘perfect’ for the ideal and ‘good enough but incomplete and perhaps possessed of some error’ (which may be accommodated on the way from the immediate to the ultimate); but the criterion is one as it derives from the (or an) ultimate value of enjoyment of paths in the present and to the ultimate; the meaning of the real metaphysics is intrinsic—i.e., as just conceived and developed (the reasoning) and extrinsic—generally, that we ought to have a dual concern with the immediate and the ultimate and, particularly, its implications as developed earlier and below consistency of the real metaphysicsconceptsno concepts introduced contentthe real metaphysics is consistent with rationality, logic, experience, and science because all these must be modified by the descriptor ‘so far’ and do not necessarily project to the universe (will consistency survive developments in logic and science—yes, for the developments are or will be always ‘so far’); note—it is not claimed that this consistency is proof of truth, but proof was given earlier doubt and attitudeconceptsdoubt, heuristics, attitude, metaphysical hypothesis, existential principle contentyet it is good to doubt the proof; and, allowing for both doubt and consistency, and regarding the proof as heuristic, suggests alternate attitudes to the real metaphysics (i) as a metaphysical hypothesis in a scientific metaphysics (ii) as an existential principle of action let us now look at consequences of the real metaphysics experience and significant meaningthis section is naturally of apiece with word and concept meaning, p. 10, and concept meaning, knowledge, logic, and science, p. 16; however, the present placement is efficient—(i) as introduction to ‘significant meaning’ and as preliminary to universe as field of being, p. 60 conceptsexperience, significant meaning contentin talking, earlier, of concepts, p. 16, and their references, experience was already implicit experience, in its first meaning here, is conscious awareness in all its kinds (e.g., cognition, emotion) and modes (e.g., of experience itself and interaction with the world which includes the individual); experience is the place though not the only source of significant meaning (e.g., of life) and without experience the individual is effectively non-existent; all real transformation of an individual and continuation beyond death and approach to peak being must effectively occur in experience (but for continuation beyond death etc, this section is not dependent on the fundamental principle); thus experience, here, is broader than a common use as external experience, i.e., ‘experience of’ something effectively, experience is the place of our being with the later expansion of the scope experience in the section universe as field of being, p. 30, occurrences of the term ‘effectively’ in this division may be omitted experience is the place of our being, significant meaning, and linguistic and concept meaning an improved characterization of being is that a being is that which can have an effect on experience (of some experiencer) systematic development of the concept of experience*introductionexperience is implicit in discussing being and beings, p. 14, (‘that which is validly described…’) and meaning, p. 16, earlier; have deferred explicit treatment for efficiency why the term ‘experience’?though there are other uses of ‘experience’, e.g., to mean ‘experience of’, experience as conscious awareness is a common use in philosophy I prefer ‘experience’ to ‘consciousness’ because (i) experience has connotations over and above those of consciousness, particularly ‘experience of’ (ii) I do not wish to refer to modern (c. 2020) consciousness studies, especially because they often find the term contentious and because the contentiousness (‘the hard problem’ of consciousness, the problem of mental causation, the problem of mind and matter as substances), I hold, is an artifact of an immature materialism and an immature metaphysics and understanding of the nature of metaphysics why experience?place of our being and significant meaningexperience is the place our being and place (if not source) of all significance not transcended, for the measure of experience is experience; therefore, for us, being is experiential and, ultimately, as experienced as will be seen, we are entirely experiential; the universe is entirely experiential the place of all change, intrinsic and instrumental relational; therefore, being—the world—is experiential the being without (with no trace in) experience, self or other, is effectively non-existent (later ‘effectively’ will be removed; this will require expansion of the meaning of ‘experience’ to the root—to make the elimination meaningful; and it will require establishment of the fundamental principle to make it true) co-foundation…together with being necessity—experience is our only window on being (for we do not get outside it); it is therefore necessary to foundation sufficiency—and therefore sufficient to whatever foundation there may be with adequate, unconditionally sufficient, e.g., to being will be seen perfect, relative to the aim of realization source of all knowledge—the worldbeing and experience complement one another as object and subject side of the world and approach to the world; this is taken up in detail in ‘interpretations’, below, and further developed in the subsequent narrative experience incorporates reasoneffective—optimal—way of achieving good—valuable, optimal—outcomes (ends, right ways, virtue) includes determining value includes attention to received reason note the distinction—reason vs reasons understanding, inference, and feeling—and their products (knowledge, rational action); received reason includes learning experience incorporates knowledgeworld‘everything’, clarified below conceptmental content in this most general sense, does not distinguish between percept, or ‘low- or high-level concept’ referentthat part of the world which a concept locates not all concepts have referents a concept can refer to another concept—i.e., concepts may be referents; if they could not, we could not have a concept of the idea of a concept objectreferent of a concept external object an object that is not a concept the distinction between a concept as object and an external object, may mislead us into thinking that the distinction is fundamental (it is not), definite (it is not, objects have been seen to have an interpretation of being concepts at root, and the idea of the world as a conceptual system will be found to be an effective understanding of being and the universe), and that external objects have a different grade of reality than concepts (a mistaken view) from a universal perspective, the distinction between concept as object and external object is not as significant as it seems, and will and need not be emphasized in any metaphysical description of the universe world (detail)the complete system of objects external world the system of external objects with minor modification, the comments on external objects apply to the external world meaninga concept and its possible intended objects the use of ‘meaning’ here is that of concept meaning and is distinct from that of significant meaning iconic case iconic concept the concept is ‘pictorial’—i.e., it ‘shape’ (appears to) conform to the object iconic meaning an iconic concept and its possible intended objects sign (simple) mental content or other object, whose shape has no significance in itself, and whose role in meaning is solely in association with iconic concepts sign (compound) arrangement of simple signs that acquires meaning (possible intended objects) from conventions about the arrangements that correspond to forms of the world i.e., the convention is not mere convention, but has arisen in selection or in design, so as to model (aspects of) the world linguistic case a linguistic concept is a simple or compound sign associated with an iconic concept a linguistic meaning is linguistic concept and its possible intended objects knowledgemeaning realized about experiencethe concept of experiencedefined above building up to the first use of the concept‘experience of’… and ‘the experienced’ ‘experience of’ is a common use, preliminary to the first meaning; entails ‘the experienced’; the two together do not constitute our use etymology here, does not refer to the related use of ‘experience’ as the process of getting knowledge firsthand—i.e., doing, feeling, seeing, or thinking about are there ‘experience of’ and ‘the experienced’? at least a manner of speaking, which may be used the fact of the two aspects is shown experience as concept and object to be able to talk of experience is to know that there is experience of experience ‘mind’ and ‘matter’ ‘experience of’ and ‘the experienced’ correspond roughly to ‘mind’ and ‘matter’, which makes the relation transparent (note—this is not interaction, for the interaction is between two elements of being); we may see the material as being as such and the mental as relationship a further ‘kind’ might be relationship of relationship, which is just relationship—i.e., there is no further kind; mind and matter are the only elements of what Spinoza thought to be an infinite series of ‘attributes’; but there may be limitlessly many qualities are there mind and matter? the structure of experience suggests there are ‘mind’ and ‘matter’, we find this to be one of two consistent interpretations; later, from FP, it will follow that the universe must be experiential and there must be mind and matter (of course appropriately understood as two sides of beings, not as substances) modes experience is attitudinal-active; bifurcates as attitudinal and active; there is no strictly pure case, for there is always potential relation to the world attitude-action experience directed toward self in relation to (form and formation of) the world note—though there is distinction, attitude and action are integrated it is therefore better to conceive and define attitude-action rather than to have separate definitions attitude emphasis on form and world over formation and self but note in more inclusive senses, form includes formation and world includes self action emphasis on formation and self over form and world ‘pure’ experience case that the directedness is null, but potential dimensions of experience (‘functions’) Σ http://www.horizons-2000.org: experience and the dimensions of the world.html (final subsections ‘Dimensions of the world’, ‘Dimensions of experience’); manual for the way of being.html (especially experience-1, experience-2, experience-3) and very bare content.html (especially experience) inner-outer, form-quality, bound-free, iconic-symbolic, imperative-neutral, state-function-recall (memory) develop the logic and implications for cognition, emotion, feeling, memory, personality… the first use of ‘experience’—animal awareness in all its formsis there non-conscious awareness? will find awareness to be a kind of relation between sentient and world and conscious to non-conscious awareness a continuum (multi-d) of degree, not kind awareness is relational; this is also noted below relational being in all its forms—second use, justified later in ‘universe as field of being’as ‘experience of’, experience so far is relational; pure experience is internally relational and potentially relational regarding the world the object of ‘experience’there is experience—and experience of experience the notion of an ‘external world’ is metaphorical experience is recursive experience is part of the world … and an as if world which includes experience the as if world contains (as if) experience itself, the experiencer (or self), the experienced which—over and above experience and the self—other selves including animals and the ‘environment’ which harbors all of the foregoing the environment and its contents are the world or universe, which are usually distinguished, but will be seen to be the same as seen in the main narrative, FP enables removal of ‘as if’ and allows dual consistent interpretations—the standard v universe as field of being of which both have reality status, each being more convenient for certain situations; thus the ‘as if’ world is a good interpretation of the world, but not the only good interpretation characteristics of experiencepreliminarythe concept and object, above, already have characteristics of experience will now consider amplification and further characteristics how is experience knownas stated above to talk of experience requires its existence in higher being (e.g., in some animals), experience is self-aware that we have experience of experience is a source of intelligence for it results in the ability to direct experience Descartes—to doubt experience is an experience: to doubt experience is to have experience That there is experience requires no foundation beyond experience; and, certainly, the being of experience is not to be and does not need foundation in something else (e.g., matter or brains—which does not mean that there is no conceptual or actual relation between matter and brains or that the study of the relation is without worth) formexperience and form experience has form (with extension and relation) and formation (with change) given experience as premise, there must be form and formation; but are form and formation will later be found necessary without further premise—but there are no further modes of difference but for absence (there may be multiple spatialities and temporalities in the same region) sameness-difference difference fundamental and elementary aspect of the world, without which there is no experience of the world sameness absence of difference duality sameness and difference are dual is not absence of sameness equivalent to absence of manifest being? identity this definition covers individual or personal and object identity sense of sameness of object, includes self as object extension (space) measure of difference over difference of object duration (time) measure of difference with sense of sameness of object change difference with sense of sameness of object therefore, duration is measure of change attribute (Spinozan) measure of difference as difference with sense of sameness vs of difference of object exhaust kinds of Extensional difference, there are no further Spinozan attributes; however, this account does not eliminate the possibility of limitlessly many qualities Extension extension with duration attributes (non-Spinozan) quantity aspect of an object that is dependent on Extension quality aspect of an object that is independent of Extension may include spatiotemporality property quality that is independent of an observer experiential relationsexperience of see more complete earlier discussion of knowledge ‘pure’ experience is relational icon sign language symbolic-iconic syntax is iconic languages metaphysical language(s) the experienced world includes experience—i.e., experience is experienced object experiencer self (also experienced) relational nature of experience meaning and knowledge because of its importance, this may have a separate higher-level section interpretationselaborates the main narrative introduction—i.e., of experience and the world experience as if of the real may be (i) categorially in error in mistaking what is ‘as if of the real’ with the real (ii) imprecise, even if categorially valid the aim of this section is to (begin to) derive valid description(s) of the real from experience since we always remain ‘in experience’, the notions of ‘world’, ‘validity’, and ‘the real’ will necessarily be derived from the entire range of experience what an interpretation isin this section, an interpretation is a description of the world that is consistent with the entire range of experience more generally, ‘interpretation’ may be used to refer to description of some object that is consistent with some system of experience the interpretations may include patterns (‘higher’ concepts) projected on ranges of direct experience (percepts or ‘lower’ concepts) why we introduce interpretationsinterpretations are pragmatically useful since not posits, even if categorially and objectively unfaithful, are open to refinement and correction analysis of a range of interpretations that are consistent with experience may and will lead, by demonstration, to a true picture of the world and the real (this will require clarification of the meaning of ‘true picture’) the aims are (i) to develop definite conclusions from experience, e.g. that there experience, that there is being (if only the being of experience itself) and so on which we have done so far, then of the existence of beings and the universe, which (in outline), is rather trivial and then the existence of the void, which while formally trivial, is profound in its implications (ii) develop a range of interpretations of experience (there is some concern with whether the range will be complete in some sense) (iii) regarding consistency with experience we can choose the level of conclusions in #i—if we start at the beginning (just experience) we will be able to generate a greater range (iv) we will look for a (the) maximal interpretations (an interpretation is maximal if it contains all beings contained in any other), there mutual consistencies, which can be eliminate at which level of conclusions #i and which are true descriptions (v) the remaining descriptions will then be true and the choice from among them will be made, not on the basis of truth, but on the basis of efficiency (noting that efficiency will be relative to criterion—but perhaps our analysis will single out one group of criteria that will be pertinent to the greatest value which should also emerge from analysis) the interpretationsthe main interpretations—i.e., classes of interpretation—are numbered (i) and (ii) there is experience—for to doubt experience is to have an experience, positively—experience is the medium of our being and window on being there is experience of experience—for without it, we could not know there is or report experience there is a world—if only that the range of experience is itself a world there must be a world—this will be shown after demonstration of the fundamental principle; heuristic—the standard world view, below, and its apparent stability; existential heuristic—from meaningfulness the world is strictly materialist—this seems to follow from some interpretations of science and the apparent objectivity of ‘matter’, but, as we have seen, it is not a consistent interpretation of our world; however, from possibilism, developed later (the fundamental principle), there are strictly materialist worlds and other barren worlds that are dead to process, life, and experience the world is monist, with experience as the substance and as having a matter-like aspect in having form and formation—this is at least an approximation to proximate experience (i.e., to our experienced world, e.g., the world of modern cosmology—the big bang or, perhaps, the multiverse world) (i) a common world view that we call the standard secular view (SSV)—the world is a place with selves and others (including animals) and an environment (including plants), where the environment is not experientially null but has experientiality at a low or zero level (ii) the world is the world experience as if of a single experiencer, but without the experiencer; though seemingly absurd, this is logically possible; here are two sub-cases (a) the experiencer has the experiential capacity of a human being as it is typically held to be—if our world is as rich as generally held, this cannot be our world (b) the world or universe itself is the experience of an experience of sufficient experiential capacity—from the earlier discussion under ‘substance’ this is not absurd, and it incorporates interpretation #i (SSV) above; it shall be named a field of being and experience (FOBE, FOE) interpretation and is an interpretation for the universe; if possibilism (FP) holds this is the maximal universe and includes all other possible interpretations of experience above; FOBE would phase into and out of manifestation, and the manifest phases would include human beings merged as ultimate in peak being universe as field of beingconceptsinterpretation, materialism, solipsism, field of being, field of experiential being, god contentan interpretation of experience is a picture of the world (or part of the world) that is consistent with experience and may be suggested by it the common interpretation of the world of experience is that of selves that are experiential and others, in an environment that is not necessarily categorially non-experiential but possessed of experientiality that is low or numerically zero (just as in physics a force of zero magnitude may be seen as a zero force or no force; for beings for which experientiality it is zero and without significance, the fundamental principle implies that it may acquire experientiality); this interpretation is a weak form of materialism; as used here, the first meaning of experience, p. 29, has been extended to the root of being a second interpretation is that there is nothing but the experience (of an experiential whose existence would be hypothetical—all that is acknowledged is the experience); this interpretation is called (philosophical) solipsism; the fundamental principle permits and requires the existence of solipsist cosmoses; the difficulty in seeing our world as solipsist arises in relation to the common interpretation in which the individual is seen as limited in experiential scope relative to the world a third interpretation is the same as the second—but rather than limited, the ‘individual’ of solipsism is the universe (and ordinary individuals are part of the greater individual); under this interpretation, experientiality extends down to the root of being, in fact and in potential, in muted quality and magnitude (as the material ‘side’ of the world); and the universe is a field of being (or just field, or field of experiential being); this reveals a second, enhanced, meaning to ‘experience’, in which experientiality extends to the root of being, not as we have it but as relation which, in human and other beings is additively constitutive of our level of consciousness; ‘matter’ and ‘mind’ are rough words for two sides of being; finally, given the fundamental principle, the greater individual-field of being are peak being and ordinary individuals are part of and approach it the common and field interpretations are adequate descriptions of the universe; but then, there seems to be conflict between them—they seem to compete as descriptions of the real; but there is no conflict—both are valid; the common interpretation is suited to pragmatic living in our cosmos; the field interpretation is suited to living in our cosmos and seeing and moving beyond to the ultimate; of course, both views may be held simultaneously and are not in real conflict under the field interpretation, we can see god as ultimate peak being but not as distinct from persons or the world—in that the name ‘god’ has meaningful application (in view of its uses), persons, the world, are rising from their primitive states, by evolution and saltational and other processes, pointing toward the ultimate, being there, and dissolution; the process is repeated eternally the universe has phases of being an ultimate field of being dimensions of beingconceptsdimensions of being, form, extension, duration, pure dimensions of being, pragmatic dimensions of being, nature, society, culture, the universal contentthe dimensions of being are variables whose values define kinds of being experience necessarily has form, which necessitates extension (space); and change, which necessitates duration (time); difference with sameness of identity measures duration; with change of identity, it measures extension; therefore, there are no measures of such change beyond extension and duration (spacetime); but there may be other changes within identity (quality, property) the pure dimensions of being are experiential form and formation as the world pragmatic dimensions are chosen from tradition—from considerations of the real metaphysics, these need not be perfect; multiple traditions may be employed; an example from the modern western tradition follows a system of pragmatic dimensions of being is nature (roughly, the world as found—simple or physical, complex or living, and experiential or of what we call ‘mind’), society and culture (a part of the world constructed by beings, defined in the tradition of a culture, and which includes knowledge or representation of itself and other pragmatic and pure dimensions—see the resources, p. 53, for a knowledge reference; some elements of knowledge are the pure and abstract sciences, art, technology, history, religion, and the humanities; some elements of society are politics, economics, exploration, building civilization, and pursuit of meaning and realization), and the ultimate or universal (the universe as beings become it via yoga, p. 48, which includes metaphysics, p. 26, and reason, p. 35) metaphysics, cosmology, and physicsconceptscosmology, absolute indeterminism, absolute determinism, block universe, dialetheia, quantum field, becoming from the void, emergence contenton cosmology—cosmology, the study of the extension, duration, and variety of being, is continuous with metaphysics; some cosmology was considered in the ultimate, p. 25; this section takes up some topics in cosmology; there is systematic discussion in the resources, p. 53 determinism vs indeterminism (see determinism, p. 22), the block universe description, individual and peak identity—since the void is precursor to any being, the universe is absolutely indeterministic, but since it is precursor to every being, the universe is absolutely deterministic (in this dual remark ‘the void’ may be replaced by ‘any given being’); to resolve this apparent tension, consider the block universe, i.e., the universe described as a block constituted of the histories of all beings (here the block is regarded as a valid description, but not as ‘more real’ or ‘less real’ than other descriptions); the identities of individuals are elements of the experiential being of the universe; there are multiple trajectories through any given element of being, individual, or cosmos, and it is via these crossings, that the elements merge with peak being; further, the multiple copies of an individual (due to limitless repetition), though locally separate, gain identity via the peaks; for an individual in a cosmos, the cosmos has strong elements of determinism, but the cosmoses beyond are not determined relative to the individual; however, for being in its peak phases, the domain of determinism—of the definitely known—is greater and, considering all peaks, approaches the entire universe existence of the void, dialetheia, and quantum theory: earlier, existence of the void was argued from equivalence to its non-existence; that the void exists and does not is an example, if it is true, of a dialetheia—a ‘true contradiction’; it has been argued, e.g., by Graham Priest, that there are dialetheias; that a dialetheia would not result in all statements being true, as it would in standard logic, would be ensured by somehow isolating it or via a para-consistent logic; however, many examples of dialetheias involve a shift in meaning such that the claimed contradiction is not a true contradiction in the present case, again, there is no true contradiction, for the void is a ‘null universe’—and it is not a contradiction for a null universe or its ‘objects’ in a null universe to have contradictory properties as it would be for existing objects in a non-null universe (e.g., the tenth vs the eighth planet of the solar system being green and not green); what is interesting, however, is that this ‘edge case’ models (i) the equivalence of ‘nothing’ and a universe in which the energy of gravitation and matter add to zero (gravitation has negative energy) (ii) a logical precursor to quantum fields (iii) more generally the equivalence of being and non-being and the logical foundation of becoming from the void; why does quantum theory have a degree of indeterminism (if it does—the issue has not arrived at consensus)? perhaps in the emergence of form from the void (partial in quantum theory, complete in classical theories), quantum indeterminism is a residue of the indeterminism of formation from the void dimensions of being, extended vertical and horizontal treatment*Σ http://www.horizons-2000.org: done well and briefly in very bare content.html; also see manual for the way of being.html; see experience and the dimensions of the world.html (the final subsections are dimensions of the world and dimensions of experience) treated ‘vertically’ above, here the vertical treatment may be in greater detail and is extended horizontally about religionconceptsrational speculation, religion contentwhere does religion fit into the scheme of the real metaphysics, p. 27? referring to word and concept meaning, p. 10, and concept meaning, knowledge, logic, and science, p. 16, and realizing that human endeavors such as religion, science, and art are constructs and objects, it follows that we do not know that our grasp of them is final (until finality is demonstrated); therefore, an empirical and psychological account of such endeavors must be supplemented by a conceptual account; how shall this be done for religion? note that our best science is essentially empirical (even where summarized conceptually as our ‘great’ theories) and that most religion is essentially speculative, especially in its cosmological aspect, and often dogmatic; therefore, there is room beyond what is true in science and our religions for investigation; which may be scientific or rational speculation (i.e. speculation that is both reasonable and consistent with all that we know); therefore, let us conceive religion as an endeavor to know and be the ultimate with all our being—experiential and instrumental; now, however, from the real metaphysics, we know that religion includes but is more than rational speculation—the processes of logic, science, art, religion, and becoming merge as co-extensive under the metaphysics the range of metaphysical thought*“developments in metaphysics” development of metaphysicsΣ http://www.horizons-2000.org: topics in metaphysics, problems of eastern metaphysics, problems of western metaphysics Σ other sites: Metaphysics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) kinds of metaphysicsdescriptivethe structure of our thought content about the world, an idea of Peter Strawson, who emphasized its importance in contrast to revisionary metaphysics (going beyond description); covered here under interpretations in interpretation in universe as field of being, p. 30 speculativebuilding consistent conceptual structures, developing conclusions, and comparing with the world (e.g., as done by A.N. Whitehead in his Process and Reality), then accepting tentatively or rejecting analyticbuilding systems of thought, perhaps necessary, e.g., of abstract objects regarded as non-physical; may enhance speculative metaphysics to show necessity synthetic-experientiale.g., the real metaphysics, a mix of necessary and pragmatic, perfect in terms of revealed value; includes elements of previous kinds
|