SOME PATHWAYS OF A
UNIVERSAL JOURNEY IN BEING
BRIEF INTRODUCTION

Written Starting February 16, 2012
File Created February 16, 2012

Latest Writing February 19, 2012

ANIL MITRA

© Anil Mitra PhD, February 2012—February 2012

Home

Introduction

The idea of a journey has origins in my life. My passions and interests have included nature, ideas, and experience shared with others. In ideas I have sought to understand the world; and significant inspiration toward this understanding came in nature. Nature—places less influenced by civilization—have also been direct inspiration; I have experience them as portals to the real. This does not imply that society is less real to me than the natural world; sharing my ideas in person and in writing is exciting; and encouraging and productive of careful and imaginative thought. Behind these general comments is a unifying thread of my life in which one stage would open up possibilities that later stages would build upon; earlier stages revealed opportunities that I would work out in later stages. I began to see this thread as a journey

In 2002 I had insights that enabled the demonstration of a powerful view of the Universe. In philosophy such views are sometimes called ‘metaphysics’ and roughly since the time of the philosopher Immanuel Kant the possibility of such views, i.e. metaphysics as study of the world as it is, have been criticized as impossible. In this narrative I have demonstrated a metaphysics from fundamentals (and this shows possibility). An essential part of what makes it possible is the method of abstraction that is introduced and used (this kind of abstraction studies what is most direct and not, especially, what is remote or theoretically removed). I have shown that the metaphysics is ultimate (a) In providing a foundation that is not a postulated system or a reference another, e.g. more basic, level (i.e. the metaphysics is ultimate with regard to depth and this is commonly believed impossible), (b) In being unique (other expressions and degrees of detail are of course possible) and (c) In regarding the Universe roughly as ‘all things’ and in demonstrating that the Universe cannot be greater—i.e. that it has no limits (the metaphysics is ultimate with regard to breadth). In consequence I have called it The Universal Metaphysics. It is an ultimate and universal metaphysics may be referred to as the metaphysics

The demonstrated assertion that the Universe has no limits requires clarification for its meaning to be understood and its power to be appreciated. I have labeled the conclusion The Principle of Being (PB). This is done in the text but there is some clarification in the following paragraphs

In consequence of its ultimate nature the metaphysics has reasoned and demonstrated resolutions for the important problems from the history of metaphysics. One such problem is the problem of substance which is essentially the foundation problem of the previous paragraph: in the metaphysics substance neither necessary nor, as substance is usually understood, possible. Another problem is that of the question ‘Why, given that there could be nothing, is there anything at all in the Universe?’ Heidegger called this the fundamental problem of metaphysics. Given that the Universe has no limits it follows that if it were in a state of ‘nothingness’ then something would necessarily emerge from that nothingness; resolution of the fundamental problem is trivial. Further, it will emerge that the problem of What things and kinds of things there are in the Universe does not have any obvious resolution and deserves to be called the fundamental problem of metaphysics. The metaphysics enables partial resolution of this problem but also makes clear a complete and explicit specification of things and kinds cannot be given

Additionally, the metaphysics enables an immensely powerful reconceptualization of logic that I label Logic. It has significant interactions with the major academic disciplines: mathematics; the sciences of matter and energy, of life, and of mind where it provides foundation, interpretation, and new methodologies. In turn the disciplines provide illustration of the principles and suggest some filling out of details for the metaphysics. The metaphysics provides new understanding of the nature of art, literature, humanities, and religion. It is significant for the entire human endeavor

Some consequences of the metaphysics are (a) Our cosmos is one of an unlimited number and variety of cosmological systems that ‘stand’ against a background of limitlessness (b) The Universe has phases of acute and diffuse Identity (c) Every individual experiences this Universal Identity but intelligent application makes the process more efficient and enjoyable and (d) The process of realization is without end: there are peaks of resolution and dissolutions without end (e) Though crucial ideas are inadequate to realization, the individual is required to seek transformation, to experiment with his or her own Being

Another conclusion is that every religious cosmology must be realized in some cosmological system. That conclusion may appear to be absurd and, in fact, the principle regarding limits may be tentatively modified: Subject to Logic, the Universe has no limits. However, Logic pertains not to the Universe but to assertions made about the Universe or parts of it. Therefore, the principle stands in its original form but we need to remember that our conceptions or assertions are realized if and only if they are Logical. Therefore, if Logic errors such as contradictions are removed every religious cosmology is realized somewhere. The conclusion is awkward for the secular thinker but reconciliation with secular reason is possible as follows. What is commonly thought of as secularly (for example scientifically) impossible is merely very improbable and therefore in some sense insignificant and, further, no support is given to literal realization in our cosmos. It is important to not avoid the conclusion regarding the religious cosmologies because it illustrates the metaphysics and how to think about its thorny aspects, the nature of limits and the principle regarding limits. Further, from the secular and religious points of view the conclusion is significant in that it emphasizes a position that the main spiritual aspect of the traditional religions is their symbolic and moral meaning.

…

The metaphysics inherits much from the traditions of human thought; this will be obvious to those who have familiarity with the traditions. However, the present development employs old and new ideas and it puts them together in ways not seen before. The system as a system is new; it is demonstrated and not merely speculated; it develops new approaches to demonstration; and it is elaborated and applied in detail. Since the superstructure (elaboration and application) depends on the methods its reasoned development would have been impossible before the development of the metaphysics or some equivalent to it

In developing the metaphysics I found the idea of Being—conceived neutrally as that which is there—to be pivotal. What is powerful about the idea of Being is that it makes no commitment to or against special categories such as mind and matter; it allows that any actual categories may emerge in experience and in the development of the ideas. It avoids the error of initial over-commitment as well as the error of remaining uncommitted when commitment is indicated by reason

What had roots in the idea of a personal journey became realized as a universal Journey in Being

…

We may regard science to include reason, logic, mathematics, and technology; and religion (as search but not as dogma) to include artistic and intellectual sources of inspiration. We may then see science and religion as the pillars of the human culture and tradition. Human culture, endeavor, and tradition may be regarded as the sum of those two pillars since the origin of human being

The Universal Metaphysics goes far beyond the sum of that tradition—ancient through today—in our standard views of it

The metaphysics shows that every valid scientific theory may be regarded as a fact in its domain of validity and that the Universe is immensely larger than every such domain. This has the interpretation (a) scientific theories cannot be direct and empirical theories of the entire universe (b) scientific discovery is without end (c) in the future the method of science will expand to include participation and immersion

The Universal Metaphysics provides a framework for the religious or spiritual or ideal search—as well the search of science. The main meaning of the religious systems is in their symbolic and moral sense. The Universal metaphysics is neither science nor religion but provides an ultimate framework for this search in which the religious or spiritual aspect of search is not of necessity limited to the symbolic and the moral but need not be dogmatic. In this view religion may seem to impinge upon science but it does not (a) because science can never be complete, (b) because the spiritual approach would be one of reflection and experiment with the Being, (c) because the validity of the view is allowed and required by the metaphysics which (d) requires merging of the different kinds of experiment if full knowledge and realization of the Universe is to occur. One in process framework for realization is provided in Journey (the second part of the narrative) and illustrated from personal experience

The metaphysics shows that the search is and must be in the form of a Journey in Being

…

Traditional religion makes promises: certain right or moral behaviors result in rewards such as heaven or nirvana

The Universal Metaphysics shows that there will be great rewards but also great pain and it does not provide a definite causal connection between behavior and outcome

As suggested earlier it is reasonable to think that intelligent application (which it is reasonable to think includes moral behavior but also raises the question of what behaviors are moral) immensely increases efficiency and enjoyment but the connection between behavior and outcome is and cannot be necessary

Under the metaphysics the individual is left with immense degrees of freedom and little in the way of immediate guarantee except perhaps the satisfaction of being here and now in the process of realization of truth

…

You—the reader—may have questions about the meanings of terms used here. What is metaphysics? Should not the terms ‘Being’ and ‘Universe’ be defined with greater precision? (Precision will be supplied.) And why should the Universe not be defined as the physical universe? (The Universe will be defined in such a way that its constitution may be the result rather than the assumption of study.) You may have further questions, doubts and objections

There is a temptation to make an introduction too long. The temptation is to answer everything that the text should answer. Therefore the address of objections, doubts, and questions of meaning is left to the text

It will however be useful to alert you to an important aspect of meaning before you begin to read the text. It is that in any new system it is expected and natural that the meanings of the individual terms of the system and of the system itself shall go beyond prior meanings. Many of the meanings associated with the Universal Metaphysics go immensely beyond prior meanings. ‘Being’ crucially important; the term ‘Universe’ has a number of uses: reasons for the present choice are given; and the expressions ‘the Universe cannot be greater’ and ‘the Universe has no limits’ require clarification before they can be understood and their significance appreciated. Meanings need to be and are carefully specified and developed in the text; and reasons for the choice of terms and definitions are given. The reader should pay careful attention to this for the expectation that meanings are already determined in common or general academic use may lead to confusion

Further, it is in the nature of the new metaphysics that it may challenge the reader’s intuitive or formal world views. The reader who understands this and has patience while working into new meaning and new vision will be rewarded with the understanding of an ultimate metaphysics

I expect that any serious reader—one who wants to understand the work—will have questions and objections. This is healthy in that having and dealing with objections and doubts is part of learning and of the growth of knowledge. The process of objection and response is part of what makes for power and validity. In developing the ideas of the narrative many objections have occurred to me—it became part of my approach to look for and respond to criticism—and many objections are addressed in the text. This encourages understanding as much as it strengthens the work

I do not—of course—expect that all readers will agree with the main positions laid out in the text. The main sources of disagreement with content are concerns over consistency and validity. I am convinced that the system is internally consistent and that it is consistent with what is and will later be valid in the tradition (and the tradition will receive careful analysis so as to make this clear). However, while I have provided demonstration of the main position (and consequences) and while objections have been anticipated and addressed, there are doubts about the validity of the demonstration. The essential doubt is subtle and I am not certain that it should be a point of doubt; however, in metaphysics, when consistency has been determined, the ‘size’ of the doubt is irrelevant; in metaphysics, one thinks, there should be no doubt at all

What is the ‘correct’ approach to this situation? It is helpful to recognize that a similar situation pertains to even those parts of human knowledge that are commonly regarded as absolutely certain—e.g., logic and mathematics. We often think of these disciplines as certain knowledge, but careful study of the fields shows that all but their absolutely trivial parts have shades of the empirical and therefore shades of doubt; and this is perhaps not the only reason for doubt. Therefore in all cases including that of the present metaphysics, there is some doubt and therefore when we proceed with them we proceed with an element of faith. Such faith is not misplaced because we have nothing better than what we have and the options are either inaction or action with an element of faith (given, as is the case in the metaphysics, that what is lacking is absolute confidence in proof of validity but not of internal or external consistency). But what is this faith? Faith as understood here is not blind belief in dogma or the absurd: it is not belief at all. FAITH is that attitude toward life and knowledge and always adaptive and always adaptable, that has as its intent the greatest outcome of action

Perhaps, you think, an existential attitude is better than one of faith. However, an existential attitude can be nihilist or neutral or positive. There is a time for nihilism because it is sometimes unavoidable and the way through it is to live it though without indulgence; and because a feeling of nihilism may be a spur to a real and realistic overcoming. And there are naturally times for a neutral attitude. We would not want to be neutral—without commitment—at all times but there are times to take a rest from our commitments; there are times to sit back and enjoy what we have. What it a positive existential attitude? Surely it would contain what is true and in the present case that would be an acknowledgement of the consistency of the metaphysics and of the (strong) arguments for it, and of the doubt. The existentialist is in the world and faces it on its own terms. In the present situation the terms include what is given—a powerful metaphysics with potentially momentous outcome as well as doubt. The existential attitude will therefore constant in being responsive to the situation but since the situation varies the attitude will be vary. There will be times that emphasize doubt and there will be times to act without doubt or when doubt will not be at the fore of thought or the master of action. This is the attitude of faith as understood above

…

We have seen that Ideas (concepts, knowledge, understanding, commitment including emotion) and a Journey of Transformation (including experiments in the transformation of Being and driven by a mesh of metaphysics, tradition, experiment, experience, and risk) are essential to full realization. Therefore, the narrative has two main parts, (1) Ideas and (2) Journey

The net process is a Journey in Being