|
SOME PATHWAYS OF A
ANIL MITRA © Anil Mitra PhD, February 2012—February 2012 PreliminaryApproachKeep this—preliminaries and text; frequently refresh / excise material Some auto-textpb—PB: The Principle of Being wbl—WBL: Within the bounds of Logic um, umet—UMET: The Universal Metaphysics Godel—Gödel trad—TRADITION: as defined below val—VALIDITY: as defined below Criteria for what to writeThe main points of the metaphysics that enable the new view and the journey Points that bring out confidence and meaning which includes seeing the difference between it and TRADITION but also seeing the mesh in the domain of validity of TRADITION and the relative immensity of UMET Objections / responses. These are essential to trust, bringing out confidence and meaning, showing the method Levels and kinds of detail and stylesMain pointNormal—paragraph. Alt + N Boxed Point. Alt + B Main Point. Alt + M Result—paragraph—demonstrated by and from givens. Alt + S Given—paragraph—truth that requires no demonstration other than naming or identifying Truth—paragraph—significant truth or result Define—paragraph. For short one or two sentence paragraphs that are definitions. Definition—character style—default paragraph style + small caps (Alt + F); to identify the term being defined. In this narrative to use for print and web (1) Apply the definition style—alt + F2 and then the SMCAP macro (2) If the first letter is capital, use the Cap macro. Examples are DEFINITION and LOGIC Objection-Response—paragraph DetailAcademic—paragraph Academic 2—paragraph. This second level of detail will probably not be used Detail—paragraph. Detail, elaboration, less than primary significance or text, illustration. Will apply to ‘normal’ text. May apply to detailed parts of results, givens, truths, definitions, and objection-responses: in such cases a brief definitive paragraph may be given the distinctive style so that (a) a table of results may be constructed and or (b) details may easily be identified and eliminated See ..\..\..\..\..\..\USERS\ANIL MITRA PHD\APPDATA\ROAMING\MICROSOFT\TEMPLATES\JOURNEY IN BEING SIMPLE BIG.DOT for other styles Possible topicsConsequencesSubstance: two lines Consequence types: disciplines, endeavor The academic thinks disciplines trump endeavor, and others may think that endeavor trumps the disciplines… but as idea and action / transformation there is no trump The main classes of consequence are defined by the level 1 headings of this document and perhaps also of universal journey-ways.html On the introductionShall we use the one below or universal journey-ways-essential-brief introduction.doc Introductionuniversal journey-ways-essential-long introduction.html universal journey-ways-essential-brief introduction.html BeingMeta TextAvoid too much detail on triviality, neutrality, emergence, profundity Whether to motivate or to introduce Being first The motive The neutrality of Being and other concepts cuts out the vagueness of so much substance and related metaphysics—e.g. issue of mind and matter In natural science approach to precision is good because immediate practicality is important. Because metaphysics is (a) categorial and (b) universal, any ‘imprecision’ makes it absolutely wrong as metaphysics It is inclusive and includes all actual kinds and things but leaves those kinds and things open to investigation and emergence We can categorially assert There is Being (to give it robustness and externality requires some work) That there is Being implies that it is a perfect object, i.e. in this case ‘objective’ has meaning and is perfectly realized …and in this the approach to Being is a paradigm for the other objects of metaphysics: mainly, Universe, Domain, Void, Logic / Logos (Metaphysics itself) There is more than the above to the development of the metaphysics but this provides firm foundation What else over the (1) Givenness of the primitives? (2) Articulation of the system (3) Essential givenness of the method (4) Its adaptability to the imperfect objects TextBeing is that which is there In some domain of extension and duration Normally ‘is there’ means is somewhere now; i.e. ‘is’ is neutral with regard to location but now we make ‘is’ capable of specificity in extension and duration This is the neutrality of which we speak that gives Being its trivial but contributory profundity Objections. That I can know anything. That what I know is robust MetaphysicsMeta TextThe following will go somewhere. Where? Ways in which the metaphysics is ultimate (1) Depth, (2) Capture of the entire Universe, (3) Demonstration, and (4) Showing the unlimited nature of the Universe, e.g. in variety, extension, and duration Additionally it addresses and resolves just about every fundamental problem in metaphysics, and has significance for the major academic disciplines within the sciences, arts, and humanities and for every fundamental human endeavor TextMetaphysics is the study of what is there It is the study of the most immediate and remote without distinction [It is not the study of the occult or of what is beyond physics] It is the study of Being In light of the concepts of metaphysics and Being, metaphysics is trivial but has the potential to be profound There is one metaphysical study of any object; it can have multiple ways of expression and be developed to different degrees of detail There is at most one Universal Metaphysics From the concept of Being there is at least one Whether it will be no more than trivial is not determined so far in the text In the development below we find ways in which it is ultimate (in intrinsic terms and relative to any other metaphysics so far) UniverseDomainsVoidFundamental PrincipleMeta TextWhen I say that the Universe has no limits this is the object of the statement that the concept of the Universe is coextensive with the object of Logic TextConcern: the meaning of the principle, of ‘limits’ of ‘greatest’ Doubt: The Universe is a certain way—e.g. finite or infinite which means not infinite or finite… or there are seven continents which means not eight, not seven, not zero, and not an infinite number… or there are laws of physics which means that a system of two planets will travel around their common CG in ellipses, not in spirals etc. Response: the cosmos will be a certain way: it must be some way and that is not a limit… it is a fact; if the cosmos could logically be a number of ways but had to be one of those ways that would be a limit; that it is in one of those ways is a fact or Normal limit or ‘limit under Normal circumstances’… further note that since there could be an unlimited number of cosmological systems if there were one and only one (e.g. ours) that would be a limit unless we found other numbers; then the fact that we think there is only one would the thought of a Normal fact; and we will see that science allows an unlimited number and the Universal metaphysics requires it LogicDoubt: Assertion of fact—‘everything is true’—provide an example: there is a green apple… the cosmos is repeated without limit… Response: But this is what is proved; therefore Doubt: The proof—‘The Void contains no Law’ essentially assumes what is to be proved… Response: But if ‘the Void’ contains no Law then it is no longer ‘the Void’; i.e. the crucial point of the proof is the existence of the Void… Doubt: Existence of the Void… Response: (a) Logical: for the Void existence and non-existence are identical (b) Heuristic: the laws of physics apply to seen things and therefore are not known to apply to the Void which shows that they allow limitlessness even though they do not require it Doubt: Internal contradiction. Generalization: Violation of logical principle. Response: logic. Doubt: except in primitive cases logic is flawed, empirical, incomplete… Response: Logic On demonstration: (a) In simple cases application of PB is trivial and the main concern is first, mesh with experience (science, observation, common experience) and interpretation (and the traditions ancient through today illustrate PB and its metaphysics while the metaphysics illuminates and contextualizes the traditions) (b) In general Logic is wide open for immense possibility and development ObjectsA sentence or two Applied Metaphysics: a sentence or two General CosmologyDoubt: contradiction of fact, science, common experience Response: (a) Earlier (b) The Logic of science (it applies to the seen) and its method (what is outside may lie in the range [0, u] show that there is no contradiction. Elaboration. PB requires all validly known facts, particularly the facts and theories of science and it reinterprets the theories as compound facts for the (possibly compound and incompletely determined) domain of validity for science which implies the following correction to one common opinion on science—i.e. the thought that science asymptotically approaches universal truth. That could be true but (a) history of science suggests that it may well not be true and (b) PB (UMET) imply that, e.g., a science that is a detailed description of the variety of phenomena via generalization from data (facts) cannot be a universal science and in fact must be a fact (over some limited domain) Development of the cosmology IdentityRealization is endless: a journey PowerGreatest Power: name? Mediate Powers JourneyFoundation. UMET and its mesh with TRADITION. Dynamics and History Agents and Catalysts Word ‘Agent’? The future (with planning, minimal system, phases, and plans) |