We can begin to answer the question by imagination and reflection, by becoming aware of and incorporating to our own system of thought the thoughts of others: philosophy, science, literature, and myth and religion. That is, we deploy ideas. Of course, the ideas will be used critically. And the use of ideas will not be limited to using those of others. We will also develop ideas: this essay includes an account of the development of ideas; one of the goals of the development has been to address the question about the possibilities of being. The time spent on ideas—reading, imagination, synthesis, and critical reflection—has been most exciting and enjoyable. However, it has also been necessary

It has been essential because I have found the ideas from the tradition limited: ideas that paint the Universe in grand strokes tend to be limited in their reasoning; ideas that emphasize and are executed according to reason tend to be limited in scope. I believe that I have developed a system that simultaneously overcomes both limits (of course there are doubts: doubts and doubt are explored systematically; I have put a lot of critical and imaginative work into exploring and addressing the doubts as well the issue of doubt itself)

It is shown in Metaphysics that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety. And that has the following consequence: via transformation of identity the individual will experience the Identity of the Universe. The metaphysics suggests but does not show how to get ‘there.’ So, there is an examination in Worlds of our immediate world and cosmos: for the immediate is our ground and naturally interesting in itself (in Intuition it will be seen that the Universal metaphysics is developed in part from a blurring of the distinctions between the immediate and the remote.) Regarding exploration, what emerges from this study is more concrete than the suggestions from the metaphysics, it also emerges that experiment in transformation is necessary. However, experiments in the transformation of being are not merely ‘getting there;’ transformation is be-ing itself

Journey describes the experiments so far and conceives and plans further experiments in transformation

The remaining chapters from Intuition through Method describe and develop the system of ideas. The final chapter Contribution is primarily a summary of what I see as the contributions of this narrative; still, Contribution does entertain some development

Essence: a journey in being

The journey is an exploration and an adventure into the ultimate possibilities of being. It began with an exploration of ideas and nature—with the thoughts to enjoy the immediate world and to know the Universe

After much experimentation with ideas, it was demonstrated in Metaphysics that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety of Objects—the meaning of ‘Object’ and what falls under it will be clarified; that the ideas are ultimate in some sense; and that via his or her identity the individual will experience Universal Identity. In that process it became apparent that I was in and wanted to engage in a journey

It was a journey through this world. It was inspired by wonder and beauty. It has aims at the ultimate

In emphasizing wonder, it is not sought to suggest that the vista that emerges is or can be entirely positive. For example, though pain is not sought, it cannot be avoided. That will be seen to be in the nature of being. The situation is this: pain has a function but it is certain behavior that is to be avoided; and it is important to not overestimate the behaviors to avoid or to allow pain to over-detract from process. It is probable that attempting to avoid pain is shutting down; and that living through pain is transformational: that it may be worth ‘listening’ to pain; of course, though, pain is not the only agent of transformation

It became journey in being because it was more than an exploration in which I sought only to experience and know the world but also because I sought to transform my self. The word ‘being’ is used as the most general kind—whatever exists without restriction to kind of ‘thing.’ That use is instrumental in the developments of the ideas because it is not limiting at the beginning of discovery. As the most generic kind, being includes specific kinds, e.g. mind and idea, matter, identity and self, transformation of being, society and civilization

It is a journey in the exploration and transformation of ideas and identity and, generally, of being. The ideas are developed in chapters Intuition through Worlds and in Being and Method. Journey narrates the explorations and transformations of being and identity so far

The meanings of words journey, being, identity, ultimate, idea, transformation, Universe, and others will be further elaborated in the Introduction. They will receive definition in the narrative starting with Intuition. Their full meanings as used here will not emerge with definition alone but with development of the ideas as part of an articulated system. It is notable that the meanings of many of the terms are quite fluid in the history of thought; these meanings add richness to the content of the narrative and this is one reason to not deploy entirely new words. However, it is crucial for understanding of the narrative to be aware of the uses of the terms in the narrative. Because of the rich potential for meaning, it is extremely difficult to be entirely strict in the connotations of the terms; I have tried to point out whenever a term is being used in a variant meaning. In so far as the ideas are ultimate, the present meanings must be different from received meaning—at least by expansion and perhaps also by revision

It may be useful to provide some examples of the outcomes of the journey. The primary example of the ideas is the development of the metaphysics: that process was far from being linear: the inputs were numerous, vast in scope: approach and goal remained in interaction till the metaphysics was achieved. In Journey the analogous development is the dynamics of being which derives from the metaphysics. One way of ultimate realization is to know the sameness of individual identity and Universal Identity; of this there are occasions and perhaps only occasions for in this life we remain in this world. It will be more complete to make that realization as transformation. This remains in process. Preliminary examples are given in Journey, in the areas of A. Ideas; B. Identity, Personality and charisma; C. Dynamics of mind—self—awareness; D. Body, healing and medicine

Essence—II

Journey in being is a journey into the immediate and ultimate possibilities of being. As a journey, it was not known at the beginning where and how far it might lead

The ways or modes of the journey are ideas and transformation. Ideas are a form of transformation and therefore transformation is the more complete mode. However, ideas are essential as instrument and appreciation of transformation. Imagine that an individual transforms into a god; if the individual is not aware of this he or she experiences no significance—the most significant transformation for the individual is transformation in his or her identity. The title of the essay could be Journey in ideas and identity. It is shown in Metaphysics that the individual will take on the Identity of all being. Doubts, objections, responses are taken up in Metaphysics as part of a comprehensive Universal metaphysics that has a number of formulations which include this: the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety. Regarding ‘the individual will take on the Identity of all being’ there is the concern that if the transformation is given, there is no challenge, no achievement, no adventure. The response ‘if that is the case then that is what must be’ is not necessary for even though ultimate realization is given in generic terms, the nature of the realization, the way are not. It is also given that along the way difficulty, pain, fear, challenge, will be given and adventure and enterprise may be undertaken

The ideas are developed in Intuition through Worlds; the transformations—as well as ways and principles of transformation—which are ongoing are narrated in Journey and Being. Along the way, while dealing with transformations and new and novel ideas—often using familiar words in new ways—it became apparent that the new content was the occasion for new approaches. Method collects these approaches together, organizes and formalizes them. Method reveals some limits and occasions revision of received thought on method; the revised thoughts are placed in the new context

The final chapter Contribution collects together what I believe to be new and significant in the essay. The major contributions center around the ideas described above and their application to the more immediate disciplines, especially the sciences and philosophical thought. There is a variety of contributions that is secondary in not being in the main line of development. The act of collecting the contributions together has made it possible to further develop some of the secondary contributions, e.g. to the traditions of metaphysics and systematic developments of human knowledge. The following paragraphs are outline explanation of the nature and magnitude of the contribution and my reasons for believing that the contribution is significant

Significance of the contribution. Imagination is essential in the emergence of new ideas. However, criticism is essential as well and before any ‘truth’ can be claimed, proof or demonstration—whose kind will depend on the subject matter—is necessary. The claims made are imaginative but I have also provided demonstrations including that of the nature of the ‘ultimate possibilities of being’ and the ability of an individual or finite being to achieve these possibilities. I have found via demonstration that there are no essential limits on the possibilities—or necessities—of being; and, while this is momentous in itself, its implications are immense. These implications and their significance are systematically elaborated and demonstration or proof is given

A perhaps subjective doubt about the demonstrations concerns their simplicity and the magnitude of the results. However, the simplicity is manifest only after an entire system of concepts have been selected, conceived adequately, and deployed appropriately. And there are ways to see the magnitude of the results as reasonable; of course, familiarity helps. There are also formal objections; these are enumerated and responses given

Proof is thought to be certain but it is characteristic that the certainty of proof is not invariably absolute. There are proofs in Euclid’s Geometry that, after 2000 years of having been regarded as absolute, were found faulty by the German David Hilbert; Hilbert supplied corrected proofs. There are theorems in modern mathematics that are aided by computer generation of parts of their proofs that are so complex that panels of experts may claim that while no error has been found the proof is ‘probably correct.’ There are doubts about what I have proved; these doubts are of a different character than the examples cited and their nature is described later. Were it not for the doubts I would say ‘I know what I have shown is correct.’ Instead I must be reserved and say that I believe what I have shown is correct. It is however, not mere belief; rather it is founded upon demonstration and criticism: I have anticipated and systematically sought criticism and doubt and provided responses to the doubts

I believe that this essay contains significant contribution to thought. However, that the contribution is not the result of proof: the fact of proof is necessary but not sufficient. Two further ingredients are necessary for the contribution to be significant. First, and trivially, the contributions must be new. In the essay I detail how there have been numerous glimpses of the insights but, as far as I know from lifelong reading in the tradition of thought, the insights have never before collected together as an integral whole, have never before been raised by demonstration from insight to knowledge, have never before reached the ultimate status of the present system—made possible by integration and demonstration, and have never before applied across a vast spectrum of activities and disciplines. Second, the results must be significant. Significance is manifest in the foregoing and is further brought out in the essay. One contribution is quality though not the fact of proof: the demonstrations are imaginative and novel and, additionally, the methods of proof are contributions to method

Themes for the Journey in being and the Narrative

A universe of the greatest variety

Themes—A Universe of the greatest variety. Demonstration and seeing

Journey

Themes—journey, realization, ideas and transformation, commitment and adventure, linguistic meaning, being

Narrative

Characteristics of the journey which are in chapter Journey may be relevant here but are presently omitted

Concepts—unusual form, novel and ultimate content, meaning, context, foci, the presentational form, monologue, travelogue, absorption, criticism, imagination, audience, general, specialist

A journey in being

A journey into the ultimate possibilities of being

Journey in being is an attempt by a limited being to realize the ultimate possibilities of being

Even an attempt by a limited being to realize ultimates may seem unrealistic. However, it will be shown in Metaphysics that the realization is not only possible but necessary

The claim may seem even more unrealistic if is said that the possibilities of being are without limit except any limits of Logic (if an individual achieves the possibilities of being and those possibilities are without limit, the individual has no limit.) However, that too is demonstrated. It is not hard to see that the claims apparently violate science and common sense. It will turn out that the violation is no more than apparent; in fact science in its valid domain is validated by the developments. However this will require explanation—which will be given. I.e. it will be shown how there is no violation of what is valid in science and common sense. It will also need to be explained what it means for the individual to achieve—it will be seen that the achievement will include identity with all being in the senses of sameness and subjective identity

Even so, an individual who undertakes this enterprise will make personal choices and will be concerned with what is desirable—e.g. right or good. It is expected that in an attempt to achieve ultimates the quality of the choices and understanding of desirability may change

Why being?

What is being? Being is what is there—whatever exists. Explanations will be given later but this statement will be found adequate

The idea is trivial—it says nothing—what is there is what is there! That illuminates nothing. However, it is this triviality that makes being a receptacle for discovery of the nature of what is there, i.e. the Universe

And this makes ‘being’ powerful as the mode of the journey: it is inclusive of ideas, identity, and transformation and whatever else may emerge

It might be said that one of the roles that ‘being’ plays in ideas is analogous to the role of unknown variables in algebra

This brief introduction to the idea of being receives elaborations below

A journey in ideas and transformation

The Journey in being is a journey in ideas and transformation. Transformation is the most complete realization of being. Ideas are an incomplete form of transformation but are essential as an instrument and as the place of appreciation and enjoyment of being

Scope and modes of the journey

Thus scope of the journey is universal and its modes are ideas and transformation

‘Transformation’ refers to transformation of being—of personality, of mind, of organism, and of entire being. Technological change is a specialized kind of transformation.

‘Idea’ is used in a general sense. Ideas refer to experiencing, perceiving, thinking, imagining, visualizing, understanding, theorizing and so on. Action has a significant ideational content and a limited transformational aspect; and the same may be said about experimentation. Metaphysics and science fall under ‘ideas.’ Having an idea is a limited kind of transformation; however, it is in ideas that transformation may be conceived and is experienced and appreciated

Why ‘journey’?

Parts of this essay could be developed as a series of essays in ideas; other parts could be amplified as travelogues even though the terrain is not restricted to the geographical or physical. Why then retain ‘journey’ in the title. What has been said so far suggests the idea of a journey and this thought is amplified in A personal journey below. Additionally there is the interaction between ideas and action and the fact of numerous trials with ends and process in unfolding interaction. However the essential reasons are as follows

The transformations are essential and not appended to the ideas. Therefore there is a physical journey but even the physical journey is not at all restricted to being geographical

It is the journey of an agent who enjoys travel and destination, who relates process to ends which both change in interaction

Additionally, the narrative is perhaps a reaction to the standard academic modes of publication: the treatise, the monograph, and journal and its the papers. Criticism of those modes is not the intent—they are present in this essay though not exclusively so. However, those modes of publication represent ideas moving forward and individuals, cultures and societies and technologies moving forward but with ideas at the forefront. In this narrative the individual remains an object of ideas but not merely so. In the life of a scientist, the science and the personal quest are distinct even though the quest may motivate the science. Here, the person and the idea evolve together and this is not mere juxtaposition but also essential in the ideas and in the individual. In the exploration of being idea and identity do not separate into formal development and personal motivation

A personal journey

The journey has a personal side. It began with an interest in ideas and notions of adventure and achievement. Some of the fields of interest were philosophy—metaphysics, epistemology, logic, nature of mind; natural science—physics, cosmology, and biology; technology; anthropology, society and social institutions e.g., economics; mathematics; religion; history; art, drama—especially cinema, music, and literature. And there was enjoyment of travel: nature has been an especial source of inspiration. National and international affairs, planning, human rights, environmental issues and the fate of civilization have so far been a spectator interest; it is a natural consequence of the ideas that I should want to become an active participant and leader. I have enjoyed wonderful time spent with friends: their warmth has given encouragement. Critics—even angry, irrational and distasteful critics—have fueled my drive. These have been some of the endeavors that have contributed to the present narrative

Along the way I was inspired by the wonder of the world as well as visions of the ultimate—an amalgam from physical and philosophical cosmology, metaphysics, myth, and religion. Understanding of things grows incrementally: absorption of ideas, criticism, application, imaginative conceptualization, integration…

These early visions of the ultimate were founded in analogy with science—since the energy of a gravitational field is negative the physical universe is equivalent to the Void, suggestions from the traditional literatures, and developing insight, and perhaps hope. I did not regard the visions as necessary for they lacked demonstration and, further, without demonstration, the amalgam remained a patchwork

Demonstration came later as described in the section Universe below and as worked out in Intuition and Metaphysics

The process through insight and then demonstration have been part of a personal journey that revealed the necessity of a larger journey through all being

Adventure

Interest in the ultimate has not dulled my passion for this world. And if it should, I would remember that the immediate is the first place of realization of the ultimate. I have endeavored with some success to show how the logic of the developments may be simplified to an act of vision

That realization is given may be a disappointment. There is no adventure—perhaps no meaning—in what is certain. However, it is assured that adventure, passion, pain, struggle, fear, and dissolution remain; there ever remains for the individual uncharted terrain of utter novelty; and even after the individual attains the ultimate there will be a return to forgetful sleep; therefore recreation is as creation. The metaphysics guarantees the outcome but gives only a glimmer of the part. It is perhaps the light of morning after travel though infinite night. The way starts in the immediate—one reason for immersion in it and for the study of our world in Worlds. The beginnings of the Journey in being are recounted in Journey and in Being. The future is an experiment

Universe

The purposes of this section are

‘Universe’ has a number of common uses. It is important to specify the present use so as to avoid confusion. Additionally, the idea of Universe used here is an essential to the development of the ideas

To emphasize early the importance of clarity and precision in concepts and meaning, first to avoid confusion and second and importantly that efficient choices of meanings enable the development of an articulated system of ideas with definite—and potent in the present case—consequences rather than a patchwork with vague meaning and consequences

To anticipate that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety. To discuss some consequences, especially the scope of the journey

The concept of the Universe

Definition: Universe as all being

A Universe of the greatest variety

In 2002 a critical insight enabled transformation from a patchwork vision of things immediate and ultimate into a coherent metaphysical view of all being. This view, demonstrated-laid out-elaborated in Intuition and Metaphysics, shows that the Universe has the greatest (Logically) possible variety: imagine any universe; if the imagined universe does not violate Logic, the actual Universe has at least as much variety

That the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety is one form of what will be called the fundamental principle of metaphysics

Some consequences

The immense consequences of this result are laid out in the narrative. They include (1) Our cosmological system is one of infinitely many; an infinity will identical to ours; an infinity will be similar; and an immense infinity will be vastly different. (2) The identity of individual being is in some sense identical to the entire Universe—this idea comes from the Indian philosopher Sankara; the present narrative shows it to be necessary: realization will occur even if the individual does not want it

It is crucial to absorb the magnitude of the conclusions. In every era there has been a standard picture—or pictures—of the Universe. Today there is a variety of religious and fictional cosmologies; however the standard cosmological picture is of the Universe as the known physical universe or perhaps some reasonable extension of it—dark matter, neutrinos, speculative bubble universes. And, though the big-bang cosmology is not accepted by everyone, that theory, with variations and apology, dominates secular thought. The picture developed shows the modern secular view to be—almost?—infinitesimal with regard to the extent and duration and variety of the actual Universe. If you come to this narrative with the standard secular view or the common religious, spiritual, and fictional cosmologies it will be essential to re-educate your vision of the Universe to understand the developments of the narrative. You may or may not accept the picture painted here—a Universe of the greatest Logically possible variety and implications—and you may or may not accept the demonstrations; however, in order to understand the narrative, to appreciate it, you will find it helpful, probably essential, to think and visualize in terms of the present picture

Some details. Overview of the fundamental principle, its meaning, its ultimate character—regarding the Universe and knowledge of the Universe as Identity, understanding it—its implications including what the Universe must be like, apparent paradox—and resolution, its Logical status, and its ultimate character

The implications—the Logical character, the metaphysics—contain and give context to the valid parts of all human knowledge and action both traditional and modern, and its implications

The question of science and common sense—and resolution in the limits of common knowledge and the necessary character of the fundamental principle

Limits of common knowledge

But local knowledge is not limited with regard to spatial extension alone. There is the limit of smallness—the fundamental principle requires that a particle be a cosmological systems: an electron appears as a point but our best knowledge does not disallow that an electron is a world: there are micro- and micro-micro- … cosmological systems; and there are similarly macro- and macro-macro- … cosmological systems. There are limits with regard to large and small times, large and perhaps small energies; complexity; chaotic phenomena. Science itself reveals these limits at the boundaries of present knowledge

Behind these limits is the apparently absolute limit that the apparent object is categorically distinct from the external object

Logos and variety

Journey

Why Journey?

This is a summary of earlier discussion

~~There is an analogy~~ ~~between the exploration of being undertaken and a journey without fixed path or itinerary or destination~~

The transformations are essential and not appended to the ideas. Therefore there is a physical journey but even the physical journey is not at all restricted to being geographical

It is the journey of an agent who enjoys travel and destination, who relates process to ends which both change in interaction

The narrative form of the essay complements the traditional academic forms. It integrates those forms with the travelogue in an essential way rather than as artifice

Further characteristics

No minimization of lesser worlds

No minimization of lesser worlds—including that of the immediate and of process; the immediate is not other than the ultimate and is a place of enjoyment and a place from which the larger process is seen and conceived

Insight

Insight—the journey, the ideas and transformation, are grounded in fundamental truths that have been demonstrated. However, the most important part of demonstration is perhaps finding the right way to see. And there is an attempt to reduce the processes of demonstration to acts of seeing

Doubt and faith

Doubt and faith—doubt is essential; critical doubt and imagination are mutually prerequisite for constructive thought. It is these that led to the demonstration of the truths of the narrative—Intuition through Method. And even with demonstration, doubt remains (formal doubts regarding the demonstration and subjective doubt regarding the magnitude of what is shown.) Therefore the journey continues even with doubt and the attitude most conducive to realization is labeled faith. This faith is not a given faith in fixed system but, perhaps, faith in being

The processes

Personal

Originally personal—there is an account of the personal process in Journey—a process that grew into an understanding of the identity of the individual and the Universe and undertook a journey within this ultimate ‘boundary’

Individual and universal

An individual journey whose envelope is identity with all being. The essential journey of an individual or society is not a following but a recreation; and all creation is recreation. Universe as process

Being

What is being?

Being is what is there—whatever exists. Explanations will be given later but this statement will be found adequate

Why being?

There are criticisms of the idea—it says nothing, it is trivial. But to evaluate the criticism it is necessary to refer to the function that being performs: what is the function of being in this essay? The goal: attempt ultimate possibilities. Therefore we need an idea that refers to the most general kind of ‘thing.’ That is the function of being in this essay and though not everyone uses being in the same sense it is a common use in the history of thought. It is now possible to respond to the charge of triviality: it is the triviality or generic character of being that is a source of its power in relation to the ability to refer to the most general kind. Because it says nothing about its reference—what it refers to—being refers to all kinds. Surely, though, comes an objection something should be said! Some thinkers might use matter, others mind, still others might talk of process. The point to using being is not that we shall say nothing. It is that we say nothing at outset so that if, in fact, there is some special kind that is the ‘being of all things’ then that may emerge in the process of investigation. Matter or mind or process may turn out to be appropriate but if we wait until investigation is adequate the conclusion will be justified rather than merely posited at outset. Another concern with this use of ‘being’ is that there are other uses—e.g., being is behind what is there or being is the essence of things or being is whatever has a self. There can be no objection to these uses; however they are not the use in this essay. Here, once again, being is whatever exists. Perhaps all beings in this sense have selves; perhaps not: that may emerge after investigation. (In this essay we will not particularly be concerned with selves but it should be obvious that if we assign self-hood to all beings, e.g. if a stone has a self, then the differences among the selves of different kinds must be vast. Instead of ‘self’ the essay will use the more inclusive idea of ‘identity’)

That explains the instrumental function of the idea of being in this essay

Additionally, being is the mode of journey—i.e., it is not a journey of mere external transformation but of the essence of the organism or agent. Although the suggestion is special ‘the being of the agent’ it is contained within ‘what is there’

The general significance of ‘being’

The significance of ‘being’ for thought is not other than the significance for the narrative: as an unknown, it is open to including the fundamental kind or kinds of the Universe or the absence of kinds. This openness makes the use of being immensely powerful in developing an understanding of the Universe as it is: metaphysics and cosmology

Elimination of substance and substance thinking

The significance to being-as-being as a source of understanding of the world over instrumental knowledge is a theme in Western Philosophy from the ancient Greeks to Aristotle to modern philosophy, especially Continental Philosophy

It has been emphasized, recently by Heidegger, that while special categories are powerful in the development of a useful and instrumental science, they are immensely limiting to any general understanding of the Universe

That being, i.e. what exists, should be understood on its own terms and any categorial terms that may emerge from investigation therefore has the potential to be immensely powerful. This is the reason for Heidegger’s rejection of substance, the reason for Aristotle’s emphasis on being-as-being

The present development arrived at a rejection of substance from a rational standpoint after much investigation in the explicit and implicit light of substance

A priori rejection of substance altogether is itself a kind of substance thinking—it would also be substance thinking to think that substance thinking has no benefit

That the present rejection of substance has not been a priori but consequent upon investigation is one source of the power of the present development. It was found along the way that implicit in the conception of substance is the notion of determinism. Here there has been no a priori rejection of determinism even though modern science and personal inclination have been partial to indeterminism

There is a common objection to indeterminism that it cannot result in structure; however, sustained reflection revealed simple but powerful arguments that determinism cannot develop essentially new structure and that indeterminism must develop structure

Briefly, it is thus that the limits of much prior metaphysics as the study-of-being have been transcended. An investigation that limited its circle of considerations is often regarded as necessary to productive thought; that limitation would, however, be a form of substance thinking; and the conclusion though apparently reasonable is not necessary; the rejection of the limited circle, an openness to all ideas and modes of thought in balance with critical thought, is a form of non-substance i.e. flexible thought that will later be called reflexive, has also been essential to the developments in metaphysics and related topics

Even after substance metaphysics has been eradicated, the habit of substance thought may remain. An example is in the isolation of morals without regard to other concerns such as the economic. Moral purism does not merely imply economic chaos—it is impossible. However moral purism is an example of the habit of substance or essentialist thinking. It would also be substance thinking to assume that the preceding thought permits the abandonment of morals. The point is that the join of moral and economic concerns is difficult—but essential. Another example of substance thinking is the thought that received method ever stands above content—and the thought that method and rules are ever received as though there were some foundation to them in another world… as if there were other worlds

The substance picture of knowledge is that knowledge stands by itself. The partial truth to this has been seen. Taking this partial truth results in the hyper-speculative as well as hypercritical pictures of ideas. We may like the idea of stand alone knowledge but stand-alone significant knowing in all realms is a dream. Here is an essential source of the idea of the journey

The course of the narrative traverses a number of problems whose source includes essentialism and whose resolution requires the elimination of essentialism

Metaphysics, science and faith

Metaphysics and science

At the center of the ideas is the chapter Metaphysics. This section introduces metaphysics, briefly elaborates it in terms of the ideas of being and Universe. The standard modern criticisms of metaphysics and the responses of this narrative are noted. Then contrast and comparison with science is used to illuminate metaphysics—and science. Finally, the section introduces a conception of faith—one that does require uncritical suspension of disbelief: one is concerned with the relation between ideas and action—and its role in knowledge and in life. Since the Introduction sets stage for and is an overview of the narrative, demonstrations are given later

The idea of metaphysics is that it has to do with the study of being. Being was introduced as what is there. The narrative uses the following conception: metaphysics is the study of being-as-being, i.e. the study of things as they are. This conception is of course not new and goes back to Aristotle

From the earlier section, Universe—the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety. That is one formulation of the fundamental principle of metaphysics that is at the core of the Universal metaphysics. Some conclusions of the Universal metaphysics were mentioned earlier and these included that the Universe has infinitely many cosmological systems of immense variety and that the identity—in slightly different words—of the individual was-is-will be the Identity of the Universe. Since the metaphysics shows that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety, it is ultimate in breadth

As knowledge of things as they are, the possibility of metaphysics has been questioned. Here, however, the claim is not just to metaphysics but to one of the greatest breadth. How is that possible? It is possible because it starts with certain necessary Objects that have detail abstracted out to the point that there is no distortion in knowing them; therefore knowledge of them is perfectly faithful. The necessary Objects are ‘universal:’ they include the Universe, Domains and the Void. The rest follows from the being, properties, and knowledge of these Objects. This suggests an ultimate foundation: a sense will be made clear later in which the Universal metaphysics is also ultimate in depth or foundation

It will also be pointed out that two doubts arise regarding the Universal metaphysics: the first concerns its logic; and the second is subjective and its origins are the magnitude of the conclusions: how can so much be shown at all? The doubt is amplified by the apparent fact that so little goes into the demonstration. Responses will be given. It may be noted here that ‘so little’ is not so little after all: the selection of the necessary Objects, the insight into their properties, and the insight into how to bind them into a system and see how to provide demonstration—this required time, reflection, and repeated trials of synthesis and attempts to bring the relevant array of metaphysical topics from the history of thought under the logical umbrella of the developments (as well as fortitude in the face of various doubts.) Given that development, the actual concepts and proofs are indeed trivial (and the triviality will be seen to be a source of power.) Although the ‘so little’ part of the doubt may have been erased, there is still subjective doubt regarding the magnitude of what is shown; this doubt especially natural in an era when criticism reigns over imaginative thought

In contrast to metaphysics, science starts with the immediate and the detailed. Science may abstract out some aspects of what is being studied but enough detail remains that perfect faithfulness cannot be claimed. Hypotheses are combined into theories based on insight; predictions are made via reason including mathematics, predictions compared with observation. As more predictions are confirmed, confidence in the theory grows. But, as the history of science records, if a scientific discipline aspires to universality then as its boundary moves outward, its theories are subject to comparison with new data and therefore to ongoing confirmation or to disconfirmation. The case of biology is perhaps a little different because there is currently no ‘universal’ forefront; of course, much still remains to be revealed about life on this earth. In conclusion, though, any universal science is tentative even though articulated scientific theories that have been experienced success over a long period of time may be felt to be necessary and final. Science must continue to be regarded until demonstration of finality; which of course does not imply that that demonstration shall occur

While both science and metaphysics are driven by reason and experience, metaphysics focuses on the aspects of experience so simple that faithfulness is given and therefore metaphysics may be perfectly faithful, universal and is primarily driven by reason (after the fact of the experimental and intuitive development of the ideas) and disconfirmation would be disconfirmation of reason rather than disconfirmation from empirical fact. In contrast, science is approximate even when marked by amazing precision, local, driven by reason and experiment, and subject to empirical and rational disconfirmation. As will be seen, the Universal metaphysics provides a framework for the disciplines including science; therefore while metaphysics is useful as illuminating the nature and extent of being it is also useful even from the limited point of view of the utility of science

The distinction is not absolute. Relaxing the practical requirements on science may result in metaphysics which in turn may result in science by the addition of the requirements

Metaphysics is instrumental in the exploration of all modes of being including those not claimed to be described in science; that latter includes identity and its relations to Identity as discussed earlier. Naturally, science may play a supportive role in this exploration

Faith

There is some doubt attached to all knowledge. That is the way of knowledge. If we insist that there is no doubt at all it is probably because of a desire to have a shield against doubt

Therefore, even in the strictest of science and even in the most rigorous of metaphysics there is some degree of faith in acting upon what is ‘known’

This faith is not belief in things that the individual thinks absurd—or would think absurd but for suspension of criticism; it is the attitude most conducive of productive action in the face of doubt and may take many forms

I have noted some doubt about the demonstrations of the Metaphysics: if faith is the most productive action in the face of doubt regarding metaphysics and common knowledge how can paths of action be specified? If I do not act the metaphysics on it, I lose an opportunity to be involved with the variety and magnitude of the Universe. However, to live in the world, I must act on what is generally regarded as established. Therefore I perform much of my activity—the daily routine, being part of the gears of society—in terms of what is generally regarded as established but also devote some fraction of my activity to ‘metaphysical action’ i.e., action in the light of the possibilities revealed in the metaphysics… somewhere in that range lie places that might be thought optimal …

Metaphysics: earlier version

In any journey there is some sense of the area to be navigated even if it is no more than a sense of mystery. In the journey, the area may come more or less into focus. There is interplay between the developing picture and the travel itself. Here the area is the universe and this is depicted via a system of ideas. There are entire traditions from which ideas may be drawn. Although some traditions talk of the identity, in some sense, of the individual and all being there is no tradition that demonstrates this. If the equivalence was to be more than an intuition or a hope, it would have to be demonstrated. After a fair amount of intuitive groping and reading and reflecting on the traditions a demonstration was found

The ideas are developed in the chapters Intuition through Worlds. Of these, Metaphysics is fundamental. In this essay metaphysics will mean, roughly, knowledge of things as they are. The metaphysics that is developed will be ultimate in breadth and depth and this ultimate character implies among much else that the individual can and will achieve identity with all being

‘Metaphysics’ sometimes has esoteric connotations. Here, though, the meaning is quite simple—knowledge of things as they are. And that includes the Universe which may be regarded as a thing. Perhaps though knowledge of things as they are is not simple; the tradition of thought weighs in against simplicity. If even simple things are difficult to know, how is it possible to claim knowledge the Universe? The response is that if anything is known-as-it-is that is metaphysical knowledge. According to this conception of metaphysics it may be empty

It will turn out that the opposite is the case. Metaphysics has a long history in western thought. There is no perfect agreement regarding what it is or whether it is even possible. It is an interesting point though that if we come by a final metaphysical knowledge of all things that would include knowledge of what metaphysics is. Similarly, given the incomplete nature of metaphysics in the tradition it is expected that there is no consensus regarding what it is. In this narrative we do arrive at final metaphysical knowledge in certain important but not all directions. How does that square with the tradition? On examination of the tradition it is found that there is no absolute argument that metaphysics is impossible: the argument is that if we cannot prove knowledge does not have essential distortion, we cannot know that there is metaphysical knowledge (in the present sense.) In the following paragraph a way is noted in which perfect faithfulness is possible and significant; the demonstration primarily in chapter Intuition

There is an interesting point about the tradition of thought. One aspect of it is that in attempting to refine and expand naïve thought it must include criticism of naïve thought to positions that are perhaps improved. Problems are identified and multiple approaches to resolution attempted—it cannot be known at outset what approaches will work (otherwise problems would be trivial.) All this enters into the tradition (some approaches are of course recognized as less fertile.) The point is that while it is probably necessary to have some immersion in the cumulative tradition to carry on the refinement and expansion that began with naïve thought, the immersion can become a burden. An example is the difficulty with the possibility of metaphysical knowledge that became burnished in modern and recent eras of the tradition

The meaning and proof of the assertions made and what they entail are developed in the essay. It is expected that any claim of ultimacy will raise doubt—especially since the very possibility of metaphysics or knowledge of things as they are has been questioned in modern thought. It has been a part of internal and continuing criticism to search, raise and respond to doubts—systematically as in the case of known issues and by being aware of the need to base claims on argument andor evidence and to seek and respond to flaws in arguments and bases in evidence. Criticism of the claim regarding the ultimate character of the metaphysics is tempered by the fact that the metaphysics is built up around extremely simple objects defined so as to eliminate distortions of knowing. The simple objects and the fact that knowledge of them is perfectly faithful are developed in the chapter Intuition. The reader may form his or her own judgment of the success of this endeavor

As explained later, demonstration has not removed all doubt. And even if doubt is removed, the demonstration merely shows some ends that may be achieved. It does not show all ends or how to achieve the ends. For these reasons the way to realization remains a journey. It will also be shown that the journey will remain ever fresh

Meaning

Will begin with knowledge as replica or correspondence—concept and object—and that although this must be metaphorical from a perspective of external foundation, it identifies the essential gap that must be ‘bridged’ for knowledge of the thing-as-it-is, i.e. metaphysics, can be known to be possible

This is an informal introduction to linguistic meaning—a more complete analysis is developed in Intuition through Objects

The first purpose to this introduction to meaning is to bring to readers’ attention the fact that words—often common ones—will be used with new and significantly enhanced meaning. It will be crucial for understanding to attend to meaning as introduced in the narrative

Additionally, this section provides a limited preview of the later discussions of meaning

Word and linguistic meaning

Meaning and context

Old words, new meaning

As the context changes, meaning may change (1) fundamentally as the old meaning or set of meanings is no longer adequate, (2) because the range of reference grows

Examples

Universe…

Narrative

Features and unusual aspects

Anticipated difficulties in understanding

Audience

Unusual form

The reasons for this form have been discussed above

Unusual form—a travelogue that integrates a system of ideas and its embodied use

The essay can be read as a series of essays picked from Intuition through Method and presented as contributions to thought

Unusual and ultimate content

Unusual content—scope and depth, modes of thought, bringing the received to light, fundamental insights

Ultimate in content—inclusive of the local

Audiences

An interest in the Journey

Some readers may be interested in the nature of the journey, its modes and means of transformation and idea, of the possibilities and necessities revealed, and of the process so far. Some of these readers may find inspiration and information for their own process. These readers will have An interest in the Journey itself

Some readers will be interested in the conceptual structure of the narrative, the formal developments, and the different topics at a variety of degrees of specialization. These readers will have An interest in the formal developments

The two groups of reader are not distinct. Those readers who would use the ideas in their own process will find the formal development useful for even though the language is formal the ideas are universal as well as instrumental

Combine the foregoing and the following

An interest in the formal developments

Audiences—the general and the specialist are not exclusive—the general audience is interested in the envelope and the process of the journey while the specialist andor technical is perhaps academic and interested in some specific aspect andor the underlying argument and its relation to and implication for formal thought (the development blurs the distinction of the general and the formal interest and development)

Suggestions for reading

Sources of difficulty—it is useful for a reader to know what difficulties may be encountered. The sources include the following. (1) The content is an exploration of new ground and will require readers to think outside received paradigms of understanding. The understanding of the Universe that is developed may appear to contradict science and common sense and, although potential paradox is resolved, it will take time and familiarity to feel at home with the new picture—to see the picture emerging from the details. (2) New ways of understanding are unlikely to emerge from a blank slate. It is far more likely for the new way to emerge from older understanding. To a significant degree the present developments have occurred by assimilating the thought of the past, reviewing that thought in terms of the problems it may have been intended to resolve, cross comparison among a variety of topics and disciplines, and absorbing those elements that emerge from this naturally iterative critical process. However, there are also a number of significant new developments. At the core of these developments is the fundamental principle of metaphysics one of whose forms states that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety of being. This lies at the core of the new paradigm. Readers will have technical questions about its proof. However, the magnitude of consequences is such that there will be a dual problem of assimilation and understanding. Further, an entire system is built up around this principle in chapters Intuition—Method. This development is framed by the Metaphysics and, in order to be comfortable with it the reader may first need to become comfortable with the metaphysical core. Although the ideas may be expressed simply, the reader who would master them so as to be able to undertake his or her own process in the ideas will be required to undertake some minimum degree of familiarization. ‘Experts’ will not be exempt from the difficulty and may find it especially acute if they think that the developments are technical exercises in terms with which they are already familiar. (3) The developments are anchored in an encyclopedic variety of disciplines from the traditions and while familiarity with these disciplines is not essential to understanding it can only facilitate richness of understanding

Sources of difficulty include (1) That the narrative presents a system of understanding that is in some ways ultimate and that is likely to be different in its view of the world than the common systems—including the world views from science, the religions, secular humanism and so on. (2) The development is extensive—ultimate—in depth of understanding and breadth of application. (3) While it is likely that some words will be new to many readers there are many words that will be familiar to most readers but used in specific and often unfamiliar ways

The problem of the expert

Suggestions for reading

Suggestions for reading—since the context is ultimate, ordinary words acquire new meaning. There is a tension between using old terms and coining new ones—the use of an older term is grounding but may be confusing on account of multiple and changed sense while a new term may avoid such confusion but lose richness of content. Since meaning is holistic, it emerges with net understanding; we therefore suggest two readings… a first linear reading with incomplete understanding tolerated and criticism acknowledged but temporarily and at least partially placed on hold… and a second not so linear reading to clarify, resolve or consolidate criticism, complete the understanding, integrate and merge with the reader’s process

Suggestions therefore include attention to meaning and context, holding criticism in at least partial abeyance until a second reading

Narrative outline

The preliminary comments to this chapter contain a wide-angle view of the journey and the narrative

Every chapter has an introduction that is both introduction to and wide-angle view of the topic. The latter clarifies the place of the chapter in the narrative and what it learns from and may give to the tradition

The development of the main topics Intuition through Method has not been sequential. However, a rough sequence determined by the first interest and work on the topic might be: Worlds, Journey, Being, Metaphysics, Cosmology, Objects, Method, Intuition

The sequence of placement in the narrative is roughly determined by the approximate facts: the ideas are perquisite to the transformations of Journey and of Being—except that it is proper to place Method later since it incorporates action and faith; of Metaphysics, Objects, Cosmology, and Worlds, each is conceptually prior to the subsequent topics; and Metaphysics is grounded—i.e. founded in Logic as well as (human) being—in Intuition

Introduction

The first goal is to provide an overview of the development but without excessive attention to detail and approach

The second goal of the introduction is to illuminate the narrative itself, to identify potential audiences, and to make suggestions for reading the narrative

Intuition through Being

Intuition. In earlier versions of the narrative Metaphysics was the first main chapter. The metaphysics that is developed is called the Universal metaphysics or Metaphysics of immanence. Although the metaphysics has independent foundation and is capable of impressive elaboration and application it remained remote. The concept of experience was used to provide some grounding to the metaphysics

More recently, the role of experience has been taken over by the idea of intuition. Intuition is used in a specific sense that is developed in the narrative. In this sense—in which experience is implicit—the processes of knowing, i.e. fact and inference, are brought under intuition so that no a priori claim regarding the faithfulness of the processes is made. Clearly there must be some faithfulness or else we would not be able to negotiate the world at all. That, however, does not tell us the degree of faithfulness (an interesting thought is that perhaps the modern concern with explicit and precise faithfulness is peripheral to the greatest realization of being.) By analyzing intuition it is found that certain necessary Objects—i.e. Objects that are known with perfect faithfulness—that include experience, the external world, being, the Universe or all being, difference, extension and duration, Domain and Complement, the Void, and Logic

Given—perhaps assuming—that we never get outside of knowing to give it final foundation, how is it possible to know that we know anything with perfect faithfulness? The necessary Objects are known with perfect faithfulness because they are defined by having any detail that is subject to distortion abstracted out. In knowing the Universe, we are not claiming to know it in all detail but only in that there is without doubt something that it all being. In knowing difference, we do not claim to know some particular difference to precision but only that there is difference. This process of abstraction is sharply distinct from another kind of abstraction in which a rich object is replaced, in thought, by a token. Here, is no replacement; abstraction ‘looks’ at the aspects of an object that are faithfully knowable because of their simplicity

These Objects constitute necessary, faithful, and empirical but not a priori knowledge. It is their simplicity that permits their faithful knowledge. Thus, precise metaphysical knowledge—knowledge of the Object-in-itself—is possible and given. Here is an example of the power of eliminating substance or essentialist thinking. In not insisting that all Objects should be known faithfully in order to have a metaphysics, metaphysical knowledge has been developed and identified. Although these necessary Objects provide only a skeleton, it is a skeleton of the Universe that will be developed further in Metaphysics and then filled out in Metaphysics and the remaining chapters

These Objects of Intuition ground the metaphysics

Metaphysics. The focal point of the ideas is the Metaphysics

It is here that a new and ultimate vision of the Universe is developed—the vision has been glimpsed before but the full vision, the demonstration, the elaboration and application including its use as context for all knowing are new. It is here that the fundamental principle of metaphysics is demonstrated. As mentioned in the Prologue, this principle guarantees the infinite richness of the Universe. In Metaphysics, the fundamental principle and its consequences are developed with articulation and precision into what has now takes on the aspect of an edifice but still remains fluid. An aspect of this development is the provision of an ultimate and precise concept of Logic that, because it is implicit, requires no foundation and is approximated by the extant systems of logic. In Metaphysics, Logic is added to the list of necessary and faithful Objects. The metaphysics also shows that substance is untenable as foundation of understanding but also that such foundation is possible—and developed—without substance. These results are immensely significant and contrary to the mainstream of received thought today

The metaphysics is founded independently. However, without the grounding in Intuition it would be remote—merely symbolic though not at all without content. Via Intuition, the metaphysics has intimate foundation in our knowing. In Intuition we know a skeletal version of the entire Universe that may be filled out as noted above. And it is more than a filling out for the mesh of the metaphysics with the knowledge of contexts, e.g. the sciences, provides the potential for the contextual knowledge to be raised to its intrinsic limit. These thoughts run contrary to a deep modern sentiment that metaphysics per se is impossible—that the only metaphysics is a metaphysic of experience. In effect it is shown that provided that the fundamental Objects are chosen and understood with care they are already in experience; this appears to be unappreciated and unrecognized in current and prior thought. This leads to the thought that perhaps the metaphysics as well as Logic can be ‘seen.’ The narrative stops short of regarding the metaphysical system as an act of seeing but perhaps the question becomes ‘what is seeing?’

Objects. Metaphysics is followed by Objects which asks precisely what kinds of Objects there are. Objects begins by clarifying the nature of the Object; identifies that Objects fall primarily into two classes—particular and abstract and shows how this forms a foundation for a theory of the variety of Objects. Finally, Objects develops a unified theory of Objects whose central result is that the distinction between particular and abstract Objects is not one of kind but one of mode of study. This is a fundamental discovery that is contrary to mainstream thought on the nature of the abstract and the particular. The discovery is a consequence of the fundamental theorem of metaphysics. Consequences of the discovery include that an Object may be seen as particular or abstract according to approach or phase in the history of thought. Another consequence is that—contrary to mainstream thought—abstract objects have location in space and causal character but location and cause may be more or less ‘abstracted out’ and therefore not relevant rather than not part of the constitution of the Object

Cosmology develops a variety of Objects that includes process as well as the special cases of mechanism and causation. In Metaphysics it was shown that the Universe is absolutely indeterministic—that there is no limitation on the states of the Universe except Logic and that every state is accessible from every other state. Contrary to one trend in thought this necessitates structure for structured states are among the Logical states. This eliminates the potential paradox that Universal freedom violates the science of our local cosmos. It is also one foundation of the Cosmology whose topics are General cosmology, Variety and origins, Identity and death, Process, Mind, and Space-time-being. To detail the various sub-topics and results of Cosmology would take up unnecessary space and the reader is referred to the chapter for this material. Some results such as the identity of individual identity and Universal Identity have been mentioned—this implies the relative nature of death; others include that there must be infinitely many worlds of infinitely varied character and that space and time are immanent and therefore relative but that there may be domains where they are as if absolute; and that the Universe enters stages of being the Void which resolves a fundamental problem of metaphysics, i.e. why there must be phases of manifest being rather than eternal nothingness; finally a simple consequence of the concept of the Universe as all being is that it can have no first cause or creator—however there are gods but that these gods do not generally conform to the various preconceptions of the idea of ‘god’ from myth and religion

With the conclusion of Cosmology the development of the general metaphysics comes to a temporary halt; it is taken up again in Method

Worlds. The next chapter Worlds, is a study of the local cosmological system—the one that is the subject of modern physical cosmology. The subtopics are (1) the Approach to the study which is an aspect of Applied metaphysics and Method, (2) Local cosmology, (3) Life and organism, (4) Human being which includes a study of human mind and human freedoms, (5) Society, and (6) the Human endeavor and its normal limits. All topics have intrinsic interest as the understanding of where we live and what we are. The topics are significant to the journey because understanding of where we live and what we are is significant at the journey’s outset (at least.) The final topic regarding the normal limits of the human endeavor takes up some traditional modes of human understanding of the universe and the place of human being in it. These modes include myth and religion, science and rationalism, and secular humanism. It is shown that these modes have intrinsic limits that are consequent upon the nature of their normal practice—which is to say that the limits are not essential but imposed by various factors that include conservatism and an obsessive and blinding concern with security. The reason that the discussion is separate from the section Human being is that it provides a kind of preparation for the Universal metaphysics, i.e. the nature of the limits is such that the disciplines are revealed as having domains where they do not apply. Where knowledge says nothing, nothing can be said. However, where the traditional systems say nothing there may be some other system; the Universal metaphysics is the ultimate of such systems. Precisely what is the relation between the metaphysics and the traditional systems—especially science, rationalism, and secular humanism—is taken up in the narrative

Journey. At this point the narrative takes up the transformations of being and identity in the chapter Journey described above. The sections of the chapter are A journey in being—the idea of the journey and an individual account; Method—reviews traditional approaches, catalysts, enhancements (the dynamics of being) that follow from the metaphysics; The transformations—so far… including an assessment of accomplishment and the way ahead; Investigation—foundation and peripheral studies; The future—a brief thought on a balance between being-in-all-being and being-in-the-present… and a look forward to the section Pure being of chapter Being

The next chapter, Being takes up the nature of being-that-is-capable-of-feeling-significance. The two approaches to significance are History and Pure being. The concept of History developed is tailored to the task and the attitude is light and suffused with light; it is a weightless approach to History. Pure being is discussed earlier—“Pure being takes up one closure of the process in identifying be-ing with the ultimate”; it is concerned with closure of the question of realization even while being-in-a-journey

Method

The final main chapter concerns Method. Method and content are traditionally separated; method develops slowly—witness the period of about 2000 years between the Aristotelian and modern logics; and the foundation of method appears to be obscure. However, in the development of the ideas it was seen that reflections regarding content and method were emerging together. This has already been seen in the emergence of facts that are empirical and necessary and in the dual emergence of metaphysics and Logic. Thus far—in the Introduction—of course these things have not been developed formally or demonstrated. In the narrative there is both formal development and demonstration. This material is collected together in Method. Abstraction emerges as fundamental to this development. Here, abstraction is not the replacement of a rich Object by a stick figure; that is one connotation of ‘abstraction.’ Rather, abstraction is the identification of essentials of Objects that are so simple that empirical and necessary or faithful knowledge of such Objects is given. The second aspect of Method emerges from the fundamental principle which shows that Logic is the one law of all being—of the Universe. The two ways of knowing are fact and inference and we see these as combining under Method in the development of the Universal metaphysics. This metaphysics—Intuition through Cosmology—is rich in one way but still rather barren in its immediate application. However, the metaphysics forms a framework for more immediate studies such as that in Cosmology of mind, and the studies in Worlds of Local cosmology and Human being. The principles of the application of the metaphysic are that the Universe contains all worlds; that the fundamental principle of metaphysics applies to all worlds; and that although restricted and stable worlds have Normal behaviors, those behaviors are not root behaviors and it is via root behavior that the Normal and the Universal connect. This connection is a rich source of ideas and extensions of the study of local worlds—the Local cosmology, Human being and society and so on. And it is here especially that the vast studies from the traditions of thought are so useful to the present development for they provide raw material

Method is taken up after Journey. This is because it is realization that is the completion of the ideas. The ideas alone do not constitute or show the entire way to realization. Action upon the goal of transformation is essential and there will be no ultimate guides in this ultimate adventure. Additionally, there may be doubts and objections regarding the demonstrations of the ideas; and even though these doubts and objections are addressed doubt may remain. Therefore Faith is an essential element of ‘method.’ At this point the reader may have become acclimated to the use of common words with multiple connotations in specific and sometimes ultimate meanings. Here Faith has specific meaning; it is not Faith in dogma for example which has the sometime connotation in what is or rings of the absurd. Here Faith is closer to the simple faith in regular events, to animal faith. Although such Faith is without universal logical foundation, without it the individual might be reduced to neurotic confusion. Here, therefore, Faith is that attitude that secure in the knowledge of universal realization that is maximally conducive to the contingent process of realization. This Faith encounters and allows doubt—without doubt there is no overcoming of doubt which remains neurotically suppressed; this Faith does not encourage action from universal blindness but encourages finding out about local contingencies to ferret out paths; this Faith recognizes that where we may ‘fail’ in countless manifestations, there will be realization in countless if many fewer others. This Faith is a concomitant to Method

Demonstration

That demonstration is possible as is demonstration of the way of demonstration

That this is neither infinite regress nor vicious circle

Principles of perception, thought and action

Method also considers Principles of perception, thought and action which are distinct from method. Under the principles the main concern is the constructive or imaginative process for which there appears at outset—and this would be the consensus in the literature on this process—no method. However, some order is introduced into these ‘principles’ under the idea of reflexivity. Reflexivity is roughly the idea of self reference and cross reference among content and approach and the process of thought—and of perception and action—itself

Contribution

Check earlier discussion of contribution; import

Various developments have been tendered as contributions to thought

The original contributions

In its first section, The original contributions, the final chapter Contribution summarizes these potential contributions from the main development

The chapter develops some further ideas for contribution. These concern the nature of philosophy and metaphysics, the classification and address of the problems of traditional and recent metaphysics, and the development of a system of human knowledge. The relevant sections are Philosophy and metaphysics, Problems of metaphysics which catalogs and addresses the problems of traditional and modern metaphysics, and Human knowledge which develops and outlines a system of human knowledge in light of the intersection of the academic disciplines and the Universal metaphysics

Philosophy and metaphysics

In the modern and recent era, the scope of philosophy has retracted from its role as knowledge of the world and expanded in a role in which it illuminates the nature and limits of knowledge. Similarly, traditional metaphysics—especially system building—has been seen as misguided and speculative. The present narrative has presented and demonstrated the necessity of a Universal metaphysics that is not a speculative system in the traditional sense, i.e. the present metaphysics is demonstrated rather than speculated. Of course, imagination was necessary to provide the raw material upon which reason could operate. It is fundamental that the problem of infinite regress in foundation is manifestly addressed and resolved in the development

The question arises—Why has systematic metaphysics been largely abandoned? The answer may be twofold. First, the actual systems, e.g. of the Greeks and of eighteenth and nineteenth century Europe are indeed highly speculative and rightly deemed to be without foundation (they remain remarkable in that if they were foundational, they would also be profoundly imaginative.) The fact that those systems may have been so highly and dogmatically regarded undoubtedly contributed to their downfall—to the violence with which they have been rejected; however, from that downfall it is an unwarranted conclusion that all system is impossible. Secondly however, Kant is regarded as having shown that no metaphysics outside experience is possible and even without the weight of Kant’s thought the empirical side of modern science combined with its vast success has weighed in against the possibility and usefulness of metaphysics which came to be regarded as essential speculation. The present narrative as indicated above has shown that even though those arguments are reasonable they do not imply that the Universal metaphysics is impossible for it is empirical or that it is impossible for it has been demonstrated or that it is useless for the narrative develops an immense system of revaluation of ideas and (human) possibility; and the demonstrated Universal metaphysics is consistent with and requires what is valid in science and all reason and common sense, and although difficult to test is not untestable (the method of test is the journey in identity which is rather different than the standard scientific approach to testing)

Thus real and ultimate metaphysics is not only possible but necessary. And since the limits of philosophy are largely the limits of metaphysics, a conception of philosophy as also applying to the world is restored—and the restoration is more powerful than ever before, i.e. in paradigm or understanding that falls short of the ultimate that is here revealed

The following conceptions arise. Metaphysics is the discipline whose concern is the outer limits of being; whose method—the method of the rational or empirical-logical analysis of experience-meaning—shows how to study at those outer limits; and which is revealed as a study of being of ultimate depth and variety

Philosophy is the discipline whose limits are the outer limits of being; whose method shows how to study within those limits—the method of metaphysics; and the interactively modified methods of less general contexts whose intrinsic limit is the limit of the context

The problems of metaphysics. Human knowledge

These considerations suggest and the thoughts are developed in Contribution that the present developments enable classification and address of the problems of metaphysics and universalize any modern system of human knowledge and touch all of its major divisions

Intuition

Most uses of the word ‘intuition’ refer to a kind of knowing in which the process of knowing is not explicit

Intuition can be common or unusual with regard to the process of knowing and esoteric or immediate with regard to what is known. If someone claims to have intuition of a supernatural God, that would be unusual with regard to process (most people do not have that intuition) and esoteric with regard to what is known (a supernatural God is remote from the familiar world)

The eighteenth century German philosopher Immanuel Kant used intuition to refer to perception, especially perception in terms of space, time and cause. We do perceive in those terms but the perceptual processing itself is not explicit and therefore it is appropriate to use the term intuition. Since most adults perceive in these terms this intuition is common; and it characterizes an intuition of the immediate world (space, time and cause may extend to remote regions but the ability to perceive in those terms originated in the immediate environment)

The use of intuition here is an extension of Kant’s. We bring in all cognition under intuition; specifically, in addition to perception, reasoning or inference is included. We may think that logic is not intuitive, that it is very explicit. For example, one of the laws of logic is that a statement must be either true or false; therefore if the falsity of a statement implies a contradiction, we infer that the statement must be true: that is quite explicit. What is intuitive, however, is the source of the law that a statement must be true or false (and the other law that contradictions are not allowed.) Could a statement not be somewhere in between true and false? There are systems of logic that allow intermediate values. It turns out that the source of the underpinnings of logic is not explicit, is intuitive, and empirical. Therefore, we have some reason to reign in logic under intuition. This intuition is common to most adults and it is of the immediate world.

The reason for so doing is part of a strategy that will emerge. A goal of Metaphysics is to develop a system of metaphysics that will be called The Universal metaphysics. Intuition will provide the foundation for that development. By allowing that the process of intuition is not explicit we are allowing that it may be in error; however this allowance does not rule out that intuition may occasionally be without error: it is not ruled out that there is no domain over which intuition is perfect. The strategy will be to find certain Universal Objects that are so simple that they are known with perfect faithfulness and that will be used as foundation for the metaphysics. The basis of the metaphysics will be a common intuition of immediate and basic aspects of the world

The Universal metaphysics of Metaphysics centers around the assertion that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety of being. That metaphysics is one focal point of the system of ideas. (The other focal point is Worlds. Whereas Metaphysics is focal because it develops ultimate knowledge of the Universe, Worlds is focal because it develops knowledge and understanding of our immediate world—which is enhanced by being framed by the metaphysics)

That we can have true metaphysical knowledge has always been an issue. The possibility of metaphysical knowledge, i.e. knowledge of things as they are was criticized by Kant as being outside the realm of experience and therefore impossible (Kant argued that we know that there are ‘things as they are’ but that we do not know them.) Since Kant, true metaphysics has been widely doubted and often regarded as impossible

Yet the present claim is not just that metaphysical knowledge is possible but that the greatest possible metaphysics has been developed and demonstrated

The use of intuition has already been suggested—intuition is the fulcrum of that development… of that demonstration. And, also as suggested, the development begins by identifying certain fundamental and Universal Objects that are so simple that empirical knowledge of them is not merely possible: it is necessary. In a development that has seemed immensely surprising, these Objects are used to demonstrate the Universe of the greatest variety. This metaphysics frames all knowledge and may enhance it to its intrinsic limit. Therefore the claim that a vast and ultimate metaphysical system has been developed and demonstrated is justified. (That sounds as though it is demonstrated that something has been demonstrated and that is just what is being said. Explanations will be given.) However, it is not claimed that all knowledge is metaphysical—e.g., science is (generally) not metaphysical even though it is often extremely precise and often enables understanding and prediction. It will be seen that not all knowledge can be metaphysical. However, the metaphysics will frame the non-metaphysical knowledge in such a way that the framing may enhance the non-metaphysical to approach its intrinsic limit. In a way, then, although the metaphysics itself is perfect, the larger system does not result in perfect knowledge of all things. However, that larger system that we will label Applied metaphysics is, in the sense indicated, the best or potentially best possible

Essence

The ‘Universal metaphysics’ of Metaphysics lies at the center of the system of ideas. The goal of Intuition is to develop a foundation for the metaphysics

One goal of foundation is the foundation of the ideas in a system of fundamental ideas or concepts. These concepts will correspond to what are thought to be the fundamental Objects of the domain of study which, in the narrative, is the Universe; certain realms are emphasized, among them the human realm. Another goal of the foundation is to ground the study of being, i.e. the Universal metaphysics, in being—especially in human being. Foundation in intuition has been found in the development of the ideas to be particularly suited to the second goal. The following discussion includes showing that intuition is also supremely suited to the first goal

A standard foundation to knowledge is to derive by proof a system of knowledge from primitive elements that are either given (obvious and beyond question) or known empirically. This approach is open to criticism of the foundation—i.e. the givens and the methods of proof. Much otherwise clear headed metaphysics and epistemology have suffered from this problem

The approach here is to take a position of a priori agnosticism regarding knowledge. Agnosticism is refraining from claims. A priori agnosticism is refraining from claims at the outset but allowing that some claims may be justified a posteriori

It will be found that there are certain ‘universal’ Objects that are so simple that they are known without foundation, e.g. they are known in intuition; since the domain of study is all being, the Objects will naturally include the ideas of being, Universe, Domain, and Void; it will also turn out to be natural as well as pivotal that the Objects should include aspects of methods of proof which, as will be seen in later definition and elaboration, to lie within a final universal Object: the Logos. These Objects turn out—perhaps surprisingly—to be adequate to the development of an entire Universal metaphysics that reveals the Universe to have the greatest Logically possible variety. Since the universal or necessary Objects are known immediately in intuition rather than remotely, it may be said that the metaphysics achieves ultimate foundation or depth by being ultimately shallow or immediate

In the previous paragraph there was an encounter with the phrase ‘perhaps surprisingly.’ ‘Perhaps surprisingly?’ The Universal metaphysics and its ramifications turn out to be amazing and more: the idea greatest variety is brought from a status as a rough notion within intuition to precision within the realm of Logic! Familiarity has perhaps dulled the surprise. The amazement is, first, that the metaphysics should have been discovered at all (even though the formulation in terms of greatest possible variety has independent motivation from plausibility arguments.) However this amazement is muted by the preparation in experience and reflection and symbolic and intuitive experiment. The amazement is, second, a result of the magnitude and the fact of the demonstration of the metaphysics. And, here, there are doubts that are detailed later. An array of interpretation, plausibility arguments, and alternative proofs is marshaled in defense of the metaphysics. Yet doubt remains; perhaps that is in the nature of the doubter; yet: I have come to see that all knowledge is occasionally characterized by doubt. Therefore, given doubt, there is occasion for retaining intimate contact between action and idea rather than ever insisting on independent justification of ideas. And there is also occasion for faith which concerns attitude in the face of doubt but not unwavering belief in what might normally seem absurd; in any case, in any case there is no occasion to focus on unwavering belief in what cannot be doubted; and it will be seen an aspect of this faith is maximization of expected outcome: a reward of great magnitude justifies the expenditure of some resources in pursuit of the reward even when the odds of success appear to be low

The remaining—practical—Objects, e.g. of science and day-to-day affairs, are known with varying degrees of faithfulness; physical science, for example, may have immense precision within its domain of application. Pure metaphysics—knowledge of the universal Objects—frames practical knowledge and may enhance it (1) Because there are analogs of the practical Objects in the metaphysics—i.e. the metaphysics frames practical knowledge, (2) By enabling analysis of the fundamental elements of the practical knowledge as or in terms of absolutely fundamental Objects, and (3) By encouraging revision of the conceptual elements of the practical systems in light of the metaphysics

Pivotal to the analysis is the use of intuition. It will be important to be aware of the specific meaning of intuition used here. There will also be some importance to seeing the relation of this meaning to previous related meanings from modern thought

Essence—II

Metaphysics is the central chapter of the system of ideas: it is there that the foundation is laid (1) for the Universal metaphysics which includes knowledge of the Universe as having the greatest Logically possible variety and (2) for the journey through Identity with the Universe

Metaphysics requires foundation on two accounts. First, in this narrative it will claim to be knowledge of things as they are (this is a rough statement and there will be refinement) claim requires justification because knowledge and known are distinct. Additionally, because the thing-as-known is in part a product of the knower (an insight of the philosopher Kant) the very possibility of metaphysics has been in doubt since the time of Kant. Second, even if metaphysics is possible, the Universal metaphysics requires its own foundation

The Universal metaphysics has foundation in the given: there is being. This primitive foundation allows development of the metaphysics but it is abstract and remote and does not reveal a ground in human knowing

This chapter provides a richer foundation for the metaphysics by bringing all knowing under the umbrella of adaptive intuition that has no a priori guarantee of faithful knowledge

Within intuition are found certain universal Objects so simple that they are known with perfect faithfulness. These Objects provide a foundation of the Universal metaphysics and, derivatively, of Objects and Cosmology. The Universal metaphysics is a vast system of knowledge which leaves open the problem of locating its less than Universal Objects. The metaphysics also makes possible the development in Worlds in which the framing within the metaphysics allows the traditional and modern academic divisions of knowledge to approach their intrinsic limit. The latter knowledge is labeled Applied metaphysics even though it is not strictly metaphysics at all (except when perfect faithfulness can be shown)

The foundation of Intuition is an elaboration of the of that foundation that ties the development of the metaphysics into modern thought and grounds the metaphysics in—human—experience, thought, and ambition

Introduction

Place of Intuition the narrative

Need for development of the idea of Intuition

The Universal metaphysics of Metaphysics is capable of foundation in the two statements, first, the given that There is being and There is no assertion that is simultaneously true and false. The second statement is an axiom of logic—‘law of thought’—called the law or principle of non-contradiction. Later doubts regarding this apparently rock-like principle will occasion re-conception of logic and the reconceived version will be labeled Logic

Intuition is an elaboration of that brief foundation. It brings out clearly that the metaphysics is empirical and necessary. It grounds the metaphysics in the individual knower—it shows the intimate relation between the individual and all being. It shows that the apparently abstract developments of Metaphysics through Cosmology are not at all abstract in any sense of impoverishment or remoteness or irrelevance to the immediate

The Universal metaphysics will have foundation in the given—there is being. This foundation is abstract in the rough sense of remote. It does not anchor the individual in the Universe

Use of intuition in the development of the metaphysics

Intuition remedies the problem of remoteness and anchoring

It anchors the metaphysics in—human—knowing and thus shows the anchoring of the individual and community in the Universe

Implications for the journey

The view of knowledge as standing independently has practical utility but also strikes a divide between Identity and Universe; the focus on intuition is part of a restoration that requires and involves a journey

Wide-angle view of the development

Intuition provides a foundation for Metaphysics in intuition

From adaptation we know that our common knowledge must have some degree of faithfulness. In science much of the nature of the world is revealed and in some cases the precision is astonishing. The discipline of logic is often seen as certain in its conclusions but not one of its central axioms is without criticism; and modern logic recognizes a frankly empirical aspect to logic

Since we never get outside knowing there is some doubt regarding all knowing—when reference to something else, e.g. something more fundamental such as another concept or a measurement

Therefore all knowing is reigned in—at outset—with regard to assignment of certainty. This allows knowledge of certainty to emerge—Object by Object or perhaps kind (of Object) by kind

And other ways of founding knowledge may be sought

The concept and use of intuition in this essay derives from that of Kant. For Kant, our ability to perceive the world in terms of its—apparently—natural categories such as space, time and cause lies in intuition. Because the geometry of Euclid and the dynamics of Newton were so immensely successful, Kant thought that our intuition precisely captured nature (the natural categories.) Given mechanics and geometry, conclusions about the world can be derived from logic; and in Kant’s time Aristotelian logic was regarded as the exemplar of derivation

We now know that the schemes of Newton and Euclid—insofar as it applies to the world—are local approximations. And Aristotle’s logic is far from complete; and, further, logic is not a priori to knowing but has empirical aspects

Kant’s foundation does not stand because both science and logic are incomplete and subject to correction; however his insights into the nature and foundation of knowing are immensely valuable

Therefore we reign all knowledge into the intuitive sphere and tentatively label it ‘perhaps at most approximate.’ That will allow investigation of whether there is any faithful knowledge of things as the result of investigation, i.e. as empirical rather than as a priori to the empirical

We extend Kant’s use of intuition to also include inference—including logic. I.e. all knowledge and knowing is reigned in under intuition and labeled nature and degree of faithfulness incompletely determined at outset of investigation

A way to approach this situation has emerged from trial and error. We introduce a notion of abstraction that is not one in which an object is replaced by a token concept. Instead, it is recognized that amid the networked details of knowing there are conceptually abstracted out Objects that are so simple that knowledge of them is simultaneously precise and necessary. Among the most important of these necessary Objects are—as will be shown: Experience, Being—including external world which is complement to experience, the Universe or all being in the sense of all-being-without-the-details, Duration and space-like Extension, Domain or part, and absence of being or the Void, and Logos

Of these Objects, all except Logos are first rooted in perception; however, discernment of properties of the Objects may be the result of—higher—conception. Logos, on the other hand, is derived from the properties of the other necessary Objects

This is the basis of an ultimate and Universal metaphysics that, as applied metaphysics frames and potentially pushes all knowledge to its intrinsic limit

The necessary Objects are primitive in relation to Kant’s categories; and the analysis is of the primitives as primitive. Thus the foundation of the metaphysics is taken to a deeper level than Kant’s foundation in the Kantian categories. Then, as shown in Metaphysics, the depth will be ultimate in the following sense: it shows how the variety of being flows from the simplest elements of being and requires no foundation in any unfounded substance or axiom except the principle of non-contradiction that is the least controversial and most obvious of all the fundamental axioms of logic. Further, the breadth of the metaphysics will be ultimate in that it shows that the Universe is and must be one of the greatest (Logically) possible variety. Finally, the pure metaphysics of the necessary Objects will frame an Applied metaphysics in which the framing permits local disciplines to approach their intrinsic limit

Thus in going below Kant’s analysis, it has been able also to go beyond to the Universal metaphysics of ultimate depth and breadth without reference to any contingent science. Additionally, in the case of the contingent—local, detailed-empirical—disciplines no absolute knowledge is claimed for absolute faithfulness in these cases typically has no meaning. However, the actual faithfulness is enabled to its intrinsic limit and that too is an advance for it is good to know that there is an intrinsic limit beyond which search is without significance. Perhaps there is a way in which the local sciences, e.g. quantum theory or one of its future forms, will reveal precise knowledge of the local (although there is uncertainty of simultaneous measurements, e.g. of simultaneous it is not altogether clear that that uncertainty is not due to lack of definiteness in the object itself.) However, from the Universal metaphysics any local absolute faithfulness cannot be universal

Some specific results

This may be omitted since it has been outlined earlier and will be detailed later

The intrinsic limit will be reached for some important disciplines…

It will emerge that individuals will achieve ultimate identity. Thus, it is given that I will be—in some sense already am—the Universe looking out on myself (the I here is the universal or generic I and not particularly the I of an author)

It will also emerge that while I will look out on myself as all being, the way there is immensely far from being given and that I will not remain in that state as if it were static. I can choose to let it happen or I can undertake a path directed by intelligence and correction of error. It is reasonable that the self-correcting intelligent path is immensely more probable to succeed and that the significance of that way is immensely greater than that of the let-it-happen-way

Still, as it will emerge, the way is far from given. That is the adventure of the journey in being… and in that adventure it is given that I will encounter many and immensely various worlds

Upon that path, I expect to find that the separation—so valued in our world—of knowing and acting and cannot be absolute; they will merge in degrees of ebb and flow; thus while the summit is given, that there is a way is given, the way is not and it is a way of incomplete knowing and acting

If not necessary to this acting-knowing, there is a kind of faith that will be conducive to greater process and greater appreciation of the process. It is not a faith in external knowing of how the Universe is and what there is in it. It is a moment-to-moment faith that encounters doubt-and-confidence-as-natural-partners-in-being-and-becoming. Religion that may start out as faith often becomes a perversion of it; and what sometimes passes for spirituality a infinitely limited substitute (there is one world and stuff and spirit are aspects of it)

The developments of the ideas, we follow the theme of independently standing knowledge. We see how far this endeavor may go. The themes of action and faith stand above this endeavor; we occasionally return to these themes; and action and faith become essential foci in the chapters Journey and Method

Informal view of Intuition and its role

Intuition is the way in which we know the common things and patterns of the world. A characteristic of intuition is that though we know, we do not know how we know and we cannot invariably show the validity of intuitive knowledge based on formal ways such as science and logic. However, since we have some success in living, there must be some validity to intuition

Knowledge of the esoteric and the ultimate are already in intuition—this can be shown. Stated in another way, the ultimate and the esoteric are not remote. This is seen as an invitation to an ultimate journey

Relation to the tradition

The previous sections have comments on general sources and implications

From the traditions

Intuition absorbs from the traditions the ideas of independently standing human knowing, intuition, knowing as perception and inference… and develops these notions while beginning to show their place within human action, i.e. their limits as independently standing institutions

The thinker to whom the greatest debt is owed regarding knowledge and intuition is Kant. Perhaps the most influential idea of Kant is that that we have intuition of the world and that the intuition lies outside reason even if it may be understood via reason. The present development differs from and goes beyond Kant in a number of ways. First, Kant uses intuition to refer to the ability to perceive the world in terms of its natural categories such as space, time and cause. We now know that the categories of space, time, and cause are proximate but not ultimate categories of the world. Additionally, here all knowing is reigned in under intuition so that no a priori commitment to absolute knowledge is made. Here, instead of space, time, and cause, the necessary Objects are Universe, Domain, Void, Logos and others. Whereas Kant held metaphysics to be impossible since it is beyond experience, here, in the necessary Objects, experience is seen to extend to the ultimate: metaphysics falls within experience provided restriction is made to the necessary Objects (and the implied limitation is less severe than may be supposed because these Objects form a framework that has the potential to raise all knowledge to its intrinsic limit)

It should be finally noted that the metaphysics that is developed is ultimate and that while the present theory of intuition provides foundation as well as grounding in cognition-feeling, the metaphysics is capable of a foundation that is independent of the theory of intuition

Contribution

A potent development of the idea of Intuition to allow the inclusion of all knowing

The metaphysics is shown to be synthetic and necessary and is thus an improvement of the idea and completion of development of the Kantian program

A positive epistemology that is of course not positive over all knowledge—science retains its tentative character when it claims universal knowledge—but is positive over the metaphysical core, will be seen to be positive over science on an alternate interpretation of the nature of science, and will be seen to be positive in that every concept that lies within Logic has reference in the Universe though not positive in the sense that it is currently possible to empirically locate the corresponding Objects. And even though the epistemology is not positive over the sciences and academic disciplines—i.e., over detailed and local knowledge—it will be seen that the universal knowledge frames specialized knowledge in a way that the latter may approach their intrinsic limit

Intuition: concepts, themes, and objections

Concepts

The nature and significance of knowledge

Concepts—knowledge, concept, object, meaning, replica, correspondence, human tradition, store of knowledge, dogma, speculation, criticism, reason, aesthetics, science, hypothesis, system, metaphysics, epistemology

Importance of speculation and criticism in the development and validity of knowledge

Concepts—validity, critique, grounding, metaphysic of experience, metaphysics as such

Framework for knowing

Concepts—modes of knowing, intuition, understanding, explanation, verstand, verstehen, perception, empirical knowledge, conception, thought, rational knowledge, emotion, feeling, intention, action

Elements of knowing: the concept

Concepts—concept, mental content, thing, Object, world, awareness, experience, consciousness, percept, sensation, cognition, feeling, emotion, intention, willing, action, afferent, efferent

Fact and pattern. Pattern as fact. Inference

Concepts—fact, state of affairs, similarity, difference, higher concept, theory, law, pattern, inference, novelty, speculation, induction, possibility, probability, fit, hypothesis, science, complex fact, deduction, logic, necessity

Faithfulness of knowing

Concepts—faithfulness, perfect faithfulness, implicit faithfulness, practical faithfulness

Critiques

Concepts—humanism, aesthetic, Humean: induction lacks necessity, Kant: the categorial concept-Object gap, idealist, instrumentalist, pragmatist

Responses: humanistic and aesthetic

Concepts—experience, grounding, wonder, awe, mystery, adventure, faith

Responses: practical response to Hume

The response to Hume is to recognize the validity of his criticism of the necessity of science and to see his criticism as valid in his time but also to recognize the so far lack of necessity is not a lack of necessity of all metaphysics and that in so far as there is a lack of necessity this is inherent and positive

Concepts—faithfulness, adaptation, rationalism, empiricism, the empirical, a posteriori method, abstraction, proof, demonstration

Responses: transcendental response to Kant

An extension and deepening of Kant’ response

Concepts—necessary Object, experience, external world, existence, being, Universe, difference, Domain, complement, Void, Logos

General response—the transcendental as framing the practical, humanistic, and aesthetic

Concepts—tradition, discipline, necessary Objects as framework, ad hoc elements of local disciplines, intrinsic limit

Critique and demonstration in the present narrative

Concepts—criticism, ultimate, depth, breadth, posited categories, Idea, Form, pattern, global, local, finitary, realism, a priori, method, content, rational speculation, critical empiricism, dogma, aesthetic, literal expression

Meaning, sense, and reference

Concepts—meaning, use, sense, reference, word, concept, object, connotation, denotation, intension, extension, context, system meaning, conceptual system

Intuition

Concepts—category, space, time, cause, symbol, strategy, necessary Object, pure metaphysics, practical Object, applied metaphysics, disciplinary studies, infinite adventure, foundation, internal foundation

Development of the metaphysics

Concepts—external justification, abstraction, necessary Object, Universe, Void, Logos, Domain, Difference, metaphysic of experience

The metaphysics as a framework for study of the practical Objects

Concepts—ad hoc element, intrinsic limit of faithfulness

The realm of action and faith

Concepts—action, faith, dogma, risk, wonder, adventure, expected outcome

Themes and objections

Introducing knowledge, intuition, and experience

Theme—Knowledge and Intuition—concept, Object, word, meaning, sense, reference, variation due to context and decomposition—form and problem of knowledge: the concept is not the Object—faithfulness, adaptation, practical Object… the concept may be taken to be the practical Object—abstraction, rational and empirical elements as necessary but not a prior—necessary Global and local Objects… the concept is faithful to the necessary Object—the necessary as framing and raising the practical to its intrinsic and limit of faithfulness and rationality (non ad hoc)

Theme— Seeing—the truth is already known. Seeing the necessary Objects

Objection. But Kant’s original categories included ‘unity’ ‘plurality’ and ‘totality’ corresponding to the judgments ‘universal’ ‘particular’ and ‘singular’…

Theme—Experience—Experience is the subject side of the Object that may be seen as relation; experience is the binding and grounding—and as will be seen the freedom—in and to being

The nature and existence of the necessary objects

Theme—Being

Observation. The phrase ‘in its entirety’ is not necessary

Objection. The verb ‘to be,’ e.g. ‘is,’ has not been analyzed

Objection. Various special uses of ‘being’

Objection. The classical distinction between existence as being-in-relation and being as being-in-itself

Objection—the allegation that existence is trivial, that it is not a concept… or that it applies to ‘everything’

Objection— Quantum disturbance of the Object negates the possibility of necessary Objects!

The problem of the non-existent object. … If there are no unicorns, to what does ‘unicorn’ refer in ‘there are no unicorns’

The first existential problem of being—whether anything exists. The ‘problem’ of philosophical solipsism

The second existential problem of being—what exists? The global and local necessary Objects… from experience to Logos

Theme—The necessary Objects, especially: Experience—which is roughly the sense of being but neither has nor needs any further fundamental reduction; Being—what is there… without reference to any specific Object; Universe—The Universe which is all being exists and contains all Laws; Difference and domain; The Void—The Void which is the absence of being exists and contains no Law; and Logos—which is the Object of Logic and is the Universe at any level of detail in description subject to logic

Objection regarding Law—Law as immanent is but one interpretation of the idea, even in the sense of ‘what is read;’ other interpretations are Law as imposed, Law as mere description, and Law as convention

Objection to the proof of existence of the Void. The proof of existence of the Void may be criticized (1) on the account that it is a purely logical proof and (2) that in case the Universe is the domain in question there is doubt that its complement exists. Note: the notion that the proof is merely logical is an early one and is by now old; it is replaced by the recognition of the necessary empirical elements that, by the way, are unseen by the critical element in its race to judge before understanding

Knowledge

Knowledge gives the knower some grasp of the world and thus enables appreciation as well as some ability to negotiate and control. In order to perform these ‘functions’ with success, some degree of faithfulness is necessary

Careful use will therefore pay attention to faithfulness. This attention to carefulness is a characteristic that is perhaps central to tradition of philosophy

In the modern era, i.e. beginning with the European enlightenment, the concern with faithfulness in the tradition of thought became paramount and content took second place. In philosophy, epistemology took precedence over metaphysics. Since the original purpose of knowing may be or certainly seem to be to know, this focus on faithfulness may seem paradoxical except, however, that as a result of reflection the very possibility of metaphysics or direct knowledge of the world came into question; knowledge was left to science, various practical arts and common experience. Philosophy took on a role that emphasized criticism rather than direct knowledge of the world. The validity of this role is not questioned and if metaphysics is indeed impossible, it may be the primary role and perhaps even the only role. One of the outcomes of the changing spirit of philosophy is that metaphysic is perhaps possible but it will be a metaphysic of experience rather than a metaphysics as such. These developments are of course not absolute but define a dominant spirit of a phase

In this essay, it will be shown that metaphysics as direct knowing is possible and an outcome of the development will be the demonstration of a metaphysics that is ultimate in ways to be defined later. The simplest statement that characterizes the development is perhaps that the framework of the metaphysics is one over objects that are selected for simplicity and Universality so that metaphysics of experience and direct metaphysics are identical. Because of that identity it was originally possible to develop the metaphysics without benefit of an analysis of knowledge. The independently standing metaphysics was manifestly of immense power and significance

However, a foundation in an analysis of knowledge has the following benefits. It provides an enhanced foundation; it grounds the metaphysics in the human ability to know; it helps in showing how the metaphysics over the specially selected objects may frame and enhance the entire range of—human—knowledge; and it more firmly relates the present development to the tradition of thought

We might classify knowledge according to whether it is intuitive or formal. Intuition is used here in the special sense of the ability to know the world in what may seem to be its natural categories such as space, time and cause. Clearly, from adaptation, intuition must have some degree of implicit faithfulness. Formal knowledge is symbolic—expressed in terms of language—often formal language. Formal knowledge may be classified according to whether its function is intrinsic—for its own sake—or applied. The intrinsic function is one in which knowledge is of intrinsic interest because it reveals the nature of the world in which we live—it has kinship with a spiritual or religious function. The applied function is practical as, e.g., in the use of science in technology

In the applied function we may be willing to accept sufficient faithfulness. However, in the intrinsic function we may not want to tolerate anything less than perfect faithfulness because the concern may be to know what is true Since intuition is or appears to be built in and not further understood, deep questions about its truth or perfect faithfulness

In the following development, we will draw all knowing back into this realm of uncertainty so as to be able to move forward into an analysis and demonstration of direct metaphysics

The nature and significance of knowledge

A first notion of knowledge may be that it is some sort of replica of or correspondence to what is known. The significance of knowledge, then, is that it gives us some grasp of what is known which enables appreciation of the known as well as some ability to negotiate andor manipulate it. This significance remains even when the correspondence notion is not—altogether—valid

There is an immense store of claims to knowledge in the human traditions—see, e.g. the sub-section A system of human knowledge of chapter Contribution. The store of knowledge—practical as well as enabling appreciation of the world—is immense

In the West, the thought of the Greeks emphasized speculative discovery—i.e., roughly, metaphysics and ideas; Scholasticism emphasized dogma; and Modern Thought, perhaps due to the rise of rationalism and science, has emphasized criticism and, more generally, epistemology or the investigation of the nature and validity and meaning of validity of knowledge. It is of course not implied that the emphases of the eras has been their sole preoccupation. Greek speculation and the emphasis on the aesthetics of ideas is tempered and enhanced by reason; in science, hypothesis is another name for speculation

Metaphysics is, roughly, the study of the real—of things as they are. This notion may be criticized on a number of accounts including, first, whether that is what is intended in the tradition and, second, whether knowledge of things-as-they-are is possible. The two criticisms are not independent and if knowledge-of-the-thing-as-it-is is possible then the notion of metaphysics introduced is not unreasonable. In the narrative it will emerge that there are universal Objects of which there is knowledge and that the naïve notion of metaphysics therefore serves as the first notion of metaphysics

Necessity of speculation and criticism in developing valid (reliable) knowledge

Especially as knowledge has become immensely instrumental, it is important to know that knowledge has validity

Criticism is essential for grounding and validity of knowledge

Speculation—hypothesis—is essential: without speculation development of knowledge expressed in terms of ideas, especially new knowledge, is impossible. Even instinct and the ability to have ideas and intuition cannot originate in evolution or development without variation

Constructive thought—speculation—is essential to the development of aesthetic or appreciative ideas; even here some criticism, if only implicit, is necessary

In the Modern and Recent era, criticism has assumed relative importance in relation to the aesthetics and generative aspect of knowing

Thus, in Modern Philosophy, epistemology—the study of knowledge and its criticism—epistemology—has occupied center stage; of course, epistemology is also important as metaphysics for knowledge is a part of the world. The critiques of Hume and Kant have been pivotal in this ascent of epistemology and the corresponding demise of metaphysics

Although there has been a recent return of metaphysics to importance, the new metaphysics has emphasized a metaphysic of experience rather than metaphysics as such

Framework for knowing

There are a variety of frameworks that conceptualize knowledge and its ‘validity.’ We choose one such framework—a relatively simple one based on a notion of the ‘concept.’ Initially, we lay down the framework without regard to validity. The framework will then be critiqued in light of an objective to produce as comprehensive a system a valid system as possible

The development just referred to has already taken place. These words are therefore an introduction that already anticipates the outcome and it is this that makes the apparently ad hoc selection of the framework possible. In the development a variety of alternative were considered and the present one arrived at as most fruitful. Specifically, the framework omits the ideas of the empiricists as not contributory to the present endeavor but not as a development that has no interest. Naturally, there must be some connection to the ‘real’ and therefore the framework cannot be entirely rational. It may be viewed as a union of selective rational and empirical elements that are fine tuned with respect to the Objects of knowing rather than applied uniformly

Note the analogies: concept-object : sense-reference : connotation-denotation : intension-extension: only the first two are in the list of concepts: the other two are not. But they would fit

Elements of knowing: concept and object

The framework begins with a generic element of knowledge—i.e., the concept or mental content

There is a narrower sense and somewhat different sense of concept as something conceived in the mind as in a thought or notion or, as introduced by Aristotle, an abstract idea generalized from particular instances. We often use Aristotle’s notion of ‘concept.’ In the immediate discussion, however, ‘concept’ refers to any mental content

Thus a concept may be a thought, a concept in the Aristotelian sense, a percept, a sensation, a feeling, an emotion, a cognition, an experience, an awareness, an intention, a willing, the feeling or concept of having a concept, the mental content associated with producing an action—i.e. an efferent concept … It is not inherent in its meaning that all concepts shall be conscious

A variety of critical questions may arise. Does the concept ever refer to anything—i.e., is there an external world? Since the concept is not the thing or Object, and since we never get outside conception is there even meaning to replication, correspondence or faithfulness? And if there is, to what extent is does conception participate in the Object—essentially as well as practically and conventionally?

Since we are here setting up the framework, such concerns are temporarily set aside

Framework of knowing: Fact and pattern versus systems of facts or states of affairs. Deduction and induction

One kind of concept is the percept. A percept corresponds roughly to a fact or state of affairs

The world has myriad facts. Similarity and difference may define ‘higher concepts.’ Patterns may define theories and laws. Some patterns are perceived. Others are inferred—this is for example the process of coming up with laws and theories in science. However, such induction invariably involves an element of hypothesis or speculation—for in moving to a larger domain whose patterns are not immanent in the known, novelty is essential. The new hypotheses are compared, refined, re-compared and re-refined… Once the theory or law becomes sufficiently confirmed that we have confidence in it—recognizing of course that disconfirmation is possible unless otherwise shown or known—it is possible given some facts to deduce further facts from the theories and laws. Unlike induction, deduction is commonly thought to be necessary

Thus the knowledge process under this framework is fact, induction, and deduction

In so saying, a fact is naïvely taken to be a unitary or atomic entity whereas patterns and laws are complex. Of course some facts or states of affairs, e.g. a tree are complex but it may be presumed that there are elementary or atomic facts

This is where the framework must be left at present. Later it will be seen that there can be no ultimately atomic facts, i.e. that every ‘atom’ is a world. Similarly, patterns and laws are read by knowers but also have an element of being immanent in the world and this will be seen to be ultimately essential even though patterns and laws may be imposed in a proximate way. Thus laws and patterns are facts that require conceptualization (inference) to ‘see.’ Deduction has been seen as a vast system of tautology; we will see that this is an approximate description and that systems of deduction have an empirical element; this, too, is immanent fact. In this way, the compound system of fact, induction, and deduction is a factual or ‘state of affairs’ system… and, further, the distinction between induction and deduction is not absolute as it otherwise may have been thought to be

Faithfulness of knowing

What is the Object? What is faithfulness? Anticipating the critique that the concept is never the Object, we can ask whether the terms ‘Object’ and ‘faithfulness’ have meaning at all. Before proceeding to a more complete critique of the issues and a response that will give meaning to the terms and show where perfect faithfulness is possible and where only partial or practical faithfulness is obtained and the relation of the two degrees—the framing of the partial by the perfect—we briefly define the issues and show that we experience and have some degree of—at least implicit—faithfulness over the ‘practical objects’ of our world

Faithfulness and the Object

From the significance of knowledge, it is of interest to know whether knowledge—the concept—is faithful to what is known: to the Object. One way of knowing about faithfulness is to get outside a particular concept and measure it according to another means. Since we never quite get outside knowing, we can never be quite sure of perfect faithfulness by external means. This brings into question the meaning of ‘faithfulness’ and, even, of the ‘Object’

Adaptation and the practical Objects

Since we have some success in negotiating the world, our knowledge must have at least some implicit faithfulness

Since some of our knowledge, e.g. in common physical experience and science are quite successful instrumentally, we may think that some concepts are quite faithful or accurate. Since we still never get outside the concept, we may be tempted to conflate concept and Object. In the use of familiar language, a word evokes a concept and thus we may even conflate word, concept and Object: it is practical to do so in practical or instrumental contexts. Some thinkers have therefore taken the conceptual step of equating concept and Object in general. This step clearly has at least limited and intuitive validity but cannot be justified in general for, in general, there may be concepts—mental content—without any Object and, even though we never get outside the concept there may be and we will see that there are some perfectly faithful universal concepts

Common knowledge

Science and precision

Precision does not require foundation

Precision does not imply foundation

Critique and response

The humanistic critique

Cognition provides binding to the givens of the world and freedom relative to expanding horizons, i.e. changing contexts. However, cognition is not grounded in the being of the knower. Feeling and emotion provide binding to the being of the knower as well as a range of freedom as adaptation to changing contexts and relations; however, feeling is not directly grounded in the world of the knower. Cognition-emotion has an integral character at a variety of levels and degrees of integration

A scholarly response may be to emphasize cognition: speculative responses may emphasize feeling

The present response is to acknowledge the humanistic critique and to address it in recognizing the integral character of cognition and feeling not only in fact and to the root but in their very constitution

Hume: Science versus necessity

The later suppression of induction and trivialization of logic

The facts of suppression and trivialization do not imply insignificance… Induction is perhaps the height of scientific creativity while recognizing immanent tautology (deduction or arriving at a deduction) is also inductive even though the result is not

Kant: the essential gap between the Concept and Object… in general the Object is not the Thing

Summary of critique and counter critique

The concept is distinct from the Object

Knowing does not get outside the Object

Therefore the concept is never the Object

The conflation of concept and Object is a source of immense error (even though it is normally immensely practical)

Apply the critique to itself: Object and faithfulness have no universal meaning (from external foundation)

Apply the critique again: the concept may correspond perfectly to some Objects (e.g. on account of their simplicity) and in those cases Object and faithfulness will have meaning

Abstraction reveals the Universal necessary Objects that found an ultimate and Universal metaphysics that frames the practical Objects and has the potential to eliminate their ad hoc elements and bring them up to their intrinsic limit of faithfulness

Counter-critique

The critique refers to the method of external foundation

The critique is not fine-tuned

Other critiques

Other critiques include the empiricist, idealist, instrumentalist, and pragmatist critiques… These are not taken up here since their significance is subsumed under the Kantian or transcendental critique. They may of course be treated in passing

The pragmatist-instrumentalist critique is taken up but in a certain sense—a sense in which the pragmatic is not taken as a criterion of knowledge but rather in the sense in which the relation between knower and known comes before criteria and critique. This sense envelopes all other critiques

Humanistic response: experience and grounding

Practical response. Knowing, faithfulness, adaptation, and the practical Objects

Transcendental response: Intuition, abstraction and the necessary Objects

The essence of the response follows. Kant’s use of intuition is good. First, however, it did not go deep enough; the basic objects of Kant’s intuitive perception are not fundamental categories or objects as Kant thought from the science and geometry of his day. Here intuition goes below the detailed and contingent aspects of space, time and cause, to the primary necessary objects such as Universe, Domain, Void, and—later—Logos. Second, Kant’s analysis of intuition was not sufficiently broad. Here, all conception—with conception in its broad meaning of mental content—is brought in under the umbrella of intuition. Thus, at outset, all knowing is lies within intuition which includes empirical and symbolic elements (and regarding which, therefore, it is not necessary to invent spaces or worlds of empirical and symbolic objects.) So: there is no a priori commitment to faithfulness or lack of faithfulness of knowing (naturally, from adaptation there must be some faithfulness but the argument here does not rely on that practical faithfulness of knowing.) The crux of the argument from intuition, then, is that it is the supreme simplicity of the primary necessary objects—rather than practical knowledge e.g. science and reflective common knowledge—that entails the perfect faithfulness of the concepts. This response is transcendental in that it avoids the potential distortion of the essential concept object gap; however it is direct in being supremely empirical

Note that the Logos that is the Object of Logic is identical to the Universe

General response: The transcendental as framework for the practical… and the humanistic

Note that this integration of the transcendental and the practical is new, first, in the development—later in the narrative—of an ultimate framework, second, in the identification of universal transcendental Objects, and, third, in the integration of the transcendental and the practical so that the practical has the potential for the removal of the ad hoc and faithfulness to the intrinsic limit of the practical Object (or context, local world, or discipline)

In so doing, we not only go beyond the response from the entire history of philosophy, we do so in an ultimate degree, and in which we integrate Hellenic, Hellenistic and Modern modes of thought (these translate roughly as Greek-speculate-creation-of-ideas, Alexandrian-scholarly-detail-oriented-scientific-scholastic-development-of-ideas, and the modern semi-limited-synthesis-in-humanism-science)

Critique and demonstration in the present narrative

In this narrative, a return to a direct general and not merely scientific interest in the world is developed in the form of an immensely powerful metaphysics that is ultimate in breadth and depth as explained in the narrative. It is therefore immensely important that this metaphysics is demonstrated and one approach to its justification will be via the study of knowledge its criticisms—particularly of the modern critiques of knowledge

The critiques will be taken further than they have in the past; the response to the critiques will be deeper—in the sense of referring to more basic categories—than prior responses and they will not be required to be uniform over all Objects; and discovery and identification will be favored over posited categories of being and explanation—all recognized posited categories will be eliminated; these will be some of the elements that pave the way to an ultimate metaphysics

It should be noted that there is hardly a significant prior metaphysics that has no posited categories. This speculative element of metaphysics is often considered to be its Achilles heel. The resistance to speculation is of course a value and perhaps a misplaced one for speculation may be what is best so far and as long as it is recognized as such rather than regarded dogmatically there may be value in it—a stab at the truth may result in a greater expected outcome than resolute absence of imaginative thought; additionally, speculation need not be mere speculation for it may be the result of speculative imagination of a high order and subject to criticism. Many who scorn speculation and metaphysics are highly speculative in their own choice of metaphysics—examples are the dogmatic favor of one religious metaphysics over another and the unjustified implicit and sometimes explicit materialism of so many scientists and modern philosophers (that someone who shuns metaphysics has a metaphysics is of course not a justification of metaphysics)

The critiques in the tradition Hume and Kant bring into question of the very possibility of metaphysics. The demonstration will therefore have to include showing that metaphysics is possible; this will be done by showing that the metaphysics is indeed metaphysics. Plato’s theory of Ideas suggests that true knowledge is of things in another, ideal, world. In this narrative it is shown that there is one world and that ‘ideal’ or perfectly faithful knowledge of Objects in the one world or Universe; Ideas or Forms are not rejected but are shown to be immanent in the world and only of this world—there is one Universe and any other imagined worlds are either non-existent or in this world (Universe.)

Hume’s critique emphasizes that even if a pattern is discerned over limited observation can be reasonably projected to a larger context, this projection is not a logical or necessary inference. This limitation does not concern observational or experimental accuracy and obtains even if observation is precise. And it is sometimes claimed that Hume’s critique derives force from the fact that from a finite set of data, no logical conclusion can be made about an infinite context. There is, however, no requirement that the context or Universe be infinite; the absence of logical necessity requires only that the context exceed what has been observed: that the sun has risen for billions of years does not imply that it will rise for the next ten days. The metaphysics developed in the narrative fully acknowledges this limitation: it proceeds by looking for—and identifying—those aspects the Universe or context that are either global or local but yet finitary: the concept of the Universe as all being but with no reference to detail is finitary; the concept of difference without reference to any particular difference is also finitary…

Kant’s critique emphasizes that in the correspondence view, an item of knowledge is not the thing known and therefore precise correspondence is—trivially—not inherent in knowing. This critique is further analyzed and critiqued in what follows. However, even if the critique is taken as having general application to knowing, it allows that there may be simple aspects of the world for which precise knowledge is possible on account of simplicity rather than acuity of cognition. These will be found to be the global yet finitary aspects of the Universe that feature in the metaphysics

Therefore, the metaphysics will satisfy the most stringent but realistic of critical requirements for knowledge or knowing

The realism arises in critiquing the critical requirements themselves which are often thought to be above critique owing to their apparent absolute character and apparent remoteness from the empirical but are here brought down from the ‘heights of the a priori’ to the hypothetical-empirical

It is important that criticism be critiqued—i.e. that any critical system be itself subject to criticism. It will be seen that method and content are not essentially different root categories; systems of knowing are in the world and therefore method is a form of content—method may be regarded, e.g., as second order content; method and ‘first order’ content arise in interaction even though the time scales of their genesis may be different

The metaphysics that is developed includes a join of the rational speculation of the Greeks with the critical empiricism of Modern Thought. Dogma, however, is avoided but is replaced by the force of thought itself—a force that flows from the identification of the global and local finitary Objects—the term Object is elucidated in what follows—and their constitutional characteristics. Since there is precise correspondence between knowledge and the known in the case of these Objects, it may be said that the metaphysics is forced by the real. This force, however, is not strained for the metaphysics may be seen as flowing from the real—already immanent in the knowing organism

That is, the metaphysics will also frame an aesthetic. In its outline, however, the aesthetic will require neither metaphor nor poetry but will be achieved in a demonstrated economy of literal expression

Intuition and metaphysics. The inclusive realm of action and faith

Meaning, sense, and reference

In common use the meaning of a word is the Object to which it refers. The idea of correspondence of a word to an Object may be criticized from the points of view of view of the indefiniteness of Objects and the fact that not all word use involves reference to an Object (it is perhaps an open question whether all functional words refer at least implicitly to some Object where ‘Object’ may include event, process, relationship…)

However, the idea of meaning as correspondence of a word to an Object may be criticized on its own ground

It is the concept that refers to the Object; the word evokes the concept. Word, concept and Object may be conflated and it is often natural and practical to do so

However, the identification of word, concept and Object is a conflation that can lead to severe confusion and error—and missed opportunities for insight and understanding—especially when attempting to elucidate or establish meaning in changing contexts

A word-concept may have a clear meaning in a given context. However, changing contexts will involve new meaning—especially for the old words that may be retained. An example of such change may occur when a new scientific theory replaces an old one or when understanding of a given context is clarified

Given a context, understanding it is not only a function of the individual word-concepts employed but also of their relations: one source of the relations among word-concept is the system of relations among the Objects of the context. Therefore, meaning lies, first, in the conceptual system and even when the system is given the meanings of the individual terms may change by redistribution of system-meaning among individual terms

These thoughts regarding meaning will be especially important in the present narrative where, in Metaphysics, we attempt to understand the ultimate context—the Universe that is all being (until ‘being’ is introduced later, ‘all being’ may be read ‘all things’ with a proviso that the word ‘thing’ may turn out to be inadequate.) Attention to meaning as introduced in the present narrative is probably essential to understanding and proper criticism of the system

It is therefore important to pay attention to the meanings introduced in the narrative and to suppress other meanings except perhaps for their suggestive power

It is clear from the foregoing that an ultimate or final metaphysics will render some stability in meaning but not absolute stability

The known world… and beyond

On the correspondence notion of knowledge, the concept is not the thing known. We have just seen that there are situations or contexts in which the concept may be taken to be the Object even though it is not generally valid to do so. The fact that the concepts are instrumental—enable negotiation and manipulation—is taken as justification. Clearly this is a pragmatic justification

What lies outside this realm? Clearly there may be a much vaster domain, e.g. beyond the limits of current science, where our concepts have no application on the basis of the arguments so far

Investigation of the Universe: the Metaphysics

Later, in Intuition and in Metaphysics, we will demonstrate the existence and develop systematic knowledge of general aspects a vaster domain, finding that the vastest domain or Universe has the greatest possible variety; this development will be both surprising and immense because, even though it has been speculated, it has not been hitherto demonstrated or developed in elaboration of the kinds and degrees of the present elaborations

In between the outer reach of that larger realm and the realm of the instrumental lies an intermediate and practically necessary case in which concept and Object have not yet separated and remain in interaction with one another and with action

Intuition

This includes intuition in the sense that we are able to perceive the world in terms of familiar categories such as space, time, cause, and symbol including language without—necessarily—knowing how we are so able to perceive the world and without—necessarily—being able to justify the intuition. This use of intuition, which derives from Kant, is not the colloquial use of today in which intuition is an uncommon ability to know remote Objects or events

In the present sense, intuition is the common though immensely remarkable ability by which we perceive the world—immediate and remote. The ability to see in terms of space, time, cause and think in terms of symbol is perhaps more remarkable than the perception of remote Objects. The two meanings of intuition mentioned here have in common that they lie outside reason and their processes lie outside consciousness

We expand the present meaning to include all conception or knowing, including symbolic representation and logic, even in those cases where we are inclined to think that we have certain knowledge. This is a strategic maneuver that will enable the justification of a system of perfectly known or necessary Objects—pure metaphysics that will form a framework for disciplinary studies—the practical Objects—or Applied metaphysics including disciplinary studies. A power of the approach lies in the absence of a priori commitment to faithfulness or lack of it for all Objects—i.e., it is allowed at outset that some Objects may be known with perfect faithfulness. As has been seen this position is not inconsistent with the critiques above because the conclusions of the critiques follow only for external justification

The power of this conception is that in recognizing that all knowing lacks external foundation we open up to infinite adventure in the direction of variety and to the possibility—here actualized—of final internal foundation at least in some directions

Development of the metaphysics

It may seem, then, that even if we do know some Objects with perfect faithfulness—in such cases both Object and faithfulness have explicit meaning—we cannot know that we have this knowledge and therefore we have no justification claiming that we have such knowledge. This conclusion is not true: what is true is that the approach or ‘method’ of external justification does not lead to knowledge of perfect knowledge. We will see below that there is an approach based in a certain conception of abstraction that does show perfect faithfulness in some cases—the necessary global and local Objects. The significance will be immense: it will enable metaphysics in the sense of knowing things—at least some things—as they are: which since the time of Hume and Kant has widely been regarded as impossible; this will enable a Universal metaphysics whose perfectly known Objects will include Universe, Domain, difference, Void, and Logos

The framework is chosen for its simplicity which enables faithful knowledge via abstraction. On the framework, a metaphysic of experience is metaphysics as such

The metaphysics as a framework for study of the practical Objects

The Universal metaphysics, though abstract, will frame disciplinary studies—practical Objects—with the potential of removing their ad hoc elements and raising faithfulness to the intrinsic limit

This study will be called Applied Metaphysics though strictly, as knowledge of the real, it is not metaphysics. If, however, we lift the requirement of perfect faithfulness it may be considered to be exploration of the real

We prefer to avoid the two extremes of embarrassing over-speculation and obsessive criticism and preoccupation with certainty to the point that discovery and adventure become impossible because we become entrapped in our present knowledge

The realm of action and faith

The metaphysics will reveal a domain or Universe so vast that there is no negotiation of it by present explicit and detailed knowledge because the metaphysics is a skeletal net over the Universe

Any exploration in this realm will require an element of pure action. There may—and will—of course be risks, first, intrinsic risk and, second, the 'risk of diverting resources from more immediate ends. However, diversion of some resources is justified affectively in terms of ‘wonder’ and ‘adventure’ … but also pragmatically in terms of maximizing expected outcome of the value of being-in-the-world. What attitude can we bring to bear upon the adventure in being that will ‘maximize expected outcome?’ We call this attitude faith; it is not altogether different from animal faith; and it has in common with religious faith that it refers to the essential situation in which complete knowledge is absent but differs from it in that it does not substitute either dogma or faith in scripture that enhances, seems to enhance, or is argued to enhance the quality of experience. That is, while scriptural faith is often argued on pragmatic grounds alone, the present meaning and use of faith rests upon pragmatic and epistemic grounds and is not allowed to rest on admission of any uncritical metaphysics. More will be said later about faith but it is important to emphasize that it is not a substitute for criticism and that the attitude of faith does not encourage belief in the absurd or the paradoxical or the unsupported but is a complement to criticism in regions where criticism has no foothold but where feet must or would tread

Experience

Experience and grounding

Earlier foundation of the metaphysics in experience

Transition to intuition

Intuition and abstraction

Abstraction

Necessary objects

Necessary objects are practical

The idea of the External world

Nature and existence of the necessary Objects

Experience and Intuition

The nature of experience

That there is experience

Being and Existence

The nature of being

Paradoxes and problems regarding existence and its concept

Existence of the external world

Universe

Universe as all being

Other senses of ‘Universe’

Law

The Universe and its nature

Difference and domain

Difference

Dimension

Global and local modes description

Domain

Void

The Void as the absence of being

The Void exists and contains no Law

Logos

Preview of the metaphysics

The necessary Objects may be called metaphysical Objects. This is because—intuitive—knowledge of those Objects is perfectly faithful: recall that this perfect knowing is not the result of acuity of perception but of the simplicity of the Objects

The fundamental theorem of metaphysics

Seeing the metaphysics

Variety is the place to start

Pure metaphysics

Objects

Cosmology

Applied metaphysics

Worlds or Local cosmological systems

Metaphysics

The Universe has the greatest possible variety of being. In consequence our cosmological is one of infinitely many that manifest infinitely many ‘physical’ laws and which are not causally isolated as they might be if the physical laws of our cosmos were universal; the cosmological systems extend in time and space but also in size—there are micro- and micro-micro- and macro- macro-macro- cosmoses, e.g. an electron as a cosmos of cosmological systems; therefore the actual energy of the Universe has no bound; and, finally, the identity of the individual (human) being will become Universal Identity (although it is given, it appears that it will be much more likely and meaningful when sought)

These are a few of the conclusions of Metaphysics which therefore has intrinsic significance and lies at the center of the ideas. It was Metaphysics that motivated the development of foundation in Intuition; it is Metaphysics that makes Objects and Cosmology possible; it is Metaphysics that frames and enhances the study in Worlds—potentially and sometimes actually to their intrinsic limit; and it is Metaphysics that is the occasion for the novel developments of Method

And, finally Metaphysics shows the boundaries of the transformations of Journey and even though it does not show the way it shows the necessity of and provides some illumination of the way

Essence

As shown in Intuition, intuition provides a foundation for the Universal metaphysics of the present chapter Metaphysics. However, the foundation is preliminary to the development of the metaphysics. Given the foundation, certain aspects of the development are crucial:

In the pre-formal and tentative stage the following are important: experiment with ideas, conceptions, syntheses, developments, criticisms, interpretations, elaborations, suggestions from the history of ideas, boldness but willingness to reformulate, multiple avenues, treading and retreading, foundation and re-foundation and willingness to rework entire systems at each re-foundation

Criticism is especially important: while it is the point of metaphysics to be as comprehensive as possible—due to its concern with being and all being—it should be internally consistent; its methods clear and their preservation of truth manifest; and its results should not violate experience, reasonable common sense or science… The metaphysics and its development has been subject to doubt and criticism from as many perspectives as possible and these doubts have been given responses: see The Void, below. Additionally, see The concept of metaphysics, Foundation, The normal, Logic, Logos and form, Articulation and method, and Applied metaphysics

The following formal aspects are crucial:

Care in selecting and specifying nature of the primitive concepts, i.e. of the fundamental Objects: they should be necessary or perfectly faithful and universal or significant rather than essentially trivial. Clarity of definition is essential; reflective and revisable boldness of definition is often preferable to tentativeness and temerity; however, boldness should not typically be a pretense and should not be confused with demonstration

Inclusion of Logos—the one fundamental Object that is not primarily—among the necessary Objects; i.e. inclusion of demonstration and inference among the fundamental Objects. This amounts to bringing inference down from the relative a priori to a level on roughly equal basis with content or Object… for, after all, demonstration is in the world and is therefore a kind of Object; and further, demonstration and other content co-evolve even though often at differing rates

Choice and articulation of the system of concepts; systematic development of the metaphysics from the universal Objects and their properties

The sequence of development has flexibility but is not without significance for efficiency and understanding

The main choice regarding this sequence is the order of the main necessary Objects Universe, Domain, Void, and Logos. It will become clear that Logos must follow Void. Void could come first and this would have the advantage of placing the greatest development first. However, that might obscure the developments regarding Universe and Domain. Additionally, the doubts regarding development from the Void do not affect conclusions regarding Universe and Domain which are therefore placed first among the four main Objects; and since Universe frames Domain, Universe is placed first

The preliminary ideas Metaphysics and Foundation and the preliminary Objects Experience, External world, and Being are placed before the four main metaphysical Objects. It is natural for Law to immediately follow Universe; and, finally, for Extension and Duration to follow Domain (and Complement.)

The sequence of development may be as follows—see metaphysics.html details:

1. The concept of metaphysics

2. Foundation

3. Experience. Conclusion: there is experience

4. External world. Conclusion: there is an external world

5. Being. Conclusion. With the resolution of the meaning of being, it may be said from the facts of experience and external world that there is being, i.e. ‘being exists’

6. The Universe is all being

7. The ideas of law and Law. Conclusion: The Universe is all being, exists, and contains all Law

8. Domain and Complement

9. Extension and Duration

Add: global and local modes of description

Add: dimension if it isn’t already there

10. The Void is the absence of being

11. Substance

12. The question of determinism

13. The normal

14. Logic

15. Logos and form

16. Articulation and method

17. The Universal metaphysics

18. Applied metaphysics

19. Cosmological consequences

Variety of being

Systematic working out of consequences

Essence—II

Metaphysics is the study of being as it is. The possibility of this study has been raised in modern thought; however, it is here shown to be possible and brought to an ultimate level of knowledge of the Universe that is all being

The metaphysics is the focal point of the ideas. This chapter demonstrates and develops a the idea of metaphysics as well as a metaphysics—the Universal metaphysics—the metaphysics that the Universe has the greatest (Logically) possible variety

The metaphysics indicates the infinite boundary of any Journey in being but merely suggests at the way. Objects, Cosmology, and Worlds develop a picture of the terrain in greater relief but to a degree that remains infinitesimal

Introduction

This section replaces ‘Wide-angle view.’ It’s present outline is tentative and it’s modifications may include absorption of Wide-angle view

Place of Metaphysics in the narrative

Formal

As noted earlier, the metaphysics is the focal point of the system of ideas. It is founded in the preliminary analysis of Intuition and makes possible and is continued by Objects and Cosmology which are also part of metaphysics. While developing the system of ideas it became apparent that that development naturally involved and required reflection on and development of ‘method.’ The developments are collected in Method

The development of the ideas, especially that of the Universal metaphysics, is part of the journey

The metaphysics is at the foundation of the vision and the transformations of the Journey. In showing the identity of the individual and all being, it shows the necessity that the individual journey is the greatest possible. However, it is also shown that the variety of being is without end and therefore regardless of what has come to pass, infinite adventure remains. The metaphysics does not show the path; additionally it does not rule out pain and suffering—it is not said that suffering is essential to achievement but that it is not avoidable; therefore the term adventure is appropriate

Informal

The metaphysics shows that, excepting paradox, all things occur; that this is violation of neither science nor common sense; and this illuminates the greatest adventure through many worlds on the way to and from and in Identity with All Being

Wide-angle view

The Universal metaphysics is contained in intuition, i.e. it follows from the necessary Objects of intuition. Its fundamental or essential principle is implicit in the nature and properties of the Void: The Void exists and contains no Law. Equivalent forms are (1) The Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety of being, and (2a) The Universe has no universal and immanent Law or, equivalently (2b) The only conceptual law of the Universe is that except Logic there are no restrictions on its states, and, again (2c) Metaphysics and Logic are identical (partial reconceptualization of Logic will be required.) The immense consequences have been previewed and will be developed in this chapter and subsequent chapters especially Objects, Cosmology, Worlds, and Method

Unlike the ‘great’ metaphysical systems of the past, the present Universal metaphysics is nowhere merely the product of imagination. Naturally, there has been imagination; there has been much exposure to and reflection on the history of thought—and attempt to incorporate from that history what has survived criticism and is relevant; and there has been much treading and retreading of the requirements of synthesis, covering of adequate ground, and of consistency. In the end, however, it became possible to demonstrate the metaphysics—i.e. it is a metaphysics with a foundation that, in a sense explained below, refers to no unfounded fact or principle of method; that is the foundation is absolute. Additionally, the present system shows that it is (Logically) impossible for the Universe to have greater variety than is the case. Thoughts regarding such features—depth or foundation and breadth or variety—are not new but they have not been hitherto been demonstrated. And the demonstration is connected with the power of the system in two ways: first, in making it secure, and second in the variety of being covered. Later it is shown that except for degree of development and detail all valid metaphysics must be equivalent. In this sense there is no greater or lesser metaphysics. A proposed metaphysics is or is not a—valid—metaphysics

That is, the Universal metaphysics is the metaphysics

In the history of modern thought, especially since the critiques of Hume and Kant Critique, the possibility of metaphysics has been suspect and the source of the doubt is the fundamental gap between knower and known: what I know is not the thing but some reconstruction or result of the thing in interaction with a knower. Consequently, even if it is possible that at least some knowledge may be perfectly faithful how can that be known? How then may the claim be made that metaphysics is possible and, more, it is the one metaphysics that has been demonstrated?

Demonstration follows from the existence and properties of the necessary Objects established in Intuition: experience, being, Universe, space-like Extension, Duration, Domain, and the Void. Metaphysics establishes the existence and essential properties of a further necessary object: Logos which arises from the—demonstrated—identity of metaphysics and Logic. As seen in the development, the Logos has a maximal infinite variety of sub-Objects of which all are necessary

The demonstration from the objects of Intuition grounds the metaphysics—shows that it is immediate and empirical. This development provides some grounding for the metaphysics. However a roughly equivalent skeletal foundation is possible: the foundation from intuition may be reduced to demonstration from one given that requires no foundation: there is being and a single logical axiom: the principle of non-contradiction. If the principle of non-contradiction—the least controversial of the logical axioms—is regarded as given, the metaphysics is then founded without reference to something more fundamental. In traditional logic if one contradiction is allowed, then there is an explosion of truth: every statement is true and not true: this is strong reason to accept the principle; however some logicians reject it anyway. A possible reason to allow exception to the principle is that there may be mathematical systems of immense power that already harbor contradiction that is somehow quarantined from the development so far; another perhaps related reason is that there are potentially powerful non-standard systems of logic and mathematics in which contradiction is not explosive. Surely, however, it is not the case that ‘anything goes’ for if that were the case you would be me but you would also be my girlfriend (that’s a thought regardless of our gender.) Therefore, partly in order to bypass this concern, the narrative introduces Logic as whatever it is that is disallowed (in this case even from the Universe of greatest variety.) And due to the developments of logic since Aristotle, especially modern and recent developments, this Logic will not be empty; even though we may be unable to specify it completely and precisely the extant systems of logic are approximations to it

The implications of this metaphysics—and its demonstration—for the history of thought are immense. Implications are developed in all chapters but especially in Intuition, Metaphysics, Objects, Cosmology, and Method

What Metaphysics derives from the traditions

Here, metaphysics comes under the broad umbrella of metaphysics as studied in philosophy: it is the study of being-as-such; it is not one of the special sciences, e.g. the science of physics; and it is not taken in another sense in which metaphysics is the study of the occult

This idea derives from the various traditions especially the western tradition from Thales, through Plato and Aristotle, and scholastic and modern and recent thought

What has been learned from the traditions—from Aristotle and Plato, from Hume and Kant, from Heidegger and Wittgenstein; and from Indian philosophy—has been immense and it would impossible to recount everything that has been derived from the traditions even if the time and space were available. Since much reading and reflection has been out of interest and for other projects, it is impossible for me to recall all my debts of understanding and insight. Subject, then, to limits of memory, the following are some highlights of what has been derived

The idea of metaphysics. It seems as though the idea is simple. However the gaps between pre-philosophy, Thales—perhaps the first Western philosopher-metaphysician, Plato-Aristotle, and Hume-Wittgenstein-Heidegger constitute an immense development of the idea

The ideas of being, form and substance. Although the narrative rejects substance and relegates form to a case of Object—and therefore finds form to be fully in this world—much has been learned in the attempt to understand and wrest something useful from the ideas. I have learned to regard being as a name for what is there but which I may or may not know. This admission of a priori ignorance has been a powerful guide to the development of the ideas in the narrative. There is a dual to a priori ignorance in knowledge. It is a tendency in critical thought to overstate and over-commit to critical ideas. While such commitment may be beguiling I have learned to not be absolutely committed to thinking that I can never know. An example: the thought in modern and recent philosophy regarding the impossibility of metaphysics rests on the gap between knower and known and the impossibility of straddling the gap by foundation in something else (the something else is subject to the same problem.) The resolution, here, is to seek intrinsic foundation (via abstraction of the simplest elements of, e.g., representation.) The example shows that a critical theory may apply to a standard model of foundation but fail to apply to another model… The idea of a priori ignorance applies to what I know as well as criticism of what I know

Hume’s critique of the logical nature of scientific generalization has been instructive. It is a common sense criticism: it may be reasonable to generalize from partial knowledge of a pattern but it is not logical. As the reader may tell in reading this essay, I have learned more from Kant’s response to Hume than from Hume. The historical sway from metaphysics to criticism (epistemology) and now perhaps back again to metaphysics has been instructive and a spur to seen whether true metaphysical knowledge is possible. Having demonstrated its possibility I should say that I know and believe it to be possible. However, my intuition of the metaphysics in this narrative preceded its proof and I was tempted to act upon the metaphysics (then in primitive form) out of faith; I cannot tell what I would have done if proof had not been found. I still have doubts—cataloged and responded to in the narrative—about the Universal metaphysics. Therefore faith—also discussed—may be appropriate. It is clear that I am walking a tradition

Wittgenstein talks of the identity of logic and metaphysics. However, the present work shows that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety and it is therefore infinitely larger than may be shown regarding Wittgenstein’s specification in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Here, furthermore, the identities among Logic and metaphysics are demonstrated

The identity of self and all being in the writing of the Indian philosopher Sankara, i.e. in the Advaita Vedanta—where the said identity was thought via intense insight though still not demonstrated. His thought finds an important place in this narrative; further this narrative provides demonstration. While the Void is significant in many traditions including Western philosophy I have not learned metaphysics from those treatments of the Void except perhaps that the question of the ‘number of Voids’ is a concern (resolved in this essay—the number, provided it is at least one, is without consequence;) existence of the Void is a major concern but it is so important that I was required to conceive and resolve the concern independently; my use of the Void as a centerpiece of Logical Metaphysics is something I have not seen in other writers. The word ‘nothingness’ is important in existential philosophy. I find Sartre’s philosophy repugnant and therefore I decided to use ‘Void’ rather than ‘nothingness.’ I have learned of the importance of being from Heidegger whose thought is often wonderfully clear (one has to look through the complex and often obscure language.) Heidegger called the problem of ‘why there is something rather than nothing’ the most fundamental issue of philosophy; I proved that the Void must via Logic lead to states of manifest being—that there will be occasions of manifest being; which is a resolution of Heidegger’s fundamental problem. Sartre and Lacan equated the Void to Being and this equation implied the possible creation of the Universe without God and so provided some foundation for their atheism. In this narrative the equivalence of the Void and the Universe is demonstrated. Any God must be part of the Universe (all being;) and causal creation is then without meaning; it could be said that the manifest Universe self-creates from and self-annihilates to the Void but the creation would not be caused or guided or even accidental; but there may be limited gods within the Universal metaphysics: one part of being may be causal in the creation of another part; and the Void may erupt into something God-like which may then create a cosmos such as ours; subject to Logic it is demonstrated that what is Logical was-is-will be actual; which does not at all demonstrate actuality in our cosmos or probability in any given cosmos (the metaphysics implies an infinity of cosmological systems, infinitely many identical to ours, infinitely many similar, infinitely many altogether unlike ours, micro-cosmological systems—i.e. a cosmos within a particle, and micro-micro- and macro-cosmological systems)

Contribution to thought

The following may be mentioned: the demonstration of the possibility of metaphysics; demonstration of the Universal metaphysics that is founded with no or minimal reference to unfounded facts and principles and that shows the Universe to have the greatest (Logically) possible variety; the demonstrated fact that this metaphysics is necessary and empirical; the development of the idea of Intuition suggested by the requirement of grounding of the metaphysics; and the consequent developments of Objects, Cosmology, Journey in all being, Method; the Applied metaphysics in which every major academic discipline and every major division of philosophy are enabled in moving away from their ad hoc elements and toward their inherent limits—with the limit approached in the study of mind and rich suggestiveness for modern physics and biology—and many human issues touched

Elaboration

A modern consensus regarding metaphysics is perhaps that metaphysics should be a metaphysic of experience. The metaphysics of Objects in Kant and modern developments is a metaphysic of experience. It is commonly thought that further metaphysics is not possible and that for any further metaphysics there must be foundation in substance which behaves deterministically and is posited

The Universal metaphysics transcends the consensus limits on metaphysics. However, it does not do so by showing that there is a metaphysics of what is beyond experience. Instead, it does so by showing that experience does not have its traditional limits

The Universal metaphysics that results is ultimate in depth in showing a finite foundation without substance and without infinite regress. It is thus a non relative metaphysics with foundation and this stands against nearly all modern expectation

The metaphysics is ultimate in breadth. I.e., it reveals that the Universe is one of maximum (Logically) possible variety

The metaphysics founds a revaluation of metaphysics and philosophy. Metaphysics is the discipline whose concern is the outer limits of being; philosophy as the discipline whose limits are the outer limits of being

There are various conceptions of metaphysics from the history of thought. These lines of thought may be illuminating; however it is now revealed that metaphysics is the study of the Universe itself (and how far that study goes… and that one of its extents is to reveal a universe of ultimate variety.) There is only one metaphysics that may of course have different formulations and may be developed in greater or lesser degree. The various metaphysical systems from the traditions must be either equivalent to the Universal metaphysics or at most on the way to it. However, there appear to be no ancient, traditional or modern systems that equal the present in its ultimate in extension and its ultimate in demonstration… and it is clear that no system of metaphysics can exceed the present system in extension or in the broad strokes of its demonstration (refinement is of course likely)

The metaphysics resolves what amounts to a systematic catalog of problems of metaphysics form ancient to recent times

It founds—is capable of founding—the study of the core disciplines of philosophy—metaphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics… from the point of view of elimination of the habit of substance thinking, ethics is shown to be inseparable from the study of fact and, more specifically, from other elements of context—especially economics and politics (what is shown is not just an interaction but a fundamental error in regarding the idealization of morals as a distinct realm as absolute)

The metaphysics founds the studies of Logic, Objects, Cosmology, Physical Cosmology, Life, Human being and institutions and the human endeavor, transformations of Being and Identity and Pure being. Intuition and Metaphysics found a revaluation of Method. There is also provided a revaluation of the extent of Human knowledge

Applied metaphysics—described earlier

Additional details are scattered throughout the text and collected together in Contribution

Systematic approach

The Universal metaphysics is developed by deriving consequences from the necessary Objects and their properties. The Objects are considered in the following sequence: Universe, Extension, Duration, Domain, and Void. The Void and its properties are pivotal in demonstrating the existence and properties of the Logos, also a necessary Object

When the metaphysics is used to frame practical knowledge the result is labeled Applied metaphysics. Subject to Logic, the results of Applied metaphysics must apply ‘somewhere.’ It does not follow that the enhancement of the practical knowledge applies perfectly to its original Object. Perfect faithfulness or even improved faithfulness and understanding—or otherwise—will require case by case analysis. However, it is reasonable that the enhancements may result in improvement subject to practical method. Still the potential appears to be immense and is significantly realized for mind; potential for modern physics, biology, and social science is sketched in varying degree. The section Applied metaphysics is rather skeletal and is elaborated in chapters Cosmology and Worlds

Metaphysics: concepts, themes, and objections

Concepts

Introduction

Concepts—pure metaphysics, general metaphysics, uniqueness of metaphysics

Universe and fundamental concepts

The following may be repeated

Concepts—Universe, Void, Domain, complement

Concepts—being, existence, local, global

Concepts—actual, possible, necessary

Concepts—creator

Void and fundamental principle

Concepts—fundamental principle of metaphysics, Universal metaphysics, Universal framework

Concepts—doubt

Concepts—variety, breadth, implicit but ultimate breadth, ultimate adventure, imagination, tradition, literature

Literature—the next paragraph contains some concepts for imagination, tradition, and the literature

Concepts—austerity, permissiveness, the actual absurd, imagination, experience, cultural imagination and experience, literature, novel, poem, biography, travelogue, art, music, science, history, record, mathematics, scripture, religion, myth, oral tradition

Concepts—law, Logic, logics, metaphysics, Logos

Concepts—law—restriction on accessible states

Work out the above

Concepts—law—immanent, imposed, mere description, convention

Concepts—substance, determinism, form

Concepts—absolute indeterminism, absolute determinism, temporal determinism

Concepts—depth, ultimate depth

Concepts—possibility of metaphysics, perfectly faithful percept and concept, perfect empiricism-rationalism

Themes and objections

The development of the Universal metaphysics

Theme—Metaphysics as Mereology—consider whether to pursue Mereology at present. Universe as all being—implications: contains all Objects and Law; there is exactly one Universe; the Universe has no creator; identity of possibility and actuality and beginnings of Logic. Domain and difference—cause, creation and infusion; limited and local gods; extension and duration… space, time and coordinations of part-whole relations. The Void—the fundamental principle regarding the identity of metaphysics and Logic; objections; the Normal; the principle of reference; depth of being—second aspect of the ultimate character of the metaphysics; substance, determinism and form; the variety of being—second aspect of the ultimate character of the metaphysics; possibility of metaphysics; Logic and the equivalent forms of the metaphysics; beginnings of method. Applied metaphysics—from intuition to framing of contextual studies by the Universal

Theme—Seeing the metaphysics… continued from Intuition

Metaphysics: themes

Theme—Objections, doubts, and responses

Theme—Being and substance: against substance… Absolute Indeterminism and Determinism. Practical substances. Form—for form; form does not reside in another world; form is subsumed under Object

Theme—Requirements for any new paradigm of understanding

Theme—An ultimate system of understanding

Theme—The fundamental principle and some consequences

Theme—Relation between triviality or simplicity and depth…

Theme—Equivalent forms of the metaphysics

Theme—The a priori—there is no a priori… but there is necessary empirical knowledge

Theme—Literalism

Objection. The fundamental principle is at odds with realism

Essential objection. The fundamental principle derives from the following—The Void exists and contains no Law. The essential objection to the fundamental principle, then, is the objection to the claim regarding the existence and nature of the Void

Objection. There is also the fundamental intuitive concern that so much is derived from so little

Residual doubt. Residual doubt will remain. I have this doubt… Response. After all the named doubts and responses, the response to unnamed doubt—characteristic of human being—must be core animal faith

Theme. Metaphysics and animal faith

Applied metaphysics

Concepts—applied metaphysics, the Normal, science, miracles

Theme—Applied metaphysics—Framing intimate and practical knowledge by the pure metaphysics

The idea of metaphysics

In this section we look at the concept of metaphysics. This is preliminary to the development of a metaphysical system: the Universal metaphysics of the next section

Metaphysics is the study of being as it is

The concept entails the study of the Universe as it is

Enter the following objections to ‘objections’ if they are not already there

Objection. As defined, metaphysics is not possible. Response. The reasons for the objection and responses have already been registered

Objection. There have been various formulations of the notion of metaphysics—there is debate over precisely what it is. And there is a critical tradition at least since Kant that questions the possibility of metaphysics as the study of things-as-they-are—first because knowledge begins in experience and second because we cannot know that experience is free of distortion. Response. The term metaphysics is used to connect to the tradition but also to advance it; there is an ‘obligation’ to consider the tradition but this is not absolute and—as we are seeing—the present developments establish the validity and necessity of the present simple and direct conception as an essential one. So, while it may not be said that no other notion of metaphysics is possible, it may be seen that what is valid in most reasonable notions is included in the present one. Finally, what is actually shown is not that we apprehend the ‘thing’ but that there are certain simple objects that are known precisely in intuition; it is remarkable that this should be the basis of a metaphysics of ultimate depth and breadth. And this circumvents Kant’s and related objections

Detailed response to the previous objection. Given that there is agreement on the general notion of metaphysics, lack of consensus has a number of sources. First, since the possibility of metaphysical knowledge of the world as such has been criticized there are alternative notions such as a metaphysic of the world of experience; here, the possibility of metaphysics is demonstrated—therefore our topic is metaphysics (over the necessary Objects whose variety is infinite.) Second, the question arises what is it that is being done in metaphysics? The metaphysics that is developed here, since it is ultimate, provides its own answer (allowing clarification of related notions and subsumption of their valid parts.) There is valid concern over the relationship between pure metaphysics and our more local empirical-conceptual knowledge of the world and this ongoing concern is addressed at a number of places in the discussion, especially in the section Applied metaphysics in this chapter and in Worlds. Finally there is some question whether general cosmology—rather than its restriction to physical cosmology of our cosmos—is part of metaphysics. The response may be partly a matter of taste and convention. However, even on a naïve view the boundary between metaphysics and cosmology must be seen as porous. The present metaphysics shows that the theory of depth or essential pure metaphysics and the theory of variety or cosmology are tightly interwoven

This simple conception of metaphysics is most effective and powerful

Conclusion. The simple notion Metaphysics is the study of being as it is turns out to be the most effective and powerful. This does not rule out the possibility of equivalent but at least superficially distinct notions of metaphysics

The significance of metaphysics

Common knowledge including science have the practical aspect of use or application. While such knowledge may be required to be as faithful as possible, application cannot—always—wait for perfect faithfulness

In metaphysics, however, interest is in truth, i.e. in perfect faithfulness—on the correspondence notion of knowledge and truth. Traditionally metaphysics has been questioned as futile because perfect faithfulness has often thought to be impossible or, at least, impossible to demonstrate. Here, however we demonstrate an (the) ultimate metaphysics which, additionally, has use and application

The significance is immense. Disciplines that have been abandoned because they are ‘impossible’ are now possible. The implication for the possibility and necessities of being are here revealed as ultimate in their variety. There are fundamental implications for the traditional disciplines. These developments are elaborated in the present narrative

There is at most one metaphysics

From Intuition it is seen that there is metaphysics and therefore there is precisely one metaphysics which may have different expressions and may—of course—be developed in greater or lesser degree

Pure and applied metaphysics

The Universal metaphysics

The Universe and its characteristics

There is one Universe that contains all Objects including Laws—all objects and kinds, any form, any substance, any concept and idea

Since the Universe is all being it can have no creator. When the Universe is in the Void state, there can be no being to initiate creation. When the Universe is manifest, beings may be involved in creation; however, those beings are part of the Universe and are not external creators and—from consideration of the Void state—could not have created the entire Universe

Introduction to Logic—possibility, actuality, and necessity

The Universe contains all form, all objects, all Law

Since the Universe is all being there is exactly one Universe

The Universe can have no creator

Space and time… and space-time

Possibility and Actuality—Introduction to Logic

Domains, cause, creation and infusion

Cause and creation. Infusion

Limited gods

There are cosmological systems that have been created by ‘gods;’ of these some have been created by a likeness of the God’s of the mythic and religious literatures. Naïvely, though, the natural case—no external cause, uniformity among cause at local and cosmological scales—must be immensely more likely

This lends no support to necessity that our cosmos was created by ‘God.’ It is naïvely immensely unlikely that our cosmos was created or is being created by ‘God’

Local space and time… and space-time

The Void and the fundamental principle of metaphysics

The Void

The Void exists and contains no Objects—especially no Laws. Objection. Existence of the Void. Response. Alternate proofs (placed later in the reserve version.) Objection. Method of proof is purely Logical. Response. Method and the characterization of Logic as necessary and empirical

The fundamental principle of metaphysics: first formulation and proof

Proof…

Objection. Lack of clarity regarding the deployment of ‘logic,’ i.e., what principles of logic are relevant and the meaning of the entire system of concepts. Response. Improved formulation and proof involving Logic… and the claim that this has content (in the reserve version this comes later)

Infinite freedom

Infinite freedom…

Objection. So much from so little. Response. (1) Challenge remains therefore there is a sense in which ‘so much from so little’ does not apply. (2) The principle was demonstrated

Adjusting the fundamental principle and its consequences to realism

Objection. Apparent conflict with science and common sense. Resolution. Not only is there no conflict with science and common sense but the emerging Universal metaphysics requires and meshes with what is valid in science and common sense—and is not merely consistent with it. In fact the relation between the metaphysics and science has parallels to the relation between science after a scientific revolution and before a scientific revolution—the newer theory introduces radically new ideas and concepts and while its predictions may be vastly different numerically as well as in kind, predictions agree within the domain of validity of the older theory

Return to limits—the Normal

Contingent and absolute limits

Residual doubt

Objection. Residual doubt. Some residual doubt will stem from factors mentioned—formal address of doubt does not eliminate it. Infinite freedom leaves perhaps a subconscious thought about consistency; however, the Universal metaphysics is supremely Logical. Still there is a real component to the doubt. In one of its ideal forms science does not overstep empirical bounds. The Universal metaphysics radically oversteps such bounds. Science is and is thought to be required to be testable; the Universal metaphysics is not. Response. As seen, the Universal metaphysics is empirical. In fact because much of science is immediate detail oriented, its concepts are not empirical even though theories are testable. The metaphysics is testable in the manner of transformation of being; however, ‘testing’ is a vast program and rather different from the instrumental testing of science. The tests for science are external; tests for the metaphysics may be external or technological but the primary ‘test’ is the transformation of being and identity. It is something of a radical paradigm. Let us not forget that with any theory—scientific or metaphysical—if the bounds of the immediately empirical are overstepped as there is in the extrapolation of science and the living in the metaphysics then there must constitutionally and not merely contingently be some what-amounts-to-living-in-faith-or-trust. But without this we would have nothing but dull certitude that would bring neither risk nor gain. In this there is no distinction between the Universal metaphysics and science

Consider the following topics for inclusion

The fundamental principle—an improved formulation and proof

The edge of the Normal

The principle of reference

Logic and law

The fundamental principle: summary of doubts and criticisms

The metaphysics is as if a ‘deus ex machina.’ Response: it is not…

Metaphysics and animal faith

Special topics regarding the Void and the fundamental principle

Token proof

Being and existing

Some properties of the Void

The variety of being

Logic: criticism and austerity versus permissiveness and imagination

Substance and determinism

Substance as grounding all being

The habit of substance thinking

The sortal—a second meaning of substance

Form

Depth of being

Possibility of metaphysics

The equivalent forms of the metaphysics

Method—preliminary comments

Applied metaphysics

What is applied metaphysics?

The methods of applied metaphysics

The normal

Science

A view of science in light of the history of science

What is science?

There is a more complete discussion in Method

Metaphysics and science

Although consistent with science—what is valid in science—the metaphysics is not entailed by it. More precisely, the metaphysics is not entailed by a scientific methodology that makes minimalist assumptions—in the style of Ockham—about what is in the world

The minimalism of Ockham provides a guide but not a method when applied to development of science. It cannot provide more than a guide because the meaning of ‘minimal’ is not clear; nor is it definite for it can apply to more than one category. For example in the development of Newtonian Mechanics, the experiments of Galileo suggest that the equations of motion are second order differential equations—but no more. However, minimalism also suggests that a body with no forces on it should have no acceleration (consistent with Galileo’s experiments.) But this contradicts Aristotle’s observation that a body in motion (on a surface) comes to rest. The resolution is a further minimalism: recognizing friction as a force and removing fundamental distinctions among kinds of forces. Clearly Ockham does not provide a methodology

Now the Universal metaphysics appears to contradict science. However, if minimalism is applied to the domain of application of science it suggests: the actual domain is probably greater than the empirical domain but that it is unlikely that that domain is the entire Universe. Therefore the Universal metaphysics may be seen as entailed by a minimalism with regard to what is not in the world—Universe—and a scientific methodology that is minimalist—or probabilistic—with regard to the domain of application

Miracles

Developments in Applied metaphysics

Chapter Worlds

Objects

The contents of Objects are somewhat technical and address technical concerns, e.g. first the nature of ‘thinghood’ and second the nature of the abstract Objects or ‘things’ such as number and morals

However, there is practical significance to these technical developments. It is illuminating to know what kinds of Object there are in the world: what is the nature of an electron, of an idea, of a number, of a moral. Although there are of course distinctions, it is shown in this chapter that these are not essentially different kinds: they all lie in the one Universe that is all being. We insist that there is a use of Universe as all being because not merely because it is valid as a concept but also and especially because it is part of a viewpoint that yields immense simplicity and economy of thought and description—i.e., it is effective as a concept (and this is the logic of many changes of paradigm: it is possible to describe the heavens with Earth at center but the heliocentric view is much more efficient and based in physical law which in turn gives way to a view, per Einstein, in which there may be no center of the physical universe.) However, we still wonder ‘If the concept is isolated from the Object, what then is an Object?’ and ‘Where and what is an idea, or a number?’ The nature of the Object has been considered in Intuition; however the early treatment may have been seen as the careful analysis of what we commonly refer to as a ‘thing.’ From Metaphysics, Objects will be able to show that there is no reason to not regard process, relation and property on the same plane as a thing or concrete Object; such Objects are collected together under the label particular Object. Now a property such as redness may be seen as what is common to all red things and has therefore been referred to as a Universal. There is a debate from scholastic philosophy whether Universals are real—whether they have Objecthood—or whether they are mere names. Here, as relation, a property may be seen as a particular: the redness of an apple is a particular, the redness of another apple is another particular. This disposes of the need to introduce the Universal; however the collection of all ‘rednesses’ could be regarded as a Universal as could the collection of all bricks or all Jesus Christs. If we were to admit Universals we would regard them as abstract. Are there abstract Objects? Objects provides an answer as described above by showing first that there are such ‘things’ as number, value and morals and by showing second that there is no essential or root distinction between the abstract and the particular even though there are practical differences. Thus a brick is located in space but a number is not; the resolution is that a number does not lack spatiality in principle but rather that spatiality has been abstracted out of it

While it is illuminating to know what kind of world we live in, the fact that all Objects are in the one Universe, and are not at root distinct in kind, conditions our choices—where to put resources—and, by introducing efficiency of description, enables them

Thus Objects introduces conceptual efficiency into understanding of the world and, thereby, practical efficiency into individual and social choice

Objects shows for Cosmology that the variety in the Universe is even greater than might be supposed from Metaphysics; and Objects suggests ways in which to think about the possibilities of individual identity in ways that are not concrete and this will illuminate Journey because identity is not concrete especially in the Universal picture

Essence

The purposes of Objects include (1) Clarify the nature of the known ‘thing;’ this starts with a look at common Objects, e.g. bricks and trees, and asks: What is the nature of those things? Since cognition plays a role in the apparent Object and since we never quite get outside cognition, an approach to this analysis will be via concept and Object. (2) Clarify what less concrete like ‘things’ such as relationship, property, and process may be brought into the realm of Object. (3) To further enquire about the status of abstract ideas such as number and value, whether they define Objects. Subject to Logic, it follows from the principle of reference that they must define Objects that may be labeled abstract, i.e. the ‘abstract’ concepts define abstract Objects. The non-abstract Objects of items 1 and 2 are labeled ‘particular’ (for reasons that will be given.) The particular Objects are primarily perceptual and rather tangible; they have location in space and time—may come into being and may return to non-being, i.e. to a non-existent state; are thought to be in the actual world—i.e. the material world on the materialist account. The abstract Objects are rather conceptual, intangible, appear to have no location in space, appear to be eternal, and they are thought by realists or, at least, those of a realistic bent to reside in a ‘mental’ world or perhaps in an ideal or Platonic world: and the reason for this is often questions such as ‘Where are they?’ rather than any intrinsic subscription to other worlds—i.e. the other worlds appear to be forced upon the realist although not on the nominalist who thinks that the abstract Objects are not Objects at all but that the corresponding ‘concepts’ are mere names; those are the standard views; and it may be noted that nominalism first arose in the case of a special type of abstract Object, the Universal, that is discussed in what follows. Here, however, the approach to abstract Objects is via the principle of reference; this suggests a similar basis to the particular and the abstract except that the particular are primarily known via perception—they are primarily empirical, while the abstract are primarily known via higher conception and are therefore primarily rational. The question remains, therefore, ‘Where are the abstract Objects?’ The answer is not that they do not reside in space but that the spatiality has been abstracted out in greater or lesser degree and that in the extreme case, all spatiality has been abstracted out; therefore they are not constitutionally non-spatial: it is simply that their spatiality is irrelevant. This unification of the particular and the abstract goes against mainstream thought and is both surprising and contributory to the recent tradition of thought. (4) To enquire about and unify as far as possible further distinctions among kinds of Objects. (5) Therefore to further found the theory of variety first taken up in Metaphysics, considered in some detail in Cosmology and further elaborated in terms of the categories of human thought elaborated in Worlds. (6) From the principle of reference and the developed theory of Objects, to see—as suggested by Wittgenstein—grammar as an Object on par with Logic and so to further clarify the nature of linguistic meaning

Essence—II

Objects clarifies the nature of the known ‘thing.’ So far the study of the kinds of thing has been naïve. A brick seems to be a thing but what of a relationship or process or property? A brick or electron is the prototype for what are called particular Objects. Bricks and electrons seem concrete while relationship and process do not; still, relationship and process will be brought under the particular Object. An example of a property is ‘greenness.’ Greenness is what green Objects have in common; therefore greenness is an example of what has been called a Universal—as distinct to the particular. However, in another—perhaps better—perspective, properties may be seen as relationships (between knowers and knowns) and therefore may also be brought under the particular Objects

What of things like value and number? Values and numbers do not have locations. If they are Objects they are not particulars. It has been suggested that they are abstract; it is sometimes suggested that they are ‘mental Objects.’ A concept is held in a mind and could be thought of as a mental Object but the idea is subject to confusion for then a number as a mental Object is not an Object at all. Still, a concept—mental content—could be regarded as a mental Object; but there is no gain to this; a concept may be regarded from the subject side or the object side; on the object side it is just a not very important special case of particular Object; on the subject side it is the experiential aspect of the particular Object—again, there is no gain but there is potential for confusion in invoking the mental Object (a further source of confusion is that there is a tendency to think of mental things as having a lesser grade of reality than actual things; it is implicit in the foregoing that the two grades of reality are identical; this is laid out and demonstrated in Cosmology; however, that elimination of confusion is still no occasion to invoke mental Objects)

Still, the question remains: what is an abstract Object? In having no spatial location it seems to be distinct from a particular Object. Various stabs at the nature of the abstract Object have been made in the tradition of thought: an abstract Object is what particular Objects have in common—like a Universal; or an abstract Object is the form of a particular Object; these thoughts are not without sense but their sense will be subsumed in the following

It will be shown that the distinction between particular and abstract Objects is practical rather than essential. Particular Objects are primarily known via perception; abstract Objects via—higher—conception; naturally there will be mixed cases, e.g. the Objects of science; and cross-over cases: number begins as particular, later when a theory of numbers is developed number ‘becomes’ abstract, and still later, with the advent of computer proof, number becomes mixed; abstract Objects are not essentially non-spatial but have had spatiality abstracted out to greater or lesser degree; finally it may be remarked that the case of value and morals will require special analysis

Proof—the essential ingredient is the principle of reference that subject to Logic every concept has reference in the Universe—and further elaboration and example is provided in the body text.

Thus, in clarifying the nature of the ‘thing,’ Objects shows that the distinction between kinds of Object—e.g., particular and abstract—are practical but not essential. I.e., the kinds are formalized and unity is brought to the world of Objects. This is a significant contribution to thought which has labored from the time of the Greeks to the present with the kinds of things in the Universe

Some thinkers speak of different worlds, e.g. the world of physical or actual or particular things, the world of mental things, the world of Ideal or Platonic things (with an often vague relation to the physical and the mental.)

While showing unity, Objects admits many more practical kinds and therefore many more Objects to being-hood.

This is a further development of the foundation of the metaphysics. It is also further foundation for the study of the variety of objects in the Universe

Introduction

Place of Objects in the narrative

Formal

Intuition provides a foundation for necessary Objects in—human—intuition. Metaphysics develops the properties of the necessary Objects as a Universal metaphysics and shows how the necessary frames the practical and raises the practical to its intrinsic limits

Objects clarifies the nature of the Object: it answers the question What has being? The Object is the fundamental concept of the metaphysics—all existents fall under the Object and are fundamentally of one kind even though there are of course practical distinctions. In clarifying, e.g. the abstract Object as having fundamental unity with the particular, Objects shows with greater explicitness and quantity the variety implied by the fundamental principle of metaphysics

In summary Objects clarifies and makes explicit the variety of being while showing that there is exactly one fundamental kind

Objects helps provide foundation for the theory of variety and so set up Cosmology and Journey

The theory of variety will be developed in Cosmology and further enhanced in Worlds

Informal

In the Journey we are interested in the variety of things in the Universe and our relation to them including what may be realized

This chapter completes the study of the nature and our knowledge of things, the nature and our knowledge of their variety

Wide-angle view

Intuition sets up the study of things, relations, patterns, laws… Metaphysics extends the study to its limit. However, in metaphysics some possible kinds of thing such value and number and concept or mental content were left unanalyzed

The present chapter completes the study by setting all such notions on a common basis

The basis of this accomplishment is the theory of reference which says that all concepts that are not a violation of Logic have reference

The concept-object relation is used to elucidate the general nature of the Object. The concept is not generally known to be perfectly faithful but immense precision is possible and in many cases there is sufficient faithfulness. The general Object is called practical

A necessary Object is one that is known perfectly: the concept corresponds perfectly to the Object. The simplicity of experience, being, Universe, duration-extension, and the Void make them necessary. The demonstrated properties of the Void make the Logos necessary (the concept is Logic.) The Logos is immense but we do not have experience of all its Objects. The necessary Objects are also practical. Not all practical—e.g. scientific—objects are necessary

Various kinds of Objects are identified—particular, abstract, and other abstract-like objects such as values are identified. The particular are tangible or thing-like and intangible or less tangible e.g. process and relation. In recent thought these are distinct kinds (abstract objects are not thought to reside in space.) While there are practical distinctions, there is no essential distinction of kind (it is not that the abstract objects are not spatial at all but the spatiality is abstracted out)

The place of the Object in thought

The western tradition has had a concern with the nature of Objects and this has taken on greater importance since Kant emphasized the problem of the nature of the Object in acute terms. The tradition identifies kinds of Objects—e.g., particular objects such as bricks and a range of other objects such as number and value that are labeled abstract

What Objects derives from the traditions

The chapter derives some ideas from the theory of Objects that originated roughly with Kant and includes the recent distinction of particular and abstract Objects. However, as noted below, the developments show that there is metaphysical identity between the abstract and the particular and that the distinction (1) is according to mode of knowing—empirical versus symbolic, and (2) has conventional aspects

The present study of Objects derives from the interaction of the history of thought on Objects in interaction with the Universal metaphysics. It is natural that common views of what exists should depend on our psychology and on what is commonly believed in the general cultural milieu, in religion and in science. It is also natural that philosophy should, in its attempt at clarification, retain some biases from the common view. In the present study the Universal metaphysics has enabled an ultimate distance from the human perspective without of course suggesting any common irrelevance to our perspective. In this distancing it has been possible to simultaneously provide clarification in some ways ultimate regarding what exists, the nature of existence, and the variety and kinds of existing things

Contribution to thought

A unified theory of Objects. This is surprising and deep—but not so surprising after all given the principle of reference Of course, practical distinctions remain and is important from the perspective of embodied observers. Psychological objections are typically based in that perspective. Formal objections are referred to the development

All Objects lie in the one Universe: there is one world. It is not the case that there are multiple worlds, e.g. physical or actual, mental or conceptual, and Platonic or ideal

An immense variety of Objects. The number of Objects is seen as enormously expanded. The number of essential kinds is reduced to one

These claims are demonstrated

Objects helps clarify the nature of the kinds studied in Cosmology

Objects: concepts, themes, and objections

Concepts

What is an Object?

The Object is perhaps the fundamental concept of metaphysics

Concepts—concept, Object

Kinds of Objects. Unified theory of Objects

Expand the following kinds of Objects in line with the newer developments

Concepts—particular, concrete, abstract, immaterial—complete this—necessary, practical… universal, local

Concepts—unified theory of Objects, principle of reference

Kinds of Objects. For consideration

Concepts—actual, fictional

…this distinction is significant in local contexts

Concepts—logical, contradictory

In the universal context ‘actual’ and ‘logical’ are identical and the contradictory Objects are the only fictional Objects

Concepts—manifest, potential, value

This identifies a distinction only in local contexts

What kind of Object is a value? Originally, a value is perhaps a shared agreement regarding desired versus undesired choices, actions, ends. However, this has some source in adaptation. It has some worth for the future but not absolute worth or purchase. Therefore, a value is local. On the concept side, a value is a concept that refers to desired choices, actions and ends. This does not make a value immaterial; however, it is not material in the sense that atoms are; it is material in the sense that a collection of atoms conditions its own future—and also in the sense that that is not the complete set of factors conditioning its future. A value is the subset of potential Objects coded from adaptation as desirable

The foregoing has tautologous implication for

Concepts—axiology, ethics

Theory of variety

The categories of intuition are treated in chapter Worlds

Concepts—categories of intuition, theory of variety

Logic, grammar and meaning

Concepts—Logic, grammar, meaning

Themes and objections

Objects

Theme—Object as fundamental

Theme—Essential unity of Object kinds. A Unified theory of Objects—subsumption of kinds under the object

Theme—Practical kinds; basis in categories of concept

Particular and abstract objects

Theme—particular and abstract Objects are not fundamentally different: the distinction between particular and abstract is according to empirical versus conceptual-symbolic mode of study. Although the distinction is not fundamental there is a practical and proximate distinction

Objection. Standard objections to a unified theory of the abstract and the particular would be that, in contrast to the particular, abstract objects lack causal efficiency—and therefore tangibility—and location in space and time

Theory of variety

Theme—Theory of variety… and its basis in the fundamental principle, the principle of reference, and the variety of Object kinds

What is an Object?

The meaning of the question

Concept and Object I

Given a concept—mental concept—there may correspond an object. If there does, the object ‘exists.’ However, the object is not entirely of the external world. It lies at some ‘intersection’ of knower and known. The feeling of independence—when it is there—of known from the knower is built into the knower; the known may be dynamically independent but is not constitutionally independent; however even the feeling of constitutional independence may be adapted in origin and adapted in nature; and due to adaptation there is typically some at least intrinsic faithfulness. However, the concept lies in the world even though not in the first order external world (on a second order, at least some concepts may also be experienced.) That is the general case for particular objects

However, on account of the perfect faithfulness of the necessary objects, they may be seen as lying in the external world. These objects include Universe, Domain, and Void; and Logos whose concept is Logic

Concept and Object II

The concept is not the object and does not get out of itself and so there appears to be no objectification through external foundation

Practically, since we do not get outside the concept the concept is the object. This is the basis of Alexius Meinong’s concept-object

However, when absolute faithfulness is desired the practical may be insufficient. We have seen that absolute faithfulness is possible in case of the necessary objects

Generally, the object is at the intersection of idea and world. In the case of the necessary objects the idea is essentially identical to the thing in the world. In the practical case, there is practical correspondence. That the necessary frames the practical results in the potential, realized in the main cases, of the practical to be raised to its intrinsic limit. Since the necessary is practical this applies in an ideal way to the necessary objects… i.e., in a practical way to all objects

Much more can be said; however there is no need to say more

What are the kinds of Objects?

I.e. what are the kinds of things in the Universe—a theory of variety. Partial foundation for Cosmology

Necessary versus practical: distinction according to faithfulness

The necessary Objects are those that are known faithfully

The practical Objects are not known to be known with perfect faithfulness. They may however be known with great precision. Some ‘practical’ Objects may turn out to be necessary

Universal versus local: distinction according to scope

The local Objects are the objects of this world. Some—e.g. the objects known logically—may be Universal

The Universal Objects are those that are known from the Universal metaphysics—the fundamental principle—to exist but are not otherwise known empirically

The categories of Intuition are instrumental in cataloging the variety, especially the local Objects. This includes the system of human knowledge, especially the sciences

Working out the variety of Universal Objects is an exercise in imagination, Logic, and experiment in transformation—either technological or of being and Identity

Particular versus abstract: distinction according to study from object versus concept side

Perhaps the most important distinction. Unifies the particular and the abstract

Approach

1. From the metaphysics, all objects—and concepts—must reside in the universe; there is no ideal world of abstract objects, ideas or forms

2. Further, from the fundamental principle of metaphysics, every concept that neither harbors nor entails contradiction is—and must be—realized. Therefore, as far as realization is concerned there is no distinction between particular and abstract objects

3. That an abstract object may have no location in space may be a result of location having no place in the concept: it is not that there is no location but that by some abstraction, location is irrelevant—the object is location invariant

What is an abstract object? Continued

The objects that lie in the world, e.g. bricks and Laws, are particular objects

What kind of thing is a number, e.g. the number ten? And where does it lie? It does not appear to be in the world. However, mathematical realism seems to suggest that numbers are real. So what kind of an object is it? And where does it lie? Because its reality does not seem to be quite as concrete as that of a brick and because there is a certain abstract quality to it, numbers have been called abstract and it has been thought that they do not exist in space—i.e. in everyday physical space

Where are the abstract objects?

In asking this question, we start a chain of thought that answers the question ‘What is an abstract object?’ and shows the unity of the abstract and the particular

Consider the generic question ‘Given some object, where does it lie?’ I.e. does it lie in physical space or abstract space? Is it in this world or another world? A brick seems to lie in ‘this’ world, the physical world. Surely though, a number—if it is to be real, if it is to exist—does not lie in this world the physical world—it could not for where is it and clearly it is not tangible; a number, it is therefore sometimes thought, must lie in some other world. What is that world? Perhaps it is mental—there is something mental about numbers. Perhaps it lies in an ideal world—a world of ideal forms, a Platonic world—the Logos (used in a meaning that is different from the main use of Logos in this essay)

The issue is clarified by going back to concept-object notion of things. The question ‘Does a unicorn exist?’ is clarified by saying that it does (or does not) exist if there are (or are no) objects corresponding to the concept. Thus a brick lies in this world because the object to which the concept refers is in this world. From the principle of reference the object to which the concept of a number refers must also lie in this world—for, according to the principle, the only way that there can be no corresponding object in this one Universe is for the concept to violate Logic; however, it need reside in the world in quite the same way as the brick was seen to lie in the world. A number is, for example, something that is common all collections that lie in a 1:1 correspondence with one another. A number lies in the world but it is not that it is not tangible at all or not spatial at all but that the tangibility and the spatiality have been factored out. I.e. numbers have spatiality but the spatiality is not relevant because the instances of the reference of the concept may translate spatially without changing the reference. Thus numbers lie in this world. Thus as we have seen there are forms but forms do not lie in a separate Platonic or Logos world. There is the remaining thought that some things may lie in a mental world. This is a confusion that may arise out the question ‘Where is a number?’ I think I can think of a number, therefore I speculate—before the clarification of the lack of distinction between the ideal and the actual—perhaps number is mental… perhaps it lies in a mental world. Again, go back to the concept-object notion. We have seen that the object is in the world. The concept, however is mental. However, the mental is not un-physical. Rather, it is the conceptual-experiential side of some physical thing that is in my brain. I have an experience or concept of a brick. This does not make the brick a mental object. There are no mental objects except of course the concepts; however, the concept of an object is the experiential side of another object. (The argument is precise if the world is physical for being mental and being physical would then not be different categories. There will be further clarification of this point in the section Mind of the chapter on Cosmology.) Thus there is one world and not two or three worlds, i.e. this world, mental world, and Logos world; and the of the physical, the mental, and the Logos are seen to be aspects of the one world

Also, symbolic representations—including operation—is may be seen as or a map of subsets of conceptual—mental content meaning—states

The natural intuitive reaction to identification of the particular and the abstract has the following response. It is first noted that there is a practical and psychological distinction. However, (1) the two kinds are unified under the principle of reference, (2) the distinctions such as spatiality (the abstract objects have been thought to not be located in space) are apparent rather than real, and (3) it is not argued that the abstract is brought to the plane of the particular but that the plane of the particular is special only from the adapted perspective of embodied observers

The abstract and the particular

And going back to the particular and abstract objects, they too lie in the same world but the concept—mental content—of an abstract object is conceptual in the sense of, e.g., thought; the concept—mental content—of a particular object is perceptual or empirical. This is the typical distinction

What kind of an object is a value?

As concepts, values including morals do not appear to correspond to actual objects. On an ethics of ends, a moral corresponds to a ‘desirable’ end. On an ethics of action, a moral corresponds to a desirable action. In either case, the concept has an embodiment that is quite ‘objective’ and real. In this way a moral is an object; and this is quite independent of any theory of justification of morals or reference outside the ‘moral agent.’ Regarded as an object in the world external to the knower or agent, a moral appears to be ‘potential’ or ‘desirable’ and thus somewhat abstract. Therefore, values have been called abstract. This is not unacceptable. However, that kind of abstract object would not reside in the actual world, e.g. in actual physical space. However the concept-moral can be seen as it is the concept or feeling of a real propensity

What of beauty? A first thought regarding beauty is that of desirable thing. But there are things that we do not desire so much as appreciate: they make the world feel as though it is a better place. If I would I would surround my self with beauty; except that I may need to do otherwise—sometimes—for the sake of other values or drives; and except that I may be afraid to lose beauty; or worried that I am alienating myself from the real which includes the ugly but perhaps possessed of another kind of beauty e.g. sensed as an inner quality. We could analyze beauty without end to it; but we forget that beauty has a practical origin—regardless of what it is precisely or whether there is a precise thing that it is—as an ongoing construct there is not; so there is a sense in which the fact of beauty is more important than the idea of it; and yet, we start, e.g. in culture, and build layers upon it; and we build up in our taste at the same time. In the latter sense, beauty is not a given concept but something that we are constructing; that of course is part of the conception at a higher level and could stand to be refined—but I have no immediate intent to go in that direction. In the primitive sense, beauty may be seen as a rather abstracted object associated with things or as concept or a feeling of a real propensity. The ‘function’ of the feeling does not wait upon its analysis or its higher elaboration

What of knowledge—is that practical too? What is the practical component of the concept-object in which the concept refers to a ‘thing’ in the external world? We may say, roughly, philosophical thought is an area of activity in which we are prepared to wait for faithfulness—it is a value that some philosophers have that they ‘know’ they cannot know and therefore make a value of waiting forever (there is of course value in contemplating the great questions.) However there is also practical knowledge that is put to use and use cannot wait forever for demonstrated perfect faithfulness: science and common knowledge are examples—at least in some of their uses. Perhaps the distinction is one of degree: almost all knowledge can wait at least a moment and no knowledge need wait forever

Further distinctions

Comment. These distinctions are not particularly important to the development and may be omitted. See Journey in Being-New World-essence.html

Possible relevance to the theory of variety from the kinds in the section What are the kinds of Objects?

Distinctions according to completeness—full versus partial. Perhaps every object is a partial object

Distinctions that determine existence—actual versus fictional, logical versus contradictory

Distinctions according to definiteness of being—manifest versus potential, determinate versus incompletely determinate

The distinction of manifest versus potential may have relevance to value

Distinctions according to quality of knowledge—absolute versus practical, definite versus vague, and entire versus filtered

A unified theory of Objects

Since the necessary-practical and universal-local distinctions do not mark different kinds, it is only the particular and the abstract that are candidates for unification

The purpose of the present section is to show that contrary to most recent thought, the particular and abstract are not different kinds of Object

Particular objects

Concrete versus non-concrete objects

An example: universals as non-concrete particulars

Variety of particular objects

Theory of abstract objects

The concept of the abstract object

Abstract versus particular objects

The unified theory of particular and abstract objects

An example that straddles the particular-abstract continuum: universals as abstract objects

The theory of variety

The categories of intuition

Particular objects

Affect

Abstract objects

The Logical status of Objects

A system of objects

There are no fictions

The only descriptions or depictions to which nothing corresponds are the ones that violate Logic

Sources of the system

Therefore experience, experiment, and imagination—which includes criticism; and the entire oral and written traditions which include myth, science, and all art and music are the sources for the classification and ‘enumeration’ of any system of Objects

The Object as the fundamental concept of the metaphysics

Logic, grammar and meaning

Cosmology

A principle of ultimate variety was introduced in Metaphysics and extended in Objects; and variety was given some illustration via example

In this chapter, variety is systematically pursued. The principle of the discussion is the principle of variety. The sources include imagination and literature; if art, music, and drama are regarded as having Objects then they too are sources. Subject to the minimal requirements of Logic, there is no fiction

A picture of the Universe derived from Logic alone is bare and skeletal. Conversely, the picture of the Universe allowed by Logic—the picture developed in Metaphysics—is ultimately rich

If metaphysics is shrunk to its essential core and no characteristics of being are discussed other than the defining characteristic then metaphysics might consist of the single statement: there is being (which, without clarification of being, i.e. as experience and world, is a tautology.) When we consider the aspects of the Universe of this chapter: variety, process, identity and death, mind, and space and time and being, we are considering not what flows from being-as-being but from our forms of experience of the world. However, in Cosmology the discussion is at a level, e.g. of abstraction or generality, that does not introduce essential distortion

Therefore while there are distinctions, the border between metaphysics and cosmology need have no actual significance

In illuminating the variety in the Universe, Cosmology provides a large scale map for any physical cosmology and any journey in being. The discussion of Identity and death shows personal or experiential ways in which to enter the exploration; and it also shows that Universal identity is realized even though the path is not fully shown (the path is further illuminated in Worlds but is still not given: realization requires that actual exploration and experiment in being and identity be undertaken)

Essence

General cosmology or, simply, cosmology is the study of the variety of being—which includes process and therefore dynamics and origins. The physical cosmology of our cosmos is taken up in chapter Worlds

The essential new principles of the present study are those of the Universal metaphysics, especially the principle of Variety, i.e. that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety of being. Thus the principle generating the cosmology is that subject to Logic, all literature is cosmology: there is no distinction between fact and fiction. If music, art, and values have Objects, they too generate the cosmology. The variety is further expanded by the inclusion of abstract Objects; and later, in Worlds, made more explicit in terms of the categories of being

At its purest core metaphysics is concerned with being. Cosmology studies aspects or kinds. However, Worlds is also concerned with kinds: the kinds of being that populate our world—and that includes the cosmological system as well as living being. What is the difference, then, between the kinds studied under the two topics? An obvious differenced is that Worlds is concerned with the local

The essential difference, however, is that the phases or aspects considered under cosmology are considered at a level of abstraction that permits study to be faithful: in Cosmology we learn from the Normal but remain free of its bounds; in Worlds the interest is significantly what lies within those bounds. Still, the topics of Cosmology include Variety and origins. 62; Process. 63; Identity and death. 63; Mind. 63; and Space, time and being; and the corresponding ideas come from experience that is more specialized than that of being. Therefore, there is some reason to separate these topics from metaphysics even though there is arbitrariness to the separation and it is natural to have some discussion of cosmological topics in Metaphysics. Additionally, these topics fit with uses of ‘cosmology’

Although origins are process, the study in Process is general

It is typical of the level of detail of study of the Objects in Worlds that the study is not faithful; however, some disciplines that fall under Worlds are useful andor achieve high precision

The cosmology of this chapter is general cosmology. The natural place to study the physical cosmology of our cosmos is Worlds

Introduction

Place of Cosmology in the narrative

Sources for Cosmology in the Metaphysics and theory of Objects

The cosmology derives, first, from the fundamental principle of metaphysics which implies that the Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety

This variety is further enhanced by the theory of variety developed in chapters Objects and Worlds (especially in the study of the categories of intuition)

Implications for Variety, Adventure, and the Journey

The cosmology shows the infinity of variety and the potential for variety. It is perhaps too vast to be anything more than a call to adventure and a reminder that contingent limits are a call to overcoming, a reminder to not stand in excessive awe or blindness regarding such limits

The path to adventure begins in this world… and that is the topic of chapter Worlds

The cosmology is a reminder that the particular study is as much about possibility and direction as it is about limits. And it is a reminder that limits have a dual function—caution, of course, and overcoming and adventure

Wide-angle view

General cosmology is the study of variety which includes process and therefore dynamics and origins

The fundamental principle of metaphysics is the basis of the study of variety. This is enhanced with regard to category of Object by the theory of variety developed in chapters Objects and Worlds (especially in the study of the categories of intuition)

These general principles are combined with aspects or elements of being to illuminate those aspects as in the sections below from Variety and origins to Space, time and being

The approach to study and kind of conclusion varies among the sections. For example in Process, it is shown that while the evolutionary mechanism of life is a necessary ‘mechanism’ it cannot be the universal mechanism even if it is the most probable one—this is a case of the more general observation that what is contingent (not Logical) cannot be universal. In Identity and death it is shown that death is contingent—it is absolute to our proximate identity but simultaneously gateway to Identity. Mind provides an occasion to see the essence of mind, i.e. experience, as reaching to the root of being and, adequately understood, as providing a basis for foundation and significantly improved understanding of the essential phenomena of mind and study of mind

What Cosmology derives from the traditions

Since any system of concepts that does not violate Logic has an Object, the following are sources of cosmology

Experience, experiment, and imagination—which includes criticism; and the entire oral and written traditions which include myth, science—physical cosmology is included here but emphasized in Worlds, and all art and music are the sources for the classification and ‘enumeration’ of any system of Objects

Naturally, philosophical and physical cosmology are in the background any reflection on cosmology; modern physical cosmology, certainly, has provided a model, not to take literally but upon which to build. Philosophical and physical cosmology are not distinct topics but their approaches differ. Physical cosmology is experimental and conceptual but the concepts emphasize modern theoretical physics; kinds of thing not encountered in experiment and theoretical physics generally do not find a place in physical cosmology. In philosophical cosmology the method is rational and therefore may be imaginative but subject to logic; physical cosmology enters as suggestive; the limits of physical cosmology are under review and therefore philosophical cosmology is not limited to models from physical cosmology but of course, philosophical cosmology will not violate what is definite in physical cosmology. In this essay, it is seen that there must be an infinite world starting at the edge of the known cosmos; however, modern philosophical cosmology typically though not invariably focuses on the big-bang family of cosmologies

Contribution to thought

While the metaphysics reveals the Universe to be finite in conceptual depth the cosmology reveals a conceptual and factual variety without limit. It is revealed that the greatest and unending adventure is that of variety

It is revealed that, as long as the confines of Logic are not exceeded, all literature, art, myth and science so far reveal mere and minute fragments of being. Even when I become the Universe looking in-out upon myself, there will still be occasion for adventure and awe. Every realization is limited relative to what is possible and actual

The narrative describes a number of practical foundations to the disciplines. Some of these are in Worlds, others are summarized in Journey—section Investigation in the modes and means of transformation

Cosmology: concepts, themes, and objections

Concepts

General cosmology

Concepts—general cosmology

Variety and origins

Concepts—variety, origins

Process

Concepts—process, mechanism, evolution, causation

Concepts—theory of evolutionary systems

Identity and death

Concepts—identity, death

Concepts—theory of identity, immanence of the universal in the present

Mind

Concepts—mind, explanation, consciousness, feeling, awareness, free will, Object

Concepts—the nature of explanation

Concepts—psychological account of Objects

Space, time and being

Concepts—space, time, being, absolute, relative, imposed, immanent

Themes and objections

Cosmology

Theme—Cosmology and variety—the intersection of depth and Object kinds and categories (breadth) including fiction

Variety and origins

Theme—A cosmological variety

Objection. It should be equally true that there is a limit to variety

Identity and death

Theme—Identity and Trans-identity

Mind

Theme—Mind and its initial nature and, via the metaphysics, its root nature and being: mind is at and goes to the root and core of being. The aspects and elements of mind as reflecting the organism in (adaptation to) the Universe… the subject or experience and creative side or will and experience of will of mind as essential. Absence of final distinction between material and mental modes of understanding and description

Objection—the problem of Mind and mind as experience

Objection—the problem of Free Will. However, the logical arguments against freedom of will in thought and action are (1) the universe is deterministic and, in any case, structure cannot come from indeterminism and (2) even if the universe is or were to be indeterministic, our actions are bound and, obviously, we cannot choose to do whatever we want to do or be whatever we want to be

Space, time and being

Theme—Space-time

Theme—Normal worlds: method of study

General cosmology

Variety and origins

Approach to study

The variety and origins…

Process

The order of the this and the next section is changed from ..\Journey in being-2009-reserve.doc

Note: origins—the previous section—are a process

The nature and necessity of process

Necessity of becoming from the Void

Mechanism and chance

When there is no preferred direction of change, significant change by incremental variation and selection is almost always immensely more likely than single step change by ‘chance’

Evolution

Evolutionary systems

Causation

Identity and death

Mind

A possible outline

The approach to the analysis of mind

Plan for the discussion of mind

Meta-theory: the nature of explanation and its use in understanding mind

The nature of explanation—concept and object

Explanation of mind

The concept of mind

Outline of phenomena to be explained

The phenomena

Mode of explanation

Consciousness and awareness

Free will

A preliminary psychological account of Objects

Retain this?

The question of psychic powers

There are psychic powers such as the mathematical intuition of the Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan who, self-educated, was able to conceive remarkable results in mathematics even though his proofs were sometime inadequate as a result of having no formal training. Ramanujan is regarded as one of the great mathematicians Leonhard Euler, Carl Friedrich Gauss, and Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi, for his natural mathematical genius. Ramanujan’s powers are abnormal in their degree but not in kind

Other psychic powers such as extrasensory perception and telekinesis are abnormal in the sense that they are abnormal in kind: not possessed by normal individuals. Supporters of such powers claim that they transcend known modes of perception, known physical law and so on. There seems to be some relish in the fact of transcending known means and science. It is remarkable that psychic powers remain with marginal application and that science and its application are in many ways much more remarkable. Supporters of psychic powers would argue that, e.g., the unwillingness of people to believe makes it impossible for them to see. I believe, however, that it is openness in ideas and means characterizes the most powerful of human agencies; of course there is native intuition such as Ramanujan’s insight into numbers and their relations but the insights are supported by explicit proof; and in the case of modern mathematical proof that is partially computer generated and so complex or long that examination is difficult it is precisely that difficulty that is a source of doubt but precisely the willingness to provide proof for open examination which then results in a verdict of ‘probably correct’ that is a source of confidence

It is not the intent here to catalog or prove the possibility or actuality of such powers as presented by telekinetics and so on. The questions are: Given that all human beings have some mental power, what is the nature and degree of psychic powers? How can this question be brought into the realm of understanding rather than remaining outside it? Can this understanding lead to a realistic cataloging of psychic powers and explicit ways of developing andor invoking such powers

I suggest the following keys to answering these questions. First: openness in ideas and means. Second: it has been seen that mind is not other than the body: that mental description whether direct or from the outside and bodily description are modes of description of the same phenomena; therefore what is ‘of the psyche’ is not ephemeral and therefore the idea of psychic power should be neither surprising nor separated from the idea of physical or body power. Third: as seen, both ‘mind’ and ‘body’ go to the root of being

These aspects of approach will be taken up in the transformations; the possibility is interesting; there is no pre-judgment of what will emerge; it is estimated that this open approach, combined with a study of open powers but also openness to all claims has the greatest potential for significant outcome

Space, time and being

It is significant that discussion of space, time and being should come after the discussion of mind

Change to space-time and being?

Extension and duration: their necessity and interaction

Incomplete cover

Being and time

Other modes?

Space, time and being

Is that all there is?

Relative versus absolute space and time

Immanent versus imposed space and time

Worlds

Introduction

Place of Worlds in the narrative

‘Worlds’ derives from

The Universal metaphysics—Intuition through Cosmology. These include the emerging thoughts on method—that there is an ultimate understanding of all being of finite depth that reveals an ultimate variety; that this understanding is simultaneously empirical and necessary; that the understanding therefore includes method; that the finite depth and empirical-necessary understanding coincide in recognizing or seeing through the details by abstraction to what is invariant in seeing and knowing; that this is done by bringing all knowing under intuition and without a priori foundation so that what foundation there may be may be seen; that therefore method and content emerge together and it is not as if method and logic are received while knowledge alone is discovered for in the end method is seen as an element of content for the object of method is knowing which is also in the world

The study of local worlds begins with what is received as knowledge. This includes the tradition. However, along the way there has been occasion to reflect on the elements of received knowledge to reflect upon them in light of experience and criticism and to play with those elements especially in the recognition that they are somewhat ad hoc and therefore playful even if we want to be serious about them as though they bore the stamp of the given (the psycho-social institution of the serious and its positive and detrimental value might make an interesting study.) You will encounter this play-that-takes-us-below-and-beyond-the-merely-serious in the sections that follow, especially those starting with Human being

Use of ‘Worlds’ in the journey

If we conceive the Journey as now a diving into the deep pool of being that is both light and dark, the knowing that is developed in this chapter is a spring-board

Wide-angle view

Worlds is the study and understanding of our world—more generally of local worlds and contexts

It is a study of our world and what is held as knowledge of it within the framework of Universal understanding so far

The further basis of study is the emerging method in which the framework of the Universal shows the essentially local and limited character of what is received—the various traditions including the academic—and so encourages the revaluation of local understanding to its intrinsic limit

What Worlds derives from the traditions

The development derives much—of course—from the traditions

That the Universal theory of the previous chapters derives inspiration from the inspired thought-fragments of the past is already manifest

Here, it is the traditions of study of and experience in this world—the local cosmology and the studies of organism and of human being and society—that are essential to the development

Contribution to thought

The result is extension and clarification of the local disciplines—extension that approaches the root of being and clarification that continues the shedding of the mere ad hoc and the superficial so that understanding converges on its object

The main contribution of Worlds, is the understanding and way of explanation of human being, especially mind which is at the core of human being. There is some contribution to the way of understanding and explanation for society—and perhaps some contribution to the concept of the institution and the nature of language. There is an evaluation of the limits of the human endeavor—especially in its common and paradigmatic modes; and of course, there is the significant revelation that, important as they are, these modes are not merely limited but infinitesimal and therefore capable of infinite transcendence: it is remarkable that the Universal metaphysics permits and requires a coherent and consistent union of the secular-scientific view and a view that is not that of the religious cosmologies but that does employ language that is similar to that of the religious cosmologies (the Advaita Vedanta is regarded as philosophical rather than religious.) There is potential contribution to a number of topics, especially modern physics and physical cosmology; these are mentioned here and outlined in Journey—section Investigation in the modes and means of transformation

Worlds: general concepts and themes

Concepts

Any further concepts that apply to Worlds in general?

Concepts—modes of mind or local being, modes of local world

Concepts—applied metaphysics, method

Concepts—explanation, meta-theory

Concepts—tradition, universal metaphysics… and their interaction

The concepts for Worlds are in divided into concepts for Local cosmology, Human being, Society, and Human endeavor

Themes

Worlds

Theme—Normal worlds… Normal worlds and necessity…

Theme—Method for Normal worlds—see Framing, earlier

Theme—Variety—This world—the intersection of depth and Object kinds and categories

Theme—Ground—This world as ground for Human being, Individual and Identity, Society… the Journey…

Human world

Theme—study of the forms of experience—via mind—as an approach to human experience and local categories of being

Theme—complementary approaches to the understanding of the metaphysics and the place of the individual in it—Plato, Nietzsche, Kant, Heidegger…

Theme—Civilization as a matrix of interconnections, as Islands connected under the surface of the Ocean, mountains in a sea of mist

Theme—complementary approaches to the understanding of the metaphysics and the place of the individual in it—Plato, Nietzsche, Kant, Heidegger…

Human endeavor and its normal limits

Theme—Relation of Journey | being to the—common—human endeavor

Theme—The contingently-scientifically-practically impossible re-interpreted as the infeasible, i.e. as infeasible relative to the state of knowledge

Theme—The common human endeavor and its limits: rationalism… nature of the physical world… nature of the living world including mind and behavior… human being… secular humanism… myth and religion… science and belief

Approach

Carefully study the details of this section and its subsections and their application for improvement and inclusion under Method

Condense the content of the section Approach perhaps eliminating the sub-section titles

Principle—framing of the local by the Universal: the Universal is an envelope of the local. The mesh of content and method provides potential for the local to be raised to its intrinsic limit

Method—the components of the method are the phenomena or what is to be explained, the elements or terms of explanation, and the theory or local conceptual framework of explanation which includes (a) perception and establishment of fact and (b) induction including pattern recognition, and deduction (thus the methods of science are an explanatory framework as are the symbolic studies such as logic and grammar)

Elements, phenomena, and theory iterate within and in interaction with the Universal. Then, the elements may root to the universal; the phenomenology and behavior begin to fit into the universal ‘model.’ Understanding expands from its ad hoc and academic forms to the universal

The explanatory triad

The explanatory triad—the phenomena, the elements, and the explanatory framework

Explanation includes scientific and predictive theory as a case

In one conception of philosophy—that of Wittgenstein—the phenomena and the elements are the same… in that conception or mode of philosophical thought, understanding is essentially superficial—not because of any shallowness in an ability to understand but because there is nothing under the surface. This is a conception of an approach to understanding rather than a concept or definition of philosophy

It is typical that there is indeterminacy in the triad; acknowledgment of it is a factor in improvement and, perhaps, movement toward determinacy. Although we approach new knowing, new understanding, new explaining from the point of view of what is received, we also make the approach from multiple modes of ignorance—otherwise the knowing etc would not be new

We therefore do not insist on any essentialism or substance with regard item or kind in the triad

Regarding mind for example, the elements could be mental or material… or neither… or both. A system of understanding of mind could explain high level mental phenomena in terms of mental elements—e.g. feeling, afference, efference—which could be explained neurobiologically… or the neurobiological could parallel the mental elements

The phenomena are not invariably given; discovery reveals new phenomena and kinds; theory and experiment often show distinct phenomena to be related and, via new elements and frameworks of explanation, to integrate within a new unified understanding. Standard explanatory models may be pursued—direct and transcendental, inductive and deductive, from experiment to law and law to experiment

Contribution of the Universal metaphysics

The indeterminacy is emphasized and encouraged. Simultaneously it is given determinacy by providing framing and showing the root to which the elements may approach. Even if there is an infinity of layers, there is a level—the Void—below which there is no depth. The metaphysics provides without substance but allows local substance in the physical and explanatory sense

The theory of the Void shows that there is no final substance but also suggests that substance may be pursued on the way to explanation. We are not committed to essentialism but not invariably committed to avoiding it—this is itself an avoidance of the habits of substance thinking

The openness allows that the intrinsic limits of the disciplines may be attained. It encourages the combining of disciplines in this endeavor. It suggests foundations to the current disciplinary foundations as best recognized in the academic world

The sections of this chapter provide examples. However these are not mere examples but span what we know as our world

The metaphysics itself is an example of reaching the intrinsic and in this case ultimate limit of explanation

Contribution of the tradition

The approach is the framing of the local by the Universal. The source of the Universal is the Universal metaphysics

Sources for the local include imagination, experience, and the traditions of human knowledge and experience which includes oral and written traditions including drama and art and literature. These include the modern sciences and humanities. These inputs to the study of the local are essential and immense

Local cosmology

Here only a sketch

Phenomena—mechanical and electromagnetic phenomena on earth and solar system, small and large scale behavior, fundamental forces and theories, cosmological phenomena

Elements—theoretical physics—space-time-matter and the fundamental theories

Theory—the mesh with Cosmology provides potential foundation. Interpretation within the Universal framework provides enhanced interpretation and application of modern cosmology and shows that it is a speck in the Universe

A possible outline:

Evolution and evolutionary theory

Origin of dynamics

Physics and physical cosmology

Large scale theory of the physical universe

Physics at small scales: quantum theory

Life and organism

Phenomena—life, function, variety

Elements—cells, biochemistry

Theory—variety and micro-coding; adaptation and coding of the environment-organism in the organism; variation and selection, micro and macro evolution, coding of structure and genetics, adaptability and intelligence as adaptation

Local cosmology: concepts

Note that space and time are considered in the previous chapter Cosmology

Concepts—local cosmology, Normal cosmology

Concepts—evolutionary theory and systems

Concepts—physics, physical cosmology

Concepts—large scale theory of the physical universe

Concepts—physics at small scales—quantum theory

Concepts—biology

Human being

Phenomenology—mind, experience-consciousness; mental function starting with cognition and emotion; personality and identity; human freedom and its dimensions; health and disorder

Elements—determinism and indeterministic elements; feeling, elaboration, integration and layering

Theory—explanations of the elements from fundamentals—adaptation, the local world and the Universal metaphysics; the higher elements from the lower; and of the phenomenology

A possible outline

The organism

Mind at the level of human being

Elements of mind: the phenomena to be cataloged andor explained

Mind and its nature

The elements of mind

Modes of organization

The categories—a system of intuitive or adapted Objects

Timelines and origin of the higher elements

Elements and concept of mind: explanations of the phenomena

The elements

Introducing states that include elements of volition regarding mental content

Object as element

The categories

Existential

Physical

Biological

Of the psyche

Social

Of perception and judgment

Timelines and origin of the higher elements

Personality and Identity

Mechanism of integration

Meta-theory: the nature of the explanations

Health and disorder

Human being: concepts

General

Concepts—freedom, choice, action

Human organism

Concepts—human organism

…and related concepts

Concepts—variation, selection, adaptation, co-adaptation, incremental variation, internalization, genetic code, creative intelligence

Concepts—human mind—mind at the level of human being

Concepts—animal mind, human mind, element, elaboration, integration, layering, phenomena

Element

Concepts—element

…and related concepts

Concepts—primitive state, process, relation; afferent-neutral-efferent

State

Concepts—state

…and related concepts

Concepts—bound, free; intensity, modality, quality; memory, transient, stable; compound, object or gestalt

Modality and quality

Concepts—modality and quality

…and related concepts

Concepts—primitive feeling, external feeling—world—‘five’ senses and their qualities… and sources in the physics of this solar system; internal feeling—the body—kinesthetic feeling, pain, affective feeling, feeling of feeling

… and the recursive feeling of feeling?

Object

Concepts—Object

…and related concepts

Concepts—origin of gestalt, binding, constancy

Function

Concepts—function

…and related concepts

Concepts—intuition, conception—mental content or cognition-affect—i.e., inner-outer or body-world feeling; perception, higher-conception, icon, symbol, language; cognition, emotion; external world—i.e., inner-outer mental content

Experience and consciousness

Concepts—experience and consciousness

…and related concepts

Concepts—all experience, pure experience, attitude-experience, action-experience, awareness, consciousness, consciousness—degrees, awareness without consciousness, on-off character of consciousness, focal and volitional aspects of consciousness, consciousness of consciousness

Modes of organization and integration

Concepts—modes of organization and integration

…and related concepts

Concepts—elaboration—modality, quality; lateral, vertical—layering

Concepts—integration—adaptation via exposure to the Object—the origin of binding in adaptation; degrees of integration—independence, interaction and holism… holism of emotion and cognition… and its essential character—degrees of binding, variation, and self and interactive volition

Exposure in the co-Object?

Concepts—integration of cognition and affect—thought and its experimental integration in synthesis and fragmentation in analysis, affect-thought and its constructive and experimental integration in higher emotion… non-volitional modulation of emotional response over time and cultivation of volition in emotion

Categories of intuition

Concepts—categories of intuition

…and related concepts

Concepts—categories—natural, psychosocial, existential

Concepts—natural—physical: space, time, physical object, causation, indeterminism; biological—life form and ecosystem, species, heredity

Concepts—of the psyche—conception, intuition, higher conception, emotion, free icon, free symbol, recollection, dissociation, origination

social—the institution

add to the social… or refer to Concepts for Society and Civilization below

Concepts—existential—being, becoming, being-in, experience, Object, humor

Personality and identity

Concepts—personality, identity

…and related concepts

Concepts—innate, learned, enduring, adaptive, plasticity, pattern, thought, behavior, feeling, affective expression, drive, integration, interaction, self, commitment, other, world

Explanation and meta-theory

This is repeated from the general concepts for Worlds. Is it useful here?

Concepts—explanation, meta-theory

Health and disorder

Concepts—health, disorder

Concepts—theory of function and disorder

The ‘theory’ is that of the correspondence between disorder and function via dysfunction

Society

This is the section Social world and the social sciences of previous versions

Explain why objective history is brief and that History under Being is about significance rather than objectivity per se

Phenomena—groups and activities; kinds—natural, social, psychic and universal; variety; change, stability and instability

Elements—person; knowing and foresight; language, expression, and communication

The boundary between constitution and theory is somewhat arbitrary. Note, also that use of structure is not structuralism

Theory—institution, person, blood and other kinship groups; culture—discovery, coding and recording, reflection, and transmission; social function—economic, political or group decision, cultural

A possible outline

Introduction

Combine with foregoing?

In Social world, the ideas of society, culture and institution are developed from the ideas of groups and group interaction in light of the nature of Human being and the Metaphysics. The significance for the journey is that in the elaboration of its nature the group—the Social world—is an object of interest. Groups undertake journeys and for the individual society is both ground and support

Culture

Freedom

The concept of the institution

Institutional form and the idea of institutional purity

The institutions

People—persons—and groups

Culture

Language

Introduction

What is language?

Approaching language

Pre-language

Meaning

Speech

Context

Para-verbal language

Writing

Symbol and icon

Summary, conclusions, further development

Organization and transaction

Some definitions and explanations

People and groups

Culture

The culture of the institution

Religion

The limits of institutional religion

The future of the idea of spirit or the ideational form

Organization and transaction

The network of institutions

Ethics, value

Civilization

History and design

Policy

The state of civilization—an ongoing concern

Society and Civilization: concepts

General

Concepts—society, culture, freedom, institutional form, institution, institutional purity, network of institutions

Institutions

Concepts—institutions

…and related concepts

Concepts—person, group, actual group, virtual group

Concepts—culture, language

Organization and transaction

Concepts—organization and transaction

…and related concepts

Concepts—economic, work, political, legal, discovery, knowledge, ethics, value, transmission, learning, education, university, school, archival, play, tradition, church, performance

Civilization

Concepts—civilization

…and related concepts

Concepts—history, design, planning, policy

Concepts—the theory of civilizations, the state of civilization

The Human endeavor and its normal limits

A possible outline

Common and experimental endeavor

The categories

Modes of being and knowing and normal their limits

The animal

Primal holism—early religion-myth, and science

Religion / religion

Science / science

Secular humanism

Future of the ideational form

The Human endeavor: concepts

Human endeavor

Concepts—human endeavor

…and related concepts

Concepts—modes of being and knowing, the categories, normal limits, limits

Modes and paradigms of being and knowing

Concepts—modes and paradigms of being and knowing

…and related concepts

Concepts—animal, primal holism, myth, religion, science, empiricism, rationalism, humanism, secular humanism

Concepts—ideational form

Journey

Eliminate unnecessary overlap between this chapter and Introduction

This chapter narrates the foundation for transformation, the experiments and trials and achievements so far, and vision and plans for the future

The chapter is brief because the transformations are less well developed than the ideas. It may be that the transformations are more extensive than they appear to be; it would then be useful to see this fact

Essence

Material placed in outline from scratch.html

Introduction

Place of Journey in the narrative

Ideas and transformation of being are the two—incompletely distinct—modes of realization

Although ideas are essential as a mode of realization and as instrument and appreciation of transformation, transformation of the individual to Universal Identity is the ultimate realization. Since transformation includes ideas, transformation is the complete mode of realization

This chapter describes the means and modes of full transformation, their foundation in ideas and the nature of human being and the world, what is achieved so far and what lies ahead

Sources in the narrative

The ideas—Intuition through Worlds and Method

Implications for the subsequent narrative

Since realization is on the way, the chapter Being includes focus on what realization there may be in the present

Journey also contributes to Method

Wide-angle view

The central focus of the chapter is transformation. The ‘method’ derives from the Ideas, the traditions and experience. Transformations so far are described and assessed. A path for the future is laid out. The chapter then refers forward to chapter Being for a focus on what realization there may be in the present

What Journey derives from the traditions

Knowledge that contributes to and founds transformation. Contributory knowledge has been taken up in earlier chapters, especially Worlds. Special foundational knowledge includes such traditions as Samkhya, the western mystic reflections, the myths of the hero

Traditions of transformation include such traditions as Yoga, Mysticism, and Shamanism

Contribution to the tradition

The process described is a contribution to and merging with the human and universal journeys

Journey: concepts and themes

Concepts

A journey in being

Concepts for the span and history of the journey

Concepts—idea-action-being, individual-communal-universal, finite-ultimate, ultimate as infinite, ultimate-as-immersion in the immediate, ambition-goal, known-unknown, vague-definite or vague-definite-continuum

Concepts—foci—Metaphysics, dynamics-Journey-Pure being-meaning as significance

Concepts for the characteristics of the journey

Concepts—ultimate, commitment, dual means and modes—process and realization—discovery in ideas, transformation of being and identity, full realization is transformation, idea as appreciation, idea as instrument, incomplete distinction between idea and being, variety and depth, demonstration, seeing, limits, overcoming

Concepts—journey, individual journey, universal journey, ambition, transformation in ideas, transformation in being-identity, non-linear, process, end, process as end, multiple paths and kinds of path

Concepts—feasibility, value, resource allocation

Concepts—principle of the journey

Concepts—journey in being-identity

Concepts—being, becoming

Method; plan

Method and sources

Concepts—dynamics of being, catalytic states, dynamics of the dynamic

Concepts—it is originally development of the dynamic

Concepts—traditional systems

Plan

Concepts—experiment, minimal system, modes, means

The transformations

Phases

Concepts—phases

Concepts—ideas; realization—being and identity; social—action, culture, networked intelligence, cultural intelligence; design and construction of being— physical, psychological, social, technological

Illustrations of the dynamic

Concepts—illustrations of the dynamic

Concepts—ideas; identity, personality, and charisma, dynamics of mental functions and (self) awareness; body, healing, and medicine

Themes

Journey

Theme—Journey—bases—Universal, i.e. Intuition through Cosmology—Local, i.e. Worlds—Bridge, i.e. Mesh via Ideas or theory, experiment and process

A journey in being

Theme—An individual journey

Ways and ideas of transformation

Theme—Methods of the Journey—the traditions from the primal to the recent… experiment and the Dynamics of being

A journey in being

The goals and ambitions

The ultimate and the immediate

The possibility and necessity of the ultimate

That it remains the ultimate adventure

Transformation

Why transformation; transformation as full realization

Possibility and necessity of ultimate realization; that it is the greatest adventure

Relation to ideas; ideas as transformation; ideas as instrument; ideas as appreciation; that ideas are essential; in a fuller meaning, Ideas merge with being

Ideas and transformation of being and identity as the modes and means of realization

Why ‘Journey’?

Though realization is necessary, the path would not be linear even if the ultimate were the only goal

The path will go through worlds of being; there will be dead ends and fresh starts; the modes and means are among the ‘ends’

The individual discovery of the journey is itself a journey

Each individual, each culture, each civilization rediscovers its own way. Rediscovery is as good as discovery. There is no patenting of authorship

Two meanings of ‘Journey’

Concept and character of the journey

Import and rewrite the essence of Journey, and its foundation in the Prologue and then send a précis back. Finally, eliminate the bookmarks introduced by these hyperlinks

Import and minimize repetition with the following sections from the Introduction

The sources and characteristics

A principle of the journey

Origin, development and evolution

A brief history of the ambitions

Origin of the focus on being

The Void and the origin of the Universal metaphysics

The journey in being-identity

An individual journey

Combine with previous section?

Method

Call this ‘Ways and ideas of transformation?’

Dynamics of being

Basis in the Universal metaphysics

The dynamics

Essential concerns of the dynamics of being

Catalytic states and modes of transformation

The catalytic states

Combination with the dynamics

Appendix—History of transformation

Possible outline

Aims of a study of history of transformation

Western systems

Shamanism and other prehistoric systems

Indian systems

Nature of the Object

Is this section needed?

Development of the dynamic

The transformations

A minimal system

The system has four phases

The main phases

Ideas

Transformation of being and identity

The secondary phases

Society and charisma

Experiment and concepts in transformation matter and organism manifest as life and mind

The journey so far—illustrations of the dynamic

Ideas

Identity or being-as-being

Identity

Personality and charisma

Dynamics of mental function

Healing and medicine

Assessment and the way ahead

Investigation in the modes and means of transformation

This was called ‘background study’—not good

Abbreviate to investigation; incorporate terms future andor plan andor program andor experiment

Ideas

Possible outline

General

Logic

An atemporal metaphysics

Strengthening the relation between Theory of being and science

Foundation of modern physics and biology

Extending modern physics

A quantum or genetic and dynamic theory of laws

An ensemble of laws

Is a quantum theoretic proof of the fundamental principle of the metaphysics of immanence possible?

Human World

Language, grammatical forms, emotion and will

Social world

Application to other areas of experiment

Being-as-being

Possible outline

Sources

The transformations

Areas of study

The range of experiment: definition

The range of experiment: extension

The ways of plants and animals

Society and culture

Possible outline

Sources

Transformation

Charisma and influence

Journey

Organic and material being

Possible outline

Sources

Transformations

Narratives and narrative form

Possible outline

Goals

Narratives

Forms

Presentational form

The story

A novel

Automation

Appendix: further possibilities

Incorporate the appendix in the foregoing?

The future

Was a sub-section of the previous section

Being and becoming—perception and transformation

Being

The transformations in Journey aim at realization of the ultimate via process

The aim of Being is realization in the present. One focus is significance which may be found beyond the immediate—in history; a second source of significance is being-in-the-immediate labeled Pure being

The approach of Being may be seen as preliminary to that of Journey. Perhaps Being will enable shortcuts that do not eliminate significance

Essence

Journey’s focus is realization as process. Being aims at realization in the present

The focus is the realization of the ultimate in the immediate. As far as possible, without abandoning realism, the realization would be explicit; secondarily, it will be cognitive-emotive (purely emotional realization may also be sought)

There is, therefore, a focus on the meaning of being—in the sense of significance in being

A finite—limited—being may find significance in what is beyond the immediate and in the immediate

What is beyond the immediate is labeled History. Being-in-the-immediate is labeled Pure being

That is, a meaning—significance—of history is its suggestive power, the way in which it influences views of ourselves and others: individually and collectively, i.e. as persons, cultures, nations, civilizations… The traditions of history influence the way in which we view our potency in the world

An instrumental thought regarding ‘entry into pure being’ is the acceptance of opposites including what is attractive and what is repulsive. How is this instrumental? In not avoiding either—and there is avoidance of the positive—life, i.e. our lives and the world, energy is not lost in avoidance and this opens up to experience of the real; naturally there are practical limits to acceptance of destructive things

I continue to seek transcendence of process

Introduction

Place of Being in the narrative

The ultimate includes the immediate. Although there is concern with the ultimate in realization, there is no suppression of the immediate. Any bridge to the ultimate is grounded in the immediate. It has been emphasized that the ultimate is implicit in the immediate

In this chapter the focus is the explicit realization of the ultimate in the immediate without abandoning realism (of course)

Wide-angle view

A focus of this chapter is the meaning of being

Here meaning is meaning-in-the-sense-of-significance of being; therefore the focus is being-that-is-capable-of-the-experience-of-significance

Perhaps whatever-meaning-may-be-found-in-being is more appropriate than the-meaning-of-being

The chapter continues the search and transformations of Journey

The idea of significance is implicitly present earlier even though the explicit focus may have emphasized being-as-being where reference to the meaning of terms such as ‘being’ and ‘experience’ was, roughly, that of word or linguistic meaning

The transformations recorded in Journey are incomplete. There is however a sense in which a certain attitude of the individual to his or her own being is already full—even while realization is in process. The present chapter may be seen as beginning with an exploration of the possibilities for that attitude

Significance is not found outside being. Ultimately, there is no external support for meaning-as-significance

In a sense, therefore, being itself is the meaning of being—or being has and generates its own meaning from bound and free elements that constitute meaning and involve ideas, identity and their transformations

A finite—limited—being may find significance in what is beyond the immediate and in the immediate

Since the meaning of here-now is indefinite, ‘beyond the immediate’ does not mean ultimate and ‘in the immediate’ does not mean ‘limited’

What is beyond the immediate is labeled History. Being-in-the-immediate is labeled Pure being

What Being derives from the traditions

The ideas in this chapter have some overlap with the study of history and existentialist philosophy

It is primarily the importance and the importance of the criticism of these traditions that influences present thought

While the traditions of criticism and writing of history are not minimized, the present narrative takes history in a non-critical direction

In having a view of the individual as looking out upon universal possibility, the present narrative has sympathy with existentialism. However, the narrative does not share the gloom of existentialism—especially that of Kierkegaardian existentialism. Kierkegaard’s existentialism is based in a kind of realism that regards metaphysics as irrelevant to the human existence. Is metaphysics irrelevant? The present development shows that metaphysics intimately ties into the organism. Kierkegaard’s rejection of metaphysics was however a rejection of Hegel’s Absolute Idealistic fantasy. It is quite likely, then, that any such existentialism also has roots in the background scientific empiricism of and, perhaps, in a naturally gloomy orientation. Similarly, the self-created man who creates his own meaning against the backdrop of an absurd world is likely a reaction against the absurd. In the present narrative the world is not seen as absurd. How can the world be absurd? It can only be absurd when compared to expectation; replace the idealistic or unrealistic expectation by openness—even in the absence of metaphysics—and there is no occasion for absurdity or gloom. Absurdity and gloom are probably the result of an unstated nihilist metaphysics combined with depressive personality

The present narrative derives from existentialism a focus on the individual but stops short of seeing that individual as alien; it stops short of seeing the individual as creating all meaning in the face of the absurd. Meaning is derived in part from a metaphysics that originates in the individual who looks without depression or euphoria at the real… and also in part from wonder rather than absurdity regarding the world that is implicitly delusional plaything of an ego. Further, the view is not that of the individual against the universe but—while of course there may be intense difficulty of fact and feeling—but that of individual and community within the universe. Regarding community, realism requires acknowledgement that the motives of others—and therefore likely of self—contain the pure and the impure, but—since this is unlikely to change—also acknowledgement that it would be tragic to be stopped short by the insults to self from the world

Contribution to thought

The ideas are, it is hoped, a contribution to the meaning-in-the-sense-of-significance of being and of life… to a balance between achieving and deep satisfaction… to being centered in being regardless of circumstance—within reasonable bounds… and, also within reasonable bounds, to uses of centeredness in achieving

Being: concepts and themes

Concepts

History

Concepts—history, nature of history, function, functional continuum, vision, transformation, fact, establishment, interpretation, error, distortion, revisionism, realism, myth, cool heads, warm hearts

Concepts—the theory of history

Pure being

Concepts—substance, slant, significance, crystal purity, the problem of eradication of all doubt, fetish or neurotic attraction, fetish or neurotic avoidance

pure being, eros, death, inseparability of eros and death, pure being is not crystal purity, attraction, repulsion, life, annihilation

Themes

Being

Theme—Being and Process

History

Theme—Nature and use of History

Pure being

Theme—Being in the present as Identity with all being… as a mode of eternity (Wittgenstein)

History

History represents the search for meaning outside the immediate. History may be thought of as—a sense of—connection in relation, i.e. across or through space and time

Therefore any substance or essentialist view of history is avoided. An essentialist view is a limited notion in combination with a commitment to that notion and a commitment against any complementary or contrary notions. Therefore, the avoidance of essentialism allows the notion as well as others, i.e. it allows the occasional appearance of essentialism

As noted earlier there is no ultimate meaning to history outside all history—just as there is no meaning to or of being in any ultimate outside

Therefore we find in history what significance we may; in some sense—in that history can never be complete—there is no objectivity to history; but in this sense there is no ultimate significance to objectivity in history and any goal of objectivity is founded in significance

Therefore history represents our common stories and myths with objectivity as one story

What is history?

Vision

Transformation

History in the light of being

Pure being

The idea

A world and therefore meaning unmediated by substance

A problem

No crystal purity or avoidance of proximate death

If there is no ultimate death, it need not be avoided—it is impossible to avoid what does not exist

Attraction and repulsion

Ever present

Wonder without crystal purity; or the way to ‘purity’ lies through not avoiding all things ‘impure’

Pure being

Is therefore in the union of these opposites

Method

The ideas of Metaphysics through Being have novel content. They are sufficiently novel in content, sufficiently outside of received paradigms of thought that they also required novel reflection in arriving at them: i.e., they required novelty in method

This chapter collects together and formalizes the reflections and conclusions on method; it also places traditional thought on method in context of the present development

Informally the approach places content and method on par; it brings both into the realm of intuition—i.e. we have such and such knowledge, and such and such method but we are agnostic toward them at outset; which allows that some definitive content and some definitive method may emerge

The result was faithful knowledge or metaphysics that framed and enhanced practical knowledge

We also learned that method and content arise together; that method need not be regarded as received; and that we can think about and develop method; and that even though there is the fundamental problem that any justification refers to something else and that a never ending sequence of ‘something else's’ that seems to arise this never ending sequence can be terminated by looking at rather than looking out; that the result of that—metaphysics and Logic framing and enhancing practical knowledge and practical process—is not absolute but has an approach to and gives some meaning to the ‘best’

Essence

While working on the ideas, I noticed the absence of prior paradigms for my mode of reflection. It became manifest that my thought was concerned with establishing method as well as content. It emerged that method and content emerge together but that method emerges at a slower pace perhaps because it is abstracted from examples of content. Perhaps because of this slower emergence and perhaps because of its greater difficulty—it is thought about thought, i.e. second and higher order thought—the springs of method are as if invisible: method takes on the cloak of the a priori

Method gathers together and formalizes what has been seen. The following elaborates the thoughts of the previous paragraph

While working on the novel metaphysics I realized that I was using novel extensions, variations, changes, and criticisms of classical through modern ideas of method. I recognized that I was asking: What may be known empirically? What is logic in face of the fact that every fundamental axiom of logic may come under doubt? Since there are apparently no rules of deduction for the rules of deduction what is the foundation of inference itself—i.e., inference is foundational for to knowledge, what if anything is foundational for inference? And if rules are founded in second order rules, do not the latter require third order rules: in other words, does it not appear that there is either no final foundation or infinite regress? The problem is of course well known and it is usually accepted that there is no final foundation. However, here some foundation has been found

In some directions these novel aspects of method are ultimate. They are not limited to metaphysics but have application to the institution of thought and action in general. They have implication for the concepts and contents of philosophy, metaphysics, ethics, Logic and the nature of inference in general, mathematics, science, what it is to have empirical knowledge

I saw that content and method are not distinct at root; that method is not received even when it is taken as received—method and content develop together although at different rates

The Universal metaphysics already had a nice foundation when I thought to seek a foundation that would ground the metaphysics in the abilities of—human—being. In earlier philosophy—the philosophy of Immanuel Kant—intuition has been used to find foundation for the categories of perception; and some form of logic has founded inference; those earlier philosophies appealed to the mechanics of Newton and the Geometry of Euclid to found the perceptual categories of space, time and cause and to Aristotelian logic to found inference. We now know that those foundational sciences of the world and of inference are not as firm as they were believed to be in Kant’s time (some simple logics may perhaps be excepted)

An essential step was to reign in all knowing, i.e. perceiving and thinking inferentially, under the umbrella of without a priori foundation. That allows that there may be some foundation; that the foundation is not received; and that the foundation may therefore emerge

The developments in method are already anticipated in bringing demonstration—Logos—under intuition. The developments show content and method as on par: method lies within being: perhaps method and content may be regarded as conjugate

The reigning in of all knowing under an intuition that has no explicit a priori validity is one key to the unification of knowledge of content and knowledge of method. From within intuition are found the fundamental but universal and necessary or perfectly Objects known in intuition; though known in intuition the perceptual Objects are primarily empirical and the remaining Object, Logos, is rational. In case of the perceptual Objects, perfect faithfulness is a result of simplicity; for Logos, faithfulness results from its implicit definition (however, its concept Logic, is approximated by the logics and therefore, there are explicit and excellent approximations to it)

The present section gathers together the explicit and implicit developments regarding method and attempts to see to what extent a uniform theory of method and content is possible

It is also important to be concerned with the development of knowledge in its details—the disciplines and their contents—while being concerned with the metaphysics or universal picture and its ‘method.’ The dual and interactive concern has implications. As an example a modern view of science is that its assertions should be falsifiable or testable. This suggests never ending development. The development of the metaphysics shows an alternate view of scientific theory—i.e. a scientific theory reveals a fact or facts regarding a limited domain. This view and the view from revisability are dual rather than exclusive

The view of disciplines from revisability occurs when those disciplines would be applied to an open context, e.g. the Universe (relative to finite being, the Universe is effectively open.) As has been seen the framing of the disciplines by the Universal metaphysics encourages progress of the disciplines to their intrinsic limit; this limit is achieved in a number of cases, especially in Cosmology; and the disciplines of Worlds may be seen to be ‘on the way’

The occasion to be critical and constructive with regard to a number of disciplines that may be seen as being in hierarchical and lateral organization and interaction has also lead to some thoughts on constructive thought (creativity)

Method and constructive thought are the two topics considered in this chapter. Traditionally, they are taken as working together. Here, in addition to interaction, it is attempted to see overlap and synthesis. When method is regarded as prescription, constructive thought is greater because it may be generative of—advances in—method; if a priori prescription is relinquished, the distinction between method and constructive thought fades

Introduction

Place of Method in the narrative

In the process that resulted in this narrative some reflections on method and on discovery emerged. That the content—the Universal metaphysics, its interpretation in relation to action, and its application—has been novel and ultimate in some directions has proved a fertile source on method

Additionally, since method is a form of content—in which the process of knowing and knowledge itself are content—the metaphysics and other ideas have implications for the method. The implications are two-way for it is in the concept of method that it should have implication for knowledge including the metaphysics and the ideas

In summary, method and content emerge together. They do so because they are not fully distinct and where they are they interact

The process of development has not been linear. The thoughts on method emerged in parallel with the (other) content—Intuition, Metaphysics and so on. It has been useful to gather together the thoughts on method. At first these thoughts were fragmentary and semi-formal

In this chapter, the thoughts on method are given their latest form. The thoughts fall under formal Method and discovery or Principles of perception, thought and action

Method

In developing the Universal metaphysics—Intuition through Cosmology—and the Applied metaphysics—Worlds, Journey—a powerful understanding of method has emerged. This understanding which has both necessary and contingent aspects is an extension of prior conceptions of method that is (a) ultimate in the direction of demonstration of the Universal metaphysics of necessary Objects (b) an enhancement with the potential to raise knowledge of practical Objects to its intrinsic limits and includes science, logic and grammar

Whereas there is a tendency to regard method as received and while it is true that it stands somewhat over contextual content, there is no ultimate distinction between content and method—method is a form of content—and both have necessary and contingent aspects

In this chapter what has emerged regarding method is collected together and formalized

Principles of perception, thought and action

Some aspects of the development of explanatory frameworks are not algorithmic, i.e. ‘non-linear’ or ‘creative.’ This is true in particular of the development of the Universal and the Applied Metaphysics and Method itself

Although it is perhaps true that there is no method regarding the creative and that creativity is perhaps a special talent whose features have variance among disciplines and individuals, it is also perhaps true that what is essential in formal method emerges after creative development and, then, creative input is required again to go beyond method as it stands at a particular time. Outside application that is marked by routine, then, method is perhaps only the formalization of what has emerged and makes understanding, application, and further development easier

In the developments of this narrative, many lines of development have been tried and many abandoned, and there is formal input and analogy from an immense variety of ideas and disciplines from the traditions and from individual reflection and experience. The development, then, has been a fertile ground for various and repeated exercise in attempts to go beyond formal method. It has therefore also been an occasion to observe and reflect on processes of attempting to go beyond formal development in the traditions including philosophy and of my own thinking

The section Principles of perception, thought and action brings together these reflections and attempts to bring some unity to them under the ideas of reflexivity and of action and faith

Wide-angle view

Integrate the original and the modified developments

The original development

The steps in developing the Universal metaphysics were (1) reign in all knowing under Intuition whose character includes that the means of knowing itself is not transparent and the knowing does not carry its own explicit justification, (2) use abstraction in the sense of identifying those elements of what is seen that constitute necessary Objects, i.e. those Objects for which knowledge is perfectly faithful, (3) from the necessary Objects develop the Universal metaphysics

The essential elements of method identified in this process are (a) understanding the nature of Intuition—i.e. that it includes perceiving and deducing, (b) Abstraction which results in knowledge that is empirical and perfectly faithful, (c) using abstraction to arrive at the necessary Objects—especially Universe, Domain, Void and Logic—that constitute the Universal metaphysics

The steps in developing the Applied metaphysics—the term is used even though the result is practical rather than perfectly faithful knowledge—which is the interaction between the Universal metaphysics and the study of special contexts. The components of the method for the contextual studies are the phenomena or what is to be explained, the elements or terms of explanation, and the theory or local conceptual framework of explanation which includes (a) perception and establishment of fact and (b) induction including pattern recognition, and (c) deduction (thus the methods of science are an explanatory framework as are the symbolic studies such as logic and grammar)

Then, elements, phenomena, and theory iterate within and in interaction with the Universal. Then, the elements may root to the universal; the phenomenology and behavior begin to fit into the universal ‘model.’ Understanding expands from its ad hoc and academic forms to the universal

The method or approach of Applied metaphysics, then, is (1) identify the components of disciplinary studies including science and symbolic studies, (2) iterative experiment with all these components with freedom within the envelope of the pure (Universal) metaphysics allowing—though not requiring—elements to extend to the root of being and to lie within any category of being, seeking andor predicting new phenomena, and channeling existing explanation by imagination but constraining it only by Logic

A modified development

The reference for this new development is journey in being-for Robin.doc

The goal is a framework for knowledge, its nature and use, and its faithfulness

At outset, we note the encompassing context in which knowledge and action are not separated. This is a realm that includes (a) knowledge as knowing, i.e. as capturing the object through correspondence andor replication and (b) the instrumental view of knowledge. The encompassing context is one in which measures of knowledge are neither relevant nor emerged across the entire context; this encompassing realm contains the correspondence-replication and the instrumental realms where measures or faithfulness are emerged. When there is correspondence-replication there is at least the potential for instrumental application and therefore it is perhaps the case that the instrumental realm contains the realm of correspondence

Framework for the correspondence or replication view—this is new and the relevant sources are the sections Establishment of an epistemology through Improved analysis of knowledge of journey in being-for Robin.html

Knowledge as simple and complex fact. Inference as tautology

Abstraction from conception or intuition (as mental content… including the ability to have mental content… and it is noteworthy that a rock does not have mental content—at least of this type) to the necessary and empirical but not a priori universal Objects—Universe, Domain, Void, Logic (and others) which includes the Metaphysics through Cosmology

Applied metaphysics—the study of contexts in which the interactive study of the pure and universal metaphysics with the contextual study has the potential to eliminate the ad hoc from the context and to raise it to its intrinsic limit on faithfulness

Journey—here the system of knowledge enables the dynamics but at the same time there is inclusion of the larger context of immersion in being, i.e. knowledge as not yet separate or needing separation from action

What Method derives from the traditions

The idea of Method derives, of course, from the traditions of thought. In any discipline or area of thought there is, having had success, a natural desire to instruct others in the approach and to formulate the approach as close to algorithmic as possible

Since contexts vary, there can be no Universal completely algorithmic method

Here, the idea of method is extended to the Universal context in a post hoc way—i.e. the justification is a posteriori rather than a priori. The significance is (1) that there is some method for improved showing or demonstration of and elaboration within the Universal metaphysics and (2) there is some mesh of the method of the metaphysics and the received ‘methods’ of the disciplines that illuminates the metaphysics and raises the local discipline and its ‘methods’ to—potentially and actually in important cases—the intrinsic limit

The development derives much from the traditions regarding method—as noted above

Contribution to thought

The developments have implication for the nature of method and creativity in general. There are, in particular, implications the meaning and limits of empirical knowledge, the significance of induction and the nature of scientific method, for the nature of Logic, of the ‘logic of logic’ i.e. how Logic is arrived at and to what extent that process is empirical andor necessary, and the nature of the of foundation of metaphysics without substance but that is also terminating—in that it is not necessary to go under the phenomena—and therefore in the fact of—some—demonstration that requires no assumption

The conclusions regarding method are, it is felt, a contribution to the general notions of method and creativity. The conclusions are spelled out in greater detail in the remainder of this chapter and the narrative

Method: concepts, themes, and objections

Concepts

Framework for knowing and Object

Concepts—modes knowing, intuition, fact, inference, reason, empirical, rational, faithfulness, abstraction, necessary Object, Universal Object, Logic, Universal metaphysics, ultimate depth, ultimate breadth, Universal framework, Normal Object, science, induction, intrinsic contextual limit, Normal studies, Local studies, idea, transformation, faith, action, journey

Necessary but not a priori knowledge

Concepts—necessary but not a priori knowledge

…and related concepts

Concepts—theory of necessary and empirical and or rational but not a priori knowledge

The idea of faith

Concepts—the idea of faith

…and related concepts

Concepts—faith—implicit even when we know; necessary when knowledge is incomplete but not when claims are truly absurd in the relevant modes of ‘meaning;’ caveat—is absurd and seems absurd are distinct

Concepts—theory of faith

Principles of perception, thought and action

Concepts—principles of perception, thought and action

…and related concepts

Concepts—method, criticism, construction, reflexivity, self reference, paradox, action, faith, perfection

Concepts—realms of perfection

Themes

Theme—Method—Method and Content—Intuition as including all knowing without a priori commitment—Abstraction as omission of distortable details on the way to empirical-rational and necessary but not a priori knowledge of Global and Local necessary Objects—Framing as elimination of the ad hoc from and raising to its intrinsic limit of practical Objects, i.e. the disciplines and so on—and Reflexivity over given, hypothetical or fictional-speculative and critical elements as source of new and rational knowing

Theme—Principles of perception, thought and action—see reflexivity as part of method

Objection. Circularity of abstraction

Objection. Every rational scheme requires at least one unproved axiom and one unproved rule of deduction

Objection—The foundational fallacy

Method

Framework for knowledge

The development of knowledge of facts occurs by facts in perception and by inference of facts from facts

When we negotiate the world using knowledge as an instrument we have some success and some failure. We know that both perception and inference may yield valid results but may also be mistaken. Therefore—from adaptation—our instrumental tools for knowledge must have some faithfulness; however this does not tell us what knowledge is faithful, how faithful it is or how we may ascertain faithfulness

We ascertain faithfulness from using knowledge and by provisionally accepting items of knowledge that result in success and by rejecting items of knowledge that result in failure. The more we are successful the greater is our confidence in knowledge but since no amount of success guarantees future success we regard knowledge as provisional as long as success or validity is its measure (it will be seen that the error in therefore regarding all knowledge as provisional lies first in regarding external foundation—success or more generally validity in terms of something outside the knowing—and, second, in thinking that knowledge must uniformly fail or succeed across all its actual and potential Objects.) Since there can be error or failure in assigning failure, we should also regard rejection as provisional; however as error accumulates doubt grows

The suggestion so far is that knowing is instrumental. However, much of our knowledge is implicit or tacit or received or contextual or a function of the complex interactions of our cultural system

Still, we have a valid concern with validity. Since we never get altogether outside knowledge, both perception and inference are open to doubt—it is not just that faithfulness is open to question, the very meaning of faithfulness is unclear on externalist accounts

The claim regarding doubt may itself be made more precise. The various doubts of the previous paragraph arise on a paradigm of external foundation. Any external foundation begs the question, What founds the foundation? However it is intrinsic to foundationalism that foundations are external—or under or outside or other than. Perhaps we arrive at a degree of understanding when the support is simpler than the Universe; however, unless the support is ‘zero’ or ‘empty’ or the Void there is no absolute simplicity and therefore no final foundation

Fact is subject to a variety of intrinsic doubt that is over and above the tacit or cultural nature of fact. What constitutes fact? ‘The facts and only the facts’ suggest that facts are hard and immutable and, practically, that is how we typically regard facts. Here, however, where the concern is with eliminating doubt we ask about the constitution of facts. Many facts are about complex things—patterns, laws, interactions—and the limits of the facticity are not given. Doubt regarding fact appears to also be intrinsic

Inference is of two types. In induction, specific instances are generalized to a pattern or law or theory. This is the conceptual side of the development of science; it immediately suggests that the claims of scientific theories to final validity are empty. However, scientific theories are not so much generalizations from vast amounts of data as they are they are—recursive—conceptualizations that capture patterns in concepts, laws, and theories. A quite amazing characteristic of the theories of science is the capture of vast and new realms of phenomena, often unanticipated and often with astonishing precision. We feel that surely something of reality has been captured. However, the edifices of classical physics stand overturned as Universal theories and we suspect that the newer theories may themselves be tentative (biology is on a somewhat different standing because knowledge of life so far is restricted to Earth and there is therefore no biology that makes claim to being Universal.) A restricted claim may be made for scientific theory—the valid theories of science are impressively successful over some domain but until some final theory is demonstrated as such, there is no Universal scientific theory. Thus scientific theories have factual character even though they are not Universal. A scientific theory is an Object with restricted extension; in this a scientific theory is a fact even though it may have an extensive internal structure

A second kind of inference is deduction that is thought to be necessary. Necessary deduction is logic. Given some facts and a scientific theory, further facts may be deduced. Thus the activity of science in relation to fact is a mixture of induction and deduction. What, however, is it about logic that makes it necessary? It appears that it is its tautologous character—the inferences are already contained in the premises even though that may be hard to see which is why inference is needed. In simpler logics such as the propositional calculus it is possible to see why inference is necessary. In other logics of common use such as the predicate calculi, the obviousness is no longer apparent. The question of foundation arises again and the problem of the foundation of the foundation remains without final resolution. Modern logic is regarded as having an irreducible empirical and therefore tentative element

Internal and external foundation appear to be absent for both fact and inference

Intuition, abstraction and the necessary Objects

Intuition

‘Intuition’ has a number of meanings. There is however a broad class of meaning in which the essence of intuition is that while there is intuitive knowing it is not known how it is had and that while it may be regarded as being valid we do not know with certainty why it is valid. Having an intuition of a distant event and the intuitive solution of a problem in mathematics has that characteristic. It is of the essence of intuition in this sense that we do not know the truth of the claims even if we think it highly probable

While remaining within this broad sense, Kant used intuition in a specific way. For Kant, intuition is the faculty of perception whereby we perceive the world in the categories of space, time, cause and others. From the vast success of the science of his day, Kant thought that the intuitive categories of space, time, cause and others was intuition of the categories of the world. This is Kant’s foundation of perception. Kant then proceeds to found inference from the categories and theories of science in terms of logic which he presumed from the two thousand year reign of Aristotelian logic to be necessary. However, as we know and as Kant may have seen, the two pillars of his foundation stand overturned as necessary even though they provide some practical support and constitute significant insight into the nature of knowing. The value of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason is the insight into the dual contribution of knower and known to the nature of the Object and the consequent transcendental nature of proximate knowing

All knowledge as Intuition

In this narrative, both perception and inference are reigned in under Intuition. This is necessary—no final external foundation except in the Void and strategic—Intuition is practical and thus we trust our Intuitive knowing but regarding necessary knowing we make no claim from external foundation thus opening the way for some other foundation

Abstraction and the necessary Objects

The nature of abstraction

Conclusions

As we have seen the method is that of abstraction of the necessary that results in the necessary Objects that include Universe, Domain, Void, and Logic

The ‘independent’ foundation of metaphysics of Metaphysics is founded in the merest fragment of Intuition necessary to establish that there is a world and therefore a Universe. The value of this foundation is its stark character and the resulting demonstration of depth foundation in the Void and the demonstration of infinite variety. The value of the detailed foundation in Intuition is the understanding of the foundation, and of the grounding of knowledge of the metaphysics—of the Universe or at least of its envelope—in our Intuition, i.e. of knowledge of all being in Being

Method—empirical and necessary character of Abstraction and the Metaphysics

Abstraction in this sense, the necessary Objects that found the pure and general metaphysics, and therefore the metaphysics itself are empirical and necessary but not a priori

Necessary and empirical though not a priori

One and many—Universal metaphysics

Here, unity is not merely oneness. It is an encompassing oneness

Method—demonstration

That demonstration is possible as is demonstration of the way of demonstration

That this is neither infinite regress nor vicious circle

Inseparability of method and content

As seen

Both concern what is in the world

Method and content are not at different levels

Knowledge

Knowledge, then, has necessary and practical parts. The necessary and the practical are not distinct realms

The practical has its practical foundation—Intuition, empirical and theoretical science, mathematics, logic, reason…

From the suggestion from the metaphysics, the foundational elements of every discipline of practical knowledge merits revaluation. Thus, for example, the revaluation of the phenomena, elements, and explanation of the phenomena of mind under Cosmology and, especially, of human mind in Worlds

Applied metaphysics which is not—pure—metaphysics is the intersection of the revaluated disciplinary knowledge whose freedom allows it to intersect the Pure and General Metaphysics and so have the potential to be raised to the intrinsic disciplinary or contextual limits

Then, what is not inconsistent is somewhere realized. Thus the disciplines—all images and representations—are part of Logic

What is the application to this world? It must remain locally empirical. As we have seen, provided we do not get mired in substance and essentialism, we see many actual significant advances, the potential for much more, the rooting of the world in the Universe, the beginning of the bridge from the present to the Ultimate

The actual achievements are more impressive than the sketch of their development. This is, in part, because of the coordination of vast arrays of contexts, the non-essentialist approach in which conceptual organs that clash may be replace incrementally so that there are fewer and fewer jags and the system of thought approaches organic harmony which is also achieved in the proximate sense that we remain in process and not insist on essence

One and many—Normal and local studies

The method of applied metaphysics. Framing

On intrinsic limits

It has been claimed that the mesh of the Universal metaphysics and a special discipline—the study of some special context—has the potential to raise the discipline to its intrinsic limit of faithfulness

The claim is significant with regard to the broad or categorial disciplines such as physical science and the study of mind (a sub-discipline such as chemistry has limits that lie within the broader study)

The basis of the claim is as follows

Since the metaphysics describes the root of being, it defines the limit of the root of the categorial elements

In the case of physical science, the variety from the root far exceeds the variety within our cosmological system. Therefore, modern theoretical physics is far from its intrinsic limit. There is an immense gap between local and general cosmology. The general cosmology is physical cosmology raised to its intrinsic limit except that the general cosmology does not provide the predictive precision of theoretical physics. However, this predictive precision is not possible or significant at the general level. There may be—perhaps infinitely—many stages of generalization between modern theoretical physics and the general cosmology. Therefore, while general cosmology describes the limit the remove from the local has only general implications such as the confirmation of the indeterministic nature of being and other implications described in chapter Journey, section Investigation in the modes and means of transformation

It has been seen that via the concept of experience, the concept of mind may be taken to the root and therefore while knowledge of kind of experience is limited, knowledge of the nature of experience is knowledge of the nature of mind. This has enabled the trivial resolution of numerous problems of mind and its nature

Further examples of intrinsic limits are shown in the trivial resolution of a catalog of problems of ancient through recent metaphysics

In the case of more specialized or more localized disciplines the metaphysics enables revelation of what has been thought universal as contextual and simultaneously shows that the laws and mechanisms of those contexts to be local rather than universal. Here, lack of information prevents further raising to an intrinsic limit in any detailed way. Still a narrative raising is possible in the recognition that imagination, criticism, and literary endeavor reveal a world beyond this world even if the revealed world should be a fragment of the universe

Limits are perhaps not completely overcome; the overcoming of all limits is the end of process; but the process of overcoming limits is the adventure; and it is perhaps the ultimate adventure in a balance between substance—what is received, that into which we are thrown—and elimination of substance—the fluid character of all aspects of substance: the phenomena, the elements and the explanations

Science

Faithfulness—its meaning and range

Action and faith

Journey

Dynamics of being

Principles of perception, thought and action

Call this reflexivity and use ‘Principles’ as a subtitle?

Reflexivity and faith

Principles of perception, thought and action

Reflexivity

The original ‘idea’ and its cultivation

The ‘spark’ and its dimensions—may go to section Human being

Reflexivity as a source of originality

Elaboration and examples

Sources of ideas. Construction. Listing possibilities

Construction and criticism

What reflexivity covers

Action and faith

Perfection

Contribution

Essence

I believe that the contributions and potential contributions of this essay to human thought and action may be significant. The general contributions are: the articulated and founded views of the Universe as having the greatest possible variety and of individual being as capable of and necessarily realizing that variety; of the relationships of those views to the immediate world and immediate endeavor; and perhaps of the process I have undertaken in arriving at the views and in the beginnings so far of realizing what is shown necessary (as pointed out in the narrative, though realization is given it is far more likely and perhaps more enjoyed when it is sought as adventure but with diligence)

I have attempted to formulate what might be objective criteria for significance. However, I do not expect such criteria to displace evaluations by others or the ‘judgment of history’

The purpose of this chapter is to gather together and make explicit what I think to be the contributions of the essay

The Introduction is followed by the Main contributions—i.e. those that belong to the main thrust of the essay. This is followed by three sections of contributions that are secondary to the main thrust of the essay; gathering these together has encouraged some further development that is included below

Introduction

The Universal metaphysics develops around the following equivalent assertions, (1) The Universe has the greatest Logically possible variety—a simple statement with implications whose significance is immense, (2) The states of the Universe are those permitted by Logic—i.e., metaphysics and Logic are equivalent, (3) The Void exists and contains no contingent Law (a contingent Law is one that could be otherwise without violation of necessity or Logic)

This metaphysics has been glimpsed in Western and Eastern traditions—the typical glimpse is of a facet or aspect but without significant development—but, as far as I know, has not been conclusively elaborated as it has been in Intuition through Method—the elaboration includes the areas of idea, action, and transformation—and has not been demonstrated at all prior to the work leading up to this essay. That stands to reason for the demonstration is an essential ingredient of the elaboration in the variety of formulations of the metaphysics as well as its detailed development and application within philosophical thought, to the major disciplines of thought, and to paths of action and transformation

The developments mentioned just recounted constitute the system of major contributions of this narrative

In referring to the contents of this work as ‘contributions’ it is understood that the assertion is that I believe them to be contributions. I have some doubt about the demonstrations and minute doubt about the lack of prior demonstration and elaboration. The doubt about prior demonstration is minute because although I have read and researched extensively I have not come across any hint of demonstration. For example, the ‘Great Chain of Being’ of classical and medieval thought is imaginative but without demonstration (further the imagination is quite limited.) The Eastern philosopher Sankara stands in a tradition that conceives the identity of the individual and all being; but there is no proof. Wittgenstein and Leibniz talk of the identity of metaphysics and logic but there is no theory of variety and the showing is inadequate to any standard of demonstration (and this is why there Wittgenstein’s Tractatus can have no theory or demonstration of variety.) Additionally, it is not possible for a writer to predict the judgment of history. The doubts are not insignificant but they are not blocks; and part of the doubt is psychological rather than Logical: it is the magnitude of the result that causes doubt. Regarding Logical concerns, I estimate that the doubt has some par with the recent computer assisted proofs in mathematics but is far less than the doubt that modern physics represents final physics. Except these doubts and I may assert that I know that this work makes an immense contribution

Contribution: concepts and themes

Concepts

A number of the following are (1) new concepts, (2) new as concepts but not names… or as names but not as concepts, (3) repeated or repeated with new understanding

General

Concepts—contribution, originality, significance, ultimacy, intrinsic ultimacy

Concepts—implication, potential contribution

Concepts—ultimate in realization, ultimate in ideas, journey, re-creation

Concepts—intrinsic ultimacy has been mentioned but not named yet—it is the raising of a contextual study to its intrinsic limit

Metaphysics and philosophy reconsidered

…and related concepts

Concepts—metaphysics, philosophy, intrinsic limit of philosophy, error of premature criticism, error of paradigmatic criticism

Concepts—divisions of philosophy

The logic of the divisions of philosophy

Concepts—problems of metaphysics, death of problematicity

Concepts—method

System of human knowledge

Concepts—the academic and other disciplines and practices

Concepts—system of human knowledge, ultimate system

Concepts—symbols and knowledge, the Universe, artifact

Themes

Contribution

Theme—Contributions. Original contributions—Intuition through Being. Contribution to thought, action and their history. Contribution to philosophy and metaphysics. Contribution to definition and definitive resolution of the classical through recent problems of metaphysics. Contribution to method and effective development of conceptual knowledge and understanding for new and extended contexts. Contributions to Human knowledge

Significance of the ideas of the narrative for thought and its history

Theme—Significance of the work

Major contributions

The contributions of the narrative listed and hyperlinked

These contributions belong to the main thrust of the work

Significance for the history of ideas

Emphasis is on philosophy, metaphysics, method, and the implication for specifying a system of human knowledge

Action includes human concerns and the modern discipline of public decision making which includes domestic and international affairs

Divisions of philosophy

Main disciplines and topics touched

Potential contributions

Brief summary with reference to Journey. Perhaps some fill in of minimal items from Journey

Reference

Include Reading