The fundamental question may be approached in the context of two further questions—What is the best that any being can do and what is the greatest possible universe?

The best we can do is and has been fundamental at all times and in history for many individuals and societies. In attempting to elucidate it, our resources include experience, reason, and action—our own and those of other persons and societies, today and in history. The question about our greatest possibility may be called the fundamental question of meaning—in a sense that suggests ‘the meaning of life’ rather than semantic meaning.

The philosopher Immanuel Kant asked three questions that he reasonably considered to be fundamental to human meaning and philosophy—What can I know? What must I do? And What may I hope for?

We will find that Kant’s three questions are implied by and may be subsumed under the fundamental question.

What was my motive in asking the fundamental question? A partial answer is as follows. I have found the beauty of and in the world to be inspiring, even overwhelming. I wanted to cultivate it. That search led to the fundamental question.

A response to the question

The way of being is offered as demonstrating an ultimate view of the world with consequences for knowledge and destiny. If this is achieved, not just the content—what we know—but the method or how we know, too, must be ultimate in some manner, for otherwise, the content could not be known to be ultimate. Is the ultimate significantly greater than is commonly thought? This will indeed be shown true—it will be shown that the ultimate is the realization of all possibility and, therefore, that all beings access the ultimate.

The ultimate content is that the universe is the realization of all possibility. This implies that the destiny of all beings is that of the universe itself, which includes universal heights and depths. This is what we might naïvely expect regarding the ultimate. It does not, however, imply that we will always feel perfection as part of a process of realization.

The ultimate method begins with an examination of received reason—its genesis and nature, especially its context or scope of application and its critical and constructive or creative elements. The received is enhanced with regard to the context, the critical, and the creative. What we find regarding method is that the ultimate is roughly a mix of perfection and pragmatism in a traditional sense.

What is the meaning of the term ‘ultimate’, above? For limited beings it is that a framework of perfection can be developed, but that knowledge of what is framed, the world of detail, is not and cannot be perfect by traditional criteria. But if perfection cannot be achieved, surely it is in terms of an imperfect sense of perfection. The narrative will develop a more perfect sense of perfection.

The way is grounded in the history of thought and exploration—and derived from study, experience, reflection, and synthesis. As far as judgment of originality is a concern, it is left to readers.

The sources for the way are vast; some are discrete, but much is diffuse and diffusely absorbed; links to sources are in the division on resources.

The aim

The aim of the way is shared discovery and realization of the ultimate in and from our world (the immediate).

How is this to be approached?—In will be in terms of a comprehensive and principled view of the world – which will include, frame, be in, and rise above the ‘world of ten thousand things’—of the disorder within order. Such a view for a part or phase of the world is a paradigm.

We shall first consider received paradigms for the universe—i.e., the paradigms we consider are received worldviews. Critical examination of the received views, content and method, may—and will—suggest a way forward. The narrative will implement the suggestion.

Worldviews

This section considers our main common or received worldviews and their limitations.

The concept

A paradigm for the universe, a worldview, is a patterned description that captures some truth and enables negotiation of the entire—known—real. It is the intent of common paradigms to capture the entire truth, but they may fall short with regard to both truth and entirety.

Worldviews as means

Though a worldview is a framework, when filled in with the system of knowledge and practices of a culture, it is a means of being in and negotiating the world—and the universe.

Kinds of worldview

The received worldviews or paradigms are secular and transsecular.

The secular is grounded in what is commonly known; it often hypothesizes that that is the world. The transsecular posits more—an ultimate, which it may hold as ultimate in terms argued as dogma, hypothesis, or reason.

In principle the secular and transsecular cover the realm of possibility.

Secular

Common received secular paradigms of the world as found in consensus experience have value and truth. Secular humanism is a life philosophy that human beings are intrinsically capable of ethics and aesthetics without traditional religion, which embraces reason, and which commonly holds to philosophical naturalism, i.e., roughly that science has revealed the essential features of the universe. However, reason itself suggests the view from science to have local truth—the big bang cosmology and so on—but that, without further consideration, we ought to be neutral to what lies beyond the big bang cosmos. Conflation of the secular with the real, though typically tacit, is widespread among secular thinkers. It will emerge that this conflation is limited and limiting in extreme. However, intuitive and tacit conflation of the limited version of secularism with the real often makes it seem as though there is nothing beyond.

A neutral interpretation of the secular paradigms is that they have truth but are not the entire truth. In this form, they are a platform for seeing what truth may lie beyond. Such neutral interpretations may be termed ‘neutral secularism’.

Further, that the secular thinker finds the common transsecular paradigms for the world and beyond to be absurd and dogmatic, tends further to shut down secular thought to seek beyond its commonly assumed limits.

Transsecular

Transsecular paradigms see the world as more than in the secular. Common religious paradigms are limited by their cosmologies and other dogmatic form. Common metaphysical paradigms based in facets of or projections on the real, are also limited with regard to necessity and completeness of their truth. While the common transsecular paradigms have truth—real or symbolic or both, they are not the truth, perfect or complete.

The transsecular paradigms suggest worlds beyond common experience. However, religious dogma tends to shut down transsecular thought that would seek beyond its limits. Common received metaphysical transsecular paradigms provide little ground to seek beyond.

The way

Though not true, the common paradigms have truth. The way will draw from what is true and useful in the received paradigms.

The way develops and works through a way to seek, to see, and to forge pathways to the ultimate. It is essential to critique not only common views of the world but also to question common critical paradigms regarding their possible deficits and overreach.

An ultimate view

This section introduces the worldview of the way (demonstration is deferred to the limitless universe > the fundamental principle).

The view

The view, named the ‘real metaphysics’ is grounded in received thought, experience, and reason and attempts to go beyond them via criticism of the received modes of knowledge and criticism itself. It is argued that the attempt is successful. It is endeavored to show that its elements of newness—and their characteristics are

(i) Demonstration—absolute (with alternate attitudes to truth),

(ii) Explicitly shown consistent with experience and reason from experience (demonstration shows this implicitly).

(iii) Relation to received views—coincides with their account of the real where they are valid; the region of validity is extended and in this is analogous to transitions from classical to modern science—but is unlike them in that this transition is to the ultimate.

(iv) The basis of the demonstration is the combined use of abstraction, emergence of an ultimate value, framing pragmatic knowledge to form a dual system that is imperfect according to received criteria, and emergence of an ultimate value in terms of which the dual system becomes perfect, integrated, and substance free.

(v) Depth or foundation—fully grounded (with accounting for doubt and the means of knowledge),

(vi) Breadth or scope—the universe,

(vii) What it reveals—the universe is ultimate, i.e., the realization of all possibility, and therefore that all beings realize the ultimate.

(viii) Application—the range of all endeavor.

It is shown in the limitless universe that the universe is the realization of all possibility—and that this is consistent with and follows from reason and experience.

This implies that the universe has ultimate identity, that all beings realize this ultimate, and that ‘god’ and ‘Brahman’ are real—not as remote, not as in ideology, but as a process of which we are a part. It does not imply that a limited sense of the real is an illusion—rather, it is an illusion to see the limited as the precise and entire real.

The implications are fleshed out in the narrative, especially in the sections cosmology, metaphysics, and logic as a theory of the universe.

Meanings of the terms

Because the system of the way has an ultimate character, the meanings of the terms, though related to received use, must be enhanced from the received. To do so is to enhance rather than to negate the received meanings.

Understanding the way

To appreciate the way, it is essential to follow meanings as introduced. Since the meanings and paradigm are new, diligence may be needed to absorb the work.

Imperative

The section on pathways derives an imperative from the worldview—to be on a pathway to the ultimate. The nature of the pathway is to negotiate and share—not to just to follow the word of others. The nature of the imperative is (i) not to suppress the immediate for there to be a balance of foci on the immediate and the ultimate (ii) not one of compulsion but to be on a path because the aim and the path are seen as true (iii) that it is useful as a framework for local ethics.

Narrative

The way of being

The way of being is intended as a contribution, not as a compendium or review of the literature.

The origins of the way are in experience of the world, reading in eastern and western thought, reflection, analysis and synthesis of ideas, and experiment. External sources are identified in links in the resources section.

Experimental versions of the narrative, long and short, are at the site for the way—http://www.horizons-2000.org. The versions have incremental and step changes. Most of the material here has appeared in earlier versions.

This version

The version of the way is a brief and essential version of the way. It is not an introduction or elementary version. It is intended as a succinct, rapidly accessible resource and foundation for shared and independent development. This explains the brevity, emphasis on its truth and realization of that truth.

It is not a ‘how to’ work—the section, path, has some derived suggestions for being on a path; the resources point to some ‘how to’ works.

The version is written as if confident of its truth. There is of course doubt, which is noted below and addressed in the resources.

There will be many questions of foundation and elaboration.

A version this brief cannot address many issues that will arise. A complete version will address anticipated issues.

Audience

Those who (i) accept secular truth but not the limits of its view of the world or reason (ii) accept transsecular views but wish to move beyond dogma, myth, and exclusive dependence on hypothesis for truth (iii) have moved beyond these limits and wish to share.

Ground

This division sets up foundation for the worldview.

As preliminary let us introduce ‘existence’ which is equivalent to and helps illuminate being. Existence is not (a property or predicated) of contents of the world but of hypothetical knowledge of the contents. Given a referential concept (the hypothetical knowledge) and a possible referent, it is said to exist—it has existence, if the referent is actual.

The first section introduces the foundational concept of being (it would be effective and grounding to begin with experience, but it is efficient to defer that discussion). Subsequent development will flesh out aspects of being that were found pivotal in developing the worldview of the narrative.

Being

A being is that which can be said to be—i.e., which exists; being is existence.

How is being foundational of understanding of the world? Traditional foundations are based in criteria (knowledge of substance, e.g., mind or matter, which are thought to be known and known to be the essence of everything; or coherence among knowledge claims). However, though criteria are appealing—even beguiling, the criteria are subject to error and incompleteness. On the other hand, being is just what is there. Trivially, there is being. What is it? There is no ‘what’ concerning that which is foundational—there cannot and ought not to be (of course, there may be ‘what’, but it would be in terms of alternative foundations). The essential issue is whether being can serve as basis for knowledge of things. We will show that it is and how it is so—which will require the introduction of further fundamental concepts that are derivative of being.

Given a referential concept, its validly known referents are beings; beinghood is not determined by special kinds, even if they have being, such as state of being, entity, process, relation, pattern, law (of nature), substance (e.g., matter, mind, or neutral), sapience, ultimate state – relation – or process, cosmos, world, the concrete, the abstract, word or kind of word, trope and so on.

Cause

A cause and effect are a pair of beings, usually distinct, such that the likelihood—probability—of the effect existing (obtaining) is greater when the cause obtains than when it does not obtain.

The idea of a definite being as causing itself is—seems—trivial, but when we think of a being as a trajectory or set of trajectories in time, the cause may be the state at one time and the effect the state at another.

If there is a traceable (‘contiguous’) link between cause and effect, the cause is classical, of which one kind is material. Not all causation is known to be material or even classical.

If the effect certainly obtains when the cause obtains, the cause is necessary. If the cause is not necessary, it may be because (i) there is a necessary cause, but the given cause is partial or (ii) there is no necessary cause. The terms possibility and probability are associated with causes that are not necessary.

If there is no cause, i.e., in the case of null cause (‘void cause’) but yet an event obtains, the event is spontaneous. A null and necessary ‘cause’ is an absolute cause; while ‘an event caused by a null cause’ has a ring of the absurd, it is not logically impossible. From symmetry, if any being has absolute cause, all possible beings obtain.

Spontaneous creation, likely as well as necessary, are logically possible.

Law

A being has a pattern (‘is patterned’) if the information necessary to specify it is less than the raw information. For example, a circle in a plane highly patterned, for it may be specified by the position of its center and its radius, but the raw data is the infinity of its points.

A natural law is a reading of a pattern for a being, e.g., a cosmos. The word ‘law’ will be used for the pattern.

Laws have being—i.e., laws are beings.

Laws can be seen as—are—constraints.

Universe

The universe is all being.

The universe exists—it is a being.

There is one and only one universe.

If creation is to cause existence, the universe is not created by a manifest being—for (i) it is not created by another manifest being since there is none (ii) to be created by itself to count, would require an instance of the universe as manifest and not manifest.

Void

The void (‘nothingness’) is defined as the being that has no parts—i.e., that has no sub-beings.

The term ‘defined’ indicates that, for the void, definition does not imply existence. However—

Existence and non-existence of the void are equivalent. It is therefore valid to assert its existence (this is where essential doubt should occur, not because the proof is ontological, but because it is not supported by further empirical content—and because to doubt, to question, is to encourage truth; note, however, that existence of the void is consistent with experience and reason).

The void is a being.

There are no laws of or in the void.

The limitless universe

The division develops the worldview of the way.

The development is in two stages.

The fundamental principle of metaphysics is an abstract framework for the view—it is shown that the universe is limitless in every possible way. Then the concept and kinds of possibility are fleshed out and, regarding limitlessness, the possibility is logical. Consequences for and means of realization are developed. Finally, what has been developed is stated as a theory and given a foundation.

Principle

If from the void, a possible being is not emergent, the fact would count as a law of the void. So—

All possible beings emerge from the void (this must be in terms of the most permissive kind of possibility).

The universe is limitless in that all possible beings are realized in it (this is the ‘fundamental principle of metaphysics’, which will be abbreviated ‘fundamental principle’ or ‘FP’).

That the universe is limitless means that all possibilities are realized. A consequence is that individuals inherit this limitlessness (for if not, the universe could not be limitless).

The meaning and consequences of the limitlessness of the universe will now be further elaborated and explored.

An effective sequence of development is (i) a preliminary discussion of possibility (ii) set up a metaphysics (‘knowledge of the real’)—the real metaphysics (iii) develop a cosmology based on the real metaphysics (iv) review the foundation of the development in terms of a reformulation of the concept of logic.

Possibility

The meaning of limitlessness lies in the concept of possibility.

A being is possible if its nature does not rule out its existence.

If the existence of a being is not ruled out by its conception alone, it is logically possible—i.e., its possibility is logical possibility.

If, over and above, logical possibility, its existence is not ruled out by its context, it has real possibility.

Logical possibility is the most permissive kind of possibility. Therefore, in the fundamental principle, ‘possibility’ is logical possibility.

Real possibility does not exceed logical possibility. The fundamental principle implies that real and logical possibility are coextensive.

Real possibility presumes logical possibility and examples of real possibility are physical, sentient, and practical possibility. Practical possibility is close in meaning to feasibility.

In review of discussion from the universe to the present point (i) self-cause is possible but (ii) the particular case of self-creation of manifest beings is logically impossible, but possible if the manifest is augmented by the void.

Metaphysics

What is metaphysics?

Though the received meaning of metaphysics is itself an in process philosophical issue, the definition just below is what metaphysics shall mean here. I see the essential question regarding this meaning as whether it is part and generative of true and potent understanding. It is also important that the introduced meaning should be continuous with the received, and that the extension of the meaning should include of what traditionally and rationally lies under ‘metaphysics’.

Metaphysics is true knowledge of the real.

Metaphysics may be seen as ‘theory of being’.

The idea of metaphysics has been criticized as being impossible on various counts (e.g., that it goes beyond experience, that our knowledge is at best derivative of the real, that knowledge and the real are inextricably interwoven and so even the existence of an objective real is questionable).

However, we have just seen that we have some true and potent knowledge of the real.

What makes this true knowledge possible?

It is that we were looking only at aspects of the real that do not suffer distortion in their conception. To look or consider only those parts of a concept that are not distortions is to abstract. In this sense, the abstract is not remote but most real.

The idea of abstraction is elaborated in what follows and in the complete version of the way of being.

Abstract metaphysics

The abstract metaphysics developed so far is perfect (by its definition, anything that is to count as metaphysics must be perfect).

This metaphysics shows what will be achieved, but not the means of achievement in detail. The real metaphysics below shows the means.

Real metaphysics

To the abstract metaphysics, append what is valid in tradition (‘tradition’ shall refer to cumulative knowledge and agency from the origin of the world to this very day).

It seems unlikely that tradition in all its detail and variety can be perfect in terms of traditional criteria of truth, e.g., of correspondence to objects, coherence among the elements of knowledge, or pragmatic measures in terms of successful agency (it is not implied that there is no truth or that epistemic studies of truth and knowledge are without value).

However, tradition, which includes reason and experiment, is a practical means, which may complement the abstract metaphysics in pathways to the ultimate. That tradition may be imperfect means only that realization may not be achieved at once or even in this or the next ‘few’ lives. But tradition is an instrument, and the only instrument over and above the abstract metaphysics, therefore its join to abstract metaphysics, makes for the best there is in the realization of the ultimate value. As such it is perfect. Name the join of the abstract metaphysics and tradition the real metaphysics. In terms of the ultimate value—realization of the ultimate, it is perfect. We might say it is ultimate in terms of ethics; however, that would be superfluous, for the ethic emerges from the abstract metaphysics. It thus follows that—

The real metaphysics is more than an instrument—it is a true metaphysics revealing the nature of the universe as ultimate and of beings as achieving this ultimate. The contours are revealed in the immediate present; the details are of necessity never final, ever emerging, except when ultimate being is achieved. While at most pragmatically true by traditional criteria of perfection, it is perfect by emergent criteria. It is important to see that the emergent criteria allow for and even celebrate what is imperfection by traditional criteria.

New and old paradigms that emerge with the metaphysics are taken up in dimensions of being > paradigms.

Consistency

That the real metaphysics has been shown shows its consistency.

On doubt and its importance

However, truth of the metaphysics may and should be doubted, even though it has been proved, (i) on account of the magnitude of the conclusion and (ii) doubt will either improve understanding or discredit the metaphysics. Since the greatest possibility is logical, internal consistency is given. But does the metaphysics violate experience of the world—is it externally consistent? It does not violate experience of the world, for what we see—our science—is one possibility and other possibilities occur somewhere and when, elsewhere, in other cosmoses and beyond.

Attitude

In view of doubt and of consistency of the conclusions, alternative attitudes to the fundamental principle, its cosmology, and the real metaphysics, alternative attitudes to the principle and the real metaphysics are as (i) a consistent metaphysical hypothesis about the universe (ii) an existential principle for the most rewarding action. It ought to be recognized that the different attitudes, real, hypothetical, and existential, are not exclusive and may be seen as complementary.

The full version of the way has a more complete treatment of doubt, criticism, and imagination in arriving at truth and the nature of truth.

Cosmology

Cosmology is description and principles of description of the universe and what is in it. The cosmology of the way is in part a consequence of the fundamental principle.

However, what is needed in this version follows directly from the fundamental principle. The cosmological implications that follow begin to show the power of the principle.

Cosmology of limitless identity

The cosmology described in the worldview of the way, the cosmology of limitless of identity, follows from the fundamental principle. Let us now flesh out the implications.

The universe—

(i) Has ultimate identity,

(ii) Is in a process of phasing in and out of manifest form, which achieves peaks of limitless quality and magnitude, and

(iii) Has arrays of cosmoses and sub- and super-cosmoses, all in transaction with nothingness, i.e., the void.

As far as we seem lesser than the ultimate, the limits of our being—

(iv) Are real but not absolute,

(v) Are only apparent from an ultimate perspective (for all beings realize the ultimate in merging in its peaks),

(vi) Are no more than an apparent gulf between our world and the ultimate.

The ideas of God and Brahman are possessed of the real—

(vii) As immediate and pervasive rather than remote,

(viii) Not as static but as in process—a process of which we are part,

(ix) Are exemplified by our cosmos and its living and sentient-sapient forms rising from primeval origins.

Finally,

(x) The cosmology does not imply that a limited sense of the real is an illusion—rather, it is an illusion to see the limited as the precise and entire real.

Pathways

It follows that the ultimate is ‘given’—that all beings realize the ultimate. However, waiting for it to happen, to focus on only the immediate and social worlds are immensely inefficient and unrewarding relative to the ultimate. It also follows that—

(i) there are efficient and intelligent pathways to the ultimate (intelligence is not just ability to function in our world but also of negotiation for and beyond the world),

(ii) if enjoyment is value (desirable), there is an imperative to be on an intelligent path (enjoyment is appreciation of pleasure and pain, and of the use of abilities in and for the world),

(iii) that there is an imperative is not to be seen as moral compulsion, but as knowledge that without being on a path, one’s life and being are incomplete even if enjoyed, and that one is not enhancing the process of the world, even though ‘they also serve who only stand and wait’ has truth,

(iv) the imperative is to an ultimate value,

(v) pleasure and pain are unavoidable, and their best address is being on a path (which is and includes therapy),

(vi) to be on a path is not just to follow but also to share, to negotiate the way, and to develop pathways,

(vii) that all possibilities are realized, does not imply they are attained in this world or our cosmos; it implies that there are limitlessly many cosmoses in transaction with the void and that while the ultimate may be realized beginning and remaining in ‘this life’, it is more likely realized beyond—in the movement of identity from cosmos to cosmos,

(viii) received ways from tradition are useful, ought to be considered for integration of their useful elements into paths, but the received, even where they aim at the ultimate and finality, are almost invariably limited and in process.

General cosmology

The real metaphysics enables further development of a cosmology of the limitless universe in terms of received paradigms of science and metaphysics, subject to reason, and enhanced by the fundamental principle. To engage in this development here is not consistent with the aims of this version of the way. Cosmology—general, of form and formation, and physical—is developed in a full version of the way.

Some aspects of cosmology, which are instrumental in realization, are developed in the earlier section on the dimensions of being.

Logic

This section develops logic as a theory of the universe.

Introduction

The title of the section might have been ‘Logic as the theory of the universe’, but that would be presumptive and perhaps have a degree of overreach. However, the theory is a theory and framework for the essential character, extent, duration, and variety of being in the universe. With regard to the descriptive ‘essential’, there is a deficit, which is that the section does not consider the experiential character of the universe. This deficit is remedied later in the section, dimensions of being.

It is important that the term theory is used in the sense of ‘a comprehensive and demonstrated view or body of knowledge’ and not in the sense of the hypothetical or ad hoc.

What is logic?

Though we do not hope to fully characterize received conceptions of logic, it obviously has something to do with inference and truth—e.g., (i) given some truths—actual or hypothetical, other truths may follow ‘logically’, i.e., be implied by the given, and (ii) the valid forms of inference, i.e., of truths following from truths, constitute ‘logical truth’. Concern here is with both certain and likely inference. The certain is a special case of the likely, but given the special importance of certainty, it is an important case. It is also significant in that the forms of certain inference are far more definite and well known that any forms of likely inference.

Given the real metaphysics, both certain and likely inference can be seen to fall under one rubric without confusion of the two.

An equivalent conception of logic

With scientific theories as systems and axiomatic systems of mathematics, given a set of fundamental truths—the basic assertions of the theory or the axioms—other truths are inferred. This builds up a structure of truths that constitute the system. Thus, ‘general logic’ may also be seen as a general system. It is general in that it is a part, often tacit, of every particular theory or system. Though it is not of the received meaning, the means of establishment of the fundamental truths may also be brought under logic.

The theory

Though science and logic are seen as distinct in content and method, they are in fact, in their nature, closer than is usually seen in received thought.

To know is to perceive or conceive (or both; here ‘perception’ is bound to the percepta, and ‘conception’ is, roughly, free conception); a being that is never perceived or conceived is (effectively) nonexistent—i.e., the world is the world as known (as best possible). I.e., knowledge—percepts and concepts—are part of the world.

Note—there is a meaning of ‘concept’ as mental content, which is not emphasized in this section, and which includes all feeling, particularly perception, and free conception. With this meaning, to know is to conceive.

Where science is empirical over the relation of percepts and the world, logic is empirical over the relation of propositional concepts and the world. Science and logic are inductive (hypothetical) over patterns of the world—in science the patterns true patterns are of the world as perceived, in logic the patterns are patterns of truth among propositional concepts. Where science is an induction from concrete data, logic is induced from data among statements, both for truth to obtain. Where inference under logic is necessary, so is inference under science (as pointed out, it is inference to logic and to science that are inductive). Mathematics, an abstract science, can also be brought under this fold.

Thus, where we thought of science as a theory or collection of theories of the universe, and of logic as a collection of theories about the relation between concepts and the universe, the join of science and logic is better understood as being a theory of the universe. We could call this join either general logic or general science (of the abstract and the concrete).

An aspect of the extension is implicit—to bring the truths or facts regarding the world, not just the webbing, under logic. Whereas the logical connections are conceptual, facts are perceptual. Just as logical connections can be contingent vs necessary, so can facts.

Some facts are contingent, known from observation, experiment, and corroboration. But, except for the possibility of elementary facts, facts have a structure even though experienced as atomic, as a result of the structure of intuition (in the sense of Immanuel Kant) having conformation to the world. That is, non-elementary facts are conceptual in nature, even though experienced as elementary. The conceptual aspect occurs via formation of the conforming organism, rather than only as a process of the organism. Such facts are conceptual in a sense that is hardwired relative to the organism, though not hardwired relative to the world.

Some facts are necessary—those derived from experience, e.g., that there is being, that there is a world, which are a necessary consequence of the existence of experience; other necessary facts require not even experience, e.g., the existence of the void. Necessary facts are obviously conceptual in nature.

Thus, both facts and logic, understanding and inference, have structure—are conceptual, and both are divided into the contingent and the necessary, some being touched by both contingency and necessity.

What has been done above is (i) to reconceive logic as the glue or webbing of systems of truth (ii) extend the reconception to include mathematics and science.

From the fundamental principle and the real metaphysics, logic (science) is the theory of the universe or, equivalently, the theory of being.

Foundation

A technical meaning of foundation of a system of knowledge is a set of primitive statements or belief regarded as true, which are the basis of the system. Here, foundation is a way of seeing and establishing truth.

This section is a brief address of the ‘logic behind the logic’—i.e., the foundation of the developments.

The view of the way has emerged in two stages of development, (i) the fundamental principle and (ii) the real metaphysics.

The foundation of the fundamental principle is in abstraction.

As defined and conceived earlier, to abstract is to remove from a referential concept, those elements that do not or cannot precisely represent the object (without abstraction, it may be questioned whether to have a true object is meaningful). Thus, the present sense of the abstract is what is most real—in contrast to another meaning of the abstract as what is remote or existing only in thought or in words.

There are two aspects of abstraction that are pertinent. The first is the abstraction of the concepts in the ground. Though the concepts of being and so on are not abstract, what is necessary for the fundamental principle is the abstracted concepts—e.g., even if we do not know what has being, i.e., the entire range of meaning of the phrase ‘that has being’, we do know that there is being, and then, that the universe has being, and the void, given demonstration of its existence, has being.

The second aspect of abstraction is in the elementary logic used in demonstrating the fundamental principle—the void contains no laws – it exists – if from the void a possible state or being did not emerge, it would constitute a law – therefore all possibilities are realized.

While the fundamental principle is true in a correspondence sense—what it specifies of the universe is precise and accurate, the real metaphysics is not true in that sense. The framework of the metaphysics, the fundamental principle, is true. However, the flesh of the metaphysics needs only to have pragmatic truth—this is because it is the best and an effective instrument in realization of the ultimate, the ultimate value that emerges from the fundamental principle. The truth of the metaphysics, as ‘truth’ emerges here, is embedded in the metaphysics itself. The fundamental principle was seen true by abstraction; what is over and above the principle in the real metaphysics needs only pragmatic truth; thus, the metaphysics is both method and content—or method and content are one, i.e., not ultimately distinguished.

Indeed, given that content is knowledge of the world, and that knowledge is in the world, content and method must be one. It is not of course that there is no distinction between method and content, but that we can, during and after analysis, look and see that they are one.

Realization

This division uses the worldview of the way toward realization of the ultimate in and from this world.

Means

The real metaphysics, action in itself and as experiment, and reason constitute an ideal instrument of realization. In an extended sense, action and reason are part of the metaphysics.

Dimensions

This section develops the dimensions of being.

Development of the dimensions

In some attempts at fundamental accounts of the world, being is not just foundational but also itself the depth of things, especially human being. That approach, if solely employed, clouds foundations as well as understanding of depth and variety beings. In this account, being is foundational but depth, breadth, and function are aspects of being rather than being itself. Here, being is not the depth but reflects and contains it; this approach avoids the clouding. The narrative has been developing function and depth. This now continues and is complemented by breadth or variety.

The dimensions of being shall be aspects of being chosen for their efficiency in realization. The dimensions arise from givens.

Experience is conscious awareness in all its forms. Because we do not get outside experience, even though it is not the limit of the world, experience is the place of concept and language meaning — knowledge — significant meaning in the rough sense of ‘the meaning of life’ — and of our being. Though it is not the world, it is effectively our world, and the world as we know it is a process of a wave front of experience moving outward.

Experience is relational—it relates organisms (beings) to the world. In pure experience, the relation is not immediate.

There is a common secular view of the world as one of experiential beings in a material environment. If the universe were strictly material, there could be no experience. This entails that the environment is not strictly material but, just as experiential beings do, has an ‘in itself’ or material aspect and a relational aspect which is a primitive of experience. In organisms the primitive is combined and amplified in their neural systems as organism level intelligence and organism level conscious experience. In the environment the level of conscious experience is low enough that the environment may be labeled ‘material’ and commonly treated as such.

In an enhanced and extended sense of the concept of experience, it includes the primitive. In an interpretation equivalent to selves in an environment, the universe is a field of experiential—relational—being, in which individuals are bright, focal, intelligent centers of experience. Thus, sapient beings have an ’intrinsic’ experiential side of selfhood and an instrumental side.

The universe as a field of experiential-relational being and as an environment with individual selves and others are two equivalent and valid interpretations of the world-as-experienced; both are true; neither is truer; but for each, there is a range of contexts for which it is simpler and more natural.

The field of being is ever in process and is the place of multiple cosmoses in transaction with the void and the phasing in and out of manifestation, with peaks in which beings merge as local ultimates.

Seeing the universe as a field of experiential-relational being affirms as manifest, the oneness of method and content.

The most primitive experience is of sameness and difference. Experience is experiencing, which entails change and duration (‘time’). Identity, whether of other beings or selves, is a sense of enduring sameness through change. Incremental change in identity without duration marks and measures extension (‘space’). Because the distinction of change with and without duration is not precise, being – extension – duration constitute the world. Beings are in interaction, and the interactions are a source of change.

This paragraph is an aside. The intent is to correct a thought of Spinoza, so as to bring it into alignment with the present development. Spinoza regarded extension (‘matter – space’) and thought (‘mind – time’), as two attributes of being. We find—found—them to be necessary. Spinoza regarded God as having infinitely many attributes. Since the two attributes are ‘in itself’ and ‘relational’, a third would be ‘relation of relation’, which is relational. There may be higher order relations but there is no third or further attribute. There may be limitlessly many qualities.

The pure dimension of the world is of experiential being in form and formation. It has an experiential-intrinsic side and an instrumental-as-if-material side. The path of realization involves both. The yoga tradition addresses both sides (‘mind’ and ‘body’). But yoga cannot be static—as if an ancient tradition with insight should have necessarily had an insight that should have no transcendence. A true yoga ought to learn from tradition but also be enhanced by imagination, experience, and reason. The pure dimension is also pragmatic.

But the pragmatic side needs enhancement. Our detailed knowledge of the world is imperfect in traditional senses of ‘perfection’. However, from the real metaphysics pragmatic knowledge need not be perfect in the received senses, for that is not a block to realization of the ultimate. The pragmatic dimensions or categories of western culture may be chosen—nature and its experiential side, society with culture and technology, to which we append the universal.

Nature—is physical (simple), living (complex), and experiential (‘mind’, intelligence). Nature is that which we find unchanging (of course the boundary between the changeable and the unchangeable is a function of knowledge).

Society—is the niche in the world we create for ourselves, which provides for basic and higher ‘needs’. Culture is our store of knowledge, its modes of expression, communication, and evolution. Culture is a cumulative result of intelligence, communication, and experience. The ‘dimensions’ of society include economics, politics, knowledge (discovery and transmission), and significant meaning as in art, literature, and spiritual endeavor (including religion—at least in symbolic interpretation—if not in the religions).

The universal—is the highest reach of the possible as outlined above; it is not very well recognized in the west or understood in the east (however eastern metaphysics has been suggestive for the way); its means are the real metaphysics, experiment, and reason together with the dimensions of being.

Tools for realization

The core instrument is being itself—that is experiential being. Experiential being is being itself and includes mind and matter as ‘experience with experience of’ and ‘the experienced’. The discipline and practice of experiential being in realization of the ultimate shall here be named Yoga, whose meaning is continuous with but must transcend the received. Approaches to being—and nature, civilization, and technology, below—are intrinsic or immersive (‘being-in-the-world’) and instrumental.

Nature is deployable as an instrument—via knowledge and technologization. Society and civilization are similarly deployable but are also vehicles (where our civilization is society and culture across time and continents, universal civilization is the same but across cosmoses in transient contact with the void—i.e., across all extension and duration.

Technology is an instrument and though the possibilities may currently seem low, they ought not to be ignored, for their potential is high; of particular interest are a range of conceivable physical, biological, and medical technologies for preserving, encoding, transforming, and transporting individuals, cultures, and civilizations

Summary for realization

The pure dimension of being is experiential being in form and formation as the world. It has experiential and instrumental (‘material’) sides.

The pragmatic dimensions are nature (physical, living, and experiential), society (with culture and technology), and the universal (ultimate realization of possibility or peak being as merging of all beings).

Paradigms

The real metaphysics harbors paradigms, which when developed in detail, are powerful instruments of knowledge and exploration. Development and demonstration are in the way of being; here we mention—

For ultimate being there is no possible knowledge or being that is beyond its power. For that being there is no knowledge that is prior to its experience or reason—but knowledge is an essential aspect of its being. This no apriorism (in which the a priori has an amplified sense of being prior to not just experience, but reason as well), extends to beings that experience limits, but, in principle rather than fact; as for the real metaphysics, the framework has no a priori to its process, but full transcendence of the a priori occurs only in realization of the ultimate.

From the fundamental principle, all possible states are realized; yet given a stage, immediately emergent states are not at all determined (there may be probabilities). The universe is therefore a creative mix of order and disorder, out of which form arises and because of which we ought not to expect realization of our notions of perfection (however, we ought to strive to a proper understanding of perfection, which may include ‘imperfection’, and its realization).

Tradition encodes a raft of paradigms, which find a place within and may be refined under the real metaphysics. These include incremental emergence of form via variation and selection suggested by evolutionary theory, mechanism—total to partial—from physics, universe as experiential from cartesian analysis.

Path

How are we to be on a path? Two path templates, a dedication, and an affirmation are derived from the real metaphysics and the dimensions of being. For details, see the templates and the resources below.

Printable every day and universal templates are available in editable microsoft word document and pdf format.

Design of the templates

They shall be adaptable templates rather than detailed prescriptives.

They are suggestive—it is not seen as imperative that they be followed (independent path development is an encouraged option); nor is it seen that to be on an explicit path is a compulsion (‘they also serve who stand and wait’).

The templates are tailored to an emphasis on the way and its development but are adaptable to other emphases and alternate forms.

They are derived rather than merely ad hoc or merely spontaneous. Therefore, they are true and adaptable.

Their derivation shall be from what is true, which shall include the real metaphysics and the dimensions of being, and a system of human knowledge (see resources for the system).

They shall be flexible and adaptable to a range of individual and social orientations and circumstances.

They shall admit and promote import of what may be valid and useful in received ways.

They shall focus on both the immediate and the ultimate—on ground and realization. There is an everyday and a universal template.

The templates are derived from experience.

Reason and action

The real metaphysics embodies reason; review of the section, real metaphysics, reveals it as incomplete without action. It may be regarded as incorporating action.

The two sides of being, the experiential or intrinsic and the in-itself or ‘material’, are two aspects of realization. In fact, they are one, but it is important to recognize since the in-itself or material aspect has instrumental value. However, the experiential side is the place of our essential being. Therefore, an inner or experiential way, e.g., meditation, is essential in realization. The inner and the instrumental join in reason—and in the eastern tradition of ‘yoga’. But to employ the idea of yoga, we cannot regard it as final. Rather, its eastern and other manifestations are pointers to a real reason, a real yoga, a real meditation—all seen imaginatively, critically, experimentally, and in process.

Everyday template

Kinds of activity

Activities are for the way (development and execution, marked by a dagger†) and ground (unmarked)

Activities

Rise early, before the sun, dedicate to the way (detail) and its aim, affirm (detail) the universal nature of being. Morning reflection in nature. Breakfast.

Meditative-contemplative review of priorities and plans—the way, life, the day. Reflect on realization, priorities, and means; employ simple reflection, (Shamatha—calming meditation for re-orientation of purpose and energy—to experiential transformation toward oneness; Vipasana—analytical to visionary meditation—to see what is essential now and in other time frames; see the discussion of experimental meditation and yoga). †

Realization—work; care and relationships—networking; ideas and action; experimental and structured yoga-exercise-meditation-share in practice and in action; engagement in the world—languages, art, and other activities. †

Tasks—daily and long term; midday meal. Attitude—in tasks and toward others and the world—an element of realization; light; yoga in action. Merge with Realization.

Physical activity—exercise and exploration of the worlds of nature and culture for experience and inspiration.

Evening tasks, supper, preparation-dedication for the next day and future.

Evening rest, renewal, review, meditation and realization, network, and community. Sleep early. †

Summary—ground—support for development; daily living, health and meals, tasks, work, community with networking; rest, review, sleep.

Summary—the way—home and world travel and communication. Emphases—(i) reflection, study (reading), writing, sharing, and publishing (ii) yoga and meditation (iii) attention to the dimensions of being as in the universal template (iv) directed and immersive action in the world—nature and society. †

On meditation and yoga

Meditation is person (mind and body) employed reflectively on their self and the world toward ends of its intelligent choosing. In this sense, meditation, reason, and yoga are identical. Source – meditation.

Incomplete separability of body from mind is implicit, therefore meditation encompasses yoga, reason, action, and transformation.

Intelligence is frequently understood as that which enhances effective action in the world. Here action in the world is enhanced to action in and for the world.

Traditional modes of meditation (e.g., Shamatha and Vipasana) and of yoga (e.g., eightfold, which derives from Buddhism) are included.

Dedication and affirmation

Dedication

I dedicate my life to the way of being,

To living in the immediate and the limitless ultimate as one.

For they are one, their separateness only apparent, the oneness waiting for realization.

What are the means of realization?—

To its shared discovery and realization,

Under the pure dimension of experiential being in form and formation as the world,

And the pragmatic dimensions of nature, society, and the universal.

In flow and adversity—

To shedding the bonds of limited self and culture, so that even in adversity, life approaches flow,

Practice and therapy merging in action

To realizing the ultimate in this life—this world—and beyond,

So again, to return to beginnings.

Affirmation

“That pure unlimited consciousness—transcending all principles of form… that is supreme reality. That is the ground for the establishment of all things—and that is the essence of the universe. By That the universe lives and breathes, and That alone am I. Thus, I embody and am the universe in its ordinary and most transcendent form.”— Abhinava Gupta (950 – 1016 CE, a philosopher-theologian of Kashmir)

Universal template

Pure being, everyday

Being in the world—Dimensions Pure being, yoga, meditation, ideas to action; Community, education (general, paradigm, ways of life), retreat to the real, renewal, development-reemphasis of paradigm.

Ideas—Dimensions: relation, knowing as relation to the world, reason, art; acting—effective creation of the real. Means—reason, yoga-meditation, the real metaphysics, site plan.

Essence—yoga, meditation, ideas into action. Community, education (general, paradigm, ways of life), retreat, renewal, development-reemphasis of paradigm.

Becoming

Nature

Dimension: nature as catalyst to the real. Animal being and devolution—observation, situational empathy, defocus, reason.

Essence—being in nature as source (immersion over conquest, an example is beyul of Tibetan Buddhism).

Society and culture

Dimension: society. Civilization as vehicle and path to the real. Transformation via psyche—by immersion in social groups as place of being and catalyst to the real.

Essence—immersion and travel in a range of cultures; the dimensions of society engaged in directive and immersive manner (economics, politics, ideas and culture, art, religious-spiritual sources). Immersion in and attention to the challenges and opportunities of the world.

Artifact

Dimension: artifact. Civilizing the universe (especially technology as enhancing being in the universe)—universe as peak consciousness via spread of sapient being.

Essence—technological enhancements of being (artificial being, sciences—abstract and concrete, technology of exploration and space travel).

Pure being, the universal

Being in the universe—Dimension: universal. Realizing Peak Being (Brahman) in the present. Said to be rarely achieved in ‘this life’ which is a beginning that is continued beyond death. Outcome of items 1 to 3. The means are in the previous dimensions, the everyday template, and open.

Essence—metaphysics into action, meaning and awareness of self – human limits – birth – and death; their real but non absolute character.

Resources

Resources are important (i) for living the way—as elaboration for understanding and action (ii) for development, especially as the way is essentially eternally in process.

Resources are available at The way of being (http://www.horizons-2000.org). The underlined items are reader resources, while the resources that are not underlined are resources for development—

The complete version of the way, a database for formal versions of the way, bare content – a secondary resource, influences and sources and bibliographies, an every-day and a universal path (templates), dedication, yoga and meditation, source for beyul, system of human knowledge, reading, more resources, resource development.

Return

‘Return’ and ‘into’ are metaphorical.

While the narrative is about being in the real, this division emphasizes being in the world.

Into the world

The way in the world is living in the immediate and ultimate as one, shared discovery and realization of the real, working with the limits of self in vision – action – relationships, realizing the ultimate in this world and beyond.

Unconditional being

Was ‘timelessness’

Or past, present, and future over extension without limit as one.

We work toward the ultimate in which being, beings, becoming, exploration, and history are transparent.