The way of being—template edition—in-process
Anil Mitra, Copyright © April
6, 2021 – May 27, 2022
Home | Essential edition
Contents
Plan
this
document
formatting
plan for
the field
Into the
way
Preface
Preface
Prologue
Prologue
Origins
Into the
way
Aim
Worldviews
The issue
of foundations
Method
and content I pre-metaphysics
Consequences
I—pre-metaphysical
Imperative
Narrative
Audience
Ground
The
beginning of metaphysics
Human
ground in the world
Mind,
world, and action
Meaning
Knowledge
Knowledge,
meaning, and paradigm
Experience
Existence
Being and
beings
How to
identify beings
A
collection of specimens
Kinds of
being
Being
Cause,
effect, and power
Cause
Natural
law
Law
The void
Void
Dialetheism
Dialetheism
The
universe
Universe
Creation
Method
and content II being to the void
Consequences
II—metaphysics up to the void
The
limitless real
Possibility,
logic, and science
Possibility
The
limitless universe
Metaphysics
Method
and content III—developing a real metaphysics
Method
and content IV the real metaphysics
The world
Method
and content V interpretations of experience
Cosmology
Method
and content VI cosmology
Logic
Logic as
the theory of the universe
The
fundamental principle of metaphysics
Consequences—the
identity of all beings
Consequences—all
beings realize the ultimate
Enjoyment
Realization
is an imperative
Foundation
so far—abstraction
The
abstract metaphysics and tradition
The real
metaphysics
Cosmology
of spacetimebeing
Cosmology
of limitless identity
Dimensions
of being
The pure
dimension
A system
of pragmatic dimensions
Growth of
persons and civilizations
Realization
Aim of
being
Means
Method
and content VII realization
Path
About
religion and received ways
Resources
Pathways
to ultimate being
Path
templates
Everyday
template
On
meditation and yoga
Dedication
Affirmation
Universal
template
Quality
of being
Doubt,
judgment, and action
Resources
Return
Epilogue—Into
the world
Universal
text
Unconditional
being
Return—into
the world
The way of being
(Font
for essential content)
1. Is an
in-process template for field, essential, and complete editions.
2. Has the
following main sources—home, plan, reading, bare content, and the database, and
secondary links.
3. Consider
simplification to just field and complete editions, with the essential a
stand in till the complete is written (but backup essential).
the complete, essential, and field manual editions are
abbreviated comp or comp ,
ess , and fm , respectively
here’s how to extract the editions
(i)
comp currently includes (a) unshaded material, not for other
editions, supplemented in the field by writing and absorption from the database (docm) and bare
content (docm) shaded yellow ) (b) material from an earlier, eliminated, in-process version
shaded blue , (c) ess shaded green (except material only for ess
); but (d) does not include material from fm, except
some which is duplicated from fm colored blue-gray but is under a non-shaded
heading
(ii)
comp will include (a) level 1 and other headings: unshaded original – green – in-process
(shading to be eliminated) and database
(b) level 2 fm headings and text to
which will be added some lower level-headings and content—either unshaded or differently
shaded (c) content absorbed
from database and bare contents
(iii)
ess is just the material shaded green (what
is needed from fm is repeated as
green ); ess will be eliminated as noted above ,
(iv)
fm is just the material shaded blue grey and
under a heading that is also shaded blue grey .
plan the plan
ongoing planning
minimize plans
merge
4. The field and
essential components leaving the essential edition as the field version with
supplements.
consider
5. Elimination of
the essential edition, leaving only the manual and complete editions.
merge
6. This document
into the database—then this document will be the complete edition.
edit
all versions for content, arrangement, language and
style, functionality of links
The way of being has five
divisions—(i) this division, into the way, in which ‘into’ is metaphorical, for the way is where we are—in
the world, (ii) ground, which lays out some foundational ideas for which
any newness is in the way of presentation, (iii) the
limitless real, that presents
and develops a view of the universe as far greater than our common views of
it, (iv) realization, on realizing the limitless or ultimate, and (v) return, also metaphorical, about living in ‘this world’—with
renewed vision of and being in the immediate-and-ultimate-as-one.
This
division is an informal introduction to the way. It introduces sources, motives,
a brief
description of the way, aim, means
(worldviews), and imperative. It then
discusses the nature
of the work and audiences to whom it may appeal.
The
way is introduced via its aim.
This version of the way of
being is a short field manual—a booklet that can be carried in one’s pocket.
For foundation and detail, the text refers to resources.
Small capitals
indicate significant terms and definitions. Sections human ground in the
world to a system of pragmatic
dimensions are relatively formal.
In the less formal sections, usage need not follow definitions and may be
metaphorical.
In the text, ‘I’ is at
times the author, at other times universal.
The prologue is a short
story of a life as it is continuous with being.
I found the beauty of the
world so powerful that it led to a search in ideas and the worlds of nature,
society, culture, and beyond.
I found I did not know my
true origins or my true destiny. What sense did it make, I asked, that my
awareness came into being, that it will end, and that it has isolation from
all awareness in the universe. Those thoughts further motivated my search.
I explored ideas from world
cultural traditions—framing them in terms of paradigms such as materialism,
naturalism, individualism as the notion that my awareness a distinct
awareness, critical philosophies…, their oppositions, generalizations, and
syntheses. This led to a framework based in being and the idea that knowledge
is essentially connected to action—acting and knowing do not exist without
each other. The merit of a foundation is being is elimination of hypothetical
foundations. Critically, the foundation will be nontrivial.
What is the being—the
essence—of beings, of our being? Is this famous question in the history of ideas
answerable? Precisely? How may we frame the question? Is an answer worth the
attempt? The projection of this work onto the space of these questions is an
answering. It is an intending and an emerging.
I discovered that the
universe is limitless, i.e., that all consistent possibility is realize. The
universe is the greatest (possible) identity and, consequently, I am the
universe—but also a limited individual that does not fully see and experience
my identity with Identity. Community and relationship are embedded in
Identity.
This work is a story of
ongoing discovery and realization.
The prologue is a short
story of a life as it is continuous with being.
I found the beauty of the
world so powerful that it led to a search in ideas and the worlds of nature,
society, culture, and beyond.
I found I did not know my
true origins or my true destiny. What sense did it make, I asked, that my
awareness came into being, that it will end, and that it has isolation from
all awareness in the universe. Those thoughts further motivated my search.
I explored ideas from world
cultural traditions—framing them in terms of paradigms such as materialism,
naturalism, individualism as the notion that my awareness a distinct
awareness, critical philosophies…, their oppositions, generalizations, and
syntheses. This led to a framework based in being and the idea that knowledge
is essentially connected to action—acting and knowing do not exist without
each other. The merit of a foundation is being is elimination of hypothetical
foundations. Critically, the foundation will be nontrivial.
What is the being—the
essence—of beings, of our being? Is this famous question in the history of
ideas answerable? Precisely? How may we frame the question? Is an answer
worth the attempt? The projection of this work onto the space of these
questions is an answering. It is an intending and an emerging.
I discovered that the
universe is limitless, i.e., that all consistent possibility is realize. The
universe is the greatest (possible) identity and, consequently, I am the
universe—but also a limited individual that does not fully see and experience
my identity with Identity. Community and relationship are embedded in
Identity.
This work is a story of
ongoing discovery and realization.
Origin and
motivation
for the way of being include questioning—What is the best I can do in my
life? What is the greatest possibility for and in my society,
humankind, the universe? These interwoven questions have clear
significance in the sense of ‘meaning of life’—but relative to them, questions of linguistic
meaning, taken up later, are
also critical—What is the meaning of best? What is my relation to the
universe? Who or what, if anything, is the ‘I’ behind the ‘my’? What is ‘my
life’—is it ‘this life’ and if so, what is beyond this life? And what
are the meanings of ‘greatest’, ‘possibility’, and ‘universe’?
This fundamental
question of meaning may be
approached in the context of further questions—What is the best that any
being can do and what is the greatest possible universe? That is—What
is (the) real?
A beginning of the way was
with reflection on, exploration of, and action upon these issues of meaning
and the real. Other sources and reasons for the way are the history of ideas,
intentions, knowledge, and action, and individual understanding, reason with
feeling, and action (I have read and forgotten so much that is safe to lay no
claim to originality).
The history of ideas is
colored by paradigms from which we learn received frameworks of perception, thought,
knowledge (especially, as well as knowledge of knowledge), being, and action.
In learning we are empowered but discover that the paradigms have limits,
many of which, we discover, in employing and explicitly critiquing them, are
not essential limits, but self-imposed due to their assigned value and
our limited understanding. In the way, via criticism and imagination
(reason) and action, we discovered an ultimate paradigm of the ultimate (in
ways of discovery and meanings of ‘the ultimate’ that will emerge
later)—which frames what is valid and valuable in the ‘traditional’
paradigms.
Though the ultimate has
been seen as too sacred, too dangerous to even name, a true ultimate would
not be remote; it would embrace, nurture, and beckon us. And we find, within
us, a motive to reach out, to search for it. The ultimate and the immediate
will be found mutually enhancing.
Though we may imagine the
real as pure and remote being, there is effectively no being that is
unknowable (later, the word ‘effectively’ will be found unnecessary).
Knowledge and action never
separate, for even ‘pure thought’ remains (potentially) connected to the
world and, besides, knowledge is a form of action.
However, it is effective to
occasionally withdraw from immediacy of acting, to reflect, to understand,
and to make action better (what the understanding consists in includes
knowing the world and knowing what is desirable and their mutual inclusion).
Therefore, we delve into
this understanding. Of course, ‘into’ is metaphorical for we never leave the
world, and we are never completely removed from the immediate.
Origins
Search, experience, reflection, agency,
change
Individual
Inspiration includes
beauty in the world—nature, culture, and the universal—and ideas and art.
What is the best I can do?
What is the destiny of the individual and other beings?
Humankind
History of ideas, action, and
exploration
Reasons
A question of meaning
A
source and
motive for
the way of being is a question—What is the best we can do in the world?
This 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? That
is—What is (the) real?
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 resources.
Acknowledgments
Sources
Inspiration
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, and
of content and method, may—and will—suggest a way forward. The narrative will
implement the suggestion.
Is the ultimate too great
or remote to know or realize? The greatest ultimate will contain the
immediate. We will show that it is accessible from the immediate world and
that there is an imperative to the ultimate.
Into the way
Knowledge and action never
separate, for even ‘pure thought’ remains (potentially) connected to the
world and, besides, knowledge is a form of action.
However, it is effective
to occasionally withdraw from immediacy of acting, to reflect, to understand,
and to make action better (what the understanding consists in includes
knowing the world and knowing what is desirable and their mutual inclusion).
Therefore, we delve into
this understanding. Of course, ‘into’ is metaphorical for we never leave the world,
and we are never completely removed from the immediate.
A worldview a framework for
being-in-the-world and a way of relation to the world via knowledge,
action, foundation—content and method or means—interaction. In this discussion
of worldviews, explicit focus is on the latter.
This section considers our
main common or received worldviews and their limitations.
The concept of a worldview
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, which, 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
We begin with worldviews
‘received’ from tradition—i.e., what is valid in the history of human culture
to the present time.
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 worldviews
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 worldviews
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 neither the full
truth nor entirely 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.
The
ultimate worldview of the way
This section introduces
the worldview of the way (demonstration is deferred to the limitless
real > 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
real 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 discussions, the
limitless universe, and metaphysics through 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.
The issue of foundations
Discussion includes address
of ‘content and method’.
Issues of foundation and ground
begin with the way of being – database.docm > the
way of being > the main narrative > the
universe > foundation (this document has further significant
information on foundations)
About
experience and being
the foundational aspect of experience
experience
experience is conscious
awareness in all its forms
aspects or dimensions of experience
there is experience of
experience—we experience not only the world but experience itself—i.e.,
experience is part of the world
there is experience of (or
as if of)
1. experience itself, ‘experience of’, and ‘the
experienced’
2. experience of the world (or a world)—i.e.,
experience is part of the world (and so the world, less experience, is
sometimes loosely called the external world)
3. the world as including self (which
designates ‘my experience of the world’, ‘my body’, ‘my willing and my
action’), other, and environment—
4. pure experience, which is experience itself
without explicit reference to the world or action; but pure experience is
pure-at-most-in-the-moment, and is potentially of the world and action
from which follows the three-aspect description of mind due to some
philosophers—experience, intention (‘of the world’), and action…
which, however, as seen above, all fall under experience
about interpretation
it is clear from the above
that there is experience;
however, it is logically
possible or consistent with experience but given nothing further, that
experience is all there is and that the world etc are constructs of or places
within experience
therefore, the following
are consistent interpretations—(i) experience is all there is (ii) the
standard view (experience, world, self, other, environment) (iii) other views
to be discussed later; which of these interpretations is ‘real’—none, one, or
more—will also be discussed later
the following discussion
is easily but not necessarily understood in terms of the standard view
experience is the place of
‘significance’
by ‘significance’ we mean
‘what is meaningful’
without experience we are effectively
nonexistent
experience is ‘where’
significance occurs (it does not follow experience is the source or creator
of all significance)
experience is the place of
our being (in terms of the concept of being introduced later, here ‘place of
our being’ is metaphorical)
that which cannot be
experienced is effectively nonexistent
the term ‘effectively’ is
crossed out in the two occurrences above because will be found later that
they may be eliminated
concept and object
the discussion from here
on in ‘the foundational aspects of experience’ is a preview of what comes
later
in concept-object terms, a
concept is ‘experience of’ and a referent (‘object’) is ‘the experienced’
concept and linguistic meaning
concept meaning is a
concept and its possible referents
in linguistic meaning,
symbols are part of the concept (clear definition and elaboration come later)
what an object or referent is
so far, we commonly think
of the referring as ‘concept’ and referred as referent or ‘object’
but this leads to
difficulties, particularly that the idea of an object with no referrer
whatsoever is empty, for to talk of objects at all is to refer generically,
and to talk of particular objects is to particularize the reference
therefore, i.e., in view
of the given that objects (the referred) are always bound together with
concepts (the referring), a better and good (re) definition of an object is
as the concept-referent pair
existence and nonexistence
an object is said to exist
when there is a referent
it is nonexistent when
there is no referent (given this definition the problems—not problem—of
negative existentials, singular or otherwise, do not arise)
it is possible (possibly
existent) when a referent is possible
necessary when there must
be a referent
impossible when there
cannot be a referent
detail
reality
there is experience
real world
the idea of the world
‘experience of’ – concepts
‘the experienced’ – referents
(‘objects’)
the world is (experienced as) relational
meaning
knowledge
being
interpretation(s)
standard interpretation
yes—external world
no—alternatives:
significance of the logical
indistinguishability
the real
the questions
approach to answers
plan
what has been
accomplished
how to present the
material
In the following imperative
to the ultimate, the immediate and the ultimate require an emphasis on both.
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—a synthesis, a
going beyond the received, to the ultimate, not as a compendium or review of
the literature.
The way is intended to be
part of an open narrative—evolving in form and content, and continuous with
and contributing to the history of ideas, action, and exploration.
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.
History of the narrative
It follows an individual
search.
The development is
incremental and experimental—and so there is a proliferation of versions.
This version
Overview
There are two current
versions of the way—an essential version for
rapid access, and this, the complete version of the way.
These two versions
constitute a large cumulative increment.
Like the essential
version, this is not a ‘how to’ work. The intent is to take readers who so
choose to the point where they may independently negotiate, critique, and
further develop the way.
This work provides
multiple perspectives, elaboration, and application to a range of topics,
some peripheral to the main thrust of realization. Though I write as if
confident so as to provide brevity, doubt is addressed.
The issue of foundation is
given greater attention than in the essential version. The initial approach
to foundation is that what foundation is possible is not known at outset and
therefore foundation and founded, method and content, are both tentative, in
interaction, in process. The interactivity is more than empirical, it is also
rational because process is in the world and method is therefore also
content. Method and content are one—epistemology and metaphysics are parts of
the same subject, and that subject may be seen as metaphysics, with knowledge
as a part of the world or as epistemology, with metaphysics as a consequence.
What is found is that (i) some aspects of knowledge are perfect by abstraction
and according to received criteria (ii) these aspects reveal the imperative
to the ultimate in a universe which is also ultimate and (iii) according to
this ultimate value, a join of the abstract perfect and pragmatic knowledge
is perfect relative to the ultimate value. This does not mean we have a theory
of everything, but a framework of such a theory, which is what is to be
expected. It is simultaneously an ultimate and a moving picture of the
world—it is one in which there is no ultimate a priori either to experience
(the usual meaning) or to reason.
The treatment of
realization and resources is far more comprehensive than in the essential
version.
Originality
Though it draws from sources,
the synthesis and much of the argument and proof is original and, as far as I
know, it is new. Yet, I may be mistaken and am not committed to originality.
The way is presented as a potential contribution.
From the incremental
nature of the work and its versions, most of the content appears in earlier
editions available on the internet.
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 of the way will
address anticipated issues.
Overview
Themes and
topics
about
themes and topics
themes
topics
general
significance
origins
and sources
structure
into the
way
theme 1
arrangement of the narrative
the way
theme 2
the way and its unfolding
topic 1
received and emergent culture, ideas,
and reason
experience
theme 3
experience
topic 2
semantic meaning
metaphysics
theme 4
metaphysics and worldviews
topic 3
possibility, necessity, and the real
(actuality)
topic 4
system of human knowledge—the
disciplines
topic 5
philosophy and its problems
theme 5
foundation
topic 6
the abstract and the concrete
topic 7
special topics
realization
topic 8
world challenges and opportunities
theme 6
realization
theme 7
illustrations
into the
world
theme 8
being in the world
into the world
theme 9
an older system of themes and topics
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.
characteristics
kinds
information seeking,
general, academic, and committed readers
attitude
openness
negotiating and sharing,
not just following
background
primary material may be
followed by all readers; but ‘unprepared’ readers should expect only broad
understanding
full understanding will be
enhanced by some acquaintance with metaphysics, science, and reason and their
methodologies, but this understanding may be acquired in parallel with
reading
who
secular
those who accept secular
limits—everyday – scientific – philosophical – and more, but think there may
be a beyond with regard to (i) what is there in the universe (ii) received
standards and paradigms of understanding, reason, criticism, and hypothetical
imagination
transsecular
those who accept religious
and metaphysical transcendence of the secular, but wish to avoid dogma, and
limits of received general and special metaphysics and cosmology (especially
with respect to the previous point)
universal
those who have moved
beyond the limits in the two previous items, and wish to share
Ground
This division sets up
foundation for the worldview.
The beginning of metaphysics
Though metaphysics is formally introduced later, it begins
with experience, below.
Indeed, though not all claims to knowledge are metaphysical,
with proper emergent understanding of the term ‘metaphysics’, and with claims
framed therein, all claims to knowledge are metaphysical claims and, all such
claims, when valid, are metaphysical knowledge.
What this means and its validation is taken up beginning
with experience and will be completed by the end of the next division on the limitless real.
Human ground in
the world
Experience
is conscious awareness in all its forms. We do not get out of experience, and
it is therefore fundamental to meaning (life and linguistic), knowledge, and
our very being in the world. Is there experience? Is there a world whose
existence and nature are independent of experience—i.e., is there a real
world? If there is a real world, given that our grasp of it is (seems to be)
always in knowledge and not in itself, can we know the real world and of it?
These questions are taken up in the essential and extended editions of this
work where it is seen that our experience gives us interpretations that are
at least as if of a world, from which it is possible to extract a real world
and understanding of relative and absolute aspects of its nature. Here, we
will take experience for granted—packed into the notion of mental
content in what follows. It is
relevant to add that, in the longer versions of this work, the first concept
of experience above is, embedded in a deeper concept that extends to the root
of being, is relational, and is effectively the essence of the world and
universe.
A concept is mental content, which includes perception,
signs, feeling, intention, free cognitive concepts, with or without
significant feeling (mental content with associated simple or compound signs
are symbols).
Concepts, signs, and symbols may be simple or complex, e.g., as in the use of
language.
Some concepts seem pure,
some seem to refer. Perhaps there is no ‘referring’—perhaps concepts
(awareness) are all that there is, but there is at least ‘as if referring’.
Later, we will see that the seeming awareness is not an illusion and that
there is referring (there is a world). So—we will proceed naïvely and justify
referring later. Since there is illusion, we will of course distinguish
between real referring and illusion. As a preliminary point, there is no
doubt that concepts can refer to concepts—that some concepts refer to others
(this is the essence of Descartes’ cogito argument).
A referential
concept is a concept that
refers to the world or part of it, which include ‘things as they are’ and
‘action’ (unless said otherwise, in the rest of the text ‘concept’ shall mean
‘referential concept’).
Though there are
distinctions, concepts (ideas), world and action are essentially continuous.
Action is part of the world—a part that is in a direct causal relation with
ideas, which could be written ideas ® action ® ideas ® action… However, the connection is more intimate
in that there are loops within loops, in that ideas phase into action and in
that ideation that is not purely spontaneous is action.
Meaning is
a concept and its possible referents.
Knowledge
is meaning realized—i.e., concepts and their actual (and intended) referents.
The ‘meaning of meaning’
above is fundamental—it is necessary and sufficient to effective meaning, for
without the concept, there can be no referent, and with the concept,
signs—words and other linguistic concepts—have the capacity for reference
(actual reference needs verification in specific cases and classes of cases).
It resolves further problems of meaning, e.g., the problems of negative
existentials. And—because the metaphysics of the narrative will go beyond
received knowledge, to the ultimate, new meaning will be associated with new
and received terms, individually and jointly (as a system). As meaning is
conceived here, it will be effective in the task of developing emergent
meaning (it is important for understanding, that readers attend to meanings
and system meaning as introduced in the text).
See that in going beyond
received paradigms, meanings of terms must change. There cannot be identity
of meaning. Of course, since the narrative draws from the received in which
we are grounded, continuity of meaning is necessary for grounding,
significance, and accessibility of the work. But if the received has not
achieved the ultimate, it cannot have achieved ultimate meanings—its
meanings, no matter how established, must have transitionally. What is
crucial is that the new meanings, individually and in system, should capture
the real. It will emerge that, for limited beings, there are directions in
which ultimate meaning and knowledge can be achieved, and ways that are only
available to ultimate being. For limited beings, these limits are not further
limits over and above their limitedness. And it will emerge that the
limitedness of limited beings is contingent and will be transcended.
The empirical concept
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.
Note that an enhanced and
more inclusive conception of experience is introduced later. For convenience,
a preview follows—
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.
Significance of experience
In addition to the above—
We live in experience
The being that has no effect in
experience is effectively non-existent
Place of concept (linguistic) meaning
Effective place of our being; place of significance
(‘meaning of life’)
The range and dimensions of experience
The range
The range of experience is the variety of experience
(feeling etc.), ‘experience of’ (the subjective), and ‘the experienced’ (the
objective)
The dimensions
The dimensions are the subjective side formalized according
‘parameters’, e.g., primitive-complex vs variegated, object bound vs free,
inner vs outer, intense vs neutral…
Concepts
Elements
The elementary concept is a primitive ‘feeling’,
which is at the root of ordinary feeling, perceptions, conceptions,
intention, and emotion.
The general concept of a concept
A concept is mental content, which includes perception,
signs, feeling, intention, free cognitive concepts, with or without
significant feeling (mental content with associated simple or compound signs
are symbols).
Concepts, signs, and symbols may be simple or complex, e.g., as in the use of
language.
Perceptual concepts
As noted, perceptions are concepts in the general sense.
Particularly, they are bound to their objects, except in
ideation, visual (imagination) or other and hallucination.
Distinctions between ideation and hallucination are (i)
ideation is clearly not bound to any particular object (i.e., not directly of
the real) but hallucinations seem real (ii) sometimes hallucinations seem so
real that they cannot be distinguished from the real—or distinguished only
with effort and difficulty.
Signs
A sign is a concept, typically simple, usually perceptual
in nature, which may refer.
A sign may be associated with an external object, also
called the sign.
Symbolic and free concepts
The discussion under ‘the general concept of a concept’ is
adequate.
Symbolic, free concepts have degrees of binding to the
world.
Pure vs referential concepts
Some concepts seem pure, some seem to refer. Perhaps there is no
‘referring’—perhaps concepts (awareness) are all that there is, but there is
at least ‘as if referring’. Later, we will see that the seeming awareness is
not an illusion and that there is referring (there is a world). So—we will
proceed naïvely and justify referring later. Since there is illusion, we will
of course distinguish between real referring and illusion. As a preliminary point,
there is no doubt that concepts can refer to concepts—that some concepts
refer to others (this is the essence of Descartes’ cogito argument).
A referential
concept is a concept that
refers to the world or part of it, which include ‘things as they are’ and
‘action’ (unless said otherwise, in the rest of the text ‘concept’ shall mean
‘referential concept’).
Concept, world, and action
Though there are
distinctions, concepts (ideas), world and action are essentially continuous.
Action is part of the world—a part that is in a direct causal relation with
ideas, which could be written ideas ® action ® ideas ® action… However, the connection is more intimate
in that there are loops within loops, in that ideas phase into action and in
that ideation that is not purely spontaneous is action.
Concept-object interpretation of experience
A picture of the concept-referent
Possibly no more than metaphorical
To be clarified later.
Existents
An existent is a concept-referent.
We think of existents as existing independently. However,
there is no knowing of things outside of possible knowledge of things.
Therefore, effectively, ‘existents’ are concept-referents.
Objects
Sometimes a distinction is made between objects and
existents or beings (later we will define beings as existents).
Under this distinction, Sherlock Holmes would be an object
but not a being.
However, an adequate notion of ‘object’ in this sense is
realized in the concept of ‘nonexistent being’ (the concept of ‘nonbeing’ has
the different sense of a being that has or might have existed but does not
currently exist).
Meaning
Meaning
is a concept and its possible referents.
Knowledge
Intention
Intention is referring that is focused or pointed at
the referent (i.e., it is more than mechanical or casual reference).
Meaning realized
Knowledge is meaning realized—i.e., concepts and their actual (and intended)
referents.
Given a concept that has a
hypothetical (possible) referent, the concept-referent is said to exist—has existence or is an existent—if the reference is real(ized), i.e., is actual.
An object is
a concept-hypothetical referent, realized or not; the object exists if the
reference is realized (the object is ‘real’). A nonexistent object is one for which the concept is not
realized. Under this distinction, Sherlock Holmes would be a nonexistent
object, which, despite nonexistence has significance and at least as if
reference. A being
is real object; being is the property of beings that marks them as
beings—i.e., being is existence. A putative distinction is that whereas there
are nonexistent objects, beings are regarded as causal and therefore
necessarily exist. However, this distinction would be based on a classical
conception of ‘cause’ and that in a full conception, nonexistent objects can
be causal (the apparent violation of our sense of existence and cause will be
defused). Therefore, we will find that we can also talk of nonexistent
beings. It is not necessary to distinguish beings from objects.
In ‘objective’ terms—
A being is
that which can be said to be—i.e., which exists; being is existence.
The ‘objectivity’ is merely
apparent because the concept is under the hood. This might seem to mark the
concepts of ‘being’ and ‘object’ as subjective in the mere sense. However,
there is nothing mere about the conceptions because we never get out of the
‘knowledge loop’. Metaphorically, at least, the universe knowing itself is a
minimal criterion for realism.
Of course, since we have
concepts of objects, the concept-object exists even if the object itself is
not realized. The distinction between objects and beings is more than merely
theoretical, we will find objects for which there is no distinction between
existence and non-existence and therefore may be taken to exist (regardless
of the question of realization). Which also means that the distinction
between objects and beings is at least rather thin.
A collection of
specimens—examples of beings—if a
concept is not logically contradictory, it has a possible object. This
enables listing some possible kinds of being without further criteria;
development of ‘metaphysics’ later ensures their reality—i.e., that they
occur somewhere in the universe.
The next section is an ad
hoc collection intended to illustrate ‘how to identify beings’ and the broad
inclusivity of being.
Here is a collection of
beings and kinds of being based
on the criterion above—as illustrative, as showing the inclusiveness and
implied power of the concept of being, and as preliminary to systematic
cataloging of kinds of being—causes or interactions, relations,
sentient or experiential beings, facts,
states of affairs or being, events, objects, processes,
laws and patterns, abstractions from beings (by filtering the
concept), beings conceived perfectly or pragmatically (as
justified later), objects anywhere on a concrete-abstract
continuum (including those with sufficient abstraction to be perfectly
knowable, e.g., on correspondence criteria), ideas, concepts including
linguistic concepts, signs, letters of alphabets, parts of speech, clauses,
sentences and other linguistic constructs, universals (e.g., redness),
particulars (e.g., a red ball), tropes (e.g., the redness of a
red ball), the universe, the void, transient emergents from the void,
creators, particles, fields, and cosmoses.
This section is a somewhat
ad hoc collection. The next section emphasizes kinds, systematically.
And now for some kinds—also
for illustration, as principles of enumeration are developed not here but in
the longer editions of the work in the resources—the
abstract-concrete continua; causes, abstract and concrete; sentience and
agency continuum; parthood continuum; ‘degree of existence’
continuum—negative, possible, definite, and necessary existentials;
concept-object continuum; primitive-high level continuum based on degree to
which the ultimate is realized; detail-essential continuum.
Existence
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 concept that has a
hypothetical (possible) referent, the concept-referent is said to exist—has existence or is an existent—if the reference is real(ized), i.e., is actual.
An object is
a concept-hypothetical referent, realized or not; the object exists if the
reference is realized (the object is ‘real’). A nonexistent object is one for which the concept is not
realized. Under this distinction, Sherlock Holmes would be a nonexistent
object, which, despite nonexistence has significance and at least as if
reference. A being
is real object; being is the property of beings that marks them as
beings—i.e., being is existence. A putative distinction is that whereas there
are nonexistent objects, beings are regarded as causal and therefore
necessarily exist. However, this distinction would be based on a classical
conception of ‘cause’ and that in a full conception, nonexistent objects can
be causal (the apparent violation of our sense of existence and cause will be
defused). Therefore, we will find that we can also talk of nonexistent
beings. It is not necessary to distinguish beings from objects.
Thus, existence is cast in
terms of experience. An ‘object’, i.e., a concept-hypothetical referent,
exists if the concept has the referent. Since we never get outside
experience, this is the nature of objects at their very core and depth. This
does not mean knowledge is never faithful to the referent, but even in faithfulness,
of which a potent system will emerge, concept and referent are bound
together.
The next section introduces
the foundational concept of being. Though it is cast as if objective, it is
as bound to experience as is existence. And, similarly, knowledge of being
can be faithful, and the same potent framework found for existence holds also
for being.
Subsequent development will
flesh out aspects of being that were found pivotal in developing the
worldview of the narrative.
The concept of beings and 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.
Beings and objects
Beings as existents – as concept-referents
Kinds of being
Principles of enumeration
A catalog of kinds of being
A collection of specimens
If a concept is not logically contradictory, it has a
possible object. This enables a listing of possible kinds that requires no
further criteria, e.g., that the individuals of the kind be material or
sensible. The real metaphysics ensures that these kinds are real—i.e., that
they occur somewhere in the universe.
Here is a collection, based on the criterion above—as illustrative, as
showing the inclusiveness and implied power of the concept of being, and as
preliminary to systematic cataloging of kinds of being—causes or
interactions, relations, sentient or experiential beings, facts, states of affairs or being, events,
objects, processes, laws and patterns, abstractions
from beings (by filtering the concept), beings conceived perfectly or pragmatically
(as justified later), objects anywhere on a concrete-abstract
continuum (including those with sufficient abstraction to be perfectly
knowable, e.g., on correspondence criteria), ideas, concepts including
linguistic concepts, signs, letters of alphabets, parts of speech, clauses,
sentences and other linguistic constructs, universals (e.g., redness),
particulars (e.g., a red ball), tropes (e.g., the redness of a
red ball), the universe, the void, transient emergents from the void,
creators, particles, fields, and cosmoses.
Catalog
Significant kinds
the world, sentient beings and persons, natural and social
beings, the universe, cause, creation, law, the void, existence of the void
Given a hypothetical being,
if its existence implies likelihood of existence of a second being, the first
is the cause of
the second, which is called the effect (of the cause).
In a trivial case, the
second being is the first—it is trivial in that every being is trivially its
own necessary cause.
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.
Power is
the capacity to give and receive cause; it is important because power has
been seen as the measure of being.
If the likelihood is
certain, the cause is necessary (if the cause is not necessary, it may be because
either there is a necessary cause, but the given cause is partial or
there is no necessary cause; the terms possibility and probability are associated with causes that are not
necessary).
If the cause is null, the
effect is spontaneous.
The cause of spontaneous and necessary being is absolute. Spontaneous, necessary, and absolute cause are
not ruled out by experience (but only by induction from experience).
The concepts of cause and effect
A cause and effect are a pair of beings, usually distinct, such that
the likelihood—probability—of the effect
obtaining (existing) 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.
The capacity to participate
in cause and effect has been called power, e.g., by Plato, who asserted that power is the
measure of being.
Classical and material cause
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.
Necessary and possible cause
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.
Null and absolute cause
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
Spontaneous creation, likely as well as necessary, are logically possible.
A being has a pattern if the information to specify it is less than the
raw information. A natural law is a (reading of a) pattern for a being such as a
cosmos. Laws have being—they are beings, i.e., laws exist.
Information
Quantity of information is
quantity of atomic data—either absolute or relative to posited atoms.
Pattern
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.
Law
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.
Constraint
Laws can be seen
as—are—constraints.
The void
The void (‘nothingness’) is the being that has no parts.
Its existence and nonexistence are equivalent. The next statement is
therefore valid. The void exists and is eternal.
Doubt has been relevant so
far, but it is critical regarding existence of the void. However, it is
effective to defer address of doubt to the section, doubt,
judgment, and action.
The concept
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
Existence and non-existence
of the void are equivalent. It is therefore valid to assert its existence
(doubt, which should arise here, is entertained below).
That is—
The void is a being.
There are no laws of or in
the void.
Significance
Relative to the
received conception—the present
conception is definite.
For the narrative—(i)
As noted above, the void exists. (ii) As will emerge below, the power of the
conception. Equivalently, that the union of the manifest universe and the
nonmanifest (the void) has unconditional and therefore necessary existence.
Doubt
Given the power of the
concept of the void, it is critical to entertain doubt regarding its
existence and power. However—
Essential doubt should arise at demonstration of existence, 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).
Relation to creation of the universe
This is taken up in the
section on the universe, below.
A sentence that is both
true and false is called a dialetheia.
Dialetheism
is the view that there are true dialetheia—i.e., there are true
contradictions.
Here, we mention of
dialetheia out of interest—but only briefly; more detailed treatment is in
the longer editions (resources, essential and complete editions). In the detailed treatment, we will see
that there are at least as if dialetheia, but that perhaps they can be
unpackaged in standard non-contradictory terms. But even if that is the case,
dialetheia are of interest (i) for perhaps there are real, unpackageable
dialetheia and (ii) perhaps dialetheic reasoning, e.g., in terms of
paraconsistent logic, is a convenient shorthand for situations where the
unpackaging is too detailed or difficult to access.
We saw, above, that the
void exists and does not. Thus, there is at least one dialetheia.
The usefulness of
dialetheia in the view to be encountered later, that “I am my limited self
and the universe.” But the dialetheic analysis of the view is assigned to the
longer editions in the resources.
A sentence that is both
true and false is called a dialetheia.
Dialetheism
is the view that there are true dialetheia—i.e., there are true
contradictions.
The principle
of noncontradiction states
that an assertion cannot be both true and false. For example, a black swan
cannot be not black. It seems absurd that a real object can be simultaneously
black and not black. The principle of noncontradiction is buttressed, perhaps
conclusively, by the fact that in standard sentence logic, if any sentence is
true and false, all sentences are true (and therefore also false). Thus, the
principle is the orthodox position at least since Aristotle. From this
perspective, dialetheism seems absurd, for if there are true contradictions,
then, on standard logic, it would imply that all assertions are true.
However, we just saw that
the void exists and does not. Thus, there is at least one exception to the
principle of noncontradiction. That is, there is at least one nonexplosive true dialetheia. How shall we understand this
case? If understood in the classical sense of ‘to exist’ as ‘being
causative’, then, since the void is nothing (or nothingness), we expect to
class the void as nonexistent. On the other hand, since the void is nothing,
we expect it to have no constraint and therefore to be maximally causative.
We can understand this as follows: the expectation of non-causation is based
on our classical physical understanding, but there is no reason that that
understanding should apply to nothingness which is not—does not seem to be—an
empirical object.
We will see below that some
dialetheia can be understood in terms of standard logic. Can this always be
done? How might we do so? Let us think as follows. The laws and systems of
logic seem necessary but perhaps the rendering of something fundamental for
particular kinds of situations (we will return to that something a little
later). That is, there is a limited universe of contexts to which the systems
apply, but there is perhaps something fundamental from which, by a
restriction of scope, the limited contexts arise. We can therefore understand
true dialetheia by carving out a context, a context that is not standardly
recognized, but real nonetheless, and see that standard logic does not apply
in this context. The logic that does apply, if there is one, will not be
standard. This is the source of the idea and development of paraconsistent
logics. The main thing to know
about these logics is that true contradictions do not lead to explosion.
Above that consideration, we want to know what the ‘something fundamental’
may be. This consideration will be addressed at the end of this section.
There are other purported
dialetheia, e.g., (i) nonexistent beings—i.e. being-concepts that have no
referents but have meaning and significance (e.g., Sherlock Holmes), (ii)
apparent dialetheia in which apparent contradiction arises from use of a sign
that is associated with more than one meaning—literal or metaphorical, (iii)
dialetheia that arise via abstraction, e.g., while zero and one
are different and me and not me are different, with sufficient
abstraction the distinction disappears and therefore on abstraction are the
same object; note that we should therefore not say “zero and one are
the same or are different” but, rather, “zero and one have sameness
under sufficient abstraction while obviously different in their less abstract
and more concrete interpretations”.
Another seeming dialetheia
arises in what is known as the Thompson Lamp Paradox.
Here is a modified version. Imagine a lamp capable of and in fact turned on
and off with infinite rapidity (it would seem impossible under our physics,
but we are here considering whether the very concept rules out possibility). James F. Thompson argued (in effect, since his situation was
somewhat different) that the concept rules out possibility since the lamp
would be simultaneously on and off, which would be a contradiction. However,
we might argue that, given infinite rapidity of switching, ‘on-off’ is a
possible state, giving a true dialetheia. But it is not really a
dialetheia—on and off are classically distinct, but not necessarily distinct
in Thompson’s imagined world. A better resolution might be that under time,
as we conceive it, does not distinguish on from off, but, still, there is no
situation which is both on and off (perhaps with time represented in surreal arithmetic).
Thus, we can see how Thompson’s lamp is not a dialetheia at all.
Reconsider existence of the
void. The nonexistence was on the classical notion of cause. Yet, there is no
logical reason for the void to not causal (and we will find out that it is
causal). Again, there is no dialetheia.
We can review other
purported cases of true dialetheia and, at least of those considered above,
find that they are really not dialetheia at all.
Perhaps, therefore, all
apparent dialetheia can be unpacked as non-dialetheia. Perhaps there is no
need for or universe of application of paraconsistent logic.
Thus, if I say “I am my
limited self and the universe”, it may a true dialetheia, or an ordinary
statement in a universe of noncontradiction in which I am myself in a limited
context, but in a wider context of extension and duration, I will find my
identity merged with a greater identity—that of the universe (whereas I am
here talking of the meaning of the statement in quotes, we will later
investigate the facticity of it).
However, the idea of
dialetheism is interesting, and I think it we ought to remain open to the
idea. Perhaps there are true dialetheia—or perhaps there are none, but
limited minds may best understand some ultimately non-dialethic situations as
true dialetheia .
Regardless of the outcome
regarding dialetheia, its consideration leads to an interesting reflection on
the concept vs realizations of logic. Let us think of logic in terms of a
possibilist interpretation—that is, while we can conceive impossible
situations, logic is what rules them out. Historically, the ability to
conceive the impossible, was important in the development of logical laws and
systems (in fact of science as well—where deductive logic arises from
consideration of only necessary restrictions of the possible, but science
arises from contingent restrictions). Imagining things that are and are not
some particular state may be the source of the principle of noncontradiction.
That most assertions seem true or false, suggests the principle of excluded
middle. That if two things are identical to a third, they would seem to be
identical to one another, suggests the principle of identity. The various
logics can be seen as arising out of considerations of possibility. Yet we do
not regard our systems as final. While the systems are the realizations, the
underlying principle, the ‘something fundamental’ referred to earlier, is or
at least seems to be what may be called the principle
of possibility.
The universe is all being. From the concept, the universe
exists. Since there is no other manifest being, the manifest universe has no
other creator. Creation alone does not explain the existence of the universe
except just at the moment of creation. However, sustenance would explain
ongoing existence, and an extended meaning of sustenance would explain
creation and destruction as part of sustenance.
The sustenance of the universe is the ongoing and everywhere
cause of its being. The universe cannot have another being as its sustainer.
But logically, its sustainer may be itself or one of its parts—even the void.
The concept
The universe is all being.
From the concept, the
universe exists—it is a being.
Significance
The universe exists—there
is one and only one universe.
Clarity
relative to the received conception, especially the universe as container—definiteness, elimination of consequent
confusions, e.g. (a) as noted, there is one and only one universe (b) all
things that exist are in the universe, for example, if there are atoms,
ideas, and words, they are in the universe.
Creation—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.
In this section the term
‘logical possibility’ means ‘does not violate any law of logic’; the term is
further clarified, and its meaning altered in the next division, the limitless
real.
The concept
For a being to create
another is for the first to cause the existence or being of the second.
Self-cause and self-creation
Self-causation of manifest
beings is logically possible. However, self-creation in the sense of a being
effecting its creation seems is logically impossible, for the being would
have to exist before its existence.
That real self-cause
occurs for compound entities is obvious. That real self-cause should occur
for truly atomic entities is not obvious—therefore that it is logically
possible is not an assertion that is void of significance.
Note—‘effecting its own
creation’ is not entirely semantically clear. Above, it is intended that it
excludes spontaneous creation.
If spontaneous creation is
regarded as self-creation, then, of course, self-creation is possible.
Creation of beings by the void is
logically possible
If the void is regarded as
contained by a being, then, too, self-creation is possible (because the
meaning of ‘self’ has been extended, relative to the first meaning in the
previous section).
Creation of the universe
Creation of the universe
by a manifest being is impossible
Creation of the universe
by the void is possible
Creation of beings other
than the universe by manifest beings is possible (i.e., not ruled out by the
concept of ‘a being’)
Sustenance
Creation alone does not
explain the existence of the universe except just at the moment of creation.
However, sustenance would explain ongoing existence, and an extended meaning
of sustenance would explain creation and destruction as part of sustenance.
The sustenance of the universe is the ongoing and everywhere
cause of its being. The universe cannot have another being as its sustainer.
But logically, its sustainer may be itself or one of its parts—even the void.
Summary
In review of discussion from the universe to the present point—
(i)
Self-cause of manifest beings is
possible, but—
(ii)
The particular case of self-creation
of manifest beings is logically impossible, but possible for a manifest being
regarded as augmented by the void.
Method and content II being to the void
The limitless real
This
division develops the worldview of the way.
The section on possibility
is a preliminary. Then, the development is in two stages:
(i)
The
fundamental principle of metaphysics
is an abstract framework for the view—it is shown that the universe is
limitless in every possible way.
(ii)
Then the concept and kinds of
possibility having been fleshed out, regarding limitlessness, the possibility
is logical. A consequent metaphysics, description of the world, and cosmology
are worked out. Consequences for and means of realization are developed.
Finally, what has been developed is stated as a theory and given a
foundation.
A being is possible if its nature (conception) does not rule out its
existence. It is logically possible if its conception alone does not rule it out. Logic is what makes for logical possibility of
concepts. If, over and above logic, its existence is not ruled out by the context,
which may be physical—e.g., a particle to the universe, social, or other, the
being has real possibility, alternately named universal possibility. Science—fact and induction, which include experience of
the world—is what makes for real possibility. From their conceptions, logical
possibility is the greatest (most permissive) possibility and the extension
of the real must lie within that of the logical.
For any context, the real Í the real possibility (possibilities) Í the
logical possibility.
For the universe, the real º the real possibility º the logical
possibility.
The meaning of limitlessness
lies in the concept of possibility.
the concept—possible being and
possibility
A being is possible if its nature does not rule out its existence.
logical possibility
the concept
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.
kinds
Kinds of logical possibility are determined by kinds of
logic which are differentiated by mode of expression, e.g., propositional,
predicate and so on.
The mode of expression for most kinds of logic, standard,
extended, and deviant, is symbolic. However, a mode of expression corresponding
to a continuum or higher order can be entertained. It is not clear how such
modes might be defined, or systematized, let alone mechanized.
real possibility
the concept
If, over and above, logical
possibility, its existence is not ruled out by its context, it has real
possibility.
Logical possibility is the
greatest or most permissive kind of possibility. Therefore, in the
fundamental principle, stated and demonstrated in the next section,
‘possibility’ is logical possibility.
Real possibility does not
exceed logical possibility. The fundamental principle of the next section
implies that real and logical possibility are coextensive.
Real possibility presumes
logical possibility.
kinds
Examples of real
possibility are natural (e.g., physical, living, and experiential or
sentient) and practical possibility. Practical possibility is close in
meaning to feasibility.
natural
elementary or physical
living (complex)
experiential
social
universal
The possible and the real
For any context, the real Í the real possibility (possibilities) Í the
logical possibility.
For the universe, the real
º the real possibility º the logical possibility.
Practicality and feasibility
Necessity
Conditional
Absolute
Unconditional existence
Equivalence of unconditional existence and absolute
necessity
Given a being, its manifest and nonmanifest states are,
together, unconditionally existent
The limitless universe
limitlessness vs infinitude
To be limitless is to realize what is possible in the greatest
sense of possibility (which is logical possibility).
The limitless is infinite,
but the infinite is not limitless in the sense above.
the fundamental principle of metaphysics
demonstration
from existence of the void
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).
from unconditional existence of the joint manifest and nonmanifest
heuristic arguments for the fundamental principle
refer to the way of being
– database.docm – heuristic (html)
implications of limitlessness
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.
An effective sequence of development, after review of the
discussion of possibility is as follows (i)
discuss modes of meaning of the fundamental
principle (ii) set up a metaphysics (‘knowledge of the real’)—the real metaphysics (iii) develop a picture of
the world (iv) develop a cosmology—and
levels of cosmology—based on the real metaphysics (iv) review the foundation
of the development in terms of a reformulation of the concept of logic as a theory of the universe.
meaning of the fundamental principle
intrinsic or intensional meaning
extensional meaning
Metaphysics
At outset, it is noted that ‘metaphysics’ is understood,
roughly, as it is it is in philosophy, where it is one of four major
traditional disciplines (the others being epistemology, ethics, and
philosophical logic—broadly interpreted).
Metaphysics is not the study of the occult, interpreted as
study of the esoteric supernatural or the objects of religious belief. But
the question of the reality of the hypothetical objects of such study and
belief does fall under metaphysics as understood here (but is not seen as having
intrinsic importance).
The real
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’.
The concept
Metaphysics
is true knowledge of the real.
Metaphysics may be seen as
‘theory of being’.
Significance of this conception
The adequacy and
significance of this concept—and relations to the received conceptions—are
discussed just below and developed in what follows.
Relation to the received conception of metaphysics
The present meaning of metaphysics is close to that of the
received meaning of ontology. However, this is not restrictive as the
boundaries of ‘ontology’ are porous and limitation to a study of the most general
features of the real is artificial.
What is pertinent is that the present conception is
effective and potent and that, as noted, it includes—much of—what
traditionally and rationally lies under ‘metaphysics’.
Possibility and actuality of metaphysics
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.
Necessity of metaphysics
The unavoidability of metaphysics was observed in the beginning of metaphysics.
Method
Standard perception and conception (the empirical and the
rational, which, it may be seen, are not essentially distinct), both open and
critical, subject to reflexive review
Metaphysics vs ontology
Ontology as study of the real is not essentially distinct
from the present or the received conception of metaphysics
An 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.
Foundation—abstraction, the fundamental principle
Perfection according to received criteria
Tradition
‘tradition’
shall refer to cumulative knowledge and agency from the origin of the world
to this very day).
The
real metaphysics
Motive
The metaphysics
To the abstract
metaphysics, append what is valid in tradition.
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).
The real metaphysics
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.
Perfection
In terms of the ultimate value—realization
of the ultimate, the real metaphysics 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.
Emergent criteria
The contours of the real
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 the world
> paradigms.
Consistency
That the real metaphysics
has been shown shows its consistency.
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.
A desire to believe
Perhaps the desire to believe has a role—but it is
unnecessary.
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 complete
version of the way has an
extended treatment of doubt, criticism, and imagination in arriving at truth
and the nature of truth.
In what follows, there is a more complete treatment of
doubt, criticism, and imagination in arriving at truth and the nature of
truth. The treatment occurs, particularly, in discussion of experience, the world, and interpretation,
in reason, in foundation
of the way. Doubt is also treated throughout the narrative, in
discussions of method and content.
The abstract and the concrete
The power of
emergent systematic metaphysics
How the real metaphysics is systematic
The system of the real metaphysics is
emergent
Emergent system is potent
Method III and IV, the fundamental
principle and its use
Consequences III—fundamental principle
Method V and VI, the real metaphysics
and its use
Reason and reflexivity
Consequences IV—the real metaphysics
The concept
Whereas the universe is all being, the world
is our experience of the universe as real or otherwise; it includes
interpretations of our experience of the extent and range of things with
emphasis on what interpretations, one or more or perhaps none at all, are
real; and though it does not emphasize it, it also includes our sense of
importance, significance, and home—or their absence.
In this development, there will be an emphasis on what
interpretations are real, the emergent meaning of ‘the real’ in this context
(it must include consistency with all experience, critically considered), and
the significance of having multiple real and mutually consistent
interpretations.
Experience and metaphysics
Experience—an enhanced concept
The conception
For
convenience, the next paragraph is repeated from ear For convenience, the
next paragraph is repeated from earlier—
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 range of experience
Experience, the world, and interpretation
What an interpretation is
World and interpretation
The standard picture
Strict materialist version
Possible but not for an experiential and substance cosmos.
Extended version
Significance of interpretations
Equivalent interpretations
Choice is a matter of perspective and convenience.
There are different interpretations
Discovery of the real
Interpretations
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 range of being
A hierarchy of being
Human being
Anthropology
Psychology
Cosmology of limitless identity
Though cosmology is taken up in
detail later, this is not out of order.
What is needed to develop the cosmology of limitless
identity follow directly from the fundamental principle. The cosmological
implications that follow begin to show the power of the principle.
Identity-extension-duration
This section could be
named being-space-time.
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.
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.
Dimensions of being
This section develops the dimensions of being.
The dimensions can be seen
as part of cosmology.
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.
Pure
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.
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.
From the role of the
pragmatic in the real metaphysics, that these dimensions are rough and in
process, is not an impediment to realization.
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.
Categories and
the dimensions
Development of the person
Natural
Experiential independence
Universal
Pathways to the ultimate
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.
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 a priori to its experience or reason. This no
apriorism extends to beings
that experience limits, but, in principle rather than fact; as for the real
metaphysics, the framework has no a priori, 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.
Method and content V interpretations of experience
Method VII, equivalent interpretations
Field of being and environment with selves
Stability vs transience
Stable, incrementally formed, high significance vs
transient, saltation, low significance
Solipsism
Stable (field of being) vs transient
Consequences?
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 sections, the limitless universe and the world.
Introduction
The concept of 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 and metaphysics
The relationship
Ontology?
Metaphysics for cosmology
Methods of cosmology
General cosmology
What general cosmology is
Principles
The block universe
Interpretations of experience
Status of special metaphysics
Cosmology of form and formation
Principles
Applications (examples)
Interpretations of experience, continued
Identity, extension, and duration
Dimensions of being
Physical cosmology
General study
Modern physical cosmology
Metaphysics, cosmology, and physics
The void and the quantum vacuum
Method VIII, cosmology
Consequences?
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.
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.
Aim
To show how the metaphysics as a theory of being and the
universe is an enhancement of received notions of logic.
Logic—the received notion
Though we do not intend or 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.
Logic—an equivalent conception
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
Unifying logic, science, and mathematics
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.
General logic, general science
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).
Necessary and contingent theory and fact
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.
The real metaphysics as theory of the universe or theory of being
From the fundamental
principle and the real metaphysics, logic (science) is the theory
of the universe or,
equivalently, the theory of being.
Reason
Reason
and metaphysics
Reason the highest level of rational
process
Against exclusive specialization
Reason and method – relation and
contrast
Foundation of the way
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—from abstraction, 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.
Logic as the theory of the universe
Let us view general
logic as the amalgam of logic
and science; then, in this general sense it might and will be found that logic
is the theory of the universe (we will need to be careful about the
extension of ‘the’).
If from the void, a
possible being did not emerge, that would be a law of the void. Therefore,
all possible beings emerge from the void; an equivalent form of this
assertion is what shall be named the fundamental principle of
metaphysics—The universe is
the realization of the greatest possibility.
In that they are mutually
inter-transformable, every being is (equivalent to) all beings—and to being.
‘Every being’ includes the universe, the void, and sentient beings. It is a
dialetheia that the universe is identical to the void, that zero is identical
to one, which is not to say that in standard arithmetic, under standard logic
and arithmetic that zero is equal to one.
Thus, all beings realize
the ultimate (this is not a contradiction for they merge in the realization).
This realization may occur in this life but if not, is realized
beyond—which may involve migration of identity (defined later) from being to
being, world to world, cosmos to cosmos, through the ultimate of the
universe, to the void, and back. If the spaces between manifestations of a
limited identity are essentially infinite, they are experienced as not even
instants.
Pleasure
and pain are
given. Enjoyment
is the appreciation of the range of experience, which includes feeling—i.e.,
pleasure, pain, and more—and cognition, and intending, and action.
Realization of the ultimate does not exclude pain, but is the best enjoyment,
which, together with realist therapy (defined below), is the best approach to
the issue of pain.
Enjoyment is an ultimate
value and therefore
realization of the ultimate is an imperative.
Considerations from
conception of concepts, through the fundamental principle, to the imperative,
entail perfect knowledge of the real in a correspondence sense of truth
(metaphysics).
The entailment is via abstraction of the essential concepts, which is removal of
detail whose distortion cannot be filtered out. This shows the ultimate but
not how to get there; it shows the imperative but not how to follow it.
To the abstract
metaphysics, append tradition—what is valid in the history of human culture,
which includes knowledge-intention-action, to the very present time.
Tradition may include perfect truth (in whatever sense you choose) as well as
pragmatic truth—that is, tradition is imperfect by traditional criteria (I
use ‘pragmatic’
to refer to at least rough and usable truth—not specifically to the
philosophical tradition of pragmatism). Even if perfectable, the perfection
of tradition, though not an essentially unworthy ideal, is not worth waiting
for. It is (at least the beginning of) the journey through identity, and, in
new manifestations, in new civilizations, it will be part of what sustains
the journey to the ultimate. Thus, the join, even though it is imperfect by
traditional and received criteria, is perfect relative to the ultimate. On
the way, the abstract side guides and illuminates the pragmatic, and the
pragmatic illustrates and is instrumental toward the ideal—the ultimate
revealed by the abstract.
This join is named the real
metaphysics.
Let us look at a little
cosmology. We first consider being, extension, and duration—i.e., spacetimebeing. 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.
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.
(iv) As far as we seem lesser than the ultimate, the
limits of our being—
(v)
Are real but not absolute,
(vi) Are only apparent from an ultimate perspective
(for all beings realize the ultimate in merging in its peaks),
(vii)Are no more than an
apparent gulf between our world and the ultimate.
The ideas of God and Brahman are possessed of the real—
(viii)
As immediate and pervasive rather
than remote,
(ix) Not as static but as in process—a process of which
we are part,
(x)
Are exemplified by our cosmos and its
living and sentient-sapient forms rising from primeval origins.
Finally,
(xi) 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.
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.
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 has pragmatic aspects.
A system of pragmatic dimensions
But the pragmatic aspect
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
any world culture may be chosen—we choose western culture, 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,
technology, 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.
In forward motion of the
world, achievement of the ambient culture often presents itself as ultimate.
However, the secular and transsecular aspects of culture are nearly always
limited by experience, pragmatic considerations, and conflicts of interest. A
truth of most cultural paradigms is that they cannot validly claim any
essential completeness. The real metaphysics shows the essential completeness
of the cultural paradigms. There is a universal dimension beyond nature and
culture. We do not imply that cultures have no apprehension of the universal.
Rather, we can now see that most such apprehensions are incomplete.
It is common to think of
the height of growth to be grounded in person and culture. The ‘normal’
growth of individuals and civilizations progresses through the dimensions of
nature, society with culture, and the universal.
Relativity and absoluteness
of cultures are both ‘arrogant’ in seeing person, culture, and society as the
end of growth.
This division uses the
worldview of the way toward realization of the ultimate in and from this
world.
The aim of being is the aim of the way.
General
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.
Principles of
development
Special means
Dimensions of being
The dimensions were
developed earlier; following is a review 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).
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
Paradigms
The
dimensions were developed earlier and may be reviewed for realization.
How are we to be on a path?
Path templates
Two generic and adaptable 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)
Elements
Kinds of day
Ground and routine v The way
Home v Travel and away
Kind of activity
Universal
E.g., yoga and meditation, which, among other things, bind
to the real
Local
E.g., politics, economics, elements of ground
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.
†
Activities—summary
Ground—support for development; daily living, health and
meals, tasks, work, community with networking; rest, review, sleep.
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.
The traditions are often
treated as completed. However, they are very much in process. Therefore yoga
(with meditation) is regarded as any theory—an in-process conceptual
structure in interaction with an empirical base.
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
Elements
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—taken
up in detail below.
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).
Quality
In all these endeavors, quality of being is an essential
focus.
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 ‘becoming’, above. 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.
World
problems and opportunities
Summary
Quality of being
In all these endeavors,
quality of being, which includes satisfaction with our states of being and
process, is an essential focus.
Doubt, judgment, and action
The real metaphysics is
consistent with experience and reason, which include science and logic.
However, its proof ought to be doubted. Doubt is directly addressed in other
documents in the resources.
Given its consistency and
the reasonableness of its proof, two alternate attitudes to the real
metaphysics are (i) as a hypothesis to found a metaphysics for the universe
and (ii) as an existential principle of action.
There is value to careful
philosophical analysis that is accepted by the global community of thinkers.
However, must we be passive in the absence of absolute certainty? The time to
act on the real metaphysics is now—it is not to be deferred to some future
generation. We judge that it is now on the ground of the reasonableness of
the demonstration.
Overview of planning
Time
The way
Life
Day (week…)
Place
Home
Away
What religion is
The religions
Religion and the way
Ways
Interest in religion is not so much in the religions
themselves as in their spiritual, psychological, social, and real truths—and in
that elements of the truths may be combined with the way.
Resources
introduction—about 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. Some
general resources are—
The website for the way, http://www.horizons-2000.org/, has resources for living and developing the way. There are suggestions for immersion in the way; my sources are detailed at my influences and sources; and there is a system of knowledge based in the real metaphysics.
A more extensive and articulated system follows.
for the way
The complete
version of the way is a
resource for developing and living the way.
Living the way
Every day and universal
paths, dedication and affirmation,
yoga and meditation, source for beyul, reading.
Developing the way
A database for formal
versions of the way, bare content—a secondary resource, more resources, and developing resources.
publishing and the website
developing the way as an example or paradigm
reference
sources
topics and themes
summary and essentials of the main topics and themes
themes
the themes
recapitulation of the interwoven development of the themes,
with reference to locations of development in the narrative
topics
lexicon
with received meanings
index
Pathways to ultimate being
(A full title of this
section would be Pathways to the ultimate in and from the immediate.)
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.
How are we to be on a path?
Two generic and adaptable path templates, a dedication and affirmation are derived from
experience, metaphysics, and dimensions of being. The templates are not
intended as rigidly; by altering emphasis and detail they are adaptable to a
range of situations and contexts. For details and how to adapt the templates,
see the resources.
In the templates,
activities are for the way (development and execution, marked by a dagger †) and ground (unmarked).
Rise early, before the sun, dedicate to the way and its aim,
affirm the universal nature of being (for a dedication and affirmation, see
the resources). 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 linked in the resources). †
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.
†
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. See the link on meditation in the resources.
Incomplete separability
of body from mind is implicit, therefore meditation entails yoga, reason,
action, and transformation. The aim is dually about ends and process—calm
attachment, toward which, practice in detachment and selective detachment are
tools.
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.
The traditions are often
treated as completed. However, they are very much in process.
Therefore yoga (with meditation) is regarded as any theory—an in-process
conceptual structure in interaction with an empirical base.
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.
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.
“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).
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, and the site plan for the
way of being (for links to yoga-meditation and the site plan, see the resources)
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 (‘beyul’ is journeying to
remote natural environments that evoke true self; for a link, see the resources).
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. The means are in the previous items and the
everyday template (see the resources)—and
open.
Essence—metaphysics into
action, meaning and awareness of self – human limits – birth – and death;
their real but non absolute character.
In all these endeavors,
quality of being, which includes satisfaction with our states of being and
process, is an essential focus.
Doubt,
judgment, and action
The real metaphysics is
consistent with experience and reason, which include science and logic.
However, its proof ought to be doubted. Doubt is directly addressed in other
documents in the resources.
Given its consistency and
the reasonableness of its proof, two alternate attitudes to the real
metaphysics are (i) as a hypothesis or axiom as foundation for a metaphysics
for the universe and (ii) as an existential principle of action.
There is value to careful
philosophical analysis that is accepted by the global community of thinkers.
However, must we be passive in the absence of absolute certainty? The time to
act on the real metaphysics is now—it is not to be deferred to some future
generation. We judge that it is now on the ground of the reasonableness of
the demonstration.
Resources
Two longer editions of the way—(i) the essential edition (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/ek project/the
essential way of being.html) and
(ii) the in-process complete edition (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/ek project/the
way of being.html).
A detailed and adaptable pdf version of templates, dedication, and affirmation (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/narratives/templatesanddedication.pdf) there is also a Microsoft Word version.
An in-process document on yoga,
meditation, and reason (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/topicessays/meditation.html); here is the Microsoft Word version.
The site
plan for the way of being (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/plan.html).
A link on beyul
(http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/old/the
essential way of being.html#Beyul).
A system of knowledge based in the real metaphysics (http://www.horizons-2000.org/2021/resources/system
of human knowledge, reason, practice, and action.html).
‘Return’ is metaphorical,
an emphasis, for we have not left the world.
While the narrative is
about being in the real, this division emphasizes being in 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.
Living, ground, the dimensions
Sharing, immersion
Cumulative narrative
Rewriting history
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.
Though we may never find
ourselves complete, we seek sublime satisfaction with our states of being and
process. We seek a balance between satisfaction and achievement. With
understanding that is perhaps new, we return to the world, to live in the
ultimate, the immediate, past, present, and future as one.
‘Return’ is of course
metaphorical and emphatic, for we never left the world.
|