|
Welcome Metaphysics Realization Resources Anil Mitra
Metaphysics for The Way
of Being The metaphysics—a limitless universe
The metaphysics—a limitless universe A being is that which is w Being is the property of beings as beings (a being is an existent; beings are existents).
The universe is all being w The universe is a being.
The void is the being that contains no beings w Existence and nonexistence of the void are identical (though a contra-diction in form, this assertion does not define an opposition and therefore does not specify a contra-real) w The void exists (has being).
A law of nature has being w There are no laws in the void.
All possibility emerges from the void, and this is the greatest possibility, or the void would have a law w The greatest possibility is the collection of beings whose conception alone does not rule out their being.
How is the greatest possibility to be understood? If it is to be ultimately rich in what it allows, it must be ultimately sterile in what it rejects w It must be understood as what is allowed by logic w Though logic is often seen as sterile, it defines the ultimately permissive boundary of being w All true science, religion, and art—as far as it is about the real—and so much more fall under what logic allows w If it is not contra-real, fiction is realized in some world.
The universe is the greatest possible; it must have identity, in peak and void phases w The universe, its manifest and void phases, have necessary being w All beings realize this greatest for otherwise it would be a limit on the universe; beings and identities merge in this realization w The ultimate and the immediate are one.
The development so far is precise in virtue of its abstraction (To abstract is to remove from a concept of an object, that which cannot be rendered precise.)
How shall we realize the ultimate in and from the immediate?
To the abstract knowledge so far, join pragmatic knowledge, which includes what is valid in human cultures w The pragmatic may be imprecise even as we endeavor to improve it.
The abstract—the ideal—illuminates the pragmatic and guides it in realization; and the pragmatic illustrates the ideal and is instrumental in realization w In terms of ultimate realization, the join of the abstract and the pragmatic is perfect w The join is named the real metaphysics or just the metaphysics.
Realization involves a medium—what it is that realizes and means. What are the medium and means of realization?
Experience is consciousness in all its forms w It is essentially the place of our being and meaning w We are experiential beings.
Because the universe is ultimate, its primitive root is experiential w The universe is experiential w Action in interaction with meditation—conscious directed and undirected change in experiential content and quality—is intrinsic to realization.
The universe and its identity are limitless in variety, extension, duration, peak, and dissolution w There are limitlessly many cosmoses of limitless variety; every atom is a cosmos, every cosmos an atom w The cosmoses are in transaction with one another and the void w Identity crosses these forms in realizing the ultimate w Between death and birth, an eternity is an instant w The realizations are not limited to animal form—all beings merge as peak and fragment in dissolution.
The medium and means of realization are intrinsic to being, i.e., experiential, and instrumental, which are forms that may be labeled ‘mind’ and labeled ‘matter’ w What follows includes exploration of the means and medium.
Pleasure, pain, and the varieties of experience, receptive and active, are unavoidable w Enjoyment is appreciation of the varieties w Enjoyment is an ultimate value; therefore, realization of the ultimate is an imperative w There are intelligent, shared, and effective paths to the ultimate.
(There is a world of productive sophistication and doubt behind these developments; the sophistication of thought, especially the traditions of philosophy may appear removed from but contribute toward realization w Sophistication may be beguiling and so we ought to endeavor to not to lose sight of the ultimate w Further, preoccupation with doubt can be transformed to positive and existential doubt; the real metaphysics can be seen as embodying an empowering metaphysical theory.)
While our being is limited, perfection is not achieved w In realization we attempt to negotiate the world creatively, amid dissolution (and ‘evil’) w Preoccupation with the negative in the world (evil) and ourselves (limits, blocks) ought not to distract us from realization.
Dimensions of being are elements of the world that are effective in describing and negotiating the real w A version of pragmatic dimensions of being are natural (of which experience is a part), social, and universal w Since we are experiential beings and experience is the place of meaning, therefore—persons are the aim and object of all endeavor (institutions are important, too, but secondarily) w This—the person – the collection of persons—is the real focus of culture, cultural transformation and enculturation, ethics, economics, politics, and law (‘justice’)—which are to be founded in the natural and informed by the universal.
Whereas meditation is intrinsic to (our) being, the dimensions are instrumental in realization (though derived from our world, to project the dimensions beyond, is an aspect of perfection of the real metaphysics).
Paradigms of being are general features of the world that summarize its behaviors and forms (paradigms, e.g., causality and mechanism, are more general than laws and theories of science) w A fundamental perfect paradigm of being is logic in that what logic allows is possible w A fundamental pragmatic paradigm of formation is that of incremental variation and selection derived from the theory of evolution (it is fundamental because newness—that which is not contained in what came before—cannot arise without indeterministic variation and, secondarily, because incremental variation is far more likely than large steps) (this is one possible paradigm of formation; the other is formation in random, spontaneous, or transient formation in large steps).
From lower or no form, this paradigm in action, results in relatively stable, symmetric, and robust form w Since the robust forms are those that persist and foster high-level experientiality (‘higher consciousness’), they effectively dominate the population of the universe w Human beings and the world are most likely robust. Earth-beings, including the human, are significant achievements of being—we can ask and give some answers to questions of the meaning and nature of being and of the status and possible destiny of earth-beings, yet we are far from peak.
Though we think our empirical cosmos to be more or less stable and real as experienced—It may be the present fragment of my imagination w However, such forms are not robust w Therefore, our empirical cosmos as we see it is most likely robust and real (and while we are limited beings, we cannot know our world better than what is ‘most likely’ without introducing metaphysical hypotheses).
As far as we are limited beings, we live at two levels of being and knowledge—the ordinary and the ultimate; in the ultimate, being has a single ‘level’ and is, perhaps, beyond the robust and the transient.
A pathway or program of realization will attend to w the immediate—the everyday—and the ultimate w the intrinsic or experiential and the instrumental, the individual w community, and civilization.
Pathways will begin with the real metaphysics and the pragmatic (with tradition) w However, our best traditions are in-process and shall submit to imagination, reason (and the varieties of experience), trial and experiment, and refinement, for— “In our true being and in realization, we are always at a beginning”. ___________________________________ Contents The ultimate and its immanence in the immediate Need for new and precise meaning Validity of the meanings in the narrative Questioning the meanings of the narrative On the choice of ‘being’ for the narrative The choice of ‘universe’ and ‘the void’ An aside on the void and the universe A detour on the ideas of possibility and necessity An aside on the ineffability of being and paradox On the validity of the real metaphysics Aside on the significance of the real metaphysics On the problems of pain and escapism The person as primary target of the endeavor Significance of the dimensions and paradigms of being Aside on interpretation in understanding what is real The ever freshness of eternal being
History of the way of beingThe human endeavor to go beyond perceived and received limits is not new. It is a source and inspiration for the way of being. Here, the intent is to write a very brief story of the origin and evolution of this account of the way of being. It began in a search to understand received ways—i.e., in science, philosophy, art, religion and more, supplemented by experience, reflection, criticism (of received knowledge and critical and constructive theories of knowledge), and imagination. I asked whether the boundaries of ‘being’, which I then understood only vaguely, and the universe were as in received wisdom. Of course, the received boundaries are not definite, but I refer to a common view that science—physics—defines the physical boundaries and that higher pursuit is in secular art and forms of experience rather than in being-hood beyond. However, I saw that the theories of science are empirical and therefore do not limit the possibility of what lies beyond, or even within, below thresholds of causation. Possibility of course does not define reality, so I began to search for a real beyond the received. I first began with physical theories of the universe but got essentially nowhere (except the possibility that if the cosmos is in curved space, then there may be portals to other cosmoses at the edges or even within). I was also familiar with the fact that a cosmos coming into existence from nothingness did not violate conservation of energy because positive matter energy and negative gravitational energy may balance. At the same time, I was concerned with the nature of being and I reflected on the notion that ‘everything is equivalent to nothing’. It was in 2002, on a fall trip in Northwest California, that ‘in the shadow of mountains’ I thought—I should look at the properties of the void. The metaphysical foundation of the way of being began with the insight that there are no laws in the void. Of course, much development, critical and constructive, beyond that insight was needed, but the rest was rather the inevitable outcome of the insight of September – October 2002. The aim of the way of beingThe aim is to know and realize the ultimate. For some people, the idea of the ultimate is attractive. But it is significant, even to those whose sole focus is the here and now. That is because it is inherent in the ultimate discovered here that it has immanence in the immediate world. The aim requires that we attend to our world—and that the ultimate is to be realized in and from our world. The ultimate and its immanence in the immediateThe actual ultimate discovered here is the ultimate in ultimates—it is the greatest possible being. This ultimate is not alien—our immediate and limited form realizes the ultimate. The pathways—the programs of realization—attend equally to our world and the ultimate. Need for new and precise meaningOur natural languages have pragmatic meaning. To achieve precision in understanding our world, ourselves, and beyond, requires new meanings, revision, and removal of ambiguity in received meaning, and improved precision in all cases. To understand the essay requires attention to its significant concepts as defined—which also requires at least temporary suspension of received meaning. Since we do not have direct knowledge of the ‘beyond’, it is right to ask—How do the meanings in the narrative have validity? Validity of the meanings in the narrativeIf we can define meaning as we please, what could ‘validity of meaning’ mean? An answer is given at the end of the next section but note that if we want our system of meaning to be ‘real’, meanings cannot be defined as ‘we please’: we need to be concerned about consistency and empirical precision of the system. First, we do have knowledge beyond the pragmatic and the immediate—that there is experience and some of its elementary characteristics is precisely known and that there is a universe is precise and partakes of the beyond: it is not that we do not know this but often do not recognize it or its significance. Second, the system of meanings here and justification of the system have been arrived at by trial and error. Third, the achievement of the system, its limits and its ultimate character, and its justification are manifest in the essay. Questioning the meanings of the narrativeOne may of course challenge the meanings of the narrative. One may say “But that is not the true meaning of the terms.” I see the correct approach to this issue as follows. A term such as ‘being’ does not have intrinsic meaning; rather its meanings are derived by association of the term with concepts or ideas; the associations may be indefinite, multiple, and intuitive. Let us call a system of terms and associated meanings a metaphysical system if the system is defined, internally consistent, and validly and without error, describes at least a significant part of the universe; a metaphysical system is definite and is likely to require reeducation of intuition. The metaphysics of the narrative is a metaphysical system in this sense (and the significant part is the whole as a framework and some but not all detail). There may of course be other systems, which may be more effective in some sense. Thus, while systems can be more or less complete and more or less effective, more than one system can be valid and the question of one system being ‘more valid’ than another is imprecise and insufficiently discriminatory. In other words, the meaning of validity is threefold—consistency, empirical precision, and effectiveness. On the choice of ‘being’ for the narrativeIn choosing ‘being’ as part of the foundation, we avoid issues of substance—e.g., of materialism and idealism—altogether: substance is neither invoked nor denied (the pragmatic dimensions are substance-like, but not absolutely, and they are not projected absolutely to the universe). Thus, we avoid errors and prejudices of substance, for commitment to being asserts only that “there is what there is” and leaves unpacking “what there is” to analysis discovery rather than to pre-specification. In conceiving being as no more than “what there is” it is light in conceptual weight and not elusive like the tail which the cat never finds. And this concept of being does not exclude the richness that some thinkers assign as the essence of (their conception of) being. So, the richness is there, but left to unpacking—i.e., to analysis and discovery. Discovery has not been eliminated, but being has not been pre-weighted with vagueness or ineffability. The choice of ‘being’ lifts an unnecessary fog. The choice of ‘universe’ and ‘the void’The choice of ‘universe’ and ‘the void’ as all being and the being that contains no being, respectively, is critical. The former, together with being, ensures, in principle, that nothing is omitted. The choice of the void ensures that what is not known directly has representation. That the void exists and does not exist seems contradictory. For a manifest being simultaneous existence and nonexistence would be contradictory. But for the void to not exist is to exist. An aside on the void and the universeThe void and therefore being-in-its-real-nature are full of marvelous contra-dictions and surprises, which, unlike ‘material contradictions’ are not contra-real. For the void, to not exist is to exist. The void annihilates and creates every being, including itself. There is a void ‘attached’ to every being. Every being functions just as the void with regard to creation and destruction. Except that there is at least one, the number of voids is without significance. Even—that there are no voids at all is equivalent to there being any number of voids. That the universe does and must phase in and out of manifest being resolves Heidegger’s fundamental question of metaphysics—why is there being at all, i.e., why is there something rather than nothing? The answer, of course, is given in the essay above, but we may put it this way: nothing is something. A detour on the ideas of possibility and necessityIf something occurred, we think it is possible. We might mean ‘it could occur again’. However, it might have been a one-time occurrence. And what about something that we have not seen? Given a concept x in the form of reference to an occurrence or object (of the same name, x if, indeed, it obtains or occurs), if occurrence or existence is not ruled out, we say it is possible and use the term real possibility (examples are physical and economic possibility). If there is nothing in the concept which rules out occurrence, it is conceptual possibility or logical possibility. (logical possibility is as or more inclusive than real possibility). If x is ruled out in the cases above, there result real, conceptual, and logical impossibility. Is the concept of possibility contradictory? That is, is it possible that something we think possible is not possible—i.e., is it possible that the possible is impossible or the impossible possible? No, for it is inherent in the notion that ‘the possible is possible’. But of course, something may be possible in one sense but not another. Is everything possible? What ‘everything is possible’ would mean is that all concepts in the form of reference to something have objects. In that sense, it is not true that everything is possible. If in the universe (over all situatedness, e.g., time and space), something obtains or occurs, it is possible. If not, it is impossible. For the universe, the real or actual and the possible are the same. For a part of the universe, the possible is the same as or exceeds the real. From the real metaphysics, for the universe, the real and conceptually possible (the greatest possible) and the actual are the same. For a part, the real or actual is less than or the same as the really and the conceptually possible. However, the limitation of the real or actual is transcended in the widest perspective. From the perspective of the universe, all beings are necessary. This is of course not true on local perspectives. An aside on the ineffability of being and paradoxAre not being, universe, and the void ineffable after all? This is not something I wanted to get into in this brief essay, but a few words are occasioned since the question is begged (readers who skip this, and the following paragraph will not lose anything of the basic explanatory intent of this section). Clarification may result from asking whether anything is truly effable. In proximate character, probably, but in ultimate character not. Thus, I shall regard the primitive terms of the narrative as effable in the abstract and allow ineffability to remain tacit until it emerges (and clearly, some ineffability has emerged, e.g., in saying, “for the void, to not exist is to exist”, which becomes effable in allowing the meaning of existence to change in this special case but which perhaps remains ineffable in the unpackaging that it calls for: this is second order ineffability, if you will). In moving away from everyday pragmatic contexts, meaning may change incrementally; here, in transition, from the manifest to the void, the meaning of ‘to exist’ changes abruptly. A better way to put this is to say that the abrupt change in meaning is required for the most effective metaphysics and is linguistically—logically and semantically—sound. Thus, though ‘the void exists and does not exist’(A) is in the form of a contra-diction, it does not define a contra-real, i.e., an impossible situation, which resolves the apparent paradox. In standard logic a contradiction results in ‘explosion’—i.e., it implies that all assertions are true (and false). Therefore, the assertion (A), above must be excluded from the universe of standard logic (or a non-standard logic, e.g., paraconsistent logic, must be developed). The choice of ‘experience’In choosing ‘experience’ (consciousness in all its forms) among the fundamental concepts, we place our being in the universe and therefore in the metaphysics. Thus, meditation is an intrinsic key to realization. Meditation incorporates all aspects of experience (‘mind’). And since the concept of being does not recognize matter or mind or their distinction, meditation is to pervade action and directed action is effective when meditative and directed by meditation. On the validity of the real metaphysicsValidity of the metaphysics and its self- and empirical consistency are adequately discussed in the main narrative. We remark once again that the common argument for projection of empirical science to the universe is circular. It is often argued that what is left over, after the empirical is nothing but a set of gaps in our knowledge. However, we saw that the universe beyond the empirical is no mere gap—it is far, far greater than what we know directly. Whereas received religion and metaphysics and the view of the scientific world view as complete are speculative or dogmatic or both, the present view is neither speculative nor dogmatic. Aside on the significance of the real metaphysicsOur place in the universe—is revealed to be far greater than in received secular and transsecular thought. Our world—is not minimized; rather it is enhanced and illuminated; the world and its problems and opportunities are important intrinsically and as a platform for the ultimate. The secular is given meaning beyond itself without appeal to dogmatic or archaic worldviews. Metaphysics, ethics, epistemology—if we regard metaphysics as knowledge of the real, the real metaphysics is true metaphysics (while the abstract side is perfect in its depiction, the pragmatic side is perfect as the only pragmatic extension of the abstract in service of the ultimate). The metaphysics and the meaning of metaphysics are coherent and give coherence to and have significant overlap with received metaphysics. Here, then, is an implied epistemology—one which shows the metaphysics to be perfect. If enjoyment—as defined in the metaphysics—is the essential value of be-ing, realization of the ultimate is an imperative, within which all other values are given context. Received metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics are not displaced but are given context. This account is minimal; the resources below have greater detail. Yoga and what it isFrom the essay, “Action in interaction with conscious and other change in experiential content and quality (meditation) is a key to intrinsic realization.” This is yoga. Thus, yoga cannot be merely what it is in received practice. It must be in-process, experimental, informed by the best metaphysics-in-process; it must synthesize traditions from east and west; it must involve all dimensions of being; it must recognize experientiality as the essence of being (as far as we know); but it must also incorporate instrumental aspects of being. On the problems of pain and escapismAlthough the way promises realization of the ultimate, it does not promise escape from pain—it does not encourage escapism; though it recognizes limits, it asserts transcendence; and though it asserts transcendence, it does not promise that we will be ‘saved’—rather, transcendence is to occur via our own shared intelligence, caring, and endeavor. The person as primary target of the endeavorIn seeing the person—the unit and bearer of awareness—as the object of endeavor, the social world is grounded in true being, rather than in authority, axiom, or the ad hoc. Society and its institutions are, of course, important, but their importance derives from the experientiality of experiential beings. The experientiality of other animals assigns them primary importance (i.e., their importance is not derived from our personhood). Peak beingPeak being has personhood, which of course transcends our personhood. Significance of the dimensions and paradigms of beingThe dimensions and paradigms of being root us squarely in the world itself and as platform to transcendence. Aside on interpretation in understanding what is realThe thought that the universe is ‘the present fragment of my imagination’ is named ‘solipsism’. The conceptual importance of such seemingly absurd interpretations of our experience of the world is usually thought to be (i) they force to try to justify our normal interpretations (ii) this gives us tools to analyze our interpretations and improve upon the normal (iii) which enables going beyond the normal. Our conclusion differs from the usual in that the ‘absurd’ indeed obtain, but the normal are (almost always) more robust and more likely. Thus, the analysis enables determination of ‘what is real’ and clarifies ‘what the real is’. The ever freshness of eternal beingThe eternity of peak and dissolution is not an eternity of repetition, for the variety is without end. There is no end to adventure. Doubt ought to have arisen (a) regarding identity of existence and nonexistence of the void (b) about reasoning to the abstract metaphysics (c) concerning consistency of the metaphysics with empirical knowledge and science (d) from the very magnitude of the conclusions. Here, doubt is addressed briefly; for full address see the resources below. (a) Existence and nonexistence of a manifest being is contradictory. However, for the void, to assert nonexistence does not deny existence, but asserts a property of the void. (b) Given the simplicity of the abstract, the reasoning from existence and nonexistence of the void is elementary sentence calculus. (c) The empirical concerns only what has been observed. The common, usually tacit, projection beyond the empirical, is circular, for it assumes what it concludes—i.e., validity of the projection. Therefore, the metaphysics is not in contradiction with the empirical and its models from science. (d) The magnitude of the conclusions does not invalidate the proof of the metaphysics. However, a consequence is that there will and should be residual doubt. Given consistency, residual doubt suggests attitudes toward the metaphysics (i) as an existential attitude toward uncertainty (ii) as a metaphysical postulate (iii) as a framework that gives definiteness and finality in depth though not in breadth to metaphysics, epistemology, cosmology, ethics, and answers to existential issues. To sustain doubt is intrinsically healthy in improving the quality of experience; and it is instrumentally effective in realization of truth and the real ultimate. ___________________________________ Resources In this précis of the way of being, explanation is minimal, and attention to problems of knowledge is in the background. For more, see, https://www.horizons-2000.org, especially—https://www.horizons-2000.org/2022/resources-more.html. The way of being my expression of ideas that are derived from but go beyond their sources. The essay attempts to be the briefest that does justice to the way of being. Return to the welcome page | top |
