The Way of being – long version – in-process

Current versions: Open (working) | Long (in-process) | Mini (essential content) | Informal version

Anil Mitra, copyright © first edition – 2002
this version – February 5, 2026

Home

Contents

The words ‘sound’ or ‘strong’ associated with a title or text marks it as certain or likely inference, respectively, as defined in the text.

Notation

Definitions

Other notation

Abbreviations

In-process content

Right aligned paragraphs

Introduction to the text

Origins

Meanings – a caution

Originality

Sources

Into the way of being

Overview

Why being? Choice of being as foundation and ground

Sequence of development

Reading The way

Definitions

About the definitions

The definitions

Meaning**

A preliminary conception

Considerations for a later, improved conception

Knowledge and argument

Language, concepts, and knowledge

Discovery

Argument

Being and beings

Being

The universe and its contents

Cosmoses

Laws

The void and its existence

An apparent paradox

Possibility

The concept of possibility

Conceptual or logical possibility

Real possibility

Impossibility and necessity

Metaphysics

Limitlessness—the limitlessness of being and the universe

Limitlessness—some essential consequences

An ideal metaphysics

Real metaphysics

Metaphysical possibility

Robust worlds

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy**

Being and substance**

Against proliferation of categories.**

Objects and beings**

Concrete and abstract objects**

Metametaphysics including how to do metaphysics and philosophy**

Concrete and abstract objects**

Dialetheia (and emptiness)**

Knowledge**

Experience

The concept of experience

The fundamental nature of experience and reasons for its deferred treatment

There is experience; and it is known by there being experience of experience (sound)

We are experiential beings (sound)

The form of experience

The detailed structure of experience**

The universe is (effectively) experiential (sound)

Identity, extension, and duration

Yoga

Ethics and meaning**

Ethics**

Meaning**

Meaning and ethics**

The preliminary needs of individual meaning**

Shared meaning**

Doubt and certainty

Categories

Introduction to categories in philosophy and in this work

The categories according to their levels and paradigms

Cosmology**

General cosmology**

Cosmology of form and formation**

Cosmology of experiential being**

Physical cosmology**

Implications for knowledge (sound)

Tentative overview

Knowledge (itself)**

Metaphysics and related topics**

Cosmology**

Pathways and programs

Path and program structure

Pathways

Programs

Resources

Return

The focus

Retreat and renewal

Perception

Synthesis of the history of ideas – universal text

The Way of being

Notation

Definitions

Def. N	Format for a formal definition, numbered ‘N’ (content in brackets is either optional to or a comment on the definition and Small capitals mark defined terms)

Informal def.	Format for an informal definition—which are not numbered. Informal definitions are used (i) to introduce some informal but significant ideas (ii) as a preliminary definition to be repeated and improved later (iii) occasionally for an older definition, given as comparison with a newer definition.

Other notation

Items of lesser importance are rendered in a light colored font.

Abbreviations

TWB – The Way of Being. The phrase ‘the way’ is usually to be read as The Way of Being.

In-process content

Red font or two stars** (or both) indicates headings and content that is (very much) in process.

Right aligned paragraphs

Formatting currently reserved for centering material, e.g., dedication and affirmation.

Introduction to the text

The introduction to the text is primarily about personal material on origins and sources of ‘the way’. For an introduction to the way itself, see into the way of being. Since the personal and the ideas overlap, it is important to read the preface.

Origins

The way of being has origins in my interest in understanding the world and living accordingly

As an engineer-mathematician-physicist with a passion for nature and philosophical thought, my journey into ‘being’ began with what I called ‘design for a life’. The aim was personal and universal. That interest iterated through implications of evolution and its theories, study of consciousness (which had become a thriving field within the philosophical community in the second half of the twentieth century), understanding the universe from materialist and idealist (everything ‘is mind’) phases. In the latter, I saw—as others have seen—that with a broad enough conception of the material and the physical, inclusive idealist and materialist views would differ only in what was emphasized as central or fundamental or both.

This led naturally into an interest in ‘being’ (i) understood as characteristic of that ‘which is’, i.e., of that which exists, (ii) therefore recognizes no ultimate special kinds (e.g., matter, mind, process, word, spirit, trope, and so on), and (iii) therefore is not marked by prejudice associated with special kinds.

Whereas some philosophers distinguish ‘existence’ and ‘being’, I did not make that distinction. Two potential problems arise (i) is not the avoidance of special kinds trivializing (ii) is not something lost in equating being to existence? The answer that emerges is ‘no’ for both problems for (i) with an effective choice of fundamental concepts associated with being the picture that emerges is powerful (it is found to be ultimately powerful in some directions and that power encouraged the question ‘What is the best we can do?’) (ii) the depth that some philosophers find associated with their conception of ‘being’ is framed by being as conceived in the present development.

What emerged was the way of being (which I originally called ‘a journey in being’). It was in 2002 that the original version was published to the internet. That original version has gone through numerous iterations (with associated side developments), often many times a year, and at a range of levels of detail as well as of parallel developments. It is important to say this because consecutive versions may be marginally different but the original and present versions are significantly different. In the present version there is a tight system of concepts at the foundation of the way of being (whose meaning lies in the system as much as it does in the individual concepts).

Meanings – a caution

It is important that while the individual concepts are not in precise correspondence with their use in philosophy (they cannot be, for philosophy rarely has precisely agreed upon conceptions of these concepts), full meaning lies with the system and that, in evaluating it, it is the system that should be checked for internal (rational) and external (empirical) consistency.

(I found it remarkable that) When a term, say ‘being’, is used in a more than casual way, we often think that though we have (human thought has) not fully grasped its meaning, there is something definite to which the term refers. In fact, however, that is not the case because (i) it is an assumption that our tentative sense of meaning does capture something definite (ii) isolated terms are not the sole designators of reference.

Many of the basic and important terms in this work do not have definite common meaning, even in technical use. Their best designation is the result of a coherent system of terms and their associated concepts. However, there is no common and accepted system. Here, however, the metaphysics of the way of being, is shown to have ultimacy in foundation (though not in variety). Thus, many terms have definiteness though not uniqueness of meaning.

Informal def. What is common refers to what is accepted as received among reasonable persons—recognized thinkers and others.

Originality

Is this work original? Any work of significance must connect with other work and the way of being draws much from the history of ideas in multiple cultures, particularly, western, Indian, and primal.

Is this work original? I believe that there is significant originality. However, readers must decide for themselves to what extent the work may be original and significant.

Sources

It is inherent in a work such as this, that knowledge is a guide in further discovery and realization. See the resources for sources in world thought.

In addition to sources noted in the versions of the way, there is a list in my influences, and a longer list in main influences. The ‘little manual’ has an extensive list of internet sources (especially from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). What these sources may not reflect is that it is not particular individuals that are the main inspiration; rather, it is, even in its limitations, the power of (human) mind, complemented by experience, reflection, criticism, and, especially immersion in and inspiration from, nature-in-the-sense-of-places-less-touched-by-human-influence.

There is a store of information and inspiration in secular and transsecular traditions. TWB seeks to build on, incorporate valid elements of, and go beyond the traditions of world thought and literature, while thinking imaginatively, empirically, and critically of the traditions and itself. It finds a way of thinking securely of what lies beyond the traditional pictures of the universe.

TWB is intended as a contribution to the traditions. It is intended as a serious account—one that formulates a powerful system and addresses many significant problems in the history of thought. This is significant, for, if it is successful in its intent, one reason for it is the refinement and sharpening of thought that is the result of facing the problems.

Experience, too, is a guide, before or on par with and as a source of and guided by knowledge. The individual experience behind the way is exposure to and examination of nature, culture, mind, self, and the history of ideas.

Design and planning for the way has a selection of source material on the way of being site.

Into the way of being

This chapter is an informal introduction to The way of being. Formal development begins after the definitions.

Informal def. In the sense of meaning of life, meaning is, roughly, what it is that makes life worth living, which of course varies among people, may be active or receptive or both, and entails immediate and larger issues.

Overview

Informal def. The way of being (TWB) is shared discovery and realization of what is essential and real (in this world and beyond and their mesh; it begins in traditions of world thought, knowledge, and exploration).

Origins and sources

The origins of the way of being are in (i) a personal search for significance and meaning for the world (ii) in inspiration from world thought and traditions of endeavor (see resources) (iii) engagement in paths of realization that grew out of items #i and #ii.

Informal def. Traditions of this endeavor are secular (the world is essentially the world of common experience, interpreted in terms of common reason and informed by science) and transsecular (common experience is limited and there is a world – are worlds – beyond our world, for example as in many religions).

On meaning

So, meaning is significant to this work. What is meaning? ‘Meaning’ is used in two senses in this work (i) in this section, as in ‘the meaning of life’ and (ii) later, as in concept and linguistic meaning.

It is convenient to defer the discussion of meaning (i) to an informal early treatment and (ii) a later more formal development.

The extent of the real

A limit of secularism is that the boundaries of experience do not necessarily extend to the entire universe (but are often tacitly thought to do so). A limit of much transsecularism are to regard legend as real, often as dogma.

What is the reach of the real? The outer limit is the possible. In TWB, the real is found to be the possible in its greatest sense which is, roughly, that all non-contradictory concepts are realized.

The consequences, material and more, as developed in this work, are immense in magnitude and significance.

Justification

How are these conclusions possible and valid? They result from a careful analysis of experience and reason, about which further discussion is deferred to the body of this work. It will be found that the reasons and the findings are compelling, but not without doubt. Therefore, the question of doubt is taken up and addressed.

The picture or paradigm of the way of being

TWB develops a framework of knowledge of the universe. The framework is abstract (which is a source of its validity). To be instrumental, the framework is filled in with pragmatic knowledge, including science and its method. The ‘fill in’ is not certain but it does not need to be, for the framework carries with it a guarantee that the ultimate will be realized. Therefore the fill in needs only to be effective.

To whom the way of being may appeal

Many people live on a range an acceptance-seeking continuum; TWB should appeal to those who incline toward more than just acceptance—it should appeal to those who seek ‘beyond’ – those with a spirit of discovery and adventure.

However, an ethic developed in light of the way of being also sees and justifies acceptance as a ‘valid’ way of being.

The way of being develops a joint picture of the immediate and the ultimate as interwoven. It is not just about the ‘beyond’. It is illuminating and has practical consequences for living in the world—for addressing its problems, challenges, and opportunities. In this regard, the way weaves together the mundane (‘of the world’) and the ultimate.

The ideas and conceptual development of the way should appeal to thinkers in philosophy, science, and the symbolic sciences of language, logic, and mathematics.

An axiomatic development

TWB has an axiomatic structure that weaves through it. This structure is a part organizational and bookkeeping device. It is intended to assist in capture of the real. But precision enters via removal from concepts of what is distorted—i.e. by abstraction. Together, axiomatization and abstraction capture the real. That is, the structure is more than a system of signs and rules. It needs no semantic interpretation, for it is already semantic.

System

Thus the development has a systematic side. In philosophy and metaphysics a system is an articulated view of the world, founded in basic concepts and methods, from which all elements of the real, from elementary to the highest emerge.

It is natural that there are critics of system (i) on account of questions about its possibility (ii) because non-systematic accounts may give us better understanding (first by focusing on what is thought significant and second because the universe may not be articulated).

However, here, (i) system is emerged, not imposed (ii) the development allows for extra-systematic elements.

Overview of essentials

The following is argued, not or assumed.

Conceptual foundations

The main and common secular and transsecular traditions, including the modern, are limited and, in their common opposition, they further limit one another in common thought.

What, then, is a view of the world that is true and complete? Can we hope to such a view?

The outer limit of such a view is the possible in the greatest sense of possibility. The constraints on such a view are (i) self-consistency, i.e., there shall be no violation of logic (but our logics may fail to capture what is expressible) (ii) consistency with experience—but certainly not identity with experience, for outside the domain of experience, logic may be the only limit.

From the concepts of existence, being, beings, universe, void, cosmos, natural law for a cosmos, and (logical) possibility, it is found that the universe is the realization of the greatest possibility, which has significance for knowledge and our place and future in the universe). There is room for doubt of the proof this claim but not for its consistency—and doubt is addressed.

This is related to the possible worlds view (see Possible Worlds – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). In the common views on possible worlds that (i) they may be fictions but are of interest, particularly in that they enhance understanding of modal logic (ii) they are real but causally isolated. Here, they are demonstrated to be real and causal isolation is contingent rather than necessary and is temporary or the result of being short lived. Clearly, these developments revise notions of the reality of ‘possible worlds’.

For being and beings

The universe has identity and is limitless in that it realizes the greatest possibility (which—to repeat—has significance for knowledge and our place and future in the universe).

The universe and its identity are limitless in extension, duration, and variety; they phase through void and peak states without limit or end.

There are consequences (i) for ideas, especially philosophy, science, and the symbolic sciences of language, logic, and mathematics (ii) living in and addressing challenges and opportunities of the world.

All beings inherit limitlessness (rather, as will be seen, they already have it but may not know it). There are pathways from the immediate to the ultimate. Effective pathways enhance the immediate and realization of the ultimate.

Engaging intelligently in pathways is effective for realization of the ultimate and quality of life in limited worlds.

There is no eternal heaven or nirvana. Being and beings cycle through peaks of being and destruction. Though intelligent engagement does not always have reward in a limited sphere, it is in itself and its outcome that reward. Intelligent and shared engagement while avoiding harm as best we can is morality.

What possibilities emerge regarding the notion of God? There are non-robust possibilities, which are of lesser significance but perhaps the most significant conception is that all beings, are part of an emergent process that peaks and dissolves, that the peaks are god-phases, and that our present phase is somewhere on hierarchy from primitive to ultimate—but neither fully primitive nor near fully ultimate.

Conceptual consequences of the foundations

General consequences range over a system of (human) knowledge and include (i) the system itself based with ground in the metaphysics of the way (ii) philosophy and its nature including metaphilosophy and main branches—theory of the real and knowledge of the real (metaphysics, epistemology, ethics) and logic (reason)—and other main branches, especially the philosophies of science, religion, mind, and (to be worked out) politics (iii) religion, science, and mathematics.

There are consequences for a range of topics. Some are (i) the nature of the abstract and the concrete (ii) dialetheism—the view that there are true contradictions (iii) the nature of identity and property and of space and time—what they are and whether there are further parameters of sameness and difference (iv) experience in the sense of awareness as fundamental to being and the universe.

What is in the universe! If all possibilities obtain in the universe, many will beyond the range of our experience and some will be robust (in just the way we see our world as being robustly real); but others will correspond to fragments of imagination and strange dreams; and yet others will be worlds described in fantasy and mythic religion (subject to consistency); and still others may see the creation of worlds like ours as non-robust in that they are created ad-hoc complete with beings with memories as-if they and the world had a history of emergence from elementary origins. What is to be made of these non-robust ‘worlds’? Here, appeal is made to paradigms from our world (e.g., evolution by incremental variation and selection), which suggests that the robust worlds are far more likely to be in fact as well as in experience.

Brief outline

The introduction (into the way) is followed by definitions, collected together for convenience. The formal development then begins with treatment of knowledge and argument, and then development of ideas specific to TWB, which begins with being and beings and continues through cosmology. Then, application and further consequences are developed in implications for knowledge and pathways and programs, which is on realization of the ultimate in and from ‘this’ world. The final chapter, return, complements this introductory chapter (into the way)

The discussion of knowledge and argument is part of the main development). The chapter on definitions is presented as a convenience, for the definitions are repeated in the development.

Concept template

The development employs a concept template—is a set of issues for the development of concepts, which will be employed flexibly. Each significant concept will have—

Definition—the meaning of the concept in terms of a definition.

Essential criticisms and responses.

Proof of existence—i.e., proof that the defining concept has an object (where appropriate and necessary and where existence is not implicit in the definition).

The concepts may also have—

Explanation that brings out the meaning.

Significance—why the concept is used and what its importance is.

Relation to other concepts—vertical (parent, child relations), horizontal (sibling and cousin), and meta (e.g., how the concept is to be understood in terms of meaning and knowledge). This is the basis of the collection of concepts being a system, which is natural rather than imposed. This is a possible source for a database of concepts.

Other uses of the name of the concept, current and historical.

General criticisms of the concept—i.e., of significance, contradiction, ideology, and more – and responses to the criticisms.

Why being? Choice of being as foundation and ground

Being as foundation

Though knowledge is not the aim of all endeavor, it is critical to the human endeavor.

Many approaches to the foundation of knowledge are based in something thought to be fundamental but not truly founded, e.g., mind, matter – atoms – spacetime, process, relation, spirit, gods, concepts, and word or logical atoms.

These are foundation of understanding of the world in terms of something other than the world, e.g., a special and slanted aspect of the world. Further, such foundations are relative, e.g., in materialism, matter remains without foundation.

However, such foundations are relative in that the founding substance (mind etc.) may be – seem – reasonable but is not truly founded. Thus, the relative foundation may be imprecise and incomplete—even radically incomplete. Yet, for many immediate purposes, such foundations, even contradictory foundations, may be useful—they are as-if foundations for proximate rather than ultimate purposes. Though we often think and feel about our sense of the real reveals the real, as ‘solid’, its reality may be limited to the conditions of our form via local formation.

Being (defined later) is ‘what there is’. Thus, it does not introduce some kind (of thing), e.g., substance (as the term is used in western philosophy), as foundation. A foundation in being is not a foundation of the world in something else. All it says is ‘things are what they are’. It neither asserts nor denies mind, matter, atomism and so on—rather, such kinds, as far as real, are allowed to emerge from experience and analysis. Thus, being is suitable as foundational to a system of understanding that frames all that exists. Further, if we are concerned about our nature and destiny, we find that it is framed by being.

Informal def (formal definition appears later).	Use of the concept of being neither denies nor affirms the reality of kinds such as mind and matter, but permits us to treat them as-if real, i.e., as real for certain purposes.

The use of the concept of being may be criticized as trivial—how can ‘things are what they are’ be a useful foundation? It turns out being can be a basis of a system with power that is greater than the power of materialism and so on—a power that, in some ways, is even ultimate.

The details of how this happens is in the main text. Some essentials are in (i) introducing a system of concepts centered on being (ii) careful analysis, beginning in knowledge and argument, of what it means to be empirical and rational. An important point to emerge is that, for knowledge, content and method cannot be entirely separated, and that, to some extent, they (must) emerge together.

The use of ‘being’ in metaphysics is similar to the use of unknowns in mathematics, e.g. the ‘x’ in algebra. A metaphysics that begins with being may be algebraic in that what we know directly is ‘input’ and, in proceeding from being, we may arrive at what we do not directly know.

With being, metaphysics becomes algebraic—but more than algebra… as questioning and answering—as it should be for metaphysics is in process till completed.

It is important – and will be seen – that the view based in being, though it is ‘metaphysical’, is also empirical and rational.

It is remarkable that with being, what is called the ‘hard problem of consciousness’—i.e., how beings presumed entirely material can be conscious—becomes trivial, for there is no conceptual gap between being and consciousness. But even more emerges, on the metaphysics of the way of being, consciousness is not just an element of being, it is a necessary element of existence (in fact it emerges that the foundation of the world is necessity). Thus, being as foundational will turn out to be a foundationless foundation.

Being as ground

The foundation in being is not merely formal. It shows that there is no final ground upon which to stand—to rest our being—but also that there is no need for ground, i.e., that groundlessness is ground. It encourages an open attitude. Some readers may think that the received secular view reveals all things. Some may think that the real is defined in their religion. The foundation in being suggests an openness—the thought to all readers “my view may be in error and incomplete; perhaps the universe is nothing more than what I think, but perhaps in the range from part of what I think to limitless; let us explore what really holds; let us explore our modes of exploration”.

‘Being’ is a conceptual container for all endeavor, especially of acceptance and seeking. Being contains ‘what we are and where we are going – with and without design’.

Consider the question, “What is death; is it final; if not, what lies beyond it?” The open attitude suggests that until we have a positive answer, we shall be open to all possibilities. What we will find is that death is a gateway to ultimate limitlessness.

Sequence of development

Introduction

In understanding the world (universe), it is typical to take some things as fundamental. In the way, since the meaning of life is a focus, it is tempting to take experience as foundational. This could be done; and it would place some being, at the center of things. However, in addition to reasons given for taking being as foundational, to begin with experience would require a later reworking of experience and the whole development to the point of reworking.

But this is just one consideration on an effective sequence of development. Further considerations follow.

On definitions

The definitions are collected in one place before formal development. This is for convenience and reference.

On meaning

Meaning is discussed early as it is a motivation. It is also discussed later, in light of the worldview developed.

The place of knowledge

Knowledge and argument are placed early as they are critical to the development. They are also discussed later in greater detail.

From the abstract-perfect-and-truth to the concrete-pragmatic-and-value

Metaphysics before experience

Reasons were given above.

Experience and ethics before categories

In simple terms, the categories are the elements of being and therefore (their concepts) are elements of metaphysics. It will be seen that ethics, knowledge, and metaphysics are interwoven.

In addition to the metaphysics of the work, the varieties of experience also determine the categories.

From principles to main content to details (of knowledge and world)

Though principles and content are not entirely independent, when they are distinguished, to go from principles to content is common, while content-to-principles is less so.

From being and beings, to possibility, to necessity

From the abstract and real—‘everything’—to what may be.

From beings—the universe, the void, and laws—to what must be and so to limitlessness and metaphysics.

From metaphysics to action and realization (pathways)

While metaphysics and action have a two-way interaction, action looking for guidance is mundane, while action informing guidance is important but less common.

From the world to the way to return to the world

This is the order in which the way of being emerges.

Repeated topics and emergence of ideas

Some topics are first introduced informally or with limited scope (‘extension’) and later formalized or extended (or both).

Reading The way

The purpose of this section is to assist understanding of the narration.

General considerations

Keep the big picture in mind

Keep the big picture in mind.

The revealed universe is ultimate; though not entirely new it will be unfamiliar to many people – academic and other; it includes what is valid in but is not intuitive in terms of received views; seek to absorb the view to intuition.

Pay attention to the sequence of development and reasons for its choice

See the discussion of the sequence above.

Suspend criticism on initial reading

Suspend criticism on initial reading (readers may wish to keep a list of issues and questions).

It is important to suspend attitudes that prevent absorption of new ways of seeing. This of course does not entail uncritical acceptance but a neutral attitude until the meaning of the ideas is absorbed.

Similarly, criticism is essential to understanding and acceptance and can be kept in balance with openness or deferred to follow up reading.

Pay attention to meanings via definitions

Pay attention to meanings via definitions

In going beyond received views meanings of terms should and must change even as they retain elements of received meanings; it is essential to pay attention to the definitions.

The meaning of being and reasons for its choice (see Why being?) are crucial; it is important that it is a ‘bare’ concept and it does not have the depth of meaning assigned to it in recent (e.g., Heideggerian) philosophy; rather, it is a container for whatever depth there is and may emerge.

Holism—attend to the relations among and synthesis of the ideas

Holism—the meaning of the work is more than an accumulation of meanings of the terms – pay attention to the structure of and relations among the meanings at each stage of development and among the stages.

The meaning of the system of the way is more than the accumulation of individual meanings; it is a structure in which the individual meanings stand in relation; one approach to seeing the structure as a whole is to work through the development more than once.

The selection of concepts is particularly important – the base concepts in being and beings are (i) based in being (ii) selected to contain the range of possible objects in the universe. It is this selection that already but implicitly harbors the metaphysics of the ultimate of the work.

It is significant that experience is defined after the metaphysics has been made explicit (by derivation), for it is the metaphysics that allows us to find that we are characteristically experiential beings in a characteristically experiential universe—and that that finding does not say that we are spiritual or material or not spiritual or not material. Rather the finding is (i) neutral on the issue of materialism (but allows talk of as-if matter and as-if mind) (ii) that the issue of mind vs matter is not one of great moment.

Issues of proof

A central and fundamental result is the limitless of being—of the universe and all beings. Problems with this are—

Its meaning—it is not just that the universe is unbounded in extension and duration, but that every consistent concept is realized subject to inter-concept consistency.

The difficulty is not that the demonstration is difficult but that it has subtleties and that it is seemingly too simple.

Doubt is bound to arise. However, (i) limitless is not inconsistent with experience and reason (ii) doubt is addressed.

Seeing the truth and scope of the worldview of the way

The issue of ‘seeing the truth’ is that it is more than just following the demonstration of the worldview or metaphysics. It requires (i) building an intuitive picture of the depth (foundation) and breadth (variety, i.e., that the view is so much more in range than in common secular and transsecular views) (ii) also intuiting the essence of the demonstration and concepts that go into it (iii) having these pictures be part of one’s living—i.e., just as the received common pictures inform how we live, so ‘seeing the truth’ of the worldview also involves having its picture be part of living.

A problem with the worldview of limitlessness is that not only is the foundation in being not a foundation is something else (i.e., what foundations are often thought to be), but a foundation and something else is not even necessary because the universe (of logical necessity) has to be either the manifest universe or the void or both and that this is (will be seen to be) one approach to showing limitlessness.

A likely major difficulty is, not that of proof, but of seeing and absorbing the worldview, first, as a view at two levels, the lower being the conventional and tacit view of the universe as the conventional and often tacit universe of science and experience, and a higher level—the limitless universe and all that it is shown to entail.

It may be difficult to hold these two views at the same time (my experience is that I often revert unreflectively to the lower level).

It is also important to see that the lower level, the universe of ordinary experience and science, is limited rather than ‘wrong’. It is likely that one’s conventional secular view is limited rather than ‘wrong’.

It is then, an aim to transcend the ‘two-levels’ picture and to see the two levels as integrated—as one.

The reader may wish to return to these thoughts this during the reading.

Definitions

About the definitions

The following repeats what was earlier said about definitions.

In the definitions, the defined term is in small capitals (content in brackets is either optional to or a comment on the definition).

Formal definitions are numbered. Definitions that are not numbered—marked ‘Def.’ without a numeral—are either informal or preliminary versions given for information.

The definitions are in the main development. For convenience, they are collected together here.

The definitions

Informal def. What is common refers to what is accepted as received among reasonable persons—recognized thinkers and others.

Informal def. In the sense of meaning of life, meaning is, roughly, what it is that makes life worth living, which of course varies among people, may be active or receptive or both, and entails immediate and larger issues.

Informal def. The way of being (TWB) is shared discovery and realization of what is essential and real (in this world and beyond and their mesh; it begins in traditions of world thought, knowledge, and exploration).

Informal def. Traditions of this endeavor are secular (the world is essentially the world of common experience, interpreted in terms of common reason and informed by science) and transsecular (common experience is limited and there is a world – are worlds – beyond our world, for example as in many religions).

Informal def (formal definition appears later).	Use of the concept of being neither denies nor affirms the reality of kinds such as mind and matter, but permits us to treat them as-if real, i.e., as real for certain purposes.

Informal def. Meaning is whatever synthesis of thinking, reflecting, feeling, acting, sharing, doing that makes life not just worthwhile, but ultimately rewarding—for individuals, humankind, and being.

Def. 1	Ordinary language as one base for discovery, expression, and justification of knowledge is presumed (and improved upon in the development). A concept is a mental content. A referential concept is a concept in referential form, i.e., a concept that is intended to refer to an object, real or fictious. The association of a sign—elementary or compound—with a concept constitutes a linguistic concept. The meaning, conceptual or linguistic, of a referential concept is the concept and its possible references (objects) in use. Knowledge is meaning realized.

Def. 2	A definition is a conceptual specification.

Def. 3	A fact is a true assertion (knowledge is factual).

Def. 4	Knowledge or belief are true and certain when it is indubitable that their content corresponds to the fact(s) to which they are intended to refer (notes—some accounts of knowledge do not require absolute certainty; while certainty is desirable in some endeavors, it may not be the case that it is always desirable, e.g., to base action on it; though correspondence is not the only ‘theory’ of truth, it is, as will be seen, adequate to the needs of the present development).

Def. 5	Abstraction is removal from a concept of details so that what remains is known with perfect faithfulness and certainty (examples will be given and are essential to the development).

Def. 6	Perfect faithfulness of knowledge is perfect depiction so that truth and certainty have meaning and can be asserted (examples will be given, which are dependent on abstraction).

Def. 7	Discovery is a creative phase of knowledge acquisition (though significant, it is not the focus of this discussion of knowledge and argument; however, it is almost certainly crucial to ultimate—human—endeavor and argument, for it is unlikely that all is known regarding knowledge acquisition and negotiation of the world; thus, we cannot afford to only rely on established or certified means of argument and ought to be open to ‘what works’ and to discovery, not just of ‘things’ but also of means or method).

Def. 8	An argument is an establishment of fact (to argue is to establish a fact; here we consider only argument in itself than argument among people or, particularly, kinds of argument specific to restricted fields of inquiry; note that this definition is related but not identical to common definitions of ‘argument’).

Def. 9	Direct argument is direct establishment of a fact.

Def. 10	In indirect argument establishment of facts, from given facts, further facts are inferred (the given facts are often called premises because the characteristic of inference is that independently of their truth (facticity), if the premises have a claim to truth, the further facts or CONCLUSIONS may also have a claim to truth).

Def. 11	In certain inference, if the premises are true, the conclusions are certainly true.

Def. 12	Deduction is certain inference from premises to conclusions (stepwise) via laws of logic (and, given logic, the conclusions are implicit in the premises; also note that some basic modes of deduction are the propositional and predicate calculi and a range of extended and variant logics, which we cannot say exhaust the possibilities of deductive inference).

Def. 13	In intrinsic inference, the conclusion is established without recourse to premises (this is related and, at least in some cases, maybe identical to intrinsic fact). Though the inference of “something“ from “nothing“ may seem absurd, we will find that it is not— and an example will be given.

Def. 14	In likely inference (or reasonable inference), if the premises are true, or likely to be true, the conclusions are also likely to be true (this kind of inference is ‘ampliative’, i.e., the conclusions contain some information not present in the premises).

Def. 15	In induction, some observations of instances and regularities, are generalized or lead to general principles. Abduction is argument to the best explanation (and is significant in science). In inference by analogy, if two systems are similar in some ways, similarity in some other ways is concluded.

Def. 16	An argument is valid if the conclusion certainly follows from the premise (a standard approach is step-by-step, via rules of deduction). A valid argument is sound if the premise is true (significant sound arguments are identified, sometimes with just the word ‘sound’). A necessary argument is a certain inference from the empty fact (an important example will be given).

Def. 17	In the less than certain case, the argument is good if the conclusion likely follows (e.g., with pragmatic certainty) from the premise (such arguments are usually less than certain because they are ‘ampliative’, i.e., the conclusion has information not at least implicit in the premise). A good argument is strong if the argument and premise are likely enough that the conclusion is likely (significant strong arguments are identified, sometimes with just the word ‘strong’ in brackets; in absence of such identifiers, the argument is regarded as at least reasonable).

Informal def (earlier definitions of being and existence). Being is existence (though this seems shallow, it is not—rather it is abstract and, therefore, foundation and framework for the range from superficiality to ultimate depth); a being is an existent (in talk of a being, awareness is implicit, which entails an improved definition—a being is a referential concept and its – intended – reference or, alternatively, the being is the real and intended object of a referential concept; note that this shows one way of defining existence and an existent).

Def. 18	An existent is the real (non-fictitious) referent of a referential concept (alternatively, the existent is the referential concept and its object, where it is usually conventional and often natural to not mention the concept but to allow them to be or perhaps not see that the concept – the awareness – is at least implicit). Existence is the property of existents as existents.

Def. 19	Being is existence (though may seem shallow relative to religious-like and philosophical uses of being, it is not—rather it is abstract and, therefore, allows for and – as it will emerge – is ground for foundation and framework for the range from superficiality to ultimate depth); a being is an existent (in talk of a being, awareness is implicit, which entails an improved definition—a being is a referential concept and its – intended and real – reference).

Def. 20	The universe is all being.

Def. 21	A cosmos is a causal domain in whose interactions with the rest of universe over the times of concern, are below the threshold of observation including measurement.

Def. 22	A pattern obtains for a being if the information to specify it is less than the raw information.

Def. 23	A law for a being is (our reading of) a pattern (usually of a degree of general applicability and for one or more cosmoses, typically abstract in nature).

Def. 24	The void is the being that contains no beings (if it exists, it is an empty being and it contains no laws).

Def. 25	A being that is not the void is manifest.

Def. 26	A being (entity, event, and so on) is possible if existence is not ruled out by the concept (i.e., by its conception).

Def. 27	A being whose existence is not ruled out by the concept alone is conceptually possible, which defines logical possibility, sometimes called subjective possibility (because it is thinkable without contradiction).

Def. 28	A maximally expressive language is one that would be capable of describing all logical possibility (note that this does not imply that such a language exists, even if language in discrete signs is enhanced to include the perceivable state of the communicator).

Def. 29	Logical possibility is the greatest possibility in the sense that, presuming logic(s) for a maximally expressive language, the being has realized all that can be realized.

Def. 30	Limitlessness for a being is realization of the possible (and, optionally, the impossible—because it explicitly includes the void among the limitless but makes no difference for manifest being).

Def. 31	If, further, the existence of the being is not ruled out by the nature universe (or the locale, e.g., a cosmos, in which it is embedded), it has real possibility, sometimes called ontological possibility (or, if it is for a locale, relatively real possibility, of which an example is physical possibility—the possibility in terms of known physical laws, which are, in all likelihood, imperfect).

Def. 32	A being that is not possible is impossible.

Def. 33	A being whose nonbeing (nonexistence) is impossible is necessary.

Def. 34	A fundamental cause is itself without cause.

Def. 35	Metaphysics is knowledge of the real.

Def. 36	Limitlessness defines a perfect and ideal metaphysics.

Def. 37	When the ideal metaphysics is adjoined to at least pragmatically valid knowledge, what results is named the real metaphysics or just the metaphysics.

Def. 38	By metaphysical possibility, we understand ‘what may occur under a system of metaphysics’ (a second meaning, not emphasized here, what may occur under conditions of realism, e.g., whether an unembodied mind is possible).

Def. 39	A robust world or cosmos is one that is significant because it has an adequate combination of endurance in time, beings capable of cognitive experience, and causal ability to register in experience.

Def. 40	Experience is awareness in all its kinds and levels.

Informal def (the following informal definition will be made formal if and when ‘to mind’ is integrated to the text). To mind (as a verb—is used in the way with the following meaning) is to attend to and use all aspects of experience and experiencing (In the sense used here, this includes the passive and the active and the material. To mind is especially to attend to the issues of pleasure and pain.

Def. 41	An as-if kind (e.g., substance) is one that is not derived from being for all being but is one that may be treated as a kind for some regions of the universe, e.g., a cosmos, for some purposes.

Def. 42	The form of experience as we experience it is experience-of (subjective, as-if mental) – the-experience (being – as justified below, relation, interaction) – the experienced object (which includes what may be called as-if material). In ‘pure experience’, the object is null (but there is a potential object).

Def. 43	The most primitive aspect of being (experience) is that of sameness and difference. Emergence implies change (duration). Identity is (sense of) sameness across duration. The characteristics of identities are properties. Extension (displacement) is measure of difference across identities (note, first, that this approach synthesizes instrumental and immersive approaches to identity, extension, and duration, and, second, that there are no further fundamental kinds of sameness and difference).

Def. 44	Yoga is a (the) pathway of practice and action (of the experiential and the physical – mind and body) in and for this world in and toward identity with the ultimate in peak states (I have sought an alternate English term for yoga, e.g., binding, but continue to use ‘yoga’).

Informal def (previously used). To engage in true yoga is to see one’s identity with the universe, especially in peak states, and to be (on a path to) that identity. Yoga includes seeing and living the subject – interaction – object sides of experience as one and merging with all being.

Def. 45	The subject of ethics concerns right ways of being and acting (where being is interpreted as liberally as in the discussion of being; that ethics concerns ‘value’ does not imply that it is nonfactual).

Def. 46	To doubt is to question what is accepted as or potentially true including reasons for the acceptance.

Def. 47	A paradigm (as the term is used in this work) is system of understanding for a class of beings (up to all being), which includes methods of argument and means of transformation such as technology—particularly technology of exploration, being, and intelligence—and yoga.

Def. 48	A system of categories and paradigms is a classification of being into kinds at all levels, which derives from real metaphysical knowledge, and—especially—enables understanding, prediction, and transformation (via the paradigms).

Def. 49	Given a system of value and knowledge relative to the immediate world and the ultimate, a path is (i) a way of realization of the value as an end, as a process in – for – and from the immediate world, and in the being of beings (ii) employs knowledge as means (iii) is individual and shared (iv) is negotiated (does not merely follow received prescriptions and questions its own foundation) (v) is open to return to ground level and abandonment of designed process.

Informal def. Return signifies a focus on the world that is freshened by a new point of view. The focus is an ongoing ‘conversation’ between ideas, action, and realization.

Meaning**

A preliminary conception

Informal def. Meaning is whatever synthesis of thinking, reflecting, feeling, acting, sharing, doing that makes life not just worthwhile, but ultimately rewarding—for individuals, humankind, and being.

Considerations for a later, improved conception

Effective (and formal) definition understanding of meaning (in this sense), the meaning of meaning is best deferred (see ethics and meaning) till sufficient background has been developed. Here, we note—

The meaning of the meaning of life requires clarification—is it happiness, duty, significance, importance and so on? Is it found in self-fulfillment or in service? Is meaning the meaning for an individual or collectively? Is it a combination of such elements? Meaning may give fullness to ethics and its conception.

Animals seem to have a will to life in that their actions are directed – at least – at survival, procreation, and comfort… but what makes us different from the action based picture? While adults are capable of meaning, do infants and children have their own sense of meaning? If not, at what stages of development is meaning emerging… acquired? At another extreme, are the world and the universe capable of awareness and meaning—and do they have it?

Is meaning about ‘higher’ pursuit? Is not satisfaction with the mundane valid and full meaning, at least for some people? On the other hand, surely, it is about higher pursuit for some people. What is that higher pursuit and how are such pursuits meaningful to humankind, to being? Is there essentially one such pursuit?

Thinking in terms of a hierarchy from need to meaning (e.g., that of Maslow), are the basic elements, safety and security, essential to meaning? Surely, this varies among individuals. Are safety and security (the mundane) meaningful in themselves?

What is the ‘ground’ for addressing such issues? Perhaps the mundane is sufficient for secular meaning. However, knowledge of the real is necessary for full meaning for it addresses the issue of what lies beyond (what we commonly think we know). That is, the ground must include metaphysics.

Knowledge and argument

This chapter is about method. Subsequent chapters are content (the system of TWB). But the two are not distinct, for (i) knowledge is in the world and (ii) method and content emerge together. Just as we use the neutral term ‘being’ to refer to what is real, we will also be neutral to the concept and nature of knowledge, and the nature of those concepts will emerge with the development.

Language, concepts, and knowledge

The knowledge of interest is whatever may be regarded as fact (defined below). Though there is a traditional distinction among fact (knowledge-that), knowledge-of (acquaintance), and know-how, the distinction has been questioned.

Ordinary language as one base for discovery, expression, and justification of knowledge is presumed (and improved upon in the development). A concept is a mental content. A referential concept is a concept in referential form, i.e., a concept that is intended to refer to an object, real or fictious. The association of a sign—elementary or compound—with a concept constitutes a linguistic concept. The meaning, conceptual or linguistic, of a referential concept is the concept and its possible references (objects) in use. Knowledge is meaning realized.

The concept of knowledge above is depiction or correspondence. The concept is problematic for it is itself specified depictively and, further, so far as knowledge is depictive, precision is not guaranteed. However, the work will further develop a concept of knowledge that is a mosaic and that will be perfect relative to concepts and criteria that will emerge naturally.

Though the structure of language, particularly of grammar, has depiction of the real as one of its functions, we shall not be explicitly concerned with grammar, except in the long version of TWB.

A definition is a conceptual specification.

As it is the aim here to describe the real, it will not be enough to present an axiomatic system.

As defined, definition does not imply existence. Where it is not transparent, existence must – and will – be established.

A fact is a true assertion (knowledge is factual).

Facts are simple (e.g., atomic facts if there are any), compound, and complex (as in theories).

Knowledge or belief are true and certain when it is indubitable that their content corresponds to the fact(s) to which they are intended to refer (notes—some accounts of knowledge do not require absolute certainty; while certainty is desirable in some endeavors, it may not be the case that it is always desirable, e.g., to base action on it; though correspondence is not the only ‘theory’ of truth, it is, as will be seen, adequate to the needs of the present development).

Abstraction is removal from a concept of details so that what remains is known with perfect faithfulness and certainty (examples will be given and are essential to the development).

Perfect faithfulness of knowledge is perfect depiction so that truth and certainty have meaning and can be asserted (examples will be given, which are dependent on abstraction).

Discovery

Discovery is a creative phase of knowledge acquisition (though significant, it is not the focus of this discussion of knowledge and argument; however, it is almost certainly crucial to ultimate—human—endeavor and argument, for it is unlikely that all is known regarding knowledge acquisition and negotiation of the world; thus, we cannot afford to only rely on established or certified means of argument and ought to be open to ‘what works’ and to discovery, not just of ‘things’ but also of means or method).

In worthwhile knowledge endeavors, one need is for tentative theories and ascertain significant factual data. This stage is ‘discovery’ and is interactive with the establishment phase of knowledge. As an example, the system of TWB was arrived at over many iterations. Here, we focus on establishment of theories and data (justification).

Argument

An argument is an establishment of fact (to argue is to establish a fact; here we consider only argument in itself than argument among people or, particularly, kinds of argument specific to restricted fields of inquiry; note that this definition is related but not identical to common definitions of ‘argument’).

The elements of argument are direct establishment of fact and indirect establishment, or inference of a fact (conclusion) from an established fact (premise).

Direct argument

Direct argument is direct establishment of a fact.

Certain or precise

Certainty is possible via relaxation of precision and by abstraction.

Some facts are intrinsic in that their truth is necessary (examples will be given).

Likely or nearly precise

Direct establishment is likely when doubt is low or accuracy is high. Precision may be confirmed by corroboration or theoretical agreement with other facts.

Indirect argument or inference

In indirect argument establishment of facts, from given facts, further facts are inferred (the given facts are often called premises because the characteristic of inference is that independently of their truth (facticity), if the premises have a claim to truth, the further facts or CONCLUSIONS may also have a claim to truth).

The phrase ‘have a claim to truth’ distinguishes between certain and likely inference.

Certain inference

In certain inference, if the premises are true, the conclusions are certainly true.

Deduction

Deduction is certain inference from premises to conclusions (stepwise) via laws of logic (and, given logic, the conclusions are implicit in the premises; also note that some basic modes of deduction are the propositional and predicate calculi and a range of extended and variant logics, which we cannot say exhaust the possibilities of deductive inference).

Intrinsic inference

In intrinsic inference, the conclusion is established without recourse to premises (this is related and, at least in some cases, maybe identical to intrinsic fact). Though the inference of “something“ from “nothing“ may seem absurd, we will find that it is not— and an example will be given.

The way of being

The certain inferences in this work include the intrinsic and the deductive.

Likely inference

In likely inference (or reasonable inference), if the premises are true, or likely to be true, the conclusions are also likely to be true (this kind of inference is ‘ampliative’, i.e., the conclusions contain some information not present in the premises).

Certain inference is not ampliative, but may be effectively so when the conclusions are not intrinsically obvious or not obvious inferences from the premises.

Induction, abduction, and analogy

In induction, some observations of instances and regularities, are generalized or lead to general principles. Abduction is argument to the best explanation (and is significant in science). In inference by analogy, if two systems are similar in some ways, similarity in some other ways is concluded.

Such inference is typically more than a process from premise to conclusion but is seen as strengthened with buttressing information or inference and repeated confirmation. Further, the above modes (induction etc) may be used together and may be incomplete as modes of likely inference.

Manifest patterns may perhaps be thought of as intrinsic and likely inference.

The way of being

The likely inferences in what follows are abductive and analogical.

Some special cases considered above

Establishment of fact is a special case of argument (in which inference has zero steps).

In intrinsic inference, there is inference from an empty premise (no facts presumed) to a (non-empty) conclusion. Is such an argument possible? An important example will be given: existence of the void will be shown to be certain and necessary.

These special cases augment an argument that minimizes the difference between observation and inference.

Argumentative strength

Both direct and inference indirect establishment can be certain; and both can be less than certain but good in terms of appropriate criteria or in restricted settings.

The certain case

An argument is valid if the conclusion certainly follows from the premise (a standard approach is step-by-step, via rules of deduction). A valid argument is sound if the premise is true (significant sound arguments are identified, sometimes with just the word ‘sound’). A necessary argument is a certain inference from the empty fact (an important example will be given).

The less than certain case

In the less than certain case, the argument is good if the conclusion likely follows (e.g., with pragmatic certainty) from the premise (such arguments are usually less than certain because they are ‘ampliative’, i.e., the conclusion has information not at least implicit in the premise). A good argument is strong if the argument and premise are likely enough that the conclusion is likely (significant strong arguments are identified, sometimes with just the word ‘strong’ in brackets; in absence of such identifiers, the argument is regarded as at least reasonable).

What argument does

Argument synthesizes (i) knowledge (fact) and its establishment (‘method’), (ii) the sciences – abstract (logic, mathematics) and concrete – regarding content and method, and (iii) as will be established later, knowledge, inspiration, and value.

Though there is difference, argument (‘method’) and content (fact) are not distinct for (i) discovery and knowledge are part of the world (ii) argument is part of the structure of being (see discussion of being, just below).

Being and beings

Being

Informal def (earlier definitions of being and existence). Being is existence (though this seems shallow, it is not—rather it is abstract and, therefore, foundation and framework for the range from superficiality to ultimate depth); a being is an existent (in talk of a being, awareness is implicit, which entails an improved definition—a being is a referential concept and its – intended – reference or, alternatively, the being is the real and intended object of a referential concept; note that this shows one way of defining existence and an existent).

An existent is the real (non-fictitious) referent of a referential concept (alternatively, the existent is the referential concept and its object, where it is usually conventional and often natural to not mention the concept but to allow them to be or perhaps not see that the concept – the awareness – is at least implicit). Existence is the property of existents as existents.

That is, an existent is that which is, in the most inclusive but real senses of ‘that’ and ‘is’ (on this account).

Being is existence (though may seem shallow relative to religious-like and philosophical uses of being, it is not—rather it is abstract and, therefore, allows for and – as it will emerge – is ground for foundation and framework for the range from superficiality to ultimate depth); a being is an existent (in talk of a being, awareness is implicit, which entails an improved definition—a being is a referential concept and its – intended and real – reference).

That is, a being is that which is, in the most inclusive but real senses of ‘that’ and ‘is’ (on this account). Thus (in the present system) existence and being are identical (in intension and extension). However, the class of objects is broader, since it also includes fictitious referents of concepts.

Though it is redundant to say so, the being exists when the reference is not null (empty); otherwise, the being is (may be called) nonexistent (which includes fictional reference). Given this conception of being, argument is immanent in being.

That it ‘normalizes’ the idea of a nonexistent being, is one reason that the ‘improved’ definition is indeed improved. But, though it is not as obvious, it is also improved in the case of existent beings. For, without the concept, no being is identified. Particularly, a name alone identifies nothing (for philosophers, the idea of a ‘rigid designator’ involves a fallacy—one that could be named ‘the fallacy of the nonexistent subject’; to put it in other words – no concept, no designation).

An aside—‘object’ has two philosophical senses. Here, it is the same as ‘a being’. Another use, not used here, is when the object is ‘as-if’, e.g., a fiction which may be spoken of as though it is a being.

Consider an ordinary ‘thing’, e.g., a football. We might say that the-football-as-a-football does not exist before it is made. However, it does exist in the sense above, without further qualification. That is, it exists and does not exist. This leads to a distinction—global existence (the definition above) vs local existence which entails only existence at some places and times but nonexistence at others. These considerations result potentially in a can of paradoxical worms, which shall not be opened here—but see Dialetheism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), Dialetheia (this site), and a long version of this work.

Definition does not imply existence; however, there is being and there are beings (this is sound).

Though knowledge of being as such is synthetic (concept-object and not merely in the concept or analytic), it is perfect and true via the abstraction in the concepts of being and beings.

The universe and its contents

The universe is all being.

There is exactly one universe; all (real) beings and (real) kinds are parts of it (sound, from the definition of ‘universe’).

Examples of kinds are mind, matter, spirit, process, relation, concept, word, trope; of those, whether the kinds that are objective in nature exist is (left) open (such kinds include mind, process, and matter).

A proper part of the universe is a being that is not the universe itself; the universe may be considered to be a part of itself but not a proper part (but the distinction between part and proper part is not significant in this development).

The universe has parts, which include itself (not regarded as a proper part), other real beings (proper parts), and, if it exists, the empty or ‘null’ part or void (should it exist, it will be a proper part).

Cosmoses

A cosmos is a causal domain in whose interactions with the rest of universe over the times of concern, are below the threshold of observation including measurement.

Our cosmos exists (it is a being).

If they exist, other cosmoses are beings (it will be seen that there are limitlessly many cosmoses of limitless variety).

Laws

A pattern obtains for a being if the information to specify it is less than the raw information.

A law for a being is (our reading of) a pattern (usually of a degree of general applicability and for one or more cosmoses, typically abstract in nature).

Laws are beings (sound).

The void and its existence

The void is the being that contains no beings (if it exists, it is an empty being and it contains no laws).

That we talk of ‘the void’ rather than ‘a void’ is justified later.

For the beings introduced so far, existence was implied in their definition, and it was not necessary to explicitly establish existence. This is not the case for the void.

Existence and nonexistence of the void are equivalent (this is not a contradiction, for the meaning of ‘existence’ is different for the void than it is for other beings). This is a central truth of the development (sound—except for doubt).

Doubt of this equivalence is natural, even imperative. Doubt of this equivalence is taken up later, in doubt.

The void exists (it is a being; sound if existence of the void is sound).

There are no laws of the void (sound, from definitions).

A being that is not the void is manifest.

An apparent paradox

The apparent paradox that existence and nonexistence of the void are equivalent may be defused by considering that the meaning of existence for the void should be different than it is for non-void beings.

Is not the equivalence of existence and nonexistence for the void saying that the void exists and does not exist? And is it therefore not paradoxical? In fact, there was paradox—the thought that for a being ‘x’, that talk of x without a concept of x has meaning and that to ignore this leads to paradox, e.g., (i) a paradox of empty reference and (ii) the paradox of negative existentials—already present in the earlier conception of being, which it may be useful to review. For the void, however, we can say that global nonexistence is global existence. Here, we shall here say no more except that simultaneous existence and nonexistence of the void suggests that it grounds the vacuum in quantum field theory. This is further brought out in a long version of this work and below in all beings are limitless and what follows that chapter.

Possibility

The concept of possibility

A being (entity, event, and so on) is possible if existence is not ruled out by the concept (i.e., by its conception).

The concept may rule out existence because (i) the concept is unrealizable (e.g., it is self-contradictory) or (ii) the nature of the universe (or locale of the intended object) rules it out.

Conceptual or logical possibility

A being whose existence is not ruled out by the concept alone is conceptually possible, which defines logical possibility, sometimes called subjective possibility (because it is thinkable without contradiction).

A maximally expressive language is one that would be capable of describing all logical possibility (note that this does not imply that such a language exists, even if language in discrete signs is enhanced to include the perceivable state of the communicator).

Logical possibility is the greatest possibility in the sense that, presuming logic(s) for a maximally expressive language, the being has realized all that can be realized.

Formal or symbolic language is limited relative to language in use. In use, the symbols are bound to a world of intuition (in the sense of Kant) and therefore language in use, i.e., communication is not (necessarily) just the discrete set of symbols—the symbols communicate part of the being which may be a continuum and are heard because the receiver’s being is similar to that of the communicator. Thus, while (human) natural language is not maximally expressive, formal languages are likely less so. On this account, while limited, beings are incapable of expressing all possibility. Is this an ultimate limitation on human being? Even though our worldly knowledge is not perfect in ordinary senses of perfection, in the real metaphysics, we find a sense in which it is not an ultimate limit.

Limitlessness for a being is realization of the possible (and, optionally, the impossible—because it explicitly includes the void among the limitless but makes no difference for manifest being).

A being that realizes the greatest possibility is limitless (sound, from the concept of limitlessness).

Infinities are not inherently limitless; the limitless is not inherently infinite, but it has (all) infinities.

Real possibility

If, further, the existence of the being is not ruled out by the nature universe (or the locale, e.g., a cosmos, in which it is embedded), it has real possibility, sometimes called ontological possibility (or, if it is for a locale, relatively real possibility, of which an example is physical possibility—the possibility in terms of known physical laws, which are, in all likelihood, imperfect).

Logical possibility is a prerequisite for real possibility; real possibility presumes logical possibility.

‘Metaphysical possibility’ is a term whose use in the literature is not well-defined; therefore it will be discussed later in the chapter on metaphysics.

Impossibility and necessity

A being that is not possible is impossible.

A being whose nonbeing (nonexistence) is impossible is necessary.

A fundamental cause is itself without cause.

A being cannot be the fundamental cause of all being for that would be both necessarily and contingently unsatisfactory. Therefore, bare or absolute necessity can be the only true and ultimate cause of the universe. (Sound, from the nature of fundamental cause as itself without cause.)

But why cannot possibility be regarded as the cause of the universe? It would seem unsatisfactory, for relative to local possibility, such as possibility in our cosmos, it is possible that the cosmos would not have existed. However, relative to the universe, (i) the actual is possible (obviously) but (ii) the possible is actual, otherwise it would not be possible (that which never obtains in the universe at large over all duration must be identical to the impossible). That is, for the universe, the actual and the possible are identical and are therefore also identical to the necessary.

Metaphysics

Metaphysics is knowledge of the real.

The study of metaphysics has already begun with knowledge and argument. Indeed, metaphysical questions and informal discussion have been present from the beginning of the text. In this chapter, we derive the metaphysics of the way of being, give it explicit formulation, and begin to derive consequences.

The possibility of metaphysics has been called into question over the history of thought, but we have just seen the emergence of metaphysical content, beginning with being. The content so far is perfectly faithful – ideal – by abstraction. (Sound.)

Limitlessness—the limitlessness of being and the universe

If from the void the greatest possibility did not emerge, that would be (constitute) a law of the void. Therefore, all logical possibility is ‘in’ or emerges from the void. That is, the logical and real possibilities are, in fact, the same, even though the conceptions are (at least seemingly) different.

Since there has been no assumption in making this conclusion, absolute necessity is the cause of the universe. (All sound, given existence of the void; remaining conclusions in this section are also sound.)

This resolves (what Heidegger called) the fundamental problem of metaphysics, i.e., why there is being at all, i.e., why there is something rather than nothing.

The universe is the realization of the greatest possibility (i.e., the universe is limitless).

The universe confers greatest possibility on all beings (otherwise there would be a limit on the universe).

The limitlessness of all beings also follows from the identity of a being with the being-and-the-void (the implied identity of all beings is an apparent contradiction, which is resolved in that it holds on sufficiently large time scales or, alternatively, at a level of description above time).

This is not a contradiction, for, as will be seen, individuals (i) transcend birth and death (ii) merge in realizing the greatest possibility.

Greatest does not mean ‘best’ but it includes the best. It does not mean absence of pain or a promise of eternal heaven or nirvana but it does mean that there will be peaks of being as well as destruction. It does not mean that better and best are given but it does mean that realization must be ‘worked’ for. It does not mean that every limited region will realize ultimates within its boundaries but it does mean that it will realize ultimates in transcending those boundaries, which is best achieved by beings working intelligently working toward the ultimate with integrity and care.

Limitlessness—some essential consequences

All beings

The universe has identity (given limitlessness in the sense defined above, this and the remaining conclusions in this section are sound.)

The universe and its identity are limitless in extension, duration, variety, peaking of being and dissolution; it contains cosmoses without limit to kind and number.

And every cosmos is as-if an atom in another and every cosmos contains as-if atoms that are cosmoses.

All beings inherit the limitlessness of the universe—they realize peak being (this can also be derived from the fact that a being and the being-and-the-void are identical).

The realization of peaks by all beings is not a contradiction, for they merge as one in the peaks.

Birth and death are real—and this is not a contradiction, for, though real, they and death are not absolute.

Beings have limited form on limited scales but on death they diffuse into the background, from which they emerge on birth.

It is in higher forms that we see across the multitude of forms that do not seem to communicate with one another (while we are in limited form and do not attempt to see).

And while particular manifestations may be limited, limitlessness, which is potential in the background, is realized in the ‘sum’ of the manifestations.

Does emergence as peak require an eternity? Perhaps, but even if so, in the diffuse state between death and birth, whether of a person, a world, or a cosmos, eternity is as-if an instant (and the life of a cosmos is an instant in eternity). We might speculate that despite pleasure, pain, and striving, all forms of life that we know, including ourselves, have both significance and triviality relative to the peaks.

There are paths in, for, and from this world to the ultimate (a careful specification of paths is given later).

On perfection, pleasure, and pain

In most received senses of ‘perfection’ there is no final perfection. Pain, doubt, and pleasure are inevitable. Effective attitudes toward perfection, pleasure, pain, and doubt, are in sharing, mutual support, and pleasure in being on a path of realization, addressed further in pathways.

The void

There is effectively one void (the number of voids presumed to exist has no relevance to the real). The void is the empty being. (Sound.)

Knowledge

We begin and will continue to see, especially later in implications for knowledge that the limit of knowledge and of the universe are identical, i.e., that of logical possibility. This constitutes a framework for ultimate knowledge, which is ultimate in depth but ever open for breadth or variety (as long as the knowers are limited beings). (Sound.)

An ideal metaphysics

Limitlessness defines a perfect and ideal metaphysics.

In greater detail, from the perfection in the abstraction in the concept of being, there is a perfect and ideal metaphysics, a framework, which is summarized – the universe is the realization of the greatest possibility, which gives us an ultimate value, realization of the greatest possibility.

Real metaphysics

When the ideal metaphysics is adjoined to at least pragmatically valid knowledge, what results is named the real metaphysics or just the metaphysics.

In greater detail, when adjoined to all (at least) pragmatically valid knowledge, the result is not always perfectly faithful, but as the best we have as limited beings, it connects us (our experience) to the real and is perfect relative to dual criteria of adequate faithfulness and the ultimate value (of realization). This system is named ‘the real metaphysics’ or just ‘the metaphysics’.

While the criterion for the ideal metaphysics is perfect faithfulness the criterion for real metaphysics is dual—a join of perfect through adequate faithfulness with value (roughly, ‘ethics’ and, where cognitive power reaches a temporary or ultimate limit, aesthetic criteria for directions of thought and, so, also of action). (Though sound, relative to limitlessness, this does not negate traditional criteria for knowledge.)

The real metaphysics implies the existence of all possibility including worlds. Are all possible worlds of the same significance?

Metaphysical possibility

By metaphysical possibility, we understand ‘what may occur under a system of metaphysics’ (a second meaning, not emphasized here, what may occur under conditions of realism, e.g., whether an unembodied mind is possible).

If one accepts (say) physics as determining what is real, then the systems of metaphysical and physical possibility are the same.

Under the metaphysics, metaphysical possibility, logical possibility, and (metaphysical) reality are the same.

What, then, is the interest in—the purpose of a discussion of—metaphysical possibility?

The interest in metaphysical possibility here, is especially in the question—how shall we determine what is metaphysically possible? This is of interest regarding (i) what we may and will know (ii) what we may and will realize and what it will be like.

The development of the possibilities will require all that is discussed under argument—explicitly or implicitly.

In this work the topic has been explored, imaginatively and with input from world literature, but not particularly systematically.

What it will take is deferred to future development.

Robust worlds

A robust world or cosmos is one that is significant because it has an adequate combination of endurance in time, beings capable of cognitive experience, and causal ability to register in experience.

Via inclusion of pragmatic knowledge, the real metaphysics incorporates all valid (human) knowledge. This inclusion suggests that while many possible worlds are transitory and do not register strongly in experience, our world—the world of common experience—is likely robust (but not eternal) in endurance. While robust worlds may be statistically infrequent, the argument that they are most commonly experienced is strong. Though we may not peak in this cosmos, it is certain that, in diffusion, we are part of peak process. (Strong.)

Though imperfection in cognition suggests the impossibility of perfect metaphysics or pragmatic metaphysics of the ultimate, both have been demonstrated.

In the robustness of our world we are part of peak process – on the way to peaking – for a robust concept of ‘god’ is a process and peaking that is the world or worlds and is neither alien in kind nor remote in extension and duration (space and time). (Strong.)

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy**

Being and substance**

Against proliferation of categories.**

Objects and beings**

Concrete and abstract objects**

Metametaphysics including how to do metaphysics and philosophy**

Concrete and abstract objects**

Dialetheia (and emptiness)**

Knowledge**

See cosmology and metaphysics.

Experience

We will define experience, show it to be fundamental to (our) being, describe its form, show that it is fundamental to (as-if) mind – matter – space – time – property – and – cause, and show it as fundamental to realization (yoga).

The concept of experience

Experience is awareness in all its kinds and levels.

Informal def (the following informal definition will be made formal if and when ‘to mind’ is integrated to the text). To mind (as a verb—is used in the way with the following meaning) is to attend to and use all aspects of experience and experiencing (In the sense used here, this includes the passive and the active and the material. To mind is especially to attend to the issues of pleasure and pain.

The fundamental nature of experience and reasons for its deferred treatment

(The concept of) experience is implicitly present in (earlier) talking of being.

If its explicit treatment came before metaphysics, it would have to be reworked.

There is experience; and it is known by there being experience of experience (sound)

There is experience, for it is in and only in it that there is awareness (and even if that is illusory, illusion is experience).

Without experience of experience, there could be no real talk of it.

In terms to be introduced below, while experience is the mark of a subject, it also presents as object.

We are experiential beings (sound)

Experience is (one vehicle for the) essence of (our) being, for all significance registers in it.

We are (effectively) experiential beings.

The form of experience

An as-if kind (e.g., substance) is one that is not derived from being for all being but is one that may be treated as a kind for some regions of the universe, e.g., a cosmos, for some purposes.

The form of experience as we experience it is experience-of (subjective, as-if mental) – the-experience (being – as justified below, relation, interaction) – the experienced object (which includes what may be called as-if material). In ‘pure experience’, the object is null (but there is a potential object).

Conditions of realism including formation of cosmoses ground a strong argument that the experience of experience shows the form of experience.

The detailed structure of experience**

The universe is (effectively) experiential (sound)

The world is the object of and includes experience

The world is an object of experience and includes experience.

If the universe were a cosmos with a single kind of element, experience would be a suitable candidate. However, from the metaphysics, the universe has no ultimate kind. Yet, experientiality in primitive form, can and will occupy the lowest levels (at which experientiality is not varied and rich as it is at higher levels). This is neutral on the reality of matter but affirms that there is as-if matter whose interactions are primitively experiential, which sometimes manifest as causal. A world that is not experienced is effectively nonexistent.

The universe is experiential

The universe (being) is (effectively) experiential (this and the earlier statement about the world are consistent).

That the world is experiential is to neither deny nor affirm that it is material, atomic, spatiotemporal, ideal (in the sense of psychological or spiritual in nature), causal (in the sense of physical causation), in its ultimate nature.

The form of experience suggests and the real metaphysics (all beings interact) confirms that experience is relational and this is what is meant when we affirm that the universe is a (relational) field of experience.

That the universe is a field of experience allows both zero and infinite values, i.e., voids and particles. Also, from the real metaphysics the ‘speed of light’ has no significance for the universe at large and therefore there is no limit on beings interacting with other beings (even in our cosmos, the limit is contingent).

Identity, extension, and duration

The most primitive aspect of being (experience) is that of sameness and difference. Emergence implies change (duration). Identity is (sense of) sameness across duration. The characteristics of identities are properties. Extension (displacement) is measure of difference across identities (note, first, that this approach synthesizes instrumental and immersive approaches to identity, extension, and duration, and, second, that there are no further fundamental kinds of sameness and difference).

Originally, sameness and difference arise together from, e.g., the void. Our experience of sameness, difference, and identity arises, necessarily (from limitlessness), either in a single step or (perhaps more likely) iteratively, with selection.

But how does the uniformity of extension and duration that is our space and time arise (in general relativity it is, of course, not true uniformity, but in terms of the distribution of matter, it is a kind of uniformity because the space time metric depends only on the distribution of matter, so in the absence of local matter space and time are in fact uniform, and in the presence of matter the different measures of space time at different locations are related so that standard measures can indeed be set up)?

The answer is in the sameness of sameness and difference. Furthermore, it has already been seen, and relativity lies in the incomplete distinction between the different modes of sameness the identity. And that the quantum lies already in the void, and it’s signature, therefore marks extension and duration, that is – the objects whose identity constitutes extension, and duration, whose is measure is space and time or rather spacetime.

But how does sameness of sameness and difference arise? The real metaphysics implies that (a) one step emergence does occur (b) it also occur via mutual interaction and spreading.

Yoga

Yoga is a (the) pathway of practice and action (of the experiential and the physical – mind and body) in and for this world in and toward identity with the ultimate in peak states (I have sought an alternate English term for yoga, e.g., binding, but continue to use ‘yoga’).

Informal def (previously used). To engage in true yoga is to see one’s identity with the universe, especially in peak states, and to be (on a path to) that identity. Yoga includes seeing and living the subject – interaction – object sides of experience as one and merging with all being.

Though yoga has an historical origin in thought and practice in India as well as modern manifestations, true yoga incorporates the real metaphysics, the truth that we are experiential beings with matter- and mind-like sides, and that we are destined to merge as peak being. Further, yoga seeks effective paths to the ultimate.

The as-if material and the mindlike sides of being are significant to ways of realization of the ultimate. Thus—

Yoga as binding of beings to being has no ‘sides’ but two apparent experiential sides meditative and physical – mind and body.

As we are experiential beings, the meditative might seem supreme, but since the sides are not distinct, the physical is as essential (it being thought that experiential being must have a body).

Ethics and meaning**

Ethics**

Ethics has been present from the beginning, for (i) experiential being is the place and focus of ethics (ii) right knowledge is a foundation and element of ethics.

The subject of ethics concerns right ways of being and acting (where being is interpreted as liberally as in the discussion of being; that ethics concerns ‘value’ does not imply that it is nonfactual).

Given that peak being is realized by all beings, there is an ethical imperative – value and reward in – being on effective ways to peaks in and in enhancement of the world.

In this brief version of TWB, beside the above universal aspect, ethics is immanent in the work.

Meaning**

Meaning and ethics**

Meaning as (part of) the initial chapter?

… and the later treatment of meaning along with ethics

The preliminary needs of individual meaning**

Safety, security, education

Shared meaning**

It’s give and take with individual meaning

It is secondary

It illuminates individual meaning—and learns from it

It is instrumental in meeting the preliminary needs of individual meaning

Doubt and certainty

On certainty

It was observed that certainty may not always be desirable (i) because it does not necessarily have meaning in all contexts (ii) because it is not always possible (iii) because there is often a need to balance effort in being certain with effort applied toward action and this may be the case for the greatest of our endeavors.

Yet, so far as certainty, at least of some degree, is good, at least some doubt is good. And where absolute certainty is desirable, it must wait until all reasonable doubt is removed.

Doubt and its use

To doubt is to question what is accepted as or potentially true including reasons for the acceptance.

In seeking a presumption free grounding (as far as it is possible), the meaning and value of truth (defined earlier) and seeking should be included in the questioning.

One motive to active doubt is to find the place of doubt and to find a balance of doubt and certainty.

General doubt

Unquestioning certainty regarding what we hold as knowledge is, rather obviously, a recipe for ignorance and error, so general doubt is good—an instrument toward valid knowledge and toward realization.

However, (i) the value of doubt does not reasonably entail value to neurotic doubt or doubt as a rhetorical weapon (ii) doubt itself ought to be subject to doubt.

So, It is healthy to be open to both doubt and certainty.

We gain strength from certainty and doubt in ‘existential balance’.

Doubt in the way of being

Doubt may and ought to arise regarding the arguments. The essential doubt concerns existence of the void. Alternative demonstrations of limitlessness may be given. One is as follows. Either the void exists or does not. If it does, the earlier argument is sound. If it does not exist, the universe is eternal. Our cosmos exists (if it does not exist as the object, we think it to be it exists as the experience of ‘it’). By symmetry, eternity will not generate one possibility without generating all possibilities. Therefore, the universe is limitless.

Regarding the arguments, especially existence (and consistency) of the void and its consequences, doubt may remain.

A response to doubt, then, is, given consistency and an argument for limitlessness that is (at least) reasonable, to regard existence of the void as a postulate to guide thought, action, and living.

Thus, the way will involve living on ranges in a continuum of doubt and certainty.

The value of truth and certainty are neither absolute nor the same for all activity; it is to be in balance with realization; and the balance will depend on the activity (and perhaps in ultimate realization truth will be absolute without further requiring it, i.e., beyond the fact of realization).

Categories

In this work, the foundational elements of metaphysics are argument, abstraction, being (existence), universe, beings, the void, possibility, which are known precisely (in abstract, which is all that is needed). A further element, is the system of knowledge and ethics, for which certainty and precision are valuable but not necessary.

Just as metaphysics is study of the real at all including the highest of levels, so, in this work, categories are elements or ways of understanding at all levels (this deviates from received use as explained and justified below). Thus, the study of categories has already begun—at least implicitly and without especial attention to systematic study. Here we will explicitly develop a concept and system of categories.

Here, the categories (i) depend on chapters through metaphysics and then, especially, on experience (ii) enhance the metaphysics – its use in understanding-with-prediction and realization and. Therefore categories come after experience. There is some freedom in where to place this chapter, but the categories should come before the chapters on implications for knowledge and pathways and programs, where the categories have significant use.

Introduction to categories in philosophy and in this work

The received concept of the categories and its function

The concept

A system of categories is a list of highest genera of being or of understanding.

In older use, beginning with Aristotle, a system of categories is a complete and perhaps unique list of the highest kinds of being.

In modern use, as emphasized by Kant work, skepticism about knowledge led to emphasis on categories of our conceptual system, language, or knowledge and acknowledgement of limits to such kinds.

Function

Categories are useful in forming systems of logic, understanding, and valid thought, especially in philosophy.

With Aristotle, the categories were real but derived from language as the most general predicates and were thus useful in formulating his syllogism.

Kant begins with an attempt to identify all possible forms of empirical judgment, from which he hopes to discover the categories employed in the cognition of objects (Categories – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Some recent work has focused semantic category distinctions as a way of dissolving various mistakes and paradoxes in the use of language and logic.

Categories in this work – categories vs categorial levels

Origins

In TWB, tools of method, understanding, and realization were precursor to its categories.

I In early developments of TWB, a number of aspects of being arose as useful tools, which I named ‘dimensions’. They were similar but different from categories, so I did not use the term ‘categories’.

The dimensions were associated with paradigms of understanding. For example, at the highest level of abstraction, the paradigm is that of certain fact and inference. A paradigm that would be useful in transformation would be a ‘means’.

Since I wanted the dimensions to be useful in I emphasized not just dimensions, but dimensions and paradigms.

Determination and function

Being itself was seen as (rationally) deserving of being a category, as were levels below that of traditional categories, for the latter are essential tools in the real metaphysics and its use.

In using the real metaphysics, its abstract structure and the structure of experience is useful in understanding the high level structure of the real and employing it in action and transformation. At the highest level a paradigm of understanding is, by the real metaphysics, sound argument (certain fact established directly or indirectly by inference).

Some low level structure can be understood by abstracting the essence of and generalizing paradigms such as causality and evolutionary selection from our world.

The dimensions would be determined by working top (abstract) – down by particularization, as well as bottom (concrete, our world) – up, by analogy and corroboration. In doing so, it is effective to regard being itself as a category at a level just above that of the traditional categories.

Categorial levels and paradigms rather than just categories

Consistent with the origin and use of the idea in this work, it was seen functional to recognize not just a high-level system, but (also) levels and their systems and paradigms.

Thus, the dimensions would not just be at the highest level (just below being itself) but also at the level of being, at the traditional level, and perhaps other intermediate levels, down to a concrete level.

In determining the dimensions I found that it would be effective to (i) include being itself as a level above the traditional highest level (ii) have intermediate dimensions.

Though it might seem that the higher levels derive from the concrete, it has been seen in the development of the metaphysics, that we do know being itself directly as abstracted from the entire world rather than from something remote in the real or in our concepts (we also saw that this frames what might be deep in the world and therefore permits depth to emerge without suggesting that there is depth or otherwise).

Nomenclature

I now find that it is effective to talk of categorial or paradigmatic levels, and categories and paradigms (the latter includes ‘means’).

A paradigm (as the term is used in this work) is system of understanding for a class of beings (up to all being), which includes methods of argument and means of transformation such as technology—particularly technology of exploration, being, and intelligence—and yoga.

A system of categories and paradigms is a classification of being into kinds at all levels, which derives from real metaphysical knowledge, and—especially—enables understanding, prediction, and transformation (via the paradigms).

Deploying the real metaphysics

It is effective to have being itself as a category as this invokes (i) all, part, and null (ii) nonbeing including contradictory being, which does not affect considerations regarding manifest being but makes explicit the fact of the existence of the void (iii) possible being and argument, especially sound argument.

The high level or ideal metaphysics, affords a true and realist system at that level. At that level, there is a uniqueness of paradigm (sound argument) but the question of uniqueness in how the paradigm is worked out (what logics there are) and need for it at that level remains open.

Our understanding of the universe as experiential (at least effectively) enables incorporation of both the old and new notions of category (elements of being and of understanding).

The real metaphysics encourages the idea and introduction of categories at multiple levels, e.g., (i) the level of being (ii) the level of manifest being (iii) robust being (iv) our world. The determination will be (a) top – down (i.e., abstract – manifest – concrete) (b) bottom – up (concrete – abstract, with our world and its paradigms as analogy, buttressed by reasons).

Where appropriate, terms for categories used in the philosophical literature may be explicitly incorporated here (e.g., substance, process, entity, relationship…).

Note that two kinds of substance are recognized in the history of philosophy (i) the substance of all being, i.e., as that of which all being is made or of which it is understood and which is denied by the real metaphysics (as-if substances are permitted and useful for some purposes, e.g., in a cosmos) (ii) the substance of particular kinds of being, for which I prefer to use the idea of form (Aristotle’s use of ‘substance’ in this regard is close to Plato’s the idea of form).

We will not strive for explicit completeness in this version of TWB, but allow what completeness there is to remain partially implicit (the term ‘argument’ includes much that is implicit).

The categorial and paradigmatic levels

The categorial and paradigmatic levels of being (and understanding, prediction, and means of transformation of beings) will be:

Being and nonbeing—the highest level as known via abstraction

Universe (effectively) as an experiential-relational field of being.

Form(s) of experiential being – a continuum

Includes formation as a form.

May include singularities and voids.

Our world

Our world as depicted in our better knowledge and its paradigms.

All being—without restriction to levels

Its paradigm is general argument and its application.

The categories according to their levels and paradigms

General form

Form in general as change or changing of the experiential relational field (experience-of – the experience – the experienced).

The change and field may be described by the terms ‘continuous’ and ‘continuum’ where those terms allow abrupt change and regions of continuity, particles (as singularities or excitations), and voids.

Formation

Formation as a form—details follow.

A range from increment-and-selection to saltation in a single step or a few steps.

Correlates with the above stasis-symmetry-stability-robustness continuum.

Formation without heredity

Generally transient and low on the above continuum.

However, there are exceptions.

Formation with heredity

Vertical heredity

Beings with form that is micro-coded with inheritance of coding, but not directly of form

Paradigm of emergence—dominated by incremental variation and selection but single step origins possible and real

Horizontal heredity

Form is propagated in the field of relational being.

How might this happen? Given a region, e.g., a cosmos or pre-cosmos, of interacting elements, an emerged form in a sub-region may propagate because, from common origins, the entire region is receptive to the form emerged in the sub-region.

Vertical vs horizontal heredity

Is it likely that in some or many cases, one kind is dominant but the other is also present?

Relation as form

Form and paradigm—beings as concept – experiential relation – object.

Formed forms

The form of (concept-) objects marked by slow enough change to be perceived as static and lying on continuum of more to less stasis, symmetry, stability, and robustness.

Paradigm—saltation is possible but effective population determined by (nonlinear) interaction of degree of experientiality and robustness; robustness determined by stability and so by symmetry.

If, as is reasonable, perfect symmetry is static, while absence of it is rapidly transient, extremes are rare.

Elementary forms

E.g. field of relational experience, which permits voids and atoms as special cases.

Sameness, difference, identity, extension, relation, duration, and property.

Particular forms

Particular forms (corresponding to as-if substance as a kind of entity)

Hierarchy of experiential being

A beginning to this topic is in our world, below.

Being and nonbeing

Nonbeing

Inclusion makes no difference to manifest being but identifies the void as the object of contradiction (illogical form).

Beings

Beings and whole – part – null items and relations.

Universe as an experiential-relational field

Universe as an experiential-relational field

Our world

Approximated by an experiential field describable by as-if matter in primitively experiential relation, i.e., approximated by (as-if) matter that is primitively experiential.

Consequently the emergence of (as-if) high-level matter and mind is not substance emergence but emergence of form.

The experiential field ranges in quality and magnitude from nil and minimal as in bulk (as-if) matter, to complexity (molecules), to elementary life, to plant life, to animal including human being, to higher forms and peak being(s).

The physical or material level

Behavior

Field, atoms, bulk matter and its behavior as in quantum, relativistic, statistical, and condensed matter theories

Chemistry and nuclear physics.

Paradigms – mechanism and its origins – determinism and indeterminism, residual indeterminism and quantum theory; sameness – difference – identity – extension – duration – cause – property.

Paradigm – the object side of experience as seen in the natural and social sciences and their paradigms (e.g., evolution by variation and selection, mechanism, causality).

Extension and duration

Cosmos, origins, history; cosmological structures (galaxies etc), solar system(s) and planets.

Multiverse theory.

Mathematical and logical universe (not restricted to physical theory).

Complexity and life

Complex molecules, abiogenesis; replicators, coding, and genetics.

Life and its kinds and levels through conscious and intelligent organisms.

Function—life as it is

Paradigms—functional chemistry of complex compounds, principles of biological organisms and ecosystems.

Origins and evolution

Paradigms—emergence of complexity, evolution by variation of hereditary factors and selection.

Experiential hierarchy

As-if material, dominated by physical law.

Mid-range and human, both experiential and physical.

Paradigm – the subject side of experience and its transformations as in yoga and meditation and as seen in psychology of experiential being.

As-if spiritual, dominated by ideas as container and propagater of hereditary form.

Societies

Primitive molecules and organisms

A paradigm of synchronous cooperation.

Plant

From societies of organisms to rooted entities.

Animal – primitive through higher

From societies of organisms to mobile entities.

Human

Intelligence and physiology as preliminary to elements of culture, communication, and cooperation.

Higher

Transcending our beings, societies, and cosmos.

Universal

Paradigm – integration of the subject and object sides in understanding and means of realization—particularly transformations of self (as in yoga), aided by technology (space exploration and artificial intelligence).

All (levels of) being

This chapter begins the actual system of categories in this work.

Paradigms – general argument and the real metaphysics; analogy across levels with imagination, criticism, and corroboration as a paradigm of understanding.

Kinds of argument and levels from abstract to concrete

Cosmology**

General cosmology**

What is cosmology?**

Theory**

Computational general cosmology**

Generating possibilities of being for the universe**

A theory of form and cause**

Abstract and concrete objects**

Cosmology of form and formation**

Cosmology of experiential being**

No kind beyond experience but there are grades of experience from root to peak.**

Hierarchy of experiential being**

Description of peak being**

Identity, spacetime-being, and property**

Alternative physical cosmologies**

Physical cosmology**

Essential physical theory**

Standard cosmology and alternatives**

Implications for knowledge (sound)

Tentative overview

In this version of TWB, this chapter is intentionally brief; it is amplified in a long version of this work, which takes up questions of the nature of knowledge, its sources, its methods, its value—all in general and in light of the real metaphysics.

That there are significant consequences of the development culminating in the metaphysics is manifest.

First – It provides a framework for an ultimate view of the universe that synthesizes logic, abstract thought, rational metaphysics, science, and ethics. It finds that careful reflection on the methods and problems of human knowledge reveal much more than is held in received thought.

Second – It shows science to be open with regard to the extent of the universe and its kinds, e.g., the cosmological singularity (big bang) is but an atom of existence.

Third – It provides a degree of closure to many discussions in philosophy which are unnecessarily open ended as a result of unnecessary metaphysical neutrality and of metaphysical bias, but it is not uncritically closed. Yet, it is open in ways that are metaphysically essential and which the modern analytic and scientific canons allow but frequently do not admit and may deny (and even where it is admitted, the canons rarely contemplate or attempt to demonstrate ‘limitlessness’). That is, it is not carelessly, uncritically, or even lazily open or closed.

Fourth – Thus, the possibilities of being beyond what we see with our senses, instruments, and theories, which are spoken of in religion in mythical terms, can enter the realm of the concrete. It is of course a non-specific concreteness—we know that we are (part of) peak being, which is not remote (there may of course be remote but lesser peaks whose being may lack robustness).

For a framework for (human) knowledge grounded in the real metaphysics, see a system of knowledge.

Knowledge (itself)**

Why knowledge is important**

The significance of knowledge—ultimate or conceptual and proximate or useful in appreciating and negotiating our world.

What knowledge is**

Intentional picture theory – its domain of application despite its twofold limit.**

What it is—e.g., picture and correspondence or coherence or pragmatic (and combinations).

Criteria of validity and axiology.**

‘What it is’ is sometimes confused with its criteria (thus coherence and pragmatic ‘theories’ are or may be more about criteria than what knowledge is). Similarly ‘justified true belief’ is about criteria or at least the intersection of ‘what’ and criteria.

Axiology is significant because criteria—in general—may and ought to include ethical and aesthetic considerations (as has been argued).

How knowledge is acquired**

Empiricism.

Rationalism.

Combinations.

Non-universality.

Purely empirical cases (with examples and significance).

Purely rational cases (with examples and significance).

Method**

Discovery and justification**

Method and content are one**

Extent**

System (a system of knowledge based in the metaphysics)**

Introduction – aim, framework, and system**

Disciplines and meta-disciplines**

World and knowledge as a unity**

Oneness of metaphysics, epistemology, logic, and axiology**

Ground**

The universe and the world**

Creative being – design and artifact**

The ultimate**

Implications for epistemology**

Universal narrative**

On universal narrative**

Writing and updating universal narrative**

Metaphysics and related topics**

See topics in metaphysics and philosophy.

Cosmology**

See cosmology.

Pathways and programs

In headings in this chapter, items in brackets are details.

Path and program structure

Pathways

The aim of the way, elaborated

Elaboration

Enlightened living

Enlightened and effective paths

Immediate and ultimate as one

A healthy life

Sharing, seeking positive relations

Negotiation of paths, binding yoga and meditation

Leadership and initiative

Attitude

Effective attitude

Setting and sustaining and setting effective attitude (recognize, acknowledge, defuse, affirm, return; summary)

Affirmation and dedication

Pleasure and pain and their address

Therapy and sharing

Direct address of pain

Attention to a path; meaning of pain and pleasure

The issue of death and its address

Tradition

Programs

Design

The level of being (aim, program – foundation and realization)

The level of beings (aim, program – a routine)

An institution or organization for The way of being (purpose, emphases – foundation, realization, action)

Being – the world and beyond

Ideas and foundation (experience, reading, reflection, synthesis, writing, publishing, and advertising)

Practice, retreat, and renewal… in nature and culture

Nature as place of being, immersion, and inspiration

Society and culture—instrumental and immersive approaches (political economy, society – its elements and institutions)

Artifact—technology as being and assistive (self-evolution, exploration of mind and space, synthesis of natural and artificial being)

Universal (yoga, search for the ultimate)

Beings and community

Morning, first things – wake early (everyday preparation, home, away)

Ground

The way (foundation, realization)

Afternoon (tasks, exercise and excursion)

Evening (review – plan – prepare, activities, sleep)

Resources

The Way of Being

Reference

Action and immersion

Sources

Pathways

Given a system of value and knowledge relative to the immediate world and the ultimate, a path is (i) a way of realization of the value as an end, as a process in – for – and from the immediate world, and in the being of beings (ii) employs knowledge as means (iii) is individual and shared (iv) is negotiated (does not merely follow received prescriptions and questions its own foundation) (v) is open to return to ground level and abandonment of designed process.

The aim of the way, elaborated

Elaboration

To live and mind at two levels—the immediate (world) and ultimate as one.

An enlightened way attends to the mundane and its problems as part of the process. It employs mind in its fullest sense (defined earlier). It attends particularly to the issue of pleasure and pain.

In the world, to share living in all its dimensions (categories) and negotiating the way to the ultimate.

Enlightened living

Attention to the quality of all being (including life and a quality hierarchy from need to fullness) on the way to the ultimate.

Enlightened and effective paths

There are effective, enjoyable paths to the ultimate.

The paths invoke all capacities of beings, object-like (of the object, but not ‘objective’) and subject-like (of the subject or experience but not ‘subjective’).

Immediate and ultimate as one

A balance between realization as process and in the moment – the immediate and the ultimate as one. Being on the way. Emptiness – oneness of being(s) and the void (nothingness).

See yoga.

A healthy life

From the categories, the dimensions of healthful living are mind which includes the physical and the world, community which includes society, and spirit

And, to repeat, attention to the quality of all being (including life and a quality hierarchy from need to fullness) on the way to the ultimate.

Sharing, seeking positive relations

Paths are shared – there is sharing of functions of living and of path negotiation, the more capable assist the others, positive relations are sought and fostered.

Negotiation of paths, binding yoga and meditation

Paths are negotiated (realization is discovery – or rediscovery – in which received paths and leaders may inspire but are neither authority nor final truth).

Minding is employed—binding yoga with yoga-in-action, analytic, insightful, and calming meditation—including immersion and intentional action, in the world and toward the beyond.

Leadership and initiative

A charismatic leader inspires. A true leader encourages balance of individual, path, society, and emergence and continuity of leadership.

The focus of leadership is not just that of recognized or designated leaders, but also of individual and shared initiative.

Attitude

Effective attitude

A good or effective attitude for realization is that of shared endeavor and positivity to and recognition of the worth of being and all beings in the immediate world and on the way to the ultimate as detailed above and below.

Setting and sustaining and setting effective attitude (recognize, acknowledge, defuse, affirm, return; summary)

The effective attitude is maintained by keeping good attitude in shared awareness.

An approach to sustaining a positive attitude is the sequence – recognize, acknowledge, defuse, affirm, return; a summary version is defuse – center – act.

Recognition

Maintaining a healthy attitude requires awareness of attitude. A way to recognize decay of attitude is good, e.g., a worn item, reminders, cultivating a spacious approach to the day, perhaps via meditation.

Acknowledgment

Acknowledge negative attitude, accept in the sense of not judging it negatively but as something to turn around.

Defusion

Take time away from activities of the day, exercise, meditate (calming, analytic, and emphasis on attitude awareness).

Affirm

One’s place in the universe (self = all). The way of being with discipline (in balance with abandon), security, and sharing.

Return

Return to activities of the day.

A summary version

Defuse – center – act.

Affirmation and dedication

Affirmation

Affirming commitment to the world and its inhabitants and to identity with the ultimate real.

Dedication

A dedication to the way of being—to living in the immediate and ultimate as one.

What does this mean?
How is its truth and value known?
How is it realized?
Why being?

To its shared discovery and realization under the pure and pragmatic dimensions (categories) of experiential being in form and formation on the way to the transparently limitless ultimate.

From being to limitlessness to experiential being
to enlightened pathways to attitude
to health to address of pleasure and pain.

To overcoming the bonds of limited self, so that even in trouble or doubt or pain, life is flow rather than force.

Via therapy and sharing,
Direct address of pain,
Attention to a path and the meaning of pain and doubt.

To realizing the ultimate in this life and beyond.

A process version of the transcendent
living in the immediate and the ultimate as one.

Pleasure and pain and their address

Pleasure and pain have function but are not always functional; they deserve to be addressed but their address is often dysfunctional. The development here accepts the functionality and addresses dysfunction.

Pleasure and pain (and doubt) are inevitable; an effective path emphasizes pleasure in the path itself (over diversion). Pain is addressed—

Therapy and sharing

First – By the best available therapy (use and development), and by the fortunate assisting the less fortunate.

Direct address of pain

Second – Where indicated by addressing with pain, doubt, and destruction directly, but not with the intent of eliminating all pain (as elaborated below).

Direct address – is by looking at pain and its reasons, by addressing its reasons, by not avoiding but rather by that meditative awareness that attenuates pain by exposure and seeing any sources in erroneous thinking.

However – there is no attempt or intent to eliminate all pain, which would be a counterproductive and endless task.

but not by an attempt or intent to eliminate all pain.

Attention to a path; meaning of pain and pleasure

Third – Rather, there is an optimum of the address of pain and being on a path, in which residual pain is given meaning by being on an aware path of realization.

Pleasure – is not (essentially) sought for its own sake but by being on a shared path.

The issue of death and its address

A will to live and avoid death is natural. However, that we die and that our cosmos will end or become uninhabitable seems almost certain. Though we generally expect lives of people and worlds to follow a ‘normal’ trajectory, the end may come at any time. Coming from this point of view (and a secular view) we may wonder whether the metaphysics and realization have any significance. We may wonder whether they are at best mere solace. On the other hand…

We have seen that we are eternal; that on death, a person or a cosmos enters a diffuse state to emerge again; that the process is repeated and one path is through higher and higher form as peaks are approached.

This gives balance to passive nihilism. Death is a teacher. Motivated by the metaphysics, we may seek equilibrium and to engage in the way of being. It is a point upon which to meditate—first in calming (should anxiety be an issue), second in analyzing and intuiting the upward-downward cycles of realization, and third in commitment to realization in this world and beyond.

Tradition

Because traditional religions and related movements have appeal, their formulaic approaches and spiritual content may be recommended as a useful supplement to some people. For example, the four truths of Buddhism may help understanding of the human condition and the eightfold way of Buddhism and Yoga may help some people toward realization here on earth.

However, TWB is not presently formulaic and its principles do not recommend any particular religion. Further, while the religions and their institutions have positive and negative attributes, to assess their contribution and to suggest (needed) improvement would lead away from the purpose of a brief version of TWB.

Programs

Design

Those who would be on a path may develop and share path programs which address the needs of paths (described above), will continue learning and revising paths and programs, and, where needed, return to the beginning of the way, which includes abandonment of what has gone so far as a source of freshness and inspiration.

The programs have two meshing and merging emphases (i) the level of being, which emphases the universal and the long-term and which frames (ii) the level of beings. Details of the programs are developed below.

Design for the programs has (i) a menu of activities from personal and local to social and universal and (ii) a daily program or routine, also a menu, with home and journey options and a long-term program of foundation and realization. The design for the menus and the programs is based on the real metaphysics, the ideal and ultimate framework, filled in with cumulative pragmatic knowledge, which includes argument as an approach to generation and justification.

The menu is based on categories of being from elementary to high levels. In this account menus and programs are merged.

The level of being (aim, program – foundation and realization)

Aim

Development—develop a long-term program for the following in sequence and parallel, in terms of months – years – phases of life and history. Consider institutionalization of TWB – reasons and cautions (taken up below).

Program – foundation and realization

Defining a program—the elements of the program are the topics underneath. ‘Ideas and foundation’ is perennial, ‘Practice and retreat’ is every six months to annual. The remaining elements are engaged in parallel.

The level of beings (aim, program – a routine)

Aim

Implement the level of being in individual life and shared realization.

Program – a routine

Defining the program as a routine—the routine is presented as a menu of possible elements for (i) planning and activities from which to select (ii) flexible times and durations. The emphasis in at the level of being is universal; here it is individual through community.

An institution or organization for The way of being (purpose, emphases – foundation, realization, action)

The purpose and foci may be—

Purpose

Subject expertise, support (e.g., web design), action, power of sharing and teaming.

Emphasis – foundation

The theoretical background and consequences.

The realm and range of the possible.

Emphasis – realization and action

Ways of realization—traditional, new, and synthesis.

World problems and opportunities (see the resources).

Ethics and meaning.

Publications

For example, A manual of health.

Being – the world and beyond

Ideas and foundation (experience, reading, reflection, synthesis, writing, publishing, and advertising)

Program for the way of being—experiencing the world, reading, reflection, synthesis, writing, publishing, advertising—a program of study and development.

General—experiencing the world, reflection, synthesis and sharing—a program of development.

Experience

Direct receptive experience of the world.

Includes experience of one’s actions and results.

Reading

Indirect receptive experience of the world.

Reflection

Evaluating receptive experience of the world.

Synthesis

Synthesis of experience, reading, and reflection.

Writing

For consolidation and as a record to be improved upon.

Publishing – as sharing

For communication.

Advertising – to create community and shared endeavor

To attract and form community.

Practice, retreat, and renewal… in nature and culture

General options—travel and journey for immersion in nature and culture; retreat for renewal of awareness, self, and attitude.

Nature as place of being, immersion, and inspiration

General—as path to real self and being.

Society and culture—instrumental and immersive approaches (political economy, society – its elements and institutions)

Political economy

General options—economic and political thought, individual, charismatic, and collective action, local through global community – challenges and opportunities.

Society and its elements

General options—reflection and action on social organization and institutionalization—small to large scale; cultural (knowledge – generation, vertical and horizontal transmission, and institutions of knowledge and education), political, economic, aesthetic (play, art, spirit).

Society, institutions, and the individual

General considerations—will leaders in culture, spirit, politics, and economics arise from within institutions or without? It will likely depend on the field of endeavor; and it will not be ‘either / or’—the leaders will have ties to culture via institutions but are likely to act with independence.

General considerations—in ideas, leaders will likely have absorbed ideas and issues of world thought. However, thought within institutions today seems constrained by ideology and mass production. We expect and encourage leaders to have independence from the mainstream. This depends on field and an assessment is that it is more likely in philosophy and humanities than the sciences that the next great ideas will be extra-institutional.

Artifact—technology as being and assistive (self-evolution, exploration of mind and space, synthesis of natural and artificial being)

General considerations—beings undertaking and designing for self-evolution; exploration of mind and space; synthesis of natural and artificial being.

Self-evolution

Possibilities of being.

Exploration of mind and space

Meditation and exploration of space via technology.

Synthesis of natural and artificial being

Independent and cooperative artificial being.

Universal (yoga, search for the ultimate)

Yoga

Yoga (practice and synthesis of be-ing and becoming; living at two levels, pure and pragmatic; synthesis over spacetime and above spacetime.

Search for the ultimate

Search for gateways to the ultimate in and from the immediate.

Beings and community

Morning, first things – wake early (everyday preparation, home, away)

Every day

Set and sustain attitude

Set and sustain attitude – defuse, center, act.

Affirmation and dedication.

See the internet resources for more on affirmation and dedication.

Review and plan the day through life, death, and beyond

Review day through life plans.

Focus for the day – single vs multiple.

Rise and prepare for the day

Rise – preliminary actions for the day (e.g., medications, treatments, and breakfast).

Home

Prepare for activities of the day (e.g., open folders and files, set times and alarms, short walk).

Away

Chart the day.

Ground

Though part of the way, ground is preliminary (i) as support for the way (ii) for urgent needs as they arise.

What is essential? Return to minimal living in the moment at any time (‘zero’)

Safety, security (e.g., money, place – nature and community – for TWB).

The way (foundation, realization)

Foundation

Experience the world, reading, reflection, synthesis and sharing (e.g., developing TWB, sharing, publishing, advertising, earning).

Realization

Living the way, yoga (physical, meditative), sustaining path through doubt, pain.

Nature as inspiration

Society and sharing – general options—local to global; politics and economics; relationships, work, school; sports.

Technology – general options—technology for exploration of space, and experiential being – AI as agent and complement to (human) beings.

Afternoon (tasks, exercise and excursion)

Tasks

Tasks, lunch (from day to life+).

Exercise and excursion

Exercise, excursion, select activities (e.g., up to two hours walk or bike; explore; local hikes-rides-climbs; photo essays).

Evening (review – plan – prepare, activities, sleep)

Review, plan, and prepare

Review planning and other activities – immediate through long term; shower, supper, and fluids.

Activities

Share, network, the way.

Entertainment without dissipation, home or evening out, relaxation.

Sleep

Sleep early.

Resources

The Way of Being

Daily routine – home (pdf, word docm), away (pdf, docm).

The Way of Being – a program (pdf, docm).

The Way of Being – affirmation with dedication and attitude setting and resetting.

The Way of Being – site, in-process long version of this work.

Reference

For a system of (human) knowledge based in the real metaphysics, see a system of knowledge.

Action and immersion

For social action, see challenges and opportunities.

Sources

For sources, see my influences and main influences.

Return

Having taken time to emphasize reflection on our place in being, we (re) turn to focus on action and transformation.

The return is a complement to into the way of being—the difference is one of emphasis… ‘into’ emphasized ideas, here we emphasize action and looking outward, beyond our temporal being.

We are the ultimate even – especially – when we do not see it. Our work, if we choose it, is to see and realize the ultimate in sharing, while attending to immediate ground, informed by our new understanding.

The focus

Informal def. Return signifies a focus on the world that is freshened by a new point of view. The focus is an ongoing ‘conversation’ between ideas, action, and realization.

Focus – ‘conversation’ among living in the immediate, community, and the way of being.

A time of living in the present, for the present as (if it is) ultimate.

Retreat and renewal

Periodic retreat and renewal for sustenance of attitude and immersion in a path to the ultimate – which is effective annually or biannually.

Perception

Perception – seeing the world as it is, in balance with the lens of concepts.

Synthesis of the history of ideas – universal text

Synthesis – the history of ideas and endeavor rewritten, roughly once a generation, as a single and evolving text (and oral and ideational tradition). The synthesis will be concept rather than person centered.

For The way of being – continued development, publication, advertising, sharing, and realization.