The Way of being – Master edition
(in-process)

Current editions: master (working)
Derived from the master: long (in-process) | axiomatic (essential content)
Not derived from the master: micro | informal version

Anil Mitra, copyright © first edition – 2002
this version – March 4, 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. Absence of such marking does not imply absence of certainty or likelihood.

This document—master for The Way of Being

What it masters and their styles

The main styles identifying level of detail that are in current use

Document content and plan

Making the documents for publication

Notation

Definitions

Other notation

Abbreviations

In-process content

Right aligned paragraphs

Notational consistency

Into the way of being

Overview

Why being? Choice of being as foundation and ground

Meanings – a caution

Sequence of development

Reading The way

Definitions

About the definitions

The definitions

Knowledge and argument

Language, concepts, and knowledge

Discovery

Argument

A broad view of the role of knowledge in the world

Being and beings

Being

The universe and its contents

Cosmoses

Laws

The void and its existence

An apparent paradox

Metaphysics

Possibility

Limitlessness

An ideal metaphysics

Real metaphysics

Metaphysical possibility

Robust worlds

The significant universe**

Doubt and certainty

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy

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

Introduction

About ethics and meaning

Why ethics and meaning?

Meaning

The good

Choice and the right

Ethics

Secondary goodness

Overlap of intrinsic and secondary goodness

Ethics for the way of being

Ethical considerations in other sections

Ethics and meaning in light of the way of being**

Categories

Introduction to categories in philosophy and in this work

The categories according to their levels and paradigms

Yoga

Pathways

Contents

Design of pathways

Enlightened pathways in being

Generic programs

An example—my program for the way of being

Adaptable program templates

Resources

Return

The focus

Retreat and renewal

Perception

Synthesis of the history of ideas – universal text

Consequences of the metaphysics**

Tentative overview

Knowledge

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy

Ethics and meaning

Cosmology

The Way of being

This document—master for The Way of Being

Though it may it may be read, this document is not intended for reading.

It is a master for other documents below, and a scratchpad for new ideas and material.

What it masters and their styles

Long – LongOnly.

Mini – Main-mini.

The main styles identifying level of detail that are in current use

Source

Currently replaced by ‘Source or study topic’ (Alt + V)

For topics and external sources (Ctrl + 8)

For topics and site sources (Alt + W)

Paragraph content

Central – Alt + M – material that is the center of the center – out approach – documents: all

Main-mini – Ctrl + 9 – core material – complements ‘Central’ – documents: all

MiniOnly – Ctrl + 7 – documents: mini only

Main – Alt + Z – important: documents: long and essential only (will be deprecated)

Open – Alt + Ctrl + Shift + O – documents: master only

Character

Detail – Ctrl + Shift + H – character style – headings and content not to appear in short versions

LongOnly – Alt + Ctrl + Shift + L – character style – documents: long

OpenOnly – Alt + O – character style – documents: master – material that will not (necessarily) be retained for published documents

Document content and plan

Also see design and planning.docm.

Redo the document

Beginning with an essential outline from this document and brief essence.docm,

In the world, fill in in stages (i) center – out > essential (ii) detail,

In stage (i) use styles Main-mini (Ctrl + 9) and MiniOnly (Ctrl + 7), and Definition (mainly formal),

In stage (ii) mark content judiciously— Open, Long, Main-mini, MiniOnly, Normal, Definition (formal, informal).

New headings are red or have two stars** (or both) and will revert to their heading style when filled out; sub-topics are not so marked.

Improve (or eliminate) the marking of sound vs strong content (only some content is to be marked either sound or strong).

Making the documents for publication

This material is now in design and planning.html (docm).

Notation

Definitions

Def. N	Format for a formal definition, numbered 01, 02, … small capitals indicate defined terms (content in brackets is either optional to or a comment on the definition).

Informal definition. Format, unnumbered, for an informal, preliminary, repeated, or older, definition. May be used where a definition would be possible and relevant but is better deferred (a preview may be given).

a.	Format for a part of a formal or informal definition that it is convenient to place just below the main part.

Note—while some definitions need strict and sequential placement, others may be given at more than one place. In the latter case, the definition may be given more than once but only one such definition will be formal.

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

Two stars** indicate headings and content that is in process (subsections may also be in process).

Right aligned paragraphs

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

Notational consistency

In this in-process scratchpad, notational consistency is not enforced.

Into the way of being

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

Overview

About the way of being

Informal definition. The way of being (‘TWB’, ‘the way’) is shared discovery and realization—so far as we may succeed—of what is essential, real, and ultimate in the universe, i.e., the world and beyond as a unit of what is essential and real in the world and beyond, seen as one, and (in this world and beyond and their mesh; it begins in traditions of world thought, knowledge, and exploration). The immediate beginning of TWB is in personal exploration, discovery, and enhancement—an attempt to be and contribute the best or greatest one may. It also begins in traditions and histories of world thought, knowledge, and exploration).

The way of being, meaning, and knowledge

A central aim of many individuals is to live well. Here, we see a core aim of the history of thought as contributing to living well—roughly, to what has been called the significance or ‘meaning of life’ (the word ‘meaning’ has two uses in this work—the one just introduced and another, to be introduced, as in concept or linguistic meaning; the use will be clear from the context).

An informal conception of meaning is that it is whatever synthesis of thinking, reflecting, feeling, acting, sharing, doing that makes life not just worthwhile, but ultimately rewarding—for individuals, humankind, and being. It includes considerations of value, particularly ethics (for individuals, society, and institutions) and aesthetics (particularly beauty as way of and motive to inspired living). This conception will be repeated later in the formal development.

Without further reflection and analysis, the meaning of life—the concept and to what it refers—is not definite. Though it may vary among persons, we would like to attempt (i) to give it a specification so that it will encompass the aspirations of a comprehensive range of individuals (ii) so that part of meaning is the sharing and mutual provision of basic and higher needs and aspirations.

What constitutes meaning varies not only among persons but also among cultures and is dependent on views on what life is about and what reality—the universe—is like. In order to give meaning a comprehensive specification, it is therefore deferred to ethics and meaning, which is taken up after the development of a picture of the universe—one that will attempt to be ultimate.

What it means to live well and what it takes also involve our view of the universe and our relation to or place in it and, therefore also of knowledge, which also entail questions knowledge—what it is, what we can know and how and so on. These issues are developed at various places below (i) as part of the way of being through (ii) in general as illuminated by received thought and the way of being.

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.

It is essential to inform the reader that

The work has gone through many iterations.

The way of being in its present form began in 2002, with an understanding of the nature of the void (nothingness) and the universe (everything). And there are priors dating back to around 1985.

What is new in each iteration may be some combination of (a) a small amount of content (b) presentation.

Therefore, readers who follow the editions should know that what is new may be minimal.

However, the net content, I believe, is significantly new with regard to innovation and quantity of content (but of course crucially dependent on the ideas of others).

Origins

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 definition. 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).

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.

The text

The introduction to the text is primarily about personal material on origins and sources of ‘the way’.

The way of being has origins in my interest in understanding the world and living well in accord with that understanding.

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).

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, if robust and true (doubt is entertained), 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.

The following is c > o. Identify mini-content.

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.

The view of the way of being

Recognizing that any view begins with the form of ones being and the world, and in culture.

It attempts to boot strap – that is, not only should its content flow from process or method, so, as far as possible and reasonable, should method itself.

Certainty is a value, but for being – while – limited, it cannot and should not sought to be absolute.

We know that from some givens – by – abstraction and analysis, that there is significant certainty, even for limited being, and we intend to extend it as far as is possible and reasonable.

We fill the gaps in the certain with less than certain knowledge and thought… which reveals values that may inform us that the pragmatic combination of the certain, and the pragmatic is perfect relative to the values, especially the value of the ultimate

Which is basis for action… and in which we may find that what we think is our limited being – being with fixed limits – is not fixed after all and is/maybe in process to the/an ultimate (the significance of “an“ is reference to local ultimates

Brief outline

This informal introduction, into the way of being, is matched by a final, informal, and complementary chapter, return, which is primarily about living in and facing the world in light of the way of being. The formal development lies between these chapters. It will now be outlined.

The definitions may be augmented to ‘definitions and results’.

The formal development beings with definitions, collected together for convenience. It continues with treatment of knowledge and argument, and then development of ideas specific to TWB, which begins with being and beings and continues through categories.

Then, application and further consequences are developed in pathways and programs, return (a complement to the introductory into the way of being), and a supplement on consequences of the metaphysics, which emphasizes knowledge.

which is on realization of the ultimate in and from ‘this’ world.

Combines two sections ‘An overview of the way of being’ and ‘About the way of being’

The section will be minimal, starting with the principle of possibility – limitlessness and main consequences, to derive from core statements (by tocs).

Combine with the next section (perhaps make the next section as a subsection of the overview)

Concept template

Incorporate to logic and sequence of development, below?

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.

Preview definition (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.

Is being neutral to ‘kind’?

Perhaps being is or does introduce a kind (‘is’), for, with Descartes, experience (itself or as-if of objects) is the (or at least a) given without needing to say it is (and, particularly, questioning experience is experiential). However, if we admit nonbeing to being, then being is an abstraction from experience. Thus being is neutral to being vs nonbeing.

It might be pedagogic to begin with experience, but it would be less efficient.

Further neutrality

The neutrality of being requires, also, neutrality, at outset, to knowledge as representation vs interwoven with being, moral imperative as being, systematic vs open vs idiosyncratic metaphysics.

These neutralities do not imply that one polarity of the oppositions will emerge.

For example, rather than insist that knowledge is uniform with regard to objectivity, we will find it to be objective for some as-if objects and not so for others (without compromising the project of knowledge) and the ‘objective’ and the ‘less than objective’ will be found to mesh in a system that is perfect in a moral sense, which will require some revaluation of morality as well. And in the objective case, the object need not be claimed to be independent of mind; rather, any interwovenness does not compromise perfect representation in such cases.

Similarly, there is no insistence on systematic or idiosyncratic metaphysics. Rather, the case is that a systematic core will emerge, which frames less than systematic content.

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.

Do this red > combine parts of the preface, removing redundancy > do mini for preface and into.

Meanings – a caution

In this section, ‘meaning’ is used in the second sense noted above—concept and linguistic meaning (defined later).

It is important that while the individual concepts used in TWB are not in precise correspondence with their use in philosophy (they cannot be, for philosophy does not have agreement on precise meanings of many of the 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 definition. What is common refers to what is accepted as received among reasonable persons—recognized thinkers and others (here, we will attempt to go beyond what is widely accepted in human knowledge to knowledge of a limitless ultimate).

Sequence of development

Rename ‘The logic and sequence of the development’… generally, and why experience and ethics and meaning etc. come after metaphysics.

Refine…

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 meaning as significance

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

On definitions

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

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.

On systematic metaphysics and its emergence

Is the scientific world view complete and perfect? Science and reason themselves show neither. Certainly, the view has pragmatic correctness in a limited domain. However, science and reason do not show that there is nothing outside that domain. Nor do they show perfection, for the foundation of science is hypothetical and confirmed only to some approximation.

The actual size of the universe and its nature may be altogether different despite the pragmatic and local utility of science.

But what might lie beyond?

There is a tendency to shy away from this thought because common alternatives are (i) religion, which tends to dogmatic speculation (ii) metaphysics seen as incompletely justified if perhaps reasonable and (iii) misguided and even irrational speculation.

However, if we regard possibility (defined later) as what is and does not result in inconsistency, it is consistent with science and reason that the universe is the realization of the greatest possibility.

The developments show the universe to be the realization of the greatest possibility (proof is given, doubt is acknowledged). In this sense, what is developed has an ultimate framework.

The metaphysics that emerges has a systematic character.

However, (i) system is neither imposed nor entire but (ii) as stated, it emerges, and it is filled in with emergent extra-systematic content which is justified in emergent terms.

Thus, while system emerges, there is also room for wide ranging but reasoned ideas which are at most partially preconceive but given post-justification… in a process that remains incomplete (even while it remains within the ultimate framework.

On the emergence of some conceptions on the nature of philosophy

If we look at the history of philosophy and its currently received status we find

A vast system with many threads of various kinds of sophistication that do not have perfect mesh and incomplete agreement on what the system is.

The vastness of the system with its modes and degrees of system to be perhaps overwhelming relative to any final completion or holism.

Imperfect mesh with other modes of knowledge, especially science. That there is an imperfect mesh includes (i) that views on the nature and relation between science are in conflict (ii) while science is thought to be about the world (ii) what philosophy is thought to be today has uncertainty, even if attention is restricted to a more scientific-like ‘school’ such as analytic philosophy.

But there is another way to view the situation. It is not to start from the bottom with the different disciplines. Rather we can start at the top with knowledge as a whole and ask what its divisions are or may be. There is science. As seen above there is a region outside science, which we may call general knowing but which has clear affinities with metaphysics, general logic, and value theory (ethics and so on), i.e., with philosophy.

But where is the vastness and sophistication of this system going (the vastness is of course relative to human intellect, not to ultimate intellect)? Is it guiding us to an ultimate future or is it just more of the same—‘one damn brilliant system after another’ while the world itself lies in balance between progress and regress?

But there is another way to view the situation, especially in light of the ultimate (and simple) view above. It is that there is a framework above the level of vast sophistication which is a guide and which is developed in this work (even noting doubt).

This may be seen as an ‘uber-discipline’. What might we call it? Some might appropriate the term ‘philosophy’, and if we were to do so, we might offend some, but there would also be good reason to do so.

Which view is to be desired? The vast system at ground level or the uber at a high, even highest, level? Neither, for they mesh.

This is the emergent conception of philosophy—or, at least, the uber—in this work.

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

Review and minimize 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 definition. The way of being (‘TWB’, ‘the way’) is shared discovery and realization—so far as we may succeed—of what is essential, real, and ultimate in the universe, i.e., the world and beyond as a unit of what is essential and real in the world and beyond, seen as one, and (in this world and beyond and their mesh; it begins in traditions of world thought, knowledge, and exploration). The immediate beginning of TWB is in personal exploration, discovery, and enhancement—an attempt to be and contribute the best or greatest one may. It also begins in traditions and histories of world thought, knowledge, and exploration).

Informal definition. 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).

Preview definition (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 definition. What is common refers to what is accepted as received among reasonable persons—recognized thinkers and others (here, we will attempt to go beyond what is widely accepted in human knowledge to knowledge of a limitless ultimate).

Definition 01.	Ordinary language as one base for discovery, expression, and justification of knowledge is presumed as framework for the formal development (and improved upon via the formal development; note that when the terms ‘is’ and ‘are’ are used in defining concepts, they may be but are not necessary temporal or concerning a particular place). 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.

Definition 02.	The intension of a concept specifies the nature of the term, e.g., in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions (specifying the intension does not imply that the concept has objects). The extension or range of a concept specifies to what real objects the concept refers.

Definition 03.	A definition is a conceptual specification.

Definition 04.	A fact is a true assertion (knowledge is factual; it concerns the way the world is – the way things are, where ‘is’ and ‘are’ may be but are not necessarily temporal).

Definition 05.	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).

Definition 06.	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).

Definition 07.	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).

Definition 08.	Discovery is a creative phase of knowledge acquisition (though significant to the way, it is not the focus of this discussion of knowledge and argument, which is amplified later; however, it crucial to ultimate—human—endeavor and knowledge, for it is unlikely that all is known regarding knowledge acquisition and negotiation of the world; thus, we cannot afford to rely only 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).

Definition 09.	An argument is an establishment of fact (to argue is to establish a fact; here we consider only argument in itself rather than kinds of argument specific to restricted fields of inquiry; note that this definition is related but not identical to common conceptions of ‘argument’).

Definition 10.	Direct argument is direct establishment of a fact.

Definition 11.	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).

Definition 12.	In certain inference, if the premises are true, the conclusions are certainly true.

Definition 13.	Deduction is certain inference from premises to conclusions which is stepwise via laws of logic (its power lies in that it is explicit and open to inspection, 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, of course, are not asserted to exhaust the possibilities of deductive inference; note, further, that this does not eliminate the possibility of non-explicit certain inference as in, intuited and received results).

Definition 14.	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.

Definition 15.	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).

Definition 16.	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. (That these are recognized modes of likely inference does not eliminate the possibility that intuited and received results could be likely).

Definition 17.	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).

Definition 18.	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’, sometimes in brackets; in absence of such identifiers, the argument is regarded as at least reasonable).

Informal definition (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).

Definition 19.	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.

Definition 20.	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).

Definition 21.	The universe is all being.

Definition 22.	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.

Definition 23.	A pattern obtains for a being if the information to specify it is less than the raw information.

Definition 24.	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).

Definition 25.	The void is the being that contains no beings (if it exists, it is an empty being and it contains no laws).

Definition 26.	A being that is not the void is manifest.

Definition 27.	Metaphysics is knowledge of the real.

Definition 28.	Given a concept of a being (entity, event, …), it is possible if nothing rules out its realization (existence).

Definition 29.	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).

Definition 30.	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).

Definition 31.	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.

Definition 32.	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).

Definition 33.	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).

Definition 34.	Real possibility may be local, in which it is relative to a limited world, or global, in which it is relative to the universe.

Definition 35.	A being that is not possible is impossible.

Definition 36.	A being whose nonbeing (nonexistence) is impossible is necessary.

Definition 37.	A fundamental cause is itself without cause.

Definition 38.	Limitlessness defines a perfect and ideal metaphysics.

Definition 39.	When the ideal metaphysics is adjoined to at least pragmatically valid knowledge, what results is named the real metaphysics or just the metaphysics.

Definition 40.	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).

Definition 41.	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.

Definition 42.	To doubt is to question what is accepted as or potentially true including reasons for the acceptance.

Definition 43.	Experience is awareness in all its kinds and levels.

Informal definition (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.

Definition 44.	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.

Definition 45.	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).

Definition 46.	The most primitive aspect of (experiential) being is that of (sense of) sameness and difference. Emergence and experiencing imply change (and so duration and a concept of time). Identity is (sense of) sameness over duration or change. Extension (and so displacement and a concept of space) is measure of difference across identities; and the further characteristics of identities are properties, i.e., qualities and form (that this approach synthesizes instrumental and immersive approaches to identity, extension, and duration).

Preview. 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 as (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’).

a.	Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Informal definition (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.

Definition 47.	In this section, meaning is used in its sense as in ‘the meaning of life’; it is related to the concept of ‘significance’; it 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 (.

Definition 48.	Elaboration—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. It includes considerations of value, particularly ethics (for individuals, society, and institutions) and aesthetics (particularly beauty as way of and motive to inspired living).

Definition 49.	Intrinsic good is improvement of quality, intensity, and form of experience (receptive and active, of experiential beings).

Definition 50.	Where choice, i.e., of thought or action from among real options)is possible it is right to choose thought and action that promotes (intrinsic) goodness.

Definition 51.	Ethics is right choice in light of what is good; in simple terms, metaethics is the study of ethics.

Definition 52.	Bodily integrity, culture (which includes knowledge, belief, and art), economic and political arrangements and technology are secondarily good—have secondary goodness—as far as they promote goodness.

Definition 53.	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.

Definition 54.	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).

Definition 55.	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 as (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’).

a.	Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Definition 56.	A pathway is a way to completion in one or both of (i) experiencing of completion in the immediate (ii) a way of experience, reflection, and action toward real completion in the immediate, so far as possible, or the ultimate or both (given the developments so far, the complete is the ultimate)

Repeated definition. 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 as (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’).

a.	Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Informal definition. 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.

Knowledge and argument

Title—‘Knowledge and Argument’ vs ‘Argument and Knowledge’ vs ‘Argument’ vs ‘Knowledge’

Improve argument (and update its discussion in a system of knowledge).

Issue of certainty – if it’s not already there (it’s also in the later chapter, ‘Doubt and certainty’

Language. Discrete and linear versus continuum, multidimensional, and intuitive, roughly in the sense of Immanuel Kant. Are discreet language and logic epiphenomenal to being? Representational versus evocative.

Argument, logic, sets, and mathematics. At least through predicate calculi. Other logics and dialetheia. ZFC and alternatives. Syntax and semantics.

Non-deductive methods in mathematics (where is linear thought and logic as justification headed)—Non-Deductive Methods in Mathematics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Argument | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

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

About grammar. Chess and scrabble have rules which are absolute (in some sense). However, even if ‘life’ or ‘the world’ has rules that specify it, we do not know them completely. If grammar and semantics (formalized or not) – so far as they are attempts to capture those rules – must be incomplete and imprecise. Therefore we ought not to think that the following are the essential or only objects of study (a) natural language and its ‘rules’ or (b) formalizations thereof. Of course, in response one might ask, “But then what are the objects of study? Are there any other?” And a reply is “Of course there are. For one, there are the processes of language – its origins, evolution, and its study (and the study of all those); and for another the relations of those studies to the world.

The following may be pertinent for this and subsequent discussions of language: Philosophy of linguistics (Philosophy of Linguistics – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), Linguistics (Linguistics - Wikipedia), Philosophy of language (Philosophy of language - Wikipedia).

The knowledge of interest at this point in the development 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 (as in ‘I know how to walk’, the distinction has been questioned. Such kinds may be understood – though not encompassed – by knowledge-that and this is sufficient for the present purpose. The actual nature of knowledge as it ‘resides’ in the knowledge-holder and other issues pertaining to knowledge are discussed later in the chapter, consequences of the metaphysics.

Ordinary language as one base for discovery, expression, and justification of knowledge is presumed as framework for the formal development (and improved upon via the formal development; note that when the terms ‘is’ and ‘are’ are used in defining concepts, they may be but are not necessary temporal or concerning a particular place). 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.

This unsophisticated conception of knowledge is sufficient for developing the metaphysics of the way as the metaphysics is an abstract and perfect framework with pragmatic fill-in; details of this explanation will emerge. Sophistication and its significance is taken up in consequences of the metaphysics, after the main development.

In what follows most concepts are referential and unless otherwise stated ‘concept’ shall mean ‘referential concept’.

The following definitions will be useful later.

The intension of a concept specifies the nature of the term, e.g., in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions (specifying the intension does not imply that the concept has objects). The extension or range of a concept specifies to what real objects the concept refers.

Language - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language). Theories of Meaning (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/meaning/).

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; it concerns the way the world is – the way things are, where ‘is’ and ‘are’ may be but are not necessarily temporal).

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 to the way, it is not the focus of this discussion of knowledge and argument, which is amplified later; however, it crucial to ultimate—human—endeavor and knowledge, for it is unlikely that all is known regarding knowledge acquisition and negotiation of the world; thus, we cannot afford to rely only 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 rather than kinds of argument specific to restricted fields of inquiry; note that this definition is related but not identical to common conceptions of ‘argument’).

Argument = establishment of fact + formal inference + semantics?

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 which is stepwise via laws of logic (its power lies in that it is explicit and open to inspection, 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, of course, are not asserted to exhaust the possibilities of deductive inference; note, further, that this does not eliminate the possibility of non-explicit certain inference as in, intuited and received results).

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. (That these are recognized modes of likely inference does not eliminate the possibility that intuited and received results could be likely).

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.

On some special cases considered above

Direct 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’, sometimes 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).

A broad view of the role of knowledge in the world

One view is that knowledge that (i) we possess knowledge and (ii) it is useful and used toward ends—ends that may be seen as positive, neutral, or negative in terms of value. This view sees knowledge as instrumental (though not necessarily only instrumental).

Another view of knowledge is not as a discrete kind of ‘thing’. Rather, it sees the world as a interactive system in which, somehow (e.g. instrumentally or through mutual evolution), the parts of the world bear the marks of other parts which influences mutual process. One of those bearers of the marks of the world is labeled ‘knowledge’. This is an organic and immersive view.

Being and beings

Being—shallow and trivial, yet deep and ineffable.

Mereology—What is a whole—are there objective wholes– or is wholeness a matter of object, perception, and of function? Mereology, atomism, and coded wholes. The void or null part the issue of possible contradiction.

Existence—https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existence/.

The issue of non-deductive proof where deduction is standard.

Being

Informal definition (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 (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’). What we sometimes call ‘our universe’ or ‘other universes’ is an inappropriate use of the word ‘universe’; instead we shall use the term ‘cosmos’ (below).

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, and taken up in doubt and certainty.

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 equivalence of its existence and nonexistence is saying that the void exists and does not exist. Is this not paradoxical?

The apparent paradox that existence and nonexistence of the void are equivalent—that the void exists and does not exist—may be defused by observing that the meaning of existence for the void should be different than it is for manifest or non-void beings.

What is the source of the apparent paradox? It is that for a being ‘x’, to talk of x without a concept of x has meaning. This thought is an immense source of informal confusion and of paradox.

There is a vast confusion in questions such as ‘what is metaphysics’ where we expect both history and reason to define what it is. In fact, such confusion in the general literature may be unavoidable. However, in a particular system or work, one ought to define terms, of course to attempt to have the definition be inclusive, but to go with reason—for it is the system that counts more than its ‘atomic’ constituents. Generally to think there is meaning without a concept is to depend on convention, which is almost guaranteed to lack full consistency.

There are paradoxes arising from thinking that there is meaning without a concept. One is the paradox of empty reference in which such reference can have any property whatsoever—and thus be, for example, both black and not black, or even color and no color. A second is the paradox of negative existentials – the paradox that to talk of something that does not exist one must assume that it exists (otherwise talk of nonexistence is empty). But, here, existence means that there is a real object that is identified by the concept and nonexistence means that there is no such object. A famous case of this paradox arises in Anselm’s ontological proof of the existence of God where Anselm argues that ‘a God that is both real and in the mind must be greater than a God that is just in the mind’. The error is that ‘God in the mind’ is not God at all but a concept of God and to join ‘in the mind’ and ‘in the real’ is to make a category error—the error of equating a concept and an object.

Just as such confusions and apparent paradoxes are defused via the concept-object concept of meaning, so is the apparent paradox of the existence and nonexistence of the void.

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 metaphysics > limitlessness and what follows that chapter.

Metaphysics

Include limitlessness? Possibility? Everything—i.e., metaphysics began at the beginning, with knowledge and argument? Even the preliminary discussion of meaning raised metaphysical questions.

While ‘meta’ often signifies transcendence or self-referentiality, in its origin the term ‘metaphysics’ did not and is not used to signify a relation to physics. However, we will see that some metaphysical study does transcend the sciences.

Metaphysics is knowledge of the real.

Though this definition is explicitly close to that of ontology as the study of being, given the real metaphysics developed below, the range of what is considered to be metaphysics is implicit in it.

Clearly some metaphysical knowledge with a criteria of precise correspondence has been established. The issue of whether this can be extended and according to what criteria is addressed below in the development through the real metaphysics.

Metaphysics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/).

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).

Possibility

Possible worlds and beings—The location of possible worlds. Issue of paradox. Conceptual generation of possible worlds. Metaphysical possibility and necessity.

Possible worlds and objects—Possible Worlds (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), Possible Objects (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

The concept of possibility

Given a concept of a being (entity, event, …), it is possible if nothing rules out its realization (existence).

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

For the possible to occur cannot be contradictory. However, a description that is intended to be of the possible may be contradictory. For example, let us assume that ‘I am finite’. But if possibility is realized, then it is true that I am limitless. Is there a contradiction? Not if the ‘I’ in the finite case refers to ‘my present form’ while the latter ‘I’ refers to my participation in universal being. That is, the apparent contradiction in ‘I am finite’ and ‘I am limitless’ is not a true contradiction.

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).

It is inherent in logical possibility that there is no inconsistency with either experience or within the concept. Though ‘consistency’ and ‘no inconsistency’ are different for some uses of ‘possibility’, for logical possibility, they are identical.

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.

But it is important to see that, while the symbolic has great power (with which we are naturally impressed and perhaps over-impressed) as (i) it is transparent and (ii) can denote but perhaps not entirely represent infinities – continuum and higher, such power is (as seen, e.g., in the Löwenheim–Skolem Theorem regarding first order logic) indeterminate. Further symbolic thought is not entirely rooting in being and most likely incomplete. The future movement of our region of being must lie in symbolic and extra-symbolic thought and their join. It is likely that this join should incorporate machine thinking and robots (machine being).

If empirical knowledge is what is given by the senses and rational knowledge is what is given by reason, then a claim that the greatest possibility is realized is consistent with the empirical, the rational, and their combination (this is of course not a proof that the greatest possibility is realized).

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.

Real possibility may be local, in which it is relative to a limited world, or global, in which it is relative to the universe.

Is it helpful to have the definition above.

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.

The range of possibility

Introduction

The discussion of possibility so far has been on the intrinsic meaning or intension of the concept of possibility.

Here we are interested in the range or extension of possibility, i.e., the range of what things are possible.

If we are interested in what may occur in the universe, the range of possibility is of interest.

Shortly, we will find that the universe is limitless in the sense that the greatest possibility is realized—that is, the range of possibility is what is realized. That is, the range of possibility specifies the universe.

What is the range of possibility in its greatest sense

It is what is allowed by logic. The reference below has three approaches to specifying the range that do not meet the full range.

Possible Worlds (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

A full approach would require a ‘full logic’, which may be specified intensionally as (after study of limitlessness below) ‘in principle specification of what exists’. An extensional specification is beyond the scope of limited beings. We may say (after study of limitlessness) that logic (argument) and theory of being are one.

It seems reasonable to assert that the greatest or logically possible cannot be specified constructively by limited beings.

The approach adopted in what follows emphasizes what is qualitative.

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 (sound, given existence of the void).

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; sound).

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

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 (sound).

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.

Some significant consequences

Following is one core of a ‘center-out’ approach to presentation.

All beings

The universe has identity (given limitlessness in the sense defined above, this and the remaining conclusions in this section, ‘all beings’, 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 universe

The cause of the manifest universe is necessity (sound).

What is the edge of the known universe? It has an edge in duration and extension. There is another edge which has to do with strength of interaction, which is everywhere.

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 consequences of the metaphysics 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).

Living in two worlds

Placement?

The two worlds

Thus, we live in two worlds in the following sense. We live in the world of ‘ordinary’ experience (the big bang). But we also live in a larger world—the universe—which is real, which we do not necessarily see, but which we can know by rational thought.

Living in two worlds as one

A part of the difficulty of this view is the contrast between the two views. One may overcome this difficulty by (i) accepting the difficulty (ii) living with it (iii) becoming accustomed to it (iv) to the point where the two views merge and we no longer habitually resort to one or the other (v) living in light of the immediate and the ultimate as one as a guide to life in this world and life beyond death, birth, and finitude.

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

Remark and justify the join of metaphysics, knowledge, and ethics.

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 allows a utility to 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.

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 are the most commonly experienced (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, i.e., space and time (strong).

The significant universe**

The range of possibility

Principles

Generation

Selecting for robustness and knowability (by some beings)

The significant universe

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.

A hypothesis regarding the real, particularly, being and metaphysics.

An existential hypothesis to guide action—(i) in potential realization of the ultimate and (ii) in that living in light of the ‘realization of all possibility’ can be done in such a way as to improve the quality of life in our world.

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).

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy

Placed in consequences of the metaphysics.

Experience

Experience > Experience and time?

Yoga – name and placement? Binding? See the definition for comments.

Should we define time and space?

Consciousness?

Free will?

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 definition (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 definition of ‘to mind’ is to be brought UpToDate.

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**

One site source for this is Dimensions and Paradigms of Being, Experience, and the World. Are there better ones?

One external source for ‘experience of the experience of another person’ – Empathy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/empathy/).

The five factor model or big five model. There is also a six factor model, ‘HEXACO.’

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 nature of identity, extension, and duration

The most primitive aspect of (experiential) being is that of (sense of) sameness and difference. Emergence and experiencing imply change (and so duration and a concept of time). Identity is (sense of) sameness over duration or change. Extension (and so displacement and a concept of space) is measure of difference across identities; and the further characteristics of identities are properties, i.e., qualities and form (that this approach synthesizes instrumental and immersive approaches to identity, extension, and duration).

Thus, extension and duration (space and time) are immanent in being and therefore (i) so far as the two kinds of parameter of identity difference above are interwoven, so are extension and duration, which are thus extension-duration (spacetime) and (ii) they are dynamic entities in dynamic interaction with the ‘object’ (as above, which is matter-like as seen later) and thus constitute extension-duration-being (space-time-matter).

Since duration is or can be marked by constancy of identity across change and extension by change across identities the parameters of difference beyond extension and duration, i.e., space and time, are (further) properties.

Their origins

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

Name (‘binding’?) and placement (earlier in this chapter or in another one… e.g. pathways?).

I have hesitated to use the term ‘Yoga’ but am now settled on it, at least temporarily.

Combine this and later discussions of yoga and relink.

Preview. 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 as (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’).

Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Informal definition (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

This topic is to be (re) developed in interaction with the later treatment under ‘consequences of the real metaphysics).

he two aims for this topic are (i) a general development of ethics with critique of ethical traditions through today (taken up briefly here and in detail later in discussing consequences of the metaphysics) (ii) interaction of the general development and the ideas of and ethics for TWB.

Introduction

This topic is placed here as it is influenced by earlier material in this treatment (it could be altered) and because it influences later development—categories, knowledge, and pathways.

Ethics has been implicitly present from the beginning—(i) in inquiring into what is real and ultimate (ii) right knowledge and ethics are co-founding (iii) experiential being is the place and focus of ethics.

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.

Modern western ethics has been criticized for focus on normative systems to the exclusion of what it is to live well or to live meaningfully. The aim here includes peak realization integrated with living meaningfully. This aim is implemented skeletally in this chapter and in detail but immanently in the later discussion of pathways.

I wrote earlier “Bernard Williams has criticized modern ethical theory as emphasizing universal theories and punitive attitudes, and remoteness from individual lives. He argues for flexible understanding of ethics that accommodates the complexity of (modern) life.”

The meaning of life—The Meaning of Life (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

A source for a living ethics—Bernard Williams (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy); and a list of his books and papers. His book Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (local link: available on the Internet via Bing Search, is of special interest, for, together with Nietzsche, it argues that in (philosophy’s) striving for universality, ethics (particularly Kantian and Utilitarian), “virtually exclude everything related to the question of how to live well”.

About ethics and meaning

The main kinds of modern normative ethics are consequentialism (e.g., an act is good if it brings the best future), deontology (rightness of actions in terms of norms), and virtue ethics (actions are moral when they express virtues, e.g., honesty, courage, kindness, and compassion).

The intent the section on ethics and meaning is (i) to develop a framework for ethics for the way of being without the detail of ethical systems such as consequentialism, deontology, or virtue ethics and their application (ii) to emphasize positive ethics – meaning – for experiential beings.

For other kinds, see Ethics – normative, other traditions – Wikipedia.

The section is ‘metaethical’ in that it posits (i) the nature and place of intrinsic good (ii) other goodness as secondary (iii) the locus of right action.

Why ethics and meaning?

If ethics is about ‘the good’ and related ideas, e.g., ‘what it is to live well’, it must include consideration of the good life for experiential beings (particularly, persons), which implicates meaning as it is used in ‘the meaning of life’.

In turn, the meaning of life is not just about higher values but also concerns basic values of safety, security, health, and community.

There would be no rejection of systematic ethics, but the personal and the large scale would reflect one another.

How they do so and whether one or other is primary is addressed in what follows.

Meaning

In this section, meaning is used in its sense as in ‘the meaning of life’; it is related to the concept of ‘significance’; it 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 (.

Experience is the place of meaning in the sense of ‘meaning of life’ and ‘significance of being’. We are essentially experiential beings.

Elaboration—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. It includes considerations of value, particularly ethics (for individuals, society, and institutions) and aesthetics (particularly beauty as way of and motive to inspired living).

Well-Being (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

The good

Intrinsic good is improvement of quality, intensity, and form of experience (receptive and active, of experiential beings).

Choice and the right

Where choice, i.e., of thought or action from among real options)is possible it is right to choose thought and action that promotes (intrinsic) goodness.

Ethics

Ethics is right choice in light of what is good; in simple terms, metaethics is the study of ethics.

While facts are about the way the world is, value is concerned with preference and choice and principles thereof; and ethics concerns moral value (an issue to address in the general treatment of ethics is whether there is an ontological distinction between fact and value).

In modern western thought the study of ethics is canonically (i) normative ethics—ethics as specified just above (ii) applied ethics—the ethics of actual situations whether ad hoc or in terms of ethical principles, problems of how to apply the principles and take into account factors specific to the situations (iii) metaethics—roughly the study of the concepts – including ethics itself – that constitute ethics and its study and interactions among these three divisions.

Secondary goodness

Bodily integrity, culture (which includes knowledge, belief, and art), economic and political arrangements and technology are secondarily good—have secondary goodness—as far as they promote goodness.

Overlap of intrinsic and secondary goodness

Involvement in these matters has intrinsic goodness. Thus, thus there is intrinsic goodness to political entities with elements of democracy. Political arrangements and institutions are secondarily good as far as they promote intrinsic goodness.

In culture and its development, there may be intrinsic goodness; and there is secondary goodness as far as they are instrumental in promoting primary goodness.

While there may be intrinsic goodness in sophistication (which includes precision) of culture, its value in promoting movement (which includes progress and evolution) towards the good (e.g., better beings and societies) does not always require us to wait for sophistication. There may be tradeoffs between sophistication and goodness.

Ethics for the way of being

Brief reduction to simple language (already begun in the definition above).

A simple ethic

The life of the individual – driven by concerns of security and higher living—beauty, intellect, the union of the immediate and the ultimate; sharing; relationships.

The world—see means – the categories > world (below).

What should be considered

Aim and object

The aim of living according to TWB—Shared living and process in the immediate and ultimate as one.

Individuals—Adults, children, all living beings, the environment; their interests – sharing, caring, seeking one’s highest being.

Means – the categories

The following simple rendering of the categories is useful.

Experiential—(i) meditative (ii) active – instrumental and immersive (iii) personality and role.

World—(i) experiential-universal (ii) of nature (iii) community and global society (and categories—economic, political, knowledge and its functions, trans-worldly) (iv) artificial being as being and co-agent.

Ethics and pathway

The pathways shall address all aspects of human being – mind and body – and their best address in light of a balance among thought and feeling, sharing and individual expression, the immediate and the ultimate – i.e., this world and beyond.

Though classical perfection is not desired, there is a sense in which being on a path is provided there is intelligence, effort, sharing, negotiation (over prescription), and address of pleasure and pain (emphasis on pleasure in being and being on the way, some acceptance of pain together with therapy).

Ethical considerations in other sections

There are ethical considerations in doubt and certainty and pathways.

Ethics and meaning in light of the way of being**

Add link below.

See consequences of the metaphysics > ethics and meaning.

Categories

Implications of ethics are to be included if not already present. The treatment of categories in this chapter and that in pathways are to be brought into closer alignment.

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 at that foundational level of discussion). A further element, is the system of knowledge and ethics, for which certainty and precision are valuable but not necessary.

Early in the development of the work, the foundational elements were used as explanatory and predictive. The form of the explanation was to recognize levels and aspects of being, which were called ‘dimensions’ and paradigms of explanation or ‘dynamics’ in some generalized sense. It was then recognized that these were close in conception to the philosophical concept of category. In this version of the work dimensions and paradigms are replaced by categories and categorial explanation and dynamics.

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 and ethics and meaning (ii) enhance the metaphysics – its use in understanding-with-prediction and realization and. Therefore the categories are placed here, after experience and ethics and meaning. 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

As introduced by Aristotle, a system of categories is a complete—and perhaps unique—list of highest genera or kinds of being or of understanding (or of both being and understanding as manifest in Aristotle’s work).

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.

Comment on category ‘differences (SEP).

Function

Categories are useful in recognizing and forming systems of logic, understanding, and valid thought; their use is commonly in but not restricted to philosophy.

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

From considerations of it being difficult to distinguish appearance and reality (‘phenomena and noumena’) 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 earlier developments of 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 regard as 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 (dynamics) 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. That is, in analogy to physics, so far as they may, categories should contain a dynamics, if only implicitly.

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 old and new notions of category (elements of being and of dynamic 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).

Thus, work remains to be done for the open version of TWB.

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.

Summary

While the concept of category changed with Kant from the highest kinds of being (just under being) to the highest kinds of understanding, the real metaphysics allows a restoration of the Aristotle’s conception.

We supplement this as follows—

Experiential being and nonbeing

We go one step up from the genera to being itself, recognized as experiential (for which we are required to admit all being as potentially relational-experiential).

We admit nonbeing or nonmanifest being to being (from discussions of existence and manifestation).

This and the following may be effectively understood in terms of the real metaphysics, with joint epistemic and ethical justification.

Form

We want the categories to be more than mere classification but also to provide structure and dynamics. For this we introduce ‘general form’, as below. These first two levels mesh with the third and are mutually enhancing.

Our world

Our world from which we derive pragmatic metaphysical levels – the physical through the universal and paradigms of perception and understanding, e.g., spacetime and causation as well as their specific forms in science.

The categories according to their levels and paradigms

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.

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 (or nil or zero) items and relations.

Universe as an experiential-relational field

Universe as an experiential-relational field.

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.

Fill the above out.

Particular forms

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

Hierarchy of experiential being

See this topic under ‘our world’, below. Abstract from that topic.

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

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

The content is at present suggestive.

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

Fill this out from, e.g., the little manual.

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

Higher

Transcending our beings, societies, and cosmos.

Universal

Work this out via imagination, synthesis of foregoing elements, and criticism.

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).

Yoga

This is a good place to define 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 as (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’).

Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Pathways

Contents

Design of pathways

Enlightened pathways in being

Generic programs

An example—my program for the way of being

Adaptable program templates

Resources

Design of pathways

Design and its process

This section is preliminary to and grounds the design of the pathways.

Design

Design is a process of coming up with an address to an occasion at a level of specificity that is ready to implement.

Note that the term ‘occasion’ is generic and may refer to a need, opportunity, problematic situation, or other (kind of) occasion.

Design process

Outline

Occasion > careful definition of problem > synthesis – conceptual address of problem > analysis and improvement > final evaluation

Details

Occasion – a situation to address, e.g., a need, opportunity, or other occasion. The situation may be new or a need arising out of an existing system.

Careful definition of the problem – in concrete and specific terms.

Synthesis – coming up with a concept to address the occasion; it will involve creativity and possible (often likely) use of existing designs and implementations.

Analysis – adjustment of the conceptual synthesis to satisfy the careful definition.

Improvement generally involves – trials > matching for precision > correction of imprecision, until precision is satisfactory. Optimization may substitute for or augment the trial process if the conceptual synthesis has an analytic or otherwise definite model.

Final evaluation and review – a phase involving a wider audience than the ‘designers’ and may mesh with implementation.

Design-implementation cycle

Given an occasion that is new or of an existing system, the cycle is

… occasion > design or redesign > implementation > occasion …

Or, in general terms

… world > opportunity > choice and action > world …

Notes

As observed, the design, its process, and implementation ‘in-the-world’, may mesh in many ways, both vertically and horizontally.

Design and design elements for pathways

The occasion; what pathways are

The occasion

The metaphysics shows the universe as ultimate, that all beings will reach it, that there is an effective approach to it

What pathways are

Introduction

I.e., that there are effective and shared pathways to the ultimate “in, for, and from the immediate to the ultimate” (i.e., the aim of the way of being).

In the immediate—with degrees of approximation from zero to one according to degree of realization

Beginning in the immediate, through worlds, to the ultimate.

Definition

Given incompleteness in being or feeling, and a metaphysics with meaning and ethics

A pathway is a way to completion in one or both of (i) experiencing of completion in the immediate (ii) a way of experience, reflection, and action toward real completion in the immediate, so far as possible, or the ultimate or both (given the developments so far, the complete is the ultimate)

A pathway is (a) individual and shared (b) is negotiated (does not merely follow received prescriptions and questions its own foundation) (c) open to return to ground level and abandonment of designed process.

The purpose of pathways

Implementing the aim of the way

Aim in universal terms

Shared discovery and realization of the ultimate in, for, and from the immediate.

Aim in process terms

Realization of the ultimate in this life and beyond.

What we know: the metaphysics through categories of experiential being and their dynamics

The following and their dynamics are (i) interactive in terms of vertical cause and (ii) mutually informative in conceptual terms.

Experiential being and non-being

The category itself

Concepts—the real metaphysics including meaning and ethics, universe as experiential-relational field, with concept (mind) and object (world) sides and their mesh.

Details—oneness of being vs process; transformation of experience vs transformation in extension; immanence-vs-explicitness-of-principles-and-ideas-including-meta.

Dynamics—structures that comply with logic.

Supplement: dimensions of experience (where, what level)

To be integrated with the above.

Dimensions of state

Form – Quality

Bound – Free

Integration and personality

Trajectory in time

Ground and choice

Projects and evolution

General form and formation (intermediate between the universe and worlds)

Concepts—abstract form transcends and includes temporal formation and spatial form.

Dynamics—transients (arising from the void), of which some are more persistent as a result of symmetry and therefore stability, of which some effectively populate the universe in their experiential reflexivity.

Our world – and its general paradigms as dynamics

The pragmatic categorial levels.

Concepts

Knowledge of our world (i) is formulated as a system of levels (physical etc, below) (ii) from which paradigms, many well-known, are extracted (iii) which may be generalized and applied as justified by the real metaphysics (iv) which, together with the metaphysics enables negotiation of the universe.

Dynamics (paradigms)

Physical—mechanism (determinism with indeterminism) and causation.

Complexity from the physical to the living—form, emergence, and evolution – variation and selection (a case of formation).

Mind and its aspects—experience itself including experiencing, the concept side (cognition, emotion-feeling – especially pleasure and pain, attitude, choice), experiential relation (concept and linguistic meaning, knowing, acting), and the experienced (world including process, body).

Society and culture—competition, cooperation, and amplification of the power of mind, with technology of space and mind exploration.

Sources to use in writing this chapter (a temporary section)

The master document for the metaphysics and categories.

The document ‘a system of knowledge.docm’ for areas of action, particularly at the levels of (a) the universal and (b) this world.

Specifically for pathway design—journey in being.docm (for pathway design), received ways of realization.docm (for tradition), design and planning.docm (writing plan).

For extensive resources—the little manual.docm .

Completeness

Metaphysical

Metaphysical completeness is derived from the categories (their elements above), tradition (below, with ‘a system of human knowledge’).

‘Tradition’ is used in the expansive sense of all that is considered received, subject to reason.

Pragmatic completeness

Pragmatic completeness, such as it may occur, will come from the following and ongoing (i.e., while on paths) review and revision.

Design for completeness

See design and its process.

Adaptability

General adaptability

Orientation to a range of personality types and projects, situations, and cultures (for the range or situations also see ‘a system of human knowledge’).

Paths and programs

For adaptability, pathways will be divided into paths and programs

Paths

Paths are about quality, form, and dimensions (categories) of realization.

Programs

Programs are implementation—dynamic (i.e., learning in action) parallel sequences of action.

Programs – details

Adaptability is further implemented via (i) program elements (ii) a program for the way and my life (which also functions as an example) and (iii) a program template abstracted from the example (item #ii) and generalized to provide options.

Areas and kinds of action

Immediate v ultimate

Immersive v instrumental

Their integration

Tradition

How traditions are viewed

Traditions are not seen as authoritative but as useful for (i) symbolic and other suggestiveness (ii) elements to be incorporated in the way and its implementations.

Some traditions

Real – Buddhism, Yoga, Advaita Vedanta, Christian mysticism

Symbolic – remote gods

On yoga and yoking

There are many yoga systems today. In an original meaning, ‘yoga’, which signified yoking or binding of beings to being—the universe, is (i) approach to, embracement of, and being the ultimate (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency. ‘Yoking’ (also: ‘minding’) is engagement in yoga.

Repeated definition. 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 as (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’).

Yoga is (i) all aspects of human experience, knowledge, and action (ii) systematized for essence and efficiency (iii) to be understood as remaining in-process with regard to its nature and aspects. Yoking (minding) is yoga-in-process-and-action.

Streamline use of ‘yoga’ in this chapter.

Quality vs form

Quality – effective pathways

Form – programs

Design of programs

Universal and ultimate – the level of being (aim, program – foundation and realization)

Categorial level—experiential being and nonbeing.

Worlds – our world, everyday and immediate – the level of be-ing(s) and becoming (aim, program – a routine)

Categorial level—our world

Integration – four aspects as one

Immediate – ultimate

Instrumental - intrinsic

An institute for the way of being (purpose, emphases – foundation, realization, action)

Francis Bacon (“Salomon's House”) (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

The purpose and foci may be—

Introduction

I have long been keen to have an institute that would have members who would have knowledge in different aspects of the way of being. They would interact in such a way that it would promote (i) the way as a whole (ii) individual disciplines. There would be support, e.g., for funds, administration, and publication. There may be a physical building or, alternatively, networked interaction.

Thus far, the idea of an institute has not gotten beyond a conceptual stage. However, planning shall be part of the example that follows.

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. Example, A manual of health.

Design

Emphasis

Above.

Planning

To be undertaken as part of immersion in being and the world after completing the essential and informal versions of the way of being.

Review of concept (the section on ‘An institution’).

Search further external sources.

Review and planning of the elements of design.

Elements of design

Central location and building vs distributed and virtual.

Funding—preliminary and beyond.

Needs—establishment (information, production).

Needs—human – primary, administrative, support.

There will be a degree of immanence over explicitness

Think about what amount the level will be.

Of ‘what we know’ in the pathways and programs

Of effectiveness of pathways in the programs

Chapter structure

The structure begins with design.

Design and its process

Design and design elements for pathways

Paths

Aware and enlightened paths

Ground

Programs

Generic

See design of programs above.

For the way of being

Adaptable templates

Enlightened pathways in being

Was, simply, ‘Pathways’

The aim of the way, elaborated

Elaboration

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

Place the following definition earlier, at an appropriate place.

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.

Pathways “to the ultimate in, for, and from the world”

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.

When discussions of yoga are brought into one place, relink the above.

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 and its elements

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.

Feeling—pleasure, pain, emotion—and their intelligent address

Could be “Synthesis of the elements of experience in process”

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.

Generic programs

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.

The content is at present suggestive.

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

Pictures?

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 as understanding and as inspiration, 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. See affirmation and dedication, and 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.

An example—my program for the way of being

The following program is taken from my life. In its outline, I follow it more or less daily (with breaks). In its details it is a list of options, rather than things I do every day. It reflects the following elements (a) immediate and universal (b) individual, community, nature, and society (c) the categories.

Introduction

Source of the program in my life

The example if from my life. It may appear ambitious. However, when I was younger, I had sufficient energy for it even though I worked. Now, I am retired and, without work, my energy is sufficient to it.

Its comprehensiveness and adaptability

The example should be adaptable to a range personality types and projects, interests, situations, and cultures. It pays attention to individual and shared action and to local as well as universal issues. The categories and the universal are immanent in a daily routine.

Daily routine at home and at work

Implementation

To implement this routine, I have constructed a table with multiple columns which includes main headings and activities, times, and an open column in which I enter specific activities for the day. The activities below are generic—not the specific activities for the day.

Flexibility

An intent is to be flexible. While I generally follow the routine, I may vary from it significantly when occasioned or spontaneously.

Early morning

Awaken

Awaken early morning.

Dedication

Dedication to and affirmation of the way of being.

Review

Brief review and plan – the day to life and beyond.

Coffee in nature

Coffee on the front porch overlooking hills to the east.

Preparing for routine of the day

Set specific activities and times for the day, review of mail and news, open relevant folders and files on my computer.

Breakfast and walk—a ‘break’

Breakfast, fluids, and a short walk at this time or later.

The way of being

Foundation and long term planning

Foundation—(i) reflect on ideas and experience, read, synthesize, and write on the way of being (ii) as needed—review long term and daily planning detail.

Realization—yoga, action, and exploration

Realization—(i) yoga—physical and experiential (ii) immersive and instrumental action in the categories (iii) technological exploration of mind and space.

Note—it is important to understand the term as used in this work – see yoga.

Ground—some elements of my ordinary life

Ground—(i) work, relationships, and communication (ii) safety, security, and finance (iii) health (iv) attention to life and daily discipline.

Ground—planning for the way of being: immediate

Immediate plan—to complete an initial version of the master document for the way of being, and a tentatively final essential version.

Ground—stepping away from deep involvement with the way of being

It is useful to occasionally step away from explicit focus on the way of being.

Experiment with no coffee.

No alcohol.

Ground—planning and timelines for the way of being beginning

Review of elements of planning and timelines and dates—2026 and ongoing.

Realization, personal and shared—Spring 2026:

Home and away daily program, in interaction with:

A program of immersive and instrumental action and reflection in nature and social action.

Nature—four weeks+ – Summer 2026

Social action – truth for: the way of being | the way of the world | politics and economics.

Networking and a real or virtual institute for the way of being:

Planning—parallel to realization, above—i.e., Spring 2026.

Networking—Spring 2026+.

Implementation—2027 or earlier.

Step away from explicit involvement with the way of being—a week annually, beginning Spring or Summer 2026.

No coffee or alcohol.

The day

Tasks

Tasks—day to life (cleaning, supplies, cooking, other). I maintain a list of tasks and needs.

Lunch

Lunch.

Exercise, exploration, and photography

Exercise and exploration (aim: at least two hours, net, daily)—walking or bicycling, local streets or beyond town (e.g., Headwaters Forest), and photography.

Evening

Review and minor tasks

Review evening to life and beyond. Minor tasks. Print plan for the next day. Shower.

Networking and sharing

Share the way of being (network).

Discipline, supper, entertainment

Be disciplined, have supper and entertainment.

Early sleep and meditation

Sleep early.

Final thoughts—and brief meditation before I sleep (i) possibly structured, e.g., review of what I need to do (ii) unstructured to see what may arise.

Some details—what have I accomplished, where am I headed, is what I do (my life, my engagement with ideas – society – the world) useful, and do I enjoy it at a fundamental level… do I need or want to change my areas and level of engagement… what does my limitedness and limitlessness inform me?

If I wake up during the night—optional stretching, meditation, and snack.

Planning a trip or expedition

Trip possibilities—kinds—and planning

See my hiking list—a planning template that addresses more than hiking—it includes wilderness hiking and its reason and visiting a range of locations—towns, cultures, universities and others.

Items to plan

Especially address travel plans, places to stay, travel partners, bookings, document needs, general and special items to take.

Daily routine away from home and in travel

Aim

The aims of travel are (i) experience and enjoyment (ii) immersion in and inspiration-learning from nature and culture. My ‘away’ routine is more flexible than my ‘at home’ routine.

Morning

Review

Review plans—predetermined or spontaneous, set as yet unset times and places.

Usual morning activities

Usual morning activities—e.g., shower, breakfast. Coordinate with others.

Day

Setting out, activities

Set out if not a rest day for experience, immersion, and inspiration etc. Take photographs, record notes. May (i) follow preset plan or (ii) follow interesting-exciting-inspirations spontaneously, as they arise or (iii) both.

Rest days

Rest days—I like these to be spontaneous.

Lunch

Lunch.

Evening and night

Review and preparation

Review the day, plan for the next day, shower, dress for the evening.

Activities for ‘the way’

More experience, immersion, inspiration etc. as the thought or opportunity arise.

Supper and entertainment

Supper and entertainment—disciplined vs spontaneous.

Final thoughts and brief meditation

See daily routine at home and at work for details.

Thoughts on the current and future trips and activities – new, to be resumed or otherwise on return.

Adaptable program templates

Daily routine at home and at work

Early morning

Awaken, dedication, preliminary review – world, life, the day

Awaken early morning.

Dedication to and affirmation of being and becoming.

Brief review and plan – the day to life and beyond.

Time in nature optional coffee or tea.

Set specific activities and times for the day, review of mail and news.

Breakfast, and an optional short walk at this time or later.

Being and becoming

Projects and work

Foundation—(i) reflect on ideas and experience, read, synthesize, (ii) as needed—review long term and daily planning detail.

Wider implementation—instrumental and immersive give and take with society, the world, and beyond…

Ground

Ground—(i) work, relationships, and communication (ii) safety, security, and finance (iii) health (iv) attention to life and daily discipline.

It is useful to occasionally step away from explicit focus on primary projects.

The day and evening

Tasks

Tasks—day to life (cleaning, supplies, cooking, other). Maintain a list of tasks and needs.

Lunch

Lunch.

Realization—yoga, action, and exploration

Exercise, exploration, and photography

Exercise and exploration (aim: at least two hours, net, daily)—walking or bicycling, local streets or beyond town (e.g., Headwaters Forest), and photography.

Evening

Review and minor tasks

Review evening to life and beyond. Minor tasks. Print plan for the next day. Shower.

Networking and sharing

Share the way of being (network).

Discipline, supper, entertainment

Be disciplined, have supper and entertainment.

Early sleep and meditation

Sleep early.

Final thoughts—and brief meditation before I sleep (i) possibly structured, e.g., review of what I need to do (ii) unstructured to see what may arise.

Some details—what has been accomplished, where one is headed, is what one does (life, engagement with ideas – society – the world) useful, and is it enjoyed at a fundamental level… are changes needed … what does my ones limitedness and limitlessness inform us?

Before sleep or if waking up during the night—optional stretching, meditation, food – fluids.

Planning a trip or expedition

Trip possibilities—kinds—and planning

See a planning template —that addresses more than hiking—it includes wilderness hiking and its reason and visiting a range of locations—towns, cultures, universities and others.

Items to plan

Especially address travel plans, places to stay, travel partners, bookings, document needs, general and special items to take.

Daily routine away from home and in travel

Aim

The aims of travel are (i) experience and enjoyment (ii) immersion in and inspiration-learning from nature and culture. My ‘away’ routine is more flexible than my ‘at home’ routine.

Morning

Review

Review plans—predetermined or spontaneous, set as yet unset times and places.

Usual morning activities

Usual morning activities—e.g., shower, breakfast. Coordinate with others.

Day

Setting out, activities

Set out if not a rest day for experience, immersion, and inspiration etc. Take photographs, record notes. May (i) follow preset plan or (ii) follow interesting-exciting-inspirations spontaneously, as they arise or (iii) both.

Rest days

Rest days—may be be spontaneous.

Lunch

Lunch.

Evening and night

Review and preparation

Review the day, plan for the next day, shower, dress for the evening.

Activities for ‘the way’

More experience, immersion, inspiration etc. as the thought or opportunity arise.

Supper and entertainment

Supper and entertainment—disciplined vs spontaneous.

Final thoughts and brief meditation

See daily routine at home and at work for details.

Thoughts on the current and future trips and activities – new, to be resumed or otherwise on return.

Resources

To be overhauled.

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 definition. 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

The idea

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.

Some considerations

Today we refer back to thinkers about 2500 years ago, that is, to the earliest written words in philosophy. What if, instead, there were 10,000, 100,000, or 1 million years of written history? In formulating philosophical thought, would it be required to refer to all important thinkers of the last million years?

If philosophical thought continues for another, say, 10,000 years would not referring back, become an impediment to new thought?

What is required? Some of the seminal thinkers of the future will be summarizers and synthesizers. They will capture the essences of thousands of years of philosophy. This will make for productive new, thinking. This will, of course, not prevent any thinker from referring to the detailed record (and perhaps some kind of systematic databases will be available to help minimize the labor of back referral).

Metaphysics and the world**

The chapter may be named ‘topics and applications’.

The entries so far are but a stem-plan and need to be worked on.

This chapter is on consequences of the conceptual developments so far, with an emphasis on (human) knowledge. Though important in itself, it is secondary to the way of being.

A system of knowledge; find others—some may be in ‘versions’.

Integrate with into the way of being > overview of essentials.

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

Combine with knowledge under ‘metaphysics’ and place here or there!

Issue of philosophy—not about ¿PHIL? but about ¿SYSTEM?

Significance of sophistication

The section on knowledge addresses some issues in knowledge and its philosophy (epistemology). The developments in this work have implications for these subjects—

Epistemology remains important but less than is often thought. In contrast, metaphysics and the use of metaphysics in action gain in importance.

The real metaphysics and related developments illuminate and have consequences for knowledge and its disciplines, especially science, philosophy, and metaphysics itself. Particularly, since the real metaphysics frames all being and knowing, questions find foundation that would otherwise be foundationless or of contentious foundation.

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).

Knowledge as in itself or not

By ‘in itself’, I mean that (i) it stands according to criteria that are epistemic (ii) and is not inextricably interwoven with action or outcome.

It seems that at the highest level of generality, knowledge is not in-itself in that there are non-epistemic criteria and that it is interwoven with action.

However, there are areas and cases of knowledge in itself according to knowledge-intrinsic criteria; and, as we have seen, in some of those cases there is perfection of precision according to those (correspondence) criteria.

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

On the limits of knowledge. Consider (i) the limit of our knowledge (ii) the limit of human knowledge (which entails the question, are we what we may think we are) (iii) the limit of knowledge (e.g., of an ideal being) and (iv) the real (and its limits). It seems that each case includes the previous. What is the relation among these cases?

System (a system of knowledge based in the metaphysics)

Above all it is essential that knowledge as a whole, in relation to being and the universe, should come before knowledge-in-itself, which should come before the disciplines. For then we expect to find that in considering ‘all’ the disciplines, there will be empty spaces where there ought to be substance and that will most likely require either (a) new disciplines or (b) reconceptualization of the disciplines. In particular, it is likely to require a more complete conceptualization of philosophy as more than either its historical conceptions or modern conceptions.

… and on knowledge and knowing (noun, verb):

What it is and its place in the world and universe.

Innate vs acquired.

Explicit vs implicit (e.g., symbolic, digital-continuum vs percept-intuition)

a system of knowledge (html) (folder)

a system of knowledge-supplement (html) (folder)

toward a database for philosophy (html) (folder)

There is overlap in topics in this chapter and the chapter on topics in metaphysics and philosophy. Some minimization of repeated content should be observed.

Introduction – aim, framework, and system

Remapping (human) knowledge

What is the nature and basis of the remap?

The system is vast with respect to extent and foundation, but the question of the role of knowledge in the future of humankind is open.

The developments in this work—metaphysics and related—show that the standard received system is limited with respect to function, extent, and articulation.

The remap envisaged is (i) viewing the function relative to the universe over all extension, being, and beings (ii) extent and articulation. A remap of articulation may begin with the received divisions, e.g., ‘science’, ‘philosophy’, and many others as labels rather than terms with meaning. Meanings will then be considered holistically and analytically in view of the developments of the work and function. What will follow is a remap at horizontal levels (disciplines etc) and vertical levels (meta), which will be deep yet relatively simple relative to the vast yet limited received system.

Disciplines and meta-disciplines

From the remap, the system of knowledge is seen as an entirety.

From this entirety, disciplines fall out (with suggestion from the traditional disciplines). That is, the system is not to be determined only or essentially by the traditional disciplines.

Knowledge of knowledge will be a discipline (and its meaning and content may be suggested by the content of epistemology as it is studied).

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

Topics in metaphysics and philosophy

The material below may be moved to the chapter on implications for knowledge and linked from here (or vice-versa). If it is kept here—whole or part—the heading ‘topics in metaphysics’ may be eliminated.

what is philosophy (html) (folder)

toward a database for philosophy (html) (folder)

What these disciplines are or ought to be

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

abstract objects (html) (folder)

Dialetheia (and emptiness)

dialetheia (html) (folder)

the year (html) (folder) ‘journal 2024’ has further material on dialetheia and planning an essay on dialetheia.

little manual (html) (folder) has material on dialetheia and the source of logic; has a vocabulary for metaphysics and the way [useful]

Ethics and meaning

Ethics and the meaning of life were introduced earlier.

What is a meaningful life

Everything to be simplified and written in ordinary but appealing language.

On meaning as in ‘the meaning of life’

The Meaning of Life (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (this link is repeated in the later treatment of meaning)

A formal definition is deferred to meaning (add link)

Though philosophy, especially ethics, is concerned with many matters, I see it as an essential function of philosophy (i.e., not just ethics) to be concerned with what it means and how to live well (this emphasis is not intended to minimize other functions of philosophy).

Introduction to meaning

Basic behavior of individual animals is determined by instinct—inner processing whose patterns are relatively fixed for the animal—and circumstance. Thought begins when internal processes have freedom from the animal form, such that they may model behavior and environment. It is presumed that this emerges when net adaptation of thought is positive. It is enhanced in reflective thought, which includes thinking about thought and its process, distinguishing true from false in perception, reason from unreason, positive from negative behavior, and identifying and evaluating criteria for positivity.

An essential function of reflective philosophical thought, is to enhance the quality of individual and collective human and animal lives and the world, and to identify kinds of quality—what it means to live well—basic and more, e.g., authenticity and ultimacy.

What is the base from which we may perform these functions. We may begin from everyday life and prior thought and experience, apply reflection in individual and community life. This invariably seems open ended—do we know enough to be satisfied that we are anywhere near the best we can do?

Alternatively, we can begin from a view of the universe as a whole. But can we reason out such a view or is such a view inevitably a posited ideology?

Even if the answer is negative so far, we can begin the process of reasoning a view and see where we arrive. It is equally in doubt that we should be entirely successful vs entirely unsuccessful. This is what we attempt below.

We will find that we can have success in the direction of depth but that as long as we are limited beings, the endeavor will be incomplete in the direction of variety (we provide both proof and doubt). That is, we shall arrive at a foundation but it will not be the end of mystery or adventure. This will frame the open ended approach described above.

After arriving at such foundation, we will be in a position to characterize what it is to live well that is ultimate in some directions, though open in others.

The preliminary needs of individual meaning

In talking of ‘higher’ meaning a basis in safety, security, and education; where these are not present, they are a focus of meaning; it is an element of meaning for those who have these basic elements met, to be involved in universal access to the basic.

Shared meaning

Shared meaning and its give and take with individual meaning.

It is secondary to individual meaning.

It illuminates individual meaning—and learns from it.

It is instrumental in meeting the preliminary needs of individual meaning.

Considerations for a later, improved conception of meaning

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.

Part of what makes for a meaningful life is the search for meaning itself. One may never find final answers. And obviously, there is more to life than meaning. For a meaningful life, most people would like or need to have basic needs met—needs such as safety, security, and perhaps human relationships. But meaning is important here too, for if some people have their basic needs met, it is often meaningful for them to help others meet their basic needs.

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? While meaning has variance, how can it be specified in universal terms.

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.

About ethics

On ethics

We shall see ethics and meaning as intimately connected so that morality should be intimately connected to living well rather than just being a set of rules and principles.

On the applicability of ethics and meaning

We look for a conception and description of meaning that has significance for

Seekers of authenticity and critiques of meaning as well as those who might prefer ordinary contentment—i.e., for all reasonably aware and functional adults.

For the ‘fallen’ and the dysfunctional.

For children.

For the religious, the scientific, the empirically oriented, the philosophical, and the metaphysical; for the traditional and the seekers of change.

Respect for all life and the environment.

Ethics and knowledge

Given the reality of value, ethics is knowledge.

As we have seen, ethics is an element of criteria for knowledge—for its validity at a high level and utility at all levels.

Fact and value

Fact and value are not fundamentally distinct. Given that all consistent (logical) conceptions are realized, any fundamental distinction between the abstract and the concrete disappears. Certainly, there are differences—with sufficient abstraction, objects are not causal and there ‘residence’ in space and time is not null but abstracted out. Yet the abstract and the concrete are equally real. Fact and value are equally real—there is no absolute ontological distinction.

An imperative

That there is an imperative to be on the way to the ultimate—living in the immediate and ultimate as one—has been noted. This frames local ethical considerations.

The imperative is not to be compulsive. ‘Living in the world and its reward and responsibility’ is important.

Ethics often takes our lives in the world as ultimate. The world is significant but not the only significant—its significance is in balance with the ultimate. That is, our focus in the world should be on the world and beyond.

Cosmology

The little manual has content and sources. Seek more site and external sources.

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