JOURNEY IN BEING METAPHYSICS

odecrackΤεχνίτη Νοημοσύνη και Ρομποτική

29 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 7 μήνες)

87 εμφανίσεις

JOURNEY IN BEING

METAPHYSICS

Home

Metaphysics

new outline
................................
................................
................................
..

1

What is metaphysics?
................................
................................
................................
......

1

A Metaphysics of
Immanence
................................
................................
.........................

1

Why metaphysics?

................................
................................
................................
..........

1

Intrinsic aims
................................
................................
................................
...................

1

Metaphysics

................................
................................
................................
........................

2

Being

review and reflection

................................
................................
.........................

2

What is metaphysics?
................................
................................
................................
......

3

A Metaphysics of
Immanence

reflections on naming the metaphysics

.......................

5

Aims of the cha
pter

................................
................................
................................
.........

6

The first intrinsic goal

to develop the foundation

................................
........................

6

On ‘method’

................................
................................
................................
..................

39

A second intrinsic goal

to refine basic ideas on Being and to refine and set

up the
Theory of Being

from
Metaphysics

through
The Future

................................
....

42

A third intrinsic goal

to review metaphysi
cs and philosophy in light of

the foregoing framework
................................
................................
...............................

50


METAPHYSICS

NEW OUTLIN
E

What is metaphysics?

A Metaphysics of
Immanence

Why immanence?

Immanence of Law, Pattern and Form

Why metaphysics?

As
Theory of Being
, all ide
as and transformations flow to and from the metaphysics

the
metaphysics is ‘whatever foundation developed along the way

partial and in
-
process’

Intrinsic a
ims

Develop a foundation

First, however, refine some ideas from
Being
: general observation on the for
ms of
experience

sentience

and their kinds


2

Main or generic conclusions from the forms of experience… repeated from
Being:

being

that which exists

given fact of being but only some generic kinds of object. The
existence of generic objects: sentience, all be
ing

the universe, difference and change,
part

domain,
process
, absence of being

the void

General and particular (topical) conclusions from the existence and nature of the generic
objects. Necessary and contextual

e.g. local, probable

conclusions

Conclusion
s regarding the na
ture of metaphysics (as epilogue and

to the general
conclusions of the metaphysics)

Objections and refutations

Faith and affirmation

On method

To refine and set up
Theory of Being

from
Metaphysics

to
The Future

I.e. from
Objects

to
The Fu
ture

Review
metaphysics and philosophy in light of the
Metaphysics of immanence

Metaphysics and philosophy

Problems of metaphysics

METAPHYSICS

Metaphysics

is at the heart of the system of ideas. All theory flows to and from
Metaphysics



the Metaphysics of

Immanence

Being

review and reflection

Since metaphysics is concerned with being, some reflections on being and the role it is to
play may be useful

Being is ‘that which exists or has existence.’ As fundamental, being comes recommended
by the following cha
racteristics that have various overlaps. (1) Its uncommitted character
that enables avoidance of prejudice especially the prejudice of the paradigmatic
fundamental forms as commonly constructed

matter, mind, process… (2) It therefore
carries the power of s
ymbolic naming of the unknown, of what is to be discovered as in
symbolic algebra. (3) It derives from the most simple of language forms

the state of
being as expressed by the verb to be whose forms are ‘is,’ ‘are,’ ‘was,’ ‘will be’ and so
on… (4) It does
not distinguish near or far, immediate or eternal, esoteric or mundane…
but permits such distinctions. Thus its esoteric and even religious connotations are
incidental rather than necessary. In the global form the idea permits representation or
naming of t
he entire universe over all coordinating features, e.g. space and time, in a
single word. (5) On account of its uncommitted character and its permission of
immediacy and eternality. (6) It enables connection to the traditions of East and West

It is importa
nt to note that use of ‘being’ in metaphysics cannot be passive if it is to serve
as the foundational idea for the entire universe of experience and fact. Rather, it is
essential to develop metaphysics in such a way that there is continual shedding of
onto
logical commitments

explicit and implicit, given and as yet unrealized


in such a

3

way that they are neither enforced or disallowed but remain, in general and in specific
contexts, in interaction with discovery

They used to say

that the ontological commitm
ents should be the result rather than the
condition of metaphysics
. It is now said that investigation and commitment should be
developed interactively and, until shown to be complete, continually

What is metaphysics?

Introduction

In this narrative, metaphy
sics has, roughly, the meaning that it has in philosophy. I.e.,
metaphysics is concerned with the study of being as such. It was seen that there is no
conception or sense of existence of something over and above its conception and thus the
sense

of being i
s trivial or empty but the concept is powerful. In addition to the question
of being itself and the power that derives from it (primarily below, initial observations in
Being
,) there are a number of related and fundamental topics that may be studied in
met
aphysics. These are (1) the issue of
substance
, i.e. whether a uniform and unchanging
substance that is the source of all things and all change (this issue is interesting from the
point of view of simplicity;) (2) the question of
Objects
, i.e. how are the
‘things’ that
have being known; and (3) the question of variety of being or
Cosmology
, i.e. what things
are there in the universe

Narrow versus broad connotation of metaphysics

First considerations

This question … should interact with the development of th
e metaphysics therefore the
following is informed by the development and the question will be addressed again below
in
Metaphysics and philosophy

Metaphysics is the study of being without regard to ontological

commitment

Metaphysics must proceed by the shedding and assertion of commitments

At root, the ground of metaphysics shall have no commitments. Ground metaphysics
shall have no commitments. First metaphysics shall have only the most universal and
therefore

most fundamental of commitments

that there is being

(That there is being does not mean that there is
always

manifest being)

Metaphysics must remain in a process of discovery until any end is (or ends are)
discovered. I.e. there is no ontological commitmen
t to either endless or to final discovery

This lack of commitment to finiteness versus infinity in discovery may not be uniform
but may be relative to aspect e.g. depth and variety

This ‘first metaphysics’ appears to distinguish between void and manifest b
eing (what is
sometimes referred to as non
-
being and being) but the ideas of void and manifest may be
regarded so as to not require this distinction. Alternately, first metaphysics may be
regarded as the study of void and manifest being

Metaphysics is the
most fundamental discipline from and to which the study of all other
departments of study

objects, meaning, logic, mind, cosmology, the human world and

4

faith, character and necessity of journey, explorations in ideas and tran
sformation, and
the arc of lif
e


shall flow

Metaphysics is the discipline whose object is being and its outer limits. And: Philosophy
is the discipline whose limits are the outer limits of being and understanding

In this formulation, being may perhaps be enhanced as follows. (1) Replac
e ‘being’ by
‘being, action and transformation’ even though this enhancement is implicit. (2) Regard
Metaphysics as the object of metaphysics, Philosophy as the object of philosophy

What is metaphysics



fr
om ‘06

Metaphysics is concerned with understanding

the world. In one meaning, metaphysics is
a study of the most general aspects of things


the way they are in virtue of their
existence. The entity studied may be an object, the universe, the real, or (in a less
conventional interpretation) a method of de
monstration. The Theory of Being as
developed here is concerned not only with what there is in the local cosmological system
but what there is in the entire universe: what is
actual
? The Theory of Being is concerned
with depth (foundation, issues of substa
nce) and variety or cosmology. It is found that
what is possible is (in the global sense of ‘is’) realized in the universe i.e. the
actual

and
the possible are identical. However what is possible in terms of the patterns of behavior
of the local cosmologic
al system has a far lesser variety than what is possible without
qualification i.e. in the universe. What is locally possible is an example of the concept of
the normal e.g. of normal behavior. The idea of the ‘normal’ is developed below

They were able to
show a picture of the Universe that is demonstrably deeper than that of
the tradition of ideas and of greater variety than that of science, Faith, myth and fiction.
Their picture of depth (metaphysics and Logic) was explicitly ultimate. Their picture of
va
riety (cosmology) was only implicitly ultimate but still explicitly greater by an infinite
factor than that of science, faith, myth and fiction

In the present section, the metaphysics will be developed and an exploration of its
significance will be begun a
nd continued in subsequent sections. Further meanings and
formalizations of
metaphysics

will be taken up in division ‘Journey in Being,’ sections
‘Philosophy and Metaphysics’ and ‘Problems in Metaphysics’


5

A Metaphysics of
Immanence

reflections

on
naming th
e metaphysics

Why Immanence?

Alternatives

Metaphysics of
:

Absence

Presence

A
bsence



presenc
e

Immanence

Identity

Dynamics
,
Theory of being

Absolute indeterminism

(


absolute determinism)

Logic as the law of the universe

Reflections


Let us reflect on the
naming

of the metaphysics. What is it that gives the metaphysics its
power
?

It may be seen to start with the
void

that is the source of the
absolute
indeterminism
. From what characteristics of the void does the absolute indeterminism
follow? The characteri
stics are (1) that it contains no Form, no Pattern, and no Law and
(2) that the void exists… which it does as the complement of all being. (1) Follows from
the concept of the void as absence and the universe as containing all things including,
therefore, F
orm, Pattern and Law (as distinct from form…) I.e. the absolute
indeterminism follows from the Immanence of the
Higher

objects of being among the
‘lower.’ (Quotes because as is seen in
Objects
, the distinction between higher and lower
is not a necessary on
e.) Therefore it is the Immanence of all things in the universe (which
can be seen as equivalent to elimination of substance) that makes for absolute
indeterminism and so the metaphysics

This
——
defining characteristic may be viewed ‘negatively’ as absence f
rom the void or
positively as
presence in the universe
. The positive is cleare
r

since it obviously implies
the negative… even though it was the negative that occurred first in the development
.
The positive says more
——
explicitly
. Further, ‘immanence’ is bet
ter than presence for it
makes clear that Form is of being rather than imposed on being or merely present with
being…

The metaphysics may be named
Metaphysics of Immanence

Immanence of law, pattern and Form



from ‘06

Being is that which exists or has exis
tence. Being includes not just things but also laws,
patterns, and forms (the concept of Form is clarified in the discussion ‘Form…’ below
and in the next section ‘Objects.’) Typically, laws are thought to be read into being.
However, the concept of the Un
iverse is that of all being


the manifold of All Being.
There is nothing outside the Universe; therefore, laws, patterns, and forms are not outside
the universe
:
they are immanent in (all) being. (It will become clear that talk of distinct
universes is wi
thout content.) Therefore, while laws, forms and patterns may be read,
Laws, Forms, and Patterns are immanent in
Being
. They did not need to further
distinguish law from Law, form from Form… The Void is the absence of being and
Logos is the form

or law


o
f all being


6

Aims

of the chapter

The following goals are those of the metaphysics in the narrative
——
there is also, as for
the other topics, the intrinsic interest and the hope to make a contribution

A first goal is to develop the foundation

A second goal is

to refine some ideas on Being and to refine and set up the metaphysics
itself and Theory of Being through The Future

A third goal is to review metaphysics and philosophy in light of the foregoing framework

The narrative continues with other topics that de
fine goals of which some may be
incorporated into the above goals

Working out the aims

Metaphysics

is at the heart of the system of ideas. The topic of
Being

flows into it and
from it

as well as from topic
-
specific considerations


flows the topics of
Obje
cts
,
Logic
,
Mind
,
Cosmology
, the
Human World

and other topics

The Metaphysics may be seen as the foundation of the system of ideas … and can be set
up as follows

The first intrinsic goal

to develop the foundation

The narrative interacts with the metaphysi
cs. Although metaphysics does not fully found
transformation
or

conceptual development it has
a
foundational character

The structure of this section is this. The development stems from a small group of central
ideas

experience or sentience and the form of
experience, the concepts and facts of
being and of all being (the universe,) of difference and domain (part,) of change, of
absence of being (the void,) of form, of
this

cosmological system and so on. These ideas
outline the section; in each section the co
rresponding idea is the main source of
development

In
Metaphysics
, the focus is on those underlying ‘axioms’ and consequences that are
fundamental and necessarily true

Overlaid upon the above, the section has a second structure. This structure is defined b
y
the topic regarding which conclusions are derived. These topics define the main divisions
and chapters of the narrative

from
Being
, through
Metaphysics

and on to
Transformation

and
The Future
.
Thus, in this section, some considerations of
Being

are
refin
ed and subsequent chapters are set up
. This

development

is further elaborated in the
next section,
A second intrinsic goal

to refine basic ideas on Being and to refine and set
up the Theory of Being
from Metaphysics through The Future

1.

Five essential concepts

(could go earlier)

Earlier it was remarked that the
sense

(but not reference) of the
concept

of the being of an
entity over and above the conception of the
entity

is empty

What then may form a

basis for foundation?

The following basic aspects have arisen:
all
,
none o
r
nothing or the

void,

and
difference

or, equivalently,
part
; these aspects pertain to the concepts of
universe
,
void

and
domai
n


7

The empirical is built into the fact of perception
and into the fact of content

that imply
being and the condition of being that implies all, none and part

The qualifiers all, none or nothing and part may apply to entities or to collections of
entities. Collections of entities may be regarded as entities

I
t will be useful to first elaborate on the foundation and nature of the conceptual

empirical, the basic aspects and qualifiers

Five essential concepts



from ‘06

The essential concepts of their metaphysics were ‘
Being
,’ ‘Universe,’ ‘Void,’ ‘Logos’ (or
Logi
c,) and the ‘Normal’

These concepts arose as crucial to their attempt at understanding all being. In earlier
endeavors they attempted to understand all being from science and experience i.e. from
the local cosmological system i.e. the ‘empirical universe.’

Suggestions from modern
science (that origin of the universe out of the void may conserve energy,) from
philosophy and from intuition led to a concern with the relation of the empirical universe
to the void; however, the early reflections lacked a logical

character. What was later
revealed as the decisive inspiration

seen in the shadow of mountains


was the thought to
focus on the void itself and its characteristics rather than on the empirical universe and
this, since consideration of the void entails co
nsideration of all being, permitted the
logical foundation (that follows) of metaphysics

They said that it is essential to understand the meanings that they attached to these terms
and to exclude all other meanings in order to follow their development of t
he depth and
variety of being (while remaining open to the suggestive power of variant meanings)

2.

General observations on and conclusions from the form of experience

or sentience

Experience has certain patterns and forms. Which are important and which se
condary?
The forms selected below are the result of ongoing experiment with ideas. In retrospect
they seem to have necessity but, at least explicitly, were not even contained in the
prospect

Experience, though of the world, is not the world and it is not g
iven that it is or can be
fully faithful to the world

In a sense, since everything is known in experience of one kind or another, experience
constitutes the world of the organism

Therefore, while there must be a world (without a world there could not be ex
perience) it
is valid to ask whether there is a world outside experience

an external world. While
there is little practical reason to doubt the existence of the external world, critical doubt
may serve the function of improving understanding the nature of
the world and of
knowledge

It is shown in the narrative that it is logically possible for a single sentience to constitute
some manifest occurrence of the universe but there is little doubt that in the present phase
of the universe that contains this cosmo
logical system, there is a collection of sentient
organisms and a world external to their experience. Why ‘little doubt’ rather than ‘no
doubt?’ It is because appears to be logically possible that a single sentience could have
sufficient information proces
sing capability to produce an experience of the entire world.

8

While such a thought seems to immediately run into paradox, e.g. how is the information
processing embodied, the paradox itself arises on assumptions regarding e.g. the nature of
the embodiment.

If the embodiment satisfies the known laws of physical science then it is
reasonable to replace ‘little doubt’ by ‘no doubt’

When the individual has an experience
-
of
-
something, that experience, labeled the
‘concept’ is the joint result of the form of the
world and the organism. Since the organism

or society of organisms


has nothing to go on beyond the extended concept, the
extended concept comes to be labeled ‘object.’ When the concept is fully faithful to the
world, both concept and object may be labele
d
absolute
. When the faithfulness is
sufficient to some purpose, the concept and object may be labeled
practical

It might seem that since experience is not the world, precision in faithfulness can never
be ascertained. It also appears to be true that preci
se knowledge of all details of the world
or even part of the world is unattainable. However, precise knowledge is possible if detail
is not required. That there is a world

the universe


cannot be in doubt. Although this
piece of information is ‘trivial,’
necessary conclusions of immense significance (and
depth) will be seen to follow from such trivial but necessary knowledge. In fact, it is the
trivial

character of the ‘knowledge’ that results in the conclusions

That the absolute concept (object) has been
defined does not mean that such objects exist.
If they do exist then, in such cases, the thing
-
in
-
itself is known. It has been seen that the
universe is such an object; others will be demonstrated in the narrative. Thus, the thing
-
in
-
itself

that Kant call
ed the ding
-
an
-
sich or noumenon


is known in the case of such
objects. One source of such knowledge is the specification of a concept that is
sufficiently abstract that such details that may lead to imprecision or under
-
specification
are omitted. As Kant s
ays, the thing
-
in
-
itself is not knowable through the senses, but is
knowable through intellectual concepts. Are there other, more detailed, absolute
concepts? If this cosmological system were the universe and the scientific description of
that system were
complete and precise then the noumenon would be known in scientific
description though not in ordinary perception. It will be shown that this cosmos cannot be
more than an infinitesimal part of the universe and, further, that regardless how
practically use
ful and beautiful, the modern form of scientific description cannot be
complete any level of detail. Therefore, the noumenon is not known through science even
though science may provide a practical local description of reality. This discussion is
taken up
again in
Objects

In saying that there is a (manifest) world, it is not being said that there must (always) be a
manifest world. Rather, it is being said that experience itself is a form of manifestation
and therefore, trivially, when there is experience th
ere is a (manifest) world

That there is some absolutely faithful knowledge does not mean that all knowledge is
even capable of absolute faithfulness. There is little practical doubt that vast tracts of
detailed knowledge of the world (universe) are at most

practical. It will later be seen that
absolute knowledge of ‘all things’ is impossible

even in limited environments. This
thought is sometimes celebrated as liberation from a machine like view of human nature.
In fact, it is more than that. What is imposs
ible cannot be desirable and, importantly,
ignorance of things beyond a limited context may mean and will be seen to mean the
possibility of ever freshness in variety


9

So far, the nature of faithfulness has not been explicitly questioned. Since everything i
s
known in experience of one kind or another, the measure of one kind of experience is
another kind. Therefore, faithfulness of experience appears to be corroboration by further
experience. The eye estimates a size or shape, this is confirmed by other sens
es (touch)
and by instruments which, being of the world, are not known to yield absolute
precision

except upon constructs (ideas, theory) that, in the detailed case, are subject to
limits of similar origin

The situation is not as dismal as might appear. Th
at organisms are of the world is the
essential source of limited faithfulness. That organisms are of the world, are not thrown
into the world as alien to it, is the source of faithfulness. It is therefore reasonable that the
organism should have some innat
e capacity for faithfulness in knowledge that should be
sufficient to some purpose. That there are organisms that should even conceive of a
universe is perhaps an occasion for celebration

It is not, however, being suggested that concern with faithfulness o
f knowledge is
something to be abandoned, something that has no value at all

This kind of approach to arguing the faithfulness of concepts may be labeled
‘transcendental’ because the argument does not depend on the nature of cognition. From
the point of vi
ew of the
Metaphysics

to be developed, faithfulness itself may be regarded
as having transcendental characteristics when it is given to the organism without the
organism being able to justify it by direct (empirical) argument

The forms of experience may be

labeled universal or necessary and contextual or
contingent. The universal forms of experience are those whose absolute objectivity
follows from the nature of the form itself. The objectivity of all other forms, absolute or
practical, requires definition
of a context andor empirical data not contained in the
meaning of the form. The non
-
universal forms are mentioned below but their study is
deferred to
Objects

In some critical theories, a central goal is universal denial of objectivity; in some
speculative

theories objectivity is affirmed. The aim here is neither affirmation nor denial
but rather investigation of objectivity

whether it is universally desirable, when is it
desirable and possible, and to study its standard cases e.g. the universal and necessa
ry,
the intuition in its practical and necessary aspects, and the scientific and common as
practical

The general, universal or necessary forms of experience

The general, universal or necessary forms of experience or sentience include the
following. (A) The
re is experience

or sentience
. I.e. the form of experience includes the
fact of experience. (B) In experience, there is difference and change. (C) There are
objects
-
in
-
experience (or of
-
experience,) hereafter labeled ‘concepts.’ An illusion is a
concept. (
D) In experience there is form. Since pattern and law are instances of form, (D)
may be written, ‘In experience there is form, pattern, and law’

The general, universal or necessary form of experience does not include such thoughts as
‘I’ or ‘this’ center o
f experience or sentience. This form is considered below in (E)

Thus, sentience

experience

requires no verbalization or thought that ‘I am aware of
the world and its objects’ or even ‘there is awareness.’


10

Commonly, and in the flux of day
-
to
-
day life, the
form of experience may be taken to be
the form of being

However, in metaphysics, i.e. in the service of fundamental and universal discovery, and
in the service of a more true but hopefully not neurotic day
-
to
-
day, life the form of
experience is one startin
g point of critical and constructive analysis

As day
-
to
-
day life has continuities with the universal, so the form of experience and the
form of being have continuities

Conclusions from the general form of experience. There is being; all being

the
universe;

difference, change, and part

domain, and complement; absence of being

void; Form which is immanent in the universe but entirely absent from the void; there is
infinitesimal doubt that this cosmological system is populated by sentient beings and a
world ex
ternal to sentience or experience

further the existence of such worlds and of
solipsist worlds are both necessary modes of the being of the universe and of its domains

From (A) it
follows that there is being, for without existence there cannot be experienc
e

In having experience of something

anything

there is experience of being. Being is not
an additional fact or experience over and above experience

That there is existence is implicit in the meaning (sense) of experience

The meaning of experience harbors an

empirical fact

This empirical fact is the fact of being

That existence is necessary for experience is inherent in the meaning of existence

The meanings of existence and of experience overlap with regard to the fundamental fact

Whereas experience is not co
mmitted to its forms, it is inherent in the idea of being to
know its forms

The purpose of critical

and constructive


analysis regarding the forms of being is not
essentially to bring neurotic to common and paradigmatic forms (which are in any case
not un
iversally given.) Rather, while a purpose to common forms lies in the flux of day to
day living, the purpose of critical and constructive analysis includes valuation of the
common forms in their context (conservative metaphysics) and proper discovery and
c
onstruction of universal and other particular (contextual) forms (ultimate and liberal
metaphysics)

In ‘our world’ the fact of being is empirical. This empirical fact is given in our world

The existence of a meaning or a concept does not generally imply th
at some fact obtains.
However, that there is a concept (even if the concept has no object) implies that there is
something

it is the concept itself

In itself this does not imply that being is necessary. It says, simply, that without being
there would not e
ven be concepts (or illusions.) The status of the (meaning of the)
necessity of being is a central metaphysical concern that shall be discussed in what
follows

The fact of
Being



from ’06… a condensed version of the foregoing.
Perhaps the most
basic fact
or given is that there is being. If there were no being, these words would be

11

neither written nor read; nor would there be an impression, delusion, illusion or
hallucination of their being written or read



From the fact of being, it follows that there is
the universe i.e. all being

From (B) it follows that there is difference, for without difference there cannot be an
experience of difference

It then follows that the universe has part or domain

From the existence of part or domain, follows the existence of

complement. The
complement of a domain is the part of the universe that is not ‘in’ that domain i.e. the
complement of a domain is the remainder of the universe

I.e., the complement of a domain is that

domain which, together with the original domain,
are
the universe

If a domain exists, its complement must exist else the universe would not exist

The null domain, labeled the ‘void,’ exists and is the absence of being

Since there are parts, entities can be conceptually divided and recombined arbitrarily. For

example, one half of each of two mountains could be conceived as an entity. Such
indefiniteness is not of practical concern for the concept of significance is selected via
some combination of intuition and experience

including experience coded in laws and

theories. The ability to manipulate entities and ideas by division and combination is one
source of creativity

another source, the ability to form concepts, is discussed in Mind

Without change, there cannot be experience of change. It follows from (B) tha
t there is
change

Without change, there cannot even be illusion of change (the meaning of ‘illusion’ is
clarified below)

The form (D) of experience is the source of the following reflections

Even if form arises partly in experience, it must also be of the
universe. To whatever,
form corresponds is labeled ‘Form
.


(This thought is not final but will be refined in what
follows)

Form, of which Pattern and Law are instances, is in and of the universe

Form, Pattern and Law are immanent in being

hence the name
Metaphysics of
Immanence
… it is not just Form… that are immanent it is all things ‘material,’ ‘mental’
and symbolic… that there is no other world… that the positive conclusions are immense
as are the
negative ones that arise on from the implicit presence and instrumental
character of the idea of other worlds in so much of the history of thought…

In the void, there is no Form

or Pattern or Law

Reflection on the forms of experience pertaining to ‘I’ or
‘self’ or ‘this’ center of
experience

and ‘other’ centers of experience

The forms of experience further include the following. (E) The universe is populated (at
least locally) with sentient beings that are ‘centers’ of experience that are structurally

12

sim
ilar to ‘this’ center labeled ‘I’ and, though this form may be doubted for critical study
as well as neurotic ends, it is part of the intuition of the being
-
centers e.g. human beings

That sentient forms populate experience, does not imply that the universe

is populated
with sentient Forms or beings

The universe may, logically, (some ‘times’) be pure sentience i.e. a single sentience

which does not imply that at those times it is immaterial

That at other times, e.g. the present, the universe (locally at leas
t) contains a community
of sentient beings must be, as far as may be deduced in light of (E,) a contingent or
practical conclusion that follows from some special characteristics of (the local) sentience
(e.g. that the system of human knowledge is greater t
hat what is practically possible for a
single human being) and not from the fact of sentience. That the conclusion is ‘practical’
does not imply that there is any reasonable doubt regarding the conclusion (locally)

There may however be logical doubt. This
brings up a tension between everyday thought
and critical thought. Although critical thought may sometimes uproot common or
scientific thoughts in their contexts, that is not its invariable function. Another function
lies in the process of achieving larger

(perhaps even universal) contexts of truth

It will soon be seen that even though a single sentience and communities of sentient
beings are both logical possibilities, both are necessary at different phases of or places in
the universe. Any contradiction o
f common or scientific expectation in this assertion shall
also be resolved

It was earlier said: Even if form arises partly in experience, it must also be of the
universe. To whatever, form corresponds is labeled ‘Form’

It is now seen that even if some for
ms reside entirely in experience, the conclusion that
there are actual Forms is, in any instance, a practical conclusion. That Form is necessary
at some phases of the universe shall also follow below
. There is a difference between the
discussion of Form an
d that of communities of sentient beings

it is that even forms that
reside purely in experience are Forms while the experience of community is not
community (but is Form)

The contextual or contingent forms of experience

The intent, here, is to mention the
contingent or contextual

or local


forms and to make
some suggestions regarding their nature and the question of the existence of the objects
but to leave analysis to later sections and chapters

The contextual or contingent forms of experience are those f
orms that are contextual or
contingent relative to the forms of experience that contain in their sense the fact of
sentience and therefore of being, of all being, of domain and of absence of being.
Whereas the general, universal or necessary forms are thos
e for which the existence of
their objects follows from the fact of experience, the contextual forms require further
contingent verification of the existence of the objects (even though there may be little
practical doubt as to the existence)

The contextu
al or contingent forms of experience include those experienced as the
concepts (objects) of day
-
to
-
day life but are not restricted to such experience and include

13

the esoteric (in so far as it contains truth) and scientific concepts and, further, the
concep
ts of all cosmological systems (as detailed in what follows)

The contextual or contingent forms of experience includes the following. (F) Concepts
(and their possible objects) include concrete entities such as rocks. ‘Concrete’ is used
metaphorically for
, in addition to tangibles such as rocks, the concepts also includes
relative intangibles such as air, parts, and collections
-
as
-
entities. Concepts also include
processes, events and facts. Concepts are not limited to ‘things,’ ‘happenings’ and
‘observatio
ns’ but also form, pattern and law. The foregoing concepts, i.e. objects of or in
experience, may be labeled particular. There is good reason to have theoretical doubt
whether such concepts correspond to something in the world

in doing so, knowledge
and kn
owledge of the nature of knowledge may be sharpened and broadened. However,
there is little practical and day
-
to
-
day doubt that, except in ‘hypothetical’ cases such as
unicorns, such concepts refer to something in the world. There are other concepts such a
s
number and value regarding which, although they seem to have some kind of reality,
there may be both theoretical and practical doubt that they correspond to something in the
world; such concepts have been variously regarded as being purely mental or conc
eptual
(and therefore not residing in time or space or being causal) and so, perhaps, of or as of
another e.g. Platonic world and on account of the apparent immaterial character, have
been labeled ‘abstract’

The form of experience recognizes (G) sense and
feeling, percept and concept, intuition
(in the sense of Kant) and explicit knowledge, acquaintance and description (due to
Russell,) iconic and symbolic (including verbal) knowledge. These forms are pertinent to
questions of epistemology

Also recognized a
mong the forms of experience are those that are significant in science
and that arise in consideration of (H) ‘this’ cosmological system. As will be subsequently
seen, this cosmos is a highly localized and specific form of being relative to the universe
(a
ll being.) Therefore the object
s of science

as well as those of common knowledge
from which science stems by experiment and criticism, and by discovery and concept and
law formation

are contingent objects and the questions of their being and nature are
bot
h theoretical and practical

Another local form of experience, (J) may be called ‘the human condition.’ In addition to
the detailed particulars, the phrase sometimes connotes the affective rather than the
cognitive side, the limits rather than the possibili
ties, frailty rather than strength
, context
over time and history…

Such connotations are included but their c
ontrary forms are not
excluded

For further reflection

Two final ‘kinds’ may be mentioned

their explicit definition and elaboration as forms
or expe
rience… and related conclusions will be taken up later

These kinds are (
K
) inference and (
L
) category as in, e.g., Kant, Schopenhauer and the
present narrative; while these topics have been taken up in themselves it is their
elaboration as forms of experie
nce and any related conclusions that are left for further
reflection


14

Regarding (K
,) since there are facts beyond assumption

being is manifest at least
once

it will be interesting to see whether there are rules of inference beyond assumption

The question of

multiplicity

The question arises whether the variety of forms of experience show a variety of Forms
of being. Address of this concern is implicit in what follows

The question of objectivity

It is clear that issues regarding the sense and fact of faithfuln
ess of concepts are not
straightforward. If a concept is faithful, it may be said to correspond to an object
-
in
-
itself
or noumenal or absolute object. Other ‘objects’ are, at least in part, constructs. General
consideration of the nature and faithfulness o
f concepts (i.e. of knowledge) are deferred
to chapter Objects. There it will be established that abstract objects are of the world and it
will be seen in what sense they may be viewed as though they were purely conceptual,
symbolic or Platonic; it will be

further seen that abstract objects may reside in time and
space and may have causal features. What will be further seen is that the distinction
between the particular and the abstract is artificial

The existence of the absolute universal objects

As has be
en seen, in the case of the absolute concept, the object is known (as known

i.e.
the universe is known as universe i.e. as all being but not in its details)

From the concern with faithfulness of concepts in general, it does not follow that there
are no fai
thful concepts. It has already been seen that being, universe, difference, domain,
change, and void

are perfectly faithful concepts that describe (absolute) objects.
Experience and sentience are among the absolute objects. While particular forms may not
de
scribe absolute objects, there is Form. The status of a variety of concepts with regard to
objectivity

absolute and practical


is deferred to chapter Objects where there will be an
attempt to make the discussion complete with regard to kind or variety of
concept and
object

3.

General conclusions from the concept of Universe that pertain especially to the idea
of
all

Some conclusions about general metaphysics

Actuality and possibility
. Kinds of possibility
: absolute and contextual

If an event (thing) is des
cribed but never occurs (exists,) it cannot be possible

If it occurs or exists, it is possible

I.e.
actuality and possibility are identical in their reference even though apparently
distinct with regard to sense

In fact a definite concept of possibility ha
s been introduced. This concept of possibility,

which refers to

possibility of

occurrence in the universe is
absolute

possibility

It may be thought that some other notion of possibility may be retained, but since there is
nothing outside the universe, the
sense of absolute or universal possibility must be
identical to the sense of actuality

even though there may be an expectation of a different
sense. I.e. a different sense could be deployed before reflection but it would have to be
modified to the new sens
e

else it would be sense
-
less


15

Relative or contextual possibility refers to occurrence in a similar context. Relative to the
universe, there is no ‘other’ context. When the context is the universe, relative possibility
is absolute possibility

Absolute possi
bility will be seen to be logical possibility

Physical possibility e.g. consistency with the laws of physics is a form of relative
possibility

The common or naïve concept of possibility is relative possibility

Absolute possibility is not to be confused wit
h the common concept (it is easy to fall into
this confusion)

Immanence of Law, Pattern and Form

a

Metaphysics of Immanence

All things are in the universe

Sentience and all of its constituent and related ideas such as percept, concept, feeling,
awareness,
idea, thought, image, are in the universe

While form, pattern and law are read in the universe or in being, Form, Pattern, and Law
must be in the universe because there is nothing outside the universe. Therefore, Form,
Pattern and Law are immanent in being

Therefore, it is reasonable to call the metaphysics under development the
Metaphysics of
Immanence
.

It is important to be clear about the meaning of immanence. That Forms are immanent in
being does not mean that there is some external object or idea that
is attached to or
enmeshed with being. It means that Form is
of

being

4.

General conclusions about and from the concept of the void

General metaphysics
. The void

The void, its existence and nature

… The void is defined as the absence of being, is shown in
what follows to exist and to
have the property not only of containing no thing or Entity but also containing no Form,
no Pattern and no Law

As the complement of the universe relative to itself or the complement of any element of
being relative to itself, t
he void exists

From the above it seems that there are infinitely many voids. Each element of being may
be regarded as associated with a void

Sources of the focus on the void

Search for a not necessarily exclusive alternative to the
process

paradigm of evol
ution

A variety of intuitions of different kinds and weight. That creation of a universe from
nothing need not violate conservation of energy. Focus on ‘being’ suggests non
-
being.
That induction is probable rather than necessary; that necessary induction w
ould include
all laws consistent with data… and that would include no law, i.e. the only law is the law
of logic, and the equivalence of being to absence of being


of something and nothing. A

16

focus on being is bound to suggest focus on absence. The change
less behind the changing
(Parmenides)

Inspiration from the heart of the forest

The final inspiration in the shadow of mountains


the inspiration to focus on the void
rather than on
this

cosmological system

Note that although this came after the formal dev
elopment, there is voidism in Indian and
Judaic philosophy, e.g. the universe as the breathing that is Brahman. Sartre and
Heidegger feel nothingness to be important. Wittgenstein, Hume and Leibniz flirt
implicitly with the void in their suggestions that t
he only impossibilities are logical
(Leibniz says this and Hume and Wittgenstein say something equivalent i.e. that ‘from
the truth of one atomic proposition the truth of another does not follow.’ Hume’s form
omitted the word ‘atomic’)

Some properties of t
he void

Properties of the void. This repeats some of the above. The void exists and contains no
thing, Form, Pattern, or Law. In addition the above, it makes no difference whether there
is considered to be one void or many voids; therefore, the number of v
oids may be taken
to be one. A void may be associated with the universe as whole and with every element
of being

Theory of being.
The fundamental principle

If a concept, picture or description involves and entails no contradiction, it must be
realized from

the void. This follows since its non
-
realization would be a Law of or in the
void i.e. a contradiction

Any void generates every void. It is irrelevant whether there are many voids or just one.
The number of voids may be taken to be one

Any consistent clas
s of concepts, pictures or descriptions is and must be realized

From every state, including that of the void state, every other state (excepting
contradiction which need not be mentioned since contradictory ‘states’ are not states) is
accessible i.e. no st
ate is inaccessible

The universe enters (and leaves) a state of being the void

The indeterminism of the universe is absolute

The concept of absolute indeterminism is that no state shall be inaccessible

The universe is absolutely indeterministic

The void is

absolutely indeterministic

Since no state is inaccessible, structure is necessary; the existence of this cosmological
system is necessary. It might seem that absolute indeterminism would contradict the
existences just mention but, in fact, it makes them n
ecessary

Why this is necessary?

Why this is hard to grasp?


17

What is its meaning?

What are its implications?

How structure is not just possible but necessary under absolute indeterminism

In what way might it be a good thing?

A metaphysics of ultimate depth a
nd breadth

Combine this topic with the next

Metaphysics develops and justifies a metaphysical system that is ultimate in depth and
breadth. Many meanings will be altered, broadened or deepened. This seems to suggest
that common meaning is fluid. Common mea
ning e.g. the system of meaning that is
adequate for common purposes is fluid but is it subject to arbitrary alteration? This is not
precisely what happens. When a meaning is deepened to the root of being or to a lesser
degree, the meaning when restricted
to the original case may be unchanged or, if that
original meaning is untenable, it may be altered. Thus the extension implies some change
in common meaning but does not imply wholesale change. The extended system may,
however, be profoundly different from

a simple projection of common meaning to the
root without alteration of meaning

Repeated from
General conclusions about and from the concept of the void

Theory of Being. First proof of the ‘fundame
ntal principle’ of the Theory of Being



from ‘06

Consideration of the natures of being, Universe and Void make possible the development
of a metaphysics or Theory of Being. The general aspects of the theory are treated in the
present section, ‘Metaphysics
:
The Theory of Being’ and a variety of special concerns are
taken up in ‘Objects,’ ‘Logic,’ ‘Mind,’ and ‘Cosmology.’ The sections ‘Human Being’
through ‘Faith’ include implications of the theory for the specific topics

As the complement of any entity rela
tive to itself, or the complement of the universe
relative to itself, the void exists

The existence of the void is a fundamental fact that, as will be seen, has enabled
development of the metaphysics, the logic, the cosmology and more immediate subjects
th
at follow. Thus it is essential to question that existence. The universe exists


it is all
being. The existence of a part of the universe may be questioned since ‘part’ is
conceptual. However, ‘part’ is conceptual only when specified implicitly by a conce
pt
such as a property. However, if the existence of parts is merely the recognition of variety
or difference then ‘part’ is not merely conceptual. The void is the part whose
‘magnitudes’ vanish. How can a ‘zero’ part be said to exist? This is where doubt
r
egarding the existence of the void may be seen as lying. An additional doubt arises
because the intended proof of existence

the single sentence italicized paragraph above


is terse and transparent. The following semi
-
arguments are intended not as proof

t
hey
may serve as ideas for alternative proofs


but to assist in allaying doubt. (1) The
complement of a part exists. As the part approaches the whole, the complement exists at
every stage of the approach and its limit is the void. (2) The existence of the
void should
be equivalent to its non
-
existence; therefore the void may be taken to exist. (3) Attaching
the void to an entity makes no difference to the constitution of the entity; therefore the

18

void may be taken to exist. (4) In physics the zero force may

be said to exist; it is the
force that does not change uniform motion; this of course is not a proof of the existence
of the void but shows that existence may be assigned to a quantity of zero magnitude. (5)
If the universe has a non
-
manifest phase, that
phase will be the void; of course this final
item does not at all prove existence of the void but provides one way to see how it may
be real rather than
merely

a conceptual fiction; later it will be shown that while the void
may be regarded as being ‘attac
hed’ to any entity it must also be a phase through which
the universe passes… Discussion now turns to development of the metaphysics

Since
all

pattern and law is immanent in its complement, the void can contain no pattern,
no law. Consider a description th
at if realized would be the description of a state of
affairs. If that state was never realized from the void, the non
-
realization would constitute
a law. Therefore every consistent description


or conception or picture of a state of
affairs


must be reali
zed

(there is no connection of the present use of ‘description’ to
Russell’s theory of descriptions
.
)

More accurately, the entire system of consistent
descriptions must be realized. (‘The entire system of consistent …’ is a topic for further
investigation.

‘An apple that is fully red and fully not red’ is not consistent. This
inconsistency may be labeled ‘internal.’ External inconsistency must also be excluded.
Known facts and necessities may not be contradicted. ‘It is raining everywhere

or
nowhere


in th
e universe’ would constitute a law of the void and is an external
contradiction. ‘It is raining here and now’ when it is not contradicts a fact… The
statement regarding realization may be rendered, ‘Subject to mutual consistency, every
system of consistent

descriptions is realized.’) These necessities have the following
immediate consequences. Every element of
Being

(entity) must interact with every other
element of being. There is one universe (there are no isolated ‘universes.’) The void is
equivalent to
the Universe and to every entity. It makes no difference whether there are
many voids or one; the many are equivalent to one.
The manifest universe may be seen as
having repeated ‘origin
’ in the void; equally, any state may be seen as having origin in
(equ
ivalence to) any state of the universe



there are no ‘special’ states of the universe
.
Any entity including the manifest universe may be annihilated at any ‘time’ and this
annihilation may
be
spontaneous ‘self
-
annihilation’ or the outcome of the ‘effect’
of
the
void


or
any other state
. The void is an actual state i.e. the universe ‘occupies’ the state
of ‘no manifest being’ repeatedly in its trajectory or ‘travel’ between states of manifest
being. The void is not outside the universe; it is the universe
in its non
-
manifest states
.
The relationships between the manifest and the non
-
manifest states are neither causal nor
deterministic.
The equivalence of the void and the universe is equivalent to complete
indeterminism. Essential indeterminism
necessarily

r
esults in structure. There is no
universal determinism and whatever causation there may be is either not universal or
vastly different (perhaps weaker and less regular but simultaneously longer in its reach)
from the causation of common experience and scie
nce (classical or modern)

The fundamental principle of the Theory of Being, just shown to be true, is the assertion
that the entire system of consistent descriptions is (must be) realized

I.e. the only universal fictions are the logical contradictions (fac
t is stranger than fiction)

That, in the Theory of Being developed here, the possible and the actual are identical
shows that the theory is ultimate with regard to breadth or variety of being. This follows
e.g. from the existence of the void and its equiva
lence

in the sense that it is generative

19

of


to every state except the logically contradictory states. That this ultimate character is
implicit has been shown earlier

[
There are thoughts in the writings of Leibniz (Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, b. July 1,
16
46, Leipzig,) of David Hume (b. May 7, 1711, Edinburgh, Scotland) and of
Wittgenstein that have similarity to the theory developed here. Leibniz suggested that the
only impossibilities were logical contradictions. However, it appears that Leibniz did not
t
ake this thought to its possible conclusion


the necessity of the realization of the entire
system of consistent descriptions and the possibility of proof and
actual proof

of this
necessity; Leibniz may, in fact have disagreed with the conclusions being m
ade here


he
wrote that ‘Nothing arises from nothing.’ In the subsequent topic ‘Second proof of the
‘fundamental principle’ of the Theory of Being,’ use is made of the idea of Hume and
Wittgenstein that ‘from the truth of one atomic proposition the truth
of another does not
follow’ (the word ‘atomic’ does not occur in Hume’s version.) These writers, as well, did
not take their thoughts to their possible conclusions; they were anti
-
metaphysical; and the
statement ‘from the truth…’ may have had among its int
ents to show a lack of
metaphysical (causal) connections in the world… It is interesting to note that the
fundamental principle

proven above


may be used to
demonstrate

Wittgenstein’s idea
]

The logical status of the metaphysics

Power
and knowledge



from
‘06

They recalled Plato’s suggestion that power (having an effect) is ‘the’ measure of
Being

(‘the measure of being is being.’)
They may have started with this idea but, instead, they
found it more convenient to development of the understanding of being to

start from the
concept of being (and therefore the Void) itself. Thus it follows from the theory that there
is power between every two entities

and

power among any

(every)

collection of entities.
‘Being is the measure of being.’ This is similar to the ide
a that knowability is essential to
being (this is not the idea that being known gives or is being.) However, the idea seems
suspect. Why would something have to be known to a particular
individual

in order to
have being? That is not the claim


a better fo
rm of the claim might be that it must be
knowable

to
some

being (the Theory of Being then implies that it is known


Possibility
is
actuality
.) Still, it seems suspect to suggest that some organism must (know or) be
capable of knowing an entity for that en
tity to exist. That, again, is not the claim. The
‘causal’ order is reversed
:
if an entity exists it is known. Again, a question arises
:
if
knowing is a mark of Mind why, when mind is a special kind or aspect of being, should
being known be (in effect) a m
ark of being? The answer will be taken up in the
discussion of mind below. They distinguished mind
-
as
-
they
-
experienced
-
it
-
at
-
first
-
hand
from Mind in general. They showed that the concept of mind may be consistently
extended to the root of being and that th
is extension was Necessary; i.e. without the
extension, the ‘paradoxes’ of Mind and Matter would continually arise. They forestalled
the objection e.g. of the materialist who would say that mind
-
at
-
the
-
root (pan
-
psychism)
is absurd. They did this by identi
fying the nature of the doubt
:
it is a doubt that thinks that
the claim is that the mind at the root is like animal or human mind


possessed of a
variety of functions and elaborations, capable of understanding and so on. Instead, mind
-
at
-
the
-
root is shown

to be coeval and equi
-
primitive with primal manifest being. There is
a remaining doubt. What is it at or about the primitive level that allows identification with

20

mind and where does (the concept of) matter fit into this scheme? In discussing mind
(below)

they were able to address this doubt as well

Being known (knowable) e.g. by human beings does not confer existence although it does
show existence. However, existence necessitates knowability. This implies that there are
no entities that are unknowable. T
his may appear to be an excessive claim.
Yet
, any claim
to knowledge or knowability must be based on some concept of knowledge. In the
following, the
claim that existence necessitates knowability is investigated in terms of a
number of conceptions of knowl
edge that start with the naïve case in which knowledge is
thought to be knowledge
-
of the entity and proceeds to consider alternative conceptions of
knowledge, the nature of truth and of the real

A metaphysics of ultimate depth and breadth

its logical statu
s

The ultimate character with regard to depth is explicit and implies that while alternative
systems of equal depth are possible, no deeper foundation is possible. A variety of
alternatives is developed

The ultimate in breadth is implicit. That it is impli
cit means that while the variety of
being is ever open to discovery, this variety is ever contained within the principles of the
metaphysics


that, except for moments, while all may be known not all is known, while
all may be realized not all is realized.

That the breadth is ultimate means that every real,
the realization of every consistent idea or system of ideas even if labeled myth or legend
or fiction lies with the domain of the system developed here

Further details

of the metaphysics

Existence and pr
operties of the void

The fundamental principle and its proofs

Possibility, actuality, logic

The ultimate depth and breadth of the metaphysics

Depth and its definition. Ultimate depth. Substance and determinism; substance and
determinism (or causation) are
twins. Without determinism, substance has no
significance. Elimination of substance. Absolute indeterminism, its necessity and the
necessity of form. Normal cosmological systems and their necessity. Mechanism and
explanation. Normal mechanism of variation
and selection


it is not universal but that it
sometimes occurs is necessary and is probably associated with the population of the
universe by form. Origin of normal (quasi) causation and normal (quasi) determinism;
other meanings of ‘cause.’ That the voi
d does not cause being in the normal sense of
cause; of necessity, being comes from the void without being caused by the void; that this
may be labeled ‘Cause’ in a more comprehensive meaning that includes but is not limited
to cause

Heidegger used the phr
ase ‘nothing nothings’ as if to describe nothingness (the void) as a
causal agent. Here, in an inadequate understanding of the void, Heidegger succeeds, even
while he expresses an intuition, in mystification… In the intuition of the inadequacy of
substance
, Heidegger has, perhaps, not achieved the intuition of the co
-
inadequacy of
determinism and causation. Therefore, his intuition has not achieved full adequacy.
Nevertheless, he perseveres with his intuition despite its apparent perversion (and

21

repugnance
to myriad readers.) If Heidegger achieved the first step of overcoming
substance, here is achieved the second and necessary step of overcoming determinism.
This second step is necessary to emerge from the realm of mere intuition into logic which
of course
does not exclude intuition. Because Heidegger did not take or perhaps
appreciate the second step, he was, via determinism, still implicitly wedded to substance,
despite his explicit repudiation of substance. Therefore, he was compelled to use a
mystifying
language. His critics on this point were, of course, right
and

wrong. Perhaps,
the wrong was greater than the right for Heidegger went perhaps a third

an important
third


of the way (the remaining two thirds being explicit repudiation of universal
determi
nism and consequent introduction of logic into the intuition) whereas the critics in
insisting on clarity achieved nothing (this does not diminish the function of criticism but
instead points to the value of deferring criticism i.e. it is unlikely that Hei
degger was
unaware that argument was lacking or that he was groping at truth.) Ravi wondered what
debt he owed to Heidegger. He knew of Heidegger in the background; he had read
portions of the translation of Sein und Zeit. Heidegger’s focus on being perhap
s
affected

his own focus on being. However, there were a myriad other factors from the tradition of
thought, from the everyday that resulted in his particular focus. For a long time he
meditated on the universe and its possible equivalence to being. Only i
n his inspiration,
seen in the shadow of mountains, did Ravi see that he should focus on the void itself and
this was the crucial step. He later realized that focus on the absence of being (the void)
was equivalent to focus on all being and not just on wha
t he already knew, not just focus
on this cosmological system… No doubt, even though illogic had been overcome, the
intuition of determinism and cause is so strong (Ravi had only haltingly been able to
overcome that intuition without rejecting it in its pr
oper place) that despite the
displacement of mystery by logic, the appearance of mystery to some readers in the
strangeness of his idea
-
scapes would be inevitable

Breadth and its definition. The ultimate character of the breadth is infinite and implicit.
A
n infinity of breadth may be (recursively) described but no description contains the
entire infinity of breadth. The breadth contains all myth, all scripture, all fiction and
drama, all legend… with the single restriction of logic. Cosmology is the Theory
of
Variety

Provide a sampling of the actual breadth. Defer detail to Cosmology

Form. The nature of Form

Since all descriptions that entail no contradiction become manifest, a Form may be
regarded as a more
durable
manifestation

All structure may be regarde
d as that of Form

Form may be regarded as coming out of the void

Form is immanent in being i.e. it is of being rather than imposed

Some Forms are more durable than others

The distinction between the Forms of lesser (transient) and greater (durable) Forms i
s not
one of kind

Actual Forms are dynamic


22

A Form of infinite duration (static Form) is not a realized Form and is not capable of
decay or annihilation or of interaction. I.e. static Forms have no origins

cannot come
into being


and if one had being it wo
uld have no end. A static Form has no significance.
The existence and non
-
existence of static Forms are without distinction

The existence of a static Form capable of interaction (dynamics) would constitute a Law
of the void


in addition to being obviously

(inherently) contradictory in nature. The
being of a static form is logically impossible. The existence of a such static Form would
be a violation of any Logic immanent in being (this statement anticipates but is not used
at all to found the concept of Lo
gic of the present narrative)

All Forms are
dynamic
. There are, as has been seen,
no static forms
. Forms have origins
and ends

Mechanisms are mentioned below, in
Metaphysics
,

and are considered further in
Cosmology

Form and transient

There is no distinctio
n in kind between a transient and a (durable) form

Symmetry. Platonic

aspects of the character of Form

The condition of durability may also be called
stability
and the characteristic that results
in stability may be called
symmetry
. Because, with exception
s such as the void, there are
no eternally durable forms, there are no absolutely stable and perfectly symmetric forms.
The durable forms are
relatively stable
and
near symmetric


That all structure is Form and since there are no absolute substances, the v
iew of being
that emerges has Platonic characteristics

As already noted, Form is immanent in being. Form is not imposed. Nor is the
immanence that of a foreign kind. Form is of being, of entities as much as is being
-
hood… as much as is entity
-
hood (and wil
l be seen to be capable of consistent regard as
the same kind as entity
-
hood)

The idea of Form as foreign or imposed has probable origin in that Form is experienced
as form, i.e. as perceived and therefore ascribed the vague status of an object residing in

‘mental space’ but not in actual space

However, perfection (symmetry) of form is never attained, is logically impossible and is
therefore not desirable

There is no Platonic world

All actual worlds are in the one universe

Forms reside in this world

Sentie
nce. Sentient Form

Sentience may be seen as a relation among forms. This sets up the possibility of error,
paradox and correction

Alternately, sentience may be seen as a form that includes the related forms and their
relation

Excepting paradox, all forms h
ave the possibility of sentience


23

Significant sentience requires sufficient durability for the appropriate elaboration of form

Logos and Logic

Logic as Theory of possibility

relation to the classical idea of logic

Recall that (1) the possible and the actual

are identical and (2) a description, concept or
picture that harbors and entails no contradiction is actual and therefore possible and
necessary. Note that it does not follow and has not been shown that every actual, i.e.
possible state has a description

Therefore, a concept arises of Logic as the Theory of the Possible or, equivalently, as the
Theory of the Actual

In the preceding statement, provided that it is understood with sufficient generality,
‘science’ may replace ‘theory’

Here, use deviates from t
he capitalization convention of reserving Title Case for the
immanent form and lower case for the concept. Here, Title Case refers to the present
concept, Logic and lower case refers to the classical concept, logic

Logos

What is the immanent form of Logic?

Rather than Logic, it may be labeled the Logos.
However, it is the actual. Therefore the Logos is, trivially since so far all that has been
done is to specify it as another name, the actual

Logic as the theory of depicting, conceiving or describing the ac
tual

and the possible

From the foregoing, for a sentient being, Logic may be regarded as the theory of
depicting, conceiving or describing the possible and the actual

This may appear to be trivial in meaning (sense) but is not so in significance (reference
.)
Here is the ultimate character of Logic

There is a project to develop this concept of Logic and its consequences

If description is in language, the theory of proper use of language (grammar) is Logic.
From the Metaphysics of Immanence, this follows with

perfect clarity and simplicity.
Wittgenstein’s thought regarding grammar is arrived at from a universal perspective and
the discovery that the thought so follows is experienced as surprising, humorous, trivial,
and deep

It is not the fact of the connectio
n of logic and being with grammar that is surprising


that there may be a connection is obvious once it is pointed out

What is surprising is the clarity and necessity of the connection, that the connection is
one of identity rather than mere relatedness

A
nd it is also surprising that the connection should have emerged when it was not
sought

However, it needs also to be allowed that conception generally, including sensing,
depicting, imaging are a form of ‘description’ and therefore there is a grammar or lo
gic of
conception and of depiction

In its present conception, Logic is the one law of the universe


24

Whatever is allowed by logic is absolutely possible

The classical view of logic falls within Logic

Deduction concerns possibility of a proposition B, relati
ve to the truth of another
proposition A. Therefore, the standard concept of logic, i.e. logic as deduction, falls
within Logic as defined here

Science

as hypothetical versus factual depends on an open versus fixed perspective or
domain

The results of indu
ction (e.g. probable inference) generally and the theories of empirical
science in particular are concerned with patterns of e.g. physical possibility in e.g. this
cosmos. Therefore, what is induced and science as objects fall under Logic

The method of sci
ence is not logic

In general, there appears to be no infallible or universal ‘method’ of
arriving

at a
scientific theory by deductive inference from a set of data. Regarded as universal law,
scientific theories, however powerful and beautiful, however orde
ring or unifying or
applicable, appear to be capable of improvement especially as the domain
of application
is expanded

Science itself may be seen as Logic

Still, scientific theories may also be regarded as fact over a restricted domain. It is in this
sens
e that what is induced and what is science may be seen as falling under Logic

More on Logic and grammar. On necessity. On the importance of reference in logic

Recalling the identity of the possible and the actual again, it follows that whatever is
possible

(actual) is also necessary

Whatever is allowed by Logic is absolutely possible
and

necessary. This kind of
necessity may be labeled ‘extensional’ to distinguish it from the common or classical
meaning or idea necessity as one whose truth is independent of

the being of things


perhaps as truth by meaning e.g. by the structure of symbolic systems. Such necessity,
since it is apparently independent of the being of things may be called intensional.
Looking forward to the discussion of abstract objects in
Obje
cts
, the distinction between
extensional and intensional necessity will appear to break down except that while
extensional necessity refers to objects in the world, i.e. the universe, intensional necessity
appears to refer to symbolic objects. The discussi
on of particular and abstract objects
shows that the distinction breaks down (immanence again.) More accurately, the
economical, universal and realistic interpretation of necessity (and, as it shall similarly
turn out, of objects) is one in which there is
no distinction with regard to extension vs.
intension or with regard to reference to the actual vs. some ideal world

The immanent aspect in these conclusions make it clear that
reference

is crucial in Logic
(and soundness of language that includes grammar.
) If a description or conception or
depiction is Logically i.e. Grammatically sound, it may be realized; rather, it is realized

It is shown by examples in
Logic
, that improper reference may result in paradox and that
a number of the classical paradoxes are

resolved by paying proper attention to reference


25

It certainly appears that requiring proper reference is
sufficient

to valid Logic or
Grammar

Logic and the problem of the infinite

A possible

and immensely important
exception to the foregoing is the infini
te case


for
what is an infinite object… what is the object whose concept refers to an infinite
extension or an infinite collection? There are preliminary thoughts on the object side of
‘infinity’ in
Objects

and in
Logic

Is the requirement of proper refer
ence
necessary

to validity in Logic and Grammar?
Since various semantic paradoxes (Russell…) and set
-
theoretic paradoxes (Zermelo
-
Fraenkel
-
Skolem and von Neumann
-
Bernays
-
Gödel) have been resolved by non
-
referential artifacts, the requirement of proper refe
rence may be unnecessary

However, this conclusion is not clear. The valid aspects of the various analyses
(Russell…) should be studied to see if reference is the root justification (Kripke
employs ‘grounding’)

Secondly, a general study of the nature of ‘lo
gical objects’ and infinite objects may be
undertaken to analyze necessary and sufficient conditions of validity including the
important case of the necessity and sufficiency of proper reference

These thoughts define a research project

In any case, however
, it appears reasonable that requiring proper reference may be rich in
consequences

This idea and the remaining thoughts in this section continue the possibility of the
foregoing research project

Mathematics and science as chapters in logic

It is now clear

that in the above sense of Logic, mathematics and science are chapters of
Logic. The kind of chapters that they are, however, seems to be different. Logic concerns
the actual and its descriptions. Mathematics appears to concern those forms that are
amenab
le to ‘formal’ treatment. Science, as it is typically practiced, concerns the forms

patterns, theories and laws


of this cosmological system. Is the inclusion of mathematics
in Logic the logicist thesis of Russell? Whether it is shall depend on where logi
c is
thought to stop and where mathematics begins. It is not the case that what is traditionally
taken to be logic (as in the Frege
-
Russell Logicism) is shown here to found or contain
mathematics

Rethinking Wittgenstein’s Tractacus

In reviewing the develop
ments, especially those regarding the fact of being as implicit in
its meaning, the
General metaphysics
, the discussion of
Form
, and the present section
A
concept of Logic
… , it seems that their ideas veer (both implicitly and explicitly) in the
direction
of Wittgenstein’s Tractacus (whose influence has significance here) and go
beyond it in some aspects. The ideas that the universe is (in the global mode of
description) all its ‘
states
’ and that all its states are
all

states is close to Wittgenstein’s’
tho
ught

that

the universe is the ‘sum’ of its atomic facts. A distinction between the
present thinking and that of Wittgenstein is that, here, all states are not given at the outset
of the analysis and that their kind and enumerability and denotability (refer
ence) is not

26

given at outset or assumed to be possible even in principle. Additionally, there are parts
of the Tractacus (e.g. the discussion of Ethics


see Objects) that suffer from an implicit
substance thinking regarding the nature of the Object

The ba
ckward foundation, elimination of substance thought, and elaboration of the
ideas of the Tractacus is a project that requires patronage, that awaits keen analysis

General cosmology and metaphysics

The number of states of the universe is infinite

There are
infinite collections

The concept of ‘the class’ of consistent concepts etc presents a problem. What is that
class? How is it formed?

The issue may have resolution in terms of the concept of
patch
, mentioned in the context
of global and local descriptions

T
here is another kind of care that is needed in considering what is consistent and
therefore actual. Consider ‘There is an individual who knows everything!’ Although the
claim may seem absurd, there is no explicit logical impossibility. However, depending o
n
what it means to ‘know everything’ there may be a logical impossibility relative to that
meaning

There is a project to study the idea of the class or system or classes of consistent
conceptions, pictures, and descriptions

The source of the idea to this p
roject is the intuition that while an infinite variety is being
revealed, that variety may have profound, interesting and intricate limitations

There are no fictions except contradictions

The universe is infinitely more varied than the description in any m
yth, any fictional
account, any scripture, and any science. The only restriction on variety is the Logical
principle stated below

The universe is infinitely more varied than this cosmological system

The ‘regular’ behavior of this cosmological system in whi
ch there is structure and there
appear to be inaccessible states, in which there is causal like behavior is termed ‘normal
.


The meaning of the normal, however, must, at least initially, be an open concept because,
although, this cosmos is the necessary in
spiration, it may not be the prototype

of what is
sought

An entire panorama of cosmological (universal) possibility and actuality

opens up
. Here
are two examples that are of course both subject to the requirement that no contradiction
should be involved or

entailed. (1) Any piece of fiction is realized. (2) Any known state
of any cosmological system is infinitely repeated in the universe. The implication of these
examples is clearly immense. Description of the panorama is taken up in
Objects

(under
the topi
c of Identity,) in
Cosmology

and in
Faith

It is possible to
talk

of a map of the universe. A typical scientifically informed person
today might think of the universe as the physical universe originating with a singularity
(the big bang) about 20 billion ye
ars ago and about 20 billion light years across. That

27

‘physical universe,’ here called the local cosmological system is a finite dot in the infinity
of
the

universe as revealed here. The infinitesimal character of the local system regards
not only extent a
nd duration but also kind of being. ‘Kind’ includes constitution, nature,
magnitude, longevity, inclusivity, and, when ‘intelligent,’ kinds and magnitudes of ability

Any organism with sufficient ability and time will discover and realize all intensionally
necessary truths (this
may

happen even under restriction to the normal but without that
restriction, will
certainly

happen.) Intensional or logical necessity is explained below.
Desire and dedication may immensely enhance the efficiency of the discovery bu
t are not
logically necessary

Who is resident at the center of all being?

They repeat

the universe is infinitely more varied than this cosmological system. This
raises the following concerns. First, it may appear to question the very regularity of this
cos
mos

however, not only does it not question the regularity on some sort of
‘probabilistic’ basis, the Theory of being

the fundamental principle


shows the necessity
of such systems. Second, it may be thought of as de
-
centering. In general, the advances in
the thought in which human being appears to be farther and farther from center, are de
-
centering only relative to a certain view and certain personality types.

The enjoyment of
the moment is a form of eternity… And, Theory of being and related developments

(Theories of actuality, identity…) show that there is no being that is not at center (human
being is de
-
centered only if it is assumed that human centeredness is unique)

The normal

The ‘regular’ behavior of this cosmological system in which there is struc
ture and there
appear to be inaccessible states, in which there is causal like behavior is termed ‘normal.’
The meaning of the normal, however, must, at least initially, be an open concept because,
although, this cosmos is the necessary inspiration, it may

not be the prototype

of what is
sought

The universe enters a stage of being the void

From the void, the universe must enter a state of being. This resolves what has been
called the
fundamental problem of metaphysics

i.e. why there is being

This entering m
ay be viewed as ‘entering’ the void state. It may also be viewed as
annihilation of the universe

The universe may be in the void state or in a manifest state. Both are actual, neither
eternal. There is no reason from the perspective of possibility that it
is currently in a
manifest state. However, in the void or non
-
manifest state there is no experience of a
universe. If there is experience, the universe must be in a manifest state

The developments regarding Mind, suggest that in any manifest state there is

experience
but not necessarily of the focused, acute kind that is experienced by the living beings of
earth

The states of the universe. Annihilation. Equivalence among states
. Indeterminism of
‘origins’


28

There are further cosmological conclusions e.g. that

there are infinitely many normal
cosmological systems, that excepting when a contradiction is entailed
,

every actual state
of being within the universe and every actual description of a domain of the universe will
recur infinitely in time and space

Since
the void is absolutely indeterministic, and a void may be regarded as attached to
every state and every domain (as the complement of that state or domain relative to
itself,) the annihilation may be regarded as being brought about by the void

There is
no

e
special significance to ‘annihilation
by the void
;’ the annihilation may be
regarded as
self

annihilation

In the

sense that every state flows from the it, every state is equivalent to the void

In the global perspective it might be said that the universe ‘i
s’ in a state of the void;
however, it may be also said that it ‘is’ not; this form of the assertion encourages the twin
habit of using both local and global perspectives but whether it is otherwise enlightening
is open to question

Every state is equivalen
t to every other state

All is change and flux and all is unchanging

(Parmenides, Plato)

may be read equally
from the Metaphysics of Immanence

but of course is dependent on how the reading is
done

The origin of a formed or even transient cosmos from the voi
d is indeterministic

The origin is necessarily indeterministic (the void does not in any sense contain or map
deterministically to a formed universe)

Although the void may be thought of a ‘base’ state relative to which formation and
origins occur, under ab
solute indeterminism the role of base state may be played by any
state of the universe

Causation and determinism

The concept of causation may be seen as a topic in cosmology

Cause can be seen as interaction among dynamic forms that have similar characteris
tics
but can also be interpreted as a Form that includes the interacting form

There can be no causal relation among static forms and there is little causal relation
among highly transient forms

In general, causation is little like the causation of classica
l physics or even the
probabilistic causation of quantum physics

No universal causation

There is no universal causation of the classical or quantum kinds. Perhaps the label quasi
-
causation or normal causation is more applicable than causation. Such quasi o
r normal
causation must have exception

There are and must be phases that are normally causal and normally deterministic

As a result universal absolute indeterminism (no unaccessed states) such phases must
exist but cannot be absolutely causal or absolutely

deterministic (in the classic sense)


29

All causation is at most quasi
-
causation; all determinism is at most quasi
-
determinism

As a result of universal interaction, there must be some weak kind of universal causation

It is seen again how much truth is affect
ed by meaning

Absolute indeterminism, form, and absolute determinism

The universe is absolutely indeterministic (absolute indeterminism obtains when the only
inaccessible or unaccessed states are the logically inaccessible states)

It is often thought that
indeterminism cannot explain form and structure

Since there are no inaccessible and unaccessed states

in absolute indeterminism, states of
form and structure must too be accessed (the probability or population of the universe by
formed states or cosmologic
al systems is addressed below)

The absolute indeterminism of the universe is that no states are unaccessed. This contains
the absolute determinism that all states are accessed (except those whose access harbors
or entails contradiction)

The absolute determ
inism regards which states are accessed i.e. all states are accessed.
The absolute indeterminism regards the manner including sequence of access

Mechanism and explanation

Mechanism is an aspect of cosmology

Mechanisms or explanations show only probability,

relative stability, near symmetry

While it may be thought that formed states are relatively improbable relative to transient
states, near symmetry and relative stability imply durability

Combined with the selective nature of perception (higher perceptivit
y in the cosmological
systems of certain types of greater complexity,) it is reasonable to claim that this results
in a greater population of formed
and

perceived states. However, if a state with high
degree of formation invariably results in higher percep
tion i.e. perception of the form
over mere feeling, perception, then, does not entail any additional selective character

This kind of reflection may have implications for whether a formed cosmological system
must have life andor sentience. There are reflec
tions of a different nature on this topic in
below and, later, in
Mind

The normal is the generic term for the being of a formed cosmos in an absolutely
indeterministic background

Mechanism is typically associated with the normal

Whereas formation by a sing
le step is logically possible and therefore necessary, it seems
that incremental variation and selection (of relatively stable states) is far more probable

Form. Mechanisms of emergence. Normal mechanisms



from ‘06

They saw that there were identities amon
g Metaphysics, Logic and Cosmology; that there
was arbitrariness to the distinctions. They saw that in metaphysics, the focus was
Being

itself; in Logic, Form; and in cosmology, Variety. The developments of Logic and

30

cosmology, below, are continuations of
the development of the metaphysics.
A Logos is
in the process of revelation

Necessary versus contingent mechanism

On substance and determinism
.
The Metaphysics of Immanence is a non
-
relativist
philosophy without foundation in substances

A classical substan
ce is a uniform and unchanging thing or object from which all variety
and change manifest

The idea of classical substance arises, perhaps, from a desire to explain the complex from
the simple

Substance theory appears to be desirable relative to a desirabil
ity of explanation e.g. of
the origin of formed states of the universe e.g. of the origin of a formed cosmological
system

Monism>>>

Monism is the theory that there is one substance

However, a concern immediately arises. How would monism explain variety and

change?
Where in the realm of the uniform is the varied, where in the realm of the unchanging is
the changing?

Dualism>>>

This is one source of dualism


the theory that there are two or more substances

Dualism, however runs into the same problem of expla
nation because the variety in the
world is infinite. A theory with infinitely many substances is no longer simple and
explanation of change may require reference to shifting combinations and illusion. How
do shifting combinations occur if the substances ar
e unchanging? Illusion may explain
change and variety but this explanation is illicit for the perceiver, too, must be of
substance

‘The’ problem of substance theory is the problem of determinism…

What is the problem, then, with substance theory? Why is sub
stance explanation not
forthcoming?

It is the result of the desire for deterministic explanation

The idea the universe is a (deterministic) machine has common appeal (especially to
certain personality types,) in religion, and in science (even though quantu
m theory
contains indeterminism)

To be truly simple instruments of explanation, substances would be deterministic

Simplicity of determinism is consistent with the original desire for simplicity in substance

Metaphysics of substance and metaphysics of deter
minism are duals
>>>

It is the tacit assumption of determinism that makes substance theory untenable, that
requires the proliferation of substances that still provides no relief


31

The establishment of formation from the void and the recognition of the absolut
ely
indeterministic character of the universe shows that substance theory is untenable and
unnecessary

Determinism is the forgotten twin of substance theory

The Void

and the elimination
of substance
.
That the void may assume
some aspects of
the role of sub
stance but is not a true substance. Simplicity of the void

The void may be taken to be the basis of explanation that was sought in substance

However, since the void is not deterministic, it may be improper to refer to the void as a
substance

The void is no
t a
true

substance. There is another reason for not regarding the void as a
substance. This reason, already noted, is that although the void may be thought of a
‘base’ state relative to which formation and origins occur, under absolute indeterminism
the ro
le of base state may be played by any state of the universe. It is equally valid to
regard any state of the universe

including that of the void


as the
sub
-
stance of all being

Yet another reason for not regarding the void as substance is that although ‘vo
idism’ may
have been regarded as a substance theory in certain developments of the past, here there
voidism is not posited


the metaphysics does not start with the void and there is nowhere
any assumption of the fundamental character of a category or enti
ty of being as in
materialism, idealism and so on. Instead, the existence and characteristics of the void and
the metaphysical consequences are all derived from basic empirical facts

The void and its absolute indeterminism are simpler than substance

The vo
id is ultimately simple

The void and absolute indeterminism are absolutely simple because they place no
explanatory requirements on the elements of being

The elements of being are, then, a result and not a pre
-
condition of explanation and
investigation

Sub
stance continued. Mind and matter

Another motive to substance theory is that, under determinism, without substances, there
is no explanation of being that terminates at some concrete place, that explanation is
either incomplete or (andor) non
-
terminating i
.e. without end

From the void there may be both finite and infinite chains of explanation. The generic
explanation of being is finite

An appeal of substance had been that of providing a non
-
relativist philosophy i.e. one that
terminates e.g. with something

simple. A relativist philosophy is one that never
terminates and is unsatisfying because it provides no foundation for metaphysics or
philosophical understanding

Explanation from the void terminates at the void. The resulting metaphysics is not a
substanc
e theory of any kind (whether material or mental like or in the form of facts or
propositions…) but is not a relativist philosophy. It is non
-
relativist, i.e. it provides a
foundation although not a determinist one


32

If a determinist foundation is not possib
le it cannot be truly desirable

Conversely, if an (absolutely) indeterministic foundation is necessary it cannot be other
than desirable

Yet another appeal to dualism had been the absolute separation of mind and matter.
Regardless of the philosophical, the
ological and scientific motivations for this separation,
it should be clear by now that as distinct substances mind and matter could never interact
and as absolute but dedicated, e.g. within this cosmos, even if indeterministic, are likely
doomed as explan
atory experiments

Later, it will be seen that if mind and matter are released from their local and historical
moorings, they may be realized as nothing but other words for being

This opens up the resolution, in
Mind

and in
Human being
, by what is essential
ly the
theory of formation from the void, i.e. from absolute indeterminism, of the mind
-
matter
paradox and to an understanding of the nature of mind and its grounding and many
aspects thereof

Given concepts of mind and of matter that are not other terms fo
r being, if it is specified
that mind and matter are distinct substances, there can be no causation from mind to
matter (or matter to mind,) and there can be no origin of mind in matter (or matter in
mind)

On the condition that they are substantially disti
nct, at least
one of mind and matter is not
a substance

Regarding matter as the fundamental element of this cosmos (i.e. as generalized to
include energy and the other elements of theoretical physics,) matter can be a ‘local and
effective substance’ but no
t a substance

Mind and matter are not substances

I.e. if they are regarded in their common senses and as substantial in nature, neither can
function as
a

metaphysical or universal substance

On anthropomorphism and anthropocentrism… and cosmomorphism and
co
smocentrism

Comments on the immensely cosmo
-
centric view in John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler,
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle,
1986

An anthropomorphic view sees being as having human nature. In an anthropocentric
view, human being is at the center o
f the universe

A modern sentiment perhaps fostered by four centuries of science and by liberalism is to
de
-
anthropomorphize thought about non
-
human being e.g. other entities and the universe
as a whole

However, anthropomorphism is difficult to escape altog
ether. Even when explicitly shed,
it may remain in the weak form of cosmomorphism


modeling the universe on the local
cosmological system e.g. taking the laws of physics to be the laws or at least a blueprint
for the laws of the entire universe


33

Cosmomorph
ism is the building into a metaphysics or world picture the characteristics of
the immediate cosmos


except perhaps the most fundamental characteristics (e.g. that
there is being, that there is the universe)

Cosmomorphism is difficult to escape. However,
its retention (mythic, scientific or
philosophical
-
metaphysical) is infinitely restrictive of vision

Upon positively shedding all shreds of cosmomorphism, a vast ‘universe’ of possibility
immediately appears

It is then possible to ascertain what elements o
f that universe are (correspond to what is)
real. The result is a metaphysics of infinite and ultimate depth and breadth

The foregoing possibility is here demonstrated by construction. A metaphysics of infinite
and ultimate depth and breadth is constructed

(the notions of ‘ultimate,’ ‘depth,’ and
‘breadth’ are defined and elaborated)

A guiding principle for the metaphysician is to obtain conceptual distance from the
immediate world without relinquishing all relations to it, without relinquishing intent to
r
eturn to the immediate. The immediate is essential as is home; and is useful for its
suggestive power, inspiration and as test

Home is not invariably a fixed place

This guiding principle opens up a path to an adequate and proper conceptual relation to
(und
erstanding, knowledge of) the entire universe

The principle is also available to the study of particular aspects of the immediate world. It
is helpful, for example, in the study of (human) mind. First, in recognizing the conceptual
nature of mental categor
ies and therefore seeing that neuroanatomy and neurophysiology
(…) are at most half of the picture that is sought. Second, in the recognition that
perception, thought, emotion, intuition and so on are conceptual and therefore not given
as immediately exper
ienced or conceived a play is allowed that permits movement
toward a proper understanding and foundation of these categories and their relations

For an inhabitant of this cosmological system, knowledge of the entire universe must be
of a general or abstrac
t character

However, such knowledge is intensely and perhaps surprisingly illuminating of human
knowledge and, particularly, knowledge of the immediate world

The immediate and the ultimate are mutually illuminating

These claims are demonstrated constructiv
ely

Another modern sentiment stands against anthropocentrism

However, it is clearly seen in the metaphysics and later in
Objects
, especially in the
Theory of Identity, human being

every human individual


stands at the center of being.
What is now seen is
that is not the exclusive case, i.e. all other entities and creatures also
stand at center. It is then perhaps more than a value judgment to think that human being
stands neither above nor below the other forms of life. What may be lost in thinking of
huma
n being as special (which may be seen as based in insecurity fostered by a false
view of being) is gained in identity


in being centered among the elements of being


34

The Void, substance and Elimination of
substance



from ‘06

Since the void is equivalent t
o
All Being
, there is no substance and no explanatory need
for substance. Being may be regarded as having (Necessary) origin in the void.
Explanation terminates in the void without need for explanatory regress. (These
assertions and their meaning are furth
er shown and elaborated in what follows)

An alternate statement is that the void may be considered to be
the

substance and it may
play that role in view of the complete indeterminism of the void. The purposes of
classical substance theory include the expla
nation of complexity from simplicity


of the
Form and Variety of the world in substance which is uniform (formless) and unchanging.
The difficulties of the classical forms of substance theory arise on account of a (tacit)
association of determinism with s
ubstance. This tacit determinism is
apparently

consistent with the purpose to explain complexity from simplicity. However, given
determinism it is not merely difficult but impossible to explain form, variety and change
from uniform and unchanging substance
. This is so because determinism and true novelty

not determined by e.g. a previous state


are exclusive. Regarding sub
-
stance, it is clear
that determinism is the imposition or immanence of law but absence of any such
imposition or immanence is equivalen
t to indeterminism; therefore indeterminism of
substance is conceptually simpler than determinism

[
It would be interesting to review the history of substance theories, the meaning of
substance, the way in which successive substance theories arose in respon
se to the
problems identified with earlier ones, the increasing sophistication of substance theories.
However this temptation is avoided in this version of the present narrative, whose intents
include brevity, since all substance theories remain problemati
c and since it is here
demonstrated that the primary objective of substance theory can be achieved without
substance. It will be useful, though, to carefully define the problems of substance
theories. It is often thought that philosophical explanation requ
ires substance because it is
essential to making sense of the world. A non relativist philosophical system is one
whose system of explanation terminates at some definite point with some kind of entity
taken as fundamental; the motive to such systems is tha
t in the alternative relativist
systems there is (can be) no foundation or terminating explanation. It is thought that

non
relativist philosophical system must

acknowledge substances in the most generic sense of
that term, for that is only
to
acknowledge s
ome fundamental entities in
the

system.

A
fundamental entity or a system of fundamental entities must be simpler than what is to be
generated or explained for otherwise it or they would not be fundamental. This, combined
with the tacit assumption of determ
inism (due either to this being the classic mode of
explanation or to the thought that determinism is simpler than indeterminism and
therefore inherent in substance) makes generation or explanation of novel Variety and
complexity in terms of simplicity imp
ossible. Apparently, therefore, there is a paradox of
explanation: relativist systems
do not
provide (non
-
terminating) explanations and non
relativist systems
can not
. The source of the paradox is the tacit assumption of
determinism (and the tacit assumpti
on that determinism is conceptually simpler than
indeterminism.) If the requirement of determinism is lifted, non relativism is possible but
does not require substance. Lifting of the requirement is necessary to non relativism and
efficient in the producti
on of the ultimates in depth and variety
]


35

If simplicity is taken to be the criterion of proper or good metaphysical explanation,
metaphysics based in the void and therefore also in absolute indeterminism is necessary

Since classical substance theory and de
terminism are bound together

substance theory
has significance only if determinism obtains


it is possible but not proper to consider the
void to be a substance

The
concept

of the Void is ultimate in simplicity; it is this simplicity that allows for its
a
ctual generative power


the ‘simplicity’ of classical substance is an illusion for it
contains the constraint of determinism that the void lacks. Therefore regarding the
classical sense of substance, it is proper to not regard the ontology based in the vo
id as
substance ontology
.
The dogmas of substance and determinism have equivalence:
without determinism, substance can have no significance; without substance there is no
need for determinism

The system of explanation based in the void terminates in it. Fu
rther the existence and
properties of the void are derived from the existence of the world. Thus this form of
ontology provides explanation that terminates and posits no arbitrary fundamental
substance or given


except the world (
Being
) itself

In t
he pres
ent Theory of Being the void or absence of being has the following character

that constitutes the explicit and ultimate depth of the theory
. It is ultimate in simplicity.
If
the requirement of determinism is eliminated, the void

may be regarded as the subs
tance
of all being. It provides an explanatory system
for

the necessity of all being without
assumption and without explanatory regress

As an alternate to the void, in view of the essential indeterminism of being (since
manifest being is equivalent to the
void,) any state of the universe may be taken as
fundamental and every state be seen as equivalent to it


the universe has no special states
(these observations have been made earlier)

The following concern may have occurred to the reader. What has been s
aid so far may
be stated in the simple form (omitting logical niceties) ‘anything is possible.’ How is this
consistent with the experience of the world of laws and
limits
? To answer this question it
is required to show how form and structure
must

arise out

of the void in indeterministic
process (the origin of form and structure in indeterministic process may seem to be
counterintuitive if not paradoxical.) It may also be useful to provide a plausible or
probabilistic explanation or suggestion that the unive
rse is dominated by formed systems


or at least that such systems will dominate observation. These issues are addressed in
what follows

Realistic views of the universe as one of a field of bodies and minds, one of a field of
matter, one of a field of sent
ience cannot be essentially distinct

A sentient field reveals mind

Sentience may be regarded as a field of sentience or as a field of bodies with experience

There is no essential difference between these depictions

A contingent difference would be a ghost

Excepting ghosts, there is no difference


36

Ghosts are subject to the same analysis

If there are ghosts, they fall under the same analysis. If there are ghosts, they are merely
another kind of entity

The sentient
-
field and body
-
experience field descriptions o
f organisms in the world are
merely different terminologies

Solipsism

Except for the eternal solipsist, solipsism, i.e. occasional solipsism, is possible and
necessary

on account of the
Theory of being

The universe might be consistently seen as a solipsist

(however, since it enters a phase of
being the void it would not be an eternal solipsist even though the
universe

it is eternal
)

T
herefore,
any

argument against solipsism
must

be practical, i.e. in such and such a kind
of system of beings e.g. durable evo
lved, solipsism would be impoverished or impossible

The world of human experience is far richer than it could be if the individual were a
solipsist

5
.

General conclusions from the concept of Universe that pertain especially to the idea
of part
or

domain

Th
e idea of creation and of a creator

If a creator is external to what is created, the universe can have no creator

One part of the universe may create another part

That is logically possible. However, origins from a void may, in terms of the standard
mechan
ism, be far more likely

In
-
formation

The form of one cosmological system may be ‘informed’ by that of another or of the
background universe. It is perhaps typical that complexity and intelligence are self
-
formed while formation from the outside occurs for
at most initial conditions. This is
because the ‘ability’ of a system that forms another may, with exceptions, be of a far
greater level andor complexity

The abstract idea of God

Omnipotence (God) as an explanation of form is seriously lacking because as e
xplanation
of origins, there must also be an explanation of the origins of the omnipotence which is
less rather than more likely than self
-
formation. From Theory of being and from eternal
duration, self
-
formation is not at all likely; its probability is in

fact unity. In any case,
arguments regarding ‘external’ formation and its extent must be on a case by case basis

The void is not a causal creator

Although the manifest universe may be seen as coming out of the void, it is a stretch of
meaning to say that
the void created the manifest universe

In no deterministic or strictly causal sense did the void create the manifest universe (or
any cosmological system or domain)


37

I.e. the void is not and cannot be a causal agent of creation

However given the universe in

the void state, the following are true. ‘The’ universe will
manifest (in this sentence it is pertinent to note that ‘universe’ is used in a sense that is
local in duration.) Myriad cosmological systems will emerge (from this and subsequent
visitations to
the void state)

However, whether the void may be regarded as a causal agent depends on the meaning of
‘causation’

There is a project to investigate the meanings of cause according to which the void may
be said to cause the manifest or a domain or in which
one domain may be said to cause or
create another domain



6
.

General conclusions from the existence and form of this cosmological system

Conclusions for items 6, 7, and 8 are above. If none of the conclusions are brought here,
eliminate the particular sec
tion

7
.

Conclusions from the form and facts of experience or sentience

8.

Conclusions regarding the nature of the metaphysics as
epilogue and
prologue to the
general conclusions of the metaphysics

9.

Objections and refutations

Criticism is enhanced by alte
rnative formulation

The development of the conclusions (the Theory of being) is a source of objections

Some objections

The method of analysis and refutation

In addition to analysis of the meaning of objections, the following generic approaches to
‘refutati
on’ occur. Analysis and improvement of Theory of being and its concepts e.g. the
fundamental principle defines rather than merely employs logic… as a response to real
or apparent paradoxes; general revision of concepts. Interpretation, especially via the
c
oncept of the normal and building a coherent picture as a response to absurdity. The
idiosyncratic refutation should not be ruled out

Appeal to value e.g. the idea of faith which is not so much refutation as it is affirmation in
the face of uncertainty (bu
t not contradiction)

Analysis of the world
-
view, if any, implicit in the objections and observation that the
shedding of invalid or merely local ‘world
-
views’ is and must be liberating

That the development (search) for objections and their refutation (or o
therwise) must be
an aspect of any ‘method’

Specific objections

The void is an event

Objections and refutations



from ‘06

A number of objections to the foregoing analysis may be raised. Some foci for the
objections are (1) what may appear to be the use of

mere concepts to demonstrate actual
or real consequences and (2) that the laws of quantum theory imply the absence of actual

38

things (the ‘ground state’ of the local cosmological system) will be the quantum vacuum
which is a state that is far from being (t
he) void or absence of being but is a seat of
enormous amounts of energy and a place of continuous creation and destruction of
particle pairs, and (3)

the violation of common sense in the idea of ‘something from
nothing’ and, in physics, possible violation
s of the principle of conservation of energy.
Responses to the objections follow

(1) All being and the absence of being

the void


are concepts but not mere concepts i.e.
the fact of their reference is above question in a way that the reference to e.g. ato
ms and
apples cannot be: whereas there is always some question about the existence of an atom
or an apple (are they precisely captured in a concept) there is no question, not even a
logical one about the concept of being or the void


the fact of being for

a reader or a
writer is given just as the absence of being consists in the absence of all givens, entities,
patterns and laws. (2) The quantum vacuum is the seat of patterns of behavior that are
laws. The void contains no law and is therefore ‘below’ the
quantum vacuum in
simplicity and fundamental character. The void ‘generates’ the quantum laws of this (our)
cosmological system as well as the laws and entities of all cosmological systems. (3)
Common sense and intuition

at least for some persons


is inde
ed violated; there is
nothing, it may appear, in common day
-
to
-
day life that suggests the origin of a cosmos
out of a void. However, common sense, experience, and intuition are situated in the
everyday world. That they (may) show no origin of being from ab
sence does not imply
that such origin is impossible or that it does not occur. Self
-
aware empirical common
sense is silent on such issues and, should it desire to know, will seek to follow the
analysis. It appears to be a fact of human variety that some in
dividuals are bound to their
experience more than others. Such binding is important e.g. in survival; however,
freedom from binding is also important in growth and, perhaps, in survival (such issues
are discussed in detail in the subsequent section ‘Human
being.’) It is interesting that the
integration of intuition and analysis is similar to what occurs in mathematics, especially
e.g. in the use of algebra (which emphasizes the symbol) in geometry (whose forms are
initially known intuition.) The power of th
e algebraic approach reveals itself in the
analysis of geometric forms and even concepts that are not amenable to the intuition…
Attention now turns to the issue of violation of the principle of conservation of energy. It
is an immediate consequence of the

fundamental principle that, regarding the entire
universe, conservation of energy does not (and cannot) obtain; (near) conservation laws
are perhaps features of (relatively)
stable

worlds. However, since, in terms of physical
theory, energies can be posit
ive as well as (e.g. gravitational field energy) negative,
spontaneous creation of ‘a universe’ from nothing need not violate the physical principle
of conservation of energy


39

10.

Faith and affirmation

Appeal to value e.g. the idea of faith which is not so
much refutation as it is affirmation in
the face of uncertainty (but not contradiction)

Faith is that attitude, routine or inspired, which is most productive of action in the face of
doubt

of quality of being in the face of fear, of ends in the face of des
truction

Faith is affirmation of being (over mere system)

The attitude of faith is not fixed but is adaptable and adapts to circumstance

Faith is not identical to but is not other than reason

Reason is an element of faith

At least on account of limits to r
eason, reason is not all of faith

There is an enhance meaning that includes intuition and feeling in which reason
approaches faith

Faith is not belief

Adherence to what is merely absurd or merely given on authority is not what is here
meant by faith

Above,

the word ‘merely’ is significant. What rings of the absurd may not in fact be
absurd. Often, appeal to what may appear to be absurd in a paradigmatic or common
view is in fact an appeal to recognize limits to the common, the paradigm or the canon.
Authori
ty may be occasionally respected for its authenticity, for its power over the world
rather than its force or punitive character

On ‘method’

The idea of method

The idea of ‘method’ is not that of an algorithm that, if followed, will result in precise or
cor
rect knowledge. If such algorithms should arise they would, of course, count as
method. It will be seen that a universal algorithm for knowledge and transformation is
impossible; this confirms practical expectation

What is meant by method is a system of fu
ndamental insights regarding the nature of
being and fundamental patterns of thought and transformation that are conducive to and
arise and are revisable with the practice of thought and transformation

It is right that ‘method’ should be taken up after or

in interaction with development

with
Theory of being

The most general aspects of ‘method’ will be the Methods of Theory of being

Specific aspects of method arise in the topics, e.g., Human being

Applies also to Principles of thought and transformation

In
Faith

it will be observed that, even in the absence of insight, the eminence of
epistemology may be seen as a loss of nerve in deference to an absolute reign of reason
(even as reason dethroned itself) and that it is perhaps this absence of nerve that is
r
esponsible for it to have taken 2,500 years of philosophical thought for the emergence of
the Metaphysics of Immanence. (In
Götzen
-
Dämmerung
, Nietzsche, who is perhaps
the

philosopher of both life
and

of reason, laments the
reign

of reason)


40

Source

A fundam
ental source is the approach via (A) description of the forms of experience,(B)
conclusions from the different forms, and(C) the kinds and aspects of conclusion

Method

The
Methods

employed in the development of the metaphysics deserve mention…

From a revie
w of the outline

Initial contact with the world was via an earlier evolutionary paradigm that was temporal,
and employed the categories, first, of mind and then of matter. It appeared that a non
-
temporal paradigm, would complement the earlier one and that
this might take the form
of a view that was neutral to the temporal / non
-
temporal distinction or included both
modes of description. Additionally, mind and matter were found wanting in their
particularity and their distinctions and the resulting limitatio
ns of a view that appealed to
either or both. After experimenting with varieties of materialism and idealism including
some from the history of thought, such substance like paradigms were abandoned


not as
the result of a conscious decision but because th
e explanatory modes inevitably seemed
to be artificial and contrived and because a better alternative was found. If Hegelian
idealism has basis in appeal to reason and realism

in addition to imagination and
intuition


that basis remained invisible. That a
lternative, being, had surfaced early but it
the process in which the concept of being came into clear (and finally simple focus) and
its advantages became obvious were slow. The advantage of neutrality was clear quite
early. However, the development of a
logical metaphysics around being was slow. There
were experiments with the idea that the universe is equivalent to nothingness (the absence
of being) but, despite the intuition of this thought, and despite the fact that the net energy
of the universe may b
e zero, the necessity of the idea remained clouded

The situation changed when an inspiration to focus on the properties of the void (the term
was chosen because an association with Sartre was felt to be repugnant) instead of on
those of the universe (as th
en conceived.) This inspiration proved to be the point that
permitted transition from intuition alone to logic; and from this point on the development
of the Theory of being, starting as a trickle gathered momentum as a deluge

A key insight


the void cont
ains no pattern, no law, no form. Therefore, from the void,
every consistent state emerges. Therefore, the universe must enter a state of being the
void. Therefore, logic is the one law of the universe. Since the universe contains all
things, the actual is

identical to the possible. What is this possible? Slowly it emerged
that it is the logically possible. Patterns of derivation emerged that centered around the
ideas of ‘all,’ ‘none,’ ‘difference,’ ‘part,’ ‘actual,’ ‘the possible’…

The ‘grand’ vision of th
e metaphysic appeared to be indeterministic. Later, the term
‘absolute indeterminism’ arose; the idea appeared to contradict the possibility of form
and of the being of this cosmological system. The resolution of the contradiction
regarding form had been w
ell known from thought on evolution that, not only does
indeterminism allow form by seeking stable states that would be inaccessible under
determinism, such states are novel; indeterminism results in
novel

form. Since all states
are accessible, the state o
f this cosmos be accessible. The distinction between a formed
cosmos and the transient background is described by the term ‘normal.’ However, the

41

determinism and causation of a normal system are in fact quasi
-
determinism and quasi
-
causation; at root every
system is absolutely indeterministic but there are phases of
behavior where the indeterminism is little in evidence

An interesting point in the analysis. Not only does it emerge that ‘something from
nothing, is necessary, but it seems that fact emerges fro
m mere ideas and words. This
seemed quite incredible. The resolution is simple in concept. In addition to (contingent)
facts that could be otherwise and whose truth must be seen, ideas and words have
necessary fact built into their meaning e.g. in the fact

of experience there is being

The following multi
-
fold facets of ‘method’ emerge

Necessary fact resides in meaning e.g. the fact of meaning

From such facts the beginnings of a metaphysics emerge by derivation

Patterns of derivation are emerge, certain conc
epts are noted to be important

Some concepts are similar to classical concepts from the history of thought. An example
is that of logic. That the possible is the actual shows the intimate relation between
metaphysics and logic. A new concept of logic emerg
es that must be and is related to the
classical concept

In addition to the incorporation of the empirical in the form of necessary fact contained in
(the being of) meaning, contingent fact is encountered e.g. the being of this cosmos and it
apparent contra
diction of the growing metaphysics is resolved by the metaphysics itself
in the demonstration of the necessity of normal systems

The nature of the normal system is close to the classical notion of it but still essentially
different. The classical features
are present for ‘most purposes.’ However, the exception
is of enormous importance and absolute indeterminism underlies the normal

Along such lines there is a resolution of the issues of substance theory: the concept of
substance and determinism are twins;
there is no substance; yet a non
-
relativist
foundation of being is possible (in the void;) and along these lines there is resolution of
various problems of classical metaphysics including those of mind and matter

Different branches of classical thought are

brought under the new umbrella or paradigm
which emerges as a ‘paradigm free paradigm’ because no paradigms are imposed. The
key concepts are the old ones: Metaphysics, Meaning, Being, Object, Logic, Mind,
Cosmology, Substance, Universe, Absence of Being,

Form… however, their meanings
shift to incorporate what is the essence of the old and also so that the variety of meanings
is seen as an interactive and overlapping (e.g. the overlap of metaphysics, logic and
cosmology)

What are the essential features of
method

First
, contact with the world


including necessary and contingent fact; and the
determination required to encounter the necessary fact; this requires to neither reject
relativism (because it teaches a valuable lesson) nor acquiesce in it which woul
d be a
premature nihilism of ideas based in example rather than in necessity

Second
, search for ideas among the classical and in imagination (it appears that whatever
is new and fresh in imagination has connection and break with the classical ideas)


42

Third
,

seeing patterns of inference and emergence of important concepts and cultivating
these

Fourth
, ongoing incorporation, modification, and integration of areas of classical thought
while being open to new ideas, facts and vision…

Derivations

from the Theory
of Being



from ‘06

Before derivation came constitution e.g. ‘Being includes not only entities but also
Patterns, Forms, Laws and Logos (universal law.) Entities are Forms.’ The derivations or
inferences are of a number of kinds that follow. (1) General lo
gical derivations such as
‘The entire system of consistent descriptions is realized,’ ‘There is no distinction between
possibility and
actuality
’ and so on. (2) Logical characterizations of particular concepts
e.g. Power, Form and Number (below.) (3) Norma
l or probabilistic considerations e.g. the
formations of domains by ‘normal mechanisms’ and with ‘normal behavior;’ it is not
necessary that all domains be normal and be formed by normal mechanisms (incremental
change and durability of relatively stable fo
rms) but the normal domains dominate the
population of being and their formation is dominated by normal mechanisms; it is
necessary, however, that
some

normal domains be formed by normal mechanisms. (4)
Finally there is interaction between the Theory and s
pecial topics as included e.g. in the
sections ‘Human being’ and ‘Faith’ in which the particular topic is

illuminated and
enhanced by and provides elaboration of the Theory of Being

The ‘logical’ character of these developments may be limited by the precis
ion and
certainty of the particular topic. When the development is an enhancement of the
foundation of the special topic, the previous limits of that topic are no longer applicable
and certain of the resulting conclusions may be necessary. Examples of nece
ssary special
developments include that evolution must involve both indeterminism and selection for
(adapted or relatively stable) Form; that there are necessities of the Extension of the
concept of Mind (below) to the root of being; that there must be bot
h bound and free
symbols; that there be symbols (and images) that have degrees of binding to action
(emotion;) that constructive thought cannot be entirely deterministic. Other developments
are not necessary; some developments are reasonable e.g. when what

is normal and
therefore extremely probable

an example being mechanisms of origins


is taken as
obtaining in a specific and apparently normal domain; other developments may be more
speculative e.g. in assuming that something that is necessary in some doma
in applies in a
given normal domain (speculation is included when it seems useful.) There is no intent to
exclude significant content. Rather, an objective is to make clear the degree of confidence
(from certainty to mere speculation) and significance of c
ontent

A second intrinsic goal

to

refine
basic ideas on
Being and to

refine and
set up

the
Theory of Being

from
Metaphysics

through
The Future

Refinements are relative to the most recent print edition of 2006

Being

The following aspects are refined here or

in
Metaphysics

Why being


the active use of the idea in eliminating habits of prior metaphysics. The
form of experience and the empirical content of meaning. Concepts and objects. The
approach to the question ‘What has being?’


43

Clarifying the meaning of t
he form of experience as remembered form and as including
the fact of experience. Distinction between forms of experience and Forms of being

that
the forms of experience are not taken

unless demonstrated


to be or to give the Forms of
being. I.e., to not
make any
assumption

that the forms of experience have objectivity.
Introducing or recognizing the idea to derive

as far as possible


the metaphysics from
the form of experience.

Metaphysics

The absolute depth and breadth was recognized in the Some refinem
ents since the
previous edition. The name
Metaphysics of immanence
. Systematization of the aims and
derivation of the metaphysics and its use in setting up the other topics and divisions

Clarification of the relation of experience to the world; the existen
ce and meaning of the
external world; concept and object; absolute objectivity and noumenon or thing
-
in
-
itself… and the practical concept; possibility of absolute objectivity; relation to and
clarification of Kant’s system; transcendental meaning of faithf
ulness; faith and
affirmation

Elimination of habit substance thinking in elucidating the nature and role of
metaphysics… What is metaphysics? What should a metaphysics do? The idea of meta
-
metaphysics and metaphysics as physics. Recognizing and clarifying
the empirical
content of core metaphysics. Finding equivalent characterizations of the metaphysics.
Clarification of the ideas and fact of the ultimate depth and breadth of the metaphysics.
Clarification of the concept of substance, the nature of the void
and the elimination of
substance and its significance. Clarification of mechanism. Introducing the idea of
Faith
and affirmation

relative to issues of objectivity. Improved set up of later discussions
including those of
Metaphysics and philosophy

Objects

T
he problem of the object is clarified. The idea of the concept
-
object is no longer used;
while the tendency to conflate concept and object is recognized, concept and object are
distinguished. The problem and meaning of faithfulness is clarified. Absolute a
nd
practical concepts (objects) are introduced and the possibility of absolute objects shown.
Universal or necessary and contextual or contingent forms of experience are recognized

Particular and abstract objects
. The concepts; from the metaphysics of imma
nence, form
is the basis of the abstract object. From the metaphysics of recurrence, particular and
abstract objects are set on the same basis; and, abstract objects may reside in time and
space and may have causal efficacy. Absolute and practical objects;

the noumenon.
Classification and examples

Application
. Consistency and reference. Number, mathematical and infinite objects.
Identity. Ethical or value object. Action, concept and object. Truth and the real

Detail

That all things and Forms are in the univ
erse sets up the study of
Objects

That knower and known are in the universe (and are constituent to a form) sets up a
notion of knowledge where exact correspondence percept to perceived or concept to
conceived has no universal meaning; and therefore no uni
versal occurrence; and
therefore no universal desirability or necessity. Conversely, this may be seen as good;

44

it shows that discovery (a kind of formation) may be available. This does not rule out
that there are cases where exact correspondence has meanin
g and possibility. This
narrative constructs such a system. Another possibility regards sufficiently abstract
objects (next.) A third is the development of quantum theory to describe a system of
both knower and known. Although this narrative shows that pro
jection of current
theoretical physics to the universe would be mythic, there may be a significance for
knowledge within ‘our’ normal cosmos or with sufficient abstraction some greater
application

That perceiver, perceived and percept are in the universe s
ets up the study of abstract
objects. Questions such as whether they are temporal or spatial are to be settled on a
case by case basis, i.e. it cannot be said that all abstract objects are not spatio
-
temporal
but only that certain sufficiently and appropri
ately abstracted objects are. Are abstract
objects mental? What does that mean? It could mean ‘Do they exist in some abstract or
abstracted conceptual space?’ The resolution is, perhaps, that they may be regarded
(from the concept side) as residing in conc
eptual space but they are better regarded as
being in the world (universe)

Intensional necessity may be seen as extensional necessity over certain abstract objects

Meaning

Use

its meaning, lexical theory and atomism

Holism and residence of meaning in the s
ystem of concepts; division and recombination
of concepts; formation of the free concept

Meaning

a system in, of and in interaction with the world. That until demonstrated
otherwise, meaning remains incomplete, contextual, and in evolution. That if meaning

has limits on precision and completeness, in revealing ever freshness of discovery this is
good

Concept and object

sense and reference, connotation and denotation, intension and
extension

Possible detail

That sentience is a form whose constituents include

other forms (organism, object) and
their relation sets up the study of
Meaning

and of
Mind
.

Logic

Theory of possibility

Theory of descriptions, grammar… description, conceptualization, depiction

Logos

That Logic is the one law of being

… and logic

Paradox

and reference

On logic and logics

Mathematics


45

Science

Possible detail

That Logic is the one Law of being sets up the study of
Logic

Science may be seen as a kind of relative possibility but not (always) a necessary one.
Science will be taken up further in

Logic

The systems of deductive logic are studies of relative but necessary possibility

Mind

Preliminary

In common and much philosophical and scientific use, mind and matter are vague and
extensible concepts that may each fit one another and fit many pheno
mena but in their
definiteness cannot fit all phenomena
. If the requirement of definiteness is lifted they are
not even candidates for substances and on account of the metaphysics each may be
extended to cover the other and all phenomena

If

mind and matter

are definite substances then they are necessarily identical.

If they are
distinct substances then, necessarily, a contradiction results



Contents

The status of mind relative to the ground of being is clarified

As commonly used, mind and matter are indefi
nite concepts but may be so regarded or
defined to incorporate what is true of the common meanings and reach to the ground

Feeling is the essential character of mind

it is the primitive form of mind
; it reaches to
ground; its elaboration gives mind
-
as
-
expe
rienced… as discussed in Human being

Resolution of mind
-
body, mental causation and other problems

Originality, consciousness and attributes

Cosmology

Cosmology is the Theory of variety

General cosmology… a variety of cosmological consequences

Mechanism and

explanation. Necessity of absolute indeterminism. Necessary and normal
mechanism

Time and space

Cosmological status of substance

Local cosmology


atomism, divides

Possible detail

That there are no fictions except logical contradictions sets up the study
of the variety
within
Cosmology
. The formation from the void sets up the study of origins of both
transient and formed (normal) systems


46

Human world

Explicit recognition of ‘method’ for this section is new

Method

Necessary conclusions regarding Human World
follow from necessary premises e.g.
necessary propositions from Theory of being and necessary facts regarding the human
world. Contingent conclusions, usually detailed and contextual, follow when one or more
premises are contingent

Continuous and extended
reflection in which the atomic conclusion is regarded as neither
final nor the unit of reflection but is integrated with a larger whole and tested for
coherence and factual character. Experience may serve the role of experiment

although
some situations cal
l for active experiment to achieve greater differentiation

including
precision


such experiment is by no means universally necessary and the extreme points
of view that eschew and that invariably require controlled experiment are both mistaken

Function

Hu
man World provides a ground context for the journey

where Theory of Being
provides the universal ‘context’

Human World is presented as a contribution in aspects of the organism; psychology,
intuition and its categories; society and its institutions; ethics

and ideals; the problem of
the modern world; the nature of civilization and history; and to the concepts, nature and
place of faith and affirmation and of religion

Human being

Human essence

e.g. awareness of and therefore, by duality of ability and functi
on,
instrumental presence in the stream… Essence as remaining in continual reflection until
conclusion is necessary and complete

Feeling

as defined here


as the fundamental element of mind; attitude and action as
characteristics or manifestations attached

to feeling but not as elementary. Dimensions of
feeling. Integration and function. The intuition… and its categories defined by the
categories of being. The unconscious… its existence, its nature as an element in the
continuum of rather than opposite to f
eeling, its significance in binding and freedom.
Growth, personality and commitments.
A
tman. Dynamics e.g. psychoanalysis,
determinism and the unconscious… and dreams. Love

fact before theory; the core idea
as sufficient equality regard for self and other.

Language

the importance of symbol but
arbitrariness of the distinction between symbolic, iconic and dramatic imagination,
processing and communication… and conclusions from the absence of complete
distinction. Language, sense and grammar. Achievement and
disorder… or function and
dysfunction

Social world

‘Method.’ Ideas of society, culture and institution are developed from enumeration of the
possible kinds of group interaction in light of the
Metaphysics

and the nature of
Human
being

Individual and group.

Social freedoms. Culture and institution. Institution of culture. The
social institutions. Dynamics…


47

War and peace

The problem

The context of the problem has no boundaries

an occasion for a meditation on ‘
Our
World


Ethics and instance, and instance and i
nstance are not separable

The interactive character of problems of ‘Our World’ and their dimensions

cultural,
educational, economic, political, law, and faith and religion

Possible detail

The co
-
existence of absolute indeterminism and of form is crucial to

the study of the
Human world

Faith

The concepts, nature, and place of faith

especially in the modern world


and religion.
Institutions of religion. Religion and truth

Nature and function of institutions of religions (‘the religions’) and adherence

Nomadi
c societies and the character of faith

Rational attitudes toward religion

especially in the present world

Civilization and history

Old and new concepts. Metaphors for civilization

Civilization as connectedness of society and societies in time and space. In
ternal
coherence as incomplete. Theory of being shows the necessity of universal civilization
and identity of individual and group with that civilization

Prospect

History as the web or matrix of interconnection

The highest ideal

Classical ideals and substa
nce thought

The highest ideal incorporates the ideas of the past

the classical ideals


and
search

for a
hierarchy of ideals

The Idea of a Journey

Nature of a journey

how the endeavor is a journey. Includes transformation of ambition
and goals

Why the jour
ney (re
-
discovery of the universe) is essential to realization

Journey’s arc

Story as presentational form


48

Ideas

Principles of thought and transformation
arise in thought and transformation

in the
journey. They do not stand outside; a glimmer of ‘method’ is

seen, cultivated, multiplied,
refined…

The remaining ideas illustrate the journey

are occasions of discovery and illustration of
Theory of being

Transformation

History, basis and theory of transformation. Root in history and Theory of being

System of expe
riments

Transformation so far. Designs

The Future

Continuing…

A time of perception. A time the eternal in the present; of Brahman in
A
tman

The Author

Some elements of process

The place of the journey in a life

Some details to incorporate

The following take

on materialism is to be incorporated into the development

Materialism and other substance ontologies begin with a dedicated (implies restricted)
concept, e.g. matter (if materialism is another name for being it is not dedicated but
empty with regard to be
ing a substance)

In monism, the universe is matter or mind or…; in dualism it is more than one kind or
substance and each kind is restricted in nature and it is this essential restrictedness that in
the thinking of the dualist requires dualism… Here the un
iverse is what it is! This trivial
and obvious thought is the source of a revolution. Whether there is a substance and if
there is, what that substance may be will fall out of analysis rather than being a
precondition of analysis

Similarly, the idea that a
nalysis should be flat (lateral) is a precondition. The proper mode
of analysis

flat, depth or mix


should be a result and not precondition of investigation.
That analysis should be in some specific mode is a consequence of a way of thought
rather than ex
pression of a universal necessity or dependent on the subject matter, e.g.
meaning, science…

The approach here is to start with the immediate. Then the word meaning of ‘being’ shall
fall out of the subsequent consideration. Insofar as the meaning
-
sense of
being is empty,
the analysis of its sense
-
meaning shall be clarification by elimination of invalid and
misleading associations. Being is perhaps the one (general) concept whose analysis is
without depth; however this does not imply that being contains no d
epth. Perhaps the
only concepts whose analysis shall necessarily be horizontal (lateral) are empty concepts.
Perhaps the only general metaphysical concept of this nature is that of being.

49

Additionally, the fundamental concepts for restricted contexts may p
erhaps be empty and
therefore their analysis horizontal

However, in saying ‘being is’ is it not being said that being is something? And then what
is that something that being is said to be? No, these assertions are not an implicit part of
‘being is’ and wi
ll become part of that assertion only if the phrase is extended to ‘being is
x.’ The bare phrase ‘being is’ or ‘being’ refers to the necessary empirical facts of
experience (rather than the content of experience) and of entirety, absence, difference and
do
main

In admitting the case of absence of manifest being i.e. that the universe visits the void
state, the fact of perception becomes occasional (even if dominant) but not universal

That there is an occasional fact of perception necessarily obtains. It is n
ot possible that
there is never perception
or

that there is always perception

The truth of the previous paragraph holds when ‘perception’ is replaced by ‘manifest
being’

Is it not however in saying ‘being is that which exists’ being asserted that being exi
sts
-
in
-
time? There is a variety of uses of the idea behind the word ‘is.’ Some uses are peripheral
to the assertion of existence and have no pertinence here. As far as existence is
concerned, the use does not always indicate existence in time… and even if
it did, that
could only mean that ‘is’ does indicate existence in time and not that it must do so and
that ‘is’ could then be extended. Does that mean that existence out of time (or before, or
after or over time) is possible or is a possible connotation of

‘is?’ If the facts are possible
then an extended andor neutral connotation is also possible. Since it is not clear what ‘out
of time’ means that idea is omitted here. The ideas ‘before time’ and ‘after time’ may
refer to states of being in which change th
erefore time is indiscernible but do not appear
to have a connotation of true timelessness but only that of apparent timelessness. The
idea of being
-
over
-
time may connote a picture in which e.g. the trajectory of a motion is
regarded as the entity; in this

case the use of ‘is’ would not connote being
-
in
-
time. Then
‘is’ could be used neutrally to connote both cases of in or over time. A similar
consideration is possible with respect to space or space
-
time. And, finally, further
abstraction results in the glo
bal andor local description described in what follows. Thus
being is not necessarily regarded as in or not in time, in or not in space, and, in the
abstract case, that space and time (or space
-
time) are the only descriptors or that whatever
descriptors obt
ain form a universal continuum

Are space and time always descriptors and are they the only descriptors of manifest
being? If manifest being must require variety it seems that extension or space is
necessary. Since all being must occasionally obtain as the
void or absence of being, it
would seem that change, duration or time is necessary. Space and time then are necessary
to manifest being (and though it is possible to appreciate how they may necessarily be
coupled in certain cosmological arrangements it is
not as easy to see that this is always
the case.) Are space and time sufficient to manifest being? Since manifest being relative
to the void is given by the fact (variety) and act of manifestation, it appears that they are
sufficient. However, the previous

appearance may be simply a consequence of the
structure of human intuition or the nature of this cosmos


50

The clarification of the meaning of being then, since the being as such knows no
distinctions, is an elimination of associations that dedicate the idea

in some direction so
as to specialize it. Distinctions are either eliminated or the distinct realms are allowed to
stand together. To not do so results in a specialized association. The following
distinctions have been eliminated or mentioned: substance v
s. non
-
substance theories,
finite vs. infinite depth theories, local vs. global description, necessary vs. contingent
dependence on space and time, continuum vs. patch, manifest vs. non
-
manifest,
difference vs. uniformity, and part vs. whole. Additionally,

the following distinctions
may be considered. Absolute determinism vs. absolute indeterminism, the varieties of
cause and cause vs. non
-
causation

Here, in the idea of being, all, absence, difference and part, is (the root of a) systematic
metaphysics. Thi
s metaphysics may frame speculation but is not itself speculation; and it
shows also in significant measure what ‘speculations’ are necessary, what are perhaps
only probable, what may be highly probable, when the occurrence of what is probable in
any conte
xt or domain is necessary relative to all being, and when the metaphysics itself
gives little credence to contingent contextual claims or speculations

The greatest scheme of thought, regardless of its source, is grounded not in speculation or
imagination o
r romance but in cold logic

The real immanent form of logic in being called Logic is not other than feeling but
contains it

A third intrinsic goal

to review metaphysics and philosophy in light of the
foregoing framework

T
he discussion the review of metaphy
sics and philosophy, their nature and possibilities in
general and not in their specific form as in this narrative is to be in

the division

Ideas
.
The aim here is to set up the later discussion. Distribute material accordingly