Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Have you people ever considered this?

Expand Messages
  • Dick.
    Have you people ever considered this? First, here are Rams four parts again; and note what he says in part one are his views on Metaphysics; and a couple of
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 28, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Have you people ever considered this?

      First, here are Rams four parts again; and note what he says in part one are his views on Metaphysics; and a couple of other highlighted comments in red here ....

      [ Ram: [1] Metaphysics is “a branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world, although the term is not easily defined. Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms: 1. ‘What is there?’ 2. ‘What is it like?’ […] The metaphysician attempts to clarify the fundamental notions by which people understand the world, e.g.,existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility. A central branch of metaphysics is ontology, the investigation into the basic categories of being and how they relate to each other. Another central branch of metaphysics is cosmology, the study of the totality of all phenomena within the universe. […] Prior to the modern history of science, scientific questions were addressed as a part of metaphysics known as natural philosophy. The term science itself meant ‘knowledge’ of, originating from epistemology. The scientific method, however, transformed natural philosophy into an empiricalactivity deriving from experiment unlike the rest of philosophy. By the end of the 18th century, it had begun to be called ‘science’ to distinguish it from philosophy. Thereafter, metaphysics denoted philosophical enquiry of a non-empirical character into the nature of existence. […] The nature of Being is a perennial topic in metaphysics. […] Metaphysical Cosmology is the branch of metaphysics that deals with the world as the totality of all phenomena in space and time.”
      Ontology is “the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.”
      Epistemology is “the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of knowledge. It addresses mainly the following questions: What is knowledge? How is knowledge acquired? To what extent is it possible for a given subject or entity to be known?”
      In my investigation, many meanings have been attributed to the same term. For example, there are over 40 meanings (with some overlap) have been attributed to the term ‘consciousness’ as elaborated in (Vimal, 2009f) and (Vimal, 2010d), where the conclusion was that author should define the term before using it to avoid confusion. The same is true for the term ‘metaphysics’.
      My definition of metaphysics is simply the foundation of everything, which tries to elaborate the Fundamental Truth/Reality. One of the methods of generating major metaphysics is categorizing all entities of universe in two (mind and matter-in-itself). This generates 4 major metaphysics: materialism (mind from matter-in-itself), idealism (matter-in-itself from mind), interactive substance dualism (mind and matter-in-itself can exist independently but they can interact), and dual-aspect monism (DAM, where an entity-state has inseparable mental and matter-in-itself aspects). Since matter-in-itself is unknown (as per Kant), we assume that matter-in-itself is close to the physical aspect (P) of entity-state (3rd person perspective) because mind is also a part on Nature and hence it must be telling us something about matter-in-itself (neo-Kantian view). The mental (M) aspect is from the 1st person perspective, such as our subjective experiences. The first three metaphysics can be rejected based on the category mistakes and only the remaining metaphysics is DAM, which has least number of problems. A category mistake is when there is cross-interaction, such as M-P (or M from P) and P-M (or P from M); same-same (M-M or P-P) interactions are allowed.
      My DAMv metaphysics is an extension of DAM and is designed to encompass all views as special cases. The DAMv framework that has 3 components: (i) the Dual-Aspect Monism (Vimal, 2008b) with (ii) (Vimal, 2010c) and (iii) varying degrees of the dominance of aspects depending on the level of entities (Vimal, 2012a), where each entity-state hasinseparable mental and physical aspects (the doctrine of inseparability).
      Furthermore, in consciousness research, it is useful to melt the boundaries of various disciplines. This is because it is complex research and single discipline cannot explain all aspects of consciousness. There are over 40 aspects as elaborated in (Vimal, 2009f) and (Vimal, 2010d). Thus limiting our discussion on consciousness in religions, epistemology, cosmology, ontology, philosophy, psychology, neuroscience, and other sciences will limit our understanding of consciousness. It reminds me the story of understanding elephant by blind people: some said that just big trunk is the elephant; some said that the big ear is the elephant; and so on. We need all disciplines and their boundaries must melt to understand consciousness.

      [2] In philosophy, idealism is “the group of philosophies which assert that reality, or reality as we can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial. Epistemologically, idealism manifests as a skepticism about the possibility of knowing any mind-independent thing. […] As an ontological doctrine, idealism goes further, asserting that all entities are composed of mind or spirit. Idealism thus rejects physicalist and dualist theories that fail to ascribe priority to the mind. An extreme version of this idealism can exist in the philosophical notion of solipsism. Religious and philosophical thought privileging the immaterial or supernatural over the material and natural is ubiquitous and ancient. […] The Hindu idealists in India and the Greek Neoplatonists gave pantheistic arguments for an all-pervading consciousness as the ground or true nature of reality. In contrast, theYogācāra school, which arose within Mahayana Buddhism in India in the 4th century CE, based its ‘mind-only’ idealism to a greater extent on phenomenological analyses of personal experience. This turn toward the subjective anticipated empiricists such as Berkeley, who revived idealism in 18th-century Europe by employing skeptical arguments against materialism. Beginning with Kant, German idealists such asHegel, Fichte, Schelling, and Schopenhauer dominated 19th-century philosophy. This tradition, which emphasized the mental or ‘ideal’ character of all phenomena, birthed idealistic and subjectivist schools ranging from British idealism to phenomenalism to existentialism.
      Thus, we can start from epistemology and go all the way up for understanding everything including consciousness.

      [3] You are correct that I have ideas clear enough to hypothesize the DAMv framework. Please see (Vimal, 2008b, 2009f, 2010c, 2010d, 2012a, 2012d). Over 40 different (some overlapping) meanings attributed to the term ‘consciousness’ can be categorized in two: functions and experiences as discussed in (Vimal, 2009f) and (Vimal, 2010d). Most of your queries will be addressed after reading these articles.

      [4] You use configuration or Aristotle’s concept of ‘form’ for appearances, which his fine. And you define matter in mind-dependent reality (MDR): “Matter is simply the experiencing of relative configuration between the subject and the object” rejects Kant’s ‘ding an sich’ or unknowable matter-in-itself in mind-independent reality (MIR). This rejection is incorrect because there can be many experiences for a given matter. For example, a ripe-tomato appears red for trichromats but dark-gray to achromats. Feelings or emotions are experiential aspect of consciousness in the DAMv framework, which is the best framework so far because it has the least number of problems and other views can be derived from this general framework as special cases. The DAMv framework is not just ‘Monism of Exclusive Reality, where ‘universe excludes everything that is not real’, rather it is general framework that encompasses all views and all three kinds of realities: our conventional daily life MDR (where subject and objects are different), samadhi-state ultimate MDR (where subject and objects unify), and unknowable (and hence unreal) MIR; each of the states of entities in each reality has inseparable mental and physical aspects. Please try your best to reject it but after understanding the DAMv framework thoroughly by studying the above six articles rigorously.
      Cheers!
      Regards,
      Ram
      27Aug12 ]

      I do not know but I would imagine that all those who are interested in reading this would either have read the book I wrote on all this or at least read the exegesis of transcendence and that trip back to the ground of being ( the point of the Eternal NOW). So I will assume that you have read at least that, if you have not then it will be a waste of your time reading this. So I will assume that those reading this have at least read the exegesis of transcendence. And in which case you will know that I have explained that no matter how many times you went there it would always be the same thing, the same event, and the same TIME. For events in time are irrelevant to this. It is always the same NOW.

      So, was I there before I was born here, or did I go there during this lifetime, or did I go there at the end of this lifetime and after all this was done? What do you think lads and lassies? The book says I was there in 1964. But there is no 1964 there. What do you make of that? Did you ever even consider it? I doubt it. Life and Existence is nothing like as simple as any of you are believing it to be. And none of you are mystics. It is irrelevant when we go there !!! Neither is all this about IDEAS and thinking. QED.

      Metaphysics comes AFTER physics, not before it. Things of a Metaphysical nature are an epiphenomena of matter and a physical existence. Such as your memories are; just to give one simple example. So, all your senses are Metaphysical detection tools. But that which some of those tools are detecting are NOT of a Metaphysical or a Physical nature. They are of a Protophysical nature. BEFORE physics and material existence. Before Time is made. You don't seem to have worked that out yet. But how could you, for you are NOT mystics. So don't blame yourselves for that blindness. Man is ever tied to cross of time and eternity (X) FACT of living experience, not IDEAS or thinking.

      You have a very fine profile and achievements there Ram, or a personal CV; and I sincerely congratulate you on all that and your hard work and efforts, you have been very busy and are certainly not a procrastinator in putting off till tomorrow what you can do today. But none of this work touches the mystical re-union event outside of Time; let alone the rest of the stuff which follows on from it. Your stuff is ALL about what you can find here in spacetime and then what each of you make of it. Mystical consciousness is not about spacetime lads. There is more than has ever occurred to your philosophy lads. As yet.

      The world has ALWAYS hated mystics. It did millennia ago and it still does today, and it will not doubt continue to be like that for much time yet to come.

      R.W. (Dick) Richardson
      England. 2012 of the common era.



      From: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpvimal@...>
      To: Dick Richardson <dick.richardson@...>; Bhanu Padmo <greenbhanu@...>
      Cc: Nadeem Haque <haque_nadeem@...>; Ravi Prakash <drravi2121@...>
      Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 2:21 PM
      Subject: Re: Good morning Ram and Gentlemen



      Thanks Dick.
      Regards,
      Ram
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.