12.12.08

Preterphysics

Posted in epistemology, logic, ontology, philosophy, preterphysics at 12:30 pm by nogre

Well, I guess this is it, the conclusion of this strange little saga which has been my foray into metaphysics.  I get to go teach elementary school in rural Austria now.  2 whole pages in which you get to learn how to go from insanity to wisdom.

I have a  final total version that contains the prologue and metaphysical ontology (slightly edited) here/ pdf.  It’s just over 4 pages in length.  I suspect I’ll edit some more and eventually I’ll have to do more with the middle section, but since it was the beginning and the end that really mattered to my current interests, I’m in no rush.

It is very odd completing everything you ever set out to complete (yes, it is a very good question why anyone should set out to write a new metaphysics and have no other plans).  But I am happy I accomplished what I wanted.  Truth is I never really thought I would.

1 Preterphysics

(Sometimes not everyone understands.)

Everyone has experienced misunderstanding: either you have been misunderstood, misunderstood someone else, or, more likely, both.

When some do not understand and others do, then there is something different between the two groups: one group recognizes something about the world or themselves that the other does not. It is this mutual recognition that allows for metaphysical agreement, and lack thereof for metaphysical disagreement.

To change metaphysical understanding means to recognize, discover or invent something that was not previously recognized, which likewise identifies a deficiency in the prior understanding. However, this means going outside of your prior metaphysics and thence the failure of ontological relativity.

With the denial of accepted metaphysics, some (if not all) things that everyone previously believed to exist will now be denied. The people who believe the prior metaphysics are excluded, at least initially, from understanding the new metaphysics and hence ontological relativity fails. The person who is denying the prior metaphysics may be considered insane by those that are excluded (which could be everyone).

Moreover, when ontological relativity is foregone, the denial of insanity is put into question. Making a unique claim is, at first, indistinguishable from nonsense because there is nothing comparable anyone else has ever said. If no one has ever made a similar claim then there is no way to tell whether you have become damaged, i.e. lost your mind, and if this claim is metaphysical, it can lead to changes in all other aspects of thinking. Therefore changing your metaphysics is done at the risk of going insane.

No one pulls something from the metaphysical vacuum without risking being pulled in themself.

1.1 Love

Metaphysical research done with love discovers a new worldview in relation to responsiblity to others. Therefore, since others are included, it is possible to change your metaphysical position without the completele loss of ontological relativity.

If you love with respect to other people, then you need not fear new worldviews. Any change that you make will inherently have something in common with others, even if they do not yet recognize what you have recognized. Moreover, any inferior worldview will be apparent because it will be comparatively limited in ways to identify with others.

Without love having a fractured worldview with shattered responsibilities is possible. You can start to be worried when you are unsure of what your commitments to yourself are: if you are not commited to valuing your sanity, then you have lost your ability to deny insanity.

1.2 Force

Metaphysical research done with force discovers a new logic in relation to the language of others. Therefore, since others are included, it is possible to change your metaphysical position without the completele loss of ontological relativity.

If you use force with respect to other people, then you need not fear new logic. Any change that you make will inherently have something in common with others, even if they do not yet recognize what you have recognized. Moreover, any inferior logic will be apparent because it will be comparatively limited in ways to change others.

Without force having a fractured logic with shattered language is possible. You can start to be worried when you are unsure of what your own words describe: if you cannot describe insanity, then you have lost your ability to deny it.

1.3 Creativity

Metaphysical research done with creativity discovers a new science in relation to other peoples’ view of nature. Therefore, since others are included, it is possible to change your metaphysical position without the completele loss of ontological relativity.

If you create with respect to other people, then you need not fear new science. Any change that you make will inherently have something in common with others, even if they do not yet recognize what you have recognized. Moreover, any inferior science will be apparent because it will be comparatively limited in ways to explore the world.

Without creativity having a fractured science with a shattered view of nature is possible. You can start to be worried when you are unsure of your own existence: if you cannot be sure of the existence of your sanity, then you cannot deny that you are insane.

2 Conclusion

If you have love, force and creativity then you are assured rationality even in unfamiliar territory. This means you have wisdom: the ability or skill to maintain and adapt your knowledge to future situations is called wisdom. Hence the greater love, force and creativity that you wield, the greater will be your wisdom.

Moreover, the basic metaphysics derived from the denial of insanity can now be built upon with confidence. Discipline is the foundation knowledge and wisdom is how we are able to extend it. If every distinction is made in such a way, then there will be no need to fear any argument.

Permalink