While no system can directly address every argument or concern, this system provides a framework or a mental tool to filter every concern through. Like all technologies, this philosophy is meant to grant the user access to abilities they lack or are unwilling to cultivate. Providing the non-transcendent access to the peace and clarity enjoyed by the transcendent mind is of vital importance because of the civilizational metamorphosis we’re undergoing. The effort of cultivating a broad, inclusive, and distanced view has kept most people from doing so, but we can no longer afford such barriers to awakening and progress. Understanding the five branches of this philosophical system will alter a person’s perception of reality and existence, but like any powerful technology, it should be approached with caution and humility. Only those that are truly desperate or find themselves in a circumstantially or mentally secure position should proceed. All branches are essential for recalibrating and reorienting the mind, but we start will epistemology because it creates a solid intellectual foundation. Ethics is the most important branch for us and our lives, but the rest are required to support a transcendent perspective. Everything written is ironclad except for metaphysics. Because our epistemology informs us of our inability to confidently know many of the claims of metaphysics, we maintain awareness of our limitation, and we accept the explanation of observed events because it’s congruent with knowledge, it’s coherent in terms of its fit with the other branches, and because it supports a resilient and stable mental house.
DIRECTORY
EPISTEMOLOGY
METHODOLOGY - ABSOLUTE SKEPTICISM
This philosophical system and our theory of mind begins with the most sobering truth of all, “we can know nothing to a certainty except that we exist, and we only know that because we’re experiencing”. We’re not rejecting the possibility of knowledge, knowledge is certainly possible, we’re merely rejecting certainty in the truth or rightness of knowledge had from anything less than an absolute perspective. Beginning with this truth of near absolute ignorance, one that reasonably applies to every individual with a sensory mediated connection to the outside world, is essential if we want to stand on a solid and shareable intellectual foundation.
Terra Ferma is had by adopting an absolutely skeptical position, and then methodically building back to a life in reality based on degrees of surety and confidence. We know we exist because the experience of existence we’re currently having requires a subject of some kind in some form, a direct recipient of a reality we call the experiencer, and because experience in and of itself is and existing reality. Second to the fact that we exist, the next most confidently known thing to us is the subjective quality of our experience, how right or wrong something is to us.
Everything known to be in existence, including us, can be reduced to energy at its most fundamentally substantiating level, and from our perspective, the things that we call the world, the universe, and life experiences are just varying densities or forms of energy. Quantum field theory is the best rational/scientific approximation of this description, and in it we’re granted particles and material reality, although the truth is probably derived from a singular field of energy, not the potentially infinite in QFT. What we know and call life, our family, our work, our body, and world, can be reduced to an interplay of different fields and different densities and energies in these fields, but to us they’re mental, sensory, or intuitive/feeling based experiences of a mostly material reality.
Without a concerted effort to interpret the world from a stable and reasonable foundation, the human collective can't help but exist in a fog like ephemeral reality of irrational thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Our world will be an ever-shifting cloud composed of countless unchecked opinions and perspectives, creating infirm social and intellectual ground on which to build a shared understanding of self, world, and other. Unsolid ground makes it hard for us to find our bearings individually and collectively, so we'll struggle to find meaning, a fitting identity or sense of self, and a purpose to direct our life and efforts toward.
WHAT IS KNOWING OR KNOWLEDGE?
Knowing is the awareness of at least one bit of distinctly new information, where information is energy patterned, structured, or organized in a way that affects a system/individual to a nonzero degree. Information helps an organism/entity understand the external world and its internal condition so that a desired state or a state called homeostasis can be achieved and efficiently maintained, but outside of life information doesn’t organize itself. Unstructured energy is called information potential or data, and it takes work by a system to process that potential into a form that can be utilized by and that system or individual.
To be intelligible information, or information that is capable of becoming knowledge, organized or structured energy must relate to something other than itself, and it must be capable of changing, altering or making something different, even if it’s only the mind that’s affected. Unorganized data lacking sufficient differentiating qualities or energy to affect change at the mental or physical level of an organism isn’t known as information, it’s known as noise because it’s functionally indistinguishable from the rest of the ocean of information potential. Information must be capable of changing our experience of reality in a way that’s perceived on some level, must be energetic enough to enter our awareness, must be an additive component of a larger body of information, or it won’t be known.
When information has a use it is considered knowledge, and when knowledge can be used to reliably affect one's condition or one’s environment, an understanding, at least on some level, can be said to exist. Knowledge is the highest form of information and understanding is the highest form of knowledge because it yields the greatest effect with the greatest efficiency in terms of realizing a desired experiential or physical state.
HOW DO WE KNOW?
As described in our Theory of Mind and Metaphysics, what we are is a portion of a possibly limitless field of awareness that’s become attracted to a transition space containing experiential potential. When the neuronal network of the brain and energetic structure of the mind form a space to mediate electrochemical to electrical communication, that space isolates and condenses a portion of a higher dimensional information space around it, forming an even broader space to mediate a higher dimensional knowing of the lower dimensional brain/mind experiences. It is within this broader transition space that the psychophysical experience of a human existence is known, and within this space we make sense of information sourced independent of our sensory or mental organs.
Each of us exists in a pseudo solipsistic state within what we can think of as us or our individuated portion of the field of awareness. Describing this space where psychophysical experience is known can be challenging because it’s most truly a featureless and undifferentiated field of awareness, which means each of us is like a fundamental particle in a vast field, undifferentiated except for a fleeting moment of topological distinction. Here, as ourselves, we have three ways of knowing the physical world and our subjective condition, we have the senses (including the brain and body), the mind or our mental organ, and intuition (referencing the collective organism’s connection with its environment and the environmental intelligence had a result). Together, these three sources of knowing, especially the senses and the mind, dominate and shape the awareness field, giving us the impression of a world and of selfness.
From our point like perspective in this individual field of awareness a peripheral auditory field, a dominant frontal visual field, an emotionally powerful olfactory center, and an encompassing tactile field bring us information about the outside world. OUR PHYSICAL SENSES, including the gustatory sense, inform of us of a certain type of energy that is perceived as experiential information after the brain and mind marry the individual sources into a cohesive picture. Because information from the five senses is mediated by the transition space formed by brain and mind before it is known in awareness, we consider it a source of secondary or secondhand knowledge.
THE MIND is an electromagnetic structure that acts like an environment separate from the world outside, and it is capable of generating information that we can know directly or unmediated in our field of awareness. Directly connected to the electrochemical brain-based network that supports it, the mind receives prepared sensory information about the external world, including the body and environment, and it uses that informational energy to fuel its modeling, organizing, and imaging processes (not a complete description). Overlaying our sensory reality with what we perceive as a ticker of worded thought and imagery streaming from below and across the front of our field, the mind acts lie a powerful filter capable of shaping our picture of reality. Autonomic mental activity isn’t the only way our knowledge about ourselves is shaped or mentally created, through a deliberate interaction with the brain/mind mechanism and the frontal lobe, objects in the mind can be actively manipulated to create new information and knowledge. The mind is continually recontextualizing information like a generative algorithm, but we can also direct it to use new inputs like an organic ai, and we can wield it as if it were a mental technology to build things ourselves.
Below or outside the transition space created by the brains and mind interaction is a beacon of information about our overall condition, our most trustworthy source of information, something we call INTUITION. It is better to think of this as environmental intelligence, a form of intelligence had by all life as a result of being continually connected to its environment. This intuitive sense is largely dependent upon our connection and sensitivity to our immediate environment, but the only limit is our capacity for awareness so we could theoretically connect to the higher dimensional information space.
WHAT CAN BE KNOWN?
Starting from the position of near absolute ignorance, the most confidently known thing is an awareness of existence of a “thing” or some bit of organically perceivable information we call an experience. Because experience requires a recipient or knower, we know that we exist or at least something exists because this very moment is proof that an experience undeniably exists. The next most confidently known thing in our awareness is the subjective rightness or wrongness of our current moment of experience.
After an awareness of an existence and knowledge about the desirability of the experience of that existence, we most confidently know the push or pull of our intuition. When it comes to the most trustworthy source of knowledge and information, our environmental intelligence is king of the hill because it's our most evolved and distributed sense. Possessed by each cell in our body, the overall condition of us as an entity or organism is knowable anytime we're still and the mind is quiet, or anytime we stray far enough from our line that homeostasis is at risk. It is a broad and general source of information with only degrees of aversion and attraction, or a pushing toward right and an pulling away from wrong or bad, but these indicators shouldn’t be confused with things like fear or desire, they’re more primal, closer to hot and cold than moral or ethical concepts.
Our sensory experience of a physical reality offers us a more detailed and granular picture than intuition alone can provide. Thanks to our senses, we seem to know a universe populated by beings and things, a seemingly tangible realm where everything seems hidden, covered, and veiled. When attempting to know this physical reality at a deeper level we must break things open to see what’s inside, but no matter how deep we probe we’re still looking at the surface of things and touching the outside. We don’t truly know what anything is through the senses alone, we only have an awareness of something existing in a manner we’d call tangible or materially real.
Despite being indirect sources of information, mediated by the brain and by the mind, our physical senses are a more trustworthy source of information than the mind since they’re produced by an independent reality. A lack of dependence means a thing is sustained by the universe or environment, and sufficiently object like to be observed or experienced equivalently by all those with similar experiential form. Because sensory information is far less likely to diverge from a shared truth than mental information, what’s known through the senses requires less scrutiny, less doubt.
Although the senses are trustworthy, they’re limited, so we need the mind to gather more knowledge granting information, we just have to check it thoroughly since it has the capacity to generate information on it’s own. To access deeper dimensions than what we can observe through touch and the reflection of light off the surface of things, we use our minds and bodies to develop extensions of our senses through technology, and to develop a pragmatically dependable models of reality. Through this effort and the resulting knowledge, we can have confidence that our approaches and understandings are based on something other than desire, feeling, or the mind alone, and that there is some observation and independent evidence to support what we believe we know. Even if it is completely misinterpreted or erroneous, if we’re careful we can rely upon our knowledge of mind until we have reason to question and doubt, but we frequently encounter problems caused by self-deception and a lack of rigor. When we fail to find reason to doubt or question, if we’re operating on sound Epistemological ground, it’s either because we believe a reliable and useful understanding is possessed. Failing to question and doubt for any other reason indicates we’ve forgotten that our knowledge of the sensory world is indirect and that our minds are an isolated and limited realm capable of fabricating narratives that are completely disconnected from a the shared world of sense, or we’re forgoing the effort required to be rigorous. This means we can learn everything we want, have reliable and predictable models of every state of the entire multiverse, and we still would need to doubt the truth of our conclusions and assertions to some degree.
The products of the mind are directly known to awareness, unmediated, but they’re also dependent upon the individual for their existence so one person’s mental realm can vary greatly from another’s. What this means is that although we experience the thoughts and images of the mind like we would a movie that doesn’t require a screen/device, all we can know are stories, aside from the fact that something exists. Knowing therefore is either the awareness of a sensory experience, or it’s the awareness of a story we believe to sufficiently represent a mental or physical reality. Knowing better is replacing a narrative with less congruence with experience, observation, and one that’s less explanatorily powerful, with a narrative that’s more so. Better and better stories gets us closer and closer to the truth until we no longer have need for a story because we simply see and know.
If we’re able to put the mind to bed or engage in activities that occupy it fully, it will become still and we can begin to gain information from a potentially broader source. Working in conjunction with the physical intuitive sense and the mental one, our existence as a condensed portion of a vast field of awareness means we’re also connected to a broader environment that informs and influences. Instead of simply being knowledgeable about the local environment and how it affects the individual, reducing the mental barrier expands the source of information our intuition can access to potentially infinite degrees.
LIMITS OF KNOWLEDGE
Aside from the ontological certainty that an experience of a reality exists and the epistemological certainty in the subjective rightness of that experience, we can’t be certain of the existence or rightness of anything else. Our skepticism extends to our minds and the physical reality supporting our bodies, and while we don’t reject them as outright illusions or hallucinations, we do maintain a less than certain confidence in their realness and rightness. Of the things known, we base our confidence in them on how much perspective we have on the contextual reality containing and defining the object or being.
Contextual knowledge means that if we want to be right, we need enough perspective to see the whole because one part in a quadrillion that isn’t seen or understood could change the entire story. We only possess that kind of perspective on our subjective experience, and to a lesser extent very narrow and simple physical realities like games and electrons. One can think of a broadening of awareness as an expansion of the context of knowable things, and one can think of as a deepening of perspective as an expansion of an understanding of things known. When they are objective, they can be viewed from multiple perspectives at once, this isn’t true for subjective things, there’s only one perspective, that of the subject.
Perspective dictates what a being can know within the confines of that context, but it’s just a container or boundary for knowledge and doesn’t guarantee that anything will be known. Limited to a certain capacity and breadth as all things are, a being can know anything within a certain context from nothing, all the way up to the limits of their ability. If there’s something beyond our perspective and awareness, it is beyond knowing because the context is beyond our natural bounds. Context and perspective, like ability, isn’t always fixed, so an individual can expand theirs and as a direct result, expand what is knowable. Going beyond those boundaries of perspective or capacity for awareness means transcending the definitional confines and limitations creating that being, a death of sorts.
HOW DO WE KNOW WE KNOW?
We know we know because our ethical framework leads to a desired outcome and doesn’t betray our intuition. If we’re being tricked into an ideal state then there’s nothing we can do. If doing the right thing didn’t lead to a state that we accepted as desired or ideal then we can trust none of our senses, our intuition, or our mind. We’d be lost, hopeless and helpless, and philosophy, thinking, and intelligent effort would be of no use. Because there’s no point in doing anything in a universe that betrays logic and reason, and because it at least apparently seems as if moving our hand away from a burning flame improves our experience, we accept that we know we know that this is what’s right to do to improve our experience. Trusting in an innate intelligence possessed by all life, if we do and get what’s right for us according to that experiential compass, if it’s truly good and real we won’t experience a subjectively worse existence.
In essence, we know we know we know because it leads to better experience of existence and it’s not worth wondering if better can be trusted as a reliable guide because all we know is our experience most fundamentally. Our bodies are like a record needle traveling through the grooves of reality and existence, where each sound or note is a felt experience, so when the tone or rhythm is off, we know something isn’t quite right. Acknowledging that other people and things known through the senses have a reality independent of us will lead to a better experience than rejecting them as valid concerns, so we have confidence they are real and existing, at least in a certain sense. Since the mind has evolved to autonomically generate information and construct model like stories it does so about the natural world quite reliably, but imaging the world beyond the senses is something it wasn’t it’s great at doing. For the same reason, because ignoring the products of the mind doesn’t negatively impact our experience the way ignoring intuition and sensation does, we can’t trust the mind as a source of knowledge about the objective world.
The heart or intuition leads our endeavor to acquire knowledge, and the mind guides that journey. We use the general and therefore consistently right direction of the intuition to position ourselves in a sensory defined reality, then we use the mind to narrow, reinforce, and navigate the path to a desired existential destination. If we default to using the mind, even if it’s been calibrated and trained we will likely have worldly/narrow success and existential calamity because following the mind when it opposes the evolved intuitive compass will only see us realizing heartless things.
THEORY OF MIND
A DIRECT APPROACH
The key to liberating humanity from the suffering caused by isolation, self-injury, and self-enslavement is to understand the mind as a neglected and abused mental organ, and that’s what this EXPERIENTIAL PHILOSOPHY is all about. As a vital organ, the mind plays an outsized role in our experience, but its functioning can be reduced to a few basic processes or happenings, however we can only see these happenings clearly if we step way, way back to gain perspective on a mental reality far too many confuse for their actual self. Until we can see our predicament clearly, all of our views and experiences of self and world will be filtered by a clouded and unfit lens, if it isn’t obscured completely.
Because the people studying and treating the mind are like those in the parable of the blind men and the elephant, one where their understanding is based on limited experience and information, we’re unable to address the primary source of human suffering. Most professionals and scholars approach knowing the mind from a second or third-hand perspective where they can only infer how things work from dated models and often tangential observational data. It’s best to infer the nature and structure of the mind from a direct experience of one, not just because we have direct access to one, but also because the mind is a thing without parts and the information gained through neural imaging, studying brain structures, or through language and behavioral analysis can only offer us a partial view. Part of our struggle to understand the mind has to do with our difficulty gaining distance to view our own objectively, and our inability to view another’s in an objective manner. We can theorize the existence and workings of another’s mind and we seem to be able to impact it in a variety of ways, but we don’t truly understand what another person is experiencing, which means the best thing anyone can do is understand their mind as fully as possible. From an informed an experienced position we can begin inferring the behavior and workings of others under the assumption that even minds that are considered divergent do so from a knowable median, and if we make sufficient progress we’ll see that the main issue for most people is the mental parasite their feeding and defending with their life.
To fully comprehend how our mental environment was self-infected with a life controlling parasite, and how to heal that infection, we need to adopt a detached and experiential view of the mind. The theory needed says we are not the mind, we're not even the body, so an ability to mentally simulate alternate realities and self-distance is essential if you want to make use of this model. If you’re able to occupy an outside perspective and confirm the theory through experience, the mind will cease to be a prison or a place of torture and will become your most powerful tool.
THE FIELD
Electrochemical energy traveling through the hundreds of trillions of connections in our brain’s neural network creates an information space in which the sensory experience of our existence can be known. The movement of dozens of watts of energy through the brain’s network also causes waves of electrical and electromagnetic energy to propagate across the structure of the brain, forming a separate, hyper complex network of pure energy. This continuously variable network of electrical/electromagnetic energy has a sophisticated structure that largely isolates it from the brain’s network and allows it to form an information space in which a mental reality can be experienced. We call the energetic structure and the information space it supports, mind or conscious mind, and although it emerges from and is sustained by the flow of electrochemical energy in the brain, it should be thought of as a separate organ. Mind, being an emergent structure dependent upon brain, isn’t completely separate however, where the two converge an exchange information via a bidirectional flow of energy is had.
As sensory and mental information representing experience travels through its respective information space, complex energetic structures and patterns of energy are formed. Some of these patterns and structures are so informationally rich and energetically dense they attract a higher dimensional information space in a boundary bulky dynamic. As the higher dimensional information space gets asymptotically closer to the lower dimensional mental and sensory spaces, a field is created in which the experience contained in those spaces can be known. Experiences and information aren’t dependent upon the higher dimensional space for their existence, they may exist independently as potentially knowable realities, but until they attract or activate the field they’re not considered to be actual experiences or consciously known experiences.
Fields are difficult to imagine because they’re so consistently present and featureless they’re virtually invisible and go unnoticed until something occupies or disturbs them, so it can help to envision the higher dimensional information space as a sensor tuned to respond only to experientially congruent information/stimulus, a sensor functionally no different than one that detects motion or body heat. The sensor (field in which experience is known) is always there, always on, but until there’s a sensation energetic enough or a mentation informationally rich enough to activate the sensor/trigger the field, nothing happens and nothing is experienced. Because sensory or mental stimulus must trigger this field like sensor before we’re consciously aware of it, we call it a field of awareness.
Knowing of experience happens as the higher dimensional space envelops the three dimension ones, but the awareness field isn’t just condensed and isolated around the sources of individual experience like water around a ball or a sphere, it flows through and permeates every quanta of the sensory and mental spaces like liquid saturating a clump of cotton fiber. Coming into three dimensional reality from a perspective we’re incapable of perceiving, the higher information space seems to emanate or flow from a point like region as it envelops the lower spaces. Emanating and flowing from the higher dimensional point, wherever this awareness field interacts with patterns and structures in these 3D spaces, the products of mind and body are known from the perspective of that emanating point. Experientially, the point is our perspective on existence and the field is our capacity for awareness of existence, but practically, the field and the point of perspective are a single thing we call us or I. The field is us being drawn into or attracted by human existence, and we are most fundamentally “aware” of mental and physical experience as it exists in isolated information spaces, it just doesn’t seem like that because human existence has us captivated.
We don’t Identify with the higher dimensional information space because we don’t experience the field of awareness anymore than a fish experiences water in the ocean. Like fish, we focus exclusively on the things and happenings in the field while ignoring the conditions, quality, and existence of the field itself, with the main difference between our ignorance and that of a fish being our tendency to mistake ourselves for the objects in the field of awareness. Picturing awareness as a massive rectangular swimming pool of clear fluid can help us understand our situation better. Imagine the point like aspect of you is halfway submerged somewhere near the back of the pool with a little space to each side and a lot out in front. Because the field is shaped by the dominant forward tug of our visual sense, by the less dominant peripheral auditory and tactile senses, and to a much lesser degree by the upward or toroidal slope of our mental structure, we find ourselves tidally locked in what we know as a forward position. Here, in this space that is pragmatically us, we’re a bodiless, massless, size less entity that indirectly knows a world and existence as an organism via the senses/brain, while the isolated structure/realm of the mind and intuition are experienced without mediation.
THE MIND
From a fixed position near the back of the field, our mental organ rests just below our awareness until its processes have enough energy to thrust into view, or until we call it up through an indeliberate or deliberate feed of attentional energy. The mind has the ability to interpret sensory perception and the ability to reconfigure the information it’s holding, but it has far more consistent and reliable way of knowing. Contrasting the way the brain manages the body through powerfully generic sensory feeds from organs and tissue, the mind, having evolved in an environment where the subjective quality of existence was directly correlated with actual physical conditions, uses a much more delicate and rich source of information to fulfill its role, something we call experience .
Serving first as an error correcting system regulating our overall state to an ideal condition, and then as a control module, the mind uses the experiential state of bliss as a baseline, target, or setpoint, and our actual experience is the measured value or process variable. Whenever there’s an error signal or our experience deviates from an acceptable tolerance, the mind will seek information, suggest actions or the cessation of action, and begin adjusting its model to better fit reality based on known information. Passively monitoring the experiential condition of an individual, the mind continuously works in the background to model new scenarios, assess risks, review past events, and when needed, it creates new information, forms new patterns, and builds new realities inside its pocketed and isolated domain to advise and guide the individual.
To facilitate error correcting, the mental organ constructs a representation of the organismic system and a model of the environment or world containing the organismic system, and then uses memories, patterns, and information residing in the brain’s electrochemical network, along with processes and features innate to its structure to build models, perform analysis, organize information, project events, and plan actions. Manifesting as worded thoughts, emotions, and imagery about our overall condition and the condition of our environment, the products and realities of the mind are either thrown across the front of the field where they can capture our attention, or when things are undeniably interesting, inflate to dominate the field and our awareness of the brain’s sensory reality. If the mind is healthy, it will periodically interrupt the mostly dissipated stream of brain mediated sensation filling our awareness with a consistent picture/experience of a human reality, but when it’s not it will be like painfully labored breathing in the sense that we’ll be continually aware of its happenings.
Fortunately, we aren’t completely slave, we can influence the mind by using an unseen reservoir of energy, and despite the immeasurably small amount available, when wielded properly it has profound effects on the delicate energetic structure of our mental organ. By consolidating the potential dispersed over the awareness field, a tool called attention can be fashioned, and with this attentional device we’re able to push things out of our awareness, hold things in it, or create wholly new objects in the modeling environment/information space. Attentional energy can also be used to influence physical processes like muscle movement or breathing, altering, and pausing their functioning to a degree, although the affect and duration is significantly reduced when compared to our sway over the nonphysical processes.
Directing the concentrated force of attention through the mind and into the brain’s electrochemical network can stimulate and amplify sensations throughout the body. Turning our attention to a memory or an obligation can catalyze emotions, and focusing on a spot on our arm will do more than bring that spot into our awareness, it will stimulate areas in the brain corresponding to and causing what’s experienced as a physical touching of our arm no differently than externally caused sensations in that bodily region. Shifting our focus away from a thing has the opposite effect of stimulation, instead of feeding energy into the body or holding a mental object in our awareness, it robs it of energy, starves the object of attention, causing it to dissipate or leave our awareness.
Anytime we use/wield our mind or intervene in the organs processes we inject additional energy into the energetic structure which causes it to enlarge and can cause its products to rise into our view in this field of awareness (us), a place we let it dominate far too often. This inflation of the mental structure serves two functions, it grants a larger space to work within, and it creates an overlay of our sensory reality we can’t ignore. Beyond manufacturing an ich, worsening an ache, or holding onto a painful memory, the misuse of the attentional tool can lead to the inadvertent creation of mental realities convincing enough to obscure and alter our natural perception of reality.
Because our mental organ is essential to our survival and existence it operates continually, even when we’re not awake, but it does have a standby mode. Like our other sense organs, when something is so consistent it fails to maintain our attention, it also ceases to warrant energy, which means a continuous feed or supply of attentional energy into the mind will quickly make things uninformative and uninteresting enough to put into a dormant standby by state. Our closest and most vital organ can be anesthetized with sustained and focused attention, numbing it to stimuli like a tongue saturated in sugar, like the ears in a crowded arena. Counterintuitively, putting the mind down or getting in check can’t be done if we attempt to push it out of our awareness or pull ourselves out of it since that would only inject more energy into the organ. Only through a deliberate injection of routine and mundane stimuli, a complete occupation and domination of awareness, or the ability to allow attentional energy to dissipate and disperse (usually through a satisfaction of mental obligations), can the mind rest.
I AND SELF
When someone says I hurt, I feel good, they’re referring to the locus of experience from which we’re aware of a psychophysical existence, but when they say I am this thing or I am that story, it is the self or avatar they speak of. SAYING I can either refer to the self-concept, the avatar, or the THE TRUE I, the point like and individual perspective on existence we’re experiencing at every moment. Mentioning anything other than the true I is to point to an object of memory and thought or a pattern in the mind, something other than an awareness of mental and physical experience that is most truly us.
Speaking of THE SELF is to speak of the concept, the structured pattern of energy known acting like an avatar in the minds model of our environment and reality. Both the avatar and the modeled environment encompassing it can best be thought of as sustained narratives the mind holds about us to keep track of how we’re doing in its model of the world. As awareness, we are aware of this model self-made of a combination of our self-concept (what we think we are) and social identity (who we think we are). It is important we understand the distinction between the conceptual self and the us that experiences or else risk being hijacked by the avatar. Failing to clearly see that the avatar can’t be us, we’ll give it excessive amounts of attention which will only strengthen the mental realness of it in our mind, starting a vicious and costly cycle. With such a powerful attractor in its space, we’ll continually feed the mind energy, causing it to repeatedly surface concerns about the dominant object as the organ inflates to completely obscure our perception of reality.
How well the mind functions depends upon quality information and guidance we can provide, but it will make do on its own if it must. Our minds are vulnerable, exposed, and it’s this openness that allows us to either act as a controller of the system where we decide things and influence the organismic aspect of us, or we can act like an additional layer of the error correcting system and decide amongst things presented to us by the mind. Because we can influence what the mind thinks is true, we must be careful what we give energy to and what we allow the mind to entertain, or we risk creating false realities and reducing the error correcting systems ability to achieve an ideal state.
The mind is sensitive to the information received from the brain and the information in its model, but it doesn’t know we’re there so it accepts our influence as an objective input. Because it is limited to its own domain, the images and scenarios created are merely the result of a functioning error correcting system, meaning the mind isn’t working on the behalf of anyone. It may not know we exist, but the mind relies upon our perspective outside it and upon the energy from attention to inform it of what is real and significant. Acting like a realm unto itself, our organ has no perspective on its model and no way to judge or qualify what it holds, but we do so it’s critical we stamp certain things as real in the mind in addition to our construction, alteration and destructive capabilities. Giving attention to things directly strengthens the energy they possess in the mind and the brain’s network, and the more energy something has the more likely it is to be accepted by the mind as actual reality.
Parasitism by the avatar is our greatest mental health concern because as far as the mind knows its avatar of us is us, and because it can’t distinguish between the modeled representation us and the us that experiences, the mind can’t help but amalgamate the two in its modeled reality. Of course, these modeled representations of the organism’s condition are mental objects, they’re not the locus of experience from which we’re aware of existence, but as things knowable in awareness they can have a great effect on our experience if their stamped with enough attentional energy to certify them as real. If we aren’t careful we can intertwine ourselves with the these mental objects, and being social organisms with minds evolved to contend with a different reality than the one we face today, our mental organ sees maintaining a position within a group as a life or death matter because being exiled or losing your tribe usually meant death was hours to days away. This means the mind is constantly making us aware of things that may raise or lower our position in society, whether they be pertinent or material concerns or not. Constant attention to our avatar may not improve our experience, but it can improve our position and world facing image, so it’s a near universal rule that we’ll become so fixated on the avatar it not only remains constantly in our awareness, we eventually forget that it’s just a modeled representation. How it views us and our position in the environment determines what it assists us in acquiring, and if it’s too far removed from the experience of us, our mind and our lives will be dominated by the representative self, and we’ll suffer until we die because everything we do to improve our state will be for something other than the true I.
ONTOLOGY
WHAT EXISTS?
Two concepts exist in perfect harmony as one complete and absolute reality, infinite awareness or non-thingness, and infinite thingness. Non-thingness, meaning existing yet unbounded, is one way of imagining the information space we call awareness, and thingness is a way to think about what there is to be aware of. From a god's eye view, this dualistic oneness looks like an endless and featureless field of potential with a single, almost nonexistent point in the center. Within that point every thing, every non-thing, every multiverse, every possibility, and every impossibility exists as a piece of a unified whole.
Even though a single truth likely underpins all, we approach it dualistically because attempting to adopt oneness without transcendence leads to psychological and egoic traps like “I am all that exists”, and since most of the world has only know I and not I, we need an ontology congruent with humanity’s reality. The pair of ingredients aren’t immiscible, the point and the field enveloping the point, they’re the most fundamental realities a non-transcendent mind can rationally hold, which is why we use them as components for a rational foundation. As counterintuitive as it may be, by combining the two apparently opposed concepts of infinite nothing and infinite thing, we form a perfectly balanced monistic ontological foundation more adamantine than either can produce alone.
Although the point in the center of the field is an infinite reality so complete everything that can exist necessarily does, it's zero dimensional and directly adjacent to nonexistence with respect to the greater infinity of unbounded awareness. Because thingness and beingness require limitations, context, boundaries, the infinite ensemble of things occupies infinitely less space than the limitless and boundaryless space of informational awareness. This means that while two infinities exist as a unified whole, thing and no-thing, the lesser appears to be point like from a perspective that’s infinitely far away.
Out of a single, almost nonexistent point, an infinitely complex reality is had thanks to the power of perspective. How real something is, or how much complexity, differentiation, and individuation something possesses is determined by one’s perspective or where one stands in relation to the thing, the number of degrees of freedom one can access from a given perspective, and how many of those degrees of freedom one knows about. When considering the broadest and most inclusive perspective there are no limits to the degrees of freedom available, and without constraints on how many different ways a thing can be interpreted or known, a single zero-dimensional point is all that’s needed to substantiate every “thing”.
Relating degrees of freedom to knowledge or understanding, it’s easy to see the more knowledge a person has about something, the more complex their understanding of that thing will be. Someone may only see a cue ball as sporting equipment for the game of pool or a potential weapon, but a person with an understanding of chemistry and physics can also see a three-dimensional network of cross-linked molecules called phenolic resin, or a tool to model Newtonian mechanics. It’s as if reality, additional degrees of freedom, and new perspectives are hidden by an outer shell of ignorance that only becomes permeable or penetrable when a more robust understanding is had.
Perspective, awareness, or understanding, determines what is experienced as a reality by either limiting and shaping what is known to exist, or in the case of the absolute, having no limitations on what is known. Less than absolute perspectives are contextual, bounded, or limited by definition, so while everything necessarily exists, not everything exists within every perspective. An overlap can be had between two perspectives or understandings, but any difference creates a unique perspective no matter how much is shared.
Because the nature of existence is perspectival, the best distinction to make is between things that exist independent of individual perspectives, and things dependent upon individual perspectives for substantiation. For example, what we call gold is an independently substantiated pattern of energy/matter, a part of a broader reality that’s ultimately supported by the absolute perspective, but the existence of gold as something pretty, useful, or as a form of money is dependent upon individual human minds. Independence can be equated to nature or objective reality because they exist so non-exclusively they can be known by many perspectives simultaneously, and dependence is equal to subjectivity because these realities are so exclusive that to know one perfectly and directly requires occupying a singular perspective.
Ultimately, all things and all perspectives are dependent upon the absolute perspective, so despite there being infinite degrees of freedom or an infinity of occupiable perspectives, there is no true independence or autonomy in the broadest view. Nothing exists in absolute distinction or isolation, but like the movement of an image on a screen or monitor, background independence and freedom can be experienced as long as we limit our perspective to our visual field. The moment we expand our perspective to include knowledge of LCD or OLED technology, electricity, programming, digitized data, and the film, gaming, or software industry, the experience of autonomy and independence are destroyed.
In the most objective sense, nothing happens or can happen since all concepts, things, and happenings are already perfectly known as a singularity. As difficult as it is to imagine something existing without being created, we can’t think of the singularity as the product of a global wave coalescing into something apparently tangible, or a phenomena akin to a quantum fluctuation in a vacuum because the concepts of space and time reside within that point. Change, unfolding, and evolution only exist to perspectives that are less than absolute, so we effectively exist in a block universe, it just doesn’t seem that way from the human vantage point.
ROOTED IN REASON
While our minds and bodies are rooted in what seems to be a three-dimensional physical reality, we can solidify this ontological foundation as the most reasonable by pushing our mental realm to its limits. This means understanding and assimilating arguments, evidence, and using intuition to anchor the mind in a picture of existence that’s beyond foreseeable subversion.
REDUCTIONISM
Reductionism is a philosophical and scientific approach that seeks to explain complex phenomena by reducing them to simpler, more fundamental components or parts. Following the reductionist path, our understanding of reality becomes increasingly simple the deeper we go, and because there’s no reason to believe this trend will end, jumping to the logical extreme where all is derived from one fundamental essence settles our insatiable, and sometimes painful pursuit of existential bedrock. This apparent truth of existence, oneness, doesn’t give us a complete picture of reality by itself, but it is congruent with logic, evidence, and spiritual truths known directly through things like meditation and psychedelic experiences.
LOGIC
Logic is a formal system of reasoning and inference and is often considered to be the foundation of mathematics as it provides tools, principles, and a framework for determining whether a mathematical argument is valid or not, something mathematicians call a proof. In mathematical logic a concept called an empty set exists, it is unique because it has no elements and there is only one way to conceive of a set of no elements, but it isn’t nothing because it’s a well-defined concept. The idea of an empty set is a great way to conceptualize this absolute ontology because reality exists, reality contains no-thing, but reality logically isn’t and cannot be nothing. Nothingness is a logical impossibility within the confines of set theory, but it also extends to practical or pragmatic reasoning since the existence of the experience we’re having of this very moment forever refutes the possibility of a true and absolute nothingness. Substituting perspectives for sets helps us extend our intuition from the absolute view to the individual perspective because an empty set can have other empty sets as a subset without creating paradoxes or violations.
HOLOGRAPHIC PRINCIPLE
A theory in physics called the Holographic Principle states that information about the 3D volume can be represented on the 2D boundary of the 3D volume, or in other words, the 3D volume is like a hologram that is projected from a 2D surface encoded with information. Holography is often associated with another theory called The Beckenstein bound that claims the maximum amount of information that can be stored in a physical system is proportional to the surface area of that system, rather than its volume, or put another way, the amount of information a room can hold is limited to what can be written on its walls, no matter how fine the print. Using these theories, we can rationally envision our infinite multiverse as a 3D sphere contained within a 2D boundary. Although the border is a limitation that only has conceptual existence, it can be thought of as being infinitely far away from the 3D sphere, and the volume contained within is what we ontologically describe as an awareness field or information space. The boundary is necessarily of a greater infinity because it must encode or be aware of all the information contained within the bulk, and it’s that distinction between infinities that creates distance, and it’s this immeasurable distance that creates a volume so encompassing an infinite ensemble of realities and possibilities seems almost non-existent by comparison.
BEYOND PHILOSOPHY
Ontology provides us with a frame of reference to help orient and assimilate the rest of a philosophical system, but in the case of our absolute and perfected ontological description, the value extends far beyond philosophy.
STABILITY
An absolute ontology like the one described above and in further detail in the members section of this site, helps to stabilize the mind by giving it a foundation that cannot be subverted because it’s absolutely inclusive. Since all options and possibilities are already contained within this perspective by necessity (reference video), even if one discovers a thing not yet known, as soon as it is known it resides within the absolute because all knowable and knowing things are less than absolute. The absolute isn’t a thing, it’s a logical necessity, so it doesn't require substantiation by the mind, and because it has no parts or precedents to undermine or challenge, the mind eventually ceases to probe those fruitless depths. With our mental organ absolved of sincere concerns about the nature of existence, assaults on our conceptual model become less and less severe. As our understanding progresses and more questions are settled, the turbulence caused by uncertainty or confusion begins to subside and more coherent and cohesive mental state is known.
CONNECTION
Because awareness is the most fundamentally known thing to us, and because we are aware of a vast, potentially infinite reality, extending our intellectual understanding and general awareness to the absolute limit grants us a direct connection with this stabilizing concept. We have a need for God or an explanation for existence, and the concept of the absolute is the only one that will suffice without entering the historically deceptive and manipulative territory of religiousness or spiritualness. Knowing we exist in an absolute reality and are inextricably one with this absolute existence, the mind can accept this problem as settled and focus on more immediately rewarding challenges.
DIRECTION
Knowing who you are in a broad sense, what you are, and what this reality is, even if you challenge and doubt all physical, religious, and philosophical theories, goes a long way toward helping us establish an existential frame of reference. When the mind understands the entirety of reality in an unshakeable manner, it has a point of orientation, a direction to right itself no matter how strong an assault on the existing framework may be. Putting solid ground beneath us means that we can venture as far out into philosophical, psychological, and spiritual waters as we’d like because we know that if we ever become unsettled by new information and experiences, we only need to put our feet down and stand on the unmoving foundation of the absolute.
METAPHYSICS
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF REALITY?
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy almost everyone consciously and unconsciously ventures into at some point in their life, regardless of age or culture because the need to know or understand what things are real, how things work, and how things came to be is a powerful, natural driving force behind much of our progress and development. At the root, this motivation is powered by the mind’s attempt to find a coherent, and implicitly more trustworthy picture of the world whenever there’s sincere doubt or curiosity. Our minds need to know, they require an explanation for what we see and a way to connect what we rationally and intuitively know to be true through observation, analysis, and experimentation and introspection. Things need to make sense, and even if we believe a guy in a chariot pulls the sun across the sky, it needs to be acceptable to us or the mind will reject the narrative. If the mind does accept, it will be a reality to it and it will orient itself toward that direction of flow, so it is critically important that we’re as right as possible. The goal of any worthwhile metaphysics is to bridge the gap between observation, awareness, and experience. It, metaphysics, shouldn’t be confused with the absolute and literal truth, it’s more of a guide, a heuristic approach to a healthy and stable mind, a finger pointing at the moon, not the finger itself.
HOW DID ALL THIS COME TO BE?
Reality should be conceived of as a boundary-bulk scenario where an objectively block and undifferentiated universe possesses apparent dynamism and complexity from a relative or subjective perspective. The boundary-bulk scenario described here is not only congruent with our theory of mind and our Ontology, it also has a close alignment with rigorous physical/mathematical perspectives like String Theory, ADS/CFT Correspondence, holography, information theory, and quantum field theory. There are no equations or formulas backing these metaphysical claims, but there is an intuitive logic, a parsimony of explanation unrivaled in other theories (Occam’s Razor), and a potentially unsettling correlation with direct experience.
In our boundary-bulk metaphysics, the bulk is a point of infinite potential so vast and complex it contains absolutely everything, and so informationally dense it acts like an attractor tugging on the surrounding space. Boundary is an infinite information space or an infinite field of dissipated energy that concentrates wherever there’s potential existence. Because the bulk necessarily contains all potential, the boundary condenses exclusively around that point, and when the energy in the boundary is absorbed or condensed by the infinitely complex and attractive bulk, potentiality is transmuted into actuality.
Mechanistically, the boundary can be thought of as either a higher dimensional energy field catalyzing a metamorphosis in a lower dimensional point of potential, as an infinite reservoir of luminous fluid penetrating a relatively point like yet infinitely complex and refractive crystal, or as a light like energy source flowing through an infinite fiber optical complication and producing holographic projections indistinguishable from reality as it does so. Holistically, the boundary is a field of dispersed energy we call awareness, and the bulk is an infinitely complex attractor that condenses awareness into a concentrated form of energy called attention. The holistic view is the preferred view in this framework, and in that description, as the bulk attracts and condenses attentional energy, potential is converted into actual through a metamorphic process called “mirroring”, “knowing”, or most transcendentally, “becoming aware”.
From the absolute perspective where everything in the bulk is equivalently interesting and attractive the boundary is uniformly attracted by and distributed across its infinite complexity. At that scale of awareness, the bulk is a point like sphere where nothing happens or changes, and everything actually exists because everything is known from the most objective vantage point. As we get closer to the bulk perspective becomes limited, relative distinction between potential realities becomes more apparent, and a localized condensing of awareness into attention begins to occur. Because distinct bulk realities are necessarily less than absolute, their limited nature constrains a portion of energy in the surrounding field through the mirroring processes, but we could also think of it as a focusing of attentive boundary energy on a particular subject in the bulk. Be it knowing or mirroring, at the exact instance the boundary contorts or morphs to emulate a potential bulk reality the bulk potential becomes actual, at least to the degree it’s capable of attracting the boundary field.
Once a non-absolute bulk potential attracts enough attentional energy to metamorphosize, it becomes an adult called an actual reality (a reality that has the possibility of being known in some way from a limited perspective, and one that will always be perfectly known from the absolute perspective). If that adult reality is broad or complex enough, it can act like a lesser or mini bulk in the sense that it’s capable of supporting additional perspectives, contexts, and children of its own (potential realities). All realities are childlike because they’re all dependent upon the absolutes of the boundary-bulk dynamic, but when a non-absolute adult possesses enough complexity and volume for new things to be known, it may be capable of supporting children with the potential to become actual, and those children may support children of their own. Assuming a child reality is attractive enough to become actual, the energy supporting the parent is either reallocated to the dependent potential in a type of vertical integration, or a different portion of the field is pulled into the bulk in a horizontally integrated fashion. One could think of our bodies, brains, and the universal reality we currently experience as being vertically integrated from the initial conditions of this universe, and we should think of our conscious awareness of this psycho-physical experience as being outsourced from a distinct region of the boundary.
WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS?
Metaphysically speaking, energy condensed by the attractive force of our universe’s initial conditions supports each state derived from that seed state, including the present one, and it supports the actualization of countless potential realities we can best imagine as wave like particles or excitations in a field of potential. Some realties are so fleeting they can barely be said to have existed (virtual particles/quantum fluctuations), and some are so simple they can be perfectly described by three pieces of information (charge, mass, and spin for the electron). Occasionally these particle like children interact in such a way to form sustainable and complex structures like mind, body, and world. If the complexifications of mind, body, and environment engage in certain relationships a potential experience is created, and if that experiential potential is sufficiently attractive, a portion of the boundary space distinct from the parental source is drawn to a point like region near the center of the skull and converts it to an actual experience. This attraction condenses the boundary around a point like volume in the brain-mind mechanism that can be thought of as the center of experiential gravity, and by doing so it creates an isolated perspective in the filed of awareness from which a human existence and experience are known. More descriptively, the attractive force of human experience constrains the extra-universal boundary field into an infinitesimal reservoir of attentional energy from which our life is known. That reservoir of boundary energy is capable of converting potentially knowable information into actually known, and although it exists as an isolated point for a brief duration, it’s true essence is absolute and indistinct field.
As the boundary and bulk converge, the two get asymptomatically closer and create a spherical/toroidal transition space that mediates or facilitates the conversion of potential experiential information into an actual awareness of experiential information. It is in this space awareness “knows” the information produced by the mind and the senses, and once something is known it is considered consciously experienced existence. There's always potential experience and existence, and from a certain perspective it's always actual, but potential experience doesn't become actual experience until it is known and there's some awareness of it's existence, a knowing we call being conscious.
Consciousness isn't a thing to be sourced, it is simply the direct awareness of an existing experience. These experiences can be thought of as informational or energetic, and when they’re sufficiently attractive or interesting, as it is for many complex organisms, a new perspective on reality had, and if it’s an exclusive experience, a life is known. All truths and untruths about the world, ourselves, and existence in general, is only knowable from this point like perspective, which is to say we exist in a pseudo-solipsistic universe of one that forces us to mediate the gaps between exclusive experience with messages sent through the universe supporting the attractive forces creating the exclusive experience.
PAST PRESENT FUTURE
Absolutely speaking, time and space exist within the infinitely complex point of the bulk, so the concept of time evolution aren’t fundamentally existing realities, they’re relative ones. Relatively speaking, we don’t know the past and the future as we do the present because our perspective is limited to that of a human being and the extensions of senses we’ve cultivated through science, and various forms of technology. From our experiential perspective there’s only a continually evolving present, but we maintain an awareness of the fact that all states exist from a broader/higher perspective, and that what we know of existence is owed to us being a point of awareness that acts like a spotlight shining on the present moment, making it experientially special and diminishing the realness/actualness of unilluminated states.
HOW DOES EVERYTHING WORK?
In this reality and absolutely, everything is attempting to return to a rest state or perfected state, or put another way, everything is trying to realign itself with the absolute truth. In a sense, once things are perfectly known they begin to lose their attractive energy and the boundary field retracts to a perfectly dispersed state. Things in this reality are trying to conserve energy in pursuit of the ideal state on one level (bulk level) and a state of equilibrium or harmony on another (boundary level). As a result of an attempt to realize perfection in the most perfect way, things operate with maximal efficiency at the deepest level, meaning there should be an optimal or most efficient action in terms of our expenditure of energy when pursuing a true or right state in terms of our subjective experience. In a circular manner, the logic of our minds and intuition being constrained and guided by the fundamental rule of maximal efficiency, means our Ontology will naturally be one of a perfected reality and our Ethics one of pursuing the ideal. Understanding how this reality works as best as we can is critical for rightness because our universe is like every-thing is a cell/ Since this universe is dynamic we want to align ourselves with the direction of flow, we never want to betray or willfully ignore the truth of this universal cell or the absolute.
WHAT IS LIFE AND DEATH?
Life is any system, pattern of energy, or relational network that self-sustains. Death, broadly speaking, is the end of a system’s ability to sustain itself. When the pattern or system of particles composing our body, brain, and mind no longer relate in a way that sustains their functioning, we begin to “die” because the system no longer generates experiential potential congruent with human existence.
When a system or pattern is incapable of maintaining internal harmony, meets environmental shocks it can’t absorb, it becomes incapable of sustaining its definitional structure or form. When we biologically die, the informational or energetic form congruent with the experience of us is no longer supported, and when that ceases to exist there’s nothing interesting enough to attract the field of awareness. The body, matter remains interesting and existing from the universal perspective, and others can see the body because of it’s non-dependence on the individual or it’s objectivity, but there’s not enough attractive energy or experiential happening to localize an additional perspective in awareness.
For us humans physical death isn’t truly death, or death isn’t truly a reality because what we are most directly is a temporarily condensed point in an absolute and undifferentiated field of awareness. That field, being absolute, is beyond time and space. Nothing lives or die, nothing in truth exists except an absolute awareness holding a single next to nonexistent thing its awareness, absolutely everything. Life, death, time, space, separation, movement, distance, and so on are relative realities, not absolute ones.
HOW DO THE MIND AND BODY RELATE?
The mind is an emergent reality dependent upon the more fundamental brain/body. Mind is emerges when the electrochemical patterns of energy produced by the brain form sufficiently complex structures to create an isolated higher dimensional information space. This higher dimensional pattern or energy structure creates the information space we directly know as mind, and it’s continually supported by and connected to an information space formed by the nodes we call neurons. The neuronal connective network in the brain houses what we most commonly think of as subconscious mind, and the higher dimensional structure emerging from that brain based information space, the one composed entirely of energy, is what think of as the conscious mind. Through a bidirectional flow of information/energy between the lower and higher information space a link between body and mind is established. Although we are simply knowers, condensed points of awareness, we have the ability to direct energy inside the transition space, and if it’s done correctly, it can influence both mind and brain since they’re inextricably connected.
FREE WILL
Since we’re fundamentally awareness, our ability to realize a new experiential reality is dependent upon our capacity to influence or manipulate the mind and brain through a deployment of attentional or willing energy. We can occupy any reality our energy reservoir has the capacity to reach, but the attractive psychophysical experience derived from the body and mind must adhere to the logic of this universe. Because our body is constrained by physical logic, our capacity to change reality is typically limited to a mild influence over our local environment.
Whether the universe be a deterministic or probabilistic one, we have freedom to occupy a new state because awareness isn’t dependent upon this universe’s logic, and that’s what we most directly are. A person deploying the energy bound up or attracted to this experience will have to incrementally work to realize change in a successive/progressive fashion, but they can alter the state they are aware of. Even though we’re able defy what our bodies and brains cannot, we should never think of ourselves as having freedom of will in the absolute sense. Absolute freedom of will is an illogical concept because absolute background independence isn’t possible. Yes, we experience and enjoy a relative freedom of action and inaction, but it’s no truer in an absolute context than the
Everything is one, monistic, and although we must feed our minds a dualistic interpretation until the mind is transcended, we can never forget our dependence on the absolute. Doing so, believing we have existence and reality independent of a supporting foundation is no different than imaging a small refrigerator magnet having autonomy from the universe’s electromagnetic field. We are inextricably linked, fundamentally one and the same as the essence of absolute existence, yet that shouldn’t cause us pain for a lack of godliness. Instead, we should consider the benefit of being continually supported and known by something beyond our capacity to imagine. Everything is made possible by infinite non-thingness as much as it is thingness, so we can’t escape that truth, but what we can do is learn to maximize and access the degrees of freedom available to us, no matter how short of infinite and absolute they end up being.
CAUSALITY
Our ontology, one based on an absolutely perfect reality, doesn’t allow for change or movement in the broadest sense because any change would destroy perfection. In a very real sense nothing happens or came into being because absolutely everything and every non-thing exists as a logical necessity in an absolute and perfected universe, including this very moment of individual experience. The bulk and boundary perfectly mirror one another as static absolutes, but our less than absolute minds need a causal relationship so we think of the boundary as being attracted to every region or portion of the bulk containing energetic or informational potential. There’s no true causation or movement outside the narrowing and shifting of an absolute awareness across the infinite multitude of potential perspectives, but causation can take on an apparent reality from a relative position. At the local scale where perspective is limited, there’s often an uneven or unequal ability to know, and if there is the concentration of energy and the boundary field will seem perturbed, changing or fluctuating, and this imperfect mirroring or knowing creates the subjective experience of change, happening, and time evolution we experience as human beings.
ETHICS
WHAT IS RIGHT?
One of the most important and most challenging questions that any philosophical system should answer is how to determine what’s good or bad, what’s right and wrong, or what’s true and false. Building upon our Ontology of an absolute ensemble of perspectives, guided by our Epistemology, a universal framework for Ethical action begins to emerge. What we end up with is a tool, a rubric to act as a standard of measurement by which all things can be judged and qualified.
CELL THEORY
Because the nature of reality is perspectival and because the relative difference between things becomes more imperceptible the more distant our vantage point becomes, nothing exists until a finite context is defined in which it can be said to begin and end. From an absolute perspective where distance is infinite, distinctions between things (if they ever truly existed) get lost in an abyss of equivalency, and without a way to distinguish something from its environment, there is “no thing”, not even the concepts of right and true. Boundaries are needed to constrain our perspective so that distinct thingness can emerge, and whenever or wherever it is had, a subset of reality is carved out from a broader, more inclusive one.
Whether it be a planet, rules to a game, or the simplest of organisms, subsets of an absolute and unlimited perspective are like cells of existence or reality. Cells can be thought of as mini universes or realms where the internal conditions become distinguished from the surrounding environment enough to create an exclusionary domain with its own reality. Once a cell’s limiting context has been either discovered or determined, and our perspective has becomes less than absolute, two things can now be known within those constraints, what’s true and what’s right.
RIGHT AND TRUE
The concepts of right and true are correlated with the indeterminacy of position and momentum like a philosophical and ethical version of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. Because right is similar to a direction of movement or flow, the more static and unchanging the boundaries and internal state of a cell, the less certainty we have about what's right and wrong. With truth being static or object like, the more motion or change the cell experiences, the less certainty we can have about where it begins and ends, and the less confidence we can have in what's true and false.
Since RIGHT is the direction of a destination that’s been discovered in a natural sense, or determined in a more rational one, motion of some kind, either induced or innate, must be a possibility before rightness can be known. A pocket reality/cell must be binary at minimum, it must have the ability to be in at least two distinct states or contain at least two existing truths to act as coordinates for relation and comparison, or we’re lost, spinning in a featureless abyss. With only one truth there is no change, no flow, no direction to orient ourselves towards, and with nothing to gauge our position against, there’s be no way to say something is right, wrong, or imperfectly arranged, it simply exists as self-referential truth.
For the cells capable of being in at least one additional state, right will be anything that brings the defined environment closer to an ideal condition, and the better or more efficient something is at bringing a cell to an ideal state, the more right it’s considered to be. Boundaries and conditions that we determine, allow us to understand the most right arrangement or state of a cell, and the most efficient path to that state, but when the ideal is beyond our perspective as it typically is with naturally occurring things, we can only try to understand the direction the system is attempting to flow. The better we understand the direction a system or thing is heading, the more defined paths leading toward the ideal state become, and once we understand a better or best path, we only need to work our way toward it to become increasingly right.
Serving as the inverse of right movement, TRUE is a description of a thing/cell as it actually exists, in a defined region of physical or conceptual space, at a specific moment or over a specific collection of moments. The more precisely a moment in time is specified, the lower the chance a cell of reality will undergo change and the more accurately it can be known or defined. Singular, static, and devoid of rightness, a perfect truth is an exact representation of a thing at a specific point in time that describes it so accurately it becomes identical to the thing, or indistinguishable from the thing itself.
Because we experience a universe in constant flux, isolating a moment to perfect stillness isn't practical, so to us true is anything holding a consistent enough form to remain within acceptable tolerances over a meaningful period of time, with the more accurate and more enduring descriptions being truer. Any statement that sufficiently describes a thing/cellular reality as it actually exists at a given point in time is true, and how well a “truth” describes a reality is the only qualification that exists. True isn't about right or what should be, it isn’t an opinion or a more desirable position, it's simply a static and immutable reality that is either knowable or unknowable, known or unknown from a given perspective.
Cells of truth serve as qualitatively indistinct pixels of an absolute reality, meaning everything and every state of everything is simply there, necessarily existing as a perfectly true representation of itself. Pixels of truth serve as a solid and unchanging frame of reference for us to orient ourselves against, and a destination to strive toward, while rightness is the road or path of travel, or a tuning and adjustment of that picture until it’s perfectly clear, or perfectly true. Without the organizing and orienting standard of truth, right movement would be impossible, and we’d be left with what amounts to noise or static in our picture of reality, a qualitative equivalent to no reality.
FINDING WHAT’S RIGHT
Realizing an ideal condition involves destroying an existing state of a thing so that a more desired state can exist, or it involves a process of guiding or coercing a cell to evolve in a righter or more desirable direction. Because realizing a better condition involves change of some kind, a standard must be established to work toward, or we can never know if we’re moving closer to the ideal or further away. The more degrees of freedom a cell possesses, the more likely thoughtless, ignorant, and standardless action will reduce the rightness of a cell because right action becomes statistically less probable as the number of available states increases (assuming each state is equally realizable).
These standards or archetypes don’t simply appear out of thin air, like the definition of a cell, ideals are either constructed by others, discovered by us, or determined by us. If a standard is handed to us or IF WE KNOW WHAT’S RIGHT by some other means, we need to ensure we understand what’s needed to bring it into existence if the cell is static, or we need to understand what’s needed to allow a dynamic cell to find that state. Once the optimal state and a series of actions that’ll lead to that state are known, ensuring we’re capable of executing or facilitating change causing actions is next most important.
IF WE HAVE NO CLUE what’s right or ideal, we must observe a cell’s evolution if its dynamic, induce change in a cell’s states if its static, and then we must compare those distinct states against each other until an ideal emerges or some gradient of better and worse takes shape. An ideal can be detected through observing how one or more states relate in terms of perceived qualities, and through an assessment or judgement of those findings. Having observed a sufficient sample of potential states we have a better understanding of what’s possible, what actions are useful, and we’re in a position to determine whether one of the realized states satisfies our standard or whether we need to continue our research.
FOR EXAMPLE: A cell could be as simple as the binary reality of a light switch existing in a state of either on or off, and if we know the ideal, let’s say it’s for the switch to be on, and we find in an off position, we can use energy to change the state to the one that’s desired, on. If we want it to be on and we find it in an desired/ideal condition there’s nothing we need to do. However, if we don’t know whether it should be on or off, we can induce change and assess whether an ideal becomes apparent or an acceptable outcome results.
In static situations with many potential states, like that of furniture arrangement in a room, we have no way of knowing what the objective ideal state is because we're unable to see all possible arrangements of furniture, paint, lighting, and so on. To resolve this indeterminacy for cells not in motion, we induce flow, either mentally, physically, or digitally moving furniture in or out, and rearranging what exists so that a sample size large enough to contain a gradient of better and worse begins to emerge. Whatever we do to a room will be somewhat arbitrary in an objective sense, but there will always be a context or metric in which the room and every knowable cell in existence can be judged, a cell called a knower.
As the furniture is moved and the room takes on different states, it will be closer to or further from the ideal, at least with respect to a cell called the knower. When it comes to us and what’s right, we think of ourselves and other things capable of detecting and judging conditions no differently than any other contextual universe, we’re a cell containing an experience or an experience in a cell. The knowledge of how we feel in a broad, positive, negative, or neutral sense is more reliable than anything we can know about a reality more broad and complex than the mind can comprehend, and in dynamic situations where a cell or thing is flowing or perceptibly changing states, the ideal is built into its nature like a target.
Dynamic cells often have their own ideal that exists beyond our awareness, understanding, and ability to realize, which means it’s always best to pick an ideal in alignment with what’s right for the cell. When we’re not in control of state changes, when it happens autonomically or naturally, we can’t bring an ideal about abruptly if a thing is far from the ideal (we can’t instantly dry a saturated garment without damaging the thing in most cases). The more we try to transform a dynamic thing by controlling it instead of guiding or facilitating flow, growth, or evolution in the right direction, the more static a thing becomes.
When things are flowing, like they are within the cellular reality of a house plant, we need to look to the direction they're heading and attempt to align the cell's state with that direction. Plants are in motion, although it’s imperceptible to us at times, and that means we need to do our best to understand what helps it align with its desired or natural direction of flow. What we can do, being imperfectly knowledgeable and lacking exacting control, is give it more or less water, more or less sun, and a different medium to grow in, while routinely assessing how our actions affect the realization of a better condition.
MEANING - PURPOSE - HOMEOSTASIS
Ethics can be likened to Schrödinger's cat in the sense that every possible state a thing can occupy exists in a superposition of indeterminate or equal value. Until something constrains the array of indeterminate and equivalent conditions into a hierarchy of value, no state is more real or righter than any other. In the case of a quantum mechanical system the constraining thing is called an observational measurement, in this ethical framework it’s called a knower.
Because each state of each thing is a perfectly true representation of itself from the absolute perspective, value isn’t intrinsic to thingness, it has to be discovered or created inside the context of a measurement or the perspective of a knower. The act of measuring, knowing, or deciding, limits the context in which a thing will be judged, allows for relative distinctions between states to emerge, and creates the pocket reality or cell where a value statement will live. While many cells/things are capable of measuring and judging, the ones capable of qualifying experience are elevated above the others from our perspective.
A knower or measurer, limited by definition, doesn’t judge reality in terms of absolute truth or rightness, and it doesn’t impose value or quality onto a perfectly true reality, it acquires information about a reality and processes it in some way. To qualify a thing as righter than or truer than another, a measurer slash knower must possess knowledge of an ideal or rightest state amongst the potential options, or it must be impactable in a way that informs it of the quality of a given state compared to another. Whenever the measurer detects the state of thing or a knower is impacted by a particular condition of a thing, a new reality called value or quality exists within that subjective context.
MEANING
It is the force that powers our decision making and actions. It strengthens us when we endure the inevitable hardships of life and serves as a beacon through the fog of confusion and doubt from an ever-changing world. It is the answer to why for everything we do.
The ideal, prime, or archetypical example of a cell/thing is the truest state with respect to a given knower, and realizing that state is the goal, the destination, and the meaning behind all right action. Once a knower is aware that a cell is not in an ideal or desired condition, everything done to bring the ideal or desired state into existence is considered a meaningful act. Meaning is the destination or end point of right action and meaningful things help us reach an optimal or archetypical state or to make an ideal state true and actual.
Because right leads to better and best, the meaning or aim of all right action is to realize an ideal or desired state, and because life is fundamentally an experience of reality and existence, every rational, healthy, and ethical thing we do will be to improve the rightness and desirability of our experience. Even if pain and loss are endured, or we worsen and destroy a thing, if it’s a healthy and intelligent action it’ll be to maintain or improve the condition of at least one thing, the cell containing the quality of our subjective experience. In this ethical framework, a knower that’s considered to be healthy and intelligent can never do anything except take meaningful actions, because not doing so would lessen the quality of their cell.
From the perspective of an individual and living knower, all things will be qualified in terms of how well a thing represents a known ideal, or how things subjectively impact them. What this means is that while the meaning behind every action is to improve or idealize a thing, we’re not required to right every cell that strays from its ideal, only the ones that materially impact a knower of experience, the ones that materially impact us. We’re also not confined to a specific path or course of action to achieve a meaningful state, we can choose any available degree of freedom that best satisfies our goal of an ideal experience.
PURPOSE
We can think of purpose as the what or the how you arrive at your meaning, and it is the best way for a particular knower or cell to bring an ideal into existence or a particular example of a thing closer to the ideal. Meaning is simple, singular, realize the ideal or desired state, but purpose is much harder to achieve because there can be countless ways to realize an ideal. Options become narrower the more we understand the cell in which the meaning lives, and the more right an action is for the knower to do in pursuit of their meaning, the more purposeful that action becomes.
Purpose only exists for cells capable of qualifying experience because there must be a known impact or lessening of pursuing meaning in a less than ideal way. For example, our meaning or goal may be to arrive at a particular destination a thousand miles away, but our purpose can’t simply be to get there as cheaply and quickly as possible when there are many ways of doing so that wouldn’t be right for us. Arriving at a desired destination is possible through less than purposeful action, but with respect to the cell containing the quality of our experience, we can never realize an ideal condition called bliss unless we do what is best or rightest.
Engaging in purposeful action, like meaning, is more than an ethical concern, it’s a sign of health and intelligence, meaning we don’t do things we know will definitely harm us with full awareness and soberness, and if we do engage in activity that looks harmful or painful it’s either unhealthy, or the best way we’re able to do what’s right at that moment. Right action returns more than simply achieving a meaningful outcome, it improves the condition of two cells simultaneously, the cell being acted upon and the cell containing a qualifying experience, which makes it the most efficient and intelligent way to realize a goal. What we do and how we work to realize an ideal state is as important as the goal if not more so for cells where the moment-to-moment quality or rightness is experienced directly because experiential states can deteriorate quickly when being acted upon.
EXISTENTIAL HOMEOSTASIS – EFFICIENTLY SUSTAINED RIGHTNESS
Bringing a cell to a rest or equilibrium state is the goal of every intelligent action because our ontology says the absolute is perfected and motionless, and our metaphysics says that everything in this universe wants to find a rest state and efficient path to that state barring outside or local influences. Aligning our flow or movement with that of the broader environment is advised because that direction of flow, from disorder and motion to order and stillness, is the most objective orientating coordinate for right action knowable. Although things like life and other self-sustaining low entropy systems may defy the flow of the most encompassing and universal cell (the absolute one), it’s not right to do so beyond subjectively determined need when everything is trending toward a state of rest, of dissipation of energy, or a perfect balance between action and potential.
Broadly and simply, the meaning or aim of everything, including inorganic matter/energy, is to get to a homeostatic state where the ideal is realized and maintained with minimal effort. Homeostasis is represented by a harmony or balance between a cell and its environment, and when it’s achieved by a cell containing a human experience, it’s known as bliss, or the apex of sustainable experience. Because the universe is dynamic, maintaining perfectly ideal states would require a constant expenditure of energy, so homeostasis isn’t about achieving transient conditions like ecstasy or euphoria, it’s about achieving an experience of rightness that doesn’t degrade with time. The experience of being in an existentially homeostatic state where we’ve settled our personal and worldly concern, the experience of being in a state of right and true, is one that requires more energy and effort to disturb than it does to sustain.
The goal is to find a mental state we find inviting or supportive, a physical experience we feel the same way about, and an external environment that's stimulating, calming, stable, secure, comfortable, or pleasing in a way that doesn’t conflict with what intuitively feels right. Homeostasis isn't about momentary pleasure or an avoidance of discomfort and pain, it's about reaching a stable or sustainably desirable state as efficiently as we believe to be right and are able to fulfill. If we are ethical people, we’re continually working to bring ourselves to an ideal state because it’s one where subjective experienced is apexed, but also because it’s where our impact on others is most right, and our utilization of resources is most intelligent and efficient ( not necessarily equal).
To achieve homeostasis, the place where we're good inside and out, we first look inward to regulate our internal state since it's where we have the most control, perspective, and ability to understand. Focusing on the internal state before we look outwardly is the efficient thing to do whenever we find ourselves less than blissful because our mental, emotional, and sensory realm is where we're most likely to be imbalanced, and it’s where an ideal state is easiest to maintain because a cell’s inside is somewhat insulated from the broader environment. Addressing or regulating our internal state usually involves righting our emotions, our mind and its contents, but it could also involve our body and its processes.
Without an awareness of a need to check ourselves before checking the world, we'll almost always default to taking largely unwarranted physical action because it’ll appear there's no other recourse. If an imbalanced internal state can be addressed without acting in the world and we instead choose to resolve it through pleasure seeking, acquisition, and achievement, we'll have to expend increasing amounts of energy to maintain desirability as we begin to habituate to whatever external resolution we've found. More descriptively, it means we'll create businesses, seek political power, attempt to affect social change, and involve many others in our effort to reconcile issues best reconciled internally, involving other cells unnecessarily can’t be right for us or them and will hinder our progress toward the ideal. We also live in a shared environment with finite resources and countless other cells we lack perspective on, knowledge of, and control over, so taking unnecessary and unwanted action in a closed ecosystem (and a potentially closed universe) is entropically wasteful and one of the greatest detractors in a finite world occupied by finite beings.
HOW DO WE RELATE?
How successful we are at optimizing a given cell depends on how much perspective we have, how well we understand what we’re aware of, and how much control we have over what’s in our awareness. Absolute perspective and perfect knowledge are essential for an ideal or perfect state because anything misinterpreted or residing outside of our awareness could completely change our understanding of the ideal and how to bring it into existence. Perfect control isn’t necessary for realizing a truth the way perspective and understanding are, but the more time and energy are constrained, or the more statically we want to maintain an optimized state, the more important influence becomes.
THE LIMIT OF RIGHT ACTION
Epistemologically, the more of a thing we are aware of the more we can trust our understanding of it, and when we have absolute perspective on a cell all the states composing the cell’s possible realities are laid bare, exposed, and knowable. The better we understand each state, the more the ideal or rightest one emerges until a precise and definitive example representing a perfect truth is known. Once we’ve precisely defined an ideal state or desired example of a cell, if we have sufficient control, we can act to bring that state into existence,
When a cell is static and narrow enough for us to have absolute perspective on, understanding of, and control over, we can be absolutely right about that thing, but outside extremely narrow universes/cells like the game of tic-tac-toe, there’s very little we can be truly right for or about. Except for cells where every state and optimal solution can be known, games like connect four, checkers, or Tower of Hanoi for more examples, we are physically and mentally incapable of being perfectly right. This means that for each cell we decide for or attempt to judge the quality of, we will always be less than absolutely certain we’re correct.
Being less than certain about what is right and true means our value assessments and decisions are based on degrees of confidence, not absolute and definitive understandings of an ideal. The more perspective and understanding we possess, the more confidence we have about what’s true or right, but we always leave room for uncertainty and doubt since we’re incapable of seeing and understanding every state a thing can occupy. Ignorance of even the smallest detail of the most fleeting state could completely alter our understanding of a cell and its ideal, so no matter how confident we are, we must always remember that it’s possible we’re absolutely wrong.
Gaining confidence in what’s right is a byproduct of a thorough understanding of known/established ideals and what it takes to realize them, or by assessing how subsequent states relate to one another until we understand the direction of flow. Established ideals are static and precisely knowable, and dynamic cells (cells with induced or inherent motion) have no concrete established ideal. Static cells like those in complex mathematics offer represent some of the most imposing cells known, but dynamic cells are generally more challenging to understand, and in instances where states are constantly changing or the cell is beyond our perspective and understanding, absolute confidence is an impossibility.
As far as cells go, there are none more inaccessible to us than those containing an experiential quality. We can only access and understand one cell containing experience directly so there will always be doubt about how different states and actions affect the quality or rightness of others. Observing the state of a cell and obtaining information about the rightness of a thing can help, but we can never have certainty because each experiential cell only has one knower as far as we can tell. If we must judge or act upon a cell, we do so with caution and care to ensure we’re sensitive to the changing of states.
INTERACTION BETWEEN CELLS
Regardless of what is absolutely or objectively true, as far as our minds go, a thing or cell must reside in a space, an environment, or some reality that supports its potential and actual states. Cell’s, things cannot exist in a vacuum because the mind, the thing we’re structuring with this philosophical framework, can’t conceive of an actual void. Everything less than absolute will have a boundary and an enveloping space in which it will attempt to find an equilibrium, but when that space is occupied or inhabited by another cell capable of affecting or being affected, we must consider our cohabitant to some degree if homeostasis is our goal.
Boundaries and contexts not only create an individual thing/cell, but they also create a more encompassing pocket reality in which a self-directing cell will attempt to realize an ideal condition. While most of the work toward homeostasis is done alone, an individual cell must acknowledge the potential impact of things sharing the same environment and either manage other affecting cells or cooperate with them. Natural environments put pressures on inhabitants to find a way of relating and interacting, but we humans operating increasingly in a nonphysical information space, must impose that upon ourselves, and that is exactly what this Ethical Framework does.
Using our epistemological foundations as a guide, we know we limit our confidence to what we know directly, and proceed with caution and an effort to be right in the shared domain. A room in our house is most real and impactful to us, less so to our neighbors or distant relatives, and even less so to the realtor that sold us the house and retired shortly after. Since the room is of greatest concern and impact to us, it is more within our perspective, understanding, and control than it is for another person, and as a result we posses more authority over that domain than others, just not an absolute amount.
Those that don't know themselves mistrust another's ability to direct themselves, when in reality the only thing to mistrust is another's clarity on what’s right for them, and their willingness or ability to move in that direction.
Because we’re only able to define right and wrong to an absolute certainty for ourselves, we adopt a moral maxim to always do what we feel (and hopefully know) to be right and true. Part of the maxim is to be as certain as we can be that we’re right, that we know what actions to take to realize an ideal, and that what we accept as true is representative of a thing as we best know it to exist. When it comes to experiential cells with exclusive and inaccessible truths sharing our space, we act so our subjective experience is maximized up to the point of infringing upon the experience of other beings in a way they wouldn’t appreciate if they were informed, healthy, or capable (we don’t impinge upon another’s cellular existence unless we must, meaning we know it to be right for us to do so for them, not only right for them).
Operating in a common environment, we base our motivations on the rules or constraints of that environment unless we believe them to be wrong or have a subjective need to act or proceed differently. We limit our actions based on the severity of impact on our experience for doing or not doing something, and by how much it'll impact another experiencing cell. When our personal context or environment begins to affect the broader environment in a way that’s unnecessary for subjective ideal realization, we’re impinging upon cells or contexts we have no perspective over, likely lessening the rightness of all that’s around us.
You should do what is best for you, but not if it’s based on a purely thought based assessment since thoughts tend to concern happiness, pleasure, comfort, security, and avoidance. It isn’t enough to simply do whatever you want, desire, think, or feel in any moment in this ethical framework, you must do and say only what you intuitively feel or rationally know to be right and true. We may want pleasure and comfort but seeking that to the exclusion of right is an irrational goal since pleasure and comfort are states that require ever increasing amounts of energy to sustain and are often divergent from the path to a homeostatic existence.
Because all distinctions are ultimately arbitrary, we have no objective frame of reference to assist us in coming to an agreement with others about contextual truths and constraints to liberty/freedom. The broader the context and the more complex the interior of a pocket reality becomes, the harder it is to establish an agreeable point of view, but one way to improve collective and individual success is to put forth effort to define and agree upon definitional boundaries, even if it’s that there’s no agreement. By constraining the context or size of a pocket reality, by being more precise, clearer, and more accurate about where a cell begins and ends, what the rules governing the cell are, we lessen the amount of unknown information contained within and make it easier to understand what is needed and allowable.
When beginning the effort of establishing rules of interaction/cooperation, the best consideration to start with is that we all share some common needs and motivations as humans, and we share some of the most basic requirements with all life. If we lessen the rightness of the broader environment, there will eventually be a response from surrounding cells with their own rightness to pursue, resulting in a lessening of homeostatic support, so blazing a solipsistic and tunnel visioned path isn’t advised. Although it may not be a direct path to all that we want and desire, we must adjust and consider our impact on the objective space, because failing to do so will make realizing our ultimate goal of efficiently sustained bliss nearly impossible as we endlessly compensate for environmental degradation and unwanted counteraction/response from affected cells.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE WORLD?
Worlds or civilizations are systems or a structures erected to improve the subjective desirability of its inhabitants experience by providing a more supportive and conducive environment than would exist without intervention. Each world is like an inflatable mattress or a guardian in the sense that neither are meant to be permanent fixtures, they’re meant to serve a need until the cushioned and guarded have grown beyond them. Civilizations as far as we’ve seen help facilitate an exchange of information and resources, and the help provide security and comfort beyond what can be easily obtained by an individual member of the group, but it is their ability to provide for us that gives them their purpose. How we’re doing is what determines the world’s quality or success, how satisfied we are with our existence says how right or wrong it is, not the other way around. In a broader more absolute sense, the purpose of every world that’s intelligent is to improve the subjective desirability of its inhabitants experience. To shepherd a collective, guiding and orienting structures of some form must be imposed, we must limit and constrain behavior and freedoms to maintain the integrity of our womb-like environment, but the thing we created to help us can never take precedent over its creators.
The world in fact is pointless unless we give it a point, and the only one that makes true sense is helping us improve our experience of reality, simply existing for a longer duration isn’t enough. Aside from the survival, security, community, companionship, and entertainment it provides, civilization is simply a place to grow and learn, a stage for us to interact in and act upon, but so too is the universe at large. Other than continued existence, if there is no point to the world, if it isn’t structured to make our lives better, the world becomes a prison or a cage from which we have no expectation of ever being freed or released.
Systems can be constructed, modified, and destroyed without causing suffering if done skillfully, but the lifeforms inhabiting the system do suffer so we don’t ask them to cope and adapt before first ensuring the unfeeling thing is conducive to the point of the world. Because we can never design a system that accounts for the unknown desires and subjective condition of others, we see anything that constrains another’s pursuit of their path as an evil to be eradicated, or an evil to be tolerated no longer than needed. Every ethically imaginable world will seek to eliminate all constraints and limitations on individual freedom as soon as they are able to be done away with because every ethical structure’s purpose is to support an ideal state, not merely constrain.
Our world was meant to support us, and we were meant to improve its capacity for support since realizing an ideal experience is our ethical mandate and the world is plays a vital role in that pursuit. To achieve an ideal state for our species, we must aim for state where no individual can limit the freedom of another and where each individual can find their way to a desired/homeostatic existence. Ultimately, any constructed system of control will limit, hinder, and cause suffering since no one can know whether or not a desired state has been reached or what that state looks like for another, so absolute and inalienable anarchy is the goal.
Whenever a species gains the understanding and capability to render authority useless, whenever they’re beyond the need of imposed limitations, we can say we’ve truly evolved, they can now choose to form an advanced civilization. An advanced civilization doesn’t have rational validity unless it’s sourced from an absolutely free agreement to submit to constraints and limitations, and absolutely inalienable ability to free oneself from those constraints and limitations. Humanity progressing to a point where a voluntarily occupied society exists, frequent interaction and exchange is had, but none of it is needed in any essential way aside from a desire is as close to the Übermensch mentioned by Nietzsche we’ll get. For the time being and for the foreseeable future, a capitalistic organization of humanity is workable as long as we restructure the capital to be the subjective experience of one’s existence and for the health and success of societies, economies, and civilizations is measured in how well their support individual attainment of homeostasis and not an arbitrarily relative quantity of a currency or money. With each person in increasing knowledge of themselves, with each person possessing the requisite freedom and capacity to further their own existence, we’ll each be lifted by a collective push toward individual rightness, accelerating each individual’s movement toward an increasingly uninterrupted state of bliss.
