Saturday, January 30, 2010

reiteration of the process of relations from metaphysics to physics

the imagination is the abyss itself from which we pluck a piece to place in time and space, and thus the manifestation of existence occurs... material existence is only sliver of Existence (it would be like judging a person based on their physical features and ignoring their overall character). if we do not consider and dedicate ourselves to the realm of possibility we are forced to make decisions based on past experience, and thus disabling evolution or progress

Friday, January 29, 2010

if a thought exists, it exists in the metaphysical spectrum of reality. if a thought manifests into action, the action has already existed in two places with a conscious transition from possibility to actuality or metaphysical to physical reality which means the ability to filter the action should be applied and will be perceived accordingly

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

there are a few philosophical terms that i understand, yet don't find their meaning to be enough.... i will share what i mean by them and would like to know what people think about my observation.

objective (traditionally to me) means the opposite of emotive. but (non traditionally to me) an objective is a material example or a tangible experience that is a piece of the puzzle.
subjective
is the whole (puzzle). ie philosophy is the subject, while existentialism is the object of concentration within the subject.

the ego (in the form of emotions) binds us to categorizing the object based on its tangible form, yet if we were aware of the subjective or metaphysical dimension we could grasp a concept that not only applies to the examples that we experience but avoid the fear of new stimuli because only its physical features would be new. if we observe individual objects with similar attributes, there is a deeper essence that links them; the distinguishable function that determines it necessary for multiple examples with only slight variations to materialize.

to me, this is a useful distinction in metaphysics because as an observer we can only perceive objective reality through empirical data and rationality. though rationality is itself metaphysical, it only exists and becomes more efficient by empirical experience. the brain is a physical organ and the mind is a metaphysical emergent property of the material body. rationality is a tool of the mind, yet because it relies on sense experience to make inferences it is vastly limited.
if we experience reality only in the way that it relates to us, we blind ourselves to the reality that exists beyond our perception of reality. if we don't abstract our ego from our perceptual experience, then our world becomes so narrow that we are forced to make a leap of faith and which is the basis of all prejudice, assumptions and ignorance. a leap of faith can at best be correct by chance, which is not desirable if being right is an available option, and it always is. if we observe things in nature (without the stimuli relating to us) the proper relationships appear to us more clearly than our own beliefs to the extent that the ideal manifests into flesh and bone. what i am talking about is shifting the ego's need to make sense the environment it finds itself in, to passively allowing the world to exist as it does without us. i am not denying my preferences, but they do not constitute a reality that matters to anyone or anything but me