A System of Knowledge,
reason, Practice, and action

[ Link to a supplement ]

Anil Mitra Copyright © January 2018—February 2026
updated February 23, 2026

Home

Contents

Introduction

About the system

About the metaphysics of the way of being

About knowledge and method

A reflexive system

This version

General

Structure of the system

The universe and the world

Introduction—abstract and concrete sciences

General and abstract sciences and method

Metaphysics

The real and the artifactual

Method

Abstract sciences and symbolic systems

Cosmology

General cosmology

Cosmology of form and formation

Our world

Concrete sciences

Physical sciences

Biology

Psychology

Society, social science, and sciences

Analysis of society

Applied science

Abstract sciences

Physical sciences

Biology and psychology

Social sciences

Science for advanced civilization and being

History

History

History of the world

History of ideas

History and the linear future

Creative expression and being – design and artifact

Art

Art

Art as a mode of expression

The arts

Technology

Technology, its history, and use

Elements of technology

Fields of technology

Technology for language, mind, and being

Technology for advanced civilization and being

The human place in the world

The humanities

Tradition

Religion

The ultimate

Transformation of being

Theory of transformation of being

Intrinsic modes of transformation

Instrumental modes of transformation

Dual modes

Being the universe

Future of the system

Planned

Further information

A System of Knowledge,
reason, Practice, and action

Introduction

About the system

The system is a map or outline of knowledge with foundation in and perspective from the metaphysics of the way of being (TWB); essentials of this metaphysics are presented in the sections about the metaphysics of the way of being and about knowledge, below.

Origins of the system are in (i) as the metaphysics above emerged, I realized that it provided for a foundation of knowledge that had new elements and a range that was ultimate, at least in principle (ii) interest in systematic knowledge, particularly as in encyclopedic systems; it is emphasized that while both foundation and range are important, foundation is more so for it is the depth and inclusivity of the foundation that enables the greater range. Though the system of this work has evolved in arrangement and content since its first version, it was and remains indebted to encyclopedic works and thought of the past and especially to the system of the 15th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

The origins indicate the aims of the system. The first aim is as a resource for the way of being. The larger aim is as a general resource, i.e., as systematic outline from a new perspective – the perspective of the way of being.

The system has a supplement, which focuses on (i) further topics for research and action (ii) developing a knowledge database and encyclopedia.

About the metaphysics of the way of being

The aim of the way of being is discovery and realization of the ultimate in, for, and from ‘immediate’ worlds—especially our world.

To talk validly about these matters, it is necessary to have a grasp of knowledge of the world (universe) which includes facts, patterns, and values. Here are two common approaches today—to begin discussion. The first, secular, recognizes experience and inference from experience and denies speculative dogma (as in many religions). The second, transsecular, especially as in the speculative dogma of religion. Before proceeding, observe that in the metaphysics of the way, it is shown that there is a limitless realm beyond the received secular.

The positive aspects of the approaches are (i) the secular reveals at least pragmatic truth within the empirical realm (ii) the transsecular is symbolic of what the secular omits. Negatively (i) the secular omits much and is, typically, blind to or denies any beyond (ii) the transsecular is or at least tends to the dogmatic of the beyond, whether in the world or beyond.

There is a natural conflict between the secular and transsecular, the result of which is that we tend to live with an effectively limited view of the real. Both parties focus on the error of the other while not seeing their own error or shortsightedness.

A third approach is through the philosophical discipline of metaphysics. However, as we shall see just below, modern metaphysics tends to pay excessive weight to received limits of secular views; or, to lesser degree focuses on proving dogma. Modern metaphysics tends to sophistication, and while sophistication is useful, modern metaphysics often trades in sophistication and equivocation at the expense of definiteness and truth where they could occur.

Essential problems of those limits are that they have limited views of the empirical and of reason.

The main empirical limit is to think that because we do not know the details of what may lie beyond our world, we cannot know anything about it. But we do know something—we know that there is ‘everything’, and while this may seem to be trivial knowledge, it turns out to be potent. The apparent limits of what we see are not necessarily the true limits; while we do not know the details of ‘distant’ regions of the universe, we do know that there may be such regions and their existence and some of their main characteristics are established in the metaphysics of the way of being.

An important limit regarding reason is that our major systems of inference, especially deductive reasoning (logic), fail to capture reasoning about everything—particularly about ‘nothing’ (which is a part of everything).

As an aside, note that the two limits just above may be seen as a result of subscription to substance theory in metaphysics and uniform epistemology. In metaphysics, a substance (in one of its senses) is a true constituent of all things (in some substance theories there is more than one substance). However, it is not a given that there are substances. What is found in the metaphysics of the way of being is that there is no substance and there is no need for it; however, domains of the universe may be as if they were (near) substance domains. Though Heidegger criticized substance, he does treat ‘being’ as though it has a substance or essence for he seeks the true depth in being. Here, being is plain and neutral—what there is—and depth is to be found within rather than of being. What is uniform epistemology? It is the usually unstated thought that epistemological criteria of a given epistemology should be the same for all knowledge. Here, we find that correspondence criteria should apply to part of the range of knowledge and that pragmatic criteria to the other part and that the join of the two is not ad hoc but results in a synthetic and systematic metaphysics.

While the details may be found at the way of being website, here are some pertinent aspects of the metaphysics developed there. It is grounded in experience and (a metaphysics based on) being. It is essential that being as treated in the metaphysics is all inclusive, is shallow rather than deep—is just existence. Again, this may seem shallow, but it is not for (i) as it is (shown to be) plain and devoid of mystery, it enables a straightforward development of metaphysics without the usual doubts such as “Did we get this, e.g., the depth, quite right or is there something eluding our thought and words?” (ii) and thus, rather than denying depth, it creates a framework that includes whatever may be deep and (iii) it enables a metaphysics that is ultimate in two senses—ultimacy of the universe itself and ultimacy in capture of the universe in our knowledge (the details of which will not be completely known to limited beings).

As noted, ‘being’ is one ground for the metaphysics, which is labeled ‘the real metaphysics’ or, just, ‘the metaphysics’. The label ‘real’ is justified as, to whatever some form of the verb to be applies, that has being. In that it does not distinguish kinds, e.g., matter and mind or event and state, being is simple and trivial. This is its source of power—it goes beyond or, rather, comes before substance. The universe is the union of all that has being and the void is the absence of being. While beings may be defined by form and law, the void has no law and so all possibility emerges from the void. That is, the universe is the realization of possibility in its most inclusive sense. That is, the universe is without conceptual limit.

There are three sets of consequences. The first concerns the destiny of beings. Though we experience ourselves in limited form, we are also limitless, for if we were not, the universe would have a limit. The consequences are further spelled out in the way of being, which, based in the real metaphysics, develops and presents pathways to the ultimate in, for, and from our world. That is, the pathways recognize our world as continuous with the ultimate.

Consequently, the ultimate is not to be reached by prescribed beliefs and practices or by following ‘leaders’ (which may of course be useful), but via immersion in the world and action and transformation based on understanding our connection to the ultimate. Further, the focus on the ultimate is not a focus away from the world – the pathways are in, for, and from our world, and attend to its quality and improve quality by intentional action in the light of knowledge of the ultimate (which allows living in the shadow of pain and evil as meaningful, given the light of the real).

Is confidence in the metaphysics of the way of being absolute? No. Though there is (i) demonstration (proof) (ii) self-consistency and consistency with experience and (true) knowledge, there is doubt stemming from (a) the reasoned premise that the void exists (b) the enormity and counterintuitive nature of the consequences. Therefore, doubt is addressed, first by reviewing the proof and by alternative proofs, and second by regarding existence of the void (or equivalents) as a postulate regarding the real or as an existential postulate (or both).

About knowledge and method

The second set of consequences concerns knowledge—what it is and what is the extent of its contents.

What is knowledge? A naïve concept is knowledge is a representation or depiction of what is real. It is naïve because (i) it is itself a depiction and (ii) as far as knowledge is depiction, that alone does not guarantee faithfulness.

However, the concept of being, above, is abstract in the sense that it so lacks detail that it is faithful. The same is true of the concepts of universe, void, and the simple logic of limitlessness.

Thus, the metaphysics so far, is an abstract framework—a limit case—of knowledge which is perfect.

Now, to that framework, we can adjoin common pragmatic knowledge – the knowledge of which everyone must partake to be alive in the world as well as the knowledge that is discovered and taught in schools and universities. This knowledge has some pragmatic validity—utility—even though it (often) is not perfectly faithful.

Relative to the ideal of ultimate realization, this system, which is named ‘the real metaphysics’, is perfect. It is perfect (i) because realization is given (ii) while we are limited, we can do no better (iii) therefore we accept and live with mistakes (note that no claim is made of classic perfection or that concern with it is irrelevant).

But what we do find is (a) a system with perfection in a value sense (b) that one good approach to knowledge is to see it as a mosaic and not to be preoccupied with inherited views of knowledge and its criteria.

Note—more recently it is contemplated that value does not just optimize over precision and use of knowledge jointly, but that value and knowledge are knit together, even as one.

Also note—there is no intent here to minimize the history and current thought on metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics for it may, among other uses, assist ‘limited beings’ in progress toward realization.

The third set of consequences concerns method. The proof of existence of the void is not valuable only for the result and its consequences but also in its consequences for argument and logic. The fact of being has necessity. The existence of the void is a proof from necessity. It is shown that the universe in its limitlessness is not caused by another thing (there is no other) but is necessary. The reasoning about the universe and the void—everything and nothing—has necessity and novelty. The equivalence of existence and nonexistence of the void is a case of dialetheia—a true statement that is contradictory in form. Further, whereas many dialetheia can be defused because they conflate distinct states, the present dialetheia is about a single state—the void. But what this does reveal is that the meaning of existence is in question when it comes to the void, which may be seen as a deflation—but an unexpected one.

A reflexive system

The system is reflexive in that the real metaphysics emerged with thought about the world, and what emerged informed the system about the nature of what is real, of knowledge, and how knowledge might be arranged.

It is not just the nature of the real that is emergent—the concept and nature of also emerged with the development of the real metaphysics especially because the metaphysics informs us as to what criteria knowledge should satisfy and because knowledge is part of the real.

This version

General

This version now has 2022 formatting. There is a backup with original 2021 formatting.

A change introduced in 2025 is to move the discussion of the humanities to the part on creative expression and being. There is a backup made just before this change.

Structure of the system

The main divisions

The universe and the world.

Creative expression and being – design and artifact.

The ultimate

Though the distinction between being(s) and artifacts has artificiality, it forms the basis of the distinction between the first two divisions.

While the ultimate is part of the universe, the ultimate receives especial focus in the third main division.

The structure of ‘The universe and the world’

An introduction.

Here, it is argued that the distinction between the abstract, the concrete, and method is conventional more than substantial. However, while we follow convention in keeping the abstract and the concrete separate, it is natural to keep the abstract and method together.

General and abstract sciences and method.

The discussion here owes significantly to the real metaphysics as well as to received thought.

Cosmology.

As it is deeply based in the real metaphysics, the cosmology is kept separate from the concrete sciences.

Concrete sciences.

The sciences and their divisions currently follow the canonical received divisions.

Applied science.

Though putting applications together under a single division is not canonical, the divisions are canonical.

History.

The treatment of history is a mix of what is received and the influence of the real metaphysics on my thoughts on history.

The universe and the world

Introduction—abstract and concrete sciences

Let us first consider the idea of an abstract science. The real metaphysics of the way of being is a union of a perfect correspondence abstract side with a pragmatic side. When the pragmatic side is interpreted by pragmatism itself under the umbrella of the abstract, it too is perfect (it remains imperfect and useful in its traditional use whose value is changed but not eliminated considering the perfect metaphysics). Thus, the pragmatic side is abstract because the correspondence precision is irrelevant under the abstract umbrella. The perfect metaphysics is, even while pragmatic, an abstract science.

What of the other abstract sciences listed below? It is sufficient to consider mathematics. Mathematics begins as empirical but becomes abstract with the axiomatic method. It is abstract as either (1) abstraction from the empirical or (2) study of symbolic structures in themselves and not as representation of the concrete. Is mathematics about this world? As abstraction, some fields of mathematics are. However, with the universal method, all mathematical systems have objects. Thus abstract vs. concrete can be seen as not about an ontological distinction but about degree of detail omitted. This characterization applies to the other abstract sciences.

All abstract sciences fall under metaphysics. They are studied in themselves because of their special interest, methods, and extensive development.

It may be seen that the distinction between the concrete and the abstract is not one of kind but of degree of abstraction versus concretion—that is because, given the realization of all possibility and the abstract approach from ‘being’, all (logical) concepts have objects and there is no metaphysical reason to distinguish their ontological status based in human intuition. But the ‘concrete’ sciences also partake of abstraction—while the quantum theory of fields does talk at least approximately of reality, the fields are not known to be ground level reality itself (if there is one) and are certainly not a ground level. Therefore, a further difference between the concrete and the abstract sciences is means of study; yet the differences are at root pragmatic rather than essential; they all refer to the world (universe). And they all fall under metaphysics as the most general science. Thus, metaphysics is the most general science with all sciences under its umbrella.

General and abstract sciences and method

Metaphysics

The metaphysics that informs this work was discussed in the introduction. This section is a general outline of metaphysics.

Study of being and the given, experience (and metaphysics of language—its metaphysical possibilities and limits, especially given that language is a fundamental tool for metaphysics itself, and indeed of most if not all disciplines), categories, knowledge, and principles of action; possibility of metaphysics; the abstract, the concrete, and the nature of perfect knowledge; the fundamental principle of metaphysics; all knowledge and action fall under the umbrella of metaphysics—including epistemology, reason, logic and ethics; the perfect or real metaphysics and recognized problems of metaphysics (being; substance, category, and cause; possible and necessary being; spacetime; identity; cause, determinism, freedom; mind and matter), cosmology, and agency.

For more on the problems of metaphysics, see applied science > abstract sciences, below.

The real and the artifactual

The real is what is there; the artifactual is that part of the real that is created by beings—it is real, but it is convenient to distinguish the two – as is done in the detailed topics that follow.

Method

As noted earlier, method and content have the same intension; method overlaps other entries in this document and must—for while method and content may be distinguished, they are fused. Especially, method is an aspect of content when knowledge and values are the objects.

… Method is found in and as epistemology, argument, logic, establishment of fact, inductive and scientific method, comparative method, transcendental method in philosophy, artistic and engineering design, rhetoric, and persuasion—general and political.

… Possibilities of method are exhibited by and in the perfect metaphysics of the way of being: perfect knowledge by abstraction, necessity from abstraction, complete absence of universal applicability of empirical knowledge and generalization there-from.

Abstract sciences and symbolic systems

An abstract science is a systematic study of a system of abstract objects; the question of the nature of abstract and concrete objects and their reality is considered in metaphysics.

Metaphysics of symbolic systems

Metaphysics of symbolic systems (meta-symbolic and metaphysical study of the expressive and demonstrative possibilities of symbolic systems); and in and for the following

Linguistics and study of language

Meta-linguistic study of limits and possibilities of language.

Sign and word, compound linguistic constructs, metaphysics of grammar (e.g., as depicting the real), concept, and object.

Logic

Logic as theory of inference vs theory of the world; deduction and induction; argument; logics.

Mathematics and computer science

Mathematics begins as an empirical endeavor, which may be scientific.

However, with the introduction of the axiomatic approach, it becomes abstract and mathematical systems may be seen as theories of signs. Computer science is about computing and data structures and emphasizes finite structures. It is also about efficient architectures, given finite resources (on physical computing devices).

Thus, mathematics may be seen as purely syntactical. This has the advantages that (i) it has no necessary application but may have many applications (ii) as it is not empirical, it presents as if certain.

But certainty requires consistency, and except in simple enough finite systems, proof of certainty is either (i) relative to another system, e.g., an abstract model or (ii) absolute in that the system is realized (semantically) in the world—but then the question of the certainty of the realization remains. Thus, except in trivial cases, certainty remains an issue. Still, however, there are two distinctions from the questions of certainty in science (i) the certainty of a syntactic system is of a different kind, which does not require semantic or empirical justification (ii) the transparency of syntactic systems may lead to near universally accepted and significant putative certainty.

There remain issues of uniqueness and completeness of the abstract models.

The issues of certainty, uniqueness, and completeness also pertain to logic.

Argument

Can logic, mathematics (with computer science), and science be placed on a single, joint footing.

Inference is either necessary (deductive) or reasonable (e.g., reliable induction, abduction, analogy). In the former, premises are implicit in the conclusions; in the latter, the conclusions are ‘reasonable’ but not strictly implied by the premises.

A valid deductive (or just valid) argument is one for which the deduction is correct. A sound argument is one for which the premises are true and the argument valid (true premises may be established by deduction from another true premise or be true of necessity as in establishment of the existence of the void). That is, the conclusions of a sound argument are true. If the premises are true of necessity, a sound argument is called necessary.

A reasonable argument is strong if the inference is likely or regarded as established so far. Further, if the premises are true within precision, a strong argument is good.

How are facts established? One way is observation and corroboration which is in general not entirely dependable or precise, but may be precise if, rather than the mathematics of continua is presumed, what is presumed is the mathematics of intervals.

Except for necessary argument, sound argument applied to the world is questionable and therefore sound and good argument can be brought under a single umbrella. For application to the world, all argument lies on a certainty continuum with necessary argument as the only certain kind. Mathematics with deduction is certain except where there is a question of application.

Inference under deduction is certain while inference to a theory in science are certain and less than certain, respectively. However, that standard analogy is inappropriate for the proper comparisons are (i) inference to a system of logic with inference to a theory and (ii) inference under a logic to inference under a theory. In both cases, the former may be questionable while the latter is certain.

Although that is the general case, argument with deduction and under science can both be certain if the universe of the latter is restricted (as are the universes of deductive logic) and if measurement is sufficiently coarse (science) or abstract (argument with deduction).

Meta-disciplinary study

The study of disciplines and application to the disciplines.

Realism and truth in the abstract sciences

Generalizing from the question of realism and truth in mathematics, some viewpoints on realism are (i) the objects are real and exist in this world (one interpretation is empiricism, which is largely abandoned in logic and mathematics today), another is Platonism, which holds that the objects are real but exist in another world—real (realism) or of mind (idealism, which is not necessarily distinct from realism) (ii) the objects are not real (formalism, constructivism, of which the latter includes intuitionism).

Some viewpoints on truth are, corresponding to the above distinctions, (i) truth consists in mathematics identifying objects in the worlds (ii) truth consists in valid proof under the viewpoint (formalism and so on). Under constructivism, the mathematical objects must be constructed and not shown by denying nonexistence.

From the real metaphysics, all non-contra-dictory systems must have real objects in the universe. The real metaphysics justifies realism.

A useful distinction is that of ‘certaintism’ vs ‘non-certaintism’, the point of which is that under the latter we allow a degree of uncertainty and so there is associated risk which is balanced by a greater outcome of results or application. That is, uncertainty is allowed because it may increase the expected value of the theory. The objection that non-certaintism would destroy the value of mathematics is invalid because the attitude would not be certaintism vs non-certaintism but would allow both. The true objection to non-certaintism ought to come from our attitude to and experience with risk.

Dialetheism

The term ‘contra-diction’ was used above. Let us explain.

A long-standing logical principle is the law of non-contradiction, lnc—an assertion and its negation cannot both be true. The case for lnc is strong—(i) it seems intuitively sound, for example, how could it be both raining and not raining at a given place and time (ii) in standard propositional calculus, a contradiction leads to all statements being true (and to all statements being false) (iii) which would seem to destroy logic and rational thought altogether.

However, consider that if no thing exists, there is nothing, which exists. This is clearly questionable, but arguments for and significance of this and similar cases are given in dialetheism. Here, we accept and explain.

The main explanation is that the term ‘contradiction’ has more than one sense. One sense is words that stand in opposition, for which we use the term contra-diction. The second sense is that of the object of a contra-diction which is usually impossible and would be a contrareal. The apparent paradox above is resolved by noting that many but not all contra-dictions imply contrareals.

Thus, there may be true contradictions or dialetheia. The case is established and expounded in dialetheia.

The final and current conclusion of that article (dialetheia) is that all cases examined are relative dialetheia in that they involve conflation of meaning and so absolute dialetheia have not been established. Yet dialetheia may be useful where meaning has not or perhaps cannot be disentangled.

How are dialetheias dealt with? One approach is to exclude them from the universe of standard propositional logic. A formal approach is to invoke a three valued paraconsistent logic, for which see a little manual for the way of being.

Cosmology

The received sciences are taken up in the concrete sciences below. This section briefly summarizes the manifest universe—considered as equivalent to the void—in the context of the way of being, where the universe is seen as ‘everything’. The following summarizes some points from the way of being.

From the metaphysics the universe passes through manifest and void phases (the void exists even during the manifest).

All (logical) possibilities emerge from the void.

General cosmology

Here we discuss the general aspect of cosmology. Its dynamic is logic in general.

Cosmology of form and formation

This is about systems that are more than merely transient. The conclusions are probable in the sense that most formed systems are formed via small increment from relatively stable states with a high degree of symmetry to neighboring states with such symmetry and stability.

Our world

The structure is described below in concrete sciences. The concern here is how such structure comes about. Briefly, it is an example of the cosmology of form and formation above.

Concrete sciences

Physical sciences

Classical theories of particles and fields, special and general theories of relativity, quantum theories of particles and fields and their interpretations, standard theory of elementary particles and its problems, quantum theories of gravity—quantum loop gravity and string theory; theoretical and experimental cosmology – from the cosmos and possible cosmoses down to stars and solar systems, cosmological context and origins of the empirical cosmos; tentative theories – multiverse theory, mathematical universe, theories of evolution of cosmoses; nuclear, atomic, molecular, and optical physics; condensed matter physics; chemistry and chemical origins of life; earth sciences; continuum physics and turbulence.

Biology

Nature, variety, structural levels from molecules to multi-cell organisms, origins, and evolution of life on earth; co-evolutionary processes and mathematical evolutionary biology; human anthropology; exobiology and speculative biology.

Psychology

Study of psyche; primal, eastern, and western approaches; psyche: nature, functions, memory, dynamics; and growth and integration, especially as personality; the unconscious; change and changeability of personality; an objective science of experience; biological psychology; behavioral and group or social psychology; psychoanalysis and existential-humanistic theories.

Society, social science, and sciences

Society and its nature. Change and origins. Groups and institutions. Culture. Cultural anthropology. Civilization. Economics and politics. Law.

Analysis of society

Some details for analysis, e.g., of equilibria:

Change and origins—evolution, dynamics: factors, stable vs unstable and transient.

Groups—person, family, small groups—e.g., clubs and bands, communities, villages – towns – cities – countries – nations – multinational alliances.

Culture—general; social institutions; language for expression, representation, and communication. Institutions of knowledge and information—creation and transmission: schools, universities, academies, and research establishments; distribution vs networking—physical and electronic.

Civilization—human civilization-(challenge and opportunity, see world challenges and opportunities) and universal civilization.

Economics and politics—science and philosophy. Local vs global. Economic: wealth and its distribution, money, producers – consumers, goods and services and their distribution, means of production – operators, e.g., ‘producers’ vs managers, resource assessment, economic feasibility. Political: rulers – ruled (governors – governed), rule by the few (aristocracy – oligarchy) – rule by the many (polity – democracy), appointment by force vs consensus, enforcement of rule vs rule of law). Political economy—the integration and intersection of politics and economics.

Law—creation, adjudication, enforcement.

Applied science

Method, research and development, design and planning, issues—from local to global to universal. Applied sciences have derivation from the abstract and concrete sciences and application to technology (more generally, there is interaction among the pure and applied sciences and technology).

Abstract sciences

Metaphysics and logic—conceptual discovery of the universe; traditional applications to deduction (logic) and the traditional and modern problems of metaphysics—see metaphysics, above, and the document topics and concepts for the way under ‘topics in metaphysics’, ‘problems of eastern metaphysics’, and ‘problems of western metaphysics’. Note the sense of logic as including metaphysics, mathematics, and science in the way of being. Mathematics can be seen as the discovery of possible form and structure, with origin in study of and with application to our cosmos; however, from the real metaphysics, all mathematics—all logic—has an object in or as the universe (the ‘single’ object has limitlessly many parts).

Physical sciences

Technological sciences and engineering: drafting, engineering and its fields, industrial engineering and production management, and materials science.

Biology and psychology

Especially medicine and psychiatry, principles, fields, therapies, and therapeutic approaches—diagnosis and person (holist) oriented, and professions; physical science for medicine and psychiatry.

Social sciences

Principles and practice, fields, professions.

Science for advanced civilization and being

Examples—(1) up to control of the empirical cosmos and above and (2) embodiment of mind. Philosophical supplement—philosophy of mind, organism, and being; and the Advaita Vedanta and related systems of Indian Philosophy.

History

History

The nature of history; “the study of the past as it is described in written documents” vs “ambiguously used to denote either events or records of the past (‘historiography’ is used for history as record) … also ambiguous in denoting natural as well as human events, or records of either”; here, the more inclusive meaning is intended; methods; its instrumental or practical and intrinsic or ideal uses.

History of the world

The universe; the earth, life, origin of homo sapiens; pre-history and anthropology.

History of ideas

General ideas; history of culture, human endeavor, and disciplines.

History and the linear future

(It is not implied that the history of the universe is linear)

The use of history, reason, and the remainder of the system of knowledge, to talk of the future; what can be said at different levels of generality and abstraction vs what is conjecture and possibility; the possible roles of the hierarchy of being in the universe as we know it in the future—especially the roles of the modern cultural system as described here and the issue of whether the future will or may build upon it vs building may require return to a relatively primal or organic level.

Creative expression and being – design and artifact

Art

Art

Its nature; relation to metaphysics and to being-in-the world.

Art has the following functions—it is aesthetic, it entertains, it is also functional, and it can be intuitive expression of truth.

Art as a mode of expression

There are limits to what can be expressed in language. There is the practical difficulty that there is intuition of deep truth that we find difficult to express clearly. There is also a theoretical difficulty—expression in language is discrete, which makes representation of a continuum impossible.

Art, which does not rely only on formal use of language, is thought to be capable of expressing deep truth.

The arts

Literature, drama, music, painting, drawing, sculpture, and architecture.

Technology

Technology, its history, and use

What technology is; its development; and its transformational and utilitarian uses.

Elements of technology

Energy, conversion, and use; tools and machines; measurement, observation, and control; extraction and conversion of raw materials; technology of industrial production processes.

Fields of technology

Agriculture and food production; major industries—their technologies: manufacturing, transportation, chemical, extraction, mining; civil (buildings, highways, and other civil structures), mechanical, electrical, information processing (computation), communication and networking, knowledge, and information technology; military technology; urban community; earth and space exploration.

Technology for language, mind, and being

Speech, writing, and print; artificial intelligence, dual systems—mind computer interaction and interface, robotics, simulation, bio-machines, organism-machine transference of intelligence, (evolution of) civilization as human-machine-computer interaction.

Technology for advanced civilization and being

Select technologies from the foregoing items—and for the following.

The human place in the world

This section acknowledges alternatives to thinking in terms of ultimates.

The system is constructed by the human mind. This implies possible but not necessary limits for there is an aspiration to universal knowledge. The title might therefore be A System of Human Knowledge, Reason, and Action.

The account originally began with the humanities because they motivate and encompass all other disciplines and activities. It is now placed at the end of the system. It is still a ground but understanding of the ground is informed by the earlier parts—the real and given universe and artifact and the created universe. The distinctions between the humanities, the real, and artifact are artificial.

The humanities

Preliminary

There is overlap among humanities and the other divisions of knowledge; however, where illuminating, redundancy is appropriate.

Humanities and humanism

What should we know to live well, and relate and contribute to the human side of culture? Adequacy of this rough definition of humanism and the humanities. That it suggests but does not specify the disciplines. The methods are critical or speculative, comparative, and have a significant historical element. There is no central discipline, but the humanities include ancient and modern languages, literature, philosophy, geography, history, cultural anthropology, religion, art, and musicology. Details follow.

Philosophy

Process of bridging with the unknown; philosophy of meaning in the sense of the deepest aspects of our being, e.g. ‘the meaning of life’, the universe—our place in it, our destiny, what gives us a sense of having significance or meaning; disciplines—metaphysics as, particularly, the study of the real, and its extent, duration, and variety; logic (and epistemology), and value theory in its most general sense, particularly, ethics and aesthetics; attention to language, concepts as symbolic or sign-icon entities, and concept and linguistic meaning (via meaning, philosophy is about the world… via synthesis of meaning, it is about discovery)—meaning as concepts and their possible objects and knowledge as meaning realized or as concepts and their objects; the roles of holism and context in fixing meanings; special branches—critique, understanding, and development of disciplines and human endeavors.

Knowledge and its disciplines

Knowledge, the disciplines, and their history; it is essential that though method and content are distinct in extension, they have identity in intension.

What is philosophy?

This is a critically important question, for understood appropriately, philosophy—the endeavor and the content—lies at the center of our being and seeking.

It is not the intent here to answer the question if what philosophy is, but to note some thoughts in relation to the perspective of the ‘system of knowledge’.

To answer the question it is not enough to give a definition and an explanation; definition and explanation ought to go hand in hand with reading from an adequate range of sources and at least some endeavor in doing philosophy; and to see that the purpose of the reading and doing is more than exposure and experience—the purpose includes that the development of philosophical thinking will in turn inform us on the nature of philosophy; and there should perhaps be a recognition that the nature of philosophy may, perhaps, never be completely defined but always in process).

It is natural that there will be different thoughts on what philosophy is and how to address the question. Some of these thoughts will be based on the nature and aims of human action and knowledge, others will be based on the parochial activities and interests of various disciplines; and it will not be trivial to separate these bases.

While there are many disciplines and many ways to organize them, there is a place for the question—Is there a synthesis of human knowledge and action and their methods? This question is close to the heart of philosophy. It was method and synthesis, even if not fully conscious, that was at the beginning of philosophy. And perhaps it is at the beginning of any investigation into philosophy today.

Thus, we may suggest that philosophy is the discipline that investigates all knowledge with method, and that both recognizes and integrates the system of disciplines.

Must it be systematic? It will include system, but it will also allow the ad hoc within its boundary.

Will it be poetic? It will allow poetry.

Will it be reflexive—i.e., will it study itself? Some philosophers relegate such questions and more to ‘metaphilosophy’, which they see as distinct from philosophy. The approach here recognizes the value of the label and meaning of metaphilosophy but sees it as part of philosophy.

What of the sciences that were once part of philosophy but have broken off? Here, they are seen as still part of philosophy but, since they are studied intensely and with special techniques over and above those of philosophy, in different academic departments, are not the focus of philosophy. Yet, those disciplines and philosophy overlap more than in principle (i) the analysis of the disciplines and their methodologies is philosophy, regardless of who does it (ii) the analysis of concepts of the disciplines, especially in times of change, is acutely philosophical (as recognized not only by ‘philosophers of science’ but also by revolutionary scientists, e.g., Einstein in founding and motivating his theories of relativity) (iii) knowledge is both structured and one (depending on perspective and time scale).

Does philosophy have methods of its own? It is preferrable to see method and reason as one and the methods of the disciplines as specialized instances.

We conclude with the thought—Philosophy is all knowledge and method, systematic and unsystematic, that at any time has particular foci, and which may historically vary between specialism and integrative generalism.

Reason

May be considered as falling under or parallel to philosophical and other reflexive thought. “Reason arises in the present and its foundation is not remote; is reflexive (self and cross applying); involves value, feeling, and intuition; deploys tradition imaginatively and critically; includes and is continuous with action; is continuous with philosophy, especially as a way of life that emphasizes reason with feeling.” “Reason includes critique of proof.” See reason.

Tradition

Tradition is the valid content in knowledge, reason—and action—for all cultures; its modes: primal, religious, or trans-secular, secular, and integrated.

Religion

A problem of religion

Religion is contentious—there are believers and apologists and there are rational secular critics. The latter often argue that the basis of religion is psychological but has no realist foundation. Here, the speculative and dogmatic elements of the religions are recognized.

Resolution

However, any claim that science and secularism have shown anything near complete and perfect knowledge of the universe is overreach, for science, especially physics, is empirical and has no purchase beyond the empirical boundary. Therefore, any claim that it has such purchase is based on explicit or tacit assumption that science-so-far has purchase over the entire universe. Now, since science is limited thus, the question of the universe as a whole arises, but is not (yet) answered by science. And the fact that it is ‘not scientific’ does not invalidate speculative reflection if it does not claim more than that it is speculative and that it is consistent with what we (definitely) know.

Value of religion

This, together with symbolic value, is motivation for ‘religion’. In saying this the distinction between the concept of religion and the religions must be recognized.

What religion shall be

Religion shall be knowledge and negotiation of the entire universe by the entire individual, groups, civilizations, and civilization in all their faculties and modes of being; reason applied to religion—its nature as asserting the trans-secular (consistently with experience, with an evaluation of the necessity of the assertion); omni-functionality; psychology of religion and religious experience; the religions.

The ultimate

Transformation of being

Theory of transformation of being

The perfect metaphysics; with agency, intrinsic and instrumental (see templates for transformation). Evaluation of the present cultural system of knowledge, action, and exploration for the linear future (see history and the linear future).

Intrinsic modes of transformation

Ideas (analytic and synthetic)—the system of knowledge above, especially through art; earlier culture and tradition—yoga, mysticism, Beyul (immersion in nature as ground of self and perception), and other systems (e.g. primal and post-primal religion); existential approach (existentialism), modes of therapy, and transformation of body – psyche (consciousness studies, experience and nature, psychology, psyche as ground) – person (personality); other catalysts of transformation—alteration of environment, animal empathy, physical modes, e.g. rhythm and deprivation; immersive approaches to knowledge and becoming, politics and economics (complemented by metaphysics and science).

Instrumental modes of transformation

Culture and institutions of knowledge: research, communication, education; natural sciences, medicine, engineering, design, technology (see technology) and technological-ideational-shared civilization and population of earth and the universe; social sciences—economics and politics and effective local and global action on earth toward quality of life on earth and beyond.

Dual modes

The foregoing elements are not perfectly distinct and there is a cross-over.

Being the universe

Peak being is that which is ultimate; for which the universe is deterministic; is a phase—all is known; in other phases it is diffuse and potential—a disposition.

Future of the system

Planned

Review and improve the introduction and ground for their purpose and content.

Review the main parts for foundation and order.

Foundation for a knowledge database and encyclopedia—see the supplement.

Update for recent technology, especially information technology.

Update the discussion of argument to account for the discussion in the way of being - essential.html.

Link to relevant sources at the https://www.horizons-2000.org site.

Consider external sources.

Further detail but not to the level of detail of content of a encyclopedia articles.

Further information

For further details, see a supplement to this document. The supplement also has plans for the system, its use, and the database and encyclopedia.

Go to the home page | top