philosopher for hire. A practical philosophy blog.

The Worldview

Everybody has a worldview. Just like everybody speaks prose. People of some intellectual aptitude prefer to have a right/correct/true worldview. This is a question of self-confidence and pride. A right worldview helps in life, too. Seeing reality as it truly is, helps to avoid mistakes and problems. Such worldview is sometimes called a life-wisdom. You know how the world works and what to expect. But as with any other human activity there is a pursuit for excellence in case of worldviews.

This very pursuit had started when the first abstractions had formed in a human mind; when the first questions of how and why were asked. The first real milestones had been set by the Greek philosophers. Since then, thinkers of every epoch toiled to give true, correct answers concerning our reality. Or, at least, different answers. So, nowadays we have an abundance of rubbish to choose from. But the question of true, objective answers is still vivid. The total mess and “choose whatever you like” cannot be a satisfying answer.

Many people think that the final answers had been given, already. “- Modern science answers everything”. For them, the so called “scientific worldview” is the one and only true worldview. Unfortunately, this worldview is false. But, at the same time, it is the obligatory worldview of the modern world. You cannot contradict it and be successful among wide audiences. In fact, open contradiction to this worldview and its fundamentals prevents any career. Such contradiction is considered as a weakness of mind. As foolishness. As contradiction to facts, logic and reason. As contradiction to obviousness. That’s the ‘magic’ we call: “social pressure”. Why “magic”? Because if we use facts, logic and reason to verify this post-Enlightenment worldview, we will see it needs nonsense to be kept valid. If we look at the queen of social sciences – economics, we will see it is no science, at all. And if we check how economics professors try to defend economics, we will encounter nothing but manipulation, misleading and contradiction to logic. Isn’t it magical? The emperor has no clothes, but nobody admits it, out of fear of being called a fool. A tale became reality.

The dominant worldview of the modern world is more or less strict materialism (physicalism). It is presented in pop-culture as the worldview of scientists and all wise and well educated people. But again, if we examine it a bit more closely, we will realize it is nothing more but a daft faith contradicting reality we live in. Materialism is the worldview for fools who don’t ask questions. So, the more popular choice still is materialism plus agnosticism: “Probably, there is something beyond materialism, but I’m unable to judge what is it”. And there is the whole universe of “private faiths” flavored with Christianity, Buddhism, Zen and other currently fashionable beliefs. These syncretic “private faiths” are inconsistent, usually internally contradictory. They are not so daft as pure materialism, but they are not much better.

For centuries it was philosophy and philosophers, who tried to give the final and correct answer – the true worldview. The worldview which would present the reality as it truly is. And therefore answering all the fundamental questions like: what? how? why? and what for?. But modern philosophers no longer try to answer the fundamental questions and build an objective worldview. What they do instead, looks like a result of some mind dysfunction – useless exercises of no goal or sense. But they sound very wisely. The last true attempt of finding the final answers had been made by Descartes. We will start, where he had left.

Descartes wanted to give the unquestionable, final answers. The objective, undeniable worldview. Replace the “I believe…” with “I know…”. To end the everlasting pursuit of humanity. What he’d found is widely known as “I think, therefore I am”. This is the only fact that cannot be doubted. Reality may be a delusion. An artificial projection. But, however things are, the receiver of such ‘projections’ must exist. In whatever form. Cause the form of our existence can be doubted as everything else. But not the very fact of existence. “I think, I feel” – so there must be a subject of these “feel” and “think”. But this is the one and only thing that is absolutely sure. Truly unquestionable.

Descartes’ doubt is quite well presented in “The Matrix”. Unconscious body connected to the matrix, which feeds the brain with real stimuli. Such stimuli are exactly the same (and therefore indistinguishable) as coming from our senses. For people connected to the matrix, the reality they experience is 100% real. And so, everything can be mock: not only the reality we live in, but other people, either. They can be just agents Smith – artificial projections mimicking people’s behavior. Not real persons. If there would be only one human being connected to the matrix, nothing would change from the perspective of that very person. The world, the people – everything would seem real. Descartes was right. Today we understand it much better.

Even logic and reason can be questioned. But “I think, therefore I exist” cannot. And so Descartes failed. His attempt to build the absolutely unquestionable worldview resulted in finding just one absolutely unquestionable fact. And no way of moving forward if he wanted to stay in the realm of absolutely unquestionable facts and unquestionable reasoning.

If someone would want to live according to reason and unquestionable facts, such person would be fated to solipsism. But solipsism is not a worldview for living. It’s a worldview to perish. To live, to avoid dangers, to get up in the morning, one needs to believe in reality we live in. The thing to stress here is “to believe”. You have to believe. Even if this faith is so much obvious, so natural; still, according to our reason, it is a belief.

The conclusion of Descartes’ reasoning is that a person, who wants to live according to what reason dictates, needs to perish – because what is the point in doing anything if everything may be a delusion. Yet, we all live on. We do assume the reality is as we see it. We assume other people are human beings, just as we are. Not artificial projections or delusions. But we cannot prove it beyond any doubt. We assume logic and reason are a valid foundation for our thinking – not delirium of a lunatic. But again, we cannot prove it beyond any doubt.

Basically, this is all I need. To construct the true worldview, to show the true picture of reality. The rule of this reasoning is simple: use facts, logic and reason. If possible – don’t ask people to believe in anything. If this is not possible – make the thing to believe one and as simple as possible. It is easy to create a syncretic, internally contradictory worldview using the “believe, it is as I say” phrase whenever an inconsistency or contradiction appears. We have plenty of such worldviews out there. The worldview, I speak of, must be verifiable. It has to explain reality. If it “explains”, it is “verifiable”. Because the true explanations allow to foresee the outcomes – to guess the results. Last but not least, the true explanation let us avoid futile attempts – trying to do things, which are impossible.

At first, we assume our sanity. We assume our senses don’t lie. We assume the reality to be as we see it. And our reason is the key to understanding. Very basic assumptions. Every man and woman living in our civilization assumes that. We trust our senses. We use our reason to solve the riddles of reality. We do plan – for a day, for a week, or longer. And our day-to-day expectations fulfill more often, then they fail. This verifies the assumptions I’ve just made as true. Moreover, to be successful, we use knowledge gathered for centuries. Acquiring that knowledge is called education. Educated people, utilizing the achievements of the past generations, can reach further and further – move their comprehension beyond the limits of their grandfathers. That’s all dull obviousness. But this is what I want. I seek the reasoning so dully obvious, that nobody can (honestly) deny it.

What is not obvious, at first glance, at least; it is the fact that not everything being taught at school is true or even reasonable. I have mentioned it already. The source of the problem is the error of Enlightenment. The widely accepted modern worldview is tainted with the old ideological assumption, which had been proven wrong in many ways in our time. I want to present an untainted worldview, free of any ideological assumptions. I will use logic and reason to gather everything what is true from the knowledge of the past. The false assumption of Enlightenment was: “Supernatural is non-existent. Everything is physical in its nature”. Logic tells us that if this statement is false, then the opposite must be true. And anyone can find this truth for self. Logic tells truth.

We need a dualistic worldview: containing physical and non-physical; that is: natural and supernatural. One is governed by blind laws with no exceptions, the other is different. If it would be not different, then the modern science would succeed in explaining and predicting everything. We enter the existing part of reality, which cannot be seen, touched or heard. Nevertheless, it can manifest its existence in the physical part – we call such manifestations miracles or magic. The known laws of the physical part (of reality) get suspended for a moment.

In the following paragraphs I will focus on this supernatural part of reality. Since our knowledge of the physical part is wide, solid and reliable. This knowledge is reflected in what we call: natural sciences. But how will we talk about the supernatural part? As usual.

There are people who say: “the key to the supernatural is faith, not reason. You need to believe. Don’t question!”. It seems reasonable. Oh, pardon me! “reasonable”! “Reasonably suspend reasoning”. It sounds queer, doesn’t it? But, anyway, perhaps this is the right way? Let’s suppose it is. Suppose, that there are persons with great authority, who will tell us what we should believe in. Certainly, this is a solution. But there are two problems with it. First, not many people of our (modern) culture accept such conduct: to be told what to think. In whatever subject. Everyone wants to use his/her own reason, instead. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. Especially, in other cultures.

But there is the second problem. Would it be possible for an average person to believe in Judaism and accept it as the true faith? Why not! Would it be possible to accept Buddhism or Zen? Probably. Would it be possible to truly believe in what Indian tribe of the rain forest believe? Unlikely. Can you find someone who truly believes in the flying spaghetti monster? Impossible!

True faith is always rational. It is backed by one’s life experience. And it can be undermined (and even destroyed) by doubts, contradictions and world’s pressure. It is impossible to truly believe in something artificial, made-up – like the flying spaghetti monster. Our reason plays an important role in every aspect of our life. Including our faith. The opposition between reason and faith is false. As we saw, the pure unquestionable reasoning about reality ends with “I doubt, therefore I exist”. Anything more – and that means our entire life – is backed by a tiny grain of faith, at least. If someone thinks to be living without any faith, (s)he just doesn’t understand his/her situation. Reason confirms the faith. Faith allows reason to go much further.

I will not give any revelations. This would be stupid. The truth about the supernatural world must be available, already. The only problem is the abundance of the competing truths. Someone still might ask: “- Are you sure the truth is widely known, already? Perhaps it is still to be found? Or it is contained in some forgotten writings of the past?”. I would answer: “- Don’t worry in advance! Reason is our guide. We’ll start worrying if we fail.”. We have to assume basic reliability of our experience. We have to assume the truth is to be found. Otherwise, what is the point in doing anything? We return to “I doubt, therefore I am”, and we stay there till the end of life. Additionally, know that you can have two competing truths only if wisdom is scarce. Otherwise, one ‘truth’ will soon reveal its inconsistencies.

I hope, we got to the point, where there is nothing left, but to finally start seeking for the answer. I think, the best way is to go bottom-up. Let’s start with the most basic experiences and explanations. On the very bottom, there are the “one person explanations”. A guru, an occultist gives his/her revelations to followers. In the history of mankind there had been millions of such examples. The problem with them is their subjectivity. They are just “one person explanations” – given by a guru to the followers. Accepted by them, because the guru was a true, powerful miracle-maker. All these explanations are variations of widely known religions and cults. The guru speaks of god(s), spirits, of some power(s), etc. If we have to choose between a subjective “one person answer” and answers objectified by experiences of thousands and millions – I think, it is obvious what to choose. Cults and religions are the “one person revelations” that survived by generations and had been confirmed by thousands of other smart truth-seekers. Each and every experience of supernatural is always subjective. But their repetitions over generations allow for some general truths to be found. This makes the one-person, subjective experience – an example confirming some rules and truths.

Next step are primitive cults: shamanic or witchcraft based. These are the cults of the Indian tribes and African tribes. Nowadays, they are more and more hard to find. For their believers, there is one reality: supernatural and natural constitute one world. These cults are very pragmatic in their approach – in supernatural they seek for help (like healing), advice and advance – to become better hunters, warriors, etc. These people are not much interested in answers to profound questions about reality – no matter: material or immaterial. They just live their lives. So, in these cults we won’t find answers to questions like: why? how? or what for?. If there are answers, they are basic and primitive – requiring lot’s of “because it is so…” as ‘explanations’.

Finally – religions. Still, there is plenty of them. Dealing with them one by one would take hundreds of pages. Fortunately, wise people found some common features and provided some categorization. Basically, we have theistic and monistic religions. Theism and monism. Religions with god(s) and without god(s). In monism everything ultimately is of one nature. One force. Be it yinyang or whatever else. Many people of the West become fascinated with tales of this one force, holism, etc. All this sounds very wise. We are to return to this one nature, become one with everything, to be like a wave (or foam?) on the everlasting ocean of reality. Reincarnation keeps us in this chain of existence, which we have to break. To break free. It’s satori, nirvana, etc. The promise of monism is non-existence. Or, at least, existence without self-consciousness, existence as a blank, thoughtless ‘mind’. Buddhists exercise their abilities of not-thinking, of emptying their minds. The blank, empty, thoughtless mind is devoid of desires, wants, suffering. It’s happiness at the price of losing oneself.

For people, whose life is suffering, starving, sickness – this may be seen as a salvation. No consciousness = no pain of existence, no disillusionment. The wisdom of the East is in saying that conscious existence is an illusion, something inferior to inexistence or existence without consciousness. By losing yourself you become part of something bigger, eternal; you return to the Source (whatever it is). It is impossible to explain this rationally. You have to believe, and accept. But if we use reason to understand, we will realize this is in fact a question of attitude. A deep cultural difference. Seeing reality as a glass filled in half, one can say: “- It is half empty.”, or: “- It is half full.”. The promises of monism are the conclusions of the half-emptiness.

Culture of the West values a person, it values personal uniqueness, experience, feelings. This is not only the heritage of Christianity, it is also the heritage of ancient Greeks and Romans. The heritage of thinking and philosophy. It is the heritage of rational reasoning. The ‘wisdom’ of the monistic religions is to switch off reasoning along with feelings, emotions and consciousness. You cannot value reasoning and accept a religion which says it is a worthless delusion and should be forsaken. The truth about monistic religions is even better visible if we realize that materialism is also a monism.

Materialism is a ‘monistic religion’ minus poetry. With poetry, it goes like this: There is one nature of everything: matter. Everything is material and nothing else exists. The goal of your living is to become one with this fundamental nature of everything – matter. After death, when your body decomposes totally, you become part of everything. Atoms of your body become part of oceans, soil, air. Grass and trees. And through them – hundreds of other living creatures. Isn’t it wonderful? Yes, it is. For as long as you think poetry. The real truth about materialism is unbearable for a sane mind.

Now it is theism what is left to consider. Again there is a division possible: polytheism and monotheism. Let’s start with the older group of religions: polytheism. A polytheistic religion is believing in more then one deity. A wide known example are pantheons of ancient Greeks and Romans. Many distinct gods and goddesses. Each having his/her area of interest and power. Stronger and weaker deities. Half-deities. And so on. Polytheism is natural. Gods are like people.

Typically, there are two main gods: god of good (of light) and god of evil (of darkness). Neither can conquer the other. Neither is fully omnipotent. There is some ‘reality’, they both exist in. They are subjects of this ‘reality’ just as people are subjects of the physical world. Inevitably, their conflict involves some other super- and sub- deities. We receive a tale where gods are just like people, they behave like people; they create armors, weapons and other artifacts; their story is just like a story of human kingdoms and fights between them. Is there any sense in it? Each of us can choose on which side to stand. No matter what you choose, you serve a deity of equal power as the opposite one. Each choice is rational. Such vision is simply not tenable.

Finally monotheism.

Monotheism, as Wikipedia says, is the belief that there is only one deity, an all-supreme being that is universally referred to as God. I would add: transcendent deity – existing outside of our (of any) reality. Simple and easy. But from my own experience I know, that sometimes the pretty obvious conclusions of the simple and well known things may be overlooked. It is good, therefore, to put such conclusions plainly.

I am writing about God – that is ‘something’ outside of our reality. We have no language, no notions to speak about such ‘things’. Moreover, we are unable to comprehend the notions that would be required – that is notions, that would precisely describe such ‘objects’. Still, such limitations do not prevent us from developing mathematics built on notions like: infinity or 5- 6- or 7-dimensional spaces. Therefore, I will go on using words like: “before”, “after”, “reality”, and so on, in situations where there is no “before” or “after” (because there cannot be) and “reality” is something incomprehensible. I won’t even use ‘’ or “”, since used too often, they just obscure the text.

The monotheistic religions tell us that at the very beginning there was God, and nothing else. I would go back one step more. What was there, when there was no God of the monotheistic religion? What was, or rather what would be, if there would be no such Being? The simple answer is: there would be nothing. But how do we tend to imagine “nothing”? Emptiness? Void? Blackness? Such imaginations assume some ‘space’ for instance. In fact, a reality like this is hard to imagine. But we can borrow a notion from mathematics, which pretty well depicts such reality: the empty set: ∅. This is what we would have, if there would be no God of monotheism.

The empty set is the “nothing” we require. In the empty set there is nothing. Totally nothing. We have to clearly understand what such “nothing” means. For example, is there an idea of a triangle in the empty set? No. It isn’t. Otherwise, it would be not the empty set, but a one element set containing the idea of a triangle. The same goes to any other notion or idea. The empty set lacks not only space, time, or any being. There is no idea of logic, mathematics, of any subject or object, either. This is the state before God (of monotheism) – totally nothing, not even any idea.

There were (and still there are, probably) thinkers, who say that ideas are eternal. That they were not invented by us (or God), but that they somehow always existed. That the idea of a wheel, for instance, existed even before our reality, before everything. The problem with such imaginations is that they are close neighbors of fairy tales. And like fairy tales they require multiple ‘facts’ about reality to be believed and accepted. They require complex intellectual constructs and stipulations to be seen as ‘true’. I deal with such ‘stories’ elsewhere.

What is the consequence of such state of reality? The consequence is that whatever we put into such empty set reality – it is Perfect. It is Perfect in every respect. Simply because there is nothing to compare. Not even any idea. And there is nothing else. This is the one, only and whole reality. No other reality exists or could exist. So, even if the god of monotheism could only create matches, for instance, he would still be perfect, omnipotent, etc. Because the whole and only reality would be this god, the matches created by him and nothing more. Not any idea of something else, of something better.

There may be problems in comprehension and accepting what I’ve just written. We are used to make comparisons, to think abstractly. To assume ‘objectivity’ of some ideas regardless of any reality. To think of various realities, in the first place! We think of multi-dimensional spaces, alternate realities, parallel universes. It is hard to accept and comprehend a situation where abstractions are impossible. To comprehend a state where there is no reality. To comprehend a state where THERE IS NOTHING. Period. No “but” follows. It is hard even to express it in our language. I’ve used the word “state”, because I had to express my thought somehow, using words we know. But there is no “state”. ∅. The last, one symbol sentence is what I should provide as the full description and explanation available. So, if there would be no God of monotheism, then ∅.

Now, it is easy to see, that the God of monotheism is Everything and everything has its source in Him. Therefore, deliberating about His Omnipotence (Omniscience, etc.) in every respect is useless. That’s the direct, most obvious consequence of, how to express it? – “His definition”. He IS. And everything else is a result. A more or less obvious conclusion of His existence. He IS, because the verb “is” depicts as close as possible (in human language) the otherwise incomprehensible. He IS, because there cannot be any “before”, or any “after”. No “was” and no “will be”. His “IS” is not even eternal. Because “eternity” assumes time – passing by. And there is no reality in which He IS, no reality which could “count His time passing”. God is eternal from our material point of view, only.

Many people simply cannot understand the Omnipotent Perfectness. They see the God of monotheism as yet another polytheistic deity. God as a man: capricious, jealous, getting bored; having problems with expressing himself and his will. If we are only able to see God as a human being with godlike powers, we are like people who see infinity as a VERY BIG number. Cause it must be a number, mustn’t it? It’s the last thing in a long, LONG row of numbers, isn’t it?

But enough of theory. Let’s have a look at the monotheistic religions. Unlike in the previous cases, we have just one source of the truly monotheistic religion. Interesting, isn’t it? Natural religions were born naturally – invented by people. Nearly every folk having their own. Monotheism has one source – the scripture of the Jewish folk. That’s odd. Unnatural. Why no other tribe on the Earth conceived the idea of one and only one god? God who created the world, but is not a part of it? Omnipotent God who created everything? The one and only original source is Judaism. Later, Christianity was born as the fulfillment of the promises of Judaism. Several centuries later, prophet Muhammad gave us the Quran and was proclaimed the final of the prophets. Nowadays, we have many other smaller monotheistic religions like for instance the Jehovah's Witnesses. Naturally, each religion claims to be the one and only valid.

To be able to choose the right one – the truest one, we need to change our perspective for a moment. Each monotheistic religion agrees there is evil in the world. There are people who lie, deceive. Frankly, it would be pointless to reject obviousness. Then, how can God send word to us through people, so as to prove it is Him, who speaks to us? One person can always be a deceiver, an impostor. But many? This is the way to add the seal of truth to divine revelation: speak through many, deliver your message through many prophets over time. It is not that God had to do it like that. It is made for us to be able to see the truth. For us, to be able to find it with our own reason.

What’s the bottom line? We need to reject the “one person revelations”. The revelations where one prophet says: “The truth, which God wanted to deliver to us, had been distorted. I was sent to fix it.” – Oh, really?! The Omniscient One – The Omnipotent One had failed to do what He wanted?! The Perfect One wanted one thing, but it came out another? Luckily for Him, the prophet X was born and (s)he finally delivered the true message. Funny, isn’t it? To claim in the same breath that God is Perfect and that He failed to do what He wanted. All the “one person revelations” can be safely discarded.

There is also another point. If the All-Mighty One wanted to tell us about Himself, and He did want – otherwise, why to create the world and people in the first place? So, if He did want to tell us about Himself, then His message must be widely known. This condition leaves only the three well-known monotheistic religions as the possible message from God: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Judaism and Christianity are very much the same religion: Christianity is Judaism having the Messiah, but Islam is different.

Islam officially accepts the prophets of Judaism and Christianity and their teachings. But there is no real continuity. Islam borrowed monotheism, only. It gave the prophets of Judaism and Christianity Arabic names, reinterpreting their teaching in the new view of Quran. Where are the Chosen People? Where is the Messiah? Where are the Ten Commandments? Islam is in fact a one person revelation: the revelation of Muhammad. For Muslims only the verbatim word of God really matters. When God wanted to give to Moses His verbatim words, He gave him text inscribed on stone tables. In case of Muhammad, God somehow lost His wit.

All-Mighty Allah let the unfaithful Christians conquer the world. Not excluding the faithful Arabic people. He let Christians take their “false faith” to the ends of the world. Strange decision, for God who praises Jihad. There are very many sage authors who much better than me show the problems and inconsistencies of Islam. There is no use to go any further, here.

Now, we are left with Christianity having the Messiah and Judaism which still waits for Him. It has passed a very, very long time since Moses and David. If The Omnipotent One is interested in Jews only, as His faithful servants, why did He create so many people? Are we just something a little more than animals in His eyes? Because, according to Judaism, all the prophets were Jewish and spoke to Jews. There is no universalism, no opening to all nations and people in Judaism. It’s like God would be interested in Jews, only. But it cannot be true.

The passing time made even Jews themselves lose their patience. Without waiting for the Messiah, the Jewish King to bring them to the promised land of Israel; they proclaimed Israel themselves through war and blood, which seem to have no end. Jews themselves decided to prove Judaism wrong. Why their grandfathers never tried to create Israel? Because for centuries it was obvious they need the Messiah for that. The still left minority of the truly faithful, orthodox Jews refuse to accept the existence of Israel.

It’s not good when reality contradicts cornerstones of one’s faith. Someone is wrong here. Either God is wrong or Jews are wrong. Either God didn’t keep His Promise of the Messiah or Jews are wrong in saying that the Messiah didn’t come, yet. But God cannot be wrong. God cannot break His Promise. If God is wrong then no faith makes any sense. Judaism included.

Suppose that Jesus Christ was the promised Messiah. He did die as the Jewish King: “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum”. The charge of being the Jewish king was the reason of His death. He was found guilty. Officially. By the civilized world – which was the Roman Empire. What would happen if Jews would accept Jesus as the Messiah, as the Son of God? It’s not so hard to imagine.

The capital of Christianity would be Jerusalem, not Rome. For many centuries, the Popes would be Jews, not Italians. Crusaders returning home could leave their strongholds to Jewish knights, who would stay there and defend them. Ruling the lands. This way Israel would grow into a power of an empire – ruling the Middle East and North Africa. Descendants of the Jewish slaves of Egypt would become rulers to the grandchildren of their ancient masters. Wouldn’t it be the fulfillment of the Promise?

But Jews had rejected Jesus as their Messiah. And their history looks like one long path of punishment. Could God break His Promise? Could He forget? How much time have passed since the last God’s prophet talked to Israelites? How much longer one can insist that all is right, and wait for the King? The very epoch of kings in world history had ended long ago.

And so, our journey of reason in search of objective answers about the supernatural reality ends. The only sensible explanation for the whole reality (natural and supernatural) is monotheism. The only monotheistic religion that cannot be discarded by reason is Christianity. Nothing else can survive the trial of logic and reason: considering reality without God leads to the Abyss. And that’s inevitable. Agnosticism is simply acknowledging: “- I’m too stupid to see the truth.”. Or rather: “- I feel more comfortable not seeing the truth.”. One can choose whatever faith from the modern supermarket of beliefs. But this proves foolishness not wisdom. The reality is what it is. And the truth about reality is as it is. Our denial cannot change it.

What I’ve provided here is just a first step. First conclusion – in the formal science: a hypothesis. To be proved, it needs to be shown consistent with many other aspects of reality. But it is done, already. It only needs to be written. It will take years, but that’s a minor issue.

These several texts are like puzzle. As with puzzles, you start seeing the picture long before you put the last one piece into its place. Nevertheless, it is good to continue putting together your puzzle, to see the beauty of the complete picture.

But it is perhaps even better to compare this to a map. What we have now, could be seen as a globe (not complete, I agree; but adding just a few pieces will fix it). A globe is a map of the highest scale. Many details are missing, but you can see the world as a whole. For a more detailed view you take an atlas. But even there, you won’t find every mountain, every cape or reef. But it does not make a globe or an atlas false. The same is with my work. I will not be able to map every single detail of our human reality. But I can map all the important ones, and this will allow to map the small ones accordingly.

Within this picture – this map – everything fits into place, everything is explainable reasonably, logically. And it answers all the questions of the humankind: What? Why? How? and What for?


enter the number:
Add comment

philosopher4hire on Twitter

If you like this content and you would like to see more,
then support me in my efforts, please!