View Article  Dialogue with a Neo-Buddhist: Action versus inaction 0610 04f

Clyde G. is a respected thinker and Neo-Buddhist who has been acknowledged for his ability to ask questions going to the heart of issues regarding metaphysical models of reality.

So, I will choose as best I am able in the moment to minimize the suffering I cause.

Your statement above demonstrates how it is you still miss the point.
 
What you say is very true but only represents hafl the equation.
 
One chooses, but what is it one chooses? The first half of the equation is: One chooses one's action. The other half of the equation is: One chooses one's inaction.
 
Both halfs must be fully examined if one is to minimize the suffering one causes. To be attentive to one and not the other is simply a matter of turning a blind eye to half the suffering one causes.
 
It is morally inexcusable.
 
The last four words are not directed at you, they are not meant to be personal. The four words are meant to be generic, are meant to describe the other half of morality which society and individuals fail to either acknowledge or factor into their understanding of responsibiliry.
 
We are a specie with only one eye and the reason we 'see through a glass darkly'.
 
Dan
View Article  Introduction - Q2: Can you provide a brief simplistic explanation regarding answers to the twelve questions? Part II of II

Introduction - Q2: Can you provide a brief simplistic explanation regarding answers to the twelve questions?

 

Part II of II

Having stated where it is one can obtain a brief answer to the twelve questions; let me attempt to answer the questions in light of the new model - symbiotic panentheism where a greater reality exists as abstraction within which the physical universe is located:

 

What is existence? Existence is both physical in nature and abstractual in nature.

 

Do we exist, and why? We exist. We exist to circumvent the concept of eternal recurrence Nietzsche introduced which in scientific terms might be referred to as permanent equilibrium as opposed to the process of growth or decay.

 

What is reality? Reality is both physical in nature and abstractual in nature.

 

What can we know? We can ‘know’ what we create and experience abstractually and what we create and experience physically

 

What is knowledge? Knowledge is that of which we are aware.

 

What is truth? Truth is what is relevant to an existence functioning within either of the two regions of existence: the physical and the abstract.

 

What is the purpose and meaning of life? The purpose in life is to add to the Whole

 

Why is the individual important? It is from the individual/multiplicity that the Whole/singularity becomes more than what it is.

 

What is our function within society? Our function within society is to ‘create’ and experience and to be responsible for what it is we as individuals ‘create’/’experience’ for it is what we as individuals ‘create’/’experience’ that we add to the Whole.

 

Is there a difference between “appearance” and “reality”? Appearance is what composes the abstract and ‘reality’ is what composes the physical.

 

Do we possess free will, or are our actions determined? If we exist we possess free will. Without free will we are not who we appear to be, ourselves.

 

What is morality? Morality is universally acceptable knowing action of free will which initially emerges from the categorical imperatives a metaphysical system (systems encompassing physical universes and what it is physical universes lie within) generates. Morality then progresses as knowing actions of free will which one initiates based upon the combination of beliefs/religion, observations/science, and reason/philosophy.

 

v      

 

The point: Answers to such questions can be stated and the rational/reasonableness of such answers are available in their entirety in The War and Peace of a New Metaphysical Perception.

 

End