Introduction E9F5FC

Questions FFFFC0

• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

I will be sketching out the Overview of my philosophy which I wish to write up.

In 2014, I self-published an initial, illustrated overview of my comprehensive philosophy, The Truth: From Relative to Absolute.

I would flesh that out further. I would draw on my subsequent research and the presentations which I have been giving.

My personal goal with this book would be to overview my thinking so that people could see how it fits together into a comprehensive system. I would then keep expanding and revising it.

I see my book as consisting of 12 chapters.

• Chapter 1 is an introductory chapter (which I will some day expand as a "Handbood for Investigators") on how to investigate any question.
• Chapter 2-7 would be based on "The Truth: From Relative to Absolute" and explains how we can go from personal points of view to imagining and fostering an absolute point of view.
• Chapters 8-11 would sketch out such an absolute point of view in terms of God's point of view (God's taking up his question, Is God necessary?), a first-person point of view (the basis for human behavior and morality), a second-person point of view (for systematizing the ways of figuring things out in a particular discipline or by an individual) and a third-person point of view (for engineering ambiguity to increase the likelihood of unexpected miracles).
• The final Chapter 12 would describe a culture where we live as God, growing forever, learning forever, living forever, here and now.

God's Dance

What I have been working most intensely on is the key to all of this structure. I call it "God's dance". I start by imagining how God gets going. God asks, is God necessary? Would there be God if there was no God? So God removes himself, but being God, has to reappear. But is the first God (who understands) the same God (who comes to understand)? Yes because they understand the same God. So these 3 angles on God are the same God. But that's how it looks like to God #1 when God is "I" and God loves himself. For God #2, God is "You". This is the case that we find ourselves, the most unfavorable circumstances for us to be God. God #2 and God #1 are one through their perspectives on each other, and they love each other. This takes place through and 8 fold You structure. Then God #3 sees this same but now from the side, objectively, so that God is third-person "He/She". Then God #1 and #2 are the same through their non-existence, that is, their circumstances, which are one. And they love all, either by loving God (4 ways) or loving neighbor (6 ways). Finally these three unities (of God, of Person, of People) are united by a human three-cycle of taking a stand, following through, reflecting. So all together in God's dance we have 3 + 8 + 10 + 3 = 24 expressions of God in my imagination.

Mathematically, it is a state of contradiction (God) relating with itself so as to produce a state of non-contradiction, a system of truth (goodness).

Conceptual structures

In Andrius Philosphy World there is an 8-cycle of the divisions of everything:

• into 0 perspectives (God)
• into 1 perspective (Everything)
• into 2 perspectives (like free will and fate, for Being)
• into 3 perspectives (taking a stand, falling through, reflecting, for Participating)
• into 4 perspectives (whether, what, how, why) for Knowledge
• into 5 perspectives (for perspectives in time (alternatively, space))
• into 6 perspectives (for Morality)
• into 7 perspectives (for a closed Logical system with some Slack inside)

An 8th perspective would be "all is good and all is bad" which means that the system is empty, we have a contradiction, and we go back to 0 perspectives.

Now on this 8-cycle there are 3 shifts. They are for reflections that add +1 perspective or +2 perspectives or +3 perspectives. The latter +3 is consciousness. For example, 2+3 = 5 means that consciousness (+3) of issues of Being (2) is given by issues of Time/Space (5). Basically, it says that your mind is like a trolley that moves from one trolley stop to the next. We use trolley stop 5 to describe your consciousness (+3) of trolley stop 2. I've spent my whole life mapping this out but this is just a quick prompt for your imagination.

There are 4 representations of the first four divisions (trolley stops) and 2 representations of the next four divisions. For example, on questions of Knowledge, we have to choose between thinking in terms of questions (Whether? What? How? Why?) like an idealist, with Whether? being the uninteresting ground floor, or in terms of answers (Whether! What! How! Why!) like a materialist, with Why being uninteresting. Thus there are 4+2 = 6 ways of looking at the whole of the division. Also, there are 12 "topologies", ways of snatching out a single perspective.

So these 8 divisions, 6 representations, 12 topologies are the fundamental "tables of perspectives" that describe the mind statically. Well, by coincidence, a cube has 8 corners, 6 faces and 12 edges. In fact,

• 24 / 2 = 3 x 4 = 12
• 24 / 3 = 4 x 2 = 8
• 24 / 4 = 2 x 3 = 6

There also seem to be 3 dynamic languages:

• argumentation taking us from 12 topologies to 6 representations
• verbalization taking us from 8 divisions to 12 topologies
• narration taking us from 6 representations to 8 divisions

These 3 static tables and 3 dynamic languages are "Third-Person (He/She)" structures. There are also 4 "Second-Person (You)" structures of 8 perspectives each. It seems that pairs of the latter 4 generate the former 6. Together they are like the 10 commandments: 4 for loving God, 6 for not hurting your neighbor.

Each of the 4 "You" structures links a null perspective (God) followed by a backbone of six perspectives and ending with a seventh perspective (-1 = slack = good). If we say it is the same God and the same good then we have 6x4 = 24 + 1 + 1 = 26. So we have the 6x4 = 24 + 2 dimensions which seems to come up in String theory and the monster group.

The 8 fold You structure and the 10=4+6 He/She structures and a 3-cycle and three states 1+1+1 together combine to give the 24 ways of figuring things out that I had said I think are at work in each "world".