HOME | DD

Description
I. Metaphysics

     Before we can conquer our ethical “standards” and expose the flaws of the socio-political system as a whole, we must first dissect the very principles of our experience, how we as human beings sense and interact with this Universe, and point to a flexible, digestible, and theoretical principle, which can be subject to change without contradiction. First our phenomenal senses must be dealt with in a manner which allows us to analyze, but not have preconceived notions, that make the proposed thoughts beliefs and laws, instead logical truths, unarguable with current knowledge. Keep in mind I do not hold such words absolute. They can and will change, which is their nature.

A. Phenomenal Reality
     Perception is the basis of reality and the bridge between thoughts and sensations. All entities classified as life forms have a form of perception. Microscopic bacteria perceive their own system as we would ours, if rather primitive. Because all living things perceive, I can then say perception starts immediately when life is created. I will discuss this particular topic later. Perception allows us to interpret our sensations into a tangible, four dimensional phenomenon. But since perception differs Universally, so too does reality. Reality has no core definition as defined by humanity, which is to say my reality may slightly deviate from your reality; however, it is true that realities may overlap. This is what makes defining a Universal reality so difficult but not impossible. Reality can be broken down into two separate sections, phenomenal reality (the realm of filtered sensations) and noumenal reality (the unfiltered, raw reality), the latter of which is addressed later.  The phenomenal reality can be further broken down into two distinct modes: synthetic reality and analytic reality.
     Synthetic reality comprises all the possible arrangements of sensations in the Universe. We primarily perceive the synthetic reality from our five senses, though various individuals claim to have one or more extra senses. Whether or not these claims are true is not important at this time. The purpose of the synthetic reality is to provide a method of existence. Without the persistence of the synthetic reality, nothing would exist that lies in four dimensions, all objects would be unperceivable to us. The four dimensions are vital to our experience. Whether we realize it or not, all our memories and experiences require four pieces of information. For example, my mother recites to me the day of my birth. First the x, y, and z coordinates are required. Let’s say the hospital was on the corner of 5th Avenue and 27th Street. The x and y coordinates have just been fulfilled respectively. Next I am told it was on the 3rd floor, which fulfills the z coordinate. The last piece of information I require is when; February 25th, 1988 at 8:33pm. Not all experiences have each piece specifically laid out, but they are all required.
     Analytic reality applies itself in the description for the sensational experience. Physics and chemistry apply mathematics to accurately describe why these synthetic accidents occur. Our perception allows us to see lights and colors. The synthetic reality states that we are using our sense of sight. However the analytic reality attempts to explain why we see lights and colors. Any individual moderately versed in physics would explain that light travels in waves or particles (depending on the situation) and that these particles enter our eyes. A series of neurochemical reactions occur and the perception is complete. The reason this situation lies in the analytic realm is we do not perceive the individual particles (or waves) and the consequential reactions.
     It should be noted that Berkeley was considerably correct in pointing out that we have all our experiences from the senses. In no fashion can we deny the phenomenon as thoughts inside our mind, forming perceptions, and without these secondary qualities we would have no vehicle to explain the phenomenal processes. It can also be said that the secondary qualities of phenomena follow with us in our mind and that the objects interacted with. Due to this process they do not actually possess those qualities in which we think we sense and perceive, that is to say they are all in the form of thoughts. But we must also take into consideration that Einstein was unarguably ingenious with his methods for providing descriptions with why these qualities exist and in what fashion we as human beings, being the dominant biological system to inhabit Earth, sense and perceive those qualities. Therefore to jump to one side would be foolish and should be avoided for the purpose that both have an equal, and in fact dependant, grip on the qualities of the phenomena.
     However I must point in a slightly different direction by saying that it does not seem logical to assume that an object really exits existence when it is not being perceived or sensed. Should I place an object in a room (its qualities are irrelevant) and leave that room, with the object inside, that object will remain whether or not it is being sensed. It would be a slap in the face to logic to say otherwise for there would be no reason, no convincing argument to support such claims. However, I will say that the object can only be remembered as it was last sensed because to refresh that memory that object must go through the phenomenal process again. Do not confuse the knowledge of the substance as we left it as innate. An innate thought would have to have been presented a priori and we know that our knowledge comes from the senses. Incidentally it is interesting that after this knowledge has been sensed, after we go through the phenomenal process, I may freely attach that experience to other previous experiences to extrapolate other experiences, or theories, that have not passed through the phenomenal process.
Thought is the key for perception, reason, and intelligence. Thought is a noumenal spirit (or mind) only in concept; it cannot be physically held or seen. In other words it cannot be sensed but it does exist because we can create thought and we can perceive it. Consequently such descriptions as the “I” arrive when we have conscious thought. Our reason and our intelligence are directly proportional to our thought, without the basis of thought we cannot have reason and intelligence. All our thought is derived from one mode: experience, for I cannot have innate ideas because we perceive our world through sensation and nothing else. Regardless it is true that after we have followed the natural order of sensation-perception, from which I will call experience, we can deviate and conceptualize from that and thus allow reason and intelligence, our thought, to stem and grow unobstructed from sensation. This process allows us to better describe and postulate the Universe, in ways which may seem sensationally or perceptually impossible, thus producing controversial theories and discoveries which drive humanity to find answers to reality.
      As I have stated before, the phenomenal and noumenal realms do not have direct interactions on any sort of perceivable level. This principle is easy acknowledged by saying thoughts themselves do not control our physical body, for instance, just because I think of my hand moving does not mean it will, I must apply the motor skills in the experienced in the appropriate lobes of the brain. Thought alone does not suffice for those actions. However there is fuzziness between thought and the brain, such interactions between the two are severely grayed and indistinguishable. Because I cannot offer any absolutions and beliefs, I can flexibly say that there is some sort of micro-interaction, or even possibly a noumenal interaction between the brain and thought, but we as human beings have not found a clear representation or explanation for this interaction, and perhaps we never will. Do not confuse this interaction with the neural activity within the brain itself. That is what drives motor skills (as well as everything else). That activity falls under the phenomenal realm, even though we may be drawing theories that the neural activity is also what produces thought.

B. Noumenal Reality
     The noumenal reality is raw reality before our perception filters it to the more refined phenomenal reality. The noumenal is feebly attempted at an explanation via metaphysics and metamathematics. The reason our attempts are futile is that the noumenal reality cannot be expressed in our terms; we can only refer to it and nothing more. However we can know a few things that the noumenal reality is not, and that is our perceptions of the phenomenal realm. I come back to the example of space and time. The four dimensions are filtered from the noumenal realm, and because we know that the phenomenal realm and noumenal realm do not interact, logic states that space and time do not exist in the noumenal realm. That is primarily why the noumenal realm cannot be conceived. Faith and spirituality attempt at explaining what lies inside this noumenal realm, usually failing horribly. Religion is not important in this section at the moment, so I will address it later.
     God is a metaphysical spirit, or mind. Man can think of God, but can only describe Him through the faculty of His physical manifestation, the Universe. This is easily established by the simple question “Can you draw God?” The answer is of course you cannot because He is not able to be physically described in the term of God, so we must call upon the Universe as a form of physical description. From a Deistic viewpoint, which I adopt loosely, He is the creator, which has created the Universe, and with a Grand Design, wrote the equations governing this perfect system, set it in motion and left it on its own. Much like a child spins a top, except this top does not stop spinning (as far as we know). God and the Universe are perfect, that is to say, they contain all possibilities which exist in a balance, meaning that God and the Universe are neither all good nor all evil, but a balance both good and evil. The faculties of thought and God are of the same spirit. This is so because I can ask the same question “Can you draw thought?” Once again the answer is no so there must be a link between thought and God. Skepticism may arise because an analogy may be formed as follows: elephants are heavy and cars are heavy, therefore they must be related (aside from their heaviness). Obviously such predictions are false but the reason this can be true about God and thought is because the spirit of both are the only concepts we have of each. We then can make the conclusion that God is the “I” of the Universe.
     Since there is a distinct line between the noumenal and the phenomenal, that something phenomenal cannot interact with something noumenal in any sort of terms we can comprehend; it can also work in reverse that something noumenal cannot interact with something phenomenal. While this may be true, there is a sort of fuzziness in the perception of some things. I cannot specifically draw the line between God and the Universe but I hope I can make the line more clear. It is obvious that everything is governed by some sort of principle; even at the most complex of level. Therefore we must assume there is a God that made the Universe because we have no other alternatives. Some believe in the Big Bang theory, but that can even be questioned. That could still very well have been God’s will acting in creating a phenomenal realm. For a Universe, which contains everything, to have merely spawned from even a slow evolution-based process, seems a little skeptical because we cannot possibly fathom what was there before when in fact there was literally nothing there at all. We must ask ourselves what sort of substructure or noumenal spirit existed before or outside the Universe, and how it willed for our creation? We can use our logic to calculate and conclude that God as noumenal spirit created the Universe.
     It would seem that it is impossible. But we must remember, this is God, something beyond our perception, even beyond our reason and intelligence, that is to say, His noumenal spirit cannot be comprehended, only expressed using God as an association to that spirit. An ant crawling along the ground has the same impression. As I fry it with my magnifying glass, it does not have the ability to understand (the combination of reason and intelligence) how it is being fried. I’ll even be bold and compare it to microorganisms inside our body. They act according to their DNA programming and have no sort of perception of the world outside their given system. I think that we are in the same situation; we cannot possibly hope to understand the true depth of our surroundings, and of the workings of God. But since we are a self aware creature, we can question why and how because we have that part of God. In this manner we can become closer to that understanding.

Description
I. Metaphysics

     Before we can conquer our ethical “standards” and expose the flaws of the socio-political system as a whole, we must first dissect the very principles of our experience, how we as human beings sense and interact with this Universe, and point to a flexible, digestible, and theoretical principle, which can be subject to change without contradiction. First our phenomenal senses must be dealt with in a manner which allows us to analyze, but not have preconceived notions, that make the proposed thoughts beliefs and laws, instead logical truths, unarguable with current knowledge. Keep in mind I do not hold such words absolute. They can and will change, which is their nature.

A. Phenomenal Reality
     Perception is the basis of reality and the bridge between thoughts and sensations. All entities classified as life forms have a form of perception. Microscopic bacteria perceive their own system as we would ours, if rather primitive. Because all living things perceive, I can then say perception starts immediately when life is created. I will discuss this particular topic later. Perception allows us to interpret our sensations into a tangible, four dimensional phenomenon. But since perception differs Universally, so too does reality. Reality has no core definition as defined by humanity, which is to say my reality may slightly deviate from your reality; however, it is true that realities may overlap. This is what makes defining a Universal reality so difficult but not impossible. Reality can be broken down into two separate sections, phenomenal reality (the realm of filtered sensations) and noumenal reality (the unfiltered, raw reality), the latter of which is addressed later.  The phenomenal reality can be further broken down into two distinct modes: synthetic reality and analytic reality.
     Synthetic reality comprises all the possible arrangements of sensations in the Universe. We primarily perceive the synthetic reality from our five senses, though various individuals claim to have one or more extra senses. Whether or not these claims are true is not important at this time. The purpose of the synthetic reality is to provide a method of existence. Without the persistence of the synthetic reality, nothing would exist that lies in four dimensions, all objects would be unperceivable to us. The four dimensions are vital to our experience. Whether we realize it or not, all our memories and experiences require four pieces of information. For example, my mother recites to me the day of my birth. First the x, y, and z coordinates are required. Let’s say the hospital was on the corner of 5th Avenue and 27th Street. The x and y coordinates have just been fulfilled respectively. Next I am told it was on the 3rd floor, which fulfills the z coordinate. The last piece of information I require is when; February 25th, 1988 at 8:33pm. Not all experiences have each piece specifically laid out, but they are all required.
     Analytic reality applies itself in the description for the sensational experience. Physics and chemistry apply mathematics to accurately describe why these synthetic accidents occur. Our perception allows us to see lights and colors. The synthetic reality states that we are using our sense of sight. However the analytic reality attempts to explain why we see lights and colors. Any individual moderately versed in physics would explain that light travels in waves or particles (depending on the situation) and that these particles enter our eyes. A series of neurochemical reactions occur and the perception is complete. The reason this situation lies in the analytic realm is we do not perceive the individual particles (or waves) and the consequential reactions.
     It should be noted that Berkeley was considerably correct in pointing out that we have all our experiences from the senses. In no fashion can we deny the phenomenon as thoughts inside our mind, forming perceptions, and without these secondary qualities we would have no vehicle to explain the phenomenal processes. It can also be said that the secondary qualities of phenomena follow with us in our mind and that the objects interacted with. Due to this process they do not actually possess those qualities in which we think we sense and perceive, that is to say they are all in the form of thoughts. But we must also take into consideration that Einstein was unarguably ingenious with his methods for providing descriptions with why these qualities exist and in what fashion we as human beings, being the dominant biological system to inhabit Earth, sense and perceive those qualities. Therefore to jump to one side would be foolish and should be avoided for the purpose that both have an equal, and in fact dependant, grip on the qualities of the phenomena.
     However I must point in a slightly different direction by saying that it does not seem logical to assume that an object really exits existence when it is not being perceived or sensed. Should I place an object in a room (its qualities are irrelevant) and leave that room, with the object inside, that object will remain whether or not it is being sensed. It would be a slap in the face to logic to say otherwise for there would be no reason, no convincing argument to support such claims. However, I will say that the object can only be remembered as it was last sensed because to refresh that memory that object must go through the phenomenal process again. Do not confuse the knowledge of the substance as we left it as innate. An innate thought would have to have been presented a priori and we know that our knowledge comes from the senses. Incidentally it is interesting that after this knowledge has been sensed, after we go through the phenomenal process, I may freely attach that experience to other previous experiences to extrapolate other experiences, or theories, that have not passed through the phenomenal process.
Thought is the key for perception, reason, and intelligence. Thought is a noumenal spirit (or mind) only in concept; it cannot be physically held or seen. In other words it cannot be sensed but it does exist because we can create thought and we can perceive it. Consequently such descriptions as the “I” arrive when we have conscious thought. Our reason and our intelligence are directly proportional to our thought, without the basis of thought we cannot have reason and intelligence. All our thought is derived from one mode: experience, for I cannot have innate ideas because we perceive our world through sensation and nothing else. Regardless it is true that after we have followed the natural order of sensation-perception, from which I will call experience, we can deviate and conceptualize from that and thus allow reason and intelligence, our thought, to stem and grow unobstructed from sensation. This process allows us to better describe and postulate the Universe, in ways which may seem sensationally or perceptually impossible, thus producing controversial theories and discoveries which drive humanity to find answers to reality.
      As I have stated before, the phenomenal and noumenal realms do not have direct interactions on any sort of perceivable level. This principle is easy acknowledged by saying thoughts themselves do not control our physical body, for instance, just because I think of my hand moving does not mean it will, I must apply the motor skills in the experienced in the appropriate lobes of the brain. Thought alone does not suffice for those actions. However there is fuzziness between thought and the brain, such interactions between the two are severely grayed and indistinguishable. Because I cannot offer any absolutions and beliefs, I can flexibly say that there is some sort of micro-interaction, or even possibly a noumenal interaction between the brain and thought, but we as human beings have not found a clear representation or explanation for this interaction, and perhaps we never will. Do not confuse this interaction with the neural activity within the brain itself. That is what drives motor skills (as well as everything else). That activity falls under the phenomenal realm, even though we may be drawing theories that the neural activity is also what produces thought.

B. Noumenal Reality
     The noumenal reality is raw reality before our perception filters it to the more refined phenomenal reality. The noumenal is feebly attempted at an explanation via metaphysics and metamathematics. The reason our attempts are futile is that the noumenal reality cannot be expressed in our terms; we can only refer to it and nothing more. However we can know a few things that the noumenal reality is not, and that is our perceptions of the phenomenal realm. I come back to the example of space and time. The four dimensions are filtered from the noumenal realm, and because we know that the phenomenal realm and noumenal realm do not interact, logic states that space and time do not exist in the noumenal realm. That is primarily why the noumenal realm cannot be conceived. Faith and spirituality attempt at explaining what lies inside this noumenal realm, usually failing horribly. Religion is not important in this section at the moment, so I will address it later.
     God is a metaphysical spirit, or mind. Man can think of God, but can only describe Him through the faculty of His physical manifestation, the Universe. This is easily established by the simple question “Can you draw God?” The answer is of course you cannot because He is not able to be physically described in the term of God, so we must call upon the Universe as a form of physical description. From a Deistic viewpoint, which I adopt loosely, He is the creator, which has created the Universe, and with a Grand Design, wrote the equations governing this perfect system, set it in motion and left it on its own. Much like a child spins a top, except this top does not stop spinning (as far as we know). God and the Universe are perfect, that is to say, they contain all possibilities which exist in a balance, meaning that God and the Universe are neither all good nor all evil, but a balance both good and evil. The faculties of thought and God are of the same spirit. This is so because I can ask the same question “Can you draw thought?” Once again the answer is no so there must be a link between thought and God. Skepticism may arise because an analogy may be formed as follows: elephants are heavy and cars are heavy, therefore they must be related (aside from their heaviness). Obviously such predictions are false but the reason this can be true about God and thought is because the spirit of both are the only concepts we have of each. We then can make the conclusion that God is the “I” of the Universe.
     Since there is a distinct line between the noumenal and the phenomenal, that something phenomenal cannot interact with something noumenal in any sort of terms we can comprehend; it can also work in reverse that something noumenal cannot interact with something phenomenal. While this may be true, there is a sort of fuzziness in the perception of some things. I cannot specifically draw the line between God and the Universe but I hope I can make the line more clear. It is obvious that everything is governed by some sort of principle; even at the most complex of level. Therefore we must assume there is a God that made the Universe because we have no other alternatives. Some believe in the Big Bang theory, but that can even be questioned. That could still very well have been God’s will acting in creating a phenomenal realm. For a Universe, which contains everything, to have merely spawned from even a slow evolution-based process, seems a little skeptical because we cannot possibly fathom what was there before when in fact there was literally nothing there at all. We must ask ourselves what sort of substructure or noumenal spirit existed before or outside the Universe, and how it willed for our creation? We can use our logic to calculate and conclude that God as noumenal spirit created the Universe.
     It would seem that it is impossible. But we must remember, this is God, something beyond our perception, even beyond our reason and intelligence, that is to say, His noumenal spirit cannot be comprehended, only expressed using God as an association to that spirit. An ant crawling along the ground has the same impression. As I fry it with my magnifying glass, it does not have the ability to understand (the combination of reason and intelligence) how it is being fried. I’ll even be bold and compare it to microorganisms inside our body. They act according to their DNA programming and have no sort of perception of the world outside their given system. I think that we are in the same situation; we cannot possibly hope to understand the true depth of our surroundings, and of the workings of God. But since we are a self aware creature, we can question why and how because we have that part of God. In this manner we can become closer to that understanding.