(April 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: True. The known physical laws are mental constructs that describe operations of the material universe. Even singularities have some kind of objective nature, oneness. What actually happens in the material world may indeed be quite different from what apparently happens. With respect to logic, the 'rules' of logic may also be mental constructs, but that doesn't mean the world isn't ultimately rational and understandable by means of logic. For example, it cannot both exist and not exist at the same time. Regardless of what the ground of reality actually is, as opposed to how we perceive it, I find it difficult to believe that reality is completely arbitrary and random. That would mean everything we know is unfounded.
That is exactly what is your foundational error here. I'm not saying that the world is completely arbitrary or random. I'm not saying whether or not it is completely integrated or consistent either. BUT, if this premise was axiomatic, it'd be self-evident. And if it was self-evident, then we wouldn't be able to find any evidence against it, because then they'd be the basis of our mental constructs as well. The point being made here is not regarding there being an actual "integrated All", the point here is that it does not have the axiomatic nature you are trying to assign to it.
(April 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: The All includes the fullness of time and has within itself both the initial and final state of the physical universe. One possible objection is this. While the past is known and exists, the future doesn’t exist in any meaningful sense. This position assumes that the time only extends from this point backwards into the past. And yet every law of physics is reversible, meaning that just as future states can be calculated and predicted, we can also observe a current state and predict what the previous state was.
Perception of the arrow of time moving forward is just that, a perception, i.e. the past is a current memory and the future is an imagined past. The only thing we truly experience is now. I see two possibilities for the true nature of time as opposed to the apparent one. The first is a mystical ‘eternal moment’. The second is the ineffable simultaneous occurrence of all temporal relations within the whole. In either case, various parts (the Many) both arise and dissolve within the whole (the All). But the All itself neither arises nor dissolves. We have our existence between two aspects of the All: the singularity, perfect oneness devoid of substance, and the ‘final whimper’ or substance devoid of any form.
Since we have defined integrity to describe what has both wholeness and internal consistency that makes my use of the term ‘harmony redundant. The striving for integrity I refer to is the emergence of parts within the whole. In effect one property I attribute to the All is the ability of parts to self-organizing within it to form wholes. It also allows wholes to dissolve into parts. The moral choice is nested in this dynamic. Moral agents work to either live a complete life to its full potential or they accept incompleteness and pursue goals that lead to the dissolution of self.
You are not seeing the problem at all.
All these statements you make here about the "All" and its parts and whatever, are still based on assuming its existence. The assumption has not been vindicated. You may try all the mental gymnastics to try and figure out how to fit our current knowledge in your metaphysical premise, but all that is meaningless unless you first establish your assumption as something worth considering.
And simply claiming that its an axiom is not sufficient. You have to justify that it is axiomatic - that any denial of the "integrated All" would be self-refuting. Unless you do that, you are just throwing around big words and high sounding concepts that are actually meaningless.
(April 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Happiness is a desired end. A virtuous life, a life of integrity, serves as a means to that end. I suspect the detour you imagine is related to trading current pleasures for better ones imagined in the future, or something to that effect. I imagine a detour on that path would be the like a runner that trains for a race. The pain and effort of exercise, pays off not only in terms of health but also in the satisfaction of achievement. I would assert that such endeavors exemplify the moral value of integrity apart from the pure pursuit of pleasure and comfort.
The bolded statement is what I would like you to justify. As of now, you are simply asserting that leading an integrated and virtuous life (according to your morality) would lead to happiness. That assertion is meaningless unless you provide a justification.
