Religion : The World : : existentialistics : facts

Chapter One: New I AM* a’rising
Chapter Two: How Symbols, expressing marriage of opposites, bond individual-group consciousness in communication.

CHAPTER THREE

From What Is Is … To What It Is To Be
(Existentialistics)

(Question to philosophers: If “is” is not a predicate, what can possibly be the referent of “existentialism”? The answer proposed here: Secularist (trans-religious) group TokenSpace totality.)


S* is

In addressing a popular audience on an important philosophical point, Bertrand Russell advised “Start with a premise no one can deny and proceeding irrefutably step by step to a conclusion no one will accept.” I have always held to that as an ideal, and propose to follow it here, beginning with what “is” is, as previously established in Chapters One and Two, with fresh undeniable examples.


WHAT “IS” IS .. and: What is is, and isn’t

The word “is”, in English, is used to express these logical functions: assertion, predication, class membership and inclusion, identity, existence. By derivation from contexts of use, e.g., “Jones is at home”; “the spot on the wall is blue”; “Jones is a FreeMason”; “a man is a cellular organism”; “Jones is Jones”; “Jones is”. Calling use of “is” for these functions “logical” means they are indicated in the meta language of formalized logical discourse by individually specified token inscriptions: predication by juxtaposition (‘Fa’ for “a is F”, epison e for class membership; ‘U’ for class inclusion, “=” for identity; no sign for assertion or existence. “Existence is not a predicate,” Kant noted. What it is ‘to be’, the being-ness of existing things, is shown, not said, was Wittgensteins dictum. (“existing things” is a double non-indicator). What is shown by signs used in communication, by their use, belongs to consciousness, not thought. It is the rationale, or logos, of formal logic, itself, that determines the rules for well-formed formulae. These (‘wff’ of logic text books) are required to connect all true S* into hypothetico-deductive systems (language of the organized sciences). These systems (of systems…), as a totality, constitute “the field of empirical science” <= conflating the concept of a set of indefinitely numerous particulars (‘field’ of points) and the representation, plus method by which it was devised). Again, the act of asserting that (some) S* is the case, expressed by “is” in actual predication, is similarly shown not said.



Definitions*:

“truth” => property of “S* is” when S* correlates 1-1 with fact – L. Wittgenstein)

“reality” => what is communicated by text of true S*

“phenomenality” <= being consciousness of reality, truth => including S* by-their-tokens. (The totality of content of consciousness under sign-use.)

Summary: what is phenomenal includes what is real which includes what is true.

The entire spectrum, from S*1 – cellular totality affected by sign-use; to S*7 – completing conceptual being-totality, is spanned for the individual by Religious S*. This octave* spans both the individual totality, as user of all S* of personal TokenSpace, and correlated external totality of ‘lateral planes’.





RELIGIOUS SIGN-USES (S*5.7/1 => existential totality of 2nd Brain content) FRAME PERCEPTION of lower level S*3 content of consciousness mediated by external-internal receptors in QI. They contribute the sense of “I” (S*5.7-1) linked to “God” (S*7-1) <= completion in/through the upper triad; and “Cells” (S*1) <= completion in/through the organic anatomical apparatus. Religious S* used by a person in actual conversation “go beyond” what is communicated about facts to what is communicated by the fact that they are facts* -- for the one using them. (“Use”, in psychosemiotics, is what “assertion” is to logic: the psychological activator, as it were, of the showing.)


RELIGIOUS SIGN-USE frames how facts are experienced, not what the facts are. THAT IS WHY PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT ‘RELIGIONS’ ASSUME “WE” CAN “ALL JUST GET ALONG” IN A NATION BASED ON THE PROTESTANT PRINCIPLE OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.

This, however, is precisely where positivism goes wrong, ‘flips the use without the users’, negates consciousness in subordination to text. The FRAME is as real as the FACTS framed, metaphysically. This was disguised for/by Descartes by squaring the text on utterance of its tokens. (“I think..” etc.) This led to “rationalism” (“The real is the rational”) as a philosophical metaphysic. The absolute duality he drew between (mental <=unextended; and material <= extended) reality was between the upper and lower triads of consciousness, which are organized as space-to-Space, token-to-Text spanning the octave. FRAMES are as real as material fields; they are only negated as entities subject to predication when arrived at internally by sharp discrimination between what belongs to the objectively perceived field, and what belongs to the perception of it. When “the mind” is taken in essence as only the non-materiality of the body’s consciousness of it, structured through sign-use, as Descartes did, contents of consciousness contributed by the Frame are omitted from metaphysical recognition, as “God” re-enters his system back-door, as it were, after having been excluded by systematic doubt. The “back door” is inference from veracity of the text through the token –only a demon deceiver could make all things false; “I AM” must be true any time I think it; therefore God exists <= the totality completed on the subjective side, through token use, is completed on the objective side through text in Descartes’ argument. I could not not exist. (But with certainty only "as often as an "I" think(s) "I am"! -- "I"-use at one moment cannot logically bind its use at a separte and distinct moment,so using "God" to prove veracity, as if anatomical functioning played no role in binding time, does not 'square the circle' <= properly conjoin tokens of both Upper and Lower triads in the phenomenal unity of sign-use.

THE CHIEF THREAT TO AMERICA'S LIBERAL IDENTITY DETERMINED THROUGH ITS HIGHER ORDER PROCESSES IS 'ORTHODOXY': IRAELI (Kahanr), CATHOLIC (Roeder); EVANGELICAL (Westborough Baptists)

tbc