On Metaphysics

[Peter_Kropotkin]

so, we are clear, here is what my handy-dandy dictionary says:

Metaphysics: The foundational branch of philosophy investigating
the fundamental nature of reality, existence and being. It goes
beyond the physical sciences to study abstract concepts like time,
space, possibility and the relationship between mind and matter…

Much of what used to be Metaphysics has been taken over by science,
and that part, of time and space, has been showed to be relative…
not fixed or set…not tied to anything… that human beings, each of us,
experience time and space differently… that at times, time travel
with different speeds… that one event can seem to go slow and
at other times that same event can travel quickly…
We experience time differently with different events…
and the same goes true for space…if something like
time and space are experienced differently for each of us,
then there is no objective reality for time or space…

Kant for example, believed that time and space were not objective
realities, but are ‘‘a priori’’ forms of human intuition, inherent
structures within our minds that organize sensory experience,
making it possible for us to perceive objects as extended (in space)
and events as successive (in time) For Kant, space and time
are universal, innate ‘‘lenses’’ through which all humans perceive
reality, making them objectively real for us, (empirically real)
but transcendentally ideal (not independent of our minds)

and for Einstein, his theory of relativity says that time is not
absolute, but depends on the observer’s speed, (special relativity)
and gravity (general relativity) there is no absolute time,
no universal or constant, absolute time. Time is relative to
to the observer frame of reference…

and given these two ideas, what is the underlying, not visible
part of each theory…That for Kant, the idea of time and space,
are supported by god… that is the underlying aspect of Kant…
he says that space and time are not objective realities, but
are ‘‘a priori’’ forms of human intuition, inherent structures
within our minds… and how does that inherent structure
come to be there? for Kant, it was god, even if he doesn’t admit
it…space and time are ‘‘universal, innate’’’ does not speak to
a no god universe, but it does say that space and time are universal…
and that can only mean god…for how does an idea become ''innate?"
I can only imagine god for putting that idea ‘‘innate’’ into our minds…

So, as far as I can tell, the guarantee of his universe, comes from
god, just as it did from Descartes… Descartes at least admitted it,
whereas Kant does not… and the bottom line for Einstein,
that his theories are not objective, which means that there is
no god, as part of the operating procedures of the universe…
there is no objective space or time within Einstein, and this tells
us there is no god…One of the things about Einstein, is
that he sees god within a Spinoza context…
Einstein god is Spinoza’s god…

so, given all this this suggests that there is no god…
and so, this metaphysical seeking out of that which is
outside of the physical, is a waste of time…

So, what exactly exists outside of our perceptions?
In other words, what facts do we have that tells us that
there is a god? Where is the factual, physical evidence for
a god? How do we search for the metaphysical if we can’t even
show that it, in some fashion, actually exists…
for what reason would I believe in metaphysical things, if
I can’t even show where they are or how they exists?

Metaphysics: … it goes beyond the physical sciences to study
Abstract concepts like time, space, possibilities, and the relationship
between mind and matter…‘’

The one concept here that engages me is the idea of possibilities…

Metaphysical possibility: defines what could be true, in at least
one conceivable world, acting as a fundamental, non-contradictory, and
often non-physical category…
Unlike narrow physical possibility, (limited by natural laws)
or logical possibilities (restricted only by contraction) it explores
structural alternatives to reality…
and the key words here is ‘‘structural alternatives to reality’’
Structural alternatives to reality, what are we MAGA?
What are the structural alternatives to reality?
Can you even name two ''structural alternative to realities"
I sure can’t…one might suggest this idea of the 1000 years
reign of Jesus ruling the earth, as ''one structural alternative to
realities" But once again, all I ask is some sort of proof or
evidence for this coming ''alternative to reality" or its possibility…

but here comes the real question, what drive this need of
human beings to create ''alternatives to reality"

and therein lies a tale…

Kropotkin

[Peter_Kropotkin]

So, let us continue along these lines…

If there is no Metaphysics for us to engage with, what is left?
The real world, the reality that we live in…
and within that world, the reality we live in, is what?

Is there a set, fix place upon which we can ground, or base
our values, ideas and beliefs upon, if, if we remove metaphysical
grounds for said values, ideas of beliefs?

I cannot see another place or base upon which we were to set
or fixed our values/idea’s/or beliefs upon…
if such concepts such as space and time are relative,
what does that suggest for our own values/idea’s/beliefs?
What can we deem to be some sort of base for our
values/ideas/beliefs?

Well, we have as much a certainty as anything else,
that we are driven by evolution, as it was the creator,
as much as anything else, of what it means to be human…
if there was a place that, again, as much as anything else,
that turned animals into human, I would say it was evolution…
so, what does it mean to be human according to evolution?

That we are social creatures, depending on other human beings
to meet our own basic needs, which are derived from our evolutionary
background… that human beings must have bodily and psychological
needs to meet, is an evolutionary fact…the basic point of evolution,
the thing that all creatures ‘‘created’’ by evolution, must have,
which is food, water, shelter, education, health care, love…
these are the bodily/physical needs of all life… not just humans,
all life… and the psychological needs are of course love,
self-esteem, a sense of belonging, safety/security…
We have known individuals without these needs being met,
and they are a mess, to be blunt…but there are other ‘‘drivers’’
that come from evolution… that all animals, and we are an animals,
is the basic stuff of emotions, of fear, of happiness, of gaining wisdom,
Curiosity, communication, and one of the traits that separate us from
animals is memory… it is the use of memory that has allowed us to
build a community, to cooperate, to having social networks…
all of which is imperative for human beings… whereas human beings
do something that no other animal does, we build states and societies…
and that is the social nature of being human…and why don’t animals
build a social structure like human beings, a state or a society?
Ants and bees seem to… so, having a social structure isn’t exclusive
to human beings… but these social structures of bees and ant,
are not the same as human beings…and within the social
structures of bee’s, we can think of beehives as one massive organism…
bees of course, can change and adapt to evolutionary pressures…
as do ants…and if they don’t, they die out, as all species that
fail to adapt and change to evolutionary pressures…
the question becomes how humans change and adapt,
as the bees and ants do?

The real question of human existence lies not in the metaphysical
seeking but in the focus on the here and now…and here
the 3 questions of Kant, play a role, ''What am I/we to do?"
''What am I/we to believe in?" and ''What can I/we know?"
for I hold that because we focus too much on abstract matters
such as metaphysics, we forget the here and now…

and how does that work?

after lunch

Kropotkin

[Peter_Kropotkin]

and after lunch:

so, given what we know so far, we must reject any, ANY
thoughts as to gaining metaphysical objective…
if there is no metaphysical aspect, such as god, heaven,
hell, angels, Satan…then what is it we are actually
trying to get to?

We can use biological, evolutionary ideas to understand
what it means to be human… Humans are hardwired with
certain needs, needs that must be met or we don’t survive
or procreate, as that is the only goal of evolution…
There is no big, inherent metaphysical goal within evolution…
the goal, as least as far as evolution goes, is the survival
and procreation of the species, be it bee’s, dogs, elephants,
or cats… That is the only objective given within evolution…
not metaphysical objectives, getting to heaven or pleasing god,
no, the point of evolution has the objective of the survival
and procreation of the species…and we know, or at least suspect,
that 99% of all species that ever lived on Earth, totaling over
5 billion species, has gone extinct… and that should be our
focus, not on getting to heaven, but to ensure that we don’t
become just another species that failed to adapt and change
with the environment…

And one of the best ways to avoid becoming extinct ourselves,
is to ensure that the species around us, don’t become extinct…
but there are other ways to ensure the continuation of the species…
and that comes back to the original point, which is in the human
species, that we are social, communal species… that we best
survive within the community, a social atmosphere, where we
support each other, for my continued existence requires your
continued existence… for the continuation of the human species,
requires us to continue our collective, social behavior…for
that is how we came out of evolution… being social, collective,
together… and that becomes the basis of our understanding
of what is right or wrong… if it benefits the state/society,
it is right, good, something to aspire to…not the attempt
to gain metaphysical goals which have no basis in our
understanding of the world…

so, what this means is that we aren’t trying to save the world
or become another member of heaven…if you want to make
life better, the goal is then to practice the little things that
do increase our chances of continued existence…
Which is to be kind to others, for our continued existence
depends on others existing… for we cannot exists without others…
that is a fact and the one point that we must understand if
we are to engage in the goal of evolution…

And given these parameters, we need to work out what
isms and ideologies, we should follow in order to work
out what we need to do to ensure the survival and continuation
of the human race…

so, let us put this to a test…

Do the actions of ICE/SS, allow us to fulfill our stated
intentions to survive and procreate, as needed for evolution?

I don’t see how the actions of ICE/SS allow us to hold to
the basic goals of evolution? in which we are to survive
and procreate, that is the goal of evolution, and how does
the actions of ICE/SS, allow us to survive and continue the
species?

Kropotkin

[Peter_Kropotkin]

So, there are several aspects under which we can
view the actions of ICE/SS… moral, legal, economic,
social and philosophical…

do the actions of ICE/SS fit into our criteria of being moral?
not within the context of evolution…
It is accepted as fact, as it should be, that ICE/SS has
broken dozens of laws, both local, state, and national…
for example, they have violated the constitution in every
new way…for example, there have violated the constitution
in terms of the first amendment… They have arrested many people
for practicing their first amendment rights…
Quite a few people have been arrested for filming ICE/SS…
that is a first amendment violation… they have violated
the second amendments rights of Alex Pretti… and also, in doing
so, violated his fourth, fifth amendments… the fourth amendment
is about searches and seizures.. the right of people to be secure in
their persons, houses and papers and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall not be violated…
and the 5 amendment states that: … nor be deprived of
life, liberty or property, without the due process of law…

So, I ask, how does violating the law, the very constitution of
the US, in pursuing a goal that we don’t even believe in,
how is that to be considered to be moral?
How does breaking the law in order to punish the lawbreakers
really going to engage with evolution or even in maintaining
our own rights? Is breaking the law a moral act? If we hold
that people who break the law are being immoral, then how
do we justify those who break the law to obey the law?

that is just one question…

Kropotkin

[seeds]

@Peter_Kropotkin

…this suggests that there is no god…
and so, this metaphysical seeking out of that which is
outside of the physical, is a waste of time…

So, what exactly exists outside of our perceptions?

The “perceiver” exists above and outside of its perceptions.

The “thinker” of thoughts exists above and outside of the thoughts (perceptions) it is thinking.

The “dreamer” of dreams exists above and outside of the dreams (perceptions) it is dreaming.

The “observer” of universal phenomena…

(with “observer” applying to both us and God)

…exists above and outside of the phenomena (perceptions) it is observing.

Kropotkin wrote:

In other words, what facts do we have that tells us that
there is a god? Where is the factual, physical evidence for
a god?

You want evidence for the existence of God? - then, as “Madge” the dish soap lady says…

Kropotkin wrote:

Well, we have as much a certainty as anything else,
that we are driven by evolution, as it was the creator,
as much as anything else, of what it means to be human…
if there was a place that, again, as much as anything else,
that turned animals into human, I would say it was evolution…
so, what does it mean to be human according to evolution?

Before you can speak of “Evolution” doing anything whatsoever, you must first provide a plausible explanation for how what is represented in the following two images…

…came into existence???

In other words, without the pre-existence of the amazingly stable setting depicted above,…

(a setting that somehow came fully equipped with every possible ingredient necessary to awaken innumerable billions of lifeforms into existence)

…there would be absolutely no means by which the process of evolution could ever have begun.