Tag: ontology

Categories
- Language - Science

Language as Social Convention

In understanding the role of objectivity in language, two types of statements have been presented – personal preferences, which are entirely subjective; and social conventions, which are subjective in their creation or existence yet objective in their influence and knowledge.  Let’s move progressively towards a more objective statement.

Two examples of social conventions presented last post were traffic lights and money.  So, what about the statement “That traffic light is green” or “That dollar bill is green”.  This is certainly not a personal preference, nor subjective – all people looking at these objects can reach this valid conclusion.  Furthermore, this is not societally or culturally dependent; a green light or a green bill taken elsewhere will still hold the property of green color – it is apparently an inherent property of that bulb or that ink.

Is this, then, an entirely objective statement that informs us about reality?  Upon further analysis, this statement still is based on a social convention.  Language, as has been discussed earlier, is itself a social convention.  The main point of the statement about the traffic light or the dollar bill is its green color.  However, the term “green” is simply a name that, like all other names, was at one point or another agreed upon – the naming process of language, being a social convention, is also ontologically subjective and epistemologically objective.  Additionally, languages, both between and even within, contain myriad connotations, subtle meanings, and context-specific interpretations.  In order to understand the concepts, ideas, and underling reality being conveying through the vehicle of language, one needs to go beyond names…one needs to get to the objectivity that those names symbolize.

.

Categories
- Language - Science Development Discourse Human Nature

Social Conventions – Objective or Subjective?

Objectivity – another desired quality of the language of science – is a term loaded with connotations and interpretations; it’s rarely a straightforward concept.  It helps to contrast it with subjectivity.  An entirely subjective statement is one of personal preference, such as “daffodils are the prettiest kind of flower” – this might be a consensus among a large group of people, but is not in universal agreement.  Something that is in agreement with others is not necessarily objective, nor is it necessarily truth.

There are certain things, however, that are somewhat objective because of their agreement amongst individuals.  Social conventions are of this nature.  Money, for instance, is a great example.  A particular piece of paper is money not because of any physical qualities it possesses (it’s just a piece of paper with ink), but because social agents have agreed on it and created it.  In this sense, it is ontologically subjective – meaning, its existence is contingent on human consensus, and it has no meaningful existence otherwise.  However, at this point, determining whether a piece of paper is money isn’t a matter of personal preference; no one could say that a five-dollar bill isn’t five dollars.  It is epistemologically objective – meaning, our knowledge of this social convention, and its influence and effects, are based on ascertainable facts, independent of individual opinions. Because of it’s subjectivity, collective thought determines what society is; though because of it’s objectivity, collective thoughts are, in part, determined by society.  However, those of us who aim to contribute to the advancement of civilization will benefit from understanding the subjective aspect of society.

Social reality, including rules, conventions, codes, is built on shared understandings – it is an expression of human agreement.  A red light means “stop”, and a green light means “go”; but there is absolutely no reason that it couldn’t have been the opposite.  Yet, social reality shapes human relationships and interactions, forms human thought and understanding, and directs action and conduct.  There is a profound reciprocal relationship between human thought and social reality – each affects the other, and a change is either necessitates a simultaneous change in both.

What are the implications that social reality is ontologically subjective?

What are the implications that social reality is epistemologically objective?

If a large enough amount of people believe something to be true, does it become social convention?

What about the inertia built into the social structures that exist?

 

.

Categories
Discourse Human Nature

Moderation

Up to this point, many spiritual principles and qualities have been mentioned, in multiple contexts, and to various degrees.  What is important to note, as more and more will be mentioned, is that virtues do not exist in isolation, but instead, moderate each other.  Moderation, albeit in some cases implies a desired balance against an absolute zero – ie, a moderate amount of breathing, a moderate amount of sleep – but more often means balancing two virtues, principles, or qualities together.  With each of these qualities, more is better – more love, more justice, more service – but they should not lead to excess nor lead to self-righteousness or fanaticism.  This is achieved not through balancing them against an absolute zero, but balancing them against another spiritual attitude that is likewise growing.  With this understanding, we learn to distinguish moderation from mediocrity.  We develop a sense of justice moderated by compassion, instead of a state of half-justice, half-compassion.  A type of generosity informed by humility is cultivated, and not a calculated and cautious giving.  Truth acting through love prevents it from being a negotiable commodity driven by convenience.

Speech, too, needs moderation.  It is moderated by purity of motive, by unbiased investigation of truth, and by blending one’s words with Divine words.  This resulting speech has a penetrating power that transcends mere sounds and syllables, that moves hearts in a way which ordinary speech one hears throughout the day could never.

At a foundational level, being and doing moderate each other.  It is not the case that one seeks to tone down or limit one’s actions because of some desired artificial level; nor to halt or stall one’s internal development for this same reason.  Rather, they moderate each other.  We strive to serve more, to contribute to society more, to accompany others more; and we likewise strive to reflect more, to meditate on our actions more, to develop proper attitudes, approaches, and qualities more.  There is no set amount.  Both are meant to increase and advance together.

On an ontological level, only good exists – evil is the absence of good.  Love exists, hate is lack of love.  Action exists, passivity is its absence.  In the physical world, and as an analogy, light exists, and darkness is lack of light.  And the creation of light necessitates the creation of a shadow.  It is not the moderation of light and shadow that we seek; not some arbitrary level of light against its absence.  We seek the moderation of light upon light!  The moderation of multiple shades and colors of light produces a beautiful white light.  Tyranny and oppression exist; but they are the absence of justice – they don’t moderate justice.  As we learn to moderate justice with compassion will we understand both of these principles more fully.

Categories
- Empowerment Human Nature Justice Knowledge

Champion of Justice

Knowledge of human nature is essential in championing the cause of justice. Ontologically, human beings are dual-natured – there is capacity for egoism and altruism, competition and cooperation; in short, there is a lower/animal nature, and a higher/spiritual nature. Self-interested behaviors can be conscious and intentional, and alternatively, they can be unconscious and unintentional. When human being are in a state of ignorance – a cause of injustice – they tend towards selfish actions and thoughts. As we gain knowledge of our true nature, our latent capacities and talents, and our purpose, we can consciously reveal our higher nature. And as we are able more and more to investigate reality for ourselves, we increasingly recognize the oneness of humankind.

Ignorance is a main cause of injustice. Unlike ages past, the oppression of today is not caused by a few evil tyrants actively battling the hapless multitudes. Rather, oppressive forces are the result of countless, small, self-interested thoughts, words, and actions by the vast majority of the world. These accumulate over generations and gradually consolidate themselves in social structures, which then perpetuate this oppression and normalize the selfish assumptions on which they were built.

There is no “us” and “them”. Humanity is one. Every human being is responsible for the current crisis of civilization. Through our words, thoughts, and actions, through advancing self-knowledge and empowering others, all work for justice.

Categories
- Human Body Development Human Nature Oneness

History of the World, Part 3

The next point regarding our perspective of history is that there is purpose in creation; in other words, evolution is understood as a teleological process.  Characterizing evolutionary processes with this word – meaning that it is directed by an intrinsic purpose – might conjure up controversial thoughts and connotations.  It is true that teleological “grand narratives” in the past have been used to oppress peoples and impose ideologies.  Yet, we can’t ignore a truth based on its abuses in the past.  Let us place society’s notions aside and simply think clearly.  Isn’t it the case that the purpose of the seed is to develop into a tree?  Isn’t it the case that the purpose of an embryo is to develop into a human being, and the purpose of a child to develop into an adult?  The seed does not randomly or haphazardly become a tree – it is its purpose.

Similarly, the biological evolution of a human being has a purpose; and the social evolution of humanity has a purpose.  The human body’s purpose is to provide the vehicle for the expression of the soul, through the human mind – and the purpose of an individual’s life is to develop spiritual qualities.  This purpose is realized through selfless service to humanity.  And the purpose of humanity’s collective life is to carry forward an ever-advancing civilization – eventually a world civilization that has achieved a dynamic coherence between the material and the spiritual dimensions of life.

The oneness of humankind is a teleological truth (as well as an ontological truth, which we discussed a number of posts ago).  It provides the purpose and direction for humanity’s social and spiritual evolution.

Categories
Oneness

Oneness through Time and Space

Following the last post’s foundational conviction that society should be organized according to the principles of reciprocity, cooperation, and interconnectedness, that oneness is the operating principle of civilization – as well as following a previous post’s idea that oneness is an ontological truth of reality – our perspective takes on dimensions of time and space.

On a spatial level, these principles imply the need for a global perspective.  The well-being of geographically distant people is taken into account for personal and collective decision-making.  If, indeed, oneness of humanity is the principle by which civilization operates, then the well-being of the entire earth’s population needs to be accounted for in decisions made by any one part of the world.  (And this is precisely how human physiology operates.)

On a temporal level, our perspective needs to be intergenerational.  In other words, the well-being of future generations of people is taken into account for any personal, local, collective, or world-wide decision-making.  If one thinks more deeply, this is also a feature of human physiology, particularly during embryonic and infant stages of development.  This temporal dimension to the oneness of humankind provides the foundation for the concept of sustainability – concern for future well-being – a concern that is more fully understood when adopting a vision of the body of humanity over time.

The environment crisis is one practical example of ignoring these two dimensions of oneness.  Can you think of others?  How can these issues be addressed through this richer understanding of oneness?  Any daily life examples of the operationalization of the principle of oneness?