Possible existential scheme

There are numerous speculations today as to what existence is. These speculations are chiefly in the form of complex philosophic terminologies. We are familiar with materialistic monism, type identity theory, token identity theory, functionalism, reductive physicalism, nonreductive physicalism, eliminative materialism, anomalous monism, property dualism, epiphenomenalism, emergence, etc 

Like political parties, philosophers and scientists fall behind one of these theories and create numerous academic papers and books every day. There are numerous sub-themes also like consciousness, panpsychism, etc wherein many other philosophers fall-in under various sub-theories. Academy philosophy is totally engrossed in creating numerous papers every day, on one of these multiple themes. All such theories are speculative in base character. To escape this accusation,  science has adopted the method of experiments and evidence. But we know, hypotheses are formed first by this method and then experiments are conducted to 'exemplify' the hypotheses. A veteran of Western knowledge, Alfred North Whitehead had sarcastically written on the method of the experiment, that 'it is a mode of cooking evidence to exemplify the theory in hand'. 

Are we, humans, expected to know such a scheme of existence? If yes, how?

Why judge that we are here simply to be in life blindly, not bestowed with the ability to understand who we are and why we are here? It is a basic judgment on human life. We should very carefully handle it.

The crucial role of the hidden sense organ of humans that is instrumental in 'sensing' the logic behind the evidence or arguments, or that between arguments and the point that it attempts to prove, is yet to be found and recognized by our acclaimed knowledge system. The following blog link will introduce this faculty to the readers: 

http://thesparkleofhumanreason.blogspot.com/2011/01/part-b.html

The following link might provide more, additional details on the subject: https://isreasonasenseorgan.blogspot.com/2018/11/is-mans-faculty-of-reason-internal.html

We must recognize that what our sense organs provide us constitute the base of our knowledge. These inputs play a crucial role in making up our knowledge system, so epistemology. Love to share with my readers, a paper on the important role of sense faculties in creating our knowledge:

 http://thesparkleofhumanreason.blogspot.com/2016/07/sense-organs-of-man-are-they-natures.html

When one looks at life and own 'sense of self'', freeing himself/ herself from its vicious catch, he/she comes across the following existential system or the mechanism of having own self with all our 'given' such above mentioned faculty for knowing it.  

1. Can we adopt two different stands towards life and existence? 

We know now that we can adopt two different intellectual stands towards life and existence; when we blindly fall victims of our GIVEN bodily and intellectual traits and look at life from such a stand, and when we are well aware of these traits and then look at life and existence.

While we were animals-like, living with them like one of them, we were total slaves of our bodily and emotional traits. We however realized it, and then we departed from this way of our animal brothers. Humans started living far away from the animal kingdom, as a special, advanced species. 

So, two kinds of leading life are quite possible and proven reality.

2. Can we use our bodily and emotional systems as our own and be proud of them?

When we realize that our bodily and emotional traits are simply 'given', but highly chosen 'creatively' by nature, which means these were not a natural result of the PHYSICALITY, we tend to be extremely humble and selfless. Why should one be proud of something that he doesn't own? Why should one create or produce something like a SCIENCE staying within this synthetic 'sense of self; and create KNOWLEDGE? When the very medium itself is synthetic, how could what it produces become authentic? Is the above referred is a major fault of our science?

When we reach some kind of intellectual maturity, we ultimately realize that our sense of self is also a given phenomenon. Then we realize that our sense of selves was emerged out of a simple but a certain law, a consciously schemed way that existence has devised to achieve her purpose. We were 'falsely' feeling its sense of ownership. But while living in life, in the world, one can't disown it during its tenure, as all others around one also own it and leading life as if some 'he' or 'she'. So, he/she also has to own it and live on. 

Descartes' principle was unfortunately wrong.( I think, so I am) What seems true is, 'you are, hence I am'. 

The following paper might offer more details on this new proposition: 

http://unrecognizedobjectsofthemind.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-physics-behind-birth-of-human-self-i.html

3.What Logic must have been there behind having humans in life?  

What would have been the sensible reason, or the Logic for Nature to devise such a scheme for our 'sense of selves'? Can we explain it under the principle of the scientific method, of having a sensible, logical explanation for what we claim? Of course, we have a brain-related system of science. But the question of whether thought originates first or the neuron firing is quite difficult to answer. If this could be answered, it will answer the question of whether the brain originates thought or they originate first from non-brain, purely physical sources.

We now know, that humans are bestowed with a faculty to 'sense' or detect the LOGIC of any explanation, with or without the support of experiments, the faculty of Reason. It senses the ORDER or the SENSE content of explanations, or even the conclusion of experiments when minds are kept open and receptive to new knowledge. 

What must be the most sensible cause/explanation for having humans and numerous other living species and inorganic objects in existence?  They all certainly have PHYSICAL as an end substance. But thousands of items and events around us, in the living realm as well as the inorganic realm that obviously exhibit strong evidence of CREATIVE CHOICES for their particular model of being, working principle, etc defy all our notions of us and our science, of their being a fully physical phenomenon. That all such creative choice elements we observe have resulted from the need for more successful survival. 

Let us take the example of unimaginably different models of living species around us, say, cats, dogs, cockroaches, fishes, birds of thousands of shape, vice, size of peaks, and feeding habits. The system of feelers of insects could have been in thousands of other designs; why their given design was the ultimate for survival purpose? An element of CREATIVE CHOICES is evident in each case.  Observe the thousands of shapes of tree leaves. What was the need for such variety and choices? It will be illogical to attribute the cause behind it as successful survival needs. What about our own case; the shape, location, and modes of our having sex? Men as well as that of women? The swaying desire, orgasm, periods of women, childbirth, love the mothers feel towards their babies, husbands, the phenomenon of milking, etc? There could have been thousands of other designs, ways, shapes, etc for the shape, location, way of having sex, etc for us and animals. Yes, an element of creative choices can't be ignored in every case. 

Though the idea of a creator, divine God may not be right, our inborn faculty of SENSE can never overlook the possibility of some kind of a mind and intelligence behind existence and all its varieties. In the name of science, a kind of dogma for physicalism, we can't ignore all the above-mentioned elements of CREATIVE CHOICES in existence. 

4.The inevitable need for a sense of REALITY for being in existence 

We now know that ' to be' means to be known. We all suffer from an inevitable need ' to be'. To be, means, to be known by some others. Our inescapable need for self-expression is nothing but our existential need, 'to be'. By self-expression, we are trying 'to be'.

I become or feel like someone because of the identity given to me by some others. I certainly am someone, but if I am not seen, heard, and recognized the way I am by some others, I always remain invisible and VOID. In LOVE relation, more than the sexual desire, there is a sure element of being of central importance in some other's mind. In love relation, both partners feel about each other as the most important. In other words, I feel especially alive, important, and special in my partner's mind. Both share the body of each other, a kind of ultimate expression of selves. At the same time, they keep the other too in the mind, at a central place, thus achieving the most important existential need; TO BE. 

So, if existence has devised the above scheme for all living beings for achieving the need of TO BE, it compels us to infer, that for existence too, her central purpose behind scheming life was to create KNOWING ENTITIES who could be knowing her one day. We know that she is invisible because we do not know her. 

 5.Why there are numerous inorganic objects, living species of animals and plants around us in existence?  

If developing KNOWING beings was the sole goal of existence, why she opted to have inorganic objects and different species of animals and plants also in existence? It is a very natural question. 

Let us attempt to sensibly assume the logic of existence behind the above step. 

If developing knowing beings was her sole goal, why she opted to have us with nose, chest, legs, hands, hair, etc? Our sexual organs were simply organs for urination up to our ages of maturity. Then these organs started performing two different purposes; urination as well as sex. It is clear that there were instances or elements of many 'creative choices' here. Some great imagination might have been behind scheming such feats. Physicalists attributed such developments to the smart needs of evolution and survival. But it might not require much intelligence to infer, which stand has more sense here. 

Existence seems to have devised life perfectly for the living beings, with for one, all other beings and things around one as a variety of objects, and acts of these objects constituting events for it to participate. For each, others around it turning up as WORLD, full of items and events! 

6. So, what kind of an overall 'predilection' existence might be having towards the world and its living and non-living objects?

One thing becomes clear here. More than choosing between God or Physicalism, human intelligence has a greater task here. It is about understanding the overall PREDILECTION of the phenomenon of existence. It is a greater question of importance.  

We are under the influence of either a God-like figure or a cold and statistical entity like Physics. We are being guided by some or other force than the above two; our birth, our emotional predisposition, our death, etc are more the result of such a PREDILECTION than the question of  God/ PHYSICAL substance behind it. Aren't the above-referred features of our life, more the result of such a PREDILECTION than the statistical fact of a God or physicalism? Yes, questions on existence is more a question on the PREDILECTION of her, than who is behind it? 

The above-observed elements of CREATIVE CHOICES can't be attributed to a dead, dump and mute, physicality. They can't be attributed to a God, who is the embodiment of love and care too, as analyzed in the following paper: 

http://thewhyquestionofexistenceanswered.blogspot.com/2019/08/has-life-any-meaning-and-sense-why-life.html

What might be preventing the present-day world from altering her existing word view?

We have seen above that the present-day world is either under the influence of science or that of various religions. A good percentage believes such knowledge is beyond our intellectual power- agnostics. 

All the above three flags give, a kind of strong personal identity to men and women of today. The economic system of capitalism especially made the life of humans today, centered around the economic angle, ie, exclusively around fending for one's food, housing, and clothes. There is no purpose in life except to live it; this seems the message of capitalism. 

Capitalistic values and lessons have freely influx into religious organizations. They seem to give more importance to the economic existence of the organizations than spreading the vital messages of their founders or the spiritual messages they are supposed to spread.  

Our mother institution of knowledge, science, with such a high reputation and following, seems no different from religions in matters of principle. They keep a base UNIVERSAL that everything that exists is PHYSICAL. This base premise is influencing all her rest findings.  Our world gives central relevance to logic, but this important feature of it, the relevance of the base UNIVERSAL PREMISE she keeps, is not recognized by her yet. 

Love to share with the readers, a study on the central place of such UNIVERSALS in our logical system: 

http://thesparkleofhumanreason.blogspot.com/2016/07/why-our-understanding-of-logic-needs.html

All the above are reasons for our continuing with our very fallacious knowledge system.

The premises of science today are so fanatic and orthodox like that of religions. Its followers are so confident about and enthusiastic about her achievements and method, that no amount of criticism is going to make any effect!

Existence seems to be far away from humankind's existing belief-systems, a live phenomenon, but our intellectual attention is yet to fall upon this new way of thinking.  

Authored by: Abraham J.Palakudy

He is an independent philosophy, metaphysics, and seeker/researcher of knowledge. 

His other blogs are at link: https://www.blogger.com/profile/14249415589712707293

He tweets by the name: Voice of philosohy@jopan1