Journey in being


	Objections and counterarguments
	Some of the following objections are more practical than others. Some might seem neurotic. However, all doubts are serious. The practical ones demand a response. The ‘neurotic’ doubts are the occasion for refinement of understanding and development of powerful method
	The foundational fallacy
	The foundational fallacy is the twin idea that no foundations are possible and that absolute and complete foundations are possible
	Stated simply, what has been found is that while depth foundations are possible, the exploration of variety is an ‘adventure’
	Experience and existence
	Experience
	The primary objection is that experience may have no Object
	The fundamental theorem implies that some experience must have an Object. The Universe may be seen as a solipsist; this, however, is mere renaming. Can ‘my’ normal experience be solipsist—i.e., pure experience without an Object? First, eliminate renaming in which Objects are redefined as ‘experience.’ If there is a purely logical argument it might depend on showing that experience is a relationship. The remaining argument is contingent: the solipsist acknowledges that there is more ‘information’ in the world than he or she has
	In a different vein, is it not true that the kind of experience that can be named is experience of experience—which is a case of experience having an Object? How far can this line of thought be taken in countering the solipsist position?
	The strongest solipsist argument is that there are two possible interpretations of experience, the normal one and the one that says that experience is all there is, and that we cannot choose between the two. The response is as follows. We discount the case in which there is a universal-experience, e.g. the mind-of-god, which is a re-labeling of the normal interpretation. In the remaining case, there is a distinction and, further, the experience-is-all-there-is case is incorrect. One proof of incorrectness is that the EIATI metaphysics is impossible; one way to show this is the Wittgenstein style argument that EIATI violates EIATI'S use of normal grammar
	Existence
	Objection—the allegation that existence is trivial, that it is not a concept. Counterargument. Existence is trivial—this is the source of the fundamental character and power of the idea, e.g. foundation of the Universal metaphysics, displacement of substance; similarly it is a concept that is trivial and powerful in its generic character
	The problem of the non-existent object, e.g. what does it mean to say that unicorns do not exist, i.e. what is it that does not exist? Response. That an Object exists means that there is an Object corresponding to a concept; that an Object does not exist is a shorthand in which the there is no Object corresponding to a concept—the objection is not a true objection but arises because of the common practice of conflating concept and Object names. Elaboration. Unicorn and Jesus Christ as abstract objects
	The first existential problem of being—whether anything exists. Resolution. Experience and its objects
	The second existential problem of being—what exists? Resolution. The forms of experience… and their objects… and the theory of Objects. Objection. The forms of experience cannot be said to define objects. Counterargument. The objection and its source have been dealt with in the idea of Concept as immanent in object and in the Kantian / sufficiently faithful concept
	Being
	Observation. The phrase ‘in its entirety’ is not necessary. Its function lies in the fact that concept and Object are often conflated and it is then a reminder that the every part of the concept should have reference. These words may seem to contradict the earlier assertion that all experience has an object; however, the present concern is practical and includes the case that discourse may be limited to a context
	Objection. The verb ‘to be,’ e.g. ‘is,’ has not been analyzed. Response. There is more than one meaning of ‘is.’ However, use as the verb ‘to be’ is standard and has received implicit analysis in the analysis of experience
	Objection. Various special uses of ‘being.’ Response. The special uses are not part of the sense of the present basic, fundamental use of ‘being’ but may lie in its range of reference. It would be a mistake, however, to think that these contingent references specify its sense. Audiences are reminded that understanding of the present development and appreciation of its power requires focus on its meanings even though related meanings and uses may be suggestive
	Objection. The classical distinction between existence as being-in-relation and being as being-in-itself. Response. The fundamental principle of the Universal metaphysics, below, dissolves this distinction
	Doubts about demonstration of the nature-existence of the Universe and the Void
	The primary issues are whether the Universe contains all Law and so on and whether the Void exists. The first issue is dealt with adequately earlier
	The proof of existence of the Void may be criticized (1) on the account that it is purely logical and (2) that in case the Universe is the domain in question there is doubt that its complement exists
	The first objection has been dealt with adequately in the discussions of method
	The second objection may be dealt with by providing alternate proofs. A number of rational as well as heuristic (plausible) proofs have been given in the detailed accounts. Perhaps the best alternate proof is as follows
	There is no distinction between existence and non-existence of the Void. Therefore the Void may be taken to exist. The fundamental principle now follows. This implies the existence of the Void
	There is also a doubt from the nature of the quantum vacuum that is the ‘zero’ state of quantum mechanics but is far from absence. The counterargument is that the fundamental principle shows that quantum theory cannot be the fundamental theory of the Universe
	Formal problems concerning the fundamental principle
	The essential problem is the one regarding the Void that is resolved above
	There is also the fundamental intuitive concern that so much is derived from so little. One response to this concern is that ‘so much’ is the sweeping away of preconception e.g. substance and what is perhaps false humility
	Residual doubt will remain. I have it
	There is no final argument against this but to act and enter the journey. This is essential in any case because ideas are not complete realization. It is important to enter ‘animal faith’
	There is a fine distinction between essential and neurotic or destructive doubt
	Adjusting the fundamental principle and its consequences to realism
	This adjustment is formally accomplished by the fundamental principle itself which requires ‘realism’ and therefore places realism on stronger footing than common sense ‘realism’ and even science. The problem of living in a ‘world’ that is simultaneously limited and unlimited (except for Logic) is resolved by the concept of the Normal
	Objections not based in Rationality—content or method
	These are not objections to the developments as such but include such concerns as (1) the problem from the established character of science and common sense and (2) arguments regarding the background and so on of the author
	These ‘objections’ are important because they may arise explicitly and therefore preparation is useful, because they may be subconsciously held by others and the author and should be brought to surface—for without explicit recognition they cannot be addressed
	The first counterargument is to make the ‘objections’ explicit
	‘Establishment’ is addressed by careful analysis, application, showing significance, making plausibility arguments to supplement the formal, and by repetition
	Regarding my background, although I am somewhat outside mainstream academia, my background in academics is significant and probably far broader than that of most academics. My abilities may be assessed from the resume on my website. It may be argued that being peripherally rather than totally or not at all immersed is the best preparation for this endeavor. Repetition and reaching a broad audience may be effective