Select Tractate Abstract Introduction Contents Metaphysical Systems Husserl, Hawking, & I Ockham's Razor Wrong Again The Beginning Why Now? Conclusion : The Peer Review Postscript : Chaos, Complexity, and Metaphysics

---

Tractate 17 : The Beginning - Theoretical Metaphysics - Introducing the Problem of the End (continued)

The Error of: A lack of Paradoxes

What has not been addressed within this work is that the whole/ singularity of existence itself. The understanding regarding: Where is the whole? What is the whole? Why does the whole exist? is the work of Theoretical Metaphysics and as such is the focus of this tractate, the last developmental tractate within the series.

If the whole is now understood to be virgin elements of uniquely developing abstraction existing within the physical being of the individual and the physical being of the individual existing within the physical universe which in turn exists within the abstract of the whole as illustrated by the model:



Then the question for theoretical metaphysics becomes: What lies ‘beyond’? What lies ‘beyond’ the whole of abstraction?
The question can be illustrated as:



The illustration actually becomes:



If we determine that existence exists beyond the furthest reaches of our perceptual abilities, beyond the whole of abstractual existence, then surely ‘something’ would exist beyond abstractual existence. Once we understood the ‘?’ exists, the ‘?’ would begin to reveal itself to us. Again we come back to the Aristotelian concept of existence being a form of onion we peel away not from the outside in but rather filling in the peels from the inside out.

After beginning to understand the physical, the abstractual began to reveal itself to us. After beginning to understand the abstractual, ‘nothingness’ began to reveal itself to us. Now it may be true that nothingness appeared as ‘an element’ of the abstract and thus contained within the abstract but as we learned in Tractate 8: The Error of Einstein – Resolving the Problem of Physical Time, ‘nothingness’ becomes the very boundary separating one peel of the onion of reality from another and as such can only exist as a ‘barrier’, exist as a boundary separating one layer form another but cannot exist as the ultimate ‘outside’ barrier since the ultimate ‘outer’ layer has nothing from which it is to be separated. It is the ultimate ‘outer’ layer that then becomes the foundationless system ‘containing’ the inner peels of reality. If such were not the case, and if ‘nothingness’ were the ultimate of existences, then nihilism trumps existence, disorder supercedes order, despair would dominate hope, …

This work has espoused the concept that paradoxes exist because we do not have a grasp of the larger reality. If the model presented by this work presents solutions to presently existing paradoxes then it would appear that new paradoxes would arise with our beginning to understand the ‘?’.

As of yet such paradoxes do not exist and as such we have no idea as to what ‘?’ is but that does not mean the ‘?’ does not exist and in fact that is the very essence of theoretical metaphysics. Theoretical metaphysics is the examination of the potential for ‘?’ to exist and the development and examination that such an existence would create.

Again it must be strongly reiterated that if the metaphysical model of symbiotic panentheism, initiated by this work, eliminates most philosophical paradoxes as it espouses to do that does not imply paradoxes do not exist, will not arise from such a model. What is implied is that paradoxes regarding the three items, the physical, the abstract, and nothingness, will be basically eliminated.

The concept: