The Problem of Duality and the Solution Offered

Summary

One may devise a nice discourse on the epistemology of filognosy like in the previous inspiration, but what to do with it? How to remember it, how to practice it and what would be the reason of such an exposition? Why are we having this book in the first place? What is it about, the person we need to understand, the concept of 'person' and 'integrity' we apparently did not yet think sufficiently about? All of our good willing mindfulness seems to hang in the air without any other purpose than the confirmation of our human reason. We have not mentioned a single name yet, we described no history of whatever culture, mentioned no reference to any literature, we only said that this concerns an inspiration on something, dropped a few difficult terms and that is it. We should be smart, integer, take time and think about the person. So far so good. Everybody will agree. First of all we need this kind of question marks in our exercise of mind, then we may try for an answer, but we have to solve a few problems.
The first problem seems to be the one of cohesion. We learned to know about the six perspectives of reason previously, but what is the best way to remember them, to engage them? It has something to do with the operation of our intelligence, that is important, so we should try to memorize these six limbs of filognosy. The picture presented is a great help. But one can also have a mnemonic for comprehension like 'opinion needs confirmation, explanation and objectivity to arrive at proper respect and a conclusion.' That sounds pretty logical and obvious. That line is easier to remember than 'method and science followed by analysis and transcendence runs into religion and politics.' The former line sounds more like a solution, the latter more like a problem. The difference between the two statements is that of cohesion. From this latter notion we then arrive at a statement of the problem of filognosy. We suffer a lack of cohesion and therefore we cannot remember matters very well and thus can have no love for the knowledge of self-realization. Humanity at large thus seen is in a state of incoherence, chaos and confusion; in jeopardy. There are all kinds of cohesion: material, spiritual, personal and impersonal, social and individual. But the cohesion of our minds seems to have a fundamental priority, for we as persons, as human beings of reason, regard it our honor to at least know what our own intelligence all may entail and is capable of, not to mention the necessity of a peaceful, coordinated and cooperative mind we can comfortably work with in society. Just to be able to make a choice and be in control of ourselves.

If we talk to each other we would like to have a reliable estimate of what the other says as also have a clear picture in mind of where our own argument is going. Thus cohesion..... we need the cohesion of intelligence of us persons as being part of a greater Ideal Person, a larger integrity of humanity we can all be part of. To arrive at the person we are and the Person we are part of, we consider our purpose. But to say that the person is the cohesion, that the Person is the ultimate integrity we need, is to ignore all distinctions. We need reference. If we measure something like the length of a stick we need, to the standards of science, - our modern day belief system - a measure to make sense, we have to express our measurement in centimeters or in inches e.g. That are fixed units of measurement. That makes our statement reliable. But next to that our measurement is also in need of what one calls validity. Does it make sense when I say I stand ten meters tall? Not really, for I am not a giant. So in order to make sense, I have to make a statement of relativity. Relative to what do I stand that high? On stilts? Whatever, for determining our length we need a reference point that says zero. So measured from the ground, ground zero, for instance I stand ten meters tall with a ladder under me. Now I make sense. So too this filognosy should make sense by standard units and reference points. The standard units are called words for which we have a dictionary, that is all clear, and they are lined up to make a sentence with logic, grammar, semantics and syntax, but what are we talking about? The world around us? Our imagination? The outside world as an answer constitutes the frame of reference to our imagination neatly being formulated in words that are queued up in a language we are used to. Now we know what we are talking about. In filognosy we now arrive from free statements of opinion, conjecture, theory and speculation at so-called 'empirically verified' statements of fact.

The factual world is characterized by duality and can for the present argument be divided in two parts, the human world of persons and the material world of nature those persons and cultures are a part of. With persons we take care, they are our subject of study, they are the very thing we are, we are they so to say, but first of all we want to be free from any personal preference. We do not want to get caught in a school or religion or party or culture with that or this person telling us what to do and what to think. We are a bit rebellious, anarchistic, atheistic even and are maybe even traumatized in our education. Too many people have been telling us all kinds of things, and keep urging us on with their information culture - if not deluding commercials - and now we have to figure things out for ourselves. It is about self-realization we are talking after all. So let us not get personal by immediately talking directly about the person. If the personal department constitutes a hindrance emotionally or otherwise, we resort to the impersonal of our culture and of our greater nature. One may study physics, mathematics or whatever branch of science just to find reference, a hold for our incoherent and unsteady mind. We need to verify our opinions to make sense. We cannot, and we do not, want to verify other people just like that, because they die, walk away, do not want to be controlled, do not care, want to argue with us and so on, and so on.

The person as said is a difficult subject of study and association, and just to refer to ourself is also a lonely enterprise indistinguishable from a self-created dream. So how to proceed rising above time in being a person of continuation as mentioned in inspiration number 1? Referring to ourself as a person is not a viable option either, not even as an exercise of literature. We do not want to live in illusions and need firm ground. Self-reference is nice for meditation and artful expression, but in making sense of communications like this, it is more like a curse, for starters. Thus we refer to the greater of nature we are part of. Nature is there always, the sun, the moon, the sky, the elements, plant life, animal life, all nicely cohering under the one name of Nature. Even humanity tries to blend in and cohere with it, with more or less success. More with our love for nature, less with our love for culture. Culture tends to stray away from nature with the same problem, for the same reason, we sought reference in the first place... but more about that later. Not just individually we tend to drown in the sea of duality that is the material world, also culturally we waver and tend to collapse... cultures rise and cultures fall. Cultures are easily self-confirming in denial of natural matters, just as easy as we individual people are lost in dreams or thoughts for that matter. If the culture is not explicitly referring to the state of nature, it might run into illusion. So cultures may be very reliable as to their tenets, their measures, their laws and institutions or whatever, but they can all be total nonsense at the same time missing the point of reference all together. We have clocks and calendars to respect at least the impersonal order of the dynamic world, but are these devices natural, are they valid as a reference being politically commanded? In this respect we run into psychology. We cannot criticize ourselves all the time, we need to be consonant with a positive self-image and hence we suppose we are right and doing good, despite a little original sin of time-keeping we try to forget about. We have pink spectacles and green ones. With the pink spectacles we see ourselves positively and superior, in regard of others and of nature even, but with our green glasses we see the earth in jealousy populated with far more creatures predominantly green of color with perhaps by accident a green little humanoid from another planet joining in. Looking up we see the blue or black sky with one star, the sun, or many stars grouped in constellations we fancied to be a good mnemonic of structure. We like structures, we need them to function, as said, we need to chunk info.

The point we would like to make here in our filognosy is that culturally missing the natural coherence we cannot properly remember our own filognosy, the culture and knowledge of our own coherence our own cultural and individual realization. We have a problem of consciousness, being divided between the natural and cultural 'authority'. We run in political one-sidedness and even anarchy that way. We even speak of the mental illness of affliction of neurosis - individually but also culturally - or even of psychosis for that matter. Thus we are less cognizant and not satisfied of course. Not to cohere with nature, is not to cohere culturally, is not to cohere individually with all the symptoms of the different types of mental illness. This incoherence, nay this individual and cultural neurosis, based upon an authority conflict between nature and culture is exactly what tends to run into armed conflicts and mutual self-destruction and the destruction of the planet. We rapidly lose the quality of our atmosphere, seas, soil, food and flora. We loose our fauna too, from phytoplankton in the seas to 40% of all species we know, during the last 50 years before the time of this writing january 2016. We go extinct! We will drown, get poisoned or die some other way, because of a severely weakened natural resistance. We will be eaten by resistant bacteria! Or we for that matter will eat the planet, suffocating because too much CO2 heats up our climate and acidifies our oceans and thus destroys our oxygen supply. We cannot go on like this as a threat to our own lives. That is it, that is our discontent. That is the problem we have to solve.
This problem of incoherence with ourselves and nature serves to explain the wars we have, the political and economic conflicts that run out of hand, the lovelessness, carelessness, estrangement, pain, grief and everything else we suffer and want to get rid of - except cynically spoken for the love of money and other doubtful substitutes of course in a desperate last belief in capitalism and consumerism... Please let us keep our compensations! Yes... compensated with substitutes we tolerate our misery a little longer. But not for ever, we are in decay planet-wide. We have to heal, restore and be free from those band-aids. And also with the impersonal exercise of respecting nature first, which constitutes the problem of missing the person, we explain the troubled state the same way. All of our inspirations say the same thing: we need the person, the Person, to solve our problems and thus we state now and will maintain from now on, that the greater of nature is the Great Person. We simply have to respect, develop and institute a proper consciousness of that Great Person as a living being in order to realize our own positions as smaller persons who are cast from that greater mold as little universes full of miracles and wonders on ourselves. We as individual persons constitute an integrity of life and intelligence, a cohesion based on natural law and order, that is also present all around us. That is how we are all part of the greater coherence of the Greater Person. And so, paradoxically turning away from the person, we find the Person in the impersonal of nature as a solution, for to discuss, know and respect that Person is the ultimate purpose of this study. The full comprehension of it - or Him/Her - in the sense of the complete truth, the full consciousness and final beatitude, is our purpose. That is the solution we go and will act to and that is why we took care to explain the sixfold vision of filognosy previously. Filognosy as a dual notion of the threefold order of the basic natural qualities of goodness, passion and ignorance, constitutes the integrity we asign to the grand magnificent nature all around us as a framework of mind to engage intelligently for cohering with all the separate solutions we need and know of or will have to invent. Thus the greater of nature is our first reference, our First Person and the rest of us individuals is all relative of size and importance compared to the big one.

We have not much time left to quarrel about egos or superegos, scientific, political or religious. The light of the radiating sun is His goodness, the motion of relative time phenomena constitutes His universal passion and the dullness of matter is His ignorance gravitating towards a heavy center. Space is making difference and offers knowledge in the mode of His goodness, matter is the ignorant object of knowledge subjected to - and following - His laws without any free will, and Time, the cause of relative time, is His original nature. There is time, space and matter to begin with at the impersonal level and that is all there is, so it seems. But we may from now on not forget the integrity of this trinity of science, of verified and verifiable fact, we call the person, the person we are and the Bigger Person we are part of. That is the conclusion of this science.

Source for this Inspiration:
S.B. Canto 1, Chapter 4