[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[Ham Priday]

Craig --


> If we "do not have any empirical knowledge of what gives
> rise to being", why presuppose there is something that gives
> rise to being?  It just pushes the question back to where
> does the alleged primary cause or source come from?

Indeed, why assume that the primary source must have a beginning?

Alpha and omega are the beginning and end of finite existence because they 
represent the limits of
experiential perception.  To assume that the source of creation must itself 
be limited to the conditions of finitude is what our friend Pirsig might 
have called "low quality intellection."

I asked you what you believe gives rise to being.  Since you apparently have 
no answer to the question, I'll offer my own.  It's based on three 
fundamental metaphysical principles:
 1)  Nothing can come from nothingness.
 2)  Everything that exists is differentiated (by nothingness).
 3)  Essence is the absolute integration of all difference.

Since existence is differentiated awareness (experience), its primary source 
is Essence.  But since we do not experience essentially but differentially, 
nothingness is the universal "differentiator".  Therefore, in order to 
experience being, it must be "reduced" from Essence by nothingness.  This 
implies an apparent division of Essence which itself is indivisible. 
Instead of proposing a complex hierarchy of levels, one of which is 
Intellect (or mind), my hypothesis is that Essence negates nothingness to 
create difference.  Multiplicity begins with "two", and I define existence 
as the "actualized" dichotomy of two mutually dependent contingencies, 
Sensibility and Otherness, both of which are derived from an uncreated 
source (Essence).  This negational division of Oneness into a dichotomy 
establishes the primary difference whereby individuality and relations are 
possible.

Value-sensibility is the primary attribute of proprietary awareness (self) 
by which the value of otherness is objectivized as differentiated being. 
Just as experience is the differentiated mode of awareness which does not 
impugn the integrity of the subjective agent, the negational mode of Essence 
does not impugn the integrity of its undifferentiated source.  Moreover, 
since realization of Value (by the autonomous agent) ultimately counters the 
effect of negation, it may be viewed as the teleology of Essentialism.

I know you will complain that I have no empirical justification for such a 
cosmology, have made it up out of whole cloth, have resorted to that dreaded 
"supernaturalism", etc., etc.  I can only say that it is an answer--I think 
a plausible one--to the enigma you've posed.  And while  metaphysical 
answers are by fiat beyond empirical proof, I would suggest that considered 
belief is better than presumptive denial.  Besides, this is what philosophy 
is all about.

Anyway, thanks for the opportunity, Craig.

--Ham