1. Basic concepts; Western
dualism
When you start thinking about the essence of reality, it is important to
first think well about well fitting basic concepts that can describe all
aspects of reality, the material and immaterial aspects. These basic
concepts must act like a strainer; everything must slip through it, except for
the essence.
Actually, finding good basic concepts in itself already is understanding.
In the West, our starting-point then often is a thinking in opposite
categories. A thing is either dead or alive, either organic or inorganic, it is
physical or non-physical, male or female et cetera. And in philosophy it then
is matter or idea, object or subject, body or mind. Body and brain then are
physical, mind and ideas are supposed to be non-physical.
These Western basic concepts then exclude each other. The one concept can even
be defined (partly) as the negation of the opposite concept; idea = not-matter,
body = not-mind, brain = not-mind, mind = non-physical. And then you start by
creating a gap, making it difficult to later bridge the gap again. It is like
starting to build two separate buildings and trying to make it one building
again while building.
2. The trinity of
form-fitting-form
I do not see dualities in reality but trinities instead like
bolt-screwing-nut, proton-Electra-electron, male-Eros-female,
shoe-fitting-foot, foot-walking-road, boat-floating-water, flower-light-sun,
eye-seeing-picture, ear-hearing-sound, brain-minding-world et cetera. Two forms
with a (possible) working in between and that working always is a fitting of
forms.
The two forms are different then, but also more or less the same. You can
always have the bolt-nut couple (trinity) in mind then, and the trinities
proton-Electra-electron, male-Eros-female and bolt-screwing-nut symbolize whole reality, nature, life and our culture.
Every thing and every event in reality can be described in terms of
forms and fitting of forms. The outside reality is forms and fitting of forms.
The natural forces for example and also the force of life all play as a fitting
of forms, as a relating. And roots fit in soil, leafs fit to air and light, the
flower is formed as satellite dish fitting to light, fishes fit in water, the
wings of birds fit on the air, water fits in river-beds et cetera. Forms that
because of their shape fit to other forms, that is what we see everywhere.
Our relating with the outside world, so seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,
eating, drinking, breathing, walking et cetera is a fitting of forms as well.
Our eyes fit to light, our ears fit to sounds, our lungs to the air, our feet
to the ground et cetera. Living always is fitting of forms. Dying is the end of
the fitting.
And the activities inside our body, including nerves and brains, also are a
fitting of forms, blood fits in veins, food in our stomach, bones fit in
joints, signals fit in nerves, memories in brains et cetera. In the end we
always find chemistry and electro-magnetism as fitting of forms. In the end we
always find the proton-Electra-electron trinity.
Such a trinity as a whole then often is one of the partners again in a trinity
on a more superficial level like proton-Electra-electron trinities (atoms) are
partners in molecules, and like the axle-rolling-hub trinity fits as wheel in
the wheel-fitting-fork trinity, and like the human-fitting-bike trinity is
partner in the cyclist-cycling-road trinity.
Thus the dualities and polarities we everywhere see, actually are trinities,
form-fitting-form trinities. They are not just forms, but fitting forms,
partners in one working. The partners are like the two ends of a line; there
actually only is that line then, a finite line with two ends. There is just one
working. An enclosing and a being enclosed, that is what we often see. The
electron encloses the proton like the nut encloses the bolt and like the egg
encloses the semen and the woman encloses the man, and later on the child.
So I am not speaking of things with a form, but just of forms. Is there
something like matter inside the forms? According to physics, based on facts,
matter is just a form of energy, and energy is space-time movement. Mass can
change into light-energy according to E = mc2, and light is just
form; it anyhow has no mass, and matter therefore does not really objectively
exist. Matter is just an appearance of energy.
But there anyhow is form, because even the immaterial light has a form, of a
wave. So with form I not only mean concrete forms but also more abstract forms
like air, water, light, soil, sound, taste, smell and even temperature as form;
the fur of a polar-bear perfectly fits the (form of) coldness.
Even our mind has a form, also can be formed by education and experiences. If
you do not know the Chinese characters then your mind does not fit to the
Chinese language. But after having learned the real forms these characters
point at, your mind has a new form, now also fitting Chinese.
Fitting forms, that is what we see everywhere. When the fitting is visible,
like the nut to the bolt, then we easily understand the working, so the idea of
the screw-thread. The forms of proton and electron however, can not be seen,
and we can not yet imagine these forms either. But Electra anyhow is a fitting
of forms, like life and Eros are. And an electron anyhow is an enclosing form,
the proton a being enclosed. So we do understand, but not completely. We just
can not imagine all the forms and fitting of forms used by nature; we in a way
are too superficial for that, too big as well.
When you see trinities instead of dualities, there no longer is a gap between
for example male and female, but a bridge instead. The man also is the woman,
needs the woman to be man, like a nut no longer is a nut but just a ring if
there were no bolts.
You see a difference in form then but a unity in the working. And it always
turns on the working. It is the working you buy a bolt-nut couple for and not
the material. Would the two partners be melted together, so without possible
working in between, then you would not buy the thing, then it would not even be
a bolt and nut but just a useless piece of material. It always turns on the
working, the immaterial fitting, the relations in nature.
In that fitting of forms, all workings of reality play, like rolling,
floating, flying, swimming, diving, melting, warming, burning, exploding,
opening, rooting, growing, walking, sitting, sleeping, washing, cycling,
breathing, life, Eros, chemistry, Electra, but also seeing, hearing, smelling,
tasting, feeling and even understanding. They are different workings, but all
have one aspect in common, they all play as fitting of forms.
3. Fitting as fact; idea as
form
In Western philosophy we make a distinction between the physical facts in the
outside world (including body and brain) and the non-physical mental pictures
in our mind. Physical facts are objective material facts in our Western
matter-idea view, or in the case of events at least partly material. The bolt
is a fact, the nut is a fact, the working bolt-nut couple also is a physical
fact.
But how about the fitting itself, the screwing itself, so the idea of the
screw-thread that plays in the emptiness? That immaterial fitting itself also
is a physical fact, like the immaterial field of light is a physical fact, and
like the immaterial force of life is a physical fact. The difference between a
dead body and that same body alive, is an immaterial difference. But life of
course is a physical fact, it is a fitting of forms, a relating. I am not
saying that we understand life now, I only say that it plays as fitting of
forms, like Eros and Electra. And that immaterial fitting is a physical
fact.
There also are pure immaterial facts in reality and these immaterial
facts even are fundamentally important. Everything is turning on these
workings.
Think of a bike for example, or a body as machine. Suppose you make a bike out
of one piece of material, a statue of a bike. It very well is possible then to
give that statue the appearance of a real bike. However, it is not a real bike
of course because it does not work.
In order to make it a working bike, you must create a lot of emptiness in that
statue, emptiness with all kinds of forms, emptiness in the form of
screw-threads between bolts and nuts, in the form of empty tubes between axles
and hubs and around the crank-axle and inside the steering-tube et cetera. These
empty 'parts' are very essential, because it always turns on the emptiness.
Only if there is emptiness, a fitting is possible, a working. Suppose there
only were neutrons in the cosmos? Nothing can be built of neutrons except for a
big mass without any character or quality. First the unity must be split in two
polarities, a proton and an electron with a working in between. Then creating
becomes possible. So these immaterial facts are very necessary.
So though these empty parts, the workings, are immaterial, they nevertheless
have a form like the idea of the screw-thread is a form, and like the
immaterial field of light has a form, a wave-length at least. Or think of
rolling in general? Is not the immaterial rolling a kind of form, differing
from the forms flying, floating, falling, exploding et cetera? All these
workings are a fitting of forms, but different forms of fitting since there are
many different forms.
So actually there only are forms in reality, dynamical forms (workings) and
statical forms (the things). Matter = statical form, idea = dynamical form.
Inside bigger pieces of matter we by the way also see dynamical fitting, and in
the end we always see the proton-Electra-electron trinity. In the end we even
discover that there factually is no statical form. What we call static only is
a statical appearance for a period of time.
Thus not only the objective material forms but also the immaterial workings
playing between these forms are physical facts. There are relational phenomena
in nature and these immaterial relations like life, Eros and Electra of course
are physical facts, like all fitting of forms are physical facts.
4. The fitting of forms as the spirit of
nature
When we talk of an idea, the idea of the screw-thread, the idea of the shoe or
bike, we always have fitting of forms in mind. The fitting even is
the essence of the shoe, the whole idea behind it, and the same is true for the
chair, the bed, the bike et cetera. And also when we speak of spirit, the vital
spirit, the spirit of techniques, it is a fitting of forms we have in mind.
When you dismantle a bike, you see trinities like bolt-screwing-nut,
axle-rolling-wheel, chain-gearing-cogwheels et cetera. That fitting then is the
spirit of bolt and nut or wheel and axle, the meaning, the significance, the
idea, the purpose, the value, the quality. And the bike as a whole then fits
our bodyform, forming the trinity cyclist-cycling-road or human-fitting-bike.
That fitting as vehicle to the human then is the spirit of the bike, the idea
behind it.
So spirit and ideas play as facts in reality, in the workings, always a
fitting of forms. And by feeling the forms with your hands, a bolt for example
and a perfect fitting nut, you even can feel and touch the spirit, grasp
quality as well. So spirit too is a physical fact, an immaterial fact, however
with a form.
|
|
This text too consists of forms, letterforms, or soundforms when pronounced,
and the spirit of this text therefore also is lain in fitting of forms to each
other, and to the things and events they describe. The letterforms of course
also must fit to our knowledge, the form of our mind, but learning language too
is seeing fitting forms. We see the round open vowel pictured in the letter O,
the sharp hissing consonant in the S, and that is why and how we understand SOS
and all other words. We have to learn the significance of the word SOS then of
course or the significance of Chinese characters, but learning that also is
seeing fitting of forms.
In China they picture the things in language, in the West we picture the sounds
we use to speak about things. And there are thousands of different things but
only about 25 different sounds to express these things. So our Western language
is more clever, though also more abstract. Learning Chinese is seeing fitting
of forms, but learning our abstract Western language also is seeing fitting of
forms.
We see consonants enclosing vowels in a word, nouns enclosing verbs in a
sentence. Thus, the structure of reality, form-fitting-form or
form-working-form, is found back in language as the noun-verb-noun structure.
And do you know the 500 most important nouns and the 50 most often used verbs
then, then you will find your way well. How many different words do I really
need to write this article, or any other article? Language anyhow plays as a
fitting of forms.
The spirit of food, music, paintings, novels, movies and all arts too is lain
in fitting of forms to each other, and in the fitting to us of course; water
perfectly fits a dry tongue like music satisfies our soul. So we not only see
but also hear, taste, smell and feel fitting of forms. And our understanding
then is an insight, in sounds, taste or smell, a seeing of what is playing in
the emptiness between the forms, the fitting, the working.
And do the forms fit perfectly, then we speak of beauty, sound, comfort, nice
and quality in general. But good quality, a perfect fitting, also is truthful.
And the other way around, if things do not fit well, while they are supposed to
fit well, then this lack of quality also is untruthful. So a value-judgement
can be scientifically true. But that is another chapter of philosophy (see also
part 13. of this article).
Spirit and idea can be defined now as fitting of forms, as the relations in
nature. And quality can be defined as the measure of perfection in fitting of
forms, to each other and to us. Quality is both objective and subjective. We do
not all like the same melody, like we do not all fit the same shoes. Not only
our body but also our mind has a specific form and that is why we do not all
fit to the same melody.
5. Our mind as sense organ for
spirit
Imagine egg-shaped beings without legs and feet, moving over the surface of
their planet bouncing like a ball, beings with a mind like our mind. They are
humans then, but not earthly humans. These beings then will not easily
understand our shoe or bike. They will understand the inner working of our
bike, they see fitting of forms then, but will not understand the meaning of
the bike or shoe. A shoe is just a box for them, a peculiarly formed box.
They first need to know our earthly human bodyform in order to understand our shoes, trousers, chairs, bikes and other articles of use. So understanding then is seeing that forms fit to each other. Understanding a thing is situating the thing. And if you see an unknown form and you can not relate that form with some other form, then you do not understand the thing.
This also means that a bike or shoe is not objectively a bike or shoe but
relatively, only for beings with a shape like our body. And the same is true
for flowers, birds and all plants and animals. They only can act and be as
flower, bird et cetera in conditions like on earth. Thus a flower too is not
objectively a flower but also only relatively, in earthly conditions. The forms
must fit.
Only the mathematical measures of a shoe or flower are objective. But calling
such a form a shoe or flower then, is giving a relative judgement. The trinity
shoe-fitting-foot then again is 'objective', also a true fitting for these
egg-shaped beings. But then an immaterial thing, the fitting, is called
objective.
According to me the concepts object and subject are obscure and therefore
confusing. Speaking of objects is giving the impression that there is something
like absolute matter inside the forms, which clearly is not the case according
to physics. Speaking of forms therefore is much better, since forms are all we
know. And in science we should speak of truth instead of objectivity; the shoe
fitting the foot anyhow is a truth though a relative one. And the better the
fitting the more truthful it is.
So understanding is seeing fitting of forms. And understanding itself also is
fitting of forms. We in a way understand the shoe with our foot. We understand
the shoe when we see our foot in it, and even better when we step in it. We
understand this text when we see that letterforms fit to each other and to the
things they describe, and to the form of our knowledge of course.
We understand when we see fitting of forms, so when we see the spirit of
nature. Having ideas is seeing physical facts. Spirit is a physical fact. Our
mind sees spirit, always fitting forms.
With our ordinary sense organs we see, hear, taste, smell and feel the forms
like animals do. With our mind as extra sense organ we additionally see the
fitting of forms. We see a tree-trunk on a hill or on water, we see a bird in
the sky, we see the cover rattling on a pot with boiling water et cetera.
Monkeys then obviously only see separate forms. We also see fitting of forms,
the workings of reality, the rolling and floating, so the wheel and the
boat, the airplane in the bird, the steam-engine in the boiling pot, the camera
in an eye, our chemicals in nature's chemistry et cetera.
We see ideas in nature. Our mind can be understood as an extra sense organ with
which we see what is playing in the emptiness between the forms, always a
fitting of forms. Our human spirit is a seeing of spirit.
Thus we do not need an extra category elevated above body and senses. We can
understand our brain and mind in the same way we understand our eyes and
seeing. The brain is like the eye, the minding is like the seeing. The miracle
then still is how minding, seeing or living in general is possible, but it
anyhow is a fitting of forms.
In that fitting of forms we also see harmony and regularity, the laws of
nature, 
for example as relation between the
circumference and diameter of a wheel, or the speed of light c as a space-time relation. Science is seeing and mapping.
The immaterial workings then of course also must be mapped. A rolling ball for
example not only is that ball but also a rolling. The rolling is a physical
fact that even will continue eternally if there was no friction. What we call
cause and effect, often is such a continuation of a working.
6. We all are different forms and therefore
fit to different forms
Especially in the philosophy of mind, the body-mind problem plays a fundamental
role. One then starts by dividing reality into at the one side the physical
facts in the material world including our brain, and on the other side the
non-physical mental pictures in our mind. You then create a gap between body
and mind and then it is difficult to later bridge the gap again. How then do we
get ideas? How do we know that our ideas are true?
Then there roughly are two ways to bridge the body-mind gap and in the first
solution one accepts a kind of inborn ideas or an inborn scientific ability in
our mind as a guarantee for truth. But that does not solve the body-mind
problem of course, on the contrary. Our mind then is kind of supernatural,
setting us apart from the rest of nature, and then there not only is a
body-mind gap but also a human-nature gap.
Many philosophers of mind therefore choose for the second kind of solutions, a
physicalistic solution which means that for them everything is physics, so mind
is physics as well. There only are physical facts for these philosophers, our
brain activity also is such a physical fact and our mental picture as well.
In this physicalistic view at our mind however, there does not seem to be much
left of human freedom and of the differences in opinions and tastes which
clearly exist between people; we do not all like the same melody, like should
be the case if physicalists are right.
It all depends on what we mean with physical facts, I think. Not only foot and
shoe or bolt and nut are facts, but the fitting, the relation, also is a fact.
It is an immaterial fact, however with a form, like the idea of the
screw-thread is a form and like the immaterial field of light also has a form,
at least the form of a wave. The fitting of forms also are facts and that is
why we do not all see the same facts.
When two people look at the same car for example, one a skilled technician, the
other a car-lover who does not know anything about techniques, then they indeed
see the same object but also different facts. For the car-lover without
technical knowledge, the engine is just one obscure form. For the mechanic
however the engine is all kinds of fitting forms.
We are not all attuned to the same wavelengths in a manner of speaking. And
nobody is attuned to all wavelengths, I think. We all are different body- and
mind-forms and we all suit best to these other forms that suit to our own
form.
It for example very well is possible that the car-lover never will succeed in
becoming a good mechanic, no matter his efforts. These mechanical forms then do
not fit his own form. He does not have an eye for it. But maybe he is a good
musician and maybe the technician will never learn to dance. We not only have
different body-forms but also different sense-forms. And mind also is a
sense.
So also according to me, everything is physical facts. But spirit too is a
fact. And our sensing of spirit also is a physical fact, a fitting of
forms.
7. Color and the knowledge
argument
Especially in the philosophy of mind, the body-mind problem is causing problems
and puzzles, I already said that. Color is one of these problems.
First some physics. When we see something, we do not see matter but just
immaterial light, a well-known fact. Visible sunlight consists of waves with
different wavelengths, varying between ±4x10-7 and
±8x10-7 meter. The shortest visible waves are seen as violet,
the longest as red, provided that you are not color-blind. All colors together
give white light.
When we see a color, we actually see an interaction. A green ripening tomato
for example absorbs (consumes) the red waves and the reflected light therefore
lacks these red waves, resulting in a green appearance. So red waves obviously
are ripening waves. A ripe tomato however no longer needs this red ripening
light and therefore reflects it, resulting in a red appearance.
But why is that we see a long wave as red and a shorter wave as blue? I mean,
as objective physical fact there only is that difference in length! Color is
like music. Sounds too only are waves with different lengths. Why do we
experience music and color in lengths?
Where is the color? Is it there on the tomato or only in our mind? For
traditional Western body-mind or matter-idea philosophers, something either is
a material fact, or an immaterial mindpicture. Color either is there on the
thing, or in our mind.
But factually there is something playing in between, the seeing as coloring,
the hearing as sound coloring. We do the same with everything. Food for example
also only is lengths in a manner of speaking, molecules with a size and the
like. We humans however in a way are coloring these sizes with taste and smell.
We see 'music' in all kinds of fitting of forms. We see harmony in lengths and
periods, harmony in space and time, and we enjoy this harmony much more than
any other being. So color is a coloring and coloring is a fact.
This also is the solution for what is called the 'knowledge argument' in the
philosophy of mind. This knowledge argument was invented by philosophers who
did not want to accept a physicalistic solution for the body-mind problem. For
physicalists everything is physics so mind as well. Mind then in the end is
reducible to mathematical equations. For inventors of knowledge arguments and
the like, mind however is more than only figures.
They, as a thought-experiment, invented a color-blind (actually color-blinded)
scientist who had learned all the physical facts about color and color-vision,
so without really knowing red or blue.
Then suddenly the scientist recovers from her color-blindness so that for the
first time in life she really sees what red is. She learns a new fact then,
while already knowing all the physical facts.
So physical facts are not the only facts, was the argument. Redness is a fact,
but not a physical fact, and mind therefore is more than just physics; mind is
more than only object.
The physicalists then of course came with counter-arguments "redness is not a
fact" for example "but just an interpretation of a fact" and the result still
is a seemingly endless discussion.
The solution is lain in seeing that the seeing itself also is a physical fact,
like all fitting of forms. After being recovered from color-blindness, the
scientist herself has a new form, now also fitting colors. Her mind and even
her brain has a new form, now minding colors as well.
The scientist in the knowledge argument actually was not color-blind but
color-blinded; she grew up in a black and white room, with only black and white
things, pictures and tv- and computer-screens. (How about mirrors? Actually, the
situation in the thought-experiment only is possible if the light in the room
only consisted of grey waves, and is that possible?) She anyhow never saw color
until released from her room.
But also then the explanation is lain in a new fitting of forms, a new fact.
Meeting the colorful outside world then is meeting new forms, new light
especially, and such a new fitting then is a new physical fact.
We also can think of an astronaut who grew up with only space-food, tasteless
fuel in a manner of speaking. When first smelling and tasting bacon and eggs,
he experiences a new physical fact, a new fitting of forms. The picture in his
mind will also change then, his mind will have a new form, now also minding
smell and taste.
So physicalists partly are true in saying that everything is physical facts.
But they are wrong in saying that only objective material facts are physical
facts. The seeing, the hearing, the tasting, the smelling and even the
understanding and minding also are physical facts, like all fitting of
forms.
I believe that philosophers who invent knowledge arguments and the like, can
not accept our human mind as just a passive machine, and I agree. They want to
defend our human freedom and creativity. In this relational view, this human
freedom is guaranteed. We all are different forms and therefore fit to
different forms. We also can change our own form, especially our mind-form. We
can learn to adapt. Our minds can be formed.
8. One spirit
The fitting always plays in the emptiness, and an atom is empty for more than
99,99 percent. Our body too therefore is almost completely empty.
We do not see and feel this emptiness because our sense organs are too big in a
manner of speaking. Nevertheless this emptiness is a fact and every emptiness
also is connected with every other emptiness. It is like the background of this
text; all empty spaces between and even inside the letters form just one
emptiness. So there is only one emptiness pervading everything, and in this
emptiness all workings are playing, from screwing to Electra.
We see what is playing in this emptiness, the fitting of forms and then we
understand the things and their functioning. And that seeing itself also is a
fitting of forms, like life in general is a fitting of forms; our feet fit to
the surface, our eyes fit to light, our ears fit to sounds et cetera.
And inside our body it is exactly the same, blood fits in veins, air fits in
lungs, food in our stomach, bones fit in joints et cetera. And signals fit in
nerves like memories fit in brains, always as a fitting of forms. And all these
fitting of forms, inside and outside, play in one and the same emptiness.
So the ideas we see in nature, always a fitting of forms, are stored in our
mind as a fitting of forms as well; not in protons and electrons themselves
anyhow, but in what is playing in between, chemistry and Electra.
How exactly is this information, this picture, stored then in our brain? Anyhow
as a fitting of forms. Maybe in the form of a holographic picture? When you
look through a microscope at a holographic picture of for example a car, you do
not see that car but just concentric ring-patterns, circles. Comparable with
what you see on the surface of a smooth lake after having thrown several stones
in it; every stone then causes a ring-pattern of waves, spreading out over the
surface and the patterns also start to influence each other. That is how a
holographic picture looks like. So maybe that also is the way our brain stores
our mindpicture, as a wave-pattern? New information then is a new stone in the
lake, having influence on the whole pattern in the end. This article is
supposed to be a big stone.
With our mind we dwell in the spirit of nature, one spirit that pervades
everything. We can dwell in the outside world, but also in the inside world in
our body and head, and we always see fitting of forms. And there in the
emptiness, there is no border between inside and outside, so you and the world.
There is just one emptiness, one spirit. And this emptiness is always and
everywhere filled with light or Electra.
9. The relational view as spiritual
view
Light surely is something but it is not material; a vacuum too is filled with
all kinds of electromagnetic radiation, radio-waves for example from all over
the world. These waves are immaterial but do have a form. And our receivers,
amplifiers and speakers then transform these immaterial waveforms into music
and other sounds.
The radio then materializes the immaterial forms. And sun-energy can be the
driving force then; light materializes herself then. Idea becomes thing all by
herself, if you know what I mean. Light creates.
In the beginning there only was light on earth, without flowers and eyes yet.
Now we have a multitude of different shaped flowers and eyes. And all these
different forms have one aspect in common, they all fit to the same earthly
light.
So the immaterial relational phenomenon light defines, together with other
immaterial forcefields (gravity for example), the forms of all eyes and flowers
on earth. Light also is responsible for temperature and other
weather-conditions, and these conditions as well define the forms of earth's
nature. The immaterial 'need to fit' defines the forms then, including the form
of the human. Idea defines form.
And all our articles of use too must be understood in such a spiritual way.
It is the necessity to fit to our bodyform that defines the forms of all our
clothes, vehicles, furniture, tools, books, screens and other culture. Idea
defines form here as well. First we have an idea, then we shape material into a
form.
And when it concerns the trinity proton-Electra-electron, it is exactly the
same, I think. Like in the trinity bolt-screwing-nut, where it is the
immaterial screwing that defines the forms of bolt and nut, it also is the
immaterial Electra that defines the forms of proton and electron. And such a
fundamental particle then is nothing but form, space-form I think. But that is
physics (see also part 14. of this article).
10. Light as spirit; in the beginning there
was light
A few words about light though light actually 'belongs' to physics and not to
philosophy. Light is not material and in a matter-idea or object-subject view,
it therefore does not fit in the category matter or object.
Then the category idea or subject is left, but an idea is not considered to be
a physical fact at the moment. It becomes a physical fact however if we see the
immaterial fitting of forms, the relations in nature, as facts. Then light or
Electra too can be called spirit or idea. It anyhow plays as a fitting of
forms, as a relating, as an immaterial physical fact.
So a few words about light. Suppose the already very high speed of light
becomes higher and higher and infinitely high in the end? Then distances in the
cosmos but also inside atoms and in our body become shorter and shorter and
infinitely short in the end. And everything then dissolves into nothing.
Such an infinitely fast light does not need time to bridge space, and then
space and time do not exist. Just fill in 
for the
speed of light c in physics and nothing is left of physics
but zeros and infinities.
Such an infinitely fast light actually has no form. A light must be finitely
fast in order to have a form, a finite wave-length for example. And only then
space has a form, seen in that finitely fast light. And an atom then is nothing
but space-form, I think, inner-space (protons and neutrons), border-events
(electrons) and outer-space (the field of light). An outside-enclosing-inside
trinity. But that is physics.
It anyhow is a fact that the empty spaces between and inside things are very fundamental; there we find all workings of reality. Would bolt and nut, proton and electron or man and woman really be one, then the thing would not work. There must exist emptiness, distance, only then working is possible. And for an infinitely fast light there is no distance.
11. The why of mind
Why do we have a mind? Why did not we stay like monkeys? That is a different
question of course though a related one.
First of all I want to point at the fact that a being as naked as a human,
needs something like a mind in order to survive. I mean, most animals, all
animals I think, have surviving-techniques fixed on their bodies, like furs and
shells as protection, hoofs, claws and beaks as tools, wings as vehicle et
cetera. And when they are naked, like snakes and snails, they often use
chemical or electromagnetical surviving-techniques like venom and shocks. Or
the animals are built like a leaf or a twig, also a surviving-technique.
A human however still is like the fetus, without any protection, not even a
fur. So in order to survive, we have to make these surviving-techniques
ourselves, and to be able to do that we need something like a mind that sees
the techniques in nature, always a fitting of forms. We see a coat in a fur
then, a plank in a tree et cetera.
A naked body needs a mind; many of us would be frozen tomorrow if we all would
lose our mind tonight.
But there is more then. We not only see the usefulness of what is playing
between the forms but also the beauty of these relations. We enjoy harmony when
the fitting of forms is perfect, in things, in sounds, in food et cetera.
To me it seems that the human is a logical step in the evolution of nature, and
then I look at nature as a piece of art. When we look at nature, we see a lot
of harmony and beauty. It clearly is organized, your body for example. Someone
has thought about it.
It anyhow is a fact that there will never come a car to existence by putting
all the parts in a big box and then shaking that box. And if you dismantle the
parts into rough material, then it absolutely is impossible; it would be a
miracle, an accident. But flowers like the woman-body clearly are no accidents
for me but planned in one way or another. That is my God, my belief, in the
organizer, the artist, the joker as well.
And if something is well organized, a gold-atom for example or a human body, it
also is beautiful or nice.
Before the human emerged, no creature really enjoyed this harmony. Many animals
swallow their prey in one bite, and do not seem to enjoy the beauty of nature.
Beauty then is useless.
To make enjoyment possible, something like a human mind is necessary. This mind
then sees what is playing between the forms, the fitting, the harmony in it.
Then God no longer is the only one enjoying. That is what I mean with a logical
step in the evolution. God then is an artist, creating nature as piece of art,
creating the human as spectator of his piece of art.
Our mind at the same time makes us free. All plants and also animals are fixed
to limiting circumstances and that is because of the techniques fixed on their
bodies, like wings, claws, hoofs, shells, furs et cetera. So a bird is not
really free, but bound to the air. Imagine being a human in the body of a bird?
You are a prisoner then.
Only the human really is free. With our mind we see all these different
surviving-techniques in nature's workings and then we make our own disposable
techniques for all kinds of circumstances. We then also can live like a bird in
the sky and like a fish in water, and we also are stronger and faster then,
than every other animal.
So our mind makes us free, and being so naked then is very convenient. Even a
fixed fur would be experienced as useless ballast by us, since our mind already
is our fur, the software of all kinds of clothes and other protection. So to be
free, you not only need a mind but also a naked body. It anyhow would be very
cruel of Mother Nature to create a human in the body of a bird. Our nakedness
therefore is no weakness but a strength.
For enjoyment in freedom, that is how a human is built and formed, and I
therefore think that also is the purpose of being human. And real enjoyment
then always is enjoyment of nature's harmony. Real enjoyment is bodily, a
caressing of senses, also when it concerns the elevated arts.
Our mind is just an instrument then, and we therefore should not overrate our
mind. And science too only is a map and not the whole area. Especially the
workings and relations can not be pictured on a map. These fitting of forms can only be
experienced in the real area. And our spirit is just a seeing and sensing of
spirit.
12. Materialism as cause of dualism; new
sciences of workings
"In the West, our starting-point often is a thinking in opposite categories"
that is what I wrote in the beginning of this article, and the result is
dualism and fragmentation. And I think there is a still deeper cause of our
Western dualistic approach of reality, our materialism.
Reality is forms, the material things, and fitting of forms where we find
all immaterial aspects of reality including all workings. In the West we
see the material things as most fundamental, and the workings then are just
results or effects. The particles produce Electra, that is what we think.
But factually it is exactly the other way around, that is what I hope to have
shown in this article, that it always turns on the working, the immaterial
fitting, playing in the emptiness. These workings also define the forms of the
material things.
But like I said, we in the West still see the material things as fundamental
building-blocks. And that is why we also have divided the totality of knowledge
in different sciences by dividing the material things in different sorts. Every
science then studies a specific sort of things, and fragmentation and dualism
then of course is the result. In order for example to learn to know the
rainforests as totality, you have to pick up lessons from many different
sciences; most of the facts are known but not in one hand, not in one science
(of the rain-forests for example).
We are focusing on the things instead of the workings, while it all turns on
the workings. And according to me this materialism also is the deepest cause of
the body-mind problem. We think that there is something like objective durable
matter or substance that causes every other aspect of reality. But actually
there only is form, space-form. There is no real matter, and materialism in the
sense of believing in matter as ultimate cause therefore is a mistake.
We better can focus on the workings of reality, because it is there where
everything is happening, there in the emptiness. I can imagine a better
division of the totality of knowledge in different sciences by not dividing the
things but the workings in sorts. A science of seeing and looking for example
or a science of growing and developing. Such a scientist of seeing and looking
then becomes a physicist, a physician, a technician, a biologist et cetera in
one, all of course focused on seeing and looking. Specialists then all have a
global view.
I also believe that such new sciences of workings are necessary to really get
grip on the very fundamental environmental and social problems we have to deal
with now. We do no even really know these problems now, and without knowledge
there is no solution.
13. Science and politics
Such sciences of workings then also are less value-free, more engaged with what
is happening in the world. At the moment most scientists think to have a
value-free attitude towards their subject of study, but I think that is a great
mistake, a big misconception as well. Just think of a shoe. Only the
mathematical measures of the shoe are objective and value-free. But calling
such a thing a shoe, is giving a value-judgement, since it only is a shoe for a
human foot. It is the relative fitting that makes it a shoe.
And that fitting then also must be a rather well fitting. The better the
fitting, the more truly it is a shoe. And the other way around, if the thing
does not fit to any foot at all, then it is not even a shoe but just a box or
bag.
For shoe we then can read chair, bike but also school, system of transport, and
even society in general. And when the shoe or the society do not fit well, then
the shoe or the society are scientifically untruthful.
So by focusing on the workings instead of the things, science automatically
becomes more engaged with what is happening on earth, with nature and with
people, between nature and people as well.
And it actually also is because of these practical problems that I have spent
so much energy in developing this relation philosophy. Philosophy must be
practical, since life is practical. And the first thing you have to know then
as philosopher and as human, is that your mind is just an instrument, just a
map, a mean and not the end.
14. Relational physics
Physics too knows a kind of body-mind or object-subject problem especially when
it concerns the very smallest building-blocks of reality like electrons and
quarks. Every thing around you consists of neutrons, protons and electrons, and
protons and neutrons are considered to exist of quarks. When investigating
these most fundamental particles, always by means of shining light on them,
these particles sometimes suddenly seem to disappear into nothing, coming again
to existence at some other spot, sometimes in another shape for a while.
Related electrons with a long distance in between also can change
simultaneously as if information goes infinitely fast, so faster than the speed
of light.
 |
|
 |
|
In a materialistic view at reality, still the prevailing view in the
West, wherein the material particles are considered to be the fundament, these
quantum-phenomena can not be explained. In this form-fitting-form view however,
wherein the immaterial fitting is the fundament, these quantum-phenomena even
are logical.
I think that our finite light constantly creates and recreates, so forms, these
most fundamental particles. I also think that these fundamental particles only
live a very short life, however constantly repeated. What we see on quantum
level is this birth and rebirth of these most fundamental forms, constantly
created by our finite light. And do we change that relating and creating light,
by throwing light while investigating, then the particles immediately are
reformed according to this new relation.
What we call the durability of atoms, molecules and things, then is like the
durability of a forest wherein all trees die one after another while the forest
roughly remains the same. We must give up the notion of objective durability in
order to understand the quantum-phenomena, that is what I think.
According to me, light is the fundamental building activity, light that as a
result of its finite speed, needs time to bridge space so that space and time
get a significance. So the dynamic of light is not a speed through space, like
for example the speed of a car, bullet or sound, but is a creation of space.
And that is also why its 'speed' is a constant, I think. See more about this
elsewhere on this website.
15. East or West, Relational is
best
It appears to me that in this relational way of looking at reality, many
problems can find a solution. We then see the immaterial fitting of forms as
physical facts. We also see then, that when we speak of spirit or idea, we have
real physical facts in mind, immaterial facts that nevertheless have a
form.
I still like our Western scientific approach of reality, because only facts
count. But spirit too is a fact.
I also believe that for example Taoists will recognize Tao in what I call
the fitting of forms. Because whatever Tao may be, it anyhow is a fact that the
yin-Tao-yang trinity also is a form-fitting-form trinity. So even Tao now is a
physical fact.
This does not mean that we understand everything now. Will we ever really
understand why sounds can be music for us? Will we ever really understand life,
Eros and Electra? Or just seeing? Or light? Maybe not. But music and life
anyhow play as fitting of forms, and as harmony in fitting forms. I think that
is all a philosopher can say about it; the other qualitative aspects then are
for other sciences and for poets and the like.
From dualism to trinity, that also is the result of this relational philosophy.
Gaps then become bridges. A human then is back again in his origin, right in
the middle of nature, with his body still like the fetus and his mind as a
natural instrument as well. We still are special then, the only beings with a
real sense for spirit. But we also are very natural, more natural than any
other being.
Jan Helderman, August 19, 2001
