Introduction to World-Making - Part One
One cannot read the following material like a novel through which one can sort of skim. Each numbered entry requires reflection, and each entry is related to all of the other numbered sections within this thought-experiment. The currents run in many different directions.
The material below is a study in principles of hermeneutics or interpretive methodology. Or, viewed from another perspective, the following themes explore some of the processes involved in world-making and the construction of reality.
All content is value-laden. However, this does not mean there is no such thing as truth – rather, the task with which we are faced is to find the methodologies, styles of interpretation, and modes of world-making which give expression to those values (in the form of concepts, experiences, facts, theories, paradigms, and so on) which are best able to reflect something of the structural character of the truth. Consequently, the search for true values (or, at least, values which are capable of reflecting various dimensions of reality), of whatever kind (scientific, spiritual, legal, political, philosophical, psychological, etc.), cannot escape the problems, questions, and issues surrounding the problem of methodology, interpretation and world-making.
Unfortunately, the foregoing considerations are precisely the sort of things which are almost completely absent from most forms of public and private schooling up through the completion of high school, and even carrying over into many college and university programs. The teaching of critical thinking is the exception in most systems of modern education, not the rule.
Instead, the biases and prejudices of many teachers and learning materials are confused for, and conflated with, the idea of critical thought. Objectivity, balance, fairness, truth, logic, methodology, and rigor are often reduced to whatever the opinions or theories of a teacher or educator happen to be.
Students are not free to pursue the truth wherever this may take them. Rather, they are shackled to the world-views of their mentors and the educational authorities who maintain the hermeneutical prisons known as ‘schools’.
The following material is not easy going, but, then, neither is reality. One can no more rush these issues than one can rush through reality – at least, one cannot do this and expect to derive quality answers and possibilities.
1. The only point(s) of possible contact between understanding and reality is (are) experience(s).
1.01 Initially, we do not know if this possibility is given expression through an asymptote-like relationship, a tangential link, multiple-points of contacts, or if understanding and experience constitute the sum total of reality.
1.0101 Manifold refers to the sum total of the structural character of such points of contact.
1.0102 Contact constitutes junctures of engagement, interaction, transaction, or contiguity between that aspect of reality which is capable of experience and those facets of what is which makes experience at such junctures possible.
1.0103 Interaction, engagement, transaction and/or contiguity at the junctures of contact between that which is capable of experience and that which makes experience of such structural character possible gives rise to points or clusters of data which are processed by different dimensions of understanding as information of one kind or another concerning the possible nature or structure of such junctures of contact.
1.01031 The term “identifying reference” is a way of alluding to the attentional and intentional dimensions of experience. By attending to a dimension or facet of experience and communicating the nature of that attention to another individual, we seek to inform the other person about some aspect of what we are intending in relation to that to which we are attending. The communication which involves conveying the nature of the link between attending and intending gives expression to the process of identifying reference.
1.01032 The process of identifying reference tends to involve pointing toward, or descriptions of, or attempting to draw attention to, the structural character of various kinds of qualities, properties, states of affairs, contexts, experiences, modalities of consciousness, events, objects, phenomena.
1.01033 Structural character refers to the nature of the form, logic, framework, format, pattern, figure, latticework, set of relationships, and/or set of degrees of freedom and constraints, through which a given aspect of experience, or that which makes such experience possible, is given expression or is manifested.
1.011 Solipsism is a perspective which maintains that reality is generated as a function of an individual’s states of consciousness and all that can be known are such states and, possibly, the nature of the self which gives rise to them.
1.012 Relationships give expression to the linkage, connection, interface, association, or affiliation of two or more aspects of experience, understanding, or that which makes experience of a certain structural character possible. There are many kinds of relationships which are possible, ranging from: temporal, to: spatial, logical, dialectical, ecological, moral, causal, conceptual, hierarchical, physical, and spiritual.
1.1 Kant might have been wrong, for, it may be possible, after all, to know things in themselves - but only to extent that we have the capacity to understand the nature, logic, or structural character of such ‘things’, and only to the extent that these ‘things’ are expressed through manifestations which can be experienced.
1.11 The phenomenology of the ‘manifold’ serves as that realm where understanding, experience, and reality are brought into conjunction with one another. Another way of referring to this ‘manifold’ is by the term: phenomenological field.
1.111 Phenomenology gives expression to a being’s capacity to engage experience in a conscious manner.
1.121 Consciousness is a priori - all experience presuppose its existence - indeed, consciousness is the ground through which experience is given expression. One cannot deny the existence of consciousness without affirming the very reality which is being denied.
1.122 Consciousness is the awareness of experience.
1.123 Reflexive consciousness is the awareness of such awareness and that such awareness gives expression to different kinds of experience.
1.124 A phenomenological field is a framework whose structural character gives expression to the presence of awareness or consciousness (basic or reflexive) concerning experience at any ‘point’ (simple or complex) one cares to examine, test, or challenge within the context of that framework. The lines of force which are manifested in such a field are expressions of the dynamics of experience, awareness, understanding, and the impact, if any, of that which lies beyond the horizons of the phenomenological field but which interacts with and affects, in one way or another, the structural character of that field.
1.125 Neither awareness of experience, nor reflexive consciousness, can guarantee, in and of themselves, that one’s understanding of the nature of that of which one is aware, or that which makes possible that of which one is aware, will be correct or accurate.
1.126 Consciousness may, or may not, be shaped by contingencies which lie beyond present or all future modalities of awareness.
1.127 Experience gives expression to the sum total of an individual’s interaction with reality.
1.128 Reality is synonymous with whatever is, together with whatever makes being possible, including the being of that which is capable of experience and understanding, on whatever level.
1.1281 Truth refers to an accurate, correct, or non-distorted reflection of one, or another, dimension or facet of reality or what is.
1.1282 Among human beings, truth may rarely, if ever, be acquired in an ultimate, absolute, definitive, and all-encompassing manner.
1.1283 For the most part, at best, human beings tend to acquire truths in tangential, asymptotic, or limited ways. Furthermore, rather than grasping the truth of the entire realm of being, we tend to grasp, within varying degrees, limited aspects of truth involving this or that dimension or this or that facet of experience and/or that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
1.129 Understanding is the process one uses to try to map out the possible relationship between experience(s) and reality.
1.1291 The nature of understanding is to construct possible worlds and compare the logic or structural character of such worlds with the logic or structural character of experience.
1.13 A possible world gives expression to hermeneutical space.
1.131 Hermeneutical space is a logical form that is generated through understanding.
1.1312 Logic arises through conscious construction, or appears ready made in awareness, or is a combination of conscious construction and ready-made components that arise from beyond the realms of consciousness.
1.13121 Logic concerns: (a) the structural character of a form or process; and/or (b) the relationships of similarity and difference between, or among, structural characters; and/or (c) the causal, temporal, contiguous, dependency, correlational, and/or theoretical, linkages which are believed to be operative in and/or among different structural forms and processes.
1.131212 Logic is a way of organizing, arranging, relating, valuing, exploring, traveling, and/or generating the structural character of hermeneutical spaces.
1.1312121 Logic gives expression to the degrees of freedom, constraints, operations, functions, rules, principles, relationships, and laws which govern a given hermeneutical space or which is manifested through such a space.
1.312122 Thinking, reflection, inference, interpolation, extrapolation, implication, induction, deduction, abduction, analogy, insight, conceptualization, abstraction, mapping, questioning, believing, assuming, creativity, language, interpretation, hypothesizing, fantasizing, dreaming, feeling, judgement, analysis, evaluation, critical inquiry, and understanding each gives expression to hermeneutical spaces of one kind or another, and logic seeks to chart the structural character (both static and dynamic) of such spaces.
1.322 An idea or concept is a particular kind of hermeneutical space. The structural character of such a space reflects the nature of the idea or concept. Larger hermeneutical spaces are often constructed or generated using various ideas and concepts as ‘points’, somewhat akin to the manner in which geometric points are said to give expression to, say, a line.
1.3221 The structural character of ideas and concepts tend to be far more complex than the points of geometry - even the curved points of Riemann geometry - but are closer in nature to the latter than the former, since the notion of ‘curvature’ in Riemann’s geometry suggests the possibility of an internal structure of varying degrees of complexity that may alter with circumstances and conditions.
1.3222 Reason is the capacity to grasp the structural character of a given hermeneutical space or to follow and/or predict the flow of artificial and/or natural systems of logic as these are given expression through the structural character of such a system being manifested.
1.3223 What cannot be followed through rational means is either irrational (without logical form or unintelligible or trans-rational (that is, beyond the capacity of reason to grasp but not necessarily without logical form, truth, and/or intelligibility).
1.3224 Methodology is a process of evaluation concerning the nature of understanding, experience, and/or that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
1.32241 Evaluation involves the use of reason, hermeneutical spaces, and various systems of logic to establish the value of various aspects of experience or that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
1.32242 The value of an experience or that which makes an experience of such structural character possible is an expression of the way an individual is assisted to understand, adapt, or benefit, in some manner, through such an experience or through that which makes an experience of such structural character possible.
1.32243 The significance of ‘value’ may be relative to: a given perspective, an individual, a community, or a reflection of the possibilities inherent in a given facet or dimension of the way things are.
1.133 One of the essential questions at the heart of seeking an understanding is to ask: what might give rise to experience(s) of the structural character that appear in consciousness.
1.134 One form of mapping gives expression to operations and processes which seek to chart the structural character of one, or more, hermeneutical spaces.
1.1341 Another form of mapping gives expression to those attempts of understanding to establish relationships of congruence, matching, resonance, reflection, and/or similarity between (among) the logical character of possible worlds being constructed and the logical character of experience(s).
1.1342 A third form of mapping gives expression to operations and processes which seek to establish relationships, connections, and links among the structural character of a given hermeneutical space, a given set of experiences, and various aspects of that which makes experiences of such character possible.
2. Facts constitute a logical space which gives expression to and/or represents and/or describes various dimensions of the character of experience.
2.01 Different kinds of experience may, or may not, give rise to different kinds of facts.
2.1 Facts may accurately reflect the structural character of some facet of experience, but this need not entail their accurately reflecting the structural character of that which makes experience of such character possible.
2.2 Facts require context and interpretation in order for their significance to be evaluated.
2.3 The context of facts is the catalog of experiences out of which such facts arise.
2.4 A fact may be a feeling concerning, a belief about, a reflection on, a description of, a reference to, and/or an insight into some aspect of experience.
2.41 Feelings are certain kinds of modality of relating to, and interacting with, various aspects of experience and/or that which makes experiences of such structural character possible. These modalities are non-rational in nature (which does not necessarily mean they are irrational), varying in intensity with circumstances and conditions, and often underwrite, orient, shape, and direct one’s commitments and actions.
2.411 Feelings (emotions) must be tasted or experienced in order to grasp something of the structural character of their nature. Just as one can have only very limited understanding concerning the nature of an orange if one has never seen, touched, smelled, or tasted such a fruit, so, too, one can have only very limited understanding concerning the nature of any given emotion, if one has not experienced that emotion from the inside out, as it were.
2.412 Feelings can both help one to better understand the nature of experience, as well as interfere with one’s attempt to understand the nature of experience. In the former case, they are complementary to the use of reason and help bring balance to hermeneutical activities. In the latter case, they are antagonistic to and obstacles for, one’s attempt to seek understanding.
2.413 When the presence, or expression, of certain kinds of feelings (emotions) dominates or orients hermeneutical activity in a destructive, problematic, or distorting manner, then, one of the biggest challenges to generating hermeneutical spaces which are congruent with, reflect, or mirror the structural character of various dimensions of reality is to find ways of eliminating, containing, or modulating the presence of such feelings in order to limit the extent of bias and error which affects the construction of heuristically valuable hermeneutical spaces.
2.414 A methodology, belief, idea, or activity has heuristic value when it aids the process of discovery with respect to coming to understand the structural character of some aspect or dimension of experience or that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
2.401 Beliefs give expression to hermeneutical spaces which often are not amenable to proofs but, nonetheless, tend to be concerned with the relationship among understanding, experience, and the nature of that which makes experience of such structural character possible. Beliefs are a way of orienting oneself within phenomenological and hermeneutical space.
2.4011 Beliefs are ideas and/or values to which a hermeneutical commitment, of some kind, has been made - the nature of this commitment is to accept or treat the focus of this commitment as if it were true.
2.40112 Beliefs involve commitments which are considered to have some sort of value to the one holding the commitment.
2.40113 Discussions concerning belief frequently involve descriptions of the structural character of the nature of a given belief, or belief system, together with explorations of the assumptions, evidence, arguments, explanations, consistency, coherency, validity, heuristic value, strengths, lacunae, problems, and questions which are, or might be, associated with such a belief or belief system.
2.40114 The use of data, evidence, arguments, demonstrations, and proofs in conjunction with beliefs or belief systems is often, at best, suggestive or leads to inconclusive results as far as verification of the belief or belief system is concerned.
2.40115 In general, showing a belief or belief system to be untenable or problematic tends to be easier to accomplish than showing either to be plausible, probable, or true.
2.41 Insight is the capacity of intelligence to understand, to varying degrees, the structural character of some aspect, facet or dimension of experience and/or that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
2.5 The possible worlds of hermeneutical space consist of a series of facts, assumptions, interpretations, beliefs, values, and relationships which are arranged into a structure which give expression to both form and process of a given character - namely, the logical character of that hermeneutical space.
2.6 The logical character of a hermeneutical space gives expression to the principles, rules, laws, possibilities, forces, processes, and/or limitations inherent in such a space.
2.7 Objects are forms of a given logical kind which populate a hermeneutical space.
2.8 The logical kind to which an object gives expression is a reflection of the structural character of the role which that object plays in a given hermeneutical space.
2.81 The role played by an object is an expression of the principles, rules, laws, possibilities, forces, processes and limitations that are operative in a given hermeneutical space.
2.82 The role played by an object is the locus of manifestation through which the logical character of the hermeneutical space is given expression by means of the convergent interaction of the principles, forces, forms, processes, rules, laws, and so that are inherent in that hermeneutical space at a given point in time and at a given location within that space.
2.83 Time and location are a function of the logical character of a given hermeneutical space.
2.9 Language is a species of hermeneutical space.
2.91 Hermeneutical space need not be coextensive with language.
2.92 Emotion, sensation, dreaming, aptitude, interests, motivation, movement, fantasy, creativity, insight, thinking, and spiritual knowledge may, or may not, be expressible, to varying degrees, in terms of language, but the former are not necessarily reducible to the latter.
2.921 Feeling, sensation, dreaming, aptitude, interests, motivation, movement, fantasy, creativity, insight, thinking, and spiritual knowledge may all take place quite independently of language and, in most cases, predate the appearance of language.
2.922 To make experience a function of, and dependent on, language is to render the process of language completely amorphous and, therefore, oblique to understanding.
2.923 Sometimes language determines what we feel, sense, dream, like, do, create, think or understand, but sometimes the use of language is directed and shaped by what we feel, sense, dream, like, do, create, think, or understand.
2.924. Language is a way of giving public expression to certain dimensions of experience and hermeneutical spaces concerning such experience.
2.925 Language is a tool which can assist in the construction of hermeneutical spaces, and, in turn, hermeneutical spaces can inform the way(s) in which language is used as a tool.
2.926 Language is one mapping medium, among many, through which understanding, experience, and reality may be probed.
2.927 Language without a conscious operator does not have the capacity, on its own, to serve as tool for helping to construct or map hermeneutical spaces.
2.9271 The syntax and semantics of a language are static entities until brought alive through use within a context of consciousness and understanding.
2.9272 Language serves as a catalyst for the constructing and mapping of hermeneutical spaces by conscious beings of some minimal level of understanding and hermeneutical capability.
2.9273 Language serves as a medium of public analysis and comparison for different modalities of hermeneutical space.
2.93 Among those beings who are capable of experience, some degree of understanding concerning such experience, and who have developed a certain proficiency with language to be able to describe both experience and understanding, are some beings who say that the propositions or statements of language constitute a picture of experience and/or understanding and/or those facets of reality which are given expression at the junctures of contact where experience, understanding, reality come together.
2.931 This tends to lead to the questions: What is the nature of a picture, and do the descriptions of language constitute a picture, and, if so, what kind of a picture?
2.932 There are many kinds of pictures - photographs, holographs, mental images, magnetic resonance imaging, art works, positron emission tomography, cartography, X-rays, optical illusions, radio wave imaging, sketches, dreams, hallucinations, stills, movies, televison, and so on.
2.933 All pictures involve a methodology (well-conceived or otherwise) for engaging the junctures of contact which bring experience, understanding, and reality together.
2.934 Methodology is an ordered process of understanding whose purpose is to engage experience and that which makes experience of such structural character possible in order to probe, within the capacity of the methodology to do so, the nature, structure, or logic of the relationship, if any, between these two dimensions of being .
2.935 Pictures are generated through a process which affects the quality and character of the images that are produced, as well as imposes a limiting context on the mode of engagement to which the methodology underlying the picture gives expression.
2.936 Pictures are an interpretive mapping of some given juncture, or set of junctures, in which experience, understanding, and reality come together.
2.937 Interpretive mapping gives expression to a methodology’s manner of constructing hermeneutical spaces.
2.938 Pictures are hermeneutical spaces, the contents of which are filled up by the data which is generated through the way the methodology of the picture taking engages experience and that which makes experience of such structural character possible.
2.94 Language, to the extent it constitutes a modality of generating pictures, does so according to the methodological properties of the language in question.
2.941 The methodology inherent in any given language is an expression of the rules and principles of syntax and semantics which differentiate one language from another.
2.9411 The rules of a language establish the boundary conditions which cannot be violated without removing one from the way the given language permits one to communicate with others who use the same language. Linguistic rules are like the motor vehicle codes which govern the operation of motor vehicles within a given locality in order for traffic to move smoothly with as few problems as possible.
2.9412 The principles of a language establish the degrees of freedom through which an individual can move creatively and hermeneutically within a given language in order to adapt the rules and principles of syntax and semantics of that language to one’s individual desires to communicate about issues which are either meta-linguistic or extra-linguistic. Linguistic principles are like road maps which show you places to which travel is possible but do not specify where one has to go or what routes one must take in order to arrive at one’s desired destination.
2.9413 The rules and principles of a given language’s syntax and semantics serve as mapping tools which enable an individual to translate, to whatever extent possible, between personal, extra-linguistic hermeneutical spaces and public linguistic hermeneutical spaces.
2.942 Different languages have varying degrees of flexibility concerning the extent to which the syntax and semantics of such languages are able to serve as vehicles of transmission for forms of thought, logic, creativity, understanding, and, methodology which are extra-linguistic.
2.943 Languages and pictures are similar to the extent that each uses mapping methodologies to link together junctures of contact among experiences, understandings, and that which makes experiences and understandings of such structural character possible.
2.944 Languages and pictures are dissimilar to the extent that their respective methodologies give expression to different sets of rules and principles for linking together junctures of contact among experiences, understandings, and that which makes experiences and understandings of such character possible.
| Next | Part 3 |Return to Education Menu |
|
