"Knowledge always win in the end, but not unless and until it is known." – Professor John McMurtry
The Ontological Mathematical Basis of the Infinite Felt Side of Being Within
In order to appreciate better our post-materialist cosmos, given the quantum field theory discoveries of Plank, Bohm and Laszlo, we would have to incorporate “the infinite (felt side of being) within” into a fully coherent realizable cosmic whole of understanding and meaning.
Although we have used mathematical principles and tools to guide our materialist and mechanical endeavours in mostly predictable and more often than not, unintended consequential ways, our actions have been ungrounded and mathematics have been the servant, rather than the master, hence the hubris and follies of humankind’s ways up to now.
One may rightly argue that mathematics is a human social construct of the highest order, and that it was invented by us. But an exploration of the landscape of mathematics in many fields of endeavour have shown that this is not necessarily the case, given that universal principles have been discovered along the way. Hence, one may comfortably assume that if this is the case, then mathematics must be in some way more foundational than our social constructs and in that sense ontological at its base, inclusive of the elusive infinite felt side of being within and the psychological and subjective realm of our intimate experiences.
Then in 2015 I got an email out of the blue from a Robert Hagen that opened my eyes to the primacy of mathematics over science, and I would have to give him the most credit for pointing me in the right direction.
I have reproduced the email exchanges below in gratitude for his assistance:
08/26/15 at 6:38 PM
Dear Dr. Sahely,
Hello. I read with much interest your 2012 paper on Euler’s formula and quantum physics.
I am curious if you have additional papers and research in this area?
Also was curious what you thought of the following commentary on “e” and Planck’s constant by Kieran D Kelly?:
Was curious about your thoughts on this one as well?
My best,
Robert H
09/04/15 at 10:09 AM
Dear Robert:
Thanks for the link to the mathematical universe. I agree wholeheartedly with the primacy of mathematics over science. There are many developments in the research sphere that is corroborating this view.
There is an interesting paper that conjectures that M theory is not based on strings but on point like objects D0 branes in a noncommutative space, which may be mathematically equivalent to the monad theory proposed.
If mathematics is complete, as I believe it is, then we are dealing with the proverbial six blind men and the elephant situation. In their limited spheres of study, these investigators are only seeing the parts rather than the whole. The parts should guide us to the whole, and the whole should help tie the parts together.
Best regards,
Bichara
09/05/15 at 2:26 PM
Thank you Bichara,
I will review the material you sent with interest.
Btw, the author of the Mathematical Universe has a series of publications, but I’d like to point you to 2 in particular:
1) “The God Equation.” The argument is made that all of ontological mathematics derives from Euler’s formula. Or said another way – yes, people have marveled at this equation for a long time but what has been missed is that this really is the ultimate statement of existence (and has been under our noses).
The God Series (32 Book Series) by Mike Hockney, which can be found here at https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0771LCTVQ/, provides an excellent resource detailing the implications and explications of ontological mathematics.
“From Book 1: This is the introductory text of the “God Series” of books in which the Pythagorean Illuminati reveal, for the first time in the public domain, the “answer to everything”.
Pythagoras provided a glimpse of the answer 2,500 years ago when he declared, “All things are numbers”. The God series fully reveals what Pythagoras meant. Mathematics – built from numbers – is not an abstraction but is ontological: it actually exists. Numbers are real things. Specifically, they are the frequencies of energy waves. (Moreover, energy waves are simply sinusoidal waves: sines and cosines, meaning that the study of energy is the study of sinusoids). There are infinity energy waves, hence infinite numbers. No numbers are privileged over any others, so negative and imaginary numbers are as ontologically important as real numbers (upon which scientific materialism is exclusively based).
Real numbers correspond to space and imaginary numbers to time. Negative numbers are “antimatter”: a mirror image universe.
The two most powerful numbers of all – and the ultimate basis of Illuminist thinking – are zero and infinity, which are harnessed together ontologically (opposite sides of the same coin, so to speak). The existence of zero and infinity is vehemently denied by the ideology of scientific materialism. In Illuminism, these two numbers not only exist, they are the “God” numbers: the origin of all other numbers. Zero and infinity comprise the Big Bang Singularity itself from which an infinitely large universe emerged: “everything” literally came from “nothing”.
Moreover, zero is also the “monad” of Leibniz (an Illuminati Grand Master). It is therefore the number of THE SOUL, and it has INFINITE capacity. Being dimensionless – a mathematical point – the soul is outside the dimensional, material domain of space and time, hence the soul is indestructible, immortal and cannot be detected by any conventional scientific experiment.
What we are describing are the necessary, analytic, eternal truths of mathematics – they have no connection with Abrahamic religious faith. There is NO Creator God but, astoundingly, each soul is capable of being promoted to God status, just as the pawn in chess can become the most important chess piece, the Queen, if it reaches the other side of the battlefield (the board). In Illuminism, if you reach gnosis – enlightenment – you become God.
Mathematics is literally everything. Unlike science, mathematics offers certainty: 100% true and incontestable knowledge. Mathematics unifies science, religion and metaphysics. Mathematics is the true Grand Unified Theory of Everything that science pursues so futilely. Science can never deliver truth and certainty because it is inherently a succession of provisional theories, any of which can be overturned at any time by new experimental data. Science is based on ideas of validation and falsification. Mathematics is based on absolute analytic and unarguable certainty. No experiment can ever contradict a mathematical truth.
Mathematics is the ONLY answer to everything. Mathematics is the ONLY subject inherently about eternal, Platonic truth. As soon as existence is understood to be nothing but ontological mathematics, all questions are ipso facto answered.
The God series, starting with The God Game, reveals the astonishing power of ontological mathematics to account for everything, including things such as free will, irrationalism, emotion, consciousness and qualia, which seem to have no connection with mathematics.”
A summary of the implications of this realization is that many unconnected features of the world fit together into an adamantine whole via this ontological mathematical framework, especially the infinite felt side of being within, which cannot be fathomed by the Western materialist mindset. To make contact with the infinite felt side of being within, one would have to see the finite spatio-temporal patterns without as holographic projections of the infinite and eternal vibrational frequencies of energies within.
Excerpts from Mike Hockney’s facebook page are very revealing and they provide the stepping stones of enlightenment that surpasses all of our previous understandings.
“Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler first wrote the equality, which links together geometry, algebra, and five of the most essential symbols in math — 0, 1, i, pi and e — that are essential tools in scientific work.”
“Now, maybe you’ve never thought of math equations as “beautiful,” but look at that result: It combines the five most fundamental numbers in math—0, 1, e, i, and π—in a relation of irreducible simplicity. (Even more astonishing if you slog through the proof, which involves infinite sums, factorials, and fractions nested within fractions within fractions like matryoshka dolls.) And remember, e and π are infinitely long decimals with seemingly nothing in common; they’re the ultimate jigsaw puzzle pieces. Yet they fit together perfectly—not to a few places, or a hundred, or a million, but all the way to forever.
You can take this farther, too. If you write that function above in a more general but still simple form as f(x) = e(zx), where z = (a + bi), what you get is no longer a circle but a logarithmic spiral, combining rotation and growth—now both at the same time! These graceful spirals are also found everywhere in nature, from the whorls in a nautilus shell to the sweeping arms of galaxies. And they’re related, in turn, to the golden ratio (yet another infinite decimal, 1.61803 …) and the Fibonacci sequence of numbers (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, …), which neatly describes the arrangement of leaves and petals in plants.”
Slowly but surely (or exponentially!) humanity will find all the answers to physics, light, mind, prime numbers, the universe in the god equation.”
A connection between the golden ratio and eulers formula
“Iteration in mathematics may refer to the process of iterating a function i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviours and difficult problems –Wikipedia
The physical world isn’t really anything but incorporeal mathematical forces made corporeal by their inverse operations. Points with the illusion they are interfering (because of their mathematical coordinates) but are in fact, a singularity.
The uncertainty principle basically says that you can’t make the uncertainty in a particle’s position and the uncertainty in momentum arbitrarily small at the same time. This has been proven to just be a property of the Fourier Transform. Does that not show that the Fourier Transform (leading back to the God Equation) underpins reality?
“Described as “nature’s way of analyzing data”by Yale professor Ronald Coifman, the Fourier Transform is arguably the most powerful analytical tool in modern mathematics. Professor Peter Moore, a Yale structural biologist and professor of biophysics, agrees. “To form an image on your retina, the lens in your eye performs Fourier transformations on the light that enters it,” he explains. This tool is truly ubiquitous in nature, as our eyes and ears have subconsciously performed the Fourier transform to interpret sound and light waves for millions of years. Hence it was only a matter of time until the human intellect caught up to our internal processing systems and was able to functionally describe this process. After years of research, French Baron Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Fourier uncovered this powerful tool in the early 1800s, naming it the Fourier transform.”
What came first? The senses or the mathematical Fourier Transform in which how the senses actually function. It’s insane to think the senses can tell us more truth than mathematics, which is eternal. Mathematical minds performing unconscious processes can, through evolution, create many of ways to interpret information in an environment. This is all the senses really are, mathematical ways to process mathematical information.
The senses are in fact only performing fourier transforms, the basis of holography, quantum mechanics, and interpreting the universe of signals. This is a universe of mind, of waves, of mathematics, of information defined by the god equation. It’s been well documented how fourier analysis can be traced back to Euler’s formula so it bears the question, why rely on the senses when they are only mathematical functions? Why not fully embrace mathematics, the source.
Jung’s psyche and mathematics
“the tragic thing is that psychology has no self-consistent mathematics at its disposal, but only a calculus of subjective prejudices.” – Carl Jung
Jung here expresses a longing for a mathematical basis to the psyche. Jung goes on to quote this connection of energy and psyche.
“The psyche is not a chaos made up of random whims and accidents, but is an objective reality to which the investigator can gain access by the methods of natural science. There are indications that psychic processes stand in some sort of energy relation to the physiological substrate. In so far as they are objective events, they can hardly be interpreted as anything but energy processes.”
And he concludes by stating that “… the concept of energy is a strictly defined mathematical quantity.”
Jung was right energy is defined as mathematical quantity. Take this quote from the YouTube channel The Science Asylum describing energy:
“This leaves us with an unfortunate truth, we don’t really know what energy is. Every hypothesis we’ve ever had that has pretended it’s some kind of substance has epically failed. It seems to be this weird abstract property of the universe. Energy is just a number.”
Energy is number and a substance. It is mathematics and mind but, also subjectively energy is defined by mathematical quality. Science focuses on the quantitative aspect of mathematics, but not the qualitative. The qualitative side is the content part of mathematics, the part that’s experienced by mathematical minds (monads).
Illuminism has the answer to Jung’s dilemma and that is the Fourier Transform. If we think of psyche/information/mind/energy as the flow between two mathematical domains, space/time and frequency, we have a connection between mind and mathematics. From what is known about the frequency domain implicates something fantastic about psyche, it’s a timeless, spaceless, eternal, infinite, dimensionless world of varying magnitudes of energy. This is nothing but the monad, the soul.
This domain precedes the Space/time domain of which it is just a different representation. Both domains are mathematical hence mental.
With the fourier transform we could think of archetypes as complex mathematical functions and the psyche as the mathematical point, the Leibniz monad defined by Euler’s identity in which the Fourier transform flows from. The relationship between right and left brain as the relationship between the frequency and space/time domain respectively and subjective experiences can now be interpreted as content flowing from mathematical points. All of Jung’s intuitions can one day be analytically proven.
The Seven Hermetic Principles, redone as ontological mathematics.
The Principle of Mentalism: Mathematics is completely mental, in actuality mind is mathematics. If mind was not completely mathematical it would never be coherent.
The Principle of Correspondence: This is just simply the holographic principle. The fourier transform is the basis of holography.
The Principle of Vibration: Vibration is about oscillation and oscillation is about mathematical waves and eternal motion.
The Principle of Polarity: Think the poles of the Riemann Sphere. Think of negative and positive numbers, Imaginary and real numbers, Zero and Infinity.
The Principle of Rhythm: Rhythm is about patterns in movement and sound. This is again about waves, the flow of sines and cosines, and potential patterns that can be created within those waves.
The Principle of Cause and Effect: Cause and effect has always been about mental movement in the uncaused Frequency domain causing effects in the space/time domain.
The Principle of Gender: Mental separation and integration of left brain and right brain dynamics which is about the space/time domain and frequency domain respectively. Circles and straight lines, Intuition/Feeling and Thinking/Sensing, Anima and animus, Dimensionless and dimensional.
The mathematical point or monad, as thought of by Leibniz, encompasses all these principles and more.
Black hole minds
Carl Jung once speculated in a letter that the psyche transcends physical measurement because it has infinite mass which he summarized as “Psyche=highest intensity in the smallest space” well this is nothing but a singularity.
Jung was right that psyche transcends measurement as it has no empirical components however, mind is massless and dimensionless. The concept of infinite mass is a scientific bias of dimensional thinking, singularities have no mass. The psyche is none other than the monad, the mathematical point, the true singularity.
Black holes are minds. The singularity or frequency domain eternally precedes and underpins the space/time domain, the dimensional domain of science.
Jung had a theory of the mandala as the ultimate archetype of reconciliation of opposites, unifying the mind and the universe, a particular and immensely important geometrical image from the collective unconscious.
His description of the mandala from the book “Civilization in Transition”
“Mandalas . . . usually appear in situations of psychic confusion and perplexity. The archetype thereby constellated represents a pattern of order which, like a psychological ‘view-finder’ marked with a cross or circle divided into four, is superimposed on the psychic chaos so that each content falls into place and the weltering confusion is held together by the protective circle. . . . At the same time they are yantras, instruments with whose help the order is brought into being.”
Notice he says marked with a “crosss or circle divided into 4”. Where in Illuminism have we heard of a similar object? It’s none other than the God Graph or Euler’s unit circle, Leibniz’s monad. The whole of ontological mathematics.
Jung was describing a subjectively psychological but, ultimately mathematical process.
Psychology is a subset of Ontological Mathematics – actually, all things are.
The unit circle, the representation of positive and negative, real and imaginary numbers, complex numbers that always reconciles at 0, the singularity.
The very unit circle where Riemann discovered, by extending the complex plane to a point at infinity, the Riemann Sphere. The very unit circle where Einstein mistakenly interpreted general relativity from and where quantum mechanics is derived. Only Illuminism has recognized what the unit circle represents, the whole of mathematics.
[The Riemann sphere can be visualized as the complex number plane wrapped around a sphere (by some form of stereographic projection).]
Jung amazingly, but not seemingly, was reflecting on the mathematical nature of life but, from a psychological perspective. The ultimate archetype of mind is the unit circle. Jung’s interpretation of the psyche is made more analytical by way of mathematical singularities which are none other than the massless and dimensionless frequency domain, the domain of light.
Balanced Mind
In some esoteric thinking one will find a lot of parallels between male mind and female mind, left hemisphere and right hemisphere respectively. In simplifying Myers Briggs terms could sensing (S) be low frequency male mind while thinking (T) is high frequency male mind? Could feeling (F) be low frequency female mind and intuition (N) be it’s high frequency counterpart? Could INT’s have the most balanced between male and female mind? Do they engage between the frequency domain and space/time domain more than other Myers Briggs types? Would ST’s be complete male mind and NF’s be complete female mind? If we hypothetically say man is represented by real numbers and woman imaginary numbers that always balance out to zero, could that be a way to give esoteric thinking a mathematical underpinning.
When it comes to reported and documented NDE’s there are several different types of accounts. Some see Jesus, Buddha, or lost family members, a myriad of different visions. Isn’t it peculiar that whatever the individual believed in during their life has a strong probability to manifest during a NDE. A typically reported NDE for Christians is a vision of Jesus usually followed by him proclaiming “you have more work to do” (Which they do! All abrahamist). Eastern Religious types will see eastern religious gods or visuals from eastern religious mythos, and other things they have difficulty interpreting. Atheist types typically will see their lost loved ones.
Mind is the cause of these spiritual experiences and mind is 100% mathematical. What would someone with knowledge of ontological mathematics see? What if one knew that the NDE is an integration function between the frequency and space/time domains? What possibilities can occur if one has conscious awareness of this? It would never occur to most that what they see is of their own making. Would they give up control to these functions? Would this in turn put them back into the reincarnation cycle which is another mathematical function?
When you face your soul only the truth will suffice. Mysticism, Abrahamism, and materialistic science will not give you truth. Only ontological mathematics defined by the god equation can do that. Show your soul, the monad, what you really are.
Archetypes as functions
How would we link Archetypes with mathematics? Well minds have the ability to imagine, we all utilize imagination. Imaging can be easily tied to Fourier mathematics: ANY image can be the sum of sinusoidal waves. Mathematical minds give these images base functions (again sinusoids) stories even. This information simply does not disappear. We are information interpreting ourselves! Archetypes could be seen as types of complex functions that are in the collective unconscious which a monad can actively link with and make dynamic.
A reason to get up
“Stand up!
There’s always someone dreaming of some unknown meaning to their every day
Or stay down!
Afraid of losing sight of your all you’re about to know and wish you never knew
Everybody’s praying,
Everybody’s trying to get back to where they started
I can see what they’re all about now
Everybody’s gambling trying to find a reason to get up in the morning”
– Kid Astray
I don’t pray!
Riddle me this Batman!
What has No value and infinite value simultaneously?
It’s the soul, the monad, the mathematical mind defined by the God Equation.
Traditions
Just because it’s the way that it’s always been done doesn’t mean it isn’t incredibly stupid and immune from amendment.
Holos and hollows
The holos are the brilliant, the creatives, the holographic minds, the whole, the light, those who are phasing to ontological mathematics.
The hollows are the listless, the manipulative, the uncreative, the trolls, the materialist, the blind, the tormented, the dull, those who are phasing toward meaninglessness.
Potential of the Fourier mind
“Described as “nature’s way of analyzing data” by Yale professor Ronald Coifman, the Fourier Transform is arguably the most powerful analytical tool in modern mathematics. Professor Peter Moore, a Yale structural biologist and professor of biophysics, agrees. “To form an image on your retina, the lens in your eye performs Fourier transformations on the light that enters it,” he explains. This tool is truly ubiquitous in nature, as our eyes and ears have subconsciously performed the Fourier transform to interpret sound and light waves for millions of years. Hence it was only a matter of time until the human intellect caught up to our internal processing systems and was able to functionally describe this process.”
“In 1947, Dennis Gabor formulated the mathematical theories out of which would come the development of the hologram. At the time, he was working on improving the electron microscope. The mathematical equations that he was using were based on a type of calculus invented by an eighteenth-century Frenchman by the name of Jean Fourier. The equations he had developed were called Fourier transforms”
“A Fourier transform is a mathematical way of converting or transforming any simple or complex pattern into a language of simple waves. To get an idea of how this works, let’s take the example of a television set and the camera in the studio. The television camera in the studio takes an image and converts it into electromagnetic frequencies. Those frequencies are then broadcast or sent via cable to your television set at home. There your TV converts those frequencies back into the images you see on your screen. And the Fourier transforms do the same thing. His equations convert images into waveforms and back again into patterns or images.”
The frequency domain (photonic domain, singularity) is outside of space and time and thus everywhere at once. It is instantly connected to everything that has been ACTUALIZED in the space/time domain. It’s about eternal motion and what’s being actualized within it.
There is no time like it’s usually thought of. Only eternal motion through imaginary and real space. There is only the present moment, the future hasn’t been actualized yet and the past is gone (though a powerful mind can possibly have access to wave information that was actualized. Akin to some kind of information storage) .
What outside of space/time indicates is that you are always connected to everything presently being actualized instant by instant in space/time. If it hasn’t been actualized in space/time you won’t be connected to it outside of space/time because it hasn’t happened. There is no block time in Illuminism. This is nothing but the power of a monad.
There is no matter just mathematical, hence mental forces. You are light, a mind, a soul, energy, a star, a black hole, everything and nothing. You are mathematics.
And now the final score of the perfect symphony of ontological mathematics which resonates with one accord with the infinite felt side of being within the fields of ALL LIFE.
“There are two “realities”, one true and one false (episteme versus doxa). True reality is based on necessary syntax and semantics, and concerns nature’s language: mathematics (numbers). False reality is based on contingent, arbitrary syntax and semantics, and deals with man’s languages (dealing with emotive, non-analytic words rather than non-emotive, analytic numbers).”
“A second way of talking about mathematical semantics concerns information carrier (syntax; form) versus information carried (semantics; content). A mathematical sinusoidal wave of a specific frequency may be experienced as the color blue, but it is never experienced as a numerical frequency, as a mathematical waveform. In this view, empiricism is the semantic level of mathematics, while rationalism is the syntactical level of mathematics.
The empirical meaning of something is how it is experienced, not what it actually is. Our phenomenal experiences shield noumenal reality from us. The world is pure math, but we don’t experience it as math: we experience it as feelings, perceptions, intuitions, desires, and so on, all of which belong to the level of information carried and experienced rather the level of the information carrier and transmitter. We experience content, not form. In Platonist terms, we experience the sensible aspect, not the intelligible aspect.
With mathematical semantics, the task is to overcome the unreal, abstract, purely syntactical terms in which mathematics is so often treated, and instead to show that all of our experiences, and the whole way in which the universe is evolving and in which our minds are evolving, relate to the ontological, semantic reality of mathematics.
This is a universe of information agents (monads), which are getting better and better at interpreting information. Eventually, they will be so good that they are able to understand that all information is carried by mathematical waves, and that they themselves are made of waves and carry wave information.
The semantic universe of our experience, from which we derive meaning, is sitting directly on top of a syntactical universe of sinusoidal math derived from Euler’s Formula. The mathematical form is the noumenal level of reality, while the mathematical content (information carried) is the phenomenal level. Humans are attuned to phenomena, not noumena. Only our reason and logic can access the hidden noumenal level that defines existence, and which provides the answer to existence.
The domain of mathematical form (syntax) is the intelligible, rational, explicable aspect of reality. The domain of mathematical content (semantics) is the sensible, irrational, mysterious, mystical, acausal (in terms of appearance), experiential aspect of reality.
This is a universe of information waves, organized within monads (autonomous mathematical wave containers), which are able to interact with each other via wavefunctions (generated by Fourier mathematics).
Another way of looking at things is to say that we are seeking to turn the wavefunction of quantum mechanics into an ontological, semantic reality rather than an unreal, probabilistic mathematical abstraction (as science absurdly claims it is).”
“We are dealing with a dual-aspect ontology, a two-sided coin. If your perceptions are attuned to heads, you will never see tails. If a coin always lands heads up, you will never see tails, but that doesn’t mean tails doesn’t exist. In terms of the dual-aspect ontology of the information carrier and the information carried, you always perceive the information carried and never the information carrier. A rationalist works out that the information carrier must exist. An empiricist, such as Hume, does not. He maintains that anything that cannot be perceived does not exist. He denies his own soul, his own self … simply because he cannot perceive it. It is not something that can be perceived … it is the perceiver himself! A perceiver’s mind is full of perceptions, but none of those perceptions can be of the perceiving mind since the mind is the collective perception carrier, not the individual perceptions it carries. You cannot perceive the perception itself as well as what carries the perception since that would require two independent perception systems, one for each side of the “coin”. A human cannot see heads and tails simultaneously. You would need an entirely different way of perceiving reality to see both sides of the coin at once.”
“In our system, signifier is the syntax, and the signified is the semantics, i.e. the meaningful experience – whether a feeling, perception, sensation, intuition or thought – that accompanies the syntax. This is a dual aspect system reflecting a syntactical carrier (a mathematical wave), and a semantic experience associated with it (the information carried by the mathematical wave).
Humans assign meaning and significance to the experience, not to the carrier of the experience, which is typically treated by science as an unseen, unreal, noumenal abstraction … a quantum mechanical “wavefunction”, which does not become “real” until it is “collapsed” by an observation (i.e. an experience). In our system, the quantum mechanical wavefunction is real, hence has no need of any arbitrary and unexplained collapse mechanism. It is always associated with an experience, with observational and empirical semantic properties. Observers are not required to confer properties upon the wavefunction: it possesses them necessarily.”
“The universe is a giant living mathematical organism made of energy waves which is relentlessly solving itself to establish its optimal symmetry, the symmetry of perfection, the symmetry that produces God.”
“Simple waves are the letters of the ontological alphabet, and, when we put them together, we produce ontological words, sentences, paragraphs, chapters, verses, poems and novels written not onto paper but onto the universe itself.”
The Life-Ground of Value: A concept introduced by McMurtry (1998)which signifies the totality of conditions, natural and/or social, upon which any living thing or collection of living things depends for its existence.
The Life-Ground: the conditions of all life and substantive value.
Most simply expressed, all the conditions required to take your next breath. Axiologically understood, all the life support systems required for human life to reproduce or develop. The life-ground is to be distinguished from the concept of “the life-world” which refers to background beliefs.
The universal basis of all value, the maximal development of the capabilities of living things relative to their degree of organic and social complexity.
The totality of conditions presupposed by the life of individual living things; the basis of there being value and beings that can value.
While religions have featured the animating breath of life, they have attributed it to a transcendental creator so as to overlook its source in the creation itself–a kind of idolatry of man-made ideas.
