The Oracle Chapter 4 (Cosmos)
Lorient Montaner
The Physical Realm
(Ylikó vasíleio)
1. The Oracle defines the physical realm as that which is material and of substance, forming a part of known reality.
2. Socrates believed that reality was dualistic and that it was constructed of two dichotomous realms of being. He ascribed to the notion that one realm is changeable, whilst the other is not. Videlicet, one is merely invariable and the other variable. Heraclitus argued that reality was ceaseless, whilst Parmenides maintained it was unchanging.
3. Plato believed that reality existed in ideas, knowable only through reflection and inspiration, whereas Aristotle saw ultimate reality in physical objects, knowable through the experience of the five common senses. He had predicated that that which is revealed as a tangible substance of reality is, in itself, an extant being or essence of universality. Parmenides’ view on the topic of reality was defined as either finite or infinite in its purest nature. Heraclitus believed that reality was composed of several contraries; a reality whose continual process is what defines its existing nature in representation. Anaxagoras argued that what is perceived as reality is created by the human mind.
4. To attempt to understand the convolutions in the nature of reality, we must acknowledge the peculiar effect of our perceptive ability to distinguish it. Whether we equate a preternatural description of the universe is irrelevant, because physical reality is the descriptive fulfilment of the idealisation of the universe.
5. The thought that impels our need to know the reason, cause, and effect of existence stems from the fact that, as human beings, we are constantly evolving in the world that constitutes our reality. I believe that the most abstract sense of existing is related to our consciousness. How does the conscious mind interpret, beyond the common notion of time and within the definite sphere of reality?
6. If man would only allow himself to be rid of his embedded fears of death and doubt, he would come to the powerful realisation that the only reality that matters is the observable one. Our world is merely a token reference to the condition of our reality. Does time merely reveal the relevance of that existence?
7. We are fascinated with the material substance residing in the universe and the imperceptible form of energy that transcends our world and comprehension. We are sempiternally defined by the existing nature of the universe that describes us as substantial matter in our progression.
8. The philosophical deduction would be resumed within the categorical assumption that existence is the only proof of a convergent reality. When defining the concepts of reality, we must make a clear distinction between relative reality, which is anything subject to change and absolute reality, which is something unchangeable and fixed. In philosophy, reality is the totality of universal existence, beyond the phenomena experienced by human perception and interpretation.
9. The subject of reality is relative to the agency of existence, because reality is much more than the mere perception or confirmation of something that exists or has existed. I believe that the most abstract sense of existing is related to our consciousness. How does the conscious mind interpret, beyond the common notion of time and within the definite sphere of reality?
10. It is through time, space, matter, and the universe that structure and perception correlate as realism. Reality may be perceived as abstract; nevertheless, it is the viable model by which we measure existential things that are animated.
11. Plato believed that form was, in itself, the actual embodiment of the meaning of the universal, and this concept can be interpreted in various ways.
12. He asserted that ultimate reality exists beyond our physical realm. However, I would argue that such a form of reality would need to be tangible in some relative manner that could be explored. All existing beings and things on the planet have limitations and periods of relativity. What cannot be refuted is that inevitable reality.
13. Thus, it would require our ability to comprehend the significance of the concepts of the noumenon, which is a thing in itself and the phenomenon, which is a thing generated by contingency.
14. Realism defines universals as existential and distinct from the particulars that instantiate them, whilst nominalism asserts that universals do not possess an existence beyond specific things.
15. We may introduce the concepts of realism and nominalism in depth, but the Oracle is not the foundation for this discrepancy. Philosophers have long attempted to resolve the propositions made by either argument definitively, yet the concept remains relatively debatable.
16. Plato ascribed to the notion that the Good was the ultimate measure of reality, whereas Aristotle maintained that the final cause of each substance, in its form whether incipient or altered, was the manifestation of reality.
17. There must be a primary and material substance to the universe that relates accordingly to chronos (sequential time) and kairos (the opportune moment). This substance is called existence, upon which we base the foundation of our concepts and ideas.
18. There are naturalistic explanations of the world and the universe that do not require reference to the supernatural, which remains an abstruse paradox of agnoiology. When I observe the movement of the hands of a clock, I am observing the duration of time. The perceptible notion is that the clock is contingent upon the reality of time. What is actually occurring is the phenomenon behind the passage of time. Time is not necessarily dependent on motion, but on its infinite state and predictable nature. Thus, the quantum element of time is an infinitude that transcends the motion of anything.
19. There is a constant need in our lives to ascertain complete enlightenment and judgement that can eradicate the negative energy emitted through our indifference to that need. We seek necessary knowledge to guide us through our reality.
20. We must infer from the abstract and physical components that our soul and body, through a zetetic approach that recognises the interconnection of these two forces, a compatibility generally discovered in our genetic nucleus.
21. When defining the concept of reality, we must distinguish between relative reality, which is subject to change, and absolute reality, which is immutable. In philosophy, reality is the totality of existence, beyond phenomena experienced through human perception and interpretation.
22. How we perceive an object of reality is often more dependent on the perception of our eyes than on the meticulous engagement of our mind. Ergo, reality appears to be what we see rather than what we construe. In essence, the patterns of our mind are supplanted by the sense of vision.
23. This implies that even dimensional objects presumed to be realistic are not entirely perceived in full accuracy. Our perception of an object may be influenced by the stimuli that provoke that perception and impression.
24. While our point of reference may seem to be visual stimulation, in truth, it is the cognitive awareness of the mind that transcends first impressions and retains the true nature of that principal perception.
25. By relegating the senses of our mental faculties, the mutable thought becomes superseded by the transparency of the psychagogic image.
26. Visual perception and natural observation are thus often erroneous in their composition.
27. What I acknowledge is not necessarily irrational when I propose that we are essentially composed of compoundable elements of a universal form of material substance, which manifests the most natural phenomenon of existence that is evolving matter.
28. I am a corporeal being that I clearly acknowledge without discrepancy. However, my essence is universal in structure because I am both form and matter, consistent with the visible universe.
29. The question is this: if our natural observation begins with things that are established and transparent to us, and then moves to things that are transparent and established by nature, are the things cognoscible to us not distinct from those known through contingency?
30. How could any first principle of reality be considered valid if the observation is based not on the criterion of that principle, but rather on a falsehood that fails to establish its relevancy as absolute reality?
31. To expound on the notion of a metamorphic change of form evident in the reality of the universe and our existence, we must first understand the methodical interpretation of logic as it pertains to the relationship between matter and energy, analysed through keen observation.
32. Why are we, as a society, so prone to believe in an immaterial world that succeeds our present one, when we have a convincing material world as our reality?
33. Are we to believe in a world whose existence we do not know, rather than the world in which we presently live? What result could be achieved without relying solely on faith?
34. Reality, in itself, is merely a contingency of a realm of existence that corresponds with our perception and consciousness, yet remains conducive to the operating universe to which we belong.
35. If we accept that time is interchangeable with reality, then it may be measured by elements such as motion, change, and causation.
36. What is implied is that time is the ultimate chronicler of cosmic existence. Beyond time, there is nothing by which we can correlate past or present existence.
37. How do we clearly distinguish between a sublime vision and axiomatic reality? That remains a question requiring precise determination.
38. If we claim that a vision is merely abnormal and reality normal, then what is the difference between a miracle and a manifestation of matter?
39. Could it be that a miracle is perceived as preternatural and reality as natural? The causality of the supposed preternatural occurrence might be presumed to transform into reality, but in truth, it is more likely non-existent in its composition. A supposed miracle may appear as apparent reality, but it is not an incontrovertible demonstration of materiality. Hence, it is not reality.
40. The question is not whether a miracle could manifest beyond our perception, but whether we are perceiving only what we want that perception to represent, regardless of its authenticity. The human mind is capable of much. It can easily gravitate towards substance, just as it can towards illusion.
41. The universe is replete with phenomena or occurrences that might appear as unusual or inexplicable, but these do not equate to the transcendence implied by hypothetical miracles. The threshold of the supernatural is not that of reality; at best, it is merely a perception.
42. For an individual to truly comprehend the universe in its broader context, they must grasp the significance of physical constants and the relationship between physical nature and its inherent necessity.
43. They must also understand the essential differences between particulars, universals and constants; distinctions that pertain to consciousness, not merely to observation or rare perception.
44. Thus, metaphysical questions regarding the fundamental essence of the universe, the commonality of universal life forms, the arrangement of creation, and the distinct contrasts of reality can be examined and presented logically.
45. The complexity of evolution, the non-zero constant, the articulation of cosmic principles, the multiverse ensembles, the positing of distinct theories, and observable properties; all can be intuited through consciousness.
46. The philosophical question most relevant to humanity is not what makes things universally existent, but what binds them to our parenthetical reality.
47. We might argue for a point of inference for existence or accept that cosmic existence is not necessarily conditioned by any metaphenomenal reference within our scope of reality.
48. Parmenides proposed an ontological characterisation of the fundamental nature of reality in its most basic foundation.
49. The difference between absolute reality and ultimate reality is not in the mere presence of the cosmos, but in our perception of the differing natures of these realities.
50. What this means is that although reality does not require our observation to function, it does require our observation to be comprehended.
51. Hypothetically, we can conclude that human existence is a heterogeneous composition of matter and form. The hyparxis determined thereby would be revealed in a dependable reality.
52. Every living being in the universe is a matter with a physical form or idiomorphe that is either variable or invariable. The universe is existential because it is apparent; it is the noema of existence.
53. This similitude can be conceived through valid epagoge (inductive reasoning). I shall now introduce the concepts of the hyparchein and the idion, and how they relate to reality.
54. The hyparchein is the state that belongs to an existential entity that can exist independently, without reliance on other existing things for its nature.
55. For example, air is essential to our breathing, but it can exist without the necessity of our breath.
56. The idion is the property that inherently belongs to something. For example, air is a true property of the Earth.
57. Thus, the universe could exist without our presence, according to the structure of established reality; yet we, as matter, could not exist without the universe within that paradox of reality.
58. There are omnifarious entities in the universe that are explored as properties, such as dark energy and matter, the possibilities of multiverses, and the presence of neutrons, protons, photons, and electrons similar to those in our own universe.
59. The fine-tuning or self-regulation evident within the cosmos exists also in the ontological sententia of its constancy and causative mechanisms, which correspond with the physical realm.
60. These are putative magnalities of existence that transcend our cognitive awareness. These unknowns do not necessarily reflect the limitations of our understanding, but rather remain as yet unexplored phenomena.
61. Within the universe, there are innumerable intricacies regarding the nature of existing forms of matter that we have yet to observe.
62. The pertinent question for this discussion is: what do we consider existence to mean? That which is solely material and not immaterial?
63. If one responds that only corporeal matter and form are existential, then the relativity of the universe would seem undeniably linked to our perception of reality.
64. There are immaterial entities that coexist with the physical realm and are explored through metaphysics. Yet, for metaphysics to provide a clear contrast to the parergonic, it must eventually reveal a transparency within its mutable state of being.
65. If existential reality includes some immaterial form of unique adaptation of a recurring evolution compatible with the cosmos, whether or not it is immarcescible, then we must ask: what binds such immateriality to the conducive reality of our material world?
66. To answer this specific question, the concept of such an evolution must be explored within the comparative notion of its viability. The emergence of motion and energy, and the noetic function of the cosmos’s nature, are all related to the “Omnis” of universal existence. Immateriality, on its own, does not wholly explain the actuality of its existence, only the possibility of something yet undefined.
67. Evolution is the recognisable change of a developing process we call existence. Creation is an absolute correlate to that evolution.
68. Every extant being known within the physical realm is a related form of compressed energy and matter either developed or undeveloped.
69. Therefore, the essence of everything in the universe is presumed to be either accidental or particular in nature, all within the uniformity that defines the universe.
70. It is either coincidental or natural. The elements of reality are demonstrated in the congruent properties of motion, change, time, force, space, and creation.
71. Existence comprises all of these cosmical properties and corresponds with the central point of inference, which is the sole universe that dictates our physical realm.
72. Within this physical realm, there exist inconclusive or undeveloped phenomena, just as there are things we fail to perceive as metaphysical, such as those that are variable and characterised by motion and change.
73. Metaphysical investigation concerns existence, objects and their properties, space and time, causation, and possibility.
74. According to this concept of the physical realm, existence is always evolving in one form or another. Merely because we do not observe this evolution does not mean it does not exist.
75. The versal world consists of substances. A substance may be a quantulum of matter or form, or a specific compound of both in its entirety.
76. Shape is what is general in every being and is thus intelligible. For instance, the shape of a human being is common to all humans. Matter is what is particular and, for the most part, makes the being knowable.
77. There would exist a hierarchy of beings, ranging from informally knowable matter to the pure form of a perfect intelligible universe and established reality.
78. Philosophy enables our minds, through consciousness and sentience, to recognise the incredible aspects of the universe that prompt our deductions and inductions. The reality that converges with the universe is observable to us, but it does not depend on our perception to exist.
79. What fascinates my curiosity is whether reality can be measured solely by the scientific method of investigation and examination. If we assume reality to be abstract in nature, how then do we quantify its existence in its purest form, absent of materiality, space, and time? According to Aristotle, it is only when the mind processes reality that it acquires meaning.
80. Is it plausible that some form of existence is not strictly contingent upon the perception of a sphere or plane that appears physical, but may instead represent an indefinite composition not yet fully defined as existential in paragogis?
81. One thing philosophy teaches us about human existence is that we are conscious beings that have developed into a universal form and matter, evolving alongside the progression of the physical universe.
82. Whether we live or die is inconsequential to the universe’s evolution and order, for it does not depend on our existence to function.
83. All that is relevant to the universe is time, space, and matter. Indeed, I am a genuine participant in that time, space, and matter, in co-existence. Perhaps we may never know to what extent reality, as we understand it, could be interdimensional, not solely accidental or essential in nature or omnitude.
84. The world we have constructed on our planet is merely a fabrication built upon our concepts of reality and our perceived need for it to function, based on our interpretation of its basal relativity. We may argue for a reason behind something, but that does not ensure that the explanation aligns with the relevance of its induction.
85. Hence, the reality in which we are immersed is the only observable reality we can perceive, but this does not confirm the actuality of its importance or relevance.
86. That which is observable within the physical realm is that which we attest to and consciously intuit in its finite state of being. We know that life and death are forever intertwined in our reality. Just as we are born, so shall we one day die, as part of the natural process of mortality.
87. Consequently, those existential phenomena in the cosmos that are essential are those which we can identify through their nature and form.
88. Every living entity, whether universal, particular, or constant requires a foundational physical element that represents one of those components at the nucleus of the cosmos.
89. The Oracle presents the concept of the physical realm as material, but goes further to enlighten the reader regarding the veracity of this plane.
90. Confusion arises when the reader mistakenly assumes that materiality is but a limited facet of the universe. and that something far greater exists beyond the physical realm, such as divinity.
91. Certainly, the notions of time, space, and motion must be congruent with the universal nature of reality for its appearance to be observed with meticulosity.
92. The physical realm need not impose itself upon our minds to accept its limitations; in its simplicity, it enables us to interpret its value and significance.
93. If we acknowledge this particular notion, we may become more conscious of its extraordinary operation and nature in a broader sense.
94. I ascribe to the belief that what is presently realistic in effect represents the most observable correlation between the physical realm and the metaphysical realm.
95. We may opine or surmise that such a supposition is based on interpreted but unreliable evidence. I then pose the question: can we ever truly know what lies beyond our physical realm of existence?
96. The universe cannot be constrained by the illimitable boundaries of our perception or interpretation of its reality and our surreality.
97. We often presume that we have defined its parameters, when in fact, it has defined them to us through our own perception.
98. There is still much to be discovered about the universe, but we can affirm our belief that we are a unique and infinitesimal part of its existing form.
99. We are the evident atoms within ourselves. From that reality, we correspond directly with the universe. Our cognitive senses allow us to examine and contemplate the significance of our existence within universal reality.
100. To better understand the realms of the universe, we must first understand the metaphysical realm.
Recommend Write a ReviewReport