This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
, Coif © Copyright 2007 by Anthony J. Fejfar The “modern” view of reality which prevailed in the West for quite some time was that we lived in a materialistic world and universe where the building block of reality is and was the Atom. Because of this we developed to some extent what can be described as an Atomistic World View. This idea was that the ultimate nature of reality was characterized by inanimate, material, atoms. After awhile, though, some scientists and philosophers started wondering if in fact the Atom itself was composed of even smaller particles which they called subatomic particles. Soon, scientific experiments started “proving” the existence of such subatomic particles as the electron, the positron, the photon, the quark, and finally, the Quanta. About the time that subatomic particles started being talked about, Einstein developed Relativity Theory and other scientists developed Quantum Theory. Interestingly, these scientists could not account for a Unitary nature of Reality anymore. Thus, the search began for Unified Quantum Field Theory. It was thought that if Unified Quantum Field Theory was found, this would once again argue that there is a unitary nature to reality itself, not just a probabilistic nature manifesting multidimensionally. While the search for Unified Quantum Field Theory was still well under way, some scientists decided to take another approach. This new approach to reality was called String Theory. String Theory argued that the ultimate nature of reality is
composed of “strings” which mask themselves as subatomic particles. Thus, the ultimate nature of reality is the chameleon string. The problem was, however, how to reconcile string theory with Quantum Theory? Well, the answer which I came up with, even prior to reading about string theory, is this: The ultimate building block of the universe is the Quanta subatomic particle. Thus, there is a Unitary Quantum Field, and Unitary Quantum Field Theory exists as science. I argue that the Quanta subatomic particle, like string theory, is a chameleon particle. The Quanta masks itself as other subatomic particles by reason of meaning and/or natural law. While the Quanta can certainly display itself as a Quanta, it can also display as an electron, a positron, a quark, etc Now, the question at this point is how can Quantum Physics be reconciled with Classical Metaphysics which utilizes the concept of Being as being the foundation for Reality? Well, my argument is that the concept of being, although it stands on its own two feet independently of Quantum Physics, is in fact an analogous concept. One might argue that Being manifests the Quantum Field, or on the other hand, one might argue that the Quantum Field manifests Being. Or perhaps there is a dialectical relationship in the Dao where Being manifests the Quantum Field and the Quantum Field manifests Being, simultaneously, which is my position. Now, what then is the nature of Being? Well, in Classical terms Being is Form of Form, or an Unrestricted Act of Understanding. But what is Being made of? Being is composed of Beinga Streams which take the function of Quanta Particles or Strings. Previously, if have referred to Beinga Streams as, Relational Meaning Streams. In fact this is a good definition of Beinga Streams. Beinga Streams are Relational Meaning
Streams. Thus, it is apparent that Beinga Streams or Relational Meaning Streams parallel the notion of Quantum Particles and Strings. It should be noted that Being as the Building Block of Reality is supported by the science of indigenous cultures. Indigenous cultures are typically animistic, asserting that there is a spirit for every person, animal, or thing. Every rock has a spirit as does every blade of grass. In Western indigenous culture these spirits were referred to as
Elemental Spirits. I argue that Beinga Streams, or Relational Meaning Streams, Quanta Particles, and Strings, are all analogous to Elemental Spirits and in fact perform the same function in their respective cosmologies. Finally, you might ask what are the political implications of the foregoing. In fact, the notion of Beinga Streams, Quanta Particles, Strings, and Elemental Spirits, all support the idea of Moderate Relativism as the nature of knowledge and reality. Moderate relativism means that we can have probabilistic knowledge of reality which is fallible, and subject to revision. Moderate relativism means that we must follow the Transcendental Precepts of Be Attentive, Be Intelligent, Be Reasonable, Be Responsible, be Loving. Moderate relativism means that there can be two sides to an argument. Moderate relativism means that it is possible that reasonable people can differ in their assessment of a problem. Moderate relativism means that we still have logic and reason, and must take logical arguments seriously. Moderate relativism means that the best form of government is a Constitutional Democracy which supports individual rights at law, and an Equitable interpretation of law. Moderate relativism supports the adversary system of justice and opposes the inquisition.