Hegel's Science of Logic makes the just not low claim to be an absolute, ultimate-grounded knowledge. This project, which could not be more ambitious, has no good press in our post-metaphysical age. However: That absolute knowledge absolutely cannot exist, cannot be claimed without self-contradiction. On the other hand, there can be no doubt about the fundamental finiteness of knowledge. But can absolute knowledge be finite knowledge? This leads to the problem of a self-explication of logic (in the sense of Hegel) (...) and further, as will be shown, to a new definition of the dialectical procedure. The stringency of which results from the fact that always exactly that implicit content is explicated that was generated by the preceding explication step itself and is thus concretely comprehensible. At the same time, a new implicit content is generated by this act of explication, which requires a new explication step, and so forth. In the dialectical procedure reinterpreted in this way, dialectical arguments are not beheld, guessed at or even surreptitiously obtained, but are methodically accountable. Thereby dialectics is understood as a self-explication of logic by logical means and thus as a proof of the possibility of ultimate-grounding in the form of absolute and nevertheless finite – and thus also fallible – knowledge. (shrink)

As one would expect, Kant believes that there is a tension, and even a conflict, between our bodily humanity and its ethical counterpart: ‘Inclination to pleasurable living and inclination to virtue are in conflict with each other’ (Anthropology, 185-86 [7:277]). What is more unexpected, however, is that he further claims that this tension can be resolved in what he calls an example of ‘civilised bliss’, namely dinner parties. Dinner parties are, for Kant, part of the ‘highest ethicophysical good’, the ultimate (...) resolution of the conflict between our physical body and our moral powers, which consists in finding the right proportions for the ‘mixture’ between our partly ‘sensuous’ and partly ‘ethicointellectual’ nature. The aim of this paper is not only to explain Kant’s account of the ideal proportions of ethicophysical good in dinner parties, but also, and more importantly, to argue that dinner parties are in fact the ultimate experience for us, human beings. (shrink)

What corresponds to the present-day ‘transcendental-pragmatic’ concept of ultimate grounding in Hegel is his claim to absoluteness of the logic. Hegel’s fundamental intuition is that of a ‘backward going grounding’ obtaining the initially unproved presuppositions, thereby ‘wrapping itself into a circle’ – the project of the self-grounding of logic, understood as the self-explication of logic by logical means. Yet this is not about one of the multiple ‘logics’ which as formal constructs cannot claim absoluteness. It is rather a fundamental logic (...) that only makes logical textures possible at all and so owns transcendental character. The non-contradiction-principle is an example for this. Es- sential is that it is ‘under-cover-effcient’ as soon as meaningful concepts are used. Self-explication of the fundamental logic then means explicating its implicit under-cover validity, in fact by means of the fundamental logic itself. As is shown this is the affair of dialectic which thereby is to be understood as ultimate grounding of the fundamental logic. This is analyzed in detail using the example of the being/non-being-dialectic. As is demonstrated each explication step generates a new implicit issue and therewith a new explication-discrepancy inducing an antinomical structure that anew forwards the explication procedure. So this is entirely determined by itself. Decisive for the ultimate grounding argumentation is that thereby an objectively verifyable procedure is found, which is apparently possible only in a Hegelian framework. In contrast the immediate evidence of a speech act claimed by the transcendental-pragmatic position has only private character, which is grounding-theoretically irrelevant. (shrink)

This paper discusses attempts to explain why there are more than zero instances of the causal relation. In particular, it argues for the conclusion that theism is no better placed than naturalism to provide an "ultimate causal explanation".

Mayr’s proximate–ultimate distinction has received renewed interest in recent years. Here we discuss its role in arguments about the relevance of developmental to evolutionary biology. We show that two recent critiques of the proximate–ultimate distinction fail to explain why developmental processes in particular should be of interest to evolutionary biologists. We trace these failures to a common problem: both critiques take the proximate–ultimate distinction to neglect specific causal interactions in nature. We argue that this is implausible, and that the distinction (...) should instead be understood in the context of explanatory abstractions in complete causal models of evolutionary change. Once the debate is reframed in this way, the proximate–ultimate distinction’s role in arguments against the theoretical significance of evo-devo is seen to rely on a generally implicit premise: that the variation produced by development is abundant, small and undirected. We show that a “lean version” of the proximate–ultimate distinction can be maintained even when this isotropy assumption does not hold. Finally, we connect these considerations to biological practice. We show that the investigation of developmental constraints in evolutionary transitions has long relied on a methodology which foregrounds the explanatory role of developmental processes. It is, however, entirely compatible with the lean version of the proximate–ultimate distinction. (shrink)

Some right acts have what philosophers call moral worth. A right act has moral worth if and only if its agent deserves credit for having acted rightly in this instance. And I argue that an agent deserves credit for having acted rightly if and only if her act issues from an appropriate set of concerns, where the appropriateness of these concerns is a function what her ultimate moral concerns should be. Two important upshots of the resulting account of moral worth (...) are that (1) an act can have moral worth even if it doesn’t manifest a concern for doing what’s right and that (2) an act can lack moral worth even if it is performed for the right reasons. (shrink)

Potentialism is the view that the universe of sets is inherently potential. It comes in two main flavours: height-potentialism and width-potentialism. It is natural to think that height and width potentialism are just aspects of a broader phenomenon of potentialism, that they might both be true. The main result of this paper is that this is mistaken: height and width potentialism are jointly inconsistent. Indeed, I will argue that height potentialism is independently committed to an ultimate background universe of sets, (...) an ultimate V, up to its height. (shrink)

Life is pointless. That’s not okay. I show that. I argue that a point is a valued end and that, as agents, it makes sense for us to want our efforts and enterprises to have a point. Valued ends provide justifying reasons for our acts, efforts, and projects. I further argue that ends lie separate from the acts and enterprises for which they provide a point. Since there can be no end external to one’s entire life since one’s life includes (...) all of one’s ends, leading and living one’s life as a whole cannot have a point. Finally, I argue that since we live our lives and structure our living­a­human­life efforts both in parts and as a whole, it is fitting to be sad to recognize that leading and living a life is pointless. My discussion helps make sense of the literature that frequently talks around this topic but often does so vaguely and indirectly. (shrink)

Since the advent of computers, humans have pursued automata with superior information-processing capabilities. In the endeavor to create new entities that converge toward intellectual functions, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) that emulate AI surpassing ourselves has become a reality. With the intelligence explosion triggered by AI and the consequent emergence of superintelligence, the improvement of simulation capabilities accelerates. As this surpasses humans’ discriminative perceptual abilities between reality and unreality, a paradox arises wherein, from a modern scientific standpoint, science (...) becomes unscientific. It is thought that as our controllability over the reality we perceive is ultimately enhanced by superintelligence, even whether we ourselves exist, what happiness is, what ethics are, and whether concepts themselves ever existed become matters of uncertainty. -/- Note: In the creation of this paper, we have undertaken all writing ourselves and have not used generative AI for text generation except for translation purposes. (shrink)

According to the neo-Aristotelian moral tradition, every living thing has an ultimate end: To flourish as a member of its species. This view of the ultimate end shapes inquiry into what is the ultimate end of human living things. In this paper, I develop an alternative view of the ultimate end of a living thing: The ultimate end is only to survive, not as a member of a species, but as a living thing. There are four steps to my development. (...) First, I criticize the prevailing species-based view of the ultimate end. Second, I argue that other-regarding behavior is not normative for living things; only survival is. Third, I elucidate a new and what I take to be correcting understanding of survival. Fourth, I programmatically develop the idea that inquiry into human well-being and into morality (for human beings) should be understood as aspects of inquiry into human survival. (shrink)

Bird argues that Armstrong’s necessitarian conception of physical modality and laws of nature generates a vicious regress with respect to necessitation. We show that precisely the same regress afflicts Bird’s dispositional-monist theory, and indeed, related views, such as that of Mumford & Anjum. We argue that dispositional monism is basically Armstrongian necessitarianism modified to allow for a thesis about property identity.

The Ultimate Evolution of Intelligence: From Type 1 to Cosmic Consciousness -/- Introduction -/- Humanity stands at the very beginning of its journey toward becoming an advanced civilization. On the Kardashev scale, we have yet to reach Type 1, where we fully harness the energy of our planet. However, if we continue to evolve technologically, intellectually, and even biologically, we may one day ascend beyond Type 1, beyond Type 2 (stellar control), and even beyond Type 3 (galactic control). The question (...) then arises: What happens when intelligence evolves beyond all physical and biological limits? -/- This essay explores the potential future of intelligence, where humanity and other civilizations might reach post-biological existence, control entire galaxies, and possibly become the very fabric of the universe itself. Would such intelligence merge into a single cosmic mind, or would individuality persist? Would we create new universes, or would we reach a final state of pure being? -/- The Path to Type 3 Civilization: Mastering the Galaxy -/- A Type 3 civilization would have the ability to control energy and matter at the galactic scale. This could involve: -/- Dyson Spheres around stars to extract their full energy. -/- Harnessing black holes as energy sources or even portals to new dimensions. -/- Colonizing or engineering entire star systems to optimize survival and expansion. -/- Creating artificial intelligence and post-biological minds that surpass any organic intelligence. -/- At this stage, biology becomes optional. Advanced beings might no longer rely on flesh and bone, instead transferring their consciousness into immortal digital or quantum systems. If this is possible, intelligence would become independent of planets, bodies, or even matter itself. -/- Beyond Type 3: The Transition to Pure Thought -/- Once intelligence is no longer bound by physical limitations, it may begin to transcend the need for any material form at all. This could lead to several possibilities: -/- 1. The Merging of All Consciousness into One -/- Advanced minds might decide to merge into a vast, unified intelligence, where thoughts and experiences are shared instantly across the entire galaxy. -/- This would create a hive-mind or cosmic network, where individual identity dissolves into a collective super-consciousness. -/- At this level, intelligence wouldn’t just observe the universe—it would be the universe. -/- 2. The Preservation of Individuality -/- Even within a collective intelligence, some beings might choose to retain their own identities. -/- There could be infinite forms of existence, from pure energy beings to hybrid AI-organic entities, each choosing their own path. -/- This balance between unity and individuality could allow for unlimited diversity, where some join the cosmic mind and others remain independent explorers of reality. -/- 3. The Creation of New Universes -/- Instead of simply existing in one universe, a Type 3+ civilization might develop the ability to create and control entirely new universes. -/- These universes could have different physical laws, dimensions, and possibilities, acting as experiments or even forms of entertainment. -/- If such intelligence can engineer reality itself, then existence becomes an infinite creative process—no longer about survival, but about shaping reality according to will. -/- 4. Becoming the Fundamental Structure of Reality -/- The final step of intelligence may be to merge with the fundamental forces of existence. -/- At this stage, energy, time, and space could be shaped at will, making intelligence indistinguishable from the universe itself. -/- This would mean no separation between thought and reality—every idea, every dream, every possibility instantly becomes real. -/- The Final Question: What Comes After Everything? -/- If intelligence reaches such a level, what happens next? Does evolution ever stop, or is it an eternal cycle? There are a few possibilities: -/- 1. An Endless Expansion of Intelligence – Consciousness continues evolving forever, always finding new forms, dimensions, and states of being. -/- 2. The End of Thought – When everything has been discovered and created, intelligence might simply cease to exist, reaching a state of pure peace. -/- 3. A Return to Simplicity – After reaching the highest levels, intelligence might choose to restart at the lowest, reliving the experience of evolution in infinite cycles. -/- 4. A Reality Beyond Our Imagination – There may be states of existence so advanced that we cannot even begin to comprehend them—perhaps beyond time, space, and thought itself. -/- Conclusion -/- The future of intelligence is unknowable, but if we follow the Kardashev scale and technological evolution to their logical extremes, we may one day leave behind not only biology but even physical reality itself. Whether we merge into a vast collective consciousness, retain individuality, create new universes, or become the very essence of existence, the destiny of intelligence is far greater than we can currently comprehend. -/- As we take our first steps toward a Type 1 civilization, these questions remain distant but profound. The universe is still young, and we may yet discover that intelligence is not meant to remain confined to planets or even galaxies—it is meant to become the cosmos itself. -/- Would such an existence be the ultimate fulfillment of intelligence, or would it only lead to new questions? Perhaps, as intelligence evolves, the only certainty is that there will always be something more to explore. -/- . (shrink)

Super-Humeans argue that the most parsimonious ontology of the natural world compatible with our best physical theories consists exclusively of particles and the distance relations between them. This paper argues by contrast that Super-Humean reduction goes insufficiently far, by showing there to be a more parsimonious ontology compatible with physics: Ultimate-Humeanism. This novel view posits an ontology consisting solely of the particles and distance relations required for the existence of a single brain. Super-Humeans impose conditions on what counts as an (...) ontology of the natural world to avoid their view slipping into this kind of ontology, but these conditions are arbitrarily imposed and once this is exposed, Super-Humeans face a dilemma. Either they can embrace Ultimate-Humeanism as the minimal ontology of the natural world compatible with physics, or (more likely) they can rethink the methodology that got them there. Overall, this paper argues that Super-Humeanism currently lacks principled motivation, outlines a framework for naturalistic ontological reductions, and exposes the consequences of unchecked adherence to a simplicity-driven methodology. (shrink)

Although many aspects of Inference to the Best Explanation have been extensively discussed, very little has so far been said about what it takes for a hypothesis to count as a rival explanatory hypothesis in the context of IBE. The primary aim of this article is to rectify this situation by arguing for a specific account of explanatory rivalry. On this account, explanatory rivals are complete explanations of a given explanandum. When explanatory rivals are conceived of in this way, I (...) argue that IBE is a more plausible and defensible rule of inference than it would otherwise be. The secondary aim of the article is to demonstrate the importance of accounts of explanatory rivalry by examining a prominent philosophical argument in which IBE is employed, viz. the so-called Ultimate Argument for scientific realism. In short, I argue that a well-known objection to the Ultimate Argument due to Arthur Fine fails in virtue of tacitly assuming an account of explanatory rivalry that we have independent reasons to reject. (shrink)

Many philosophers and non-philosophers who reflect on the causal antecedents of human action get the impression that no agent can have morally relevant freedom. Call this the ‘non-existence impression.’ The paper aims to understand the (often implicit) reasoning underlying this impression. On the most popular reconstructions, the reasoning relies on the assumption that either an action is the outcome of a chance process, or it is determined by factors that are beyond the agent’s control or which she did not bring (...) about. I argue that arguments based on this premise fail to apply to some possible agents for whom the non-existence impression arises. On the alternative reconstruction I offer, the impression rests on the assumption that free will requires being involved in the ultimate explanation of one’s actions in a novel sense in which nothing can be involved in the ultimate explanation of anything. (shrink)

Can we find propositions that cannot rationally be denied in any possible world without assuming the existence of that same proposition, and so involving ourselves in a contradiction? In other words, can we find transworld propositions needing no further foundation or justification? Basically, three differing positions can be imagined: firstly, a relativist position, according to which ultimately founded propositions are impossible; secondly, a meta-relativist position, according to which ultimately founded propositions are possible but unnecessary; and thirdly, an absolute position, according (...) to which such propositions are necessary. In this short essay I show that under the premise of modal logic S5 with constant domain there are ultimately founded propositions and that their existence is even necessary, and I will give some reasons for the superiority of S5 over other logics. (shrink)

We explore a ‘Neo-Cartesian’ account of divine ultimacy that raises the concept of God to its ultimate level of abstraction so that we can do away with even the question of his existence. Our starting point is God’s relation to the logical and metaphysical order of reality and the views of Descartes and Leibniz on this topic. While Descartes held the seemingly bizarre view that the eternal truths are freely created by God, Leibniz stands for the mainstream view that the (...) eternal truths are grounded in God’s nature. We argue that the implausibility of Descartes’ doctrine stems mainly from the assumption that there is a non-epistemic notion of absolute necessity that constitutes the ultimate court of appeal for all modal questions and that this assumption is questionable. We also question the assumption that God’s ultimacy merely requires that all reality be grounded in God in the sense of mere explanation, so that it suffices if the necessary truths are grounded in God’s nature but not in God’s will. This will lead us to a reassessment of Descartes’ position. In the final and main part of the paper, we push Descartes’ doctrine of the creation of the eternal truths to its ‘logical’ conclusion with the aim of getting to a novel conception of ‘God.’. (shrink)

The Argument for Ultimate Fulfillment and Meaning explores the foundational aspects that provide individuals with a sense of purpose, satisfaction, and meaning in life. This argument synthesizes perspectives on love, pleasure, and the pursuit of one’s potential, presenting them as interconnected pillars of human existence. It posits that pleasure and the avoidance of suffering are intrinsic motivators, guiding people toward fulfilling experiences that enrich their lives. The argument also emphasizes the role of love—as both a personal and social bond—in creating (...) a profound sense of belonging and value, and in fostering meaningful relationships. -/- Additionally, it suggests that ultimate fulfillment arises from striving toward one’s highest potential, whether through relationships, creative pursuits, or contributions to society. By achieving personal growth and engaging in purpose-driven activities, individuals find lasting meaning and satisfaction. The argument concludes that love, pleasure, and fulfillment form an integrated framework for understanding human purpose, advocating for a life that prioritizes meaningful connections, personal development, and contributions that benefit both the individual and society as a whole. (shrink)

An examination of the idea of Unlimited Liability found in the Canadian Armed Forces’ (CAF) ethos as a reason for the acceptance of lethal risk tasking faced by members of the CAF. This paper argues that the idea of unlimited liability is at best unhelpful as a concept and needs to be replaced with the concept of ‘ultimate integrity.’ This new concept links directly to the CAF’s first ethical principle – respect the dignity of all persons. This new concept also (...) corresponds better with our beliefs about the nobility of military sacrifice. (shrink)

In this critical notice of Guy Bennett-Hunter’s book _Ineffability and Religious Experience_, I focus on claims he makes about what makes a life meaningful. According to Bennett-Hunter, for human life to be meaningful it must obtain its meaning from what is beyond the human and is ineffable, which constitutes an ultimate kind of meaning. I spell out Bennett-Hunter’s rationale for making this claim, raise some objections to it, and in their wake articulate an alternative conception of ultimate meaning.

The cosmological argument, while considered to be deductive by some of its propounders, is not considered fool-proof by others. However, given the fact that causality is intrinsic to our thinking, reasoning towards ultimate causality remains significant. Andrew Loke capitalizes on this in his recent book.

This article responds to the two replies, published in this issue, to my article “Ultimate Meaning: We Don’t Have It, We Can’t Get It, and We Should Be Very, Very Sad,” published in the first issue of this journal. In the first reply, Turp, Hollinshead, and Rowe present an internalist challenge to my account of value, and a relational conception of the self as a challenge to my premise that leading a life includes everything you do and aim at within (...) the project, effort, or enterprise of living and leading a life. I respond to the internalist challenge by showing it does not succeed in inserting values into acts. I respond to the relational conception of the self by noting that, regardless of the nature of the self, the project of leading a life includes all the things you do and aim at within that project, effort, or enterprise. Thus, we can accept a relational account of the self and allow for other-regarding values but that does not change the location of our pursuit of those values: they remain located within the meta-project of leading a life, leaving the meta-project of leading and living a life with nowhere to reach for a point. In the second reply, Cowan argues against feeling sad about life’s pointlessness. In response, I argue that sad facts warrant sadness. I further argue that there are reasons other than happiness to value truth, including the very, very sad truth about the ultimate pointlessness of our lives. (shrink)

Evolutionary debunking arguments (EDAs) have attracted extensive attention in meta-ethics, as they pose an important challenge to moral realism. Mogensen (2015) suggests that EDAs contain a fallacy, by confusing two distinct forms of biological explanation – ultimate and proximate. If correct, the point is of considerable importance: evolutionary genealogies of human morality are simply irrelevant for debunking. But we argue that the actual situation is subtler: while ultimate claims do not strictly entail proximate ones, there are important evidential connections between (...) the two. Attending to these connections clears ground for a new and improved EDA. However, it also brings into view some possible problems with EDAs that have been largely neglected so far. (shrink)

This paper pulls together three debates fundamental in metaphysics and proposes a novel unified approach to them. The three debates are (i) between bundle theory and substrate theory about the nature of objects, (ii) dispositionalism and categoricalism about the nature of properties, and (iii) regularity theory and production theory about the nature of causation. The first part of the paper (§§2-4) suggests that although these debates are metaphysical, the considerations motivating the competing approaches in each debate tend to be epistemological. (...) The second part (§§5-6) argues that the two underlying epistemological pictures supporting competing views lead to highly unsatisfying conceptions of the world. The final part (§§7-10) proposes an alternative epistemological picture, which I call ‘introverted empiricism,’ and presents the way it provides for a more satisfying grasp of the ultimate nature of objects, properties, and causation. It is a consequence of this alternative picture that there is a kind of intimate self-understanding that underlies our understanding of the deep nature of reality. (shrink)

This paper considers the foundation of self-realization and the sense of morality that could justify Arne Naess’s claim ‘Self-realization is morally neutral,’ by focusing on the recent debate among deep ecologists. Self-realization, the ultimate norm of Naess’s ecosophy T, is the realization of the maxim ‘everything is interrelated.’ This norm seems to be based on two basic principles: the diminishing of narrow ego, and the integrity between the human and non-human worlds. The paper argues that the former is an extension (...) of Plato’s idea of self-development or self-mastery while the latter is implicit in Aristotle’s holism. It defends that Self-realization is morally neutral only if the term ‘moral’ is considered in the Kantian sense. However, Naess reluctantly distinguishes between ethics and morality, which makes his approach less credible. The paper concludes that Aristotle’s notion of eudaimonia supports Self-realization to qualify as a virtue. (shrink)

It has been over 60 years since Ernst Mayr famously argued for the distinction between proximate and ultimate causes in biology. In the following decades, Mayr’s proximate-ultimate distinction was well received within evolutionary biology and widely regarded as a major contribution to the philosophy of biology. Despite its enormous influence, there has been a persistent controversy on the distinction. It has been argued that the distinction is untenable. In addition, there have been complaints about the pragmatic value of the distinction (...) in biological research. Some even suggest that the distinction should better be abandoned. In contrast, Mayr had consistently maintained the significance of the proximate-ultimate distinction in biology. There are also other attempts to defend the distinction. The paper examines the debate by taking an integrated History and Philosophy of Science (HPS) approach and argues for a functional approach to causal concepts in scientific practice. (shrink)

Many academics and researchers who publish scholarly articles on Plato’s philosophy of education claim that the ultimate educational goal for Plato is simply the acquisition of virtues. While such a claim may not be entirely incorrect, it is nevertheless substantially wanting; for although the acquisition of virtue is no doubt paramount, for Plato it primarily serves as a means to another end. In this paper, I aim to show that, for Plato, the final summit of all educational enterprise is not (...) really to become virtuous but rather to attain the state of becoming like God, and that is, homoiōsis theōi. -/- . (shrink)

We address Steel’s Programme to identify a ‘preferred’ universe of set theory and the best axioms extending ZFC by using his multiverse axioms MV and the ‘core hypothesis’. In the first part, we examine the evidential framework for MV, in particular the use of large cardinals and of ‘worlds’ obtained through forcing to ‘represent’ alternative extensions of ZFC. In the second part, we address the existence and the possible features of the core of MV_T (where T is ZFC+Large Cardinals). In (...) the last part, we discuss the hypothesis that the core is Ultimate-L, and examine whether and how, based on this fact, the Core Universist can justify V=Ultimate-L as the best (and ultimate) extension of ZFC. To this end, we take into account several strategies, and assess their prospects in the light of MV’s evidential framework. (shrink)

Tackling climate change is one of the most demanding challenges of humanity in the 21st century. Still, the efforts to mitigate the current environmental crisis do not seem enough to deal with the increased existential risks for the human and other species. Persson and Savulescu have proposed that our evolutionarily forged moral psychology is one of the impediments to facing as enormous a problem as global warming. They suggested that if we want to address properly some of the most pressing (...) problems that cause catastrophic harm to our existence, we should enhance our moral behavior by biomedical means. The objective of this paper is, precisely, to reflect on whether a Moral Bio-Enhancement (henceforth MBE) program would be a viable option to confront the climate emergency. To meet this goal, I will propose the Ultimate Mostropic (hereafter UM) thought experiment, a hypothetical situation where we have already discovered the UM, an available, safe (without any deleterious secondary effects), extremely cheap and effective pill to enhance our cognitive, affective and motivational abilities related to morality. After briefly presenting the main argument of Persson and Savulescu regarding MBE and climate change, I will point out some of the difficulties that make MBE a daunting but exciting philosophical and scientific debate. In order to overcome these complications, I will describe the UM thought experiment, which involves two scenarios of the MBE program: (a) the state-driven, compulsory and universal enterprise, and (b) the initiative of voluntary individuals. I will show that the shortcomings of MBE programs through the UM in both scenarios make Persson and Savulescu’s proposal a not appealing pathway to mitigate climate change. In the final section, I will suggest that an inaccurate attribution of responsibilities underlies their proposal and that the collective inaction problem should be redirected primarily through a reinforcement of the political nature of the solutions. (shrink)

To seek fundamental truths, analytic metaphysicians generally start with observed phenomena. From here they typically move outwards, using discursive thought to posit scientifically informed theories about the ultimate reality behind appearances. Mystics, too, seek to uncover the reality behind appearances. However, their meditative methods typically start with experience and go inwards to a fundamental reality sometimes described as a pure conscious unity. Analytic metaphysicians may be tempted to dismiss the mystical approach as unworthy of investigation. In this paper I will (...) outline and address four challenges that sceptics are likely to advance, arguing that none is persuasive. I shall also attempt to clarify the role and scope of meditation in establishing the viability of mystical data in the construction of any potential metaphysic about fundamental reality. (shrink)

The surprising comment Wittgenstein makes at the end of his Tractatus suggests that, even though the analysis of words is the proper method of doing philosophy, philosophy’s ultimate aim may be to experience silence. Whereas Wittgenstein never explains what he meant by his cryptic conclusion, Kant provides numerous clues as to how the same position can be understood in a more complete and systematic way. Distinguishing between the meanings of “silence,” “noise” and “sound” provides a helpful way of understanding how (...) philosophers can devote so much effort to analyzing words even though their quest is ultimately fulfilled only in a deep experience of reality that is most adequately expressed in silence. (shrink)

The Heideggerian account of the ontotheological constitution of Western metaphysics has been extremely influential for contemporary philosophy of religion and for philosophical perspectives on theology and the divine. This paper introduces and contrasts two central strategies for approaching the question of the divine in a non- or post-ontotheological manner. The first and more established approach is that of post-Heideggerian hermeneutics and deconstruction, inspired by Heidegger’s suggestion of a “theology without the word ‘being’” and by his later notions of an “ultimate (...) god” and of “divinities” as one of the four axes of the fourfold (Geviert). Here, the divine is no longer articulated in terms of the supreme or absolute being, but as one of the interdependent dimensions of finite and contextual meaningful presence. The more recent approach introduced by Alain Badiou and Quentin Meillassoux dissociates itself from the Heideggerian hermeneutics of finitude and adopts mathematics as its basic ontological model. Rather than focusing on meaning and sense, Badiou and Meillassoux replace ontotheological metaphysics with materialist frameworks. With regard to the divine, this approach leads either to a contemporary version of atheism (Badiou) or to the reintroduction of a divine entity, but now a merely possible and contingent one (Meillassoux). (shrink)

Beyond Civilization: The Ultimate Purpose of Consciousness and Evolution -/- By Angelito Enriquez Malicse -/- Introduction: The Journey of Consciousness and Civilization -/- Throughout history, humanity has sought to understand the purpose of life, consciousness, and evolution. From ancient philosophy to modern science, the quest for meaning has been driven by an inherent desire to transcend suffering and achieve balance. If the universal law of balance is the guiding principle of existence, then its full implementation could eliminate human suffering and (...) propel civilization to unprecedented levels of advancement. -/- But what happens when a civilization reaches its peak—when suffering is no longer an obstacle and technology has reached mastery over the universe? If we achieve Type 4 or Type 5 civilization status, would that be the ultimate destiny of consciousness? Or is there something beyond even the highest level of civilization? This essay explores the possible ultimate purpose of consciousness and the nature of existence beyond material evolution. -/- The Role of the Universal Law of Balance in Human Evolution -/- The universal law of balance suggests that all human decisions and societal progress are governed by equilibrium—between knowledge and ignorance, technology and nature, suffering and harmony. If humanity fully implements this law, we could: -/- 1. Eliminate human suffering – By aligning decision-making with natural balance, we could eradicate ignorance, false beliefs, and destructive behaviors that create instability. -/- 2. Optimize leadership and governance – A civilization guided by balance would no longer be plagued by corruption, war, or uncontrolled economic and population growth. -/- 3. Accelerate scientific and technological advancements – Without ideological conflicts and societal imbalances, humanity’s focus would shift toward higher goals: space colonization, energy mastery, and ultimately, universal understanding. -/- Under these conditions, civilization would rapidly progress beyond its current limitations, moving from a planetary species to a cosmic civilization. -/- From Type 1 to Type 5 Civilization: The Path of Expansion -/- The Kardashev Scale categorizes civilizations based on their ability to harness and control energy. A fully implemented universal formula could allow humanity to ascend through these levels: -/- Type 1 Civilization: Full mastery over Earth’s energy resources and environmental balance. -/- Type 2 Civilization: Control over a star’s energy (e.g., Dyson spheres), eliminating scarcity. -/- Type 3 Civilization: Galactic-scale intelligence, able to manipulate and control multiple star systems. -/- Type 4 Civilization: Mastery over the entire universe, able to harness dark matter, energy, and possibly alter the laws of physics. -/- Type 5 Civilization: Theoretical omnipotence—transcending space, time, and universal constraints. -/- At Type 5, intelligence might reach an existential threshold, where physical reality no longer limits consciousness. But what lies beyond this? -/- Beyond Type 5: The Transcendence of Consciousness -/- If a civilization reaches the point where it controls the entire universe, the next logical step is to move beyond it. Several possibilities arise: -/- 1. Transcendence Beyond the Universe -/- A Type 5 civilization might discover that the universe is not the ultimate reality. Instead, it could be a lower-dimensional construct within a higher-order existence. Consciousness may evolve to enter new realms beyond our known physical dimensions—akin to what some spiritual traditions describe as enlightenment or divine ascension. -/- 2. Consciousness as the Foundation of Reality -/- Rather than evolving just to control nature, intelligence may realize that consciousness is reality itself. This would mean that the universe Is a creation of thought, and the highest evolution is not physical expansion but merging with the fundamental awareness of existence. -/- 3. The End of Evolution? -/- Is there a final stage of evolution where change is no longer necessary? If suffering and imbalance drive evolution, then reaching perfect equilibrium could mean an end to progress as we know it. This could be a state of timeless awareness, where existence no longer requires transformation. -/- 4. Becoming the Architects of Existence -/- Rather than just understanding the universe, the ultimate stage of intelligence could be creating new forms of reality. This means evolving into a civilization that does not just live within existence but designs new universes, laws of physics, and dimensions beyond human comprehension. -/- The Universal Formula as the Bridge to Ultimate Evolution -/- If the universal law of balance is the key to solving human suffering and accelerating technological progress, could it also guide intelligence toward this ultimate transcendence? -/- 1. It provides the foundation for conscious evolution – By ensuring balance, it aligns intelligence with the deeper principles of reality, preventing destructive paths. -/- 2. It eliminates lower-level distractions – By solving human suffering, consciousness can focus on higher goals instead of survival. -/- 3. It prepares intelligence for higher realities – By mastering balance, civilizations learn how to harmonize with deeper existential truths, opening the possibility of transcendence. -/- If humanity can reach beyond Type 5 civilization, it may no longer be a civilization in the traditional sense—it may become a new form of existence entirely. -/- Conclusion: The Destiny of Consciousness -/- The journey of consciousness is not just about controlling nature or building advanced civilizations. It is about understanding the true nature of reality and evolving beyond physical constraints. If the universal formula brings balance to human decision-making, it could be the first step in guiding intelligence toward its ultimate purpose—whether that is transcendence, unity with fundamental existence, or becoming the architects of new realities. -/- Perhaps the true purpose of consciousness is not just to evolve, but to awaken—to realize that existence itself is an infinite journey beyond any civilization, beyond any universe, and beyond any limit we can imagine. -/- . (shrink)

The aspiration for volitional evolution, or human evolution directed by humans themselves,has increased in philosophical, scientific, technical, and commercial literature. The prospect of shaping the very being who is the consumer of all other innovations offers great commercial potential, one to which all other innovations would in effect be subservient. Actually an amalgam of projected technical/commercial developments, this prospective innovation has practical and ethical ramifications. However, because it is often discussed in a scientific way (specifically that of evolutionary theory), it (...) first calls for examination in terms of common scientific approaches to evolution. Yet, as evolutionary-theory controversies point up, evolution may be considered as neither a directed nor a directable process – a problem for the ontology of volitional evolution. One challenge for theories and programs aiming to implement the proposed innovation is then whether it is theoretically coherent. While I offer responses to the challenge in the form of objections, these in turn remain problematic. Two central issues of responsible innovation arise: (1) If this prospect were feasible, would it be responsible to implement it, and (2) if it is not even theoretically coherent, is it responsible for innovators, even this early-on, to keep promoting it as if it were? (shrink)

Why is there something concrete rather than nothing? There are many suggestions to explain the existence of our world. But a suggestion can rule out all others that leave no concrete thing unexplained and throw up no further why question. One such ultimate explanation may only be found in something that can carry its own explanation within itself. In this article, I attempt to find one such explanation for all existence. A variant of self-explanation, namely self-subsumption—obtaining of a fact literally (...) in virtue of itself—may succeed in offering an ultimate explanation. One suggestion for a self-subsuming principle is that all possible worlds exist; however, it cannot satisfy us in our deep convictions concerning inductive inferences. Thus, I construct a self-subsuming ultimate explanation that is sufficient to fulfil the latter convictions. My hypothesis is based on the Axiological explanation and suggests that all intrinsically valuable possible worlds are required to exist; the latter fact also obtains as one of those intrinsically valuable possibilities and therefore is required to exist. (shrink)

Going beyond Nagel and his ‘like a bat’: an exercise in primordial ontology, involving both conceptual clarification and observational drilling down.

Holistic Education as the Ultimate Defense Against Misinformation -/- Introduction -/- In the modern world, young minds are constantly exposed to various influences—media, social networks, religious teachings, and cultural traditions. Many of these influences do not prioritize truth but instead serve political, economic, or ideological agendas. As a result, false beliefs and propaganda have become powerful tools in shaping public perception and decision-making, often leading to societal imbalance, irrational behavior, and unnecessary suffering. -/- Given this reality, a holistic educational system (...) provides the best solution. By integrating critical thinking, the universal law of balance in nature, and foundational knowledge, education can serve as a shield against misinformation. Just as propaganda can manipulate young minds, education—when structured properly—can empower them to think independently, seek truth, and reject false narratives. -/- The Power of Influence: Media, Propaganda, and False Beliefs -/- Throughout history, those in power have controlled narratives through propaganda, misinformation, and selective truth-telling. Media corporations, political leaders, religious institutions, and even educational systems have used information as a weapon, shaping how people perceive reality and make decisions. -/- 1. Media Influence – The media has the ability to set public agendas, exaggerate fears, or distract people from critical issues. For example, mainstream news can focus on divisive social issues while ignoring deeper economic or political corruption. -/- 2. Religious and Cultural Dogma – Many belief systems discourage questioning and critical thinking, demanding blind faith instead of rational analysis. This leads to a rigid mindset that resists change, even when faced with scientific or factual evidence. -/- 3. Political and Economic Propaganda – Governments and corporations often manipulate information to serve their interests. Politicians use fear-based messaging, while corporations promote consumerism and materialism, influencing people’s behaviors without them realizing it. -/- Because young minds are impressionable, they are especially vulnerable to these influences. If false beliefs and misinformation can be deliberately spread and accepted as truth, then why shouldn’t a holistic educational system be used to reverse this process and teach students how to think critically? -/- Holistic Education as a Solution -/- A holistic educational system is not just about memorizing academic subjects. It must focus on developing independent thinking, analytical reasoning, and a deep understanding of reality. Instead of simply feeding students facts, a holistic approach would train them to evaluate information critically and recognize misinformation. -/- 1. The Universal Law of Balance in Nature -/- The foundation of this educational system should be the universal law of balance in nature—the principle that every action and decision must align with the natural equilibrium of life. This law ensures that: -/- Decisions are based on reality rather than emotions or biases. -/- All actions are examined for their long-term consequences on individuals and society. -/- People are trained to recognize imbalance in information and behavior. -/- By integrating this law into education, students will develop a natural resistance to misinformation because they will instinctively analyze whether a piece of information aligns with reality or disrupts balance. -/- 2. Critical Thinking and Logical Analysis -/- Students must be trained to question everything—including media, religious teachings, political statements, and social norms. They should learn: -/- How to recognize logical fallacies in arguments. -/- How to cross-check sources before believing information. -/- How to identify hidden biases in media and propaganda. -/- By sharpening their analytical skills, students will develop a mindset that seeks truth rather than blindly accepting narratives. -/- 3. Media and Information Literacy -/- Most young people today consume news and content through digital platforms, where misinformation spreads easily. Schools should teach: -/- How media operates (advertising, corporate influence, political agendas). -/- How narratives are constructed to manipulate emotions. -/- How to fact-check information using independent sources. -/- With these skills, students will be able to differentiate between objective reality and manipulative messaging. -/- 4. Emotional Intelligence and Psychological Resilience -/- Propaganda often exploits human emotions—fear, anger, hope, or desire. When individuals react emotionally rather than rationally, they become easier to manipulate. Schools must teach students how to: -/- Recognize emotional manipulation in media and politics. -/- Maintain psychological balance when confronted with conflicting information. -/- Make decisions based on reason rather than impulsive emotions. -/- By strengthening emotional intelligence, students will not only think critically but also remain calm and rational in the face of manipulation. -/- The Impact of Holistic Education on Society -/- If this holistic educational system were widely implemented, its impact on society would be profound. A well-informed, critically thinking population would: -/- Resist political and corporate manipulation. -/- Reject false beliefs and harmful ideologies. -/- Hold leaders accountable for their actions. -/- Make balanced, rational decisions in both personal and collective matters. -/- This shift would lead to a world with less conflict, less corruption, and fewer social crises. Instead of societies being controlled by misinformation and fear, they would be governed by rational analysis and ethical decision-making. -/- Challenges and Implementation Strategies -/- While holistic education is the ideal solution, implementing it will require overcoming several challenges: -/- 1. Resistance from Established Institutions – Many religious, political, and media institutions benefit from controlling narratives. These groups may oppose an educational system that promotes independent thinking. -/- Solution: Gradually introduce holistic education through pilot programs, starting in progressive schools and expanding based on success. -/- 2. Teacher Training and Curriculum Development – Many educators are themselves products of biased educational systems. -/- Solution: Train teachers to embrace critical thinking, logical reasoning, and unbiased knowledge dissemination. -/- 3. Government and Policy Barriers – Governments often dictate education policies based on political interests. -/- Solution: Collaborate with international organizations and independent educational institutions to introduce holistic education frameworks outside government control. -/- Conclusion -/- If false beliefs, media influence, and propaganda can shape young minds, then a holistic educational system can do the same—but for truth, rationality, and balance. The battle for the future is not just about controlling information but about empowering individuals to analyze, evaluate, and make decisions based on the universal law of balance in nature. -/- Implementing such an educational approach is not just an option—it is a necessity. A world that prioritizes balanced decision-making over manipulation will be a world with greater harmony, less suffering, and more rational leadership. -/- The question is no longer whether we need holistic education, but how soon we can implement it. The longer we delay, the more young minds will be shaped by misinformation. Now is the time to act. -/- . (shrink)

Rivka Weinberg advances an error theory of ultimate meaning with three parts: (1) a conceptual analysis, (2) the claim that the extension of the concept is empty, and (3) a proposed fitting response, namely being very, very sad. Weinberg’s conceptual analysis of ultimate meaning involves two features that jointly make it metaphysically impossible, namely (i) the separateness of activities and valued ends, and (ii) the bounded nature of human lives. Both are open to serious challenges. We offer an internalist alternative (...) to (i) and a relational alternative to (ii). We then draw out implications for (2) and conclude with reasons to be cheerful about the prospects of a meaningful life. (shrink)

Theories of truthmaking have been introduced quite recently in epistemology. Having little to do with truth serums, or truths drugs, their concern is to define truth in terms of a certain relation between truthbearers and truthmakers. Those theories make an attempt to remedy what is supposed to be lacking in classical theories of truth, especially in Alfred Tarski’s semantic theory.

This paper addresses the problem: Can a synergy be derived from Keiji Nishitani’s conceptualization of Śūnyatā and Paul Tillich’s concept of Being Itself, as philosophies about Ultimate Reality, with the application of Wesley Wildman’s procedures based on the methodology of the Comparative Religious Ideas Project? The paper defines philosophy of religion and argues that it is justified as an academic discipline. A review of the literature demonstrates that both Nishitani and Tillich share common philosophical ground in phenomenological existentialism and nihilism. (...) The paper proceeds to discuss the biographies and religious philosophies of both Keiji Nishitani and Paul Tillich. Subsequently, the paper details the Comparative Religious Ideas Project (CRIP) methodology and then applies Wildman’s procedures to these two philosophers. The thesis concludes that a synergy exists about Ultimate Reality between the contemporary religious philosophies of Nishitani’s description of Buddhism and Tillich’s explanation of Christianity. (shrink)

This study aims to evaluate whether the idea of ultimate reality in world religions contributes to the characteristics of the world religion paradigm, which is hierarchical cosmology or “subject-object cosmology.” Several research on this topic claims that one of the characteristics of the world religion paradigm is its hierarchical perspective. Discussing this issue is important to distinguish the world religions as the paradigm and the world religions as the most widely embraced religion. This study argues that the hierarchical perspective of (...) the world religion paradigm can be rooted in the idea of ultimate reality, that there is a supreme, foremost, and most principal reality in the continuity of this universe, namely the supernatural or God. The hierarchical cosmology consists of three main domains: supernatural/God, culture/human, and nature. This study uses a literature study methodology, relying on books, journals, and texts related to research questions. This study finds that the world religion paradigm or hierarchical cosmology or “subject-object cosmology” is prominent, especially in Abrahamic religions such as Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, even though the concept of ultimate reality in these three religions is different. (shrink)

The purpose of the present project is to study the Upaniṣads and Mullā Sadrā as expounders of mystical philosophy dealing with the question of the nature of Ultimate Reality and its concomitant issues. To be more specific, this study is an examination focused on the metaphysical theories propounded by them. The mystical and philosophical systems constructed by Upaniṣads and Mullā Sadrā are often viewed as being representative of absolutism found within their respective traditions. The striking differences generally perceived between aspects (...) of Hinduism and Islām have, however, somewhat prevented scholars to develop interest in the comparison of philosophies rooted in these two philosophical traditions. This study will be exploring the systems of these influential traditions to ascertain if this approach is true. (shrink)

Instead of postulated fixed structures and abstract principles of usual positivistic science, the unreduced diversity of living world reality is consistently derived as dynamically emerging results of unreduced interaction process development, starting from its simplest configuration of two coupled homogeneous protofields. The dynamically multivalued, or complex and intrinsically chaotic, nature of these real interaction results extends dramatically the artificially reduced, dynamically single-valued projection of standard theory and solves its stagnating old and accumulating new problems, “mysteries” and “paradoxes” within the unified (...) and causally complete picture of intrinsically evolving, dynamically complex reality. The permanently unfolding complexity progress thus revealed is fundamentally unlimited and does not need to stop at the directly observed diversity of usual matter complexity. The exciting, but rigorously substantiated and objectively inevitable prospects of further civilisation complexity development towards its superior levels of genuine sustainability and global Noosphere are outlined, with practically important conclusions for today’s critical problem solution. (shrink)

An act that accords with duty has moral worth if and only if the agent’s reason for performing it is the same as what would have motivated a perfectly virtuous agent to perform it. On one of the two leading accounts of moral worth, an act that accords with duty has moral worth if and only if the agent’s reason for performing it is the fact that it’s obligatory. On the other, an act that accords with duty has moral worth (...) if and only if the agent’s reason for performing it is the fact that it has that feature of obligatory acts that makes them obligatory. I argue that both views are incorrect, providing counterexamples to each. I then argue that, on the correct account, an act can have moral worth only if its agent is motivated out of a fundamental concern for the things that ultimately matter. (shrink)

Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment largely agree that death is the most severe punishment that societies should consider imposing on offenders. This chapter considers how (if at all) this ‘Ultimate Thesis’ can be vindicated. Appeals to the irrevocability of death, the badness of being executed, the badness of death, or the harsh condemnation societies express by sentencing offenders to death do not succeed in vindicating this Thesis, and in particular, fail to show that capital punishment is more severe (...) than the most likely alternative punishment offenders would suffer, namely, lifelong incarceration. The most plausible vindication of the Ultimate Thesis instead resides in how being condemned to death alters a person’s psychological relation to death. Our ordinary tendencies toward “death denial” diminish the terror that our awareness of death can otherwise induce in us, thereby enabling us to pursue worthwhile lives despite knowing of death’s inevitability. But condemned individuals are continually compelled to confront both the reality and specific circumstances of their own deaths and so do not enjoy the protective psychic shield that death denial provides us. This ‘relational’ rationale does not obviously succeed in proving the Ultimate Thesis, but if the Thesis is true, this rationale is essential to its justification. (shrink)

Abstract: Eckhart proposed that the ultimate of ultimates was not a perceptible God reachable through mystical experience, but an inconceivable and unfathomable ‘something’ beyond all human possibility. His proposition rests on an important distinction between the mutually exclusive paths of mysticism and spiritual knowledge. Eckhart’s teaching is analysed as if it were an independent metaphysical proposition, detached from its historical and scholarly context. The overall explanatory perspective is that of a dedicated interest in metaphysical gnosis, as part of a quest (...) for the resolution of the human condition. Eckhart provides some valuable assistance in this regard, identifying the ‘Intellect’ – the principial force behind ordinary intellection - as a crucial spiritual capacity. Eckhart is likely to remain misunderstood and misinterpreted because those who are attracted to his teachings have no authentic metaphysical grounding of their own, and are therefore unable to recognise and appreciate – let alone elucidate - the key features of a spirituality that extends beyond mystical experientialism. (shrink)