Chapter 5 - Synthesis

CHAPTER 5: Synthesis - A New Proposal

The new synthesis I propose is not satisfying for those who presently hold some doctrine dear to their heart . One can err in accepting my thesis as yet a new doctrine. While the position here takes the claims that 1) all that is real is matter 2) all that is real is conceptual/symbolic and 3) all that is real is abstract or spiritual, and puts these assertions side by side, one may easily ask "What is a universal ultimately?" The answer supplied here is that there are various modes or manifestations of universals. They all three exist, albeit as different modes or "emanations" if Plotinus's term could apply here. These modes or types come in three forms and are hypostases, that is, they are that which constitute reality. A stark example is that we may take a man and see him as an ideal, a symbol, and an object. In every mode or manifestation of each hypostasis this man may function.
There are examples of purely abstract entities⁶² or characteristics. One can take a rock and kick it to refute Bishop Berkeley. One may simply look at today's media to prove the strength of symbols and icons (like Elvis or the Beatles), but how does one demonstrate or validate the existence of the abstract realm? One old argument claims that like attract like or can recognize like...If one sees in Mother Teresa's acts a quality called "charity" one needn't be a Christian to validate this quality which is self-evident.
This brings to mind a question that I have been unable to answer. While considering universals, I investigated what makes this universal different that one, what makes a universal as such, belong to a group of universals, what makes a universal exist and what is necessarily implicated. I experienced how the knower, the known, the process of knowing , and the unknown must be considered together and resolved if any metaphysical statement is to be asserted. Hand-in-hand I saw how metaphysical and epistemological claims arise codependently. I understood how the answer to Porphry's question concerning universals is on one level simple and on another requiring careful investigation. To answer his question (p.17) would be that genera and species subsist, are corporeal and incorporeal. Also they are separated from sensible things, and at other times are within sensible things. A friend of mine from Yemen would state that this is a "snaking" type of answer, not really giving an answer at all. But I would reply that a specific example must be given, a particular topic must be mentioned before a correct answer could be given. What I supply is a formula to either prove or disprove assertions, statements, and knowledge concerning universals.
The Tables I supply are only conceptual tools and are not bound to any one symbolic representation. I have created a trichotomous symbol that helps me, but others may no doubt wish to find alternative possibilities. What excites me is that these Tables could be used in the realms of science as well as in the realm of religion. It seems to work in academics well as in political or ethical matters . I'm pretty pleased with the "maple syrup" I have collected and distilled.
But even though I have found a satisfying alternative solution to the problem of universals, a more devastating question remains as I alluded earlier. This question is a launching point for any more work I shall do, or it will give others a beginning if they wish to look at archetypal philosophical questions anew. The question is:

In what sense is Being and One convertible, and which universals exist independently of mind?⁶³

This question perhaps is my contribution to the problem of universals more so than the schema I have laid out in this monograph. While I synthesize, create, discover, understand and analyze new insights concerning universals, I will utilize my theory as I have for the past five years. Over the years I learned that the trichotomous symbol I "discovered" already exists in Oriental cultures. Carl Jung's appeal to the Collective Unconscious would account for all of this. However, it is not upon the "eureka" experience alone that this thesis relies: over five years of talking with experts found in diverse fields and in all walks of life have confirmed what I now believe. Reason, imagination, and intuition have joined together here. It is as if I have walked through a Garden and like Teresias of Greek mythology, have played with the snake once too many times and have gained insight at a terrible price. Perhaps you wish to take some of this friendly wisdom: the answer to the problem of universals is immanent and transcendent of the inquirer. But then who knows? What I write may be but an error for you.