IDEALISM

THE IDEALIST HYPOTHESIS

1-INTRODUCTION

We have seen in the previous lesson that the external reality is by itself mathematic. Nevertheless, two dilemma remains:

Firstly, a mathematical form is an idea. On the other hand, an idea only exists in a thought. Since these mathematical forms are independent of our human mind, it means that they must exist in an external spirit.

Secondly, as human being, we have not only a body. We enjoy also a mind and a self. The mathématical forms do not explain that fact.

We posit that the entire universe is a thinking substance. More precisely it thinks the mathematical forms. This universe is also a self and our own selfs are just the specific modalities of the unique self.

By the end, we shall conclude that the ultimate reality, the energy, the mineral world, the living reign, and finally all the flow of events in the nature are the result of this transcendental thinking process

1-INTRODUCTION 2-SUBJECT 3-INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS 4-CONSCIOUSNESS
5-CONCLUSION

2-THE TRANSCENDENTAL SUBJECT

The entire universe is a thinking substance (1). Consequently it is also a transcendental subject: The word "subject" does not désignate a creature but a thinking substance opposed to the non thinking hypothetical matter. We use the word "transcendental" because we only reach this subject through a reasoning.

This transcendental subject is a mind or a self. What does he think?

21-He thinks his own form

In a thinking substance, the subject and the object of the thought cannot be dissociated. Firstly, the transcendental subject thinks his own mathematical form: This form is the idea of the Unity(2). It is based on the fact that the cause of all the numbers is the idea of unity and the cause of all the relations is the relation to itself that is once again the idea of unity. Consequently, this form includes in its concept all the possible units, all their relations and finally all the mathematical forms. Look at the next drawing:

DRAWING 1

The first black circle represents the idea of Unity. Then, in a second step, this idea of unity contains all the forms created by the transcendental subject (3).

Compared to the other mathematical forms, the transcendental form of Unity presents some specific properties: It is eternal: Since the other different forms, simple or complex are appearing and disappearing, they must have their common ground in something that is eternal. It means that the transcendental form is uncreated and outside the time. To get that, let's us imagine an empty box that is supposed unique, eternal and motionless. Now, let's suppose that into the box, various things appear and disappear, change and move implying time and space. These inner phenomenon do not contradict the fact that the box remains by itself unique, eternal and motionless.(4)

22-He thinks the other forms

The transcendental subject creates all the mathematical forms that constitute the universal reality. He first duplicates some simple numbers and then creates the other forms through association or dissociation of the previous forms. In doing so, he begins with the simple forms and then reaches the complex ones.

This creation obeys to some rules:

Firstly, due to the different properties, it's impossible to just add an unity to the previous number in order to get a new number. It means that a new form is often an association or a network of previous forms.

Secondly, the transcendental subject does not associate the forms at random. Let's us compare the forms with the letters of an alphabet. The letters must be disposed in order to form words and a whole sentence expressing a meaning. Therefore, at each creation of a single form, the transcendental subject tries to constitute a partial meaning. Moreover, when such a word is constituted, it must keep its meaning in all the partial sentences where it would enter. Now, replace the letters by the mathematical forms: The word with its constant meaning must be replaced by constant ratios giving the same constant results. It means that the constant ratio created at the beginning must be kept by the transcendental subject to guide the further creations.

Moreover, in accordance with the constant ratios (see above) he never associates some forms and on the other hand, he constantly associates some other. This process explains the constant relations or laws observed in the nature. it governs the rules of the synthetic and analytical relation that we have described in the previous lesson.

Thirdly, the transcendental subject is always connecting billions of forms that are constantly created and destroyed by his thinking process. Indeed, the forms appear and disappear but they never return to nothingness since any dissociation of a complex form must stop to its final units and finally to the idea of Unity. What is more, these final units are used by the transcendental subject to built up other forms.

1-INTRODUCTION 2-SUBJECT 3-INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS 4-CONSCIOUSNESS
5-CONCLUSION

3-TRANSCENDENTAL AND INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS

The process decribed above explains the existence of minerals and living bodies. It does not explain the reality of the mind or self that human and upper animals enjoy.

31-The transcendental subject is the unique self

In fact, the transcendental subject is the unique self or mind in the universe. Our specific self are just the modalities of the unique self. This astonishing assert corresponds to a logical process. When we are facing different causes which seem to produce comparable effects, we seek if they are related to only one common cause. For example, Scientists observe different objects such as this chalk or the sun and despite their diversity, they do not state that the different objects correspond to different matters. They only say that these different objects are just the modalities of a common and unique matter. By the same token, our different subjects are in fact the modalities of an unique subject.

More precisely, the transcendental subject is either global or individual. Consequently, when I shall use the word "individual subject" in the next developments, I shall not distinct another real subject but just another modality of the transcendental subject.

It means that my own self (or subject) is in fact the transcendental subject. When I say "I ", it is the transcendental subject who is speaking through me, that is to say through his individual modality (5).

However, such a conception leads to a strong objection: Obviously, your neighbor too says "I". According to our hypothesis, the "I" of your neighbor is the same as the transcendental "I". As a result, it means that you and your neighbor share the same self. Going further, we cannot limit the individual subjects to men. Some upper animals even if they cannot say "I" because they ignore the language have certainly the inner feeling to be "I". These "I" are also the same as the transcendental "I". Finally it means that men and upper animals have also the same self. Such a consequence could be considered as a dead end since it seems grotesque to compare the self of men with those of animals.

In fact, the process leading to individual selfs as modalities answer to this question.

32-Process leading to individual selfs

The process is the following: Confronted to the highly complex forms of the living, the transcendental subject concentrates his thought and becomes their specific subject. For example, when you are dealing with a very complex matter, you have to concentrate your thinking. In doing so, you forget yourself and you get the feeling to become the real and specific subject of the thing you are studying.

Of course the degree of concentration depends on the complexity of the form. As a result, the specific conscious self differs according to the species. For example, since the form of a man is complex, the concentration of the transcendental subject is higher for a man than for an animal. On the other hand, the process of concentration implies some successive degrees. The higher degree in concentration (In gold in the next drawing) determines the capacity of the conscious self of the individual subject

Indeed, the individual self is divided into two parts: The conscious part corresponding to the higher degree of concentration (In gold) and another part corresponding to a lower degree (Blue in the drawing). This second part is the subconscious. It belongs to my "individual self" but I do not clearly know it. On the contrary, the transcendental subject perfectly know it. As we shall show in a next lesson the subconscious plays the role of a transmission belt between my "conscious self" and the transcendental subject.

This description is in accordance with what we observe: The ability to be conscious, to act and to reason is strictly limited. Vegetal's have no consciousness and their tropisms obey to some chemical or mechanical process like the minerals. Lower animals such as insects register excitation and impulse but are hardly conscious. Finally, only upper animals including men can be depicted as "individual subjects" because they all share the ability to get sensations and to manage them trough actions and elementary reasoning. In short the unity of the self in all the subjects does not contradict the evidence regarding the inequalities of the different species.

The transcendental subject has now the ability to examine the forms into his consciousness. Through the intuitions of their diversity (space) and of their succession (time), he will get some mental animated images which just correspond to what the ultimate reality is.

The forms located in the receptacle are not superposed at random. It means that they occupy a logical place. Firstly as we have seen and due to the conception of numbers like set of points, any form is by itself a configuration and a network of relations that are the causes of its properties in the thought. Secondly their logical place must obey to an order in relation with the association or dissociation whom they come from.

It does not mean that the forms have a shape or occupy an extended space. It just means that they are not confused and that they represent an order of coexistence.

The forms are created according to a succession: Some have disappear, some are present and some other are expected. The receptacle only contains the present and existing forms. It means that the order of succession only exists in the transcendental subject and is not reflected like the coexisting order in the receptacle.

In the subject, this order of succession is just a count like our usual counting. Let' suppose that the subject intends to create five forms. He can expect 5 different operations. It means that each operation, whatever the nature or the complexity of the form, is an unit. So the subject counts five units. Secondly as he does not intend to realize all these operations in a same shot, he grades the units according to the order of succession he intends to follow. So he gets 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 as the ordinal rank of each unit.

Now let's suppose that the subject has created three forms. Two of them have already disappear, one is present and there are yet two forms to create. The subject counts two units for the past with their rank (1 then 2), one (3) for the present and two (4 and 5) for the future. Of course he is always repeating this counting at each operation in the present because memory and anticipation are both in the present ( When you anticipate or memorize you do it in the present).

Of course in the receptacle, you only have one form corresponding to the present operation of the subject. It means that the subject produces an order of succession of units still realized (the past) and to perform (the future). As each form, past, present or future is represented by a single unit, all the units are identical. Consequently, a portion of this homogeneous flow is always a defined number of units: A "duration". However the real succession is represented by the ordinal number that indicates the rank of each unit, that is to say its proximity in the past or in the future.

According to the combination of the coexistent order of logical places and the order of succession of units of time, motion is the representation in the transcendental consciousness of the relations established by the subject between the forms.

Let's suppose that the subject wants to establish a relation between the forms of A and E. The two forms of A and E occupy a logical place. Between A and E, there are 3 logical places (B,C,D). Then the subject relates the form of A to E. This relation is represented by a motion in the consciousness of A moving toward E.

According to our previous definition, when the subject intends to establish the relation he expects only one operation that is to say one unit of thought. That we call the speed is then the ratio between the number of logical places ( 3 between A and D) and the number of units of time (1 )

We state that the content of the receptacle (That is to say the content of the transcendental consciousness) is the ultimate reality we were looking for. The ultimate reality is nothing more and above of the existing forms in the transcendental consciousness.

To illustrate this fact, we must imagine an alien observer who could introduce himself in the transcendental consciousness to observe what is happening into it. At the lower level of the forms, he will see the single units and he will call them ultimate particles or space-time like points. Visioning the first associations of these units in simple numbers, he will call them quarks, leptons, gluons and finally atoms through their higher associations. Regarding the complex forms, he will depict them like molecules and through the same process he will reach the most complex networks corresponding to the cells of the living creatures.

As we have seen, forms appear, disappear and are animated. Once again our observer cannot know the thinking process which causes these phenomenon. He will deduce that the motion of the forms is the cause of their properties. In thinking so, he will be in accordance with Science. Finally, in calculating the position and the movements of the units, he will forecast the future state of any form. As there are different movements causing various properties, he will attribute specific names to these different phenomenon such as dilatation, elasticity, and so on.

It means that these forms in the transcendental consciousness really are the subatomic reality for an observer in accordance with the following drawing.

In contemplating the mathematical forms, our observer thinks, represents and deduces exactly like the scientist who attempts to perceive the ultimate reality of the universe.

As our observer do not know the thinking process, he falls in the same misinterpretation of the reality as the prisoners in the Plato cave. In fact, all the forms are associated or dissociated by the thought of the transcendental subject and the cause of this animation is in the thinking process. The forms by themselves have no more real power than the celluloid images of a motion movie. In attending a movie, you know that the real cause of the motion is not in the celluloid images but in the actor' studio!

Regarding the properties, they are too the result of the thinking process. Finally, the causation belongs also to the thinking process: Relations are in the subject thought and are translated as a motion in the transcendental consciousness. It means that the energy and the forces in the nature are just the result of the transcendental thinking process.

This interpretation does not change our daily science. The best proof is our agile observer: Starting with the mathematical forms but ignoring the thinking subject, he can reconstitute the casual scientific explanation. It means that the requisites of Idealism do not disturb the scientific habits. In the other hand, Idealism explains the laws regarding the relations between forms (our immaterial ratios). It means that Idealism reinforces Science in depicting the "why" and not only the "how" of the phenomenon.

By the end, we may conclude that the ultimate reality, the energy, the mineral world, the living reign, and finally all the flow of events in the nature are the result of the transcendental subject' thinking process applied to the mathematical forms.

Now, we have to come back to the daily life. We shall see that our hypothesis does not change anything to your daily perception of the reality and does not jeopardize the usual practice of science and technologies.

Along these lessons, we shall emphasize that absolute Idealism is the more elegant and comprehensive theory available on the market.

1-Independently of the general web sites, there are not many specific sites only devoted to Idealism: http://relative-mindmatter.co.uk

In fact most philosophers were dualist. However since the early origins of philosophy, any dualistic position confronts itself to a logical hurdle. A spirit cannot be in connection with an extended matter. This spirit is supposed to be our mind or our soul while the external world is supposed to be made up of matter. The dualists cannot overcome the mind body relation because it's impossible to explain how your free will could move your body. Consequently, the dualists are obliged to refer to God who realizes the constant relation between mind and body. Leibnitz , Malebranche, Descartes and some other philosophers have spent much time in trying to construct some ingenious concepts such as "Occasionalism" and "Pre established harmony". Anyway all these explanations rely heavily on a supernatural cause and are outside the scientific knowledge. Of course, the materialists are very happy with the dualist's: They play with them just like a cat with mices! It's easy to critic dualism and by contrast to promote Materialism. With absolute Idealism there is quite another business!

Regarding absolute Idealism, the only real attempt is due to Berkeley but it was based on a supernatural cause. He explained that the material objects did not exist and were only ideas in the thought of God. Then, God printed sensations in our own mind: According to Berkeley there is not an external world between God and us. On the other hand, Kant makes a distinction between "noumenon" and phenomenon. The external world is made up of "noumenon" that are not a matter but rather some objects that can be intuited only by the intellect and not perceived by senses. This noumenon refracts in our mind where it becomes a phenomenon which corresponds to a sensation. This theory contains a part of truth but remains insufficient. All the other attempts and notably the German Idealism are more confuse and have not been able to resist to the tide of the marxist propaganda.

In "The problems of philosophy", Lord Russell tries to contest Idealism in focusing on Berkeley and Leibnitz: click on: www.popular-science.net . Click on "Russell" and then on "The existence of matter" "The nature of matter" and "Idealism". Clearly, Lord Russell recognizes that he cannot prove the existence of matter and he only underlines the weakness of the Berkeley theory.

2-According to an old Pythagorean tradition, several philosophers such as Plotin, Proclus and Avicenne stated that the One was the subject of the Universe.

3-This explanation actualizes the famous Plato lesson about the Being, the "Other", and the "Same". The Being visions itself. This itself becomes other and looks like a non being. Then the Same, that is to say the divine intelligence in Plato terms establishes a relation of identity between the Being and the other. Due to this identity the Being is again unified.

4-This description could be compared to the Parmenidian sphere. Unity is in accordance with the fact that the self could think diversity. His eternity is in accordance too with the fact that he can think all the appearances and disappearances. Likely, his immobility does not contradict the fact that he can think all the relations. Read the poem of Parmenide, a masterpiece in universal philosophy: http://philoctetes.free.fr/parmenidefraneng.htm

5-As Leibnitz used to say, we are some particular looks of "God" on the Universe. This astonishing assert is in fact as old as the metaphysics. The Pythagorean professed that men were of the race of Gods. According to them, each individual was by itself a God or a part of the unique God. Averroes too thought that any individual subject was identical with the ultimate subject. Indeed, it is absurd to conceive several "I". Just scrutinize your own experience: You have been a child who said "I". Right now you are saying "I". How could you say that these two "I" separated by twenty or forty years are just yourself. Of course, you may posit that this fact results of the permanence of a specific body. Do you think that your child body was the same as your adult body today? I guess that there is none one sole particle that these two bodies share in common. Now just replace the time by the space. Put the child in a point A and the adult in a point B. You have here two different persons. The two persons say "I" and these two "I" are your own "I"! The only way to solve this contradiction is to admit that your different "I" belong in fact to an unique and permanent "I".

6-About Averroes go to www.muslimphilosophy.com , scroll and click on Ibn Rushd site (Averroes). It could be said that my subject being identical with the cosmic subject, all my thoughts and actions are guided by the latter. When I say "I" it is a mere illusion and such a dogma could conduct to deny free will, responsibilities and to develop a passive fatalism. In fact we shall see further that such a risk does not exist because the individual modality can have a specific will distinct of the global modality.

7-Beware about the meaning of the word "transcendental consciousness". Most of the available web sites use this word to describing the level of human consciousness reached through meditation such as yogi.

Regarding our present meaning, the transcendental consciousness is just the consciousness of the transcendental subject. The only way to have a look of the content of this transcendental consciousness is to develop big science because this content is just the ultimate reality which is outside our own consciousness.