In our understanding of the world we stumble across a strange thing related to the Self which perplexes us to no small degree and it is the insistence on evidences or result of evidences called "proofs" before a thing is "accepted " as a fact to our limited knowledge .
If one carefully examines this phenomenal attitude of human beings we find that it stands in the way of the human being actualizing the purportedly element of the divine through transcendence by the faculty of observation , inference and validation by experience.On the other hand there is yet another phenomenal attitude peculiar to human beings which is at the other spectrum of this and is based on the utmost reverence to belief which disregards a scientific approach to the thing on hand and becomes entirely personal and endemic.
And in between the two ends of this spectrum we have a whole lot of Scientific, Psedo Scientific and half baked notions which more or less exhibit characteristics in less or more of the two ends of the spectrum of the "need to evidences" which has given us Dogmatism relating to Religion,Science,Art, Philosophy,Psychology,Physical Sciences and Materialism,Idealism ,Realism ,Synthetic theories ,Dialogues (which are part of an Idealism) ,Endowing newer concepts by the mixing up of the character of either of one or more of the above concepts and calling it new , an alchemy of science and metaphysics under various assumptions which 'Stretch" the barriers of reasoning and intuition originally involved in either , calling upon that most fickle of faculties viz Imagination to find the correspondences and contradictions etc.It is necessary to understand this predicament in order to alleviate the mischief it has caused in the intellect .
Both Science and Philosophy presuppose a minimum development of the intellect before they can be formally entered into by anyone . The scientist from the intuitive truths which require no validation and are applicable across the spectrum to which it pertains and are called First principles or Axioms these are not required to be deduced by anyone , the originators had the necessary insight like Euclid, Pythagoras and many others , This is how the Axioms were developed and so the unassailability of the Queenly science of Mathematics which stands at the apex of all sciences and finds applications across the spectrum of the concept called Science . No other Science holds this advantage of transcendency that Mathematics holds and its sister Geometry the science of forms and position in space which rests on the bedrock of Mathematics.
Philosophy in a like manner ,has its first Principles and Axioms , and which are open to investigation by any person who is aware of the Nature of philosophy, what its primary aims are , what are the grounds it covers , its applicability or non applicability in areas, its tools or instruments of investigation , the objects that are investigated and to what end , and the base of knowledge required for a foray into such a sublime area , so far removed from the vulgarity of the common intellect and its perverted notions of life and thinking, As with the the originator of every science which is few and far between , there has to be an understanding in the matter of Philosophy also - it is only a very rare and acute person who can claim to be the originator of an original science or philosophy . These are the lighthouses of mankind pointing the way in a creative and evolutionary manner. The qualities embodied in their intellect are the rarest of the rare and so they are not everyday occurance, they further the cause of mankind beneficially and in no small measure .If "man is the measure" then they would occupy any pantheon in any country with ease .
We are not required in any way to to formulate , or discover but to just understand , and understand rightly without a shadow of a doubt , for it is an insult to intelligence if a person could not be able to understand what another has propounded with certainity and stood the test of time , We are not asked to embark on inventions but to understand .For in the correct understanding and assimilation one reaches a stage where in depth analysis can be done to ones own good , keeping in mind that he owes it to the originator for the particular advancement he finds himself in personally . To attack or controvert is to cut off the branch by which one hangs upon . It is an open clarion call of our ignorance and a stating of this fact when we slowly impersonate the originator and spin off theories and yet obfuscate it so much as to present it as our own and "new''. This is intellectual dishonesty brought about by an error in understanding of the ethos as to what exactly or how understanding is engendered.
The above discursive though lengthy is a necessary precursor to understanding the dillemma of the requirement by the individual to elicit a proof or the attachment of an evidence to a statement heard or said or known indirect.
Leaving aside the question of all Sciences , we now tackle the subject of Philosophy and its grounds of existence , which is a necessary and essential understanding failing which all forays into the subject will be doomed to failure.
Incomprehension is at the root of all ability to assimilate knowledge rightly - In philosophy it is the inability to "conceptualize" and understand correctly . Philosophy tries to get to the root of the "why" of a thing unlike science which is the "how" of a thing . Science explains how a certain axiom embraces within it the sum total of the operations within its group . In Philosophy we work from causes and not from effects . In science there has to be an "observed phenomenon" requiring investigation or explanation . Bad language and even worse intellect is to be blamed for if a person has ever believed that he was being told of the "Why" and not the "How" when listening or learning Science or dealing Scientifically . Science deals in what is already observable and available to investigation , collation , assimilation and categorization as a clear cut body of knowledge . It does not go into "why" a phenomena is , its being and non being . It deals in what has "become" and is available to us for scrutiny .
The crucial and very critical things that are to be understood , before one gets into philosophy (or Theosophy I use the extended meanings for both without dissonance ) are the points of references involved at its very basic level and they are the following :
1.Subject - Object Orientation
2.Law of Causation
3.Principles of Thought
4.Area Covered by the above . and finally
5 The.Exegesis or a "cutting away" (unlike in Religion or other subjects ).
Subject - Object Orientation
One does not deny the existence of objects , and that they stand in time and space .But what has to be understood is that an object presupposes the subject . ie. The existence of an object is based on the availability of a subject who is conscious .This has to be the right understanding in the seeing of any object . Again since the subject is presupposed in the appearance of an object , it stands to reason that the subject does not occupy the same area as the object in that we mean the subject "stands outside the purview or ambit of the object" . In other words the subject being preexisting to the object cannot come under the scrutiny or does not afford any scope for scrutiny to the object in order to be known .
The corollary to this statement is : every conscious subject comes under the class of objects as he is an object to another subject , and as between such conscious subjects they are all objects - since objects stand in time and space and are temporal , within a conscious object , those that are seen (I mean objects) exist and those that are not seen are non existent (for the particular individual) . this is applicable as for the lowest so for the highest and throughout .
So there is - since the world itself taken fully and its constituents stand in time and space and are objects which are subject to time and space preexisting as a necessary and essential condition of the appearance of forms . Out of which the conscious object will be having a conscious subject which is preexisting it . Since the appearance of objects in time and space presuppose the existence of a subject .
Now as between the conscious subject who is also an object vis a vis another object that is also a subject , there is the possibility that even if they stood in the condition of just Subject and Object , there is the (possible) event that the subject can be made an object of knowledge which in normal cases would be impossible as per the above discussion , but how and why is explained .
Vis a Vis inanimate phenomena and a conscious observer the subject is outside the purview of the object and is preexisting to it .
Vis a Vis animate objects and Subject - the subject is preexisting to the object and cannot be known as it is outside the preview of the object (though) animated or conscious.
Now the inference as between two animate objects which are both objects and subjects to each other - It is well known that not just the possibilty of knowing exists but interaction also exists , depending on their position at a given time in space . Which gives us a tremendous insight into another thing which follows and is the Start of Philosophy .
A subject exists which is conscious and pre existing every other object in existence.
This subject is outside the concepts (or temporal reality) of Time and Space.
This subject does not occupy any position as it is not subject to time (this requires some elucidation which will be done ).
This subject does not move in any direction as it is beyond the truncation of space by forms .(this too requires some clarification ).
The subject cannot be known as it stands outside the ambit of objects (or is not conditioned by it ) .
This same subject can be known since there exist a case of conscious objects interacting between each other and at a particular position (ie,earth) alternating between subject and object in rapid succession (succession is time ).
So there exists a precondition to knowing the preexisting formless and conscious subject as an object in the rare event that the subject takes the form of an object and is animate (ie a human being).
Again this subject is capable of inhabiting all objects by reasoning (both animate and inanimate ).
This subject can further be known only on reflection and never other wise , ie a conscious attempt to "know" it has to be made failing which it will never be known.
The manifold existence of millions of objects of various sizes and shapes and capabilities side by side with their various domains of perception , knowledge , movement and utility to another (if immovable like stone etc ) point to the happy ability of the coexistence of subject and object between themselves in all its possible permutations and combinations , so coexistence is also a precondition of becoming an object .
The above is not exhaustive but is only a small pointer to how one has to orient oneself when one decides to approach this subject of inquiry . Causes are ascertained in Philosophy and then worked down . Or in the corollary transcendence is achieved by employing various techniques which lead to knowledge .
(to be cont'd).