Is there a method for refining metaphysics?

>>3163209
>my friend

I have a theory of metaphysics that seeks to prove itself through analytic rationalization. Hypothetically, if reality could be made into an abstraction, how would it be constructed? What would the informational structure of the universe be? Through this investigation, I have uncovered a necessary logical chain of events stemming from existence itself leading to the mind of God.

>>3164607
id like to hear this chain of events.

>>3164610
I've posted it here before but okay :

God is firstly existence. The idea of existence applies to itself and is given its order by itself. There is an infinite sequence of bits of existence being informed by bits of existence in a chain. Then because existence is whole, existence is informed of itself entirely, making each bit of existence within all infinite bits of existence and contain each bit of existence.

The whole is informed of itself fully. God knows itself. Again, the whole is informed of itself fully but this time it is informed of its informing or knowing. God knows that it knows or is given Awareness and subsequently Bliss(the harmony of self-knowing.) (note: God at this step is similar to our own awareness, except that each mote of bliss is clearly perceived individuated and while also experiencing the infinite spaciousness of existence)
God possess the attributes of Omniscience and Omnipresence. His Awareness is spread through out the whole uniformly. At each piece of bliss, a new whole arises at that point. God multiplies Himself by Himself in addition to his original Self. The process continues, the new whole again arises at each point of bliss. The process continues infinitely.

Mathematically we can look at it like n+n2, where n is the previous sequence of the set starting with infinty : ∞, ∞+∞2, ∞+∞2 + (∞+∞2 )2, etc… God is an infinite expansion of infinite existence-awareness-bliss.

>>3164618
>except that each mote of bliss is clearly perceived individuated and while also experiencing the infinite spaciousness of existen

sound fucking exhausting

>>3164618
And you've come to the knowledge that Jesus and the buddha had. At what depth do you currently understand this? I know its hard to reflect on depth without reference points though

>>3164728
Purely from a meditative perspective, as I have not reached a vision of the divine directly. I think that requires a monastic(holy) life style which I am not prepared to embark on yet.

>>3163209
>it's had thousands of years longer than science to organize and refine itself into one universally function set of rituals

The Vedic religion/Hinduism does this. Dharma is eternal.

File: IMG_0431.png (208KB, 1400x1050px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1400x1050px

>>3164758
>tfw not prepared to be as intelligent as i can be

>>3164758
I believe taking up that lifestyle is a choice one makes once he reaches divine knowledge, cosmic consciousness, satori whatever you want to call it. I took interest in buddhism because its pretty close to the truth, some become christian priests etc. The change of lifestyle is a reaction not a cause of achieving knowledge, it just becomes easier to focus on the task at hand once one takes up such disciplines. I could be completely wrong though as im no priest or devout buddhist

>>3164787
But why then do other faiths exist?

>>3163209
Why are you and your friend using science as a paradigm for other disciplines?

That is a metaphysical opinion. You don't have a unique, universal reason to believe it.

>>3164810
One takes up a lifestyle of renunciation, Sannyasa, in order to attain the truth. Even if not a sannyasa, one must regulate his lifestyle if he wishes to approach the truth by practice of yoga. In both cases one needs to minimize enjoyment of the material world. Obtaining the truth entails the cessation of material, therefore if one is addicted to material pleasures and continues to indulge how can he hope to be free?

File: kant1.jpg (232KB, 918x536px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 918x536px

>he doesn't know

>>3164830
When there is no have access to the Vedic texts and ignorance to the dharma is present, other systems attempting to explain reality naturally crop up. Other faiths are still just as valid, but don't fully explain reality. The difference is the Vedas teach the personal aspect of God, where most other faiths teach God's impersonal aspect. Without knowing God personally, one remains imperfect.

>>3164849
Free from what? What are you trying to be free from. If it is the material world that is understandable but in the sense that pursuing materials and indulging in pleasures warps the mind to misjudge the seriousness of the reality around him, this leads one to holding material possessions at a much higher value than they truely are. Renunciating the future and past is all one really needs to do to see clearly, as they are what forms the ego. Material possessions are here to stay and i agree one must regulate his impulses and desires but renunciating for the sake of being free when one has no real concept of what he is being held captive of leads to a radical journey of chasing enlightenment

>>3164881
It is hard to detach from the need for material pleasures if one is always consuming them.

>>3164881
One is trying to become free from material nature, called prakṛti. It is this material that conditions the souls and entangled him a cycle of birth and death called samsara. Enlightenment means freedom from this material entanglement and being able to exist among nature without being caught up in its actions and reactions. Therefore if one continually interacts with the material nature without the practice of yoga and being able to detatch himself, he only complicates his entanglement. This is why yogis own nothing, as material attachment of any sort only binds you.

File: 1500899074230.jpg (3KB, 90x90px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 90x90px

>>3164607
>>3164618
Great, now which religion is the right one?

>>3164618
Your divine cosmic truth is a tautology?