êthos mystéthikos - Chapter 6 (From the work in progress: The Poetized Critique) By M. Santos

 6. THE TWO WAYS OF KNOWLEDGE (2)

In the metaphysics of the beautiful, we saw that a conceptual description of the beautiful in nature and in art, for example, is properly philosophical, in the sense that philosophy exposes in abstracto the essential meaning of things. But the meaning of a thing, that is, its abstraction, is not properly an idea and a thing in itself; since this must be understood by itself, and that, the concept is always indicated and represented by something entirely other, since it cannot of itself be intuited. So that old conception of time nunc stans was the proper term to refer to Kant's thing-in-itself, and its proper objectivity, Plato's Idea.

Therefore, every non-intuitive representation is properly abstract, because it is inappropriate for the verification of an idea in the aesthetic intuitive that clings to an object, tearing it from the temporal succession, in such a way and with a vivid intensity so grandiose that makes all the the rest becomes expendable, that is, unrelated to willing, but rather relating only to the reality of ideas.

Mystetically, we can say that such a reality remains monadic, that is, in the characteristic of being the extremely simple and unique Idea of ​​Humanity, which cannot be derived from anything else, as well as a thing in itself, which, in the whole extension of the universe, remains simultaneously present, before and after any relation to ordinary chronology.

Let us now note that the fundamental feature, in our mystesis of intuition and reason, is the total separation between reason and ingenious knowledge, since a simple element cannot be separated into two heterogeneous components. We say this to emphasize our earlier observation about the elementary meaning of monadology.

Therefore, we cannot access intuitive and immediate knowledge through the mere abstraction of the content of matter alone, since such knowledge is the legitimate correlate of the pure subject of knowledge. 

Therefore, there is no logical relationship between the intellect and the Vital Pulse, rooted in the Human Soul, or rather, in the Humanity's Consciousness.

Likewise, it is not possible to detect any resulting from the voluntas-nous synthesis. 

Thus, the incapacity of every knowing being is demonstrated here, which cannot reach the fifth-dimensionality by the scientific method. With this, it is likely that we will make the primacy of metaquantum over the ordinary theory of knowledge and even over the metaphysics of ethics amenable to intuition, as we have already announced. However, this will be further clarified later.

Therefore, pure and more objective knowledge (the immediacy of the idea) will require the complete overcoming of causal thinking, and, thus, we infer that the human being is not determined from the cogito and analytical knowledge, but only from the original Cosmic Energy and full, that is, of what conditions the whole world and the very causality of the scientific mechanism.

From this decentralization of causal consciousness it follows that reality is not the faculty of a substance nor its name, but is the very core of the human being. It is something simply given, always present and insurmountable. 

Now, the mysthesis presents us with all this as the apex of consciousness, from which the only viable continuity, in any direction, is the Idea of Humanity, because the representable world is what only exists as a limited subjective understanding, that is, that of the person who perceives it.

However, the creative genius is the one who overcomes the old synthesis of understanding and the principle of individuation, in short, the uncommon way of perceiving and conceiving the world. 

Here, therefore, is the definitive relevance of metaphysical pessimism, when it states that everything that can be empirically known in the universe is nothing more than mere representation, and the subject is the condition of existence of the representable world.

Time and space are the essential and general forms of every object and are general forms of intuition too, but they must be intuited independently of all experience. Thus, they still represent the basis of mathematics in its quantitative indefectibility. However, the subject itself, that is, the complete and indivisible subject, in every being capable of representation, will only be found outside causality, so it is concluded here that the world as representation would disappear if all subjects disappeared, because these halves meaning solely and exclusively for each other. In short, even the empirical subject cannot be the object of empirical science itself.

Therefore, the Idea of ​​Humanity can be intuited from the collective of individuals, by someone of immediate genius, whether those of the collective are active or not in the works of love.

The common expression of the a priori forms of the understanding and everything else that we can know purely a priori is the content of causality, therefore, what is given to the understanding of this principle only by aesthetic intuition, in which all undying and more objective knowledge is expressed.  

For example, the content of that old notion of substance, which, like pure substance in chemistry, is a constant form of matter characterized by its specific entities, such as atoms of such elements in proper proportions and molecules, being nothing other than the Unchangeable Energy.

Now, by the cogito ('I think, therefore I am'), notwithstanding the modification of the quality of form, which is what characterizes all change, thus all intentional volition must be taken to be posterior to the innate capacity of ordinary consciousness, the access to rudimentary knowledge of the world.

Therefore, we could not fail to allude here to basic elements of that so-called rational psychology of Kant, that so-called science, built on [the] singular proposition I think. (In KrV, A342/B400).

The human being, in Vedism, that is, in the initial period of Indian religion, is assumed to be the immaterial element of the individual, the atma. And, it's the same as what we call around here by soul. This deep soul is what presents itself to us when the subject realizes his true nature, underlying the empirical self and what is identified with the Brahman, the essential dimension of the universe, which is also called the consciousness of the origin of life and of cosmic, the power behind the body-mind complex.

In the same way, just as a body exists in space, similarly, our thoughts, intellect, emotions and psyche exist in Being, the space of consciousness. And, the cogito is not the very being and space of the Idea of ​​Humanity, on the contrary, because the Being cannot be perceived by our physical senses, and because the Idea is beyond the domain of the senses, those that were developed from the Cosmic energy, just to make possible the physical understanding of the diversity of physical objects and even of subjects, although they are always unobjectable subjects, that is, never empirically available.

The word atma was used, also in the Gita, to refer to the lower self, that is, the complex body, mind and senses. But let us also note that human consciousness, although linked to the sensible world, cannot itself be experimented with in the laboratory, that is, it is not an object of science in the proper sense.

According to thinkers such as Vyasa, from the ancient Indian Vedanta School, we can also highlight that matter coexists with perception, on which its existence, transcendental ideality and empirical reality depend. 

Therefore, the world as representation is what we consider from our perception, and it is a synthesis of external reality and non-externalized human consciousness. 

In tis sense, such a synthesis is not enough to understand the Idea of ​​Humanity, even because only dialogic-dialectic-epistemic will be the indispensable and enough necessary for that.

The a priori condition of every perceptible object is the subject, and, in this sense, everything that exists, exists for a subject whose forms that generate multiplicity are time and space. 

At this point we must clarify further, in order to avoid any misinterpretation of the Kantian notion of the thing in itself, since Kant did not understand that the thing in itself coincides with energy. In this sense, we must realize that, in mysthesis, the term reality constitutes the immediate in itself, the nucleus of Cosmic Energy. 

However, this must be 'representable', but never in abstract. In other words, it can only be represented by its own means, that is, by light, by invisibility and by cosmic resonance in general, by the music of the spheres, etc., if we want to call it that.

However, the aesthetic intuition suggested in the metaphysics of the beautiful is enough to understand why mere abstract conceptual representations do not account for the immediate in itself of mystéthika. 

Now, before the emergence of this neologism, nothing could even be assumed about the dialogical-dialectical-epistemic procedure of creative geniuses either.

In this way, the pure subject knows, but is never known, since it must not be properly understood into time and space. It is only the representable world of the understanding that is divided into necessary, essential and inseparable halves: the subject and the object. That is to say, the subject itself cannot be represented except roughly, as an individual, human and even collective phenomenon.

Mystetically speaking, the pure subject, in dialogic-dialectic-epistemic, makes it possible to access the fifth-dimensional sphere of the Idea of ​​Humanity. This possibility stems from aesthetic intuition and the realization of works of love in the world, all of this simultaneously, from a scientific point of view. Now, from the mystéthiko point of view, the ordinary chronology is totally diluted in the aionic (eternal and ever-present duration) of Cosmic Energy. 

In short, all this 'takes place' in the dialogical-dialectical-epistemic procedure of creative geniuses.

Ways of knowing imply that beginning and end exist only for the individual conditioned by the a priori forms of understanding, and to whom, therefore, every affirmation of Negativity in life makes it seem that the fleeting is not essential, when compared with everything else, that which is enduring and emphasized by time.

Up to this point, we thought we already had the essentials of our mystéthiko movement for the establishment of the future metaquantum. But, once it is realized that metaquantics does not fit into the ordinary sphere of chronology, not even into the metaphysics of the beautiful nor into the metaphysics of ethics, and more, since the latter is seen as the culmination of the theory of knowledge, of the metaphysics of nature, and even of philosophical aesthetics, at least on the threshold of metaphysical pessimism, then, something new would need to be established, otherwise, metaquantics would be confined to the narrow ghetto of crude poetic delusions.

Therefore, metaquantics demanded the propaedeutics carried out by dialogic-dialectic-epistemic into the heart of mysthesis. Now, the core that sustains us here is the sphere of knowledge of the Idea of ​​Humanity. Such an Idea can take a lifetime to be roughly conceived by binary logic, but it can also be known, immediately, in the fleetingness of genius intuiting, something that should already be very clear by now, that is, that we are dealing with a way of know that can never occur in timed time.

That is, in mystéthika the terms, fleeting and lasting, are used only in a metaphorical sense, at most they are presented as important observations of the metaphysics of the beautiful.

In short, once the dialogical-dialectical-epistemic procedure occurs, then notions such as the theory of knowledge, metaphysics of nature, metaphysics of the beautiful, metaphysics of ethics, all of these must be simultaneously implied in the Idea of ​​Humanity.

Now, since this is the proper sphere generated in the compassionate attitude of creative geniuses, therefore, only metaquantum will have epistemic efficacy, because the Cartesian plane, along with the entire scientificist chronology, for example, will have already lost its validity, through the emergence of the fifth-dimensionality. 

Therefore, the dialogical-dialectical-epistemic procedure occurs whenever a creative genius takes the attitude of sharing the idea, through his works, in order to make such genius freedom accessible to others, that is, the freedom implicit in the works of love concretized in this world.

Finally, it is worth noting that, in the case of the musician, a simple melody, performed disinterestedly can communicate the idea of ​​freedom. And, in the case of the poet, the simple recitation of a verse can characterize the concretization of the mystéthiko procedure as well.