We are faced with an immense living universe. We are made to observe and to conclude. Even little children want to know why should there be rain and who is God.

Being big children ourselves we have the natural instinctive curiosity to look about us and wonder, observe and conclude.

We undergo this experience and we make our own ideas according to our own understanding and reflection. Thoughts are merely representations of our interaction with the universe and conclusions from it. Every individual has his own share of his own reflections, about the universe, what is it, where did it come from, how did it come about andwhat are we doing here.

But, most people, if not all, cannot tell who are we, how come we are here and not elsewhere, who put us here and what’s it all about. Whether we conjecture and gues to the utmost of philosophical speculations or we try to pry into the mysteries of this universe and cannot find anything solid to base our philosophy but have to move into the hemisphere of metaphysical thinking, we all try to understand by reflecting and thinking.

]]>

We are forced to conclude with regard to these questions and when our conclusions are not up to our expectations we start speculating into metaphysical plausibility. Science is unable to find answers at the time being. It stops at the frontiers of philosophy and metaphysics.

The scriptures tell us God created the heavens and the earth and what is in between. God made us to observe and gave us some time to do it, enough time that is. For some others, and there are many of them, such speculations are unscientifically illogical conclusions and they land in philosophy. But at times, if not most of it, philosophy part company with metaphysics, and metaphysics become our spaceship to the unknown. The observable remains the spring board for either perspective. For the donkeys on two legs, limited to scientific discoveries, they reject philosophy and metaphysics.

The physical sensible leads, by necessity, to the intelligible. We have to observe and conclude whether there is a God or not, here science is limited to what can be proven,then metaphysical belief or disbelief takes over and we are left to our own convictions, lack of proof or disproof.

Science is not only limited to the perceptible but it ends up in the intelligible, without being able to answer ultimate questions like the meaning of the presence of the universe, its origin or its directionality nor our own finality. It shuts up itself on speculations, but these are inevitable for the human race.

At best, we remain marginals, flabbergasted by the landscape, but unable to resolve the unfathomable enigma.

We are creatures of observations, masters of speculations and slaves of convictions!

In the spiritual mind science or known as exclusive Fifth Science, the soul is being trained to be a conscious receiver more than being an actor. Through the mind that speaks to the soul, it is believed that the possibility of renouncing judgment can be achieved. This sounds to be a complex thing to do but this is exactly what the Druze logic reveals in many doctrines that make up their unique spiritual identity. The metaphysical realm of such practice emanated from the ancient wisdom and knowledge theories of great ancient Greek philosophers who have significantly influenced Fifth Science as practiced by the authentic Druze Gnostics. There can be an endless debate among traditional spiritual societies associated with religions and cultures from which norms and beliefs are derived. In this unique spiritual mind science, one may wonder why such elusive and secret brotherhood exists without the benefit of mass consciousness. There are doubts and dubious criticisms hurled at the Druze Brotherhood and humanity have frowned at this community. The spiritual distinction in which this mind science evokes can be as confusing and baffling if not for the limited resources that continuously faced suppression in the new world.

The Gnostic Logic stemmed from Gnosis, which is derived from the Greek term meaning knowledge. Knowledge comes from the mind that communicates directly to the soul. It is then the soul that receives what the mind conceives and expressed through a form known as the human body. The Platonic Theory of Forms substantiates how the practice of meditation can further lead to religious guilt and moral degradation. The Fifth Science elucidates how thought and action is synergized with existence to achieve a better insight into existence itself. The doctrines that www.substance.com present provide a better and richer insight of man’s existence, as opposed to the monotheistics’ point of view. Bear in mind that there is no intent from the substance to bring its readers to convert. Primarily, the people behind the website aim to give their brethren the resources which they feel they have been deprived of and to shed light to reverse the misconceptions and harsh criticisms that this spiritual society has long suffered from. The doctrines are derived from an authentic Gnostic Logic that guided the Druze Brotherhood for a thousand years but were kept in secrecy and away from mass consciousness.

According to the Fifth Science, The Universal Mind which is the light of the internal sun, allows the soul which is referred to by the Gnostics as Sophia, to see Wisdom in a conceptual realm. Without such light,  the soul becomes insensitive and could not receive anything. This negates the real function of the soul as a receiver rather than an actor. If this happens, the soul is cut off from the Universal Mind which is the source of wisdom. In effect, the internal realm is nullified, getting lost in the myriad of external events which leads to perpetual emptiness. www.substance.com is committed to make the Fifth Science comprehensible for humanity to benefit from the universal nature of the spirituality driven by the mind.

Related Metaphysics Articles

Question by .: What, if anything, is the value of philosophical reflection in the modern world?
Please note that I specified “in the modern world”, because, prior to late in the Enlightenment, philosophical reflection was not yet separated from what are now the sciences. I am here contrasting philosophical reflection with empirical investigations, theoretical speculations, and practical reasonings.

Bonus question: what contemporary philosopher, if any, would you consider to be doing valuable work?

Best answer:

Answer by Amber
What value is there in life itself?

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by funkymonkey: Recommend me some good philosophical reading. Post modern philosophers please?

Best answer:

Answer by madoli
The most influential early postmodern philosophers were Michel Foucault, Jean-François Lyotard, and Jacques Derrida. Foucault approached postmodern philosophy from a historical perspective, building upon structuralism, but at the same time rejecting structuralism by re-historicizing and destabilizing the philosophical structures of Western thought. He also considered how knowledge is defined and changed by the operation of power.

In America, the most famous postmodernist is Richard Rorty. Originally an analytic philosopher, Rorty believed that combining Donald Davidson’s criticism of the dualism between conceptual scheme and empirical content with Willard Van Orman Quine’s criticism of the analytic-synthetic distinction allowed for an abandonment of the view of the mind as a mirror of a reality or external world. He argued that truth was not “out-there”, but was in language and language was whatever served our purposes in any particular time; ancient languages are sometimes untranslatable into modern ones. Donald Davidson is not usually considered a postmodernist, although he and Rorty have both acknowledged that there are few differences between their philosophies[1][2].

The writings of Lyotard were largely concerned with the role of narrative in human culture, and particularly how that role has changed as we have left modernity and entered a “postindustrial” or postmodern condition. He argued that modern philosophies legitimized their truth-claims not (as they themselves claimed) on logical or empirical grounds, but rather on the grounds of accepted stories (or “metanarratives”) about knowledge and the world — what Wittgenstein termed “language-games.” He further argued that in our postmodern condition, these metanarratives no longer work to legitimize truth-claims. He suggested that in the wake of the collapse of modern metanarratives, people are developing a new “language game” — one that does not make claims to absolute truth but rather celebrates a world of ever-changing relationships (among people and between people and the world).

Derrida, the father of deconstruction, practiced philosophy as a form of textual criticism. He criticized Western philosophy as privileging the concept of presence and logos, as opposed to absence and markings or writings. Derrida thus claimed to have deconstructed Western philosophy by arguing, for example, that the Western ideal of the present logos is undermined by the expression of that ideal in the form of markings by an absent author. Thus, to emphasize this paradox, Derrida reformalized human culture as a disjoint network of proliferating markings and writings, with the author being absent.

Though Derrida and Foucault are cited as postmodern philosophers, each has rejected many of the other’s views. Like Lyotard, both are skeptical of absolute or universal truth-claims. Unlike Lyotard, however, they are (or seem) rather more pessimistic about the emancipatory claims of any new language-game; thus some would characterize them as post-structuralist rather than postmodernist.

What do you think? Answer below!

More Modern Philosophers Articles

Product Description
This volume is produced from digital images created through the University of Michigan University Library’s preservation reformatting program. The Library seeks to preserve the intellectual content of items in a manner that facilitates and promotes a variety of uses. The digital reformatting process results in an electronic version of the text that can both be accessed online and used to create new print copies. This book and thousands of others can be found in the … More >>

A Philosophical Inquiry Into the Source of the Pleasures Derived From Tragic Representations: From Which is Deduced the Secret of Giving Dramatic Interest … English, French, and German Philosophers.

Product Description
Volume: 3 Publisher: London : Printed for G. G. J. and J. Robinson Publication date: 1786 Subjects: Philosophy Notes: This is an OCR reprint. There may be numerous typos or missing text. There are no illustrations or indexes. When you buy the General Books edition of this book you get free trial access to Million-Books.com where you can select from more than a million books for free. You can also preview the book there…. More >>

The Philosophical Dictionary ; Or, the Opinions of Modern Philosophers on Metaphysical, Moral, and Political Subjects

Product Description
In Four Volumes…. More >>

The Philosophical Dictionary V4: Or The Opinions Of Modern Philosophers On Metaphysical, Moral, And Political Subjects