1.5 THE TWO DOMAINS OF VALIDITY :

Personal Validity & General Validity

"As an empiricist,  ( not  as a philosopher )  I cannot let myself
presuppose that my peculiar temperament , my own attitude to
intellectual  problems  is universally valid.  Apparently this is an
assumption  in  which  only  the  philosopher  may   indulge, who
always takes it for granted that his own disposition and attitude
are universal, and will not recognise the fact, if he can avoid it,
that his personal equation conditions his philosophy " ....Jung.

This article explains the need for two distinct operational domains of validity.

There is a strong human tendency to presume that any experience and its

valuation must be universally valid and applicable.  This is taken to the

extreme in science where everything has to be objectified in order for it to

exist, and also in religion where everybody is sought to be converted into a

pattern of ritual, procedure, or even blind belief - stated as faith.

Thus it becomes necessary for an exploratory individual to recognise that

even if a huge mass of people hold something to be true, does not imply that

it is also true for that individual.  Therefore, a distinctive split between that

which is generally accepted and that which is seemingly true ( to be tested )

for that individual is almost mandatory for an exploratory individual.

This  split  is necessary because an individual being in order to retain a sense

of   individuality  cannot  do  so without  questioning the validity of the values

imposed   by  family, society and culture.  Furthermore, any creative activity

arises not from blind acceptance,  but  from  challenging and breaking the

shackles of dull conformity or mindless repetition and imitation.

"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means
lack of imagination, lack of creativity."......Jean Dubuffet

1.5.1 THE NATURE of CONFLICT

"I've got a peculiar weakness for criminals and artists--neither
takes life as it is. Any tragic story has to be in conflict with
things as they are."--- Stanley Kubrik

Since  a  starting   assumption of this work is that  human  beings  have  individual

distinct  and  unique   natures,  to  be explored,  realized  and  developed,  it then

follows  that these distinct or different natures will invariably tend to conflict with

one another.  This conflict can have the following consequences: it can be creative

(or evolving) or it can be destructive (or devolving) or in some ways creative and in

other  ways  destructive.   ( In  case  there  is  a  perfect  harmony between all the

beings in a world,  there can be no destruction,  and on the other hand there can

be no creativity either.   Perfect harmony in any case implies a state of no

change, that is, a statis.)

"Change   means  movement.  Movement  means  friction.  Only   in  the
frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or
change occur without that abrasive friction of conflict......Saul Alinsky

Usually  the  creative   aspect  only  is  realized  and  the  destructive aspect

ignored or justified by the party that immediately benefits from a conflicting

interaction. But this overlooking of the destructive aspect ultimately proves

to be fatal for him who ignores this factor, although this is not immediately

apparent. And that is because what is creative and what is destructive isn't

clear-cut or obvious.  Since any change is both creative in some aspects as

well as destructive in other aspects,  it is very difficult,  if not impossible to

ascertain  whether that change   will  be for the better or worse. One thing

is more or less clear : a purely static condition or order is as good as dead,

and will be dead if it does not change, even if that change implies some

destruction in the process. In any case, the destruction of an oppressive

order itself needs a creative input.

"The urge for destruction ( of a tyranny or oppressive order ) is also
a creative urge!" ......Mikhail Bakunin

"Before you kill something make sure you have something better to
replace it with"........Charles Bukowski

As  beings having intelligence and  diverse  natures, we humans are, for

better or worse,  pitted against each other,  and as a result either learn

to  evolve  systems   for  creative  conflict  for  the  benefit  of all life on

this planet or else face the prospect of inevitable destruction.

" Once  the   realization  is  accepted  that  even between the

closest human beings infinite distances  continue to  exist,

a wonderful living side by side can grow up, if they succeed

in loving the distance between them.".....Rainer Maria Rilke

1.5.2 THE GOOD-GOOD Vs   GOOD-BAD Vs

BAD-BAD CONFLICT

The  conflicts of pre-civilization  man were between good and evil or moral

and immoral. The immoral dominated, and the result is civilization, where

most  conflicts  are those that are between one kind of immorality versus

another kind of immorality or between lesser and greater evils.

Both these kinds are also sort of  necessary, for so called development,

but  are  usually   long  term destructive (although avoidable) conflicts.

Something good comes out of these also, if nature regenerates as a result.

Or else one destructive conflict follows another.

" It is the logic of our times,

No subject for immortal verse -

That we who lived by honest dreams,

Defend the bad against the worse.'

......   Cecil Day-Lewis

But the really creative conflicts are those in which one kind of

good battles another kind of good, and both parties and

nature as a whole gains.

"It should be the magic of our times,

A subject for an immortal verse,

That we who see a horrifying future,

Must defend the best against the jerks"

......Upgraded Version July.03

    These are usually of the kind where one good challenges another

" not good enough " and that is the kind of conflict that

is creative and regenerative.

" Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet…
But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from
the ends of the earth. "  ..............Rudyard Kipling

1.5.3 INDIVIDUAL Vs SOCIETY

"The criminal and the soldier at least have the virtue of  being  against
something or for something in a world where many people have learned
to accept a kind of Grey nothingness, to strike an unreal series of poses
in order to be considered normal......It's difficult to say who is engaged
in the greater conspiracy--the criminal, the soldier, or us."
..............Stanley Kubrik

The toughest conflict is when an individual challenges long held beliefs and

concepts in a society that holds these as eternal or sacred.  The individual

who proposes a new idea is then going to come into conflict with the rest

of society,  and unless the conditions are conducive in society to accept a

change  in  its   cherished  values,  the  conflict can be an unsettling one,

especially for the rebel.

"To revolt is a natural tendency of life. Even a worm turns against the
foot that crushes it. In general, the vitality and relative dignity of an
animal can be measured by the intensity of its instinct to revolt."
................Mikhail Bakunin

But it is here that comes the supreme test of the individual with radically

new  idea/s  :  What if no one else is willing to accept it ? Even worse :

what  if  everyone   else  in society thinks that the proposer is a nut who

needs to be locked up ?

"Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-
trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a
new road."......................Voltaire.

This usually is not the case of "scientific discoveries" whereby any new

hypothesis can be tested by others,   since the physical universe has

consistent, verifiable properties.

But  when  the new ideas or conceptions are of a metaphysical (non-

physical) nature, all kinds of problems crop up, since these cannot be

verified by controlled scientific method .

For example, if I say " The average human being is destructive",  this

statement cannot be tested for its consistency by scientific method of

controlled testing. To do that,   would  in any case destroy the whole

world.

The  point  therefore   is  that  outside  the  domain of physical sciences,

we  cannot  have   general  agreement ( agreed by all ) about anything.

   And  it  is   here  that  comes  the  test  and  worth of ourselves as human

beings. Are we capable of evolving a communication technology ( ex, a

metaphysics )  through   which  a  minimal  cross-cultural  integration and

mutual understanding  is possible in order to overcome our destructive

nature, and transform it into a creative or constructive potential ?

This work attempts to answer this question.

But the first and foremost prerequisite for this is the development and the

transformation  of unique individuals through which social transformation

takes place.  But   individual creativity and uniqueness can only take place

if  the  requisite   space  is  provided for it to happen by the existing social

and cultural beliefs and values. This leads to a chicken and egg situation,

i.e., it is almost  impossible   for an individual to hold beliefs and values in

radical  contrast  to   the  culture's   beliefs   and  values  in  which   the

individual  is  brought up.  An individual  that  proposes  a concept, idea

or  belief  that  is alien to,   or opposes  the  strongly  held beliefs in a

culture  is  dubbed   insane,   mad,  pervert  and  degenerate.  And one

has to be completely cracked to persist in such a situation.

"Insanity is better than Outsanity".....J. C. Lilly

This work attempts to find the balance between personal - individual

reality and the socio-cultural reality or what has now become world-

wide as the scientifically established objective physical reality. 

"The artist's life cannot be otherwise than full of conflicts, for two forces
are at war within him - on the one hand the common human longing for
happiness, satisfaction and security in life, and on the other side a
ruthless passion for creation which may go so far as to over-ride
every personal desire."......C G Jung

The conceptual tool of Personal Validity recognizes that what may be valid

for a person may not be generally valid for everyone,  and therefore the

central  idea   is   to  consciously  and   continuously  explore  and

distinguish  between   personally  valid  beliefs  versus generally  held or

agreed upon beliefs in societies or cultures.

Furthermore a conflicting situation whether of the internal belief system or internal

Vs external beliefs provides for an opportunity or a challenge to explore, expose or

test the validity of one’s personal as well as general belief system structures. This

can lead to not only the test of the limitations, applicability and usefulness

(validity) of one’s beliefs but also to refine and to transcend their

interrelationship and limitations in terms of their applicability.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed
with me."..........Dudley Field Malone

The  end  result   should ideally be a constructive or a creative one for the entities

involved in the conflict although this is idealistic and rare, but certainly something

that should be aimed at or to strive for. This work repeatedly emphasises and

supports this kind of effort or striving.

And so one more of the   assumptions this work is based upon,  is that the being

who embarks upon the path of self exploration needs to distinguish between the

two domains of Personal & General Validity and their spheres of applicability.

The domain of General Validity should be operational when one is dealing or

interacting  with   other  beings  in  a  social system and its rules and beliefs

determined by general agreement.  These  rules, assumptions or beliefs are

more likely  to be   different  than  those that are applicable or valid for the

alone  self  in   a  being  who  believes  one's  self  to be unique and distinct.

1.5.4 NATURE : DISCRETE as well as WHOLE

In  order to understand the need and applicability for this duality of validity

systems, this work supports the belief that an essential common thread runs

through all the  beings that share a world like on this planet earth, and that

this unseen thread is what binds, supports and sustains all

the beings in this world.

This unseen thread or binding force (or intent or spirit) and all the life forms,

and the supporting physical resources in its totality is what is referred to

in this work as Nature.

It  follows  from the above definition that one's self, although unique is also at the

same time a component of and connected to this totality of Nature that gives a self

its  being  and   uniqueness,  is  therefore  an  inseparable  subject of this Nature.

This aspect of the inseparability of a being from Nature should not be lost sight of

in the process of exploring one's own unique nature.

For there is an unwritten rule of nature that although a being, given a distinct nature

has every Right to explore and express  this unique  potential,  it  also  becomes  the

responsibility of this being to ensure that in this process, he/she does not take away

or infringe upon a similar Right of other beings within the same world.

"A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take
from you".....Ramsey Clark

1.5.5 THE SPHERES OF VALIDITY: INTERNAL and EXTERNAL

1.5.5.1 Isolation as a Prerequisite

While a certain degree of isolation of an individual from society is essential for

self-realisation and individual development, yet this isolation cannot be just a

goal in itself, but only as a state where one's individuality in terms of knowing

one's predilections and potential can manifest.

The personal space of a genuine individual can only develop when there is a

certain degree of isolation from social, cultural impositions, and when there is

an inner felt sense as well as unease, about the flaws, shortcomings and

limitations of the imposed beliefs and norms.

The point here is that one does not seek escape from society, but only temporary

isolation  from   the  imposing nature of social and cultural norms and patterns of

behavior,  so   that  one's  thinking  and  behavior is not  perpetually locked onto

social and cultural reality.

The development of one's individuality cannot take place unless one can achieve

a minimum distance or isolation, in order to develop a structure of thought and

experience  that   is  independent  of the social and cultural construct. Then and

only then can one contribute creatively back to society. Else one just becomes

another cog in the socio-cultural machine.

" The very notion of a "normal human being" suggests a restriction to the
average. It is only a man, who, already finds it difficult to come to terms
with the everyday world who can see in this restriction a desirable
improvement ; a man, whose neurosis unfits him for normal life. To be
"normal" is a splendid idea for the unsuccessful. But for those who have
far more ability than the average, for whom it was never hard to gain
successes and to accomplish their share in the world's work  - for them
restriction to the normal signifies the bed of Procrustes, unbearable
boredom, infertile sterility and hopelessness." ......C G Jung

We  thus  have two spheres of validity, two distinct modes of operation that

require distinct   parameters and domains under which to function effectively

and  efficiently   in both : The Personal domain of Validity and the General or

Social domain of Validity.

1.5.5.2 THE TWO DISTINCT DOMAINS

The important point is that these two spheres of validity do not conflict in their

applicability or operation even though certain beliefs may be the opposite of

each other in these domains, and even if there is a conflict, then this conflict

has a creative outcome or resolution.

The other important point is that in the separate and distinct sphere

of Personal Validity,  one can assume, believe, conceive or construct

anything without the constraints and limitations imposed by the

beliefs and concepts held to be generally valid by the society of that

time and place. This is vital for opening up the space for imagination

and vision.

One  of  the   useful  rules  that one needs to follow is that even if one feels that

certain personal beliefs or experiences are of great importance, these may well

have no general validity and should  therefore be recognized as such.  Similarly,

beliefs  that are generally  taken to be the norm in a social setup should only be

considered  as important only as far as their functional value for the individual's

social role and responsibilities.

1.5.6 THE TWO DOMAINS TABULATED

This article covered the fundamental requirements for the concept of Personal Validity

in order to encourage any unique individual to create a personal sphere of action so as

to have the necessary free space for imagination, creation of new ideas, personal vision,

and creative expression. This personal sphere of action whose domain covers those acts

that do not directly affect others is contrasted with that other sphere of action which has

direct bearing upon others either in an interactive mode or even an non-interactive

mode whereby an individual's actions influence other people.

With this distinction as a basis, the second part goes into the building blocks of this work,

or a study of   the tools and  the underlying processes  that are to be used  for the  goal  of

self - exploration.   The  first  article  in  this  part  itself   starts  with  an  examination of what

these  tools   are,  that  is,  how  we  make  assumptions,   build  concepts  and  analogies,

how we are made to believe certain things or entities ( almost always without allowing for

any kind of questioning these beliefs, let alone their validity), and how the overvaluation

of fixed ideas, beliefs and entities leads to an entrapment :

NEXT PAGE 04 : PART 2   The Ontology : Assumptions, beliefs and concepts

HOME PAGE