An Enquiry into the Nature of Being investigates metaphysics and epistemology by accruing maximal certainties which remain open to formal falsification. In this manner, it builds upon a perpetually compounding foundation of solid ontological givens while, all throughout, maintaining the philosophical principle of fallibilism.
Newly transferred to www.anenquriy.com from its previous online home, revisions to this three-volume, ongoing philosophical work are incrementally uploaded online for public review. Topics supported by maximal certainties so far include a substantiation for the law of noncontradiction, the nature of our first-person awareness, a demarcation of what consciousness can signify, types of determinacy in general and of causality in particular, a validation that we dwell in a causally indeterminate cosmos, a validation that we are indeed endowed with a metaphysical free will, a disclosing of the basic determinants by which our free will volitions are inescapably governed, and a basic appraisal of what our total first-person selfhood consist of.
Up next on the agenda is a formal proof of why solipsism can only be a metaphysical impossibility (this deceptively unimportant conclusion is nevertheless required for the philosophy to further evidence via maximal certainties the nature of physical objectivity, as well as the processes via which it comes about, this within what can be termed a cosmos of objective idealism.)
Further Information About this Philosophy:
This philosophy’s novel approach upholds the otherwise scientific principle of falsifiability for all its pivotal conclusions: All obtained conclusions that affirm to be of a falsifiable epistemic certainty are thereby certainties devoid of any known justifiable alternatives, and can each be formally falsified as being an epistemic certainty simply via the provision of any justifiable alternative to that which it claims, this by anyone concerned. Standing in contrast to epistemic certainties which are supposed to be infallible (hence, impossible to be in any way wrong), such falsifiable epistemic certainties constitute a newly discerned form of maximal certainty, one which this philosophy uncovers and, for ease of expression, coins “unfalsified certainty” (as is described in the philosophy’s Chapter 1).
The first-person unfalsified certainty of “I—as a first-person point of view—am whenever I am in any way aware” then both serves a) as an example of unfalsified certainties in general (for no one here concerned can so far provide a justifiable alternative to their occurrence as a first-person point of view while in any way aware of anything, including while being aware of any such supposedly justifiable alternative (this as is addressed with greater detail in the philosophy’s Chapter 4)) and b) as the second unfalsified certainty this philosophy provides upon which the three volumes of this work are founded (the first unfalsified certainty provided being that we must uphold the law of noncontradiction without exception if reasoning is to be in any way rationally deemed efficacious for us (this as is established in the philosophy’s Chapter 3)).
The cumulative philosophical worldview of this work, then, will be found to coincide with many aspects of C. S. Peirce’s notions regarding objective idealism; to rationally support what in Neo-Platonism is termed “the Good”; to evidence what in Aristotelianism is termed “the unmoved mover” of all that exists, and this within a teleological cosmos; to logically confirm the reality of our metaphysical free will; to comprehensively explain meta-ethics together with the problem of evil; to clarify how the immaterial mind is determined by, and can in turn influence, the material body; to self-consistently justify the three basic laws of thought (the law of identity, the law of non-contradiction, and the law of the excluded middle) via the ontological nature of the world as previously derived in the work; to provide a satisfactory explanation of what epistemological subjects such as those of reasoning, correctitude, justification, and knowledge consist of; to provide a stringent metaphysical grounding for the necessity of biological evolution; and—among the work’s many other merits—to provide means for analytically addressing the possibility of spiritual realms in logical manners while, likewise, providing solid metaphysical support and explanation for physical objectivity as well as, subsequently, providing solid epistemological grounding for the scientific method and its results.
Please feel free to critique this philosophy’s conclusion and to see if you can in any way falsify any of its as of yet unfalsified certainties.
Michael W Moiceanu 