A new ontology

i’m trying to factor out a set of different terms which more accurately describe what is happening here with us humans than the old ones which have so much baggage and confusion attached.  

so thinking out loud … writing sentences in those terms which are true, at least to me  ...

There are beings. 

Each being has an inside which is accessible only to itself,  and a outside which effects other beings.

We humans are beings.  And deeply interacting groups of us are beings too.

We can call what happens inside a being, which is accessible only to itself, “private”, “subjective”, or “spiritual” … and we call that the beings “experience”.

There are beliefs.  Beliefs are subjective.

When a belief in one being matches a belief in another we can call it an “agreement”.

When an experience in one being harmonizes with an experience in another, we call that a sync or a touch.


  1. ontology


Mark de LA says
Something interesting from PR – whose thing is about ontology & he equates it with zen is his morning podcast here on becoming clear: https://peterralstonblog.wordpress.com/2016/07/23/episode-10-how-to-be-clear/ thumbs up
Instead of the word munge he uses smear or smudge in the 1 minute podcast.
Note I use the word as above which is munge ← defined as a bunch of things jammed together as in the tasty mess defined by the urban dictionarylaughing

Si says
Cool Seth. Nicely done, except the 2nd part of #2. There is no verification that there is an outside that affects other beings … and there is no way to set up a verification that is independent from one’s experience. The 2nd part of #2 is just a theory proposed by a few various models of thought about the nature of reality … and is probably part of the “Baggage” you mention, a carryover in thinking from several generations of living inside the universe model.

The rest seems like a very useful start on a general labeling system for leading edge thinking.   

Si says
Interesting yes … but in that tiny podcast PR only gets to say there is a smush, not what it is or how to relate to it? How is that helpful?

Seth says
well of course i can verify that others effect me … that is in my experience.  by assuming that other beings are symmetrical to me, i can logically conclude that i effect them as well. 

but your right … there is no way to verify that without experiencing it.  so it becomes an article of faith, where a person can choose if  they are in some wierd simulation chamber where it is all just their own being being reflected back into their senses.   so its is a axiom that a philosophy can choose … like choosing whether parallel lines meet at infinity or not. 

Incidentally, have you considered the effect on others of you telling them your choice?   For example, fyi, i don’t like that you think the effect of my being on you is just your own doing.    … you have robbed me of my effect on you.  laugh

Seth says
i like that he said, “pay attention to what happens, what occurs”.  if you don’t, then your awareness is a blur .. a smudge … a mere waving at whatever drives you fancy.  Good advise me thinks indeed thumbs up.

Mark, I have always interpreted your use of “mung” quite differently than PR’s use of “smush”.   You always seem to use “mung” when i combine things that you think should not be combined … or when i describe what i experience happening in a way that does not match your own thoughts on the matter … or come up with a theory which you think is off the wall … or when i recognize a pattern which you haven’t and make a general statement about particular cases.   Have i been interpreting your use of “mung” wrong? 

Anyway sounds as if i should write some true sentences in my ontology that use the words “attention” and “happening” or “occurs”.   thanks for pointing at PR bringing that up thumbs up

Si says
 Again, I did not say you do not affect me. Others exist. What I said is that you are not outside me. The version if you I experience is the one I create.  You will never experience the version of you that I experience.   Everything I experience I create.  That does not mean you do not exist and that does not mean the things you do do not become part of the experience I create. It simply means that I experience my creation and you experience your creation. It's not some weird chamber, it's your entire experience as it is,  as you are experiencing now, all of that incredible richness is your entire reality. It's everything you experience. And you create every bit of it.

Seth says
Well yes obviously, the version of me that you experience is inside you.  That can be verified by neuroscience.  But when i say “me” i do not refer to that version of me inside you … i refer to myself which is quite outside of you.   And the outside of me is what affects you indirectly through you senses .. and by symmetry “me” and “you” can be switched.   That is what my “2nd part of #2” is saying.

When you say that “i create every bit of my experience” you are discounting that part of my experience which comes though my senses from others outside of myself. 

See Also

  1. Thought Thought, Feeling, and Will with 378 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  2. Thought Wisdom - It's What's Missing from a simple NOW based Ontology with 100 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  3. Thought about: Unhacking Wars - comment 67183 with 68 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  4. Thought Can we feel our humanity? with 25 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  5. Thought Definition of Responsibility - self as cause with 11 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  6. Thought The Mentography of Rights with 2 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  7. Thought Tai Shu Yi King Commentary Brain uploaded with 1 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  8. Thought Concept Net with 1 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  9. Thought Dualities listed with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  10. Thought T-based vs E-based being systems with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  11. Thought Going Meta with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  12. Thought Relationship with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  13. Thought [title (19025)] with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  14. Thought [title (19026)] with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  15. Thought about: ConceptNet with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  16. Thought Differing ontology contexts with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  17. Thought about: a dialogue ... with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  18. Thought Ontology with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  19. Thought being as a sustaining process with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".
  20. Thought Ontology with 0 viewings related by tag "ontology".