ARS UNA

Connecting Arts, Religion, Sciences - Alternative Philosophy of Development

  A modern Middle Way in Institutions and  Private Life  (in English and German)

Not just myth or compromise
Consistency rather than proof

Anyone who may be contemptuous of the fact that the modern Middle Way is simply an adaptation of the Buddhist model to Western conditions, or rather a suitable term for compromises in Asia would seem to get a rather misconception of the associated paradigm shift.   

It is a now unacceptable simplification to look at real life as a way to assure that just certain dangers are avoided, such as the eight foundations referred to in the traditional Buddhist teachings, or as two unavoidable dangers such as Skylla and Charybdis on two opposing rocks in Homer's Odyssey,

However, if we are guided by the respective influence of astonishingly also eight extreme positions in a manner similar to field theories, which seems much more complicated at first sight, then a simplification occurs, which is manifested in our ever more complex world both as desired and also compatible with much more complex theories.

This kind of orientation does not follow a map, but has a multidimensional character that we can call intuitive. It corresponds quite well to the trend of modern young people, not to follow a firm manual, but “to learn by trying". Only too well they know the errors of many instructions of technical devices and their problems with insufficient updating.

The most unconscious eight extreme positions can be understood as two distant "structures" between which four dimensions of life as well as nature, and even of culture, extend. We can not prove that it is about all life, all nature and all culture, but there is no hard evidence against this assertion. Even the possibility of looking at life, nature, and cultures under such common aspects should be sufficiently astonishing.

The same applies to the assumption that these are exactly four dimensions. This is, at the very least, very close to the prevailing four-dimensional methods of describing modern natural sciences. It seems possible to transfer these to categories of humanities. The fact that man with his four main body-parts also encompasses a corresponding number of basic areas should not be a coincidence, although the strict necessity can not be proved here either.

Within the framework of ARS-UNA, consistency considerations, rather than rigorous proofs, are preferably used. This may seem contestable, but can be justified, as has already been explained elsewhere (Ebook "Usual Border Crossings" resp. “Gewoehnliche Grenzueberschreitugen”, not yet translated from German), and could be way-leading in the future.

  

© Hans J. Unsoeld, Berlin 2017  

Oct. 27, 2017