On the ontology, multiverse, existentialism and time
Each philosophical branch is using its own ontological base. In my opinion, existentialist is the most progressive one. In future, I will tell you about others.
Recommended reading: Gnoseology.
Existentialism is a big philosophical branch: it includes religious existentialism and atheistic one. Jean-Paul Sartre in 1943 wrote the monumental book called “Being and Nothingness”. In this book, Sartre explained his ontological sight, let’s try to understand it, with my corrections, cause I think that his theory has to be re-understood.
The first type of being is being-in-itself and it is everything you can see around. Albert Einstein told that there are “no separate space and time dimensions, there is cross-linked space-time dimension”. In my opinion, this cross-linked dimension, visible, touchable is being-in-itself one. For simplifying, let’s understand in-itself like material world — all our universe.
The second type of being is being-for-itself, is also called nothingness. You are nothingness, void. But, especially due to your perfect “voidness”, you intended into in-itself, intended to become everything. Unlikely, you can’t. And each person is unique. You can’t talk about Chinese people, or about people like solid substance, because everybody decides how to live by own mind (of course we’re talking about spherical horse in vacuum, cause mass media, politicians and tons of shitty stuff trying to make everybody the same) We can talk about humanity, like complex of different persons living on this planet. This intention makes one great thing — determinations of subjects’ freedom. I surely know that good and evil, beautiful and ugly categories do not exist. Only two categories really have to be mentioned- freedom and responsibility. So, let’s go back, what is human? You are it. Have you decided to be a junkie? It means that human is a junkie, decided to be a monk- I can congratulate you — humans are monks, etc.
The third type of being is being-for-another. To understand it, we have to understand object and subject relations. For you like a human being — in-itself is an object when you are talking to me — I’m an object to you. For you — you are a subject. However, for me, you are an object. And the image you showing to me in the communication process is an object you made for representing yourself to the world. Therefore, for me, you are the part of in-itself.
We’re living in the same world we lived 5–4 age b.c. I’m not talking about tech — it doesn’t mean anything. I’m not talking about scientific world explaining, cause less than 20 percent of all humanity knows about solar system construction. We’re still animals, and we need to evolve. To expand this idea, we have to talk about time structure first.
As we said previously, there is a cross-linked time-space dimension, which we decided to understand like “in-itself-being“. Let’s imagine it now like a big highway made of tree roots or wool strings. When you were born from this roots-highway flaked small village road — it’s your “for-itself being”, your own parallel universe. Now try to remember, you are crossing the road and car sweeps behind you, or you are crossing a bridge — the wind flows and you’re one step from falling down to the river. I call this moment — points of decision — in this moments, your life splits to “yes” or “no” choices. So, you crossed a road in one universe and car smashed you in another one. There’s no choice, cause you are doing them both but in different universes.
So we’re already talking about the multiverse. See, we’re living a billion lives at the same time. It means that your village road is already divided into two different roads, and each of them is split hundred and thousands times. But you’re living that one, you can handle, that one, where choices you’ve done are acceptable to you, to your understanding, until you are not choosing to die, or you getting sick from lethal disease if you can’t accept death. You died already many times in your life, you’ve done all choices you could, even you haven’t chosen anything. In the end of your being, as we said before, you’re becoming part of “in-itself being“, you can see all of your lives and compare it with that one you lived. Then you decide, is it sufficient to become part of in-itself. I have to tell you now, that death is not existing. Death is just a way to the fourth dimension, but we’ll talk about it later.
If there are no choices at all, if you’re doing everything — you are absolutely free. Multiverse gives you total freedom. Seems that in the multiverse there is no place for morality, and yes, it’s true, there is no place for general morality, but only for your private one. Here I have to quote famous work of J-P.Sartre: “Existentialism is Humanism”. There he was talking about freedom and responsibility. If we want to simplify his opinion for our understanding — the main point is subjectivity. We are totally free to do whatever we want to, that’s what’s going out from total freedom, but because of or absolute subjectivity, we’re rising price of our lifestyle, cause we have chosen it. You are responsible not only for yourself but for all mankind. It’s the question of axiology. Are you living a great life?
So, somebody will want to take some aspects of yours to his/hers. You are dealing with everybody like an idiot, be ready that someday there would be a big chance that everybody will become morons. I have to make a tick here — all that I said is true only if you don’t have any delusions about god existence. Of course, if you got some — you absolutely free, and you have chosen to deny freedom for yourself. Let’s remember now, that we are living in a multiverse, and your responsibility much bigger than just in-universe, cause next stop — the fourth dimension, and you’re part of it, and you are constructing it with choices you have done.
