I argued in the last piece that we have two kinds
of knowledge corresponding to two kinds of experience -
the experience of the inner world (mind) and the
experience of the outer world (matter)
clearly we can and do speak of the world -
as a singularity - a unity - as one
this is just to make a logical statement
it is to recognize that the dimensions inner and outer
are dimensions of a unity -
that which has an inner and outer
for even if you want to limit the inner to conscious
entities - still we are speaking of the nature of the
world - of the totality -
and we do not need to go much further than this
i.e. - Spinoza defines the totality - as one -
eternal and infinite
this - or such an argument is not germane to my
argument -
the point is - for the notion of dimension to
make sense
it follows that dimensions - are dimensions of a unity -
whatever its characteristics
now I think it is best to leave it just there
as a logical argument - not a substantial - ontological -
position
it is knowledge - that -
not knowledge of what
as such it is contentless -
a neutral monism in James' and Russell's senses
but a neutral stripped bare
a ground that indeed - need not be known
its assertion is as far as you need go
(and what kind of logical assertion is this?
it is to acknowledge the groundlessness of being
as the ground of being - and to state this in most
economical way
and if the statement cannot be made 'without content'
silence
still - there is nothing wrong with a bit of noise
even if it signifies nothing)
