‘A Setup for a Metaphysicratic Manifest’ is primarily what it signifies to be; a setup. A setup is usually just a rough sketch. And in sketches are the most important mainlines being put to paper. Forms and contours are being made visible, but only approximately. The eventual straight lines are not yet being laid down. A sketch and setup do not have a definite character.
Further this setup concerns a setup for a metaphysicratic manifest and thus not a setup for the metaphysicratic manifest. The metaphysicratic manifest that is being setup and sketched here is not intended to be the only one. Goal is however to contribute to the metaphysicratic agenda.
‘Metaphysicracy’ is formed out of the Greek words ‘µετάφύσις’ (‘metáphýsis’) en ‘κράτος’ (‘krátos’). ‘Krátos’ means ‘power’ and ‘metaphysicracy’ can thus be understood in the meaning of ‘power of the metaphysical’. The Greek ‘µετάφύσις’ (‘metáphýsis’) is again formed out of the Greek words ‘µετά’ (‘metá’) en ‘φύσις’ (‘phýsis’). ‘Metá’ carries the meaning of ‘after’ or ‘beyond’ and ‘physis’ can be translated with ‘physicality’. Metaphysics then can conceptually be understood as that which comes after the physicality or as that which lies beyond the physicality. ‘Metaphysicracy’ carries thus the etymological meaning of ‘power of what lies beyond the physicality’. The word ‘physicality’ is here used in distinction with ‘physics’ (derived from the Greek ‘φυσικά’ or ‘physiká’), which is in use to designate a scientific discipline. Equally can ‘metaphysicality’ be used here in distinction with ‘metaphysics’ (derived from the Greek ‘µετάφυσικά’ or ‘metáphysiká’), which also is in use to designate a scientific discipline.
Metaphysicality can conceptually be understood as that which lies beyond the physicality. The crossing of the physicality to the metaphysicality is twofold. For the physicality is crossed at the boundary of its most outer periphery and at that of its most inner centre. The boundary of the most outer periphery concerns the boundary of the macrocosm. The boundary of the most inner centre concerns the boundary of the microcosm. Within these boundaries is the physicality located, beyond these boundaries the metaphysicality.
The metaphysicality which is reached in crossing the peripheral boundary of the physicality is the same metaphysicality which is reached in crossing the central boundary. Metaphysicality lies beyond every distinction and beyond every plurality (which are characteristics of the physicality).
Every multiplicity is reducible to the unity in which it exists. Every unity has its ground for existence in the context of a nullity. It is no coincidence that a counting starts with null, continues with one, after which the multitudes follow.
Physicality is multiplicity. This physical multiplicity is reducible to the physical unity which has its boundaries in the most outer periphery and the most inner centre. Beyond that lies the metaphysical nullity. Physical multiplicity is reducible to its unity, which has its ground of existence in the context of the metaphysical nullity.
The cosmos is physicality. The macrocosm is the macrophysicality. The microcosm is the microphysicality. The macrocosm is the objective physicality, the microcosm is the subjective physicality. The Macrocosm is the perceived, the microcosm is the perceiver. The macrocosm is the world, the microcosm is the human.
Beyond the peripheral boundary of macrophysicality lies the metaphysicality. Beyond the central boundary of macrophysicality lies the macrometaphysicality. Beyond the central boundary of microphysicality lies the metaphysicality. Beyond the peripheral boundary of microphysicality lies the micrometaphysicality. Macrophysicality is micrometaphysicality. Microphysicality is macrometaphysicality. Physicality is the whole of the aforementioned. Metaphysicality lies beyond the whole of the aforementioned.
The physicality is crossed on the boundary of its most outer periphery and on that of its most inner centre. Metaphysicality can thus be reached by a boundary crossing centrifugality and by a boundary crossing centripetality.
Metaphysicality can be reached by boundary crossing centrifugality and by boundary crossing centripetality. A rhythmic alternation of boundary crossing centrifugality with boundary crossing centripetality brings the physicality under influence of the metaphysicality. Such a rhythmic alternation forms the physicality to the metaphysicality. The higher the frequency and amplitude of the rhythm the greater the influence and forming.
Centrifugality moves from the centre of the (micro)cosmos to the periphery of the (macro)cosmos, moves from the centre of the human to the periphery of the world. Microcentrifugality moves from the centre of the microcosm to the periphery of the microcosm. Macrocentrifugality moves from the centre of the macrocosm to the periphery of the macrocosm. Microcentrifugality regards intention. Macrocentrifugality regards action. Centrifugality regards intentional action.
A centrifugality is boundary crossing when it goes beyond the whole of the objects which constitute the plural physicality. An intentional action is boundary crossing when it goes beyond the objects on which this action is directed. When an action goes beyond macrocosmic objects a detached action is the case. When an intention goes beyond microcosmic objects a selfless intention is the case.
Boundary crossing centrifugality regards detached, selfless intentional action.
Centripetality moves from the periphery of the (macro)cosmos to the centre of the (micro)cosmos, moves from the periphery of the world to the centre of the human. Macrocentripetality moves from the periphery of the macrocosm to the centre of the macrocosm. Microcentripetality moves from the periphery of the microcosm to the centre of the microcosm. Macrocentripetality regards concentration. Microcentripetality regards contemplation. Centripetality regards concentrated contemplation.
A centripetality is boundary crossing when it goes beyond the whole of all objects which constitute the plural physicality. A concentrated contemplation is boundary crossing when it goes beyond the objects on which the contemplation is directed. When a concentration goes beyond microcosmic objects a selfless concentration is the case. When a contemplation goes beyond macrocosmic objects a detached contemplation is the case.
Boundary crossing centripetality regards selfless detached concentrated contemplation.
Metaphysicality can be reached by detached, selfless intentional action and selfless, detached concentrated contemplation. It is characteristic for a human that he can act and can contemplate. The more intentional the act, the more humane the human. The more concentrated the contemplation, the more humane the human.
The humaneness of a human finds it culmination on the boundaries of the periphery and the centre. Beyond those boundaries has the human transcended his humaneness. There the anthropos generated into a metanthropos.
The Greek ‘anthropos’ (‘ἄνθρωπος’) means ‘human’. The Greek ‘metá’ (‘µετά’) means ‘beyond’. These terms we can recover in contemporary English in words like ‘anthropology’ and ‘metaphysics’. On these considerations is the terminology based.
‘Anthropotelos’ is formed out of the Greek words ‘ἄνθρωπος’ (‘anthropos’) en ‘τέλος’ (‘télos’). ‘Anthropos’ (present in a word like ‘anthropology’) means ‘human’ and ‘télos’ (present in a word like ‘teleology’) means ‘goal’. ‘Anthropotelos’ then refers to the goal of man.
A de-leading is a deduction. A deduction is a movement away. Every movement away must lead to a movement back. Deduction leads to reduction. De-leading leads to re-leading. The physical multiplicity is de-lead from the physical unity. De-lead from the physical unity, is the goal of the physical multiplicity to be re-lead to it.
Being part of the physical multiplicity shares the microphysical multiplicity the goal of the aforementioned. The goal of the microphysical multiplicity is to be re-lead to the microphysical unity and to be re-lead to the physical unity. The goal of the microcosm, of the anthropos, of man is to be re-lead to unity within himself and to unity with everything.
Above mentioned movements take place in the context of the metaphysicality, to which they owe their existence.
The physical multiplicity is de-lead from the physical unity. The microphysical multiplicity is de-lead from the (micro)physical unity. Man lives at present not in unity with himself and not in unity with his surroundings. Man knows struggle within himself and knows struggle with others.
The movements of de-leading and re-leading form one curve of leading, a curve that moves away from and back to unity. Man lives at present not in unity with himself and not in unity with his surroundings. At present is (micro)physical multiplicity the case. The movement of de-leading is completed and the movement of re-leading lies ahead of us.
The movements of de-leading and re-leading form one curve of leading. The movements are lead. The movements take place within the physical multiplicity which is an exponent of the physical unity. This physical unity has its contextual ground of existence in the metaphysical nullity. Movements within the physical multiplicity and the physical unity, movements of the physical unity to the physical multiplicity and back, have their ground of existence in the metaphysicality. De-leading and re-leading are being lead by metaphysicality.
Metaphysicality can conceptually be understood as that which lies beyond the physicality. What also can conceptually be understood as lying beyond the physicality are the gods of the different religions. In religions are gods the personifications or anthropomorphications of metaphysicality. The metaphysicality as ground of existence for the physicality is there being personified as gods being creators of the world and of man. This personifying simplifies the initiation to centrifugal action and centripetal contemplation, however complicates the boundary crossing of it.
Metaphysicality is the ground of existence of physicality. Individualists lay the ground of physicality in the individual. Every individual forms here the ground for his / her own world. This is in fact an anthropofication (not to be confused with anthropomorphication) of metaphysicality. This goes also for materialistic individualists who despite a denial of metaphysicality take the individual as ground of existence of the world.
‘Theocracy’ is formed out of the Greek words ‘θεός’ (‘theós’) and ‘κράτος’ (‘krátos’). ‘Theós’ means ‘god’ and ‘krátos’ means ‘power’. ‘Theocracy’ then means ‘power of god’. In a theocracy as political system is the state then being ruled by (a) god. That god exerts his will through leaders who in that function mediate between their god and the state which they lead. These leaders are appointed by other leaders who hold a mediating role between their god and state.
‘Democracy’ is formed out of the Greek words ‘δῆµος’ (‘dẽmos’) and ‘κράτος’ (‘krátos’). ‘Dẽmos’ means ‘people’ and ‘krátos’ means ‘power’. ‘Democracy then means ‘power of the people’. In a democracy as political system is the state then being ruled by the people. In this do the people appoint the leaders who execute the will of the people at the level of the state. The leaders play here thus a mediating role between people and state.
‘Demostheocracy’ is formed out of the Greek words ‘δῆµος’ (‘dẽmos’), ‘θεός’ (‘theós’) and ‘κράτος’ (‘krátos’), and means according to the earlier mentioned meanings of these words then ‘power of people and god’ or ‘power of god through the people’. In a demostheocracy as political system is the state being ruled from the coinciding will of the people with that of their god. The between god and state mediating leaders are here chosen by the people.
In religions are gods the anthropomorphications of metaphysicality. In a theocracy are these gods by the people placed beyond the boundary of the most outer periphery of the physicality. With individualists are individuals the anthropofications of metaphysicality. In a democracy is the individual that creates his / her own world placed beyond the boundary of the most inner centre of the physicality. Only in a demostheocracy are both the most outer periphery as the most inner centre being acknowledged as boundaries where beyond lies the metaphysicality. ‘Demostheocracy’ stands with this synonymous with ‘metaphysicracy’.
In a metaphysicracy are the leaders chosen by the people. These leaders are the mediators between metaphysicality and state, and between state and people. The leader of a metaphysicracy is a metranthropos if not a fully humanized human.
In a democracy are the leaders chosen by the people. In a metafysicracy are the leaders also chosen by the people. In a democracy is the chosen leader an anthropos. In a metafysicracy is the chosen leader a metanthropos. A metanthropos can only be chosen consciously as leader when he / she is being recognized as such. The closer the people near the most outer periphery and the most inner centre of the physicality, the clearer can they recognize an metanthropos and choose him / her consciously as leader.
The road from democracy to metaphysicracy is being covered with the covering by the people of the road to a higher degree of centrifugality and centripetality. From a democracy becomes a metaphysicracy possible when the people act more intentional and contemplate more concentrated, when the people become more humane, when the people become more selfless and detached and with that near metanthroposity.
The road from democracy to metaphysicracy is being covered with the covering by the people of the road to a higher degree of centrifugality and centripetality, to a higher degree of intentional action and concentrated contemplation, to a higher degree of selflessness and detachment. This way is a growth.
Growth can be influenced with nourishment and guidance. The growth of a human to metaphysicality can be influenced with metaphysical nourishment and metaphysical guidance. This nourishment and guidance can an upgrowing human receive through upbringing and education. The nourishment the upgrowing human receives from the people that bring him up. The guidance the upgrowing human receives from people that educate him.
Upbringing and education are the most elementary points of attention in a democracy that strives towards the realization of a metaphysicracy. A democracy that strives to the realization of a metaphysicracy brings metaphysicality in upbringing and education.
In a metaphysical upbringing is the upgrowing human nourished in and with unselfishness and detachment. Nourishing in and with selflessness and detachment is nourishing in and with love. One who is being nourished in love is also nourished with love.
In a metaphysical education is the upgrowing human lead in and to metaphysicality. One who is being in metaphysicality lead is also lead to metaphysicality.
This setup and sketch of a metaphysicratic manifest is hereby given in several pen strokes. In the last pen strokes was the way from democracy to metaphysicracy being sketched. Further pen strokes are at this moment not needed. A metaphysicratic party can make a start with emphasizing the importance of upbringing and education (which contains also re-upbringing and re-education). The establishment of a metaphysicracy from a democracy does thus not take place with a short lasting revolution but with a metaphysical upbringing and educating of generations. Every generation that nears metaphysicality shall with its democratic vote bring the state of which it is part also nearer to the establishing of a metaphysicracy.
May this setup thus contribute to the metaphysicratic agenda.