If you're stuck in a browser frame - click here to view this same page in Quantonics!

How CRites View Reality

For comparison see:

How CRites Measure Reality
How MoQites Monitor Reality
How MoQites View Reality
How SOMites Measure Reality
How SOMites View Reality

How SOMite Classicists View Actuality
How MoQite Students of Quantonics View Quantum Reality

What we see here, and comparing this view to how SOMites analyze and MoQites interpret reality,
is that each CRite is like many SOMites. And, indeed, that is what CRites do: retain SOMitic
analytic and dichotomous CTMs, but apply them polylogically (SOMites say, "schizophrenically,")
to reality. What we have in any land of cultural relativism is but many SOMitic truths, none of them
absolute. By comparison SOMites say their one (OGC, OGT) 'scientific' (errr, ummm, fundamentalist)
view is 'absolute.'

Why is that important to SOMites? They believe that (some) humans must be able to know absolute truth.
Why? So that they can control nature and via absolute judgment and know-ledge logically assess others'
behaviors (moral, ethical, aesthetic, political, cultural, religious, etc.) as absolutely true or false,
right or wrong, good or evil, black or white, empty or full, absurd or not, nonsense or not, ludicrous or not, etc.
Outcome? A philosophical monism. One absolute truth system fits all.

Cultural relativism attempted to escape that ugly contrived classical utopia. It partially succeeded.

But cultural relativism itself is still ugly and contrived. Why? It retained most of SOM's classical foundations.

In our philosophical opinion, many SOM's is much worse than just one SOM. But we, personally, find SOM despicable.

How do we get out of this mess?

Tentatively, via MoQ. Quantum Think-king Modes (QTMs).

CR isn't all bad. Towards better, CRites see reality's (realities') heterogeneities. Towards worse, CRites retain
classical inanimacy and immutability plus classical Aristotelian logic and a Newtonian classical ontology. Of course
Parmenides (515b.c.) and Aristotle (384-322b.c.) built that damned wall. Many other unfortunates,
for over two millennia, have adhered its schisms, ironies, and paradice.

There are a few finer points we might offer regarding our graphic above. First, a caveat. It is 2D and thus limited.

We show one CRite with multiple views (e.g., five different colored circles) of a portion of reality.
(What classicists (SOMites) find most problematic with this perspective, is a philosophical question,
"Which circle is the real circle?" Quantumists (MoQites) answer "Mu," and "Yes." What this illustrates
most vividly is a philosophical malfunction in minds of classicists who adhere CTMs.)

For CRites our brick wall probably should be a brick sphere.
But if we did that, unless you are a MoQite, you would be unable to see any CRites inside that sphere.
And worse, how would we select said sphere's 'context' and 'locality?' (See our Bell Theorem Study.)

We could just as easily, and acceptably/analogously, have drawn multiple portions of reality.
Actually, we ask you to imagine that.

You may repeat our graphic to show multiple CRites.

What this graphic helps us to see is that, as a human developmental philosophical enterprise, cultural relativism (CR)
is an evolutionary step up from Subject-Object Metaphysics (SOM), but it is not as evolutionarily advanced
as more recent emergences of a more quantum Metaphysics of Quality (MoQ).

Please, for much greater detail, see our comparisons of MoQ, CR and SOM.

Thank you for reading and studying,

Doug - 29Jul2003
(from Or uh gun, yeah!)

To contact Quantonics write to or call:

Doug Renselle
Quantonics, Inc.
Suite 18 #368 1950 East Greyhound Pass
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730

©Quantonics, Inc., 2003-2015 — Rev. 29Jul22008  PDR — Created 29Jul2003  PDR
(25Mar2006 rev - Add list of comparisons under graphic.)
(27May2007 rev - Reformat.)
(29Jul2008 rev - Reformat.)
(17Jul2010 rev - Adjust colors. Make page current.)